May 31,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLII No. 35

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Dicks): Order, please!

Does the Member for St. John's East Extern have leave to

address the House?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: It is just a letter of congratulations to a

high school.

MR. ROBERTS: We really would prefer not.

MS. VERGE: That's not fair, we gave you leave yesterday

to send a message of congratulations.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It is up to the House. Without unanimous leave, it can't be

given.

MS. VERGE: It's a national award - (inaudible) a gold

medal - best in all Canada.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to notify

this hon. House that today marks the beginning of Tourism Awareness Week which

will run from May 31 to June 10.

This year is the 9th Anniversary of Tourism Awareness Week in

Newfoundland and Labrador. This initiative, which was created in this Province

by Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador, is now a national program.

Throughout the next ten days, industry is recognizing

individuals' and organizations' outstanding contributions to the Province's

tourism industry with the Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador's Ambassador

Award.

I would like, on behalf of the minister, to extend an

invitation to all Members of the House of Assembly, as well as those persons in

the press gallery to attend a reception this evening at 5:00 p.m. in the

Conference Area of West Block to launch Tourism Awareness Week.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I would like to

thank the minister or the acting minister for sending over his statement to me

earlier. Due to the fact that we have a major downturn in our fishing industry

in the Province many people have turned to the tourism industry for a viable

alternative to try to create some jobs. As we drive around rural Newfoundland

and travel we can see many people trying to put some infrastructure in place to

promote our tourism industry. I would just like to add that during the month of

June the new

interpretation centre at Cape St. Mary's Ecological Reserve in my

district will be having an opening -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. MANNING: I invite everybody to take the opportunity

to come out during the summer, and I wish the tourism people involved in the

tourism industry in the Province -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MANNING: - a very worthwhile 1995. Thank you.

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am pleased to

inform the hon. members of the House of Assembly the details of a three-year

pilot project on breast cancer screening.

The Avalon Peninsula and Central East Newfoundland have been

identified as the catchment areas for the pilot project which will be

implemented this Fall. The combined female population over the age of fifteen

for these regions is approximately 124,000. The three-year pilot project is a

comprehensive breast screening program intended to reduce mortality from breast

cancer through early detection measures. The project involves standardizing both

educational programs for breast health and screening methods for breast cancer.

Mr. Speaker, this project involves four key elements: breast

health education both for the public and for health professionals; teaching of

breast self-examination for all females over the age of fifteen; promotion of

annual clinical breast tests; and mammograms every two years for asymptomatic

women between the ages of fifty and sixty-nine.

For the pilot project, the dedicated mammography screening

sites for the identified regions will be the existing facilities located at the

Grace General Hospital in St. John's and the James Paton Memorial Hospital in

Gander.

There will be an ongoing evaluation process tied into this

pilot project so that the eventual diffusion of a comprehensive breast screening

program to all regions of the Province will be faster and more effective. A

pilot project will afford us the opportunity to develop the experience and the

expertise to conduct a province-wide breast screening program.

Mr. Speaker, breast cancer is the second most frequently

diagnosed cancer in women after skin cancer. Over their entire lifetime, about

one in nine women will develop breast cancer. It is estimated that 260 new cases

of breast cancer and ninety deaths will probably be reported in the Province in

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the various health

agencies and organizations, community agencies, officials from the Department of

Health, educational and professional organizations, and the survivors of breast

cancer, for their collaborative effort in planning and organizing this project.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is commendable that an effort is being made to improve

early detection in breast cancer. It has been clearly established that when it

is found in the early stages it is almost 100 per cent curable. In fact, if it

is confined to the breast and it is less than a half centimetre, it is estimated

that there is a 95 per cent cure rate in breast cancer. So this detection

process is highly recommendable because early detection and treatment has been

know to be effective regardless of a person's age in the recovery of that

particular person from breast cancer where they can live a normal healthy life

afterwards.

The American Cancer Society has estimated that about 15 to 20

per cent of women over the age of fifty have never had a mammogram and it is in

a very high risk area. It has been established that, certainly breast

examination by a doctor and mammograms are the two most effective methods of

diagnosing, dealing with, and reducing the risk of dying from breast cancer. The

minister today has indicated that every two years it would certainly be

encouraged, if possible, to expand that, because there is well established

evidence to indicate that it does determine early detection and therefore

enables people to live a healthy life afterwards in a type of cancer that is

highly curable.

I compliment the minister on taking some action to get the

ball rolling in this area.

MR. TOBIN: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin Placentia West

on a point of order.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, just before you asked for

Statements by Ministers my colleague for St. John's East Extern stood in this

House to do what has been done traditionally for the past fourteen years or so

that I have been here, where people stand to pay tribute to various groups. The

hon. member stood up to pay tribute to a school in his district, I believe, that

won two gold medals in a national competition in this country and the Government

House Leader denied him the right to bring the recognition of these young

students to the floor of the Assembly.

Now, there has been a lot less than that brought to the floor

of this Assembly in the past, and whether government agrees with it or not there

are no rules in this House to allow you to do one thing and not do another. The

fact of the matter is we have done it traditionally. I have been around here,

not as long as the Government House Leader, but longer than most and I have

never seen children who have participated and won gold medals in a national

competition being refused to be recognized in this Assembly, and I would like to

ask the Government House Leader if he would reconsider and let the Member for

St. John's East make his announcement?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Let me say that Your Honour asked for leave and members on

the other side know about refusing leave because they regularly refuse leave to

the gentleman from St. John's East when he asks to be heard on Ministerial

Statements. They regularly refuse to give him leave and they have the right to

refuse to give him leave. The reason I am not prepared to give leave to my

friend for St. John's East Extern is one we have had up many times in the House.

If he had given me the courtesy, or done his House Leader the courtesy, to ask

for it, it would have been granted routinely.

I am quite prepared to see a letter of congratulations go to

the band, what I am not prepared to do is see a situation where any member will

stand and seek leave and expect to get it automatically. We have not done that

on this side -

MR. TOBIN: You have always done it.

MR. ROBERTS: We have not done that and we shall not. I

mentioned it to my friend, the House Leader. He is not here at the moment, but I

mentioned it to him. If my friend from St. John's East Extern had done us the

courtesy of saying that, fine, but when one asks leave to interrupt the regular

business of the House then I stand by -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: We have said that repeatedly.

Now my friends opposite know full well about refusing leave.

They regularly refuse leave to my friend from St. John's East when we grant it.

Now I am quite prepared, as one member, to see an appropriate letter go to the

young people at this school; we should all glory in their achievements.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I will hear one more member. The hon. the Member for

Ferryland, briefly.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Government House Leader is confusing the issue here, and

I would like to clarify it. We have denied leave, yes, and I have done it

personally, too, to the Member for St. John's East on Ministerial Statements,

and that was addressed before in this House. The Member for St. John's East has

no more authority than any other member here on this side of the House to stand

up and address Ministerial Statements. The electorate determines that, the

Official Opposition.

We have given leave on short notice and without any notice on

occasions. We have wasted more time in this House now talking about it than we

would have done in the thirty seconds to get up and do it, so I say let's get it

done and let's get it out of the way. We ask leave for the member to stand up

for thirty seconds and congratulate those people.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I will rule on the point of

order.

As hon. members well know, there is no provision in our rules

for statements by members, which may only be given with unanimous consent of the

House, so there is no point of order as such, and it takes leave to allow that

to occur.

AN HON. MEMBER: Point of order.

MR. SPEAKER: Well, that is my ruling on the point of

order.

The hon. the Member for St. John's East Extern.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I would just like once again

to ask for leave to ask for a letter of congratulations to be sent to the Holy

Trinity High School Bands.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, we will give leave now that the

hon. member has made his request.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East

Extern.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: It is done now.

MR. J. BYRNE: Well, I want to say a few words about it.

Mr. Speaker, the Holy Trinity Senior Concert Band and Jazz

Band, under the instruction of Mr. Douglas Vaughan, competed at MusicFest Canada

on May 17 in Calgary, Alberta, the only band from Newfoundland and only one of

five groups in Atlantic Canada and Quebec.

A total of 120 concert bands and 70 jazz bands competed, with

a total of 8,800 students. Both bands from Holy Trinity High received Gold

awards, the highest award given by MusicFest Canada. Two students, Melissa

Tucker and Rene Ryan received Honour nominations.

Mr. Speaker, could you send a letter of congratulations on

behalf of yourself and the Members of the House of Assembly?

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, we on this side wish to be

associated with it. It is a matter in which every Newfoundlander and every

Labradorian should take pride, and we do, and we ask that the appropriate

congratulatory letter be sent to the teachers and to the principal and to the

children of the school.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. Member for St. John's East

have leave to address the House?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I didn't speak to the point of order but I say to the Member

for Ferryland, I was elected Leader of my party -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARRIS: - and that may make me a little different

from other ordinary members in this House, but I would like to join with the

Member for St. John's East Extern and the Government House Leader and others in

commending the Holy Trinity High School Senior Concert Band and Jazz Band on

their great achievement, and I would endorse the sending of a letter by the

Speaker to this group for their commendable effort.

Oral Questions

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

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have questions for the Premier about Health.

The government, the Premier's government, is closing

hospitals beds and causing interruptions and downgrading of services for the

sick and injured throughout the Province. Patients and their relatives

everywhere, in urban and rural areas especially are becoming increasingly

alarmed.

Will the Premier acknowledge that the present health services

have deteriorated and the outlook for the coming month is even worse, and what

is the government going to do to reverse the decline and provide adequate health

services?

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess there has been no other aspect of the public services

that government provides over the years, that has gone through more change than

probably the health care sector, but that should not be confused with any effort

intentionally or otherwise to downgrade services.

What has been happening in the health care sector is that

points of delivery have been changing, methods of providing surgery have been

changing; new technologies have emerged that have caused things to be done

differently, new medications and drugs have been developed that aid in

treatments and in post-op procedures. All of these things have contributed to a

redirecting and reallocating and refocussing of the way things are done in

health care. We are not closing beds in the health care system. We are simply,

in some instances, reallocating resources that were in place to support beds, to

do things in day surgery and the like that is appropriate in response to what

the public is demanding and in response to what new medical technology is

enabling us to do in the system.

MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to ask

the Minister of Health: Where is the Minister of Health redirecting pregnant

women, injured people, and the sick from the Baie Verte Peninsula? Is he

redirecting them to Grand Falls? Why is he closing beds in Grand Falls? Is he

redirecting people from the Baie Verte Peninsula further afield to Gander, or is

he redirecting them to Corner Brook? What is the minister going to do to ensure

that the Baie Verte health centre has their quota of six doctors next year when

administrators have already determined, after contacting ninety doctors, that

there is only one committed to return next year?

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I trust the hon.

member will give me reasonable time to answer the multiplicity of questions that

were rolled into that one question.

We are not closing hospital beds per se. We have in the

Province at the moment as low as a 39 per cent occupancy rate in some of our

hospitals. The highest occupancy rates we have are in the major tertiary care

institutes in St. John's and to some extent in Corner Brook, where the occupancy

rates are up around 80 per cent to 85 per cent. That is really considered to be

full occupancy, because you have to have a cushion there of course to provide

for emergencies. But in the instances, and in Grand Falls - Windsor in

particular, we have an occupancy rate there in hospitals at a level low enough

to allow the new regional health care board there to reallocate some of the

resources that were supporting beds to do other things that need to be done on a

more appropriate basis.

With respect to whether or not there will be six full-time

doctors in the centre at Baie Verte next year, I don't know for twelve months,

365 days, there will be six doctors there. If that is their complement it is

certainly our intention and our hope and our best wish that that can be

accomplished. But I can tell the hon. minister that - or the hon. member who

wishes she was a minister, I'm sorry - that -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Not in your lifetime, sir. I can tell

the hon. Leader of the Opposition that the new regional health care board has

the full support of government and has received an appropriate allocation of

funds from government in this year's Budget to provide the appropriate level of

medical care services on the Burin Peninsula and elsewhere in the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The minister didn't

answer the questions about how he is going to ensure that the Baie Verte health

centre has its quota of six doctors next year. Will the minister admit that his

government's proposal or plan to provide adequate doctors to rural areas has

failed and that a bad situation has become worse? Will the minister admit that

it is time for a new approach to ensure a sufficient number of doctors for rural

areas, and in particular to ensure a sufficient number of physicians for the

Baie Verte Peninsula and the Burin Peninsula?

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. I'm

not sure whether the hon. member hears well or listens well. I don't know what

her problem is. I answered the question specifically. Her question was: What are

we doing to ensure that six doctors can be maintained as required in the Baie

Verte area next year, or this year. I told her that we have done all that we can

possibly do, in that we have provided the financial resources to the health care

board in that area such that they have the capacity to recruit and retain

hopefully doctors in rural Newfoundland.

I do acknowledge that there are difficulties in retaining

doctors in rural Newfoundland. There are a number of reasons for it. Dollars and

cents is a part of the problem, lifestyle is another part of the problem, the

amount of time that they have to be on call is another problem, the ability to

get back into urban settings to practice after is another part of the problem.

We are taking a number of initiatives as I outlined to the people from the Burin

Peninsula the other day, and as was readily admitted to being appropriate by the

members who were there, that we are doing a number of things to address rural

physician problems. We will continue to be vigilant and to do what is right and

what is appropriate, given the resources that we have and the magnitude of the

thing, to do what is right to make sure we have doctors available in all areas

of the Province.

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

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I say to the minister

that he and his government are not giving the Baie Verte health care centre or

other rural hospital administrators sufficient means to successfully recruit

doctors. I would like to ask him, with respect to an urban centre, will the

minister confirm that Western Memorial Regional Hospital at Corner Brook is

going to have to close more than twenty acute care medical beds this year? Will

the minister indicate his departments responsibility for that looming closure?

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I had the good fortune and the pleasure in January I believe

it was or no, since then, when I attended the School of Nursing Graduation in

Corner Brook. I had an hour to spare so I went to the Western Memorial Hospital

and I was given a very detailed tour of that facility. One of the highlights of

the tour - as far as the people who were showing me through the facility - was

this, they were showing me a part of the hospital that had newly been renovated

so that they could provide an adequate, an up to date and an appropriate day

surgery service in that facility and not by my asking but by them telling me.

They readily told me that they were pleased I guess in a way to be able to

indicate that as a result of the redevelopment of this space and as a result of

being able to put in place day surgery services - that they would now be able to

provide - that they were going to be able to take away some of the resources

that were in place supporting beds that were inappropriately being used or not

being used and put into day surgery. That is the type of redevelopment and

redirection that is happening out there and in health care generally. The hon.

member knows that just as well as I do, if she does not I would be glad to

further inform her if she wants more information on what is happening really.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the minister, yes or no, is the government, is the Western

Memorial Regional Hospital about to close more then twenty acute care medical

beds at the hospital in Corner Brook?

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I cannot confirm with exact

precision how many beds will be affected as a result of the gradual move, I

would say, to more day surgery at Western Memorial. I can check and see what the

ultimate result of that initiative will be but beds and plenty and in sufficient

numbers will be available at Western Memorial Hospital such that we can deliver

the appropriate program from beds out there if they are needed. We will do the

other things that are required to be done, that people are asking to be done and

that medically is now appropriate to do in terms of delivering health care at

Western Memorial. The hon. member, for what it is worth, should understand that

it is in good hands.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of

Health as well.

Yesterday in the House I raised the issue of the lack of

health care on the Burin Peninsula. I brought to the attention of the minister

problems being experienced by patients scheduled for surgery which had to be

cancelled because no anaesthetist had been available. Today, Mr. Speaker, I have

spoken with physicians on the Burin Peninsula and I have been informed that the

two remaining surgeons at the Burin Peninsula Hospital are about to resign, have

indicated to the administration of their resignation. Mr. Speaker, within two or

three weeks they will be gone. I ask the minister, will he do whatever is

necessary to ensure that other specialists are put in place to replace these

immediately?

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon.

member that this government is always vigilant about these things. We will do

whatever we can to ensure appropriate physician resources are available on the

Burin Peninsula to meet the need down there and that applies not only to the

Burin Peninsula but to every other part of the Province that is of equal

importance to us in terms of health care.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Burin - Placentia West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the response is very interesting,

I say to the minister, that when you consider last year there were eleven

specialists in the hospital on the Burin Peninsula. Mr. Speaker, in two to three

weeks time there will be one specialist left on the Burin Peninsula and that

will be a radiologist, I say to the minister. So if he is going to act so fast

on this, will he now commit, Mr. Speaker, to act as fast on the rest of the

specialists and put them in place as well? Will he put in place whatever is

necessary to attract these eleven specialists who have left Burin in the past

year?

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member knows that many, many years ago the

government directly got out of the direct engaging, hiring and deployment of

physicians. That was back under the old cottage hospital days. Many years ago we

gave that responsibility basically to the regional health care boards or in the

case of Burin Peninsula at that time and as we speak actually, the Burin

Peninsula Health Care Board. In the meeting that we had the other night with

representatives from that board, with the mayors of the peninsula and with the

members, everybody generally agreed, specifically agreed I would say, that the

Burin Peninsula Health Care Board is doing everything within reason to ensure

that doctors are being retained and recruited where necessary for the Burin

Peninsula, and I can assure the hon. member, as I did then, that the government,

through the Department of Health, has made and will continue to make appropriate

resources available so that the board down there can do the recruiting, and try

to do the retaining of doctors to the greatest extent possible. These things

happen sometimes. It is unfortunate. It is not the wish of the government to

have gaps in service anywhere. I can assure the hon. member that the importance

of the Burin Peninsula health care system is of urgency to us, and we will do

all we can to alleviate the situation.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Burin -

Placentia West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister, there is

someone not doing their job. The minister tries to hide behind the board. Well,

if the board is not doing their job, fire the board and replace them.

Ten specialists left Burin in the past year and have not been

replaced, I say to the minister, and that is serious. A woman cannot give birth

to a child anymore on the Burin Peninsula. You cannot have surgery anymore on

the Burin Peninsula, and the list continues to go on, so how can the minister

say all is well?

The fact of the matter is, and I would ask this minister -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TOBIN: Is the real reason why the minister has chosen

to do nothing, has supported the downgrading of specialists on the Burin

Peninsula to put us back to where we were even before the old cottage hospital

days, is because he had a hidden agenda to downgrade it to a clinical service?

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am surprised that the hon. member would cause such an

affront to his constituents down there, having said in front of them that they

were doing a good job, now to say they should probably be fired. It is totally

inappropriate.

MR. TOBIN: If what you said is true, they should be

fired!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TOBIN: People should not have to suffer.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask for order in the House so the minister -

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Members are always concerned about time in Question Period. I

would like the House to come to order, and ask the minister to give his

relatively brief answer.

MR. L. MATTHEWS: To answer his question as specifically

as I can, there is no plan by government, as he well knows, to downgrade health

care services or cause any difficulty on the Burin Peninsula.

I am, and this government is, as concerned as he is and

anybody else about any time that physicians are not available to provide

appropriate services, and I can assure him that we will do everything within our

power to ensure that the need is met there and everywhere else.

I believe he understands that, and I am sure that he will

take that as being a commitment of this government, as he knows it is already in

place in any event.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to ask a question of the Minister of Health.

Would the minister tell the House how many of the

approximately 1,400 beds in nursing homes in this city are occupied by people

who only require Level I care?

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, I can tell him with close approximation. There are about

280 Level I beds in the six nursing homes in the St. John's area. There are

Levels I, II and III. These beds mainly concentrated, however, in just two

homes, namely Saint Luke's, and I think it is the Glenbrook Lodge, and about 50

per cent of these beds are now being occupied by Level I people who are not

inappropriately occupying the beds because they are really only suitable at the

moment for Level I occupants. But there are about 140 or 150 beds in those two

homes, and that is about the bulk of them, that are of Level I types at the

moment.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland, a

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The average cost of operating a bedding and nursing home is

about $35,000 a year, not including an extra $25,000 a year capital cost to

operate that nursing home bed, for a total of $60,000 a year. Now, the minister

stated, and he stated it on CBC television on Saturday, that there is an 11 per

cent vacancy rate in personal care homes, so I ask the minister: Why does he

permit those who require Level I care to remain in a nursing home at a cost of

$60,000 per year when they can be in a personal care home at an average cost to

this Province of $2,400 a year?

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, thank you.

The cost of nursing home care beds has been bandied around a

bit in the press lately and I have to make the point of correcting some of the

information to put it in context. Our long-term care beds, including capital

cost, range anywhere from a low of about $2,700 a month to a maximum of much

less than $5,000 in the most expensive, most modern, newest facility we have,

and that extra cost is, of course, in the newer homes, because we have recently

built them and there is capitalized money there that has to be paid back,

mortgage money if you like. The figures that are being used are high,

exorbitant, and exaggerated.

There is a higher than an 11 per cent vacancy rate, however,

in personal care homes. In subsidized beds, beds that government attach some

sort of commitment to, there is even in those beds an 11 per cent vacancy rate

provincially in the personal care homes. In the unsubsidized beds there is a 30

per cent vacancy rate and this is why today in the Province we have personal

care home operators who have more than a passing interest in coming to

government and saying, can we now be licensed to accommodate Level 2 or Level 3

residents because of the fact that they have these spaces. We have licensed too

many spaces, probably, in personal care home and government is not in any sense

directly or indirectly causing people to stay in or to be in higher cost beds as

opposed to lower cost beds.

The new single entry system that is now up and running will,

over a short period of time, seek to cause this to be organized in a better

fashion.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I will give the hon. the Member for Ferryland a final

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I tell the minister that I obtained those costs from Question

Period in the House from the former Minister of Health, and here in this House

during Estimate Committee by Your Deputy Minister and his staff, and a former

minister in this House who told me that it cost $25,000 a year capital, and this

$35,000 operating can be found in this Budget by taking the number of beds and

dividing it into the total cost of long-term care. That is where the figures

came from and they are accurate.

The minister is avoiding the question. I asked him why does

he not fill the 11 per cent vacancy in subsidized homes and take the 280 people

who are in personal care homes now and put them in there where it is only

costing $2,400 a year? Now, the minister avoided answering that question.

I have another question for the minister, too, on costs.

There are presently many people in the Waterford, the Miller Centre, and other

hospitals around this city on the waiting list who are waiting to get

transferred to nursing homes. The minister stated we do not have a shortage of

nursing homes beds. He stated that in the media this past week. I ask the

minister if he would tell me how many people are in this category, waiting in

hospitals for transfers into nursing homes? They are not on the priority list,

by the way. And I ask him: Why are you spending $300 a day, bottom-line, up to

$500 a day or about $120,000 a year on the low end of the scale, to keep those

in hospitals when you can put them into nursing homes for $60,000 a year? It

doesn't make economic sense.

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

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I did not say in the media,

nor in the House, that we do not have need for some extra beds, probably in the

long-term care sector nursing homes. He knows very well that the present

assessed list is somewhere between 130 to 150. What the House should understand

is that three months ago there was a perception that there were thousands of

names on waiting lists in the St. John's area, and in fact there were. They were

accumulated in February for processing into the single entry system and there

were 3,000-plus names, but as a result of purging down to get the duplication

out, and as a result of writing people and asking them - the names that were

left, how many people were interested in nursing homes, the system attracted

less than 600 responses and of the 600 responses we still only have 150

assessed.

What I am saying to the public and what I am saying to

members of the House is if you will allow the single entry system to work for

the next three or four months we will have some very tight and firm numbers that

we can address in terms of need, if in fact there is an identified need for more

beds in the system at that time. But we can't run ahead of what we are doing.

The single entry system is identifying and working exactly as it is intended to,

to try to get a firm handle on what we need in terms of long-term care beds in

the system in the St. John's area and in the Province.

I am assured we will get that under control, if it is in fact

not quite that way, very, very quickly.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford -

Kenmount.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would like to hear the question from the Member for

Waterford - Kenmount.

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister

of Education and Training.

For the past months, the negotiations between the government

and the church leaders on future governance of the educational system have been

shrouded in secrecy.

About three months ago, the minister announced that a

consensus had been reached on three aspects of reform; the number and

composition of school boards, new transportation policy for students, a

Province-wide, single board for school construction.

Can the minister today inform the House on the status of the

negotiations, and explain what other aspects of educational reform have

prevented an acceptable resolution to negotiations to the church leaders?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education and

Training.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, the Planning and Priorities

Committee of Cabinet is meeting with the churches tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford -

Kenmount, a supplementary.

MR. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, twice in the past eighteen months, in December

of '93 and in June of '94, I asked the minister to table in the House his

proposed legislative amendments - and I know that they were written some time

ago - these amendments were to give effect to the government's educational

reform agenda. I ask the minister, is it his intention, particularly since the

House is going to close over the next day or so, to table the legislation prior

to the summer recess or will we have some way of communicating it in the next

week or so?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education and

Training.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I expect the House will close

today or tomorrow so we would not be tabling it in the House either today or

tomorrow or Friday, but I would like the hon. member though, to take an

opportunity to let us know where his party stands now, because there has been a

change in leadership over there. I do know personally the hon. member has been

suggesting that we should move quicker. I do know where the Leader of the

Opposition used to come from at one time but I think it is now time for them to

stand up and say exactly what they want government to do, instead of hiding

behind a smoke screen, Mr. Speaker, trying to pretend that (inaudible)

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Member

for Waterford - Kenmount.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, the minister knows that his

government has been in office for six years. It has been three years since you

received the Report of the Royal Commission; you have had a mandate so you say,

from the people of the Province for two years, and substantive consolidation and

amalgamation and streamlining have occurred at the school board level.

Mr. Speaker, school boards are now leading the reform

process. The public is losing patience with the minister I say, after six years

of talking, when will the minister change from his talk mode to an action mode?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education and

Training.

MR. DECKER: I agree with a lot of the statements the hon.

member made. It has been too long. Yes, Mr. Speaker, we realize that. We have

been trying to reach a consensus with the churches, we left no stone unturned;

we have bent over backwards, all the cliches you want to use.

We have compromised to the extent, Mr. Speaker, where we are

getting a lot of criticism but I would tell the hon. member that government's

job and the job of the concerned educators in the Province, would be made a lot

easier if the hon. member would stop playing politics with this issue and get up

today and tell us exactly where that party stands, because they have not made

their position public since they have had a new leader in place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I will hear from the hon. the Member for Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, in my mail I got a letter from the Mayor of the Town

of Grand Falls - Windsor with regard to the status of the HRD office for Central

Newfoundland that is currently in Grand Falls - Windsor. I am given to

understand that there are major cutbacks coming both in the Springdale office

which I directly represent and some significant cutbacks, if not a

consolidation, of all Central Newfoundland functions in probably Gander. I would

wonder if the Minister for Employment and Labour Relations can bring us up to

date on what are the federal government's plans with regard to HRD offices in

Central Newfoundland.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and

Labour Relations.

MR. MURPHY: Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have

already had an opportunity to talk to the minister responsible for HRD, Minister

Axworthy. As I said the other day to the Member for Burin - Placentia West, to

my colleague for Stephenville, and I say now to the Member for Green Bay, on

Friday afternoon we have a meeting with Mr. Axworthy. I can assure the member

that that particular problem raised by the member will be discussed with Mr.

Axworthy, because this is not a fait accompli yet as such..

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia.

MR. CAREEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I would like to

address a question to the Premier as Minister responsible for Intergovernmental

Affairs. I would like to have an update on how the compensation package that the

civilian workforce out of Argentia were denied compared to Canadian civilians

who were working on Canadian bases were given. There is a big difference and I'm

wondering, Mr. Speaker, how the negotiations are going with the Canadian

government.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I know of the hon. member's

concern. I would say there are not many more issues that - I guess there are

probably one or two more issues I've spent more time on than that, but I've

written a lot to a lot of people, including the senior officials in Washington,

the U.S. ambassador to Canada on numerous occasions - I've met with him on

several occasions -, Mr. Dingwall, who has a responsibility in the area. I've

spoken and written to the Prime Minister about it, I've written numerous letters

to Mr. Tobin about it. We've been constantly trying to ensure that the former

employees at Argentia get the full and fair treatment that they deserve.

However, the ability to move the monolithic United States

government off a pretty fixed position once it takes it is quite difficult. The

Prime Minister I know has raised the issue directly with the President and

raised other issues in relation to it, particularly in relation to environmental

clean up which we've done at the same time, and spent a good deal of time on

that.

I can only say to the hon. member that the effort is ongoing.

As late as last week I had a discussion, and I have another discussion planned

for this coming Saturday with a senior federal minister that will deal with that

issue, amongst others. So the matter is ongoing but I don't see any immediate

success in sight.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question period has expired.

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and

Labour Relations.

MR. MURPHY: Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. At

this time I would like to present to the House the Occupational Health and

Safety Division's report of the Labrador West Dust Study 1982, and subsequent

follow-up report.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I stand today and

present a petition on behalf of fifty residents of my district, the majority

coming from the community of St. Shotts. The prayer of the petition is as

follows:

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland

in parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador ask for the House of Assembly to accept

the following prayer: We the undersigned do hereby request the Minister of

Employment and Labour Relations to provide funding to generate desperately

needed employment in our communities, as in duty bound your petitioners will

ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, once again a petition is coming forward from

this side of the House to bring forward the concerns and the issues that are

facing many of our rural communities. Not only is this topic for rural

Newfoundland but indeed, I'm sure, for many parts of urban Newfoundland also.

The reason for bringing it forward today, Mr. Speaker, I guess relates to the

problems that we have experienced in our communities over the past couple of

years in relation to the downturn in our fishery. The crisis, Mr. Speaker, I say

without any hesitation, the crisis that it has caused in the small communities

in my district as it relates to people who are looking for work or some type of

work. Mr. Speaker, the people in the communities are not looking for some short

term assistance. They are looking for some long term viable types of programs

that can not only give them the opportunity to partake in the workforce but

indeed to be able to live and to stay in rural Newfoundland where they have made

their homes.

Mr. Speaker, the problem that we find in our communities is

that over the past couple of years, due to the cod moratorium, many people have

been successful in being able to obtain the TAGS program and for some reason or

other we have many people that were indirectly involved in the fishery but for

some reason or other they fell through the cracks of these programs. They have

not been able to partake in some of the training programs that have been coming

forward or in relation to the green projects or whatever the case may be. It was

those people who were indirectly involved in the fishery or because of some

reason, Mr. Speaker, they did not make it to the TAGS program or the NCARP

program at the time, were being left out.

I receive continuous calls to my office and letters, Mr.

Speaker, from people who are trying to partake in some type of training program

that has been offered by some of the private colleges or the public institutions

here in the Province. Mr. Speaker, these people who are tying to better

themselves through adult basic education or some type of a program such as home

care, nursing assistant or whatever the case may be, these people are trying to

further themselves, to give themselves the opportunity to at leave find some

other type of employment, especially like I said before with the downturn in our

fishery.

So, Mr. Speaker, these types of employment programs, whether

they be part training and part work are desperately needed in the communities in

my district as I am sure they are desperately needed in the communities

throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. I ask that the Minister of Employment and

Labour Relations look towards the funding that he has for his department. Try to

offer some type of program, some type of training program for these people who

are left outside the TAGS program. Try to find some type of work training

related program that will give the people the opportunity and more so then

anything else, Mr. Speaker, I say with all sincerity, the dignity to have the

opportunity to work and to live in Newfoundland. I think when you look around

the District of St. Mary's - The Capes, Mr. Speaker, and I would not hasten to

guess when you look around any district in the Province, that people's loss of

dignity in being able to go out and go to work each morning, whether it was in

the fishing industry or if it was in something related to the fishing industry,

with the loss of that dignity it is certainly not creating a very good

atmosphere throughout the Province and because of this I am pleased today to

bring forward this petition on behalf of forty-seven persons from the community

of St. Shott's and three from the community of Trepassey.

Mr. Speaker, everybody is fully aware of the situation in the

Trepassey area as it relates to the former FPI plant and the devastation that it

has caused in that area since that plant was shut down in September of 1990. I

hope that the minister takes these petitions that I am bringing forward on

behalf of those people seriously, Mr. Speaker, because it is a very serious

situation. Most of these people who have signed this petition and others that I

have brought forward are people who are indirectly involved in the fishing

industry, people who were working at the restaurants, working as truck drivers,

working as babysitters or whatever the case may be, indirectly involved in the

fishing industry. These are the people now that the government, for some reason

or other, have turned their backs on. They are not giving the opportunity for

those people to go to work and in most cases, most importantly over the past few

weeks I have learned that many of those people are not even getting the

opportunity to partake in the many, many training programs that are being

offered now through the TAGS program or any other type of program that the

provincial government offers.

So, Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to present

this petition and hope that the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations

takes these petitions very seriously and does something about them. Thank you,

Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to stand and support

the petition presented by my friend and colleague from St. Mary's - The Capes as

it relates to the community of St. Shotts.

Mr. Speaker, I find it somewhat irritating, to say the least,

that a member would stand in this House and present a petition on behalf of his

constituents seeking alternate employment and the Minister of Employment and

Labour Relations would turn back on to him and ignore the comments and the

wishes of these people from the community of St. Shotts. Now the minister may

not know where St. Shotts is. I do not know if the minister knows where St.

Shotts is or not, but I can tell him that St. Shotts -

AN HON. MEMBER: He lived on the Southern Shore.

MR. TOBIN: When? When did he live on the Southern Shore,

John?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: I am not sure if the minister knows when he

lives on the Southern Shore.

Mr. Speaker, the people of St. Shotts - and I happen to know

St. Shotts well - are a hard-working, dedicated, committed group of individuals

who have given their whole lives to nothing except hard work and providing for

their families.

What is happening here is that because of the downturn in the

fishery St. Shotts, like a lot of other communities in rural Newfoundland, find

themselves in a situation whereby they have to depend upon the TAGS program, but

the people of St. Shotts do not want to depend upon the TAGS program. They are

looking to government to do something, to provide some sort of alternative, to

provide an incentive where they can go out and become meaningfully and gainfully

employed in the economy of this Province, and to contribute to the economy of

this Province. They want to be a meaningful community, diversifying themselves

and presenting opportunities which they can avail of to become gainfully

employed.

Now this government has to do something. It is all fine and

dandy to blame it all on the federal government. You have the Minister of Health

today blaming all the problems on the Burin Peninsula on the health care board

as he skirted his responsibility, ran like a rat, and let the people of the

Burin Peninsula go down there without any health care service for the past year,

since you became the minister. Eleven specialists in the Burin hospital a year

ago, and now there are ten, and the minister stands and says there is no

problem!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TOBIN: I can say to the minister that it is nothing

but negativism when you let the health care system fall from eleven specialists

to ten, and any minister worth his salt would do something about it -

MR. SULLIVAN: Down to two specialists.

MR. TOBIN: Down to two? No, one. A radiologist is the

only one going to be left there in two weeks time, and this minister says there

is no problem?

AN HON. MEMBER: Maybe he should go to work on you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TOBIN: Maybe someone should go to work on you. I can

say to the minister, the psychiatrist has left down there as well, so there is

no one there to go to work on you.

What is happening is that you have this minister come in who

is nothing but a bluff and is prepared to sell out the health care system of the

people of the Burin Peninsula and throughout rural Newfoundland. It is time for

you, Sir, to stand up and do what you have been put in that seat to do, and that

is to protect the health care interests of the people of this Province. That is

what you should do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TOBIN: I can say to the minister that when people

call me -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Yes, and you are dumb.

When people call me, concerned about their mother who has

been put in the hospital to have a breast removed for cancer, and a few hours

before she was going to the surgery room the surgery was cancelled because there

was no specialist there to administer the anaesthetic that was necessary for

that woman to have her surgery, that concerns me, Minister. It might not concern

you, but I can tell you that it concerns me, and it concerns me immensely.

AN HON. MEMBER: You have no corner on compassion or

concern (inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: No, Mr. Speaker, I do not. I say to the

minister that I really do not, and there are thousands out there like me, but I

wish you would join us, Sir.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TOBIN: I would say to the Minister of Health that it

is very easy to get carried away, and I apologize to the House for getting

carried away from the petition, but when I see you persecuting people in this

Province, denying them the right to adequate and fair health service, then, Sir,

I get carried away.

Getting back to the petition, I would encourage the minister

to look to the needs of the people of St. Shotts as they are relayed in that

petition, to do what needs to be done, and to put some jobs in place.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.

MR. MURPHY: Let me say to the hon. Member for St. Mary's

- The Capes that I share his concern. It is tough for the Myricks and some of

the other people from St. Shotts. I know St. Shotts well. It is a great area of

our Province, like all of our Province.

Traditionally, I say to the member, the people in St. Shotts

worked in Trepassey at the FPI plant, or were fishermen, and so forth and so on,

and of course he knows the impact the loss of the groundfish has had on the

people of St. Shotts. We have done some things recently that have helped some of

the people in St. Shotts, with assistance from ACOA and Mr. Crosbie and what

have you with the sod farming and those kinds of things.

But the member is totally right that we have to continue to

concern ourselves with the inability of people to find long-term gainful

employment. We are continuing to develop, negotiate with our federal

counterparts. The member can be assured that this government will do everything

it can to help the people of St. Shotts as we are trying to help people

throughout the Province, both in Labrador and on the Island portion. Thank you

very much, Mr. Speaker.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Day

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, it is the Opposition's right to

choose a subject for today. I understand they wish to debate the bill which

stands as Bill No. 100, a nice round number, Order No. 14, so perhaps if you

would call that.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act Respecting The Good

Faith Donation And Distribution Of Food". (Bill No. 100)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm very happy to

stand here today and introduce Bill No. 100, a bill which reads

An Act

Respecting The Good Faith Donation And Distribution Of Food. Otherwise known in

other provinces as the Good Samaritan bill.

The Explanatory Note for this particular bill I will read:

"This Bill would provide that a person who donates food or who distributes

donated food is not liable for injuries or death resulting from the consumption

of the donated food unless the person intended to injure the recipient of the

food or acted recklessly in donating or distributing the food."

First of all, I would like to -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, first of all I would like to

thank all members of the House of Assembly here for allowing this bill to reach

this stage in the House, for giving me leave to introduce it in the beginning,

and now allowing it to reach second reading. I would particularly like to thank

the Government House Leader for assigning it a number and bringing it forward as

a bill. It is not something that I'm doing for political reasons; it is

something that is very close to me and something that I believe in.

You might ask why a private member's bill, why not a private

member's resolution. My experience has been, and being a novice to this House

and seeing the way that Private Members' Day transpires, that I'm not so sure

that private members' resolutions have great effect. It seems as though private

members' bring forward their resolutions and we get up on both sides of the

House, debate them and put forward our views, but that is where it ends, that is

where it dies. It doesn't seem to be taken anywhere further.

Although I stand to be corrected, I understand in some

jurisdictions private members' days, instead of being used for resolutions, are

being brought forward as private members' bills in other jurisdictions. This is

a way that private members usually take

part in debate in the House. They bring

forward their own bills, and if the bill has merit it is voted on and brought

forward as legislation and becomes the law of the land. That is the reason why I

choose to bring forward this particular piece of legislation in a bill form

rather than in a resolution form.

I've talked privately with the Government House Leader and he

indicated that he had probably some concerns with the reading of the bill, in

that there may be some legitimate concerns there with the legality of some of

the words. I assured him that I was wide open for some small changes in that,

and he being a lawyer, if he could change the wording around where it would be

more satisfactory to him, then I would certainly go along with that, as well,

but having said that, I would like to say that this particular bill is written

almost identical to Bill 170, that was produced by Mr. Donald McGetty, the

Member of Parliament for Ottawa South in the Ontario Provincial Legislature.

Mr. Speaker, you might ask, why the need for legislation -

why the need for such particular legislation? I have done a fair amount of

research on this bill, made a lot of phone calls, talked to a lot of people, and

I understand that some people here in this Province who ordinarily would donate

food, have probably the same concerns as they have in other provinces, like the

Province I just referred to, the Province of Ontario, where many people, Mr.

Speaker, many corporations are a little hesitant to donate food because of the

repercussions, because they may be involved in a liability suit. And you know as

well as I do, if you have a business, whether it is a grocery business or a

restaurant business or what have you, and if it is brought forward that you have

donated food or you have been accused of distributing food that has been unfit

for human consumption, then you won't be in business very long, Mr. Speaker. You

won't be in business very long; whether it was done intentionally or

unintentionally, Mr. Speaker, the perception will still be the same.

Many people, rather than take the chance of making donations,

Mr. Speaker, and rather than take the chance of a liability suit, many times

direct this food another way, and instead of it being consumed by the needy in

our provinces, it is directed towards a landfill site or towards a dump, where

nobody, absolutely nobody gets benefit from food that can be consumed and it is

food that is quite edible, quite healthy but for those reasons, it goes to a

waste disposal site.

Mr. Speaker, identical legislation has been passed in five

other provinces of this country, namely: Manitoba, Ontario, Nova Scotia, New

Brunswick and Quebec, and I might add, similar legislation has been brought

forward, passed, made the rule of the land in all fifty states in the United

States. So it is nothing new, Mr. Speaker, it is nothing earth-shattering, it is

just a simple bill that would help many, many people in our Province here today.

For information, Mr. Speaker, I don't know how many people

are aware of it, but there is something to the tune of 45,000 people here in

this Province who make use of food banks - 45,000 people, and a rule of thumb is

that 40 per cent of all people who use food banks are children; that is, in

excess of 20,000 people right here in this Province today who are using food

banks on a regular basis.

I have had some experience with food banks myself, in that I

was part of an organization that tried to set up a food bank in my own area,

seeing a need that was there; in fact, my daughter was a volunteer, and

volunteered there on a regular basis, and for reasons I think, which probably

this bill would go forward in correcting, that particular food bank was one of

many which probably had to close because of insufficient supplies. I remember

the food bank being open five days a week; five evenings a week, then it was

down to three and then down to two and finally it had to close altogether, not

because the need wasn't there, Mr. Speaker, but because there wasn't enough food

to be distributed.

This bill is much the same, as I have stated, as Bill 170,

put forward in the Province of Ontario, and even though their numbers are much

greater because of the difference in population, certainly, and the people who

use the food banks, but the need here in this Province is just as great and just

as pressing. In this Province, today, I understand there is something like

fifty-four active food banks, of which thirty-one are located here on the Avalon

Peninsula, in St. John's, Mount Pearl and Conception Bay South. I understand

also that the Community Food Sharing Association here in St. John's probably

gets the bulk of the food and distributes it around to the thirty-one food banks

in the immediate area.

In conversation with Mr. Egbert Walters, Chairman of the

Community Food Sharing Association, a person who has been very knowledgeable,

and very close to this particular idea, to this piece of legislation - in

conversation with him, he has informed me that he would be very eager to see

this legislation passed through the House as quickly as possible, because he

feels, as I do, that you will see, maybe not many more participants, but you may

see greater quality, a greater quantity in the donations brought forward. Mr.

Speaker, there is a severe shortage in our food banks today, and I think this

bill will probably go a long way towards seeing some of that shortage is met.

Earlier, I distributed a fair amount of information, I

distributed a copy of the bill to all members of the House, and I also attached

to that some comments from people in other provinces, and in other states in the

United States who have experienced going to food banks and have been part of

food banks prior to the passing of such legislation, and being part of it after

similar legislation became effective. I might add, they were all very, very

positive upbeat remarks and encouraging remarks, that we should proceed in the

same direction.

Food banks, Mr. Speaker, whether we like them or not, are

part of every-day reality, are part of the economic conditions we find ourselves

in today, and the people who use them, I can guarantee you, are not people who

are too lazy to go to work, or people who have no desire to go to work. Many,

many people today who are using food banks are people who would ordinarily be

found in the workforce and would ordinarily be working, but because of the

downturn in the economy, because of layoffs and because of lack of opportunity,

many of our own Newfoundlanders have no other choice but to go and line up to

take

part in receiving food that is put forward in a food bank because of the

lack of funding in order to go out to the local stores to buy and bring home

such food.

You may ask: what type of food we are talking about when I

introduced this bill. Somebody might say, well, if you talk about directing food

to the city dump, you might be talking about food that is unfit for human

consumption. Mr. Speaker, that is not the intent whatsoever. Human nature has it

that when we go into a store to buy groceries, to buy food today, the first

thing we look at is the `best before' date. That is on most of our produce, it

is on most of our canned goods, our perishable items, and meats. Just about

everything we buy has a `best before' date on it.

When we see a particular item that has the `best before' date

close to the day we shop, we kind of push that aside and reach to the back to

look for something where the expiry date extends far beyond the next one or two

days. Now, a lot of this food, I am sure, in some of those grocery stores, in

some of those distributing stores, could come off the shelf days before it does,

if the operators knew that this food could be directed towards a common cause,

where people could take the food and enjoy the benefits of it, instead of

sending it to a garbage dump.

This is the type of food I am talking about. I am talking

about food that is close to the `best before' date, the expiry date. I am

talking about canned goods, dented cans, maybe cans that have been labelled

incorrectly, as long as we know what is inside of them, maybe, Mr. Speaker,

foods such as turkey, chicken, meats that have been packaged and there have been

a few pinholes in the wrappings, some small freezer burns, Mr. Speaker. This has

been shown - and the Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture looks over

because I'm sure that he is very much aware of some of the things that I'm

talking about. But in conversation with people prior to today they tell me that

such small defects do not adulterate the food, they don't make it unfit for

human consumption. If this food could be caught in time, directed towards a food

bank, have it distributed and consumed within the next forty-eight or so hours,

there is no reason why such particular donations cannot be consumed and cannot

provide some of the nutrition that we are looking for in our population today.

This legislation will do two things, as I see it. It will

increase the supply of donations to our food banks and to other areas if they

may not be called food banks. Maybe it is some other supply of food which our

churches regularly provide, or other concerned associations and participants

supply. It will protect an existing supply of donations. It will do both of

those things and I would think it would increase greatly the amount of food that

is being brought forward.

The other thing about this particular legislation is it

doesn't cost government one cent, not a cent. In fact, when the Minister of

Education in debate here a couple of days ago with the critic for education over

here - one of the things that they talked about was the need for our students to

be provided with a suitable breakfast before they go and attend a full day in

school. Many of our young people today - and I think we both agree on each side

of this House - many of our young people today -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FITZGERALD: - don't have that opportunity.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

By leave.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, I will just use a couple of

more seconds here to clue up, because I will have another opportunity to respond

after.

If we could provide a greater quantity of food, then we would

see the 45,000 people plus - or I guess taking into consideration that 20,000 of

those are children, this would also supply a need, fill a great void in the need

that is out there today, and many of our younger people when they go to school

would go with a full stomach rather than going looking for breakfast when they

get at school, or else being unable to compete and unable to excel because of

hunger.

Mr. Speaker, I will have a few more things to say when I move

this bill at the end. I would certainly welcome participation. Thank you very

much.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to say a few

words with respect to the bill moved by my friend for Bonavista South. Let me

say first of all that we are quite convinced that the subject of this bill is

one that should be addressed. That is why we went through the parliamentary

measures necessary to bring it to the stage where it could be debated.

I think my friend for Bonavista South will agree that his

decision to introduce a bill as opposed to a motion put him in a difficult

position procedurally, because under the rules of the House a bill to be passed

must see the adoption of three separate motions - first, second and third

readings. Each of those, if one had insisted on the letter of the rules, would

in theory constitute a full day. Without any hesitation, and not a matter of

looking for Brownie points, we agreed to let this move forward, but I must say

that we would be wary of seeing very many bills moved on Private Members' Day.

We think that Wednesdays should be a matter of motions where the House can

express a point of view on a topic and could be debated. I will deal with that

in a little different context in a moment or two.

I want to say as well that we don't take issue with the

general approach of the bill. It is not unique to this situation. My friend for

Bonavista South asked me some time ago about what we call the Good Samaritan act

which if I remember correctly I had a hand in enacting in a previous life, maybe

twenty years or thirty years ago when I came into the House for the first time.

I had a note of it here. It is called the emergency medical aid act, which

appears as

Chapter E-9 of the Consolidated Statutes, 1990. Again, I will make a

reference to that in a moment.

The subject is not a new one, the topic is not a new one, but

I must advise the House that in my opinion the bill as it stands is badly

drafted in that it does not express legal concepts clearly and unambiguously,

and we are not prepared to ask the House to vote for it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Why not?

MR. ROBERTS: The reason why not, I say to my friend from

Grand Bank, is that the bill - I will give my reasons; I only have fifteen

minutes, but I will deal with it as briefly as I can. We have what I believe is

a constructive solution to put forward, which I shall put forward, and the House

will deal with it.

Mr. Speaker, my friend from Grand Bank says it is taken from

another jurisdiction. I heard my friend from Bonavista South say it is virtually

the same as some bill in Ontario. I have not looked at the Ontario bill, but I

have had those who deal with these matters on our behalf look at this, and they

have given me their advice and -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: I agree with my friend from St. John's East

that just because it is in Ontario does not make it good. This bill, in my

judgement, is not a good piece of draughtsmanship and I do not say that in any

unkind way. I think my friend from Bonavista South would acknowledge that he did

not draft it, nor did he seek legal advice from some member of this Bar here, or

one of the drafters in drafting it, and I do not blame him for that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) legal advice from the leader.

MR. ROBERTS: He may have gotten legal advice from his

leader, but I want to get...

Mr. Speaker, let me just explain why, in my opinion, as a

member of this House, and as one with some limited experience in law and in

matters of statute, the bill is badly drafted.

First of all,

Section II would make a person liable in

negligence only if, number one, the food was adulterated, rotten or otherwise

unfit for human consumption and, number two, the person had a degree of intent

that the learned members of the House, the lawyer's in the House would agree is

almost tantamount to the criminal level of intent, almost tantamount to Mensrea.

That is a very long step to take.

Secondly, the bill in 2.2 - I am sorry; let me come back to

2.1 still. The first part, 2.1(

a) which says that you are not liable unless the

food was adulterated, rotten or otherwise, that is a state of fact. Who decides?

Is there a duty of inquiry on the person who gives out the food? Or can he or

she simply say: Well, there it is. I don't want it for whatever reason. I am

going to flick it out and somebody will take it and maybe be glad to have it,

and if they get sick, too bad. Is there a duty of inquiry or is there not a duty

of inquiry?

I am not raising these issues to be devilish or troublesome.

I am raising them because these are issues which will have to be addressed in

the course of administering this kind of law.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) ands.

MR. ROBERTS: My learned friend from St. John's East is

quite right. These are all ands and accumulative. It would be all but

impossible, under 2.1 as drafted, ever to affix civil liability. We are not

talking criminal liability; we are talking civil liability for the negligent

distribution of food.

Mr. Speaker, Part B, as I said, all but imparts the criminal

standard, and that is a very far way to go. The criminal standard of

responsibility is a very onerous one, and one that we should be wary of bringing

into what should be matters of civil liability.

Next, the bill is not limited to food banks. My friend has

spoken of food banks, and I understand that to be his primary motivating concern

and I share that concern. Many people look to food banks for food assistance,

and we must do what we properly can to help them, but this bill is not limited

to food banks. It would apply to me giving a round of cheese over the back fence

to my neighbour next door. That may be going too far, no duty of inquiry -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: I beg your pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: All donations (inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: And a donation is simply a fifty-one cent

word for gift. It is from the latin donatio, or the verb is dono, donare,

donati, donatum if I remember my Grade VIII Latin correctly. That is simply a

fancy word for gift. It is not even a donatio mortis causa, I say to my friend

from St. John's East.

My friend from Bonavista can find out what a donatio mortis

causa is and he can have a look at it but, Mr. Speaker, it would apply to

everybody and we are not sure that it should. Not only that, Mr. Speaker, it

applies to corporations because the word, `person' in 2.1 by definition is not

an individual, that is a person-in-law which includes a corporation. So we would

have a situation where a corporation would be under no duty to make inquiry and

unless the corporation gave away food that was rotten or adulterated and with no

duty of inquiry and they intended to poison, one would never be able to affix

liability. Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not sure that the House wants to go that far.

I can say that as one member of the House and speaking for the government,

fourteen of us in this House, we are not prepared to go that far until we know

where we are going and why. This legislation simply does not pass the test that

it must pass.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the issue quite simply is whether we wish,

the House wishes to leave any person, natural or corporate, who gives away food

from any obligation of any sort and I am not sure that we want to go that far. I

am certainly sure that we do not want to go that far until we have looked before

we leap. If my friend from Grand Bank looked before he leapt he would not be

where he is today, I say to him. We don't know, Mr. Speaker, we are not sure

that we should go so far as to exonerate a level of conduct, any level of

conduct, any level of any type of conduct below the criminal standard.

Now, Mr. Speaker, let me conclude this portion of my remarks

by simply reading the last paragraph of a minute to me by one of the legislative

council, I will not name him or her, `From a drafting point of view the language

employed in the proposed act is frequently ambiguous. Further study would be

warranted before one could endorse it as it stands.' Now, Mr. Speaker, compare

that if you wish to the Good Samaritan Act that we have on our books which is

the Emergency Medical Aid Act, that act has been on the books since 1971. Well

it was done in a previous incarnation. I guess I was probably the minister who

sponsored it twenty-four or twenty-three years ago at the end of the Smallwood

years. That act, which has stood the test of time and has met the need, exempts

conduct below gross negligence but that is all it exempts. It says that the

physician, registered nurse or other person is not liable for damages, for

injuries to or the death of the person alleged to have been caused by

an act or

omission on his/her part and rendering the medical services of first aid unless

it is established that the injury or death was caused by gross negligence on

his/her part.

So, Mr. Speaker, where we would be if we adopted this bill

without any change is that in giving away food one could escape consequences

unless there was what amounts to criminal conduct or as against that, a person

who renders medical aid in an emergency -surely a situation that commands a

higher duty - a person who renders medical aid is exempted unless he/she was

grossly negligent. Now there is just no comparison between the two.

Mr. Speaker, let me then see if we could try to move our way

out of this. Let me make a point as well, we have not heard, the government has

not heard and I have spoken with a number of my colleagues who checked with

their officials, who have not heard from the food banks. Now there is no law

saying the food banks have to speak to us. They can speak to whom they want but

I find it very interesting that if this perceived need is out there, nobody has

ever raised the matter with us. That does not mean it is right, that does not

mean it's wrong, it is just a state of fact.

So, Mr. Speaker, we are not prepared accordingly to ask our

friends in the House to vote for this bill at second reading but I am prepared

to address the issues on their merits. Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, I will move the

following amendment - now remember the motion before the House, Sir, as I

understand it, is that this bill be now read a second time. I move that the

motion be amended so that it would read: That the House request the Minister of

Fisheries, Food and Agriculture, the Minister of Health and the Minister of

Social Services to determine the legislative measures best suited to resolve the

issues addressed by the bill and to report thereon to the House at an early

time.

Perhaps Your Honour could have a look and tell me if that's

in order.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: That is a second reading amendment, yes.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: Yes, I do.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair has just received a copy of this

so I am going to recess the House briefly to have a look at the amendment.

MR. ROBERTS: Of course, sir.

Recess

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On the amendment put forth by the hon. Government House

Leader the Chair has consulted and reviewed the regulations and the forms of the

amendments at second reading and finds that this amendment is in order.

The hon. Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I shall be very brief, because

other members no doubt want to speak. I ask my friends on this side of the House

to support the amendment, and I hope members on both sides will support it

because I suggest, with all respect, that it is a means of addressing this

important issue.

MR. SULLIVAN: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland on a point

of order.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I am certainly not in any way

challenging the Speaker's decision but we did not have an opportunity to make a

submission to the Speaker.

MR. ROBERTS: That is challenging the decision.

MR. SULLIVAN: I only said I did not have an opportunity

to make a submission. That is not challenging anybody. We did have a particular

concern and I certainly respect that. Under the three options, for our

information, if possible, Mr. Speaker, if we could, the basis it is under, for

future information, that we would be able to know what is within the scope of

the proceedings of the House, whether it is under a hoist, a reasoned amendment,

or referral as subject matter to a committee that would enlighten us and be able

to expedite business on this matter in the future.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: It is my submission that there is no point

of order. Your Honour made a ruling. Your Honour adjourned the House to consider

the matter and no hon. member, including my friend from Ferryland, stood and

said he wished to be heard.

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I let my friend for Ferryland

speak without interruption and perhaps he might do me the same courtesy.

Your Honour clearly said, I shall adjourn to ponder this

matter to make a ruling and nobody asked to be heard. Now, the ruling has been

made. If His Honour wishes to add to it fine, but I am not sure one can require

him to. In fact I do not think one can, but I say in respect to the point of

order, that my friend for Ferryland cannot do indirectly that which he cannot do

directly. He cannot challenge Your Honour's ruling except by the state of

procedure, and if he wishes to follow that procedure we on this part shall

oblige him by following the procedure and dealing with it. Your Honour has made

a ruling and in my submission there is no point of order.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: I accept the Speaker's ruling. I have no

doubt about that whatsoever and I am not questioning that. To make the House

more knowledgeable on proceedings I would like to know for my personal

information and to expedite business in the future, it would be interesting to

know the reasoning behind the ruling so that it could prevent such decisions

from coming up in the future, and being able to deal with matters more

expeditiously. That is all I am requesting. I am in no way challenging it. I

accept it, move forward, and leave it at that. I would like to know for my

information.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Really, there is no point of order. The hon. member is not

raising a point of order. There is no standing order or no particular

section of

Beauchesne that he has quoted that would require that to be a point of order, so

really there is no point of order.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I need only a sentence or two

to conclude what I wish to say with respect to the matter. I shall ask my

friends to vote for this amendment and I hope that members on both sides will

vote for it because as I was saying a moment or two ago when my friend raised

his point of order this is a means whereby we can address what I acknowledge to

be and what the government acknowledges to be a valid and relevant issue, and

one which should be addressed by this House.

Our concern is simply with the legislative manner in which we

do so. We have a responsibility, as long as we are the government, to bring our

best judgement to bear, having taken advice from those who advise us, to bring

our best judgement to bear on the form and substance in which statutes are cast.

I have explained the reasons why; the advice I have is to the effect that the

draft bill as it was put forward by my friend, while it is not offensive in any

way and, in fact, much of it we find acceptable, does raise issues which, in our

view, should be addressed and resolved.

I have spoken with each of my colleagues, in fact, all three,

well, two of them are here in the House; my friend, the Minister of Health was

here a moment or two ago. I have their assurance - all three of the ministers,

Mr. Speaker, are in the House, and not that I need their assurance, but all

three have assured me that they will deal with this matter on its merits and

expeditiously, and when the House meets early in the Fall, a report will be

brought forward and either legislation, or we will have to deal with the policy

issue. But if the policy issue works out, as we anticipate may be the case, I

think it will be reasonable to expect that legislation will then be introduced.

We have no difficulty in dealing with the matter, we do have difficulty in

dealing with it in this form. With that said, Sir, I thank the House for the

opportunity to speak.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased today to stand and support the bill brought

forward by my colleague, the Member for Bonavista South, and I am pleased to say

at the outset that I fully support the bill and I would like to congratulate the

member for bringing it forward and addressing this concern that we have in this

Province, Mr. Speaker, and I would allow, in many parts of this great country of

Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I represent the fishery district of St. Mary's -

The Capes, which has been dependent on the fishery for a number of years, a

fishery that has provided full and plenty, I say, to many of the families in my

district. And we have never been in a crisis situation such as we have found

ourselves in over the past couple of years. I would just like to start off my

few remarks by touching on that. In relation to the fishery shut-down, much pain

and concern have been caused the people of the communities in my district not

only in relation to food supplement, Mr. Speaker, but in relation to the

economic benefits derived from the fishery. These economic benefits, as I said

earlier, provided full and plenty for everybody, and due to the fishery

shut-down now, we have found ourselves having some major problems in being able

to provide for our families, being able to provide for our communities. Indeed,

I have been receiving several phone calls, every day, Mr. Speaker, and some of

them, to tell you the truth, it is gut-wrenching to hear the stories, as it is

in dropping by homes in my district that have small children - which I will

touch on later - but to drop by homes in my community where they really don't

have the proper amount of food, not only for their youngsters but for

themselves.

I would think, for the first time in many, many years,

certain families in my district have had to rely on Social Services because of

the problems that have been associated with the crisis in our fishery. These

people, Mr. Speaker, have I guess, their dignity and their pride, too, which

have come to bear on the problems they are facing. This is a very serious issue

- and the fact of food banks themselves, Mr. Speaker, for the first time, I

would think, many people in the district have had to either go to the local

church or the local school or wherever, to find some assistance, whether it be

through cash or goods to provide for their families. And I know personally, Mr.

Speaker, cases where this has caused major stress on people, the fact of having

to do that because of the situation they have found themselves in.

People are not happy, Mr. Speaker, when they have to go to a

food bank or when they have to go, like I said, to the local church or school or

whatever organizations in that community that are helping; people don't want

that, but the problem is, in today's world, in today's economy and in

Newfoundland's economy, people are finding they have to do these things in order

to survive. And it is sad that we have to stand and talk about such things in a

Province where a fair number of us, including most of the people in this hon.

House, I say, have full and plenty.

I don't have to go too far from my own doorstep, Mr. Speaker,

to find people who are a lot less fortunate than I am, and I thank God that I

have had the opportunity through the years I have been in this world to have

what I would consider to be full and plenty; but that doesn't take away my

feelings or my concerns for not only the people in my district, Mr. Speaker, not

only the people in my own community but indeed, the people throughout the

Province. And just the fact that we are up discussing this issue today, just the

fact that we are up bringing it forward in this House so that every member would

have an opportunity to say a few words if they would like, I think is important

in itself.

Mr. Speaker, we talk in this House about people being hungry,

and we talk about children who are going to school hungry. The hon. Member for

Waterford - Kenmount brought forward some questions last week and gave some

Canadian statistics showing that children are definitely going to school hungry.

We are not like they are over in Biafra or somewhere. We are

not out on the streets, we are not out falling down and starving to death, There

are not those stories that you look around and we drive down in our rural

communities or in the urban parts of the Province and see people falling down on

the streets with hunger. That is not what we are talking about here. We are

talking about the basic necessities of good nutrition, the basic necessities of

the proper food for children. When we stand up and talk about people being

hungry and people starving, the old clich of `starving to death' is used in the

heat of debate sometimes. I used it myself here last Fall on several occasions,

to the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations as we brought forward some

petitions in relation to work. Often you will find when you are up speaking that

you get a bit excited and you say: People are out there starving to death. Then

somebody jumps up and says: Nobody is starving to death.

No, maybe there is nobody on the street falling down and

starving to death, but there definitely is a need to address the concern of the

lack of food for people, the lack of proper nutrition. I am very pleased today

that this bill is being brought forward, a bill that will address this concern

in an indirect way, I guess, but will definitely bring forward the concern of

the hungry. Because there are people, there are children, who don't live too far

from where I am, who are definitely hungry.

The performance in the schools, the family problems that

become associated with this, the stress that is caused to mothers and fathers

who can't provide the necessities of life, all those things need to be

addressed. I'm sure almost every department of government is addressing this

concern in some way or other. Those children who are going to school hungry -

those who are not able to participate in phys. ed., who are not able to

participate in some of the extracurricular activities because of simple pains in

their stomachs, or because of headaches, if the real root cause of the problem

were found, it would be proven that those children are basically hungry.

This, as I said, causes a lot of stress to mothers and

fathers. I talk to mothers and fathers on a daily basis who are not able now to

provide the basic necessities and this is causing family problems. There is a

host of problems associated with people who are really not able to provide the

basic necessities.

When we talk about food banks - to tell you truth, I wasn't

even familiar with them until a few years ago. It was something that we didn't

have to address or be concerned with, food banks out in my area. Again, as I

said, we have been very lucky over the years. But I found, over the past few

years, having been involved with the parish council in my hometown or my home

area, that at Christmastime and Easter and those times when we used to put

together some packages to bring around to certain families in the communities,

often we had to do it in the dark of night because some people just didn't want

to see a member of the parish council coming with a box of groceries during the

daytime.

They tell us: We really need this but we don't want you

coming here in the middle of the day because the next-door neighbour will see

you coming in with a box of groceries or a turkey for Christmas or Easter and so

on. We always did it in a discreet manner because the people who were asking for

those hampers - I was looking for the word; I have it now - the people who were

looking for those hampers, as I said earlier in the few words I started, there

was a level of dignity there. People had to be dealt with carefully when we were

delivering those hampers to the families. I found that Christmastime was one of

the hardest times in any dealings I had with this, when on December 23 or 24 you

would have to go knocking on somebody's door with a food hamper. You would go

into that house and the parents would say that their main concentration was on

food and not on toys under the tree. For some people there may be a level of

disbelief but I have seen it with my own eyes on several occasions, and I am

very pleased that we now have in place food banks that are dealing with this

situation on a daily basis, that are hopefully spreading their wings out to the

rural parts of the Province. Because the need for hampers and the need for some

sort of assistance from food banks and church organizations, or whatever, is

certainly on the increase in our Province.

It is good to see that we are bringing forward a bill today

that hopefully, if everything goes well, will certainly, without a doubt,

protect those people who volunteer their time and energy to these food banks.

Basically, that is the purpose of this bill, to offer protection to those people

who are volunteers. We have many, many volunteers in our communities across this

Province who are participating in food banks and in church organizations that

involve distributing hampers or helping the needy.

Everybody is concerned now about the way the things are

going. You are afraid you are going to be sued for this, or be sued for that,

and everybody is constantly feeling that they would like to help, but what if

something happens? This bill today, hopefully, if it passes through this House

of Assembly, will address the concerns that some people have in relation to

being able to volunteer their time and energy to, what I think, is the very

important task of helping out food banks or assisting in any way the needy

people of the Province.

Hopefully, this bill that has been brought forward will help

more effectively in the distribution and the collection of food, Mr. Speaker. I

come from a family business myself, we have a store, and there are things left

on the shelf for months and months sometimes. When the personnel from the

Department of Health, or whoever comes, and the dates are wrong, you have to

dump it out in the garbage; but often that food is still good. Many times it is

in a can which is sealed and there is no problem with the food.

I remember years ago there was a fire out home and we had a

great load of canned foods that had labels and because of the fire all the

labels were burnt off but the food was the best kind and it was up to date. We

had to pass around the food which had no labels on the cans, and it was like

Lotto 649. You didn't know what you were going to get but you hoped there would

be something in the can that was worth eating. Everybody wanted to grab a few

cans to bring home and at least hoped they were going to get something. Whether

there was a label on it or not, I guess relates to people themselves, it is not

what's on the outside that matters, it is what's inside, I say to members

opposite and members on this side of the House.

The story relates that people were not really wondering or

concerned about the labels, they were concerned about what was in the cans and

the fact that they needed some assistance. I remember that with fondness, it was

kind of a joke at the time, that we didn't know exactly what was coming out of

the can but it didn't really matter. It served the purpose, I say to all hon.

members, it served the purpose.

This bill also, along with protecting the volunteers that

have given hours of time and energy -

MR. FUREY: You are wasting your time.

MR. MANNING: I say to the Minister of Industry, Trade and

Technology that it may be wasting my time, but you are not worried about food

banks. You are only worried about one bank, and I say that is where it is all

put.

AN HON. MEMBER: Scotia Bank.

MR. ROBERTS: Scotia Bank, I say to the Minister of ITT.

I tried my best today not to get involved with shouting back

and forth because I consider this a very serious matter. I say to the Minister

of ITT that if all the people in the Province had what you have in the bank they

would not be worried about food banks.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: I say the Leader is going out preparing her

plans for the opposite side of the House. It is sad to hear the shouts from the

opposite side of the House because we are trying to talk about a serious matter

I say to the Minister of ITT. I repeat what I said earlier, the only bank you

are worried about is the Scotia Bank.

Getting back to what I said, this bill that the Member for

Bonavista South brings forward today is not only to deal with the volunteers,

and I will talk about the volunteers in a few moments, it also has to deal with

individuals, business people, corporations, anybody who donates to the food

banks on a continuous basis and would like to continue doing so in the future.

With the liabilities that come sometimes, with the liabilities that are involved

with businesses, we have to deal with those people and make sure that those

people are protected as they lay out their hand and try to bring forward and

give to the food banks, and give to the people of the Province, that they are

protected also, Mr. Speaker, and I feel very pleased to have the opportunity to

stand and support it.

Today's bill is definitely a step forward in addressing the

concerns of the food banks, the concerns of the people who work, and the

concerns of the people who support those. I think that government should also be

taking the initiative on educating our young people in playing an important

role.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MANNING: By leave, Mr. Speaker.

MR. ROBERTS: Yes, go on `boy.'

MR. MANNING: I thank the hon. Government House Leader for

giving me a few minutes to finish up. I really appreciate it.

AN HON. MEMBER: I thought you were finished.

MR. MANNING: I think it is a concern that we should try

to address, and educate our young people, and that government should be bringing

in some type of programs, to go out in the schools and educate our young people

in proper nutrition, proper diets, because it plays an important role in all

aspects of our life.

We have programs such as the breakfast program that is in

other parts of the country and that I feel certainly should be tried out in some

schools in our Province on a trial basis, and that seems to be producing very

good results in other parts of the country. There are lunch programs that we

have here within our own Province and I think all those things are good and

positive, and address the concerns that we have to deal with today.

I would like to close off my remarks by encouraging the

people to give to the food banks, encourage the people to donate to the needy,

to encourage these people to continue to work. It is definitely needed and it

goes beyond saying that it is needed more in this Province today than it was

ever needed before. I believe there is a great concern out there among our

people, and especially among our young people.

If I could say a few words about the volunteers that are

involved in those organizations, who go out and knock on doors, who go out and

stand up in halls and accept the food, and then go out and distribute this food

to the needy. Those people deserve all the praise and thanks that can be

bestowed on them for the great work they do in our communities. I think that

only by encouraging those people and supporting those people from our aspect

here in the House of Assembly to all parts of this Province, only by encouraging

them can we help to address the concerns that we have in feeding the people of

the Province, definitely feeding the needy, and taking care of the children of

this Province.

I would like once again to congratulate the Member for

Bonavista South for bringing forward this bill, and I hope that members opposite

will take it as seriously as I do, and hope that the ministers or whoever are

involved in bringing forth legislation to deal with this very important problem

we have, are serious about the concerns and that they address those concerns as

quickly as possible.

With that said, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank you for

the opportunity to speak on the bill.

Thank you, very much.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Food and

Agriculture.

DR. HULAN: Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure for me to

have the opportunity to say a few words on this resolution, or bill. First of

all I would like to commend the Member for Bonavista South for bringing the

issue forward, and I say that in all sincerity. I first of all say it as a

professional nutritionist with a great deal of interest, as most hon. members

know, with regard to the nutrition of not only people in general in this

Province but especially the school children, and the youth of the Province.

I also want to make a few comments on some of the comments

raised by the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes. I do sympathize with the

predicament that he is describing. Because I also hear the gut-wrenching stories

around the Province today with regard to some of the difficulties that people

have in making ends meet and in feeding their families. Of course, that is

largely due to the terrible devastation and down turn in the groundfishery of

the Province.

The Member for St. Mary's - The Capes also made another

astute observation, and that is there are different forms of malnutrition.

Indeed, we don't see people like in Biafra falling down on the streets from

malnutrition or even in our countryside dying from malnutrition as is happening

elsewhere in the world. That doesn't mean that it is not happening in a

different form. We have a great deal of chronic malnutrition in this Province

and that has to be addressed. There is no question about it. The bill that we

are considering here today, hon. members, focuses of course on one of the chief

essentials of life, and that is food. Because of that one could consider it

basically a motherhood issue, if you want to look at it in one form.

There is however in general, and the general thrust of the

bill indicates that there are many issues that go much beyond the motherhood

issue. I want to also state at this point that it is quite apropos that this

particular issue come up in this hon. House because some of you may remember

that last May I introduced to the House, which received unanimous support on

both sides of the Chamber, a resolution calling on the establishment of a public

policy on food and nutrition in the Province. I can tell you that now the

Ministry for which I am responsible has food highlighted. As part of its

mandate, work is currently under way to establish that very issue and policy on

food and nutrition for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I am very

proud to say that we probably will be one of the first provinces in Canada to

establish such a policy. The very fact that we have food banks amidst us means

that there is a need for them. Regardless if we want to believe that or not, or

accept that or not, those are the facts.

The greater the need of course the more difficult it is to

keep up with the contributions to these food banks and the valuable services

that such contributions make to our society. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

are well known right across this country as being great donators and supporters

of food banks, and that is to our credit and we can be indeed very proud of that

fact. That also includes, Mr. Speaker, contributions from the supermarkets,

retail stores and grocery stores of all sorts. They also have a good record with

regard to their contribution of food products to the needy.

I can also, as a health care professional in the field of

nutrition, appreciate the concerns of the retail outlets and the large

supermarkets in their reluctance sometimes to fully support the contribution of

food items to food banks because of the health safety and protection issues that

may arise from the contribution of such foods.

One has to remember that many times a food item may look safe

and wholesome but there are such problems as botulism, which is extremely

deadly, salmonella, which can also be deadly in certain forms, and listeria that

contaminates many food items, including fish, that is also deadly as far as the

human population is concerned. Unfortunately, because of these concerns, many

times perfectly good, wholesome and nutritious food is discarded rather than

being channelled toward those who need it because they cannot afford to buy it,

or for some other reasons. As the minister responsible now for food, to and

including the wholesale and retail level, I am indeed concerned about this

problem.

I have stated in this Chamber in the past that a major

problem in our society here in Newfoundland today can be corrected through

preventative health care, and no better way can we provide to the populous of

this Province preventative health care than through the production and

distribution of wholesome and nutritious food for people to consume, and

therefore end up living, in many cases, a much healthier life.

We also have the problem in this Province that is associated

with lifestyle. We have a major, major problem in the Province with regard to

diseases that are the result of improper lifestyle and nutrition. Some of these

diseases I have referred to before, such as cardiovascular disease,

hypertension, which is rampant in this Province, diabetes, which is in one form

caused through malnutrition or improper nutrition, and some forms of cancer that

are related to the food we eat, and the type and amount of food we eat.

Superimposed on all of that we have the very, very big problem in this Province

of obesity - obesity at all levels of society and in all ages.

Again, through a proper approach, through nutrition and

education, we can greatly reduce these serious problems that are very costly to

our health care system. Therefore, as we develop our public policy on food and

nutrition in this Province it will involve health care professionals, educators

and so on because, as the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes just referenced, one

of the best areas to achieve that goal is through the education of our young

people.

We know - it is a well established fact - that proper

nutrition, good nutrition, has a great bearing, a significant bearing, on the

ability of children to learn, the ability of children to retain information that

they are given, provided in schools. This is why my department, the Department

of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture, continues, in conjunction with the dairy

industry of this Province, to support the school milk program. The department's

contribution to the school milk program was increased this year by $25,000 to

the tune of $175,000 going into that very, very worthwhile program to provide

proper nutrition in the form of milk to the younger members of our society. This

then shows in a very tangible way and manner that the government of this

Province is indeed committed to the promotion of good nutrition among the

younger members of Newfoundland society.

I want to also draw one other point lest some people may go

away from this House today suggesting that what we are proposing is the making

available of food items that the more well-to-do members of our society will not

buy and that we are now making available food items that would only be purchased

by the poor. That is anything but the truth. Because one of our biggest problems

in this Province in the area of malnutrition comes from the more well-to-do

members of our society. There are many reasons for that, there are many reasons

why this is the case. It is not only those who are on the lower rungs of the

socio-economic ladder who need good direction as far as food and nutrition are

concerned.

The other issue that I want to touch on is the fact that - I

think it was referenced earlier - the words `best before date' and `expiration

date' were used I think a little interchangeably, and they are not to be used

interchangeably at all. Expiration date is a very fixed date. The best before

date, Mr. Speaker, refers to products - the only reason that date is on the

product is to identify those products that, according to the manufacturer, if

you were to eat them before that particular day the actual perception in the

mouth and so on would be a little bit better than if you ate them after that

date. It has nothing to do with the quality of the product, it has nothing to do

with the nutritional value of the product, and it has even less to do anything

with the safety of the product. The best before date is just an indication as to

whether the product might be a little better tasting the day before that date

than it would be after.

Yes indeed, food and nutrition are not synonymous at all.

Because we have people who actually practice over-nutrition and are very much

not necessarily the healthiest members of our society. Because they indulge

themselves in improper nutrition for many reasons. They become obese in many

cases and therefore they allow themselves or put themselves into a position of

contracting many lifestyle diseases such as I have already mentioned. So

although many times we associate nutrition and food in many contexts, they are

not synonymous at all.

It is a shame then that nutritious food sometimes is

discarded or even given to food banks for those who cannot afford nutritional

food on a sustained basis, and therefore we must encourage the use of such food

products to be used through the food bank system. Because those banks indeed do

give to our society, and certain members of our society, a source of good

high-quality nutritious food that they would not normally and under other

circumstances be able to attain.

With those comments, Mr. Speaker, I certainly would support

the amended bill this afternoon. Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I say to the Member

for St. John's East, I'm only going to take a few moments, because we are

running out of time and I know that he wanted to have a few minutes to say

something.

I read a quote in the paper earlier this week that the

Premier said that he didn't want to introduce any more chaos in the House of

Assembly than was absolutely necessary. It is too bad he didn't have that

thought in mind when he appointed the Minister of Fisheries, Food and

Agriculture to the Cabinet.

Mr. Speaker, there is no reason why, we, as members of this

House today, could not stand up and support this legislation without amending

it. If all of us in this House were committed to this principle that the Member

for Bonavista has put forward, if all of us are committed to it, that the

amendments that were required or that the hon. Government House Leader brought

up and brought to the attention of this floor, could have been done in Committee

stage, so I ask the question: Why was it amended? Why have we put off a

reasonable piece of legislation that is in existence in other jurisdictions, why

have we put it off to some other point in time, when we could have dealt with it

easily, effectively and quickly today, I say to the member and all members of

the House of Assembly?

The reality is this: The Government House Leader spoke of a

couple of sections with the bill and he raised some very, very legitimate

points, but again, they were points that could have been dealt with at the

Committee stage. He talked about how the food banks in this area had not talked

to the Department of Social Services that he was aware of, and then he talked

about the perceived need out in society. The reality is, Mr. Speaker, that if

we, as a government, and we as a people were doing the job that we should have

been doing, and were providing adequate levels of income to people on social

assistance and social services, there would not be a need for food banks, and he

would be correct because the need would only be perceived but the reality is

different.

There are thousands, upwards of 50,000 to 55,000 people on

the Avalon Peninsula who depend upon food banks each and every day. Large

grocery stores, Sobeys, Dominion, TRA, small outfits cannot take food that is

still good, but cannot sustain market value because people will not buy it

because it is a day old or two days old, but the nutritional content of such

food is still such that it is good, it is not bad, it is not rotten, it will not

cause food poisoning, they are not allowed to distribute it to food banks and

mostly what we are talking about, Mr. Speaker, are non-perishable items. What we

are talking about is day-old bread for example, that we cannot, by passing this

legislation enable, from a practical point of view, not have some general,

philosophical sort of debate, but a practical point of view, put legislation in

place that provides for large food distribution centres, outlets to offer food

and assistance to food banks.

Mr. Speaker, I recently attended a function at the

Newfoundland Hotel that was hosted by a non-profit organization. At the end of

that function, it was an hour to an hour-and-a-half long, there were cold cuts

et cetera that were offered; one of the people who was attending the function

with me asked the staff at the hotel where we were, could he take what food was

left over? Turkey roll, ham, some cheeses, all fresh, all of it fresh. Now what

the response from the hotel was, was simply this: that they could not do it, not

because they did not want to, but because they could not take the chance, that

if something happened, if they had given the food to a non-profit or to a food

bank or to a family or association that was in need of it, that if they did,

that they would be liable.

Now, Mr. Speaker, from a practical point of view which is

what we should be considering here, from a practical point of view is what we

should be dealing with here, that, at that function or that time, that hotel

should have been able to give that food to the needy because it was needed, not

because it was a perceived need, because the reality exists that there are many

people out there who do not have the food that is necessary to sustain a healthy

lifestyle but wish to have it.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to conclude as I do not want to take

up too much time, but I compliment the Member for Bonavista South in bringing

forth this piece of legislation. It is too bad that the House of Assembly does

not provide more opportunity for more members to provide to bring to the floor

pieces of legislation that can be debated upon its merits, because what we would

see probably then, Mr. Speaker, is more credible legislation coming forward,

more independent legislation that truly addresses the realities that each and

every one of us faces in Newfoundland and Labrador today. Let me say finally to

the Government House Leader, in his absence, to the government, that there is no

way in the world that they should have passed an amendment to this piece of

legislation. Had we done it reasonably, had we done it responsibly, we could

have dealt with the issues, the minor technical points that the Government House

Leader put forward, and had he spent half the time in dealing with what points

should have been put into the points that he raised and making amendments in the

Committee stage, this piece of legislation would have been passed before he left

the House today.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. HARRIS: First of all, I want to say something about

the process involved in this bill and I want to compliment the Member for

Bonavista South in bringing forth a private member's motion in the form of a

bill. I think it is a progressive move and I think it is one that this

government ought to be encouraging amongst its own members and amongst members

of the Opposition generally, and if it were adopted as a regular operation, then

hon. members here on both sides of the House would have a greater opportunity to

play a creative and significant role in this House, a more creative and

significant role than they are able to play as private members.

I also want to say that I believe that the Member for

Bonavista South is very sincere in his concern for the people of this Province

who are forced to go to food banks to allow them to have a decent nutritional

basis for their livelihood. I think he is sincere in bringing that forward but I

want to say both of those things before I say that I am opposed to the bill.

I am opposed to the bill, Mr. Speaker, because I have a very

serious, philosophical disagreement with a double standard for people who cannot

afford to buy food and a different standard for people who can afford to buy

food. I think that if people are going to a supermarket to buy food they deserve

to have that food prepared to a standard by the people who are preparing that

food and distributing that food to adhere to the standard of care not to be

negligent, not to have adulterated food on their shelves, not to serve it to

people in restaurants. Why should I be any different if I go to a restaurant and

pay for a meal then if I go to a soup kitchen and get my meal for free? Should I

be allowed to be served food that has not been properly handled in unclean

dishes through an unclean kitchen because I happen to be unable to pay for my

meal at a soup kitchen? If I go to a restaurant I am entitled to be ensured that

my food is prepared with a standard of care that I am entitled to as a citizen.

I don't think there should be two cla