Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 26 November 2013 (47th General Assembly, 2nd Session, Vol. XLVII No. 35)
2013-11-26
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
PDF Version
November 26, 2013
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLVII No. 35
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!
Admit strangers.
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: Today we will have members' statements from the Member for
the District of Lake Melville; the Member for the District of Bellevue; the
Member for the District of Humber Valley; the Member for the District of
Conception Bay East Bell Island; the Member for the District of Placentia
St. Mary's; and the Member for the District of St. Barbe.
The hon. the Member for the District of Lake Melville.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RUSSELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to recognize the passing of Eliza Edmunds, my grandmother.
Eliza Edmunds (nee Broomfield) passed peacefully away on September 16, 2013
surrounded by her family after a long battle with Alzheimer's. Born in Big Bay,
Labrador, her and my grandfather moved to Happy Valley as one of the three
founding families of our community, moving to seek a better life for them and
their families.
She was a great influence on my family and the community as a whole for her
work within the church community. She was famous for her laugh, her hospitality,
her cooking, her musical abilities, and her traditional Inuit clothing.
For anyone who met Eliza can confirm that she was the most wonderful and
selfless person you could ever meet, a truly beautiful and strong Labrador woman
who embraced her Inuit heritage, and her faith in God as she raised her family
and became the most caring mother, grandmother, and great-grandmother anyone
could ask for.
I ask all hon. members of this House to join me in recognizing the passing of
Eliza Edmunds, a true woman of Labrador.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. PEACH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
On September 14 and 15, 2013, the New Harbour Youth and Recreation Committee
was very instrumental in bringing the community spirit alive with the first New
Harbour Days.
There were many events that took place, but the highlight during the
celebrations was Violet Newhook. Violet had owned and operated the local takeout
in New Harbour for thirty-plus years, and it was commonly known as Violet's
Takeout.
Violet retired in 1996; however, at the age of eighty-three years, Violet
decided to come out of retirement and volunteer her time to the New Harbour
Youth and Recreation Committee during the New Harbour Days celebrations. On that
day, Violet's Takeout came back to life and was very much alive, bringing back
many memories for everyone.
It was good to see Violet working in uniform, putting the fries in a brown
paper bag and serving people as she had done years ago, and I might add with a
great big smile and a thank you. Violet said it brought back great childhood and
teenage memories for everyone.
I ask all members to join me in thanking Violet Newhook for volunteering her
time to a great cause and helping out with a great fundraiser for New Harbour
Youth and Recreation.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Conception Bay East
Bell Island.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I stand today to recognize a sports team in my district who recently made
their community and school extremely proud by winning a gold medal in the Tier 1
division at the Provincial Volley Fest Tournament held in St. John's. I speak of
St. Michael's High School Girls' Volleyball Team of Bell Island.
While Bell Island teams historically have been renowned for success in sports
such as hockey, soccer, and track, the recent surge of success in the sport of
volleyball by local teams is a testament to the support of the community and the
leadership of the coaching staff who commit countless hours to develop the
athletic skills of our young ladies.
I would like to acknowledge Coach Eric Hiscock, an inductee to the Provincial
Volleyball Hall of Fame, and Coach Kathy Mitchell for their continuous support.
Also, the administration of St. Michael's High must be recognized for
outstanding encouragement of the girls' team.
Team members include Breanna Bickford, Tara Bourque, Kayla Ford, Sarah
Madden, Morgan Mitchell, Ashley Neary, Sandra Parsons, Vanessa Penny, and
Chelsea Tremblett.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members here to join me in congratulating the St.
Michael's High Girls' Volleyball Team on their success.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Humber Valley.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate Mr. Claude Jones of Jackson's
Arm on his recent retirement as Mayor. Claude has spent twenty-five years
serving the people of Jackson's Arm, first as a councillor elected in 1980.
Claude then went on to be elected as both Mayor and Deputy Mayor.
Claude's retirement from the Mayor's bench at age seventy-seven is a
testament to his dedication to the people of Jackson's Arm. He was elected Mayor
of the town thirteen years ago, and also served in many roles as a volunteer
with the town. Claude also served on the White Bay South Development Association
Board and the White Bay Waste Management Committee. His dedication to his
residents was clear in his role as Chair of the Jackson's Arm Hospital
Foundation.
Mr. Speaker, Claude Jones has been a steady hand and a strong voice for the
people of Jackson's Arm. During his years on council, Claude has represented the
needs of rural Newfoundland and Labrador. I am honoured to know such a committed
and dedicated man, and feel privileged to call him a friend.
I ask all members of this House to rise with me in honouring Claude Jones for
his dedication to Jackson's Arm and his unwavering commitment to his friends and
colleagues in this community. As he moves forward in this next
chapter of this
life, may he enjoy his well-deserved retirement.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia St. Mary's.
MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, on November 16, I had the pleasure of
attending the Placentia Fire Brigade's Annual Dinner and Dance, an event which I
have attended regularly for the past forty years.
It was a pleasure and a privilege to bring greetings and participate in the
granting of service awards to several firefighters, including a thirty-year
service award to Val Careen and a forty-year service award to Chief Wayne Power.
Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, I did not get the forty-year service award.
I was pleased to see several honourary firefighters and spouses of deceased
firefighters in attendance and recognized for their service. It was also
encouraging, Mr. Speaker, to see that the Brigade has a good core of relatively
young but well trained firefighters. I also want to recognize the firettes who
also offer so much support to the brigade.
Mr. Speaker, Placentia Fire Brigade has a long legacy of outstanding service
to the Placentia region and have every reason to be proud of its
accomplishments.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all colleagues in joining me in thanking the Placentia
Fire Brigade for its tremendous service to the area.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of St. Barbe.
MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, the Gros Morne Fall Festival and Craft Fair has
grown from a one-day craft fair seven years ago to a full fall festival in 2013,
thanks to a group of dedicated volunteers, the Cow Head Conservation and
Heritage Committee.
This year's first annual event extended over four days and was a great
weekend of craft, culture and music. Workshops took place on moose tufting,
basket weaving, fly tying, painting and fiddle. The craft fair was a full day,
and included demonstrations and a kiddie's corner. Local music was provided by
many musicians, including Daniel Payne.
The weekend featured fine dining, a kitchen party, and nightly entertainment
showcasing the traditions of the Province in an exciting new way.
Events such as the Gros Morne Fall Festival and Craft Fair are economic
generators extending our tourism to the shoulder season, supporting community
development and forging partnerships.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members in the House to join me in congratulating the
partners, and especially the Cow Head Conservation and Heritage Committee on
this successful event.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to highlight
Mineral Resources Review, the annual international conference and trade show
that took place from October 31 to November 2 here in St. John's.
Events such as Mineral Resources Review and the Women in Mining forum
continue to grow with the industry. A record 800 delegates attended the
conference and trade show, which is hailed as the main venue for networking and
business development among all sectors of the Province's mining industry. Five
years since the inception of the Women in Mining forum, the session has grown
from fifty to close to 500 participants.
Throughout the week, I had the privilege to speak with industry leaders and
meet with representatives from Mining Industry NL and the Newfoundland and
Labrador Prospectors Association. We discussed the industry's long-term outlook
and how we can work together to capitalize on the momentum currently being felt
throughout all regions of the Province to ensure future growth and success.
I wanted to thank the conference organizers, staff with my department's mines
branch and the local branch of the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and
Petroleum. Through their hard work, this year's conference featured a
comprehensive program that included a special session dedicated to Voisey's Bay
in recognition of the twenty year anniversary of its discovery.
Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador is an internationally-renowned
exploration destination with significant mineral potential and diverse geology.
The industry is an economic powerhouse with mineral shipments of $3.9 billion in
2013 and employment at a record high of more than 11,500 individuals.
Canadian and overseas investors recognize that this is an exciting time to be
doing business in Newfoundland and Labrador. An estimated $10 billion of
investment in the mining industry may be realized over the next decade with
tremendous development expected in Labrador where the industry is booming.
Mr. Speaker, mineral development is transforming the face of Newfoundland and
Labrador and we are on the cusp of a whole new era for the Province's mining
industry. It is time to seize the opportunity to ensure a strong, sustainable
resource future in the best interest of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement.
I had the privilege actually of attending the Mineral Resources Review
conference. It was a great conference and I look forward to going back again
next year. It is a great opportunity for networking in the Province, I will say.
Mr. Speaker, speaking of the mining industry, the minister did point out
about the $3.9 billion in mineral shipments in 2013. That is certainly good, and
overall it is a significant impact on the finances of our Province. One concern
is that over the next ten years, over the next decade with the anticipated $10
billion in investments in the mining industry, particularly in Lab West, one of
the things that have been glaringly absent right now is the availability of a
transmission line that leads from Muskrat Falls into Lab West.
I ask the minister, I look forward to the discussion in the next few days
because as we all know, it was a significant part of the Muskrat Falls Project,
yet we have not seen any power lines or any transmission going into Lab West.
Initially, what we are seeing, however, is a 25 per cent increase application to
the PUB for residents of Labrador.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I, too, thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. There is no
doubt that there are good things going on in terms of the growth of mining in
the Province, and especially in Labrador. Congratulations to all those who are
involved.
I caution the minister on a few points, Mr. Speaker. With more mining
development it is really important that we make sure we are doing comprehensive
environmental assessments for the major developments. We want to make sure that
our environment and our communities are a priority, and we really do not want
another Sandy Pond happening because of mining.
As well, in the face of increased international ownership and involvement we
want to make sure that we have our labour standards paid attention to because a
lot of international companies come from countries where they do not have the
same labour standards. So I encourage this government and the minister to look
at anti-scab legislation to protect our workers.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North
have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.
MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I, too, thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. I welcome
mining exploration and development. It can certainly change an economy. I would
encourage the minister to look at further commercialization activities with the
marble mine in Roddickton and potential copper and other valuable minerals in
Goose Cove and Croque on the Great Northern Peninsula. There is certainly lots
of opportunity.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Intergovernmental
Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am pleased to rise today in this hon. House to speak about the important
work we are doing to improve municipal infrastructure across Newfoundland and
Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENT: The Department of Municipal and Intergovernmental Affairs has
made tremendous investments in the last few years to improve infrastructure in
our communities. Since 2008, we have invested over $650 million in municipal
capital works projects which has resulted in improved municipal infrastructure
across the Province. When federal and municipal contributions are included the
total investment is in excess of $1 billion.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, since April 1 of this year the department has
approved over 112 new municipal infrastructure projects under its Municipal
Capital Works and Multi-Year Capital Works Programs with a provincial
contribution of approximately $31.3 million. Including all projects at various
stages of development, there are currently more than 500 projects underway.
These projects will provide our municipalities with the opportunity to
secure, develop, and improve infrastructure for residents and support the
long-term sustainability of growth and development of communities throughout the
Province. We recognize there is an increased demand for infrastructure and we
have been making progress in addressing infrastructure needs through our
Municipal Capital Works Program.
Mr. Speaker, Budget 2013 included the second year of a two-year Municipal
Capital Works Program. This funding has allowed us to continue to fund projects
all over Newfoundland and Labrador. Projects such as: new potable water
dispensing units in Wabana and Pacquet, road improvements in
Centreville-Wareham-Trinity, and upgrade work for the community centre in Grand
bank, just to name a few.
In addition, Budget 2013 included funding for a one-time $25 million capital
works program for our seven largest municipalities, allocated using a base plus
per capita methodology. The department is currently reviewing plans for future
municipal capital works funding to inform the upcoming Budget progress.
Mr. Speaker, we will continue to work with municipalities and the federal
government to address key infrastructure priorities, and make our communities
better places for children and families.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement, but once again
thank God for polling periods because once again we get another statement here.
That is about the third or fourth one that we heard during the polling period.
Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt there has been money spent in the Province and
a fair number
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JOYCE: I always admitted that, Mr. Speaker, and I always acknowledge
that; but when you have 160 boil orders in the Province, I would not be up
bragging too much. When you put in infrastructure for communities to have water
and sewer but you do not give them the fiscal arrangement, which you promised in
2008 so they can use their water system, it is nothing to brag about, Mr.
Speaker.
Here we look at the $25 million for the larger municipalities, but they
forget that they had to give up the MOGs to get that. The City of Corner, up to
two months, did not have a project that fit under this, Mr. Speaker.
So it is easy to stand up and say it but when you actually look at the facts
when I look at Lark Harbour who were committed Phase II of the water and never
got it. Look at Humber Arm South looking for money. Look at the Town of
Irishtown-Summerside. It is great news; but let's not get up and say everything
is done, because it is not done. It is easy to get up and make statements during
polling periods, but let's look at the reality. There are still 160 with boil
orders across the Province who cannot have safe drinking water in this Province,
Mr. Speaker.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advanced copy of his statement. Regardless,
municipalities are struggling to keep basic services and infrastructure in
place. Municipalities need staff to maintain the infrastructure and need
sustainable funds to pay staff fair wages.
Government needs a new fiscal arrangement with municipalities. Government
should divert a percentage of the provincial gasoline tax to municipalities.
This could be done quickly. It is a sustainable revenue source that is steadily
growing.
After ten years in power, in March of this year, there were still more than
160 communities under boil water advisories
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS ROGERS: and more than 150 with potentially harmful levels of
trihalomethane in their drinking water. Mr. Speaker, when will this be fixed?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the Member for St. John's North have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thanks to the minister for an advance copy of his statement. These are good
investments, but I would also encourage the government to continue to invest in
Newfoundland and Labrador Housing retrofits in our communities and
neighbourhoods.
For a long time very little was done and there are many units that need work.
Improvements to these dwellings in our communities are investments in the
dwellings themselves, but they are also investments in public assets that
increase the value of private homes in all of our neighbourhoods and
communities.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yesterday, the World Trade Organization upheld a 2010 ruling to ban seal
products from this Province going to Europe. The minister revealed that the
government did not pressure the federal government to include the European ban
on seal products in the CETA talks as their federal counterparts were addressing
this already with the WTO.
I ask the Premier: Was the European ban on seal products not important enough
to address with CETA? Is that why it was dropped from the discussions in 2012?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, our record in terms of the sealing industry is unprecedented
since coming into power and the importance that we have placed on the industry
and supporting it. It is true work with the harvesters. The industry itself is
the most humane in the world in terms of what we have done in terms of working
with the industry.
Our investment in a company like Carino in terms of giving that capital to
allow them to operate, we see the growth of the industry from approximately
60,000 harvested a few years ago to 90,000 last year. We continue to work with
Carino, and continue to work with the industry.
In regard to CETA, it was an issue that was before the protocol of the WTO.
It was in place. The federal government, we encourage them to go back and appeal
that. We believe it is a humane hunt, as does many in the industry believe it.
We are going to continue to fight for the sealing industry in Newfoundland and
Labrador, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The question was more about the CETA negotiations at this point. We had an
opportunity there.
I ask the minister: Why was it that he did not include the seal ban in the
CETA negotiations?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, this issue, as I said, is important to
Newfoundland and Labrador. There were numerous issues, as you can imagine, in
terms of an international trade agreement between Canada and twenty-six states
of the EU; ten provinces, three territories in terms of a whole range of issues
in terms of getting access to that market, in terms of promoting free trade.
As I said, we are very pleased with what we have achieved through CETA. It is
unprecedented in terms of the fishing industry we talked about here in the
Province. Outside of that, we have always supported the sealing industry. We are
going to continue to support it.
We believe the ban is not accurate, it is incorrect. We encourage the federal
government to go forward in appealing it. They are doing that now. We will
continue to support the industry, and we are going to continue to grow our
fishing industry based on CETA.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yesterday, the Minister of Natural Resources again refused to release details
of a multi-million dollar contract that Nalcor awarded without a Request for
Proposal. The minister said that releasing this would be commercially sensitive
and influence the bidding into future processes.
I ask the minister: If that is true, why is it that Nalcor has already
released 150 contracts, the amounts of those 150 contracts that they have
awarded since June?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the member opposite
acknowledging the fact that what Nalcor can reveal and show to the people of the
Province they are more than willing to do so. That takes away that secrecy
argument they are always pushing at us, Mr. Speaker.
The reality is what can be shown to the people of the Province, what can be
made public, Mr. Speaker, it absolutely will be, but there are situations where
there is information that is commercially sensitive and until it is not
commercially sensitive it will not be released.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: I ask the minister. There cannot be any commercially sensitive
information here. This is a forestry contract about brush clearing at the
Muskrat Falls Project. What is it about this project that could be commercially
sensitive that cannot be released? We have released 150 contracts, the amounts.
I ask the minister: Why is it so commercially sensitive that this cannot be
released?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, just to reiterate what I said yesterday, and I
thought I was clear. In this particular case, it is deemed to be commercially
sensitive, Mr. Speaker, because it does impact in terms of brush clearing and
the right of way clearing for the transmission line. There is other work that is
going to be involved, working with other contractors as well in the very same
nature, very same type of work. So, as a result of that, in releasing prices now
it could possibly have an impact on bids, Mr. Speaker, and on prices and working
with contractors.
Ultimately, Mr. Speaker, that will have an impact on the cost of the project.
Nalcor and our government are firmly committed to make sure that this project is
the least cost option for the people of the Province to ensure that we have a
power supply into the future, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The minister knows that most of those quotes and most of those tenders are
only good for sixty days. What happened in this case is there was an extension
on that.
Mr. Speaker, government has signed a new contract to lease the former
Hamilton Sound until the end of March at $5,787 a day. We have asked the
government to table this contract. They have refused to do that.
I ask the minister: Will you now table that contract so the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador can see the details?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have no problem at all tabling that contract. That is the first time you
asked to have the contract tabled. They did ask for the information that was in
the contract and I would not release that information at the time when the
Member for St. John's South had requested it, because it was not finalized.
Mr. Speaker, I would not release information that is in a contract that is
not finalized, for sensitive reasons, but I have no problem at all tabling that
contract.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Well, I hope the contract has some details; that is what we are looking for
here, Mr. Speaker. We have also asked for a copy of the financial analysis that
has been done on the Hamilton Sound before it was sold.
Yesterday, the minister said that they analyze every movement. So, I ask the
Premier: Will you release the details of the financial analysis that was
completed on the Hamilton Sound?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as I said in the House yesterday, we have a strategy in place to
replace all of the ferries in the Province right now. As those vessels are being
replaced, other vessels will come out of service. That is exactly what happened
with the Hamilton Sound . There were two ferries that went into service
and the Hamilton Sound at the time came out.
Mr. Speaker, I find it a little bit confusing as to what the Opposition Party
want. At one point last week or the week before when we announced the $51
million contract of a new ferry coming in, the next day the Member for
Cartwright L'Anse au Clair was standing up complaining about that. Then, they
are telling us that we were not putting in any service for Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians and their companies. Now they are telling us that we are giving
them business and we should not be.
What do you want: service or no service?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Well, what we are looking for is typically if you are going to take a piece
of equipment out of service, you would do an analysis on the value of it.
Will you table here in this House the analysis on that vessel that was taken
out of the system?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MCGRATH: Thank you very much Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, when we sold the Hamilton Sound we sold it to a company,
and it was up to them what they decided to do with it. They decided to sell it
to another company. That particular company that bought it, the Norcon Marine
Services, decided that they own their own shipyard and saw an opportunity not
only to retain their employees, but at a cost price they could do repairs to a
ship that they could put back in service.
So, while you hear of a price of $1.2 million that was paid out to do repairs
to the Hamilton Sound, in actual fact the cost was about $2 million that
was spent on the Hamilton Sound . That was at a shipyard owner's own cost,
so he could retain his employees and take an opportunity that he has seen fit to
do.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Well, I ask the minister one more time: Did your strategy include a financial
analysis of the value of that vessel, yes or no?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as I told the Opposition yesterday, we have a strategy in place
for replacement of some of the marine vessels in our system right now, and we
feel our strategy is working.
At the time we sold the Hamilton Sound it did not fit into our
feasibility study, nor does it today we think we made the right decision.
Another company saw an opportunity to make a profit on that, and more power to
them if they can do it.
We, as a government, will continue, Mr. Speaker, to deal with Newfoundland
and Labrador companies such as Norcon, bringing economy into the Province and
using their services to give a reliable service to the people of Newfoundland
and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Well, I would like to see a copy of this strategy. A year ago it did not fit
in, so why does it fit into your strategy now?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, obviously the member of the Opposition is not listening, because
what I said is that our strategy did work a year ago, and two years ago, and it
is still working today.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Speaking of strategies, residents along the South Coast of Newfoundland have
been promised new ferries by this government. So on January 11, 2011, government
stated that a design contract was awarded to Fleetway Inc. for six new ferries
that would service the South Coast of the Province.
So I ask the minister: What is the status of this design contract with
Fleetway, and when can we expect delivery of those vessels?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, we are in a process right now of hoping to
replace or have a strategy put together to replace the ferry system in
Newfoundland and Labrador. We realize it is an aging fleet, and we will one by
one replace those ferries.
We are not going to put the government back into a deficit as it was in
before and end up with a deficit of another $11 billion. We will take it one at
a time and as we see fit, then we will replace the ferries.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Well, my question to the minister was what is the status of the design
contract? So will the minister please give us an update on that design contract?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we are still looking at the design contract that we have. If and
when we see that that is the design that we will go with, then we will have no
problem releasing that design contract.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Health said it is
costing $40 million to put a PET scanner in the Health Sciences Centre. The $40
million she quoted not only covers the cost of the PET scanner and the
cyclotron, but also the renovations required to install the unit. Given the
Corner Brook hospital is still in the design stage, it would be not near that
cost to install a PET scanner.
I ask the minister: What is the real cost of a PET scanner for the Corner
Brook hospital?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we have been really clear on the cost of a PET scanner and that
cost has come to us from very good authority. It is $40 million. We do need a
cyclotron because we do need to be able to produce the isotopes that are
required.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to taking advice with regard to PET scanners, my
source of advice is the World Health Organization. I am not going to take it
from across the hall there. I am going to take it from the WHO, the World Health
Organization.
Mr. Speaker, what they are telling us is that we need two PET scanners for
every million population. In Newfoundland and Labrador, we are going to have a
PET scanner. We have a 500,000 population. We are meeting all of the standards
set.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: The minister just stated that you need a new cyclotron in
Corner Brook for the isotopes. I ask you a question
MR. SPEAKER: Please direct your comments to the Chair.
MR. JOYCE: I ask the Speaker to ask the minister: Where are the isotopes
coming from that are used here now?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we do not have a PET scanner right now so we do not need the
isotopes. He is referring, I am assuming, to isotopes for nuclear medicine,
which are different all together.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: Just for the minister, Mr. Speaker, they are being shipped
from Chalk River. If you can ship them from Chalk River to Newfoundland, you can
bring them from St. John's to Corner Brook. That number is inflated so the
people of Corner Brook and Western Newfoundland cannot have those services.
Mr. Speaker, the PET scanner can be used to diagnose neurological disorders,
cardiovascular disease, infection, and many other conditions and diseases. The
use of PET scanners for the detection and treatment of disease is rapidly
growing.
I ask the minister: Many smaller hospitals in Canada are putting in PET
scanners, why is your government refusing to put a PET scanner in the new
regional hospital for Corner Brook?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, once again I have to correct the misinformation over there. When
we are talking about isotopes for nuclear medicine, we are talking about
something completely different when we are talking about a PET scanner. The only
part he has right is that the isotopes we use for nuclear medicine we are
getting from Chalk River.
Mr. Speaker, in terms of isotopes for PET scanners, they are made and used
within a particular period of time. Transporting them across the Province is not
something that is recommended. Therefore, it is not something that we are
prepared to do because we are not going to endanger the people of the Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: I ask the minister: How many PET scanners are in Quebec? How
many cyclotrons are there in Quebec where there is shipment on a daily basis of
these isotopes? On a daily basis they are shipping from PET scanner from the
isotopes, I ask the minister.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I do not speak for the Province of Quebec. What
I will talk about is the information that the member opposite has given us
before. He told us there are twelve PET scanners in Quebec. Mr. Speaker, if that
is the case then they are short four. They really need sixteen in order to
accommodate the population of Quebec at 8 million, if you go by the WHO
recommendations.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of St. Barbe.
MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, it was reported in the news yesterday
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for the District of St. Barbe.
MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, it was reported in the news yesterday that the
Fisheries Minister stated, I as fisheries critic did not seek information with
CETA. The facts are, I wrote letters, I asked in this House, and I issued press
releases.
I ask the minister: How many times and how many ways must the same questions
be asked, or is the real problem that the department changes ministers so often
nobody knows what is going on?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, my reference yesterday was to the fact that
there is significant information available in regard to CETA. It has been
released by the federal government. I think there are four particular documents
on the Web site. I have them here. I will certainly present them in the House
for the hon. member if he needs the information.
One is a Technical
Summary of Final Negotiated Outcomes; one is the opening
new markets; the other is an overview of Opening New Markets in Europe; How CETA
Will Benefit Canada's Key Economic Sectors. They deal with fisheries, and all
industries in Canada are to be affected by the CETA agreement.
I reference the hon. member, I am not aware of him calling me asking for a
briefing on the technical requirements of CETA related to the fisheries in
Newfoundland and Labrador. I am pleased to give him the information and give him
a briefing. Make the call, and we will do what we can for him, Mr. Speaker, to
inform him.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of St. Barbe.
MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, on January 29, 2013 I wrote the former Minister
of Fisheries on the challenges facing the sealing industry, specifically how the
industry figures in the CETA negotiations. He did not respond.
I ask the current minister: Will he respond to my eight-point letter on the
sealing industry that I sent to his predecessor ten months ago?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I will certainly endeavour to seek out the letter and provide what
information I can to the hon. member.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.
MS DEMPSTER: Mr. Speaker, twice now I have asked when the new poverty
reduction action plan will be released. Either the minister responsible is
unwilling or unable to answer the question.
I ask the minister: Which is it? Do you just not know enough to get into the
specifics, or do you think it is okay to be unaccountable to the people living
in poverty in this Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, in regard to the Poverty Reduction Strategy
that is exactly what it is; it is all about action. We have invested about $148
million on poverty reduction in this Province, annually, over the last four or
five years or so, each and every year.
We invest in various things. As a matter of fact, in my hand here I have a
list of items that are probably about thirteen or fourteen pages long in regard
to those initiatives right across government departments, Justice, Health,
Advanced Education and Skills, and various other departments in exactly that.
Certainly, we will keep investing in poverty in this Province. As a matter of
fact, it has been hailed across this country as being the best strategy that has
been developed to date.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.
MS DEMPSTER: Mr. Speaker, we have been waiting two years. I am just
asking: When will the plan be released?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Certainly, Mr. Speaker, I will table the plan and the
updates when we have done the proper evaluations.
We will continue to invest in school fees, free textbooks, drug cards, social
services benefits, and on and on and on. We will keep doing that. We do not need
an actual plan because this government has been very cognizant of the most
vulnerable people in this Province and we have invested heavily, I say to the
hon. members.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the government's own consultant, John Noseworthy, reflected
concerns expressed by AES staff that the maximum rental rates for Income Support
do not jive with today's rental market. Noseworthy also recommended government
consider implementing a rental rate structure based on regional market rates,
citing St. John's and Piccadilly as examples of two communities with very
different housing costs.
I ask the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills: Will you consider
implementing a regional rental rate structure as your own consultant
recommended?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member clearly knows, or at least
he should know, that due to the economy that this government has created over
the last number of years, rental rates have certainly increased in the City of
St. John's and Corner Brook and the growth areas of this Province.
I will tell you what we have done. We have invested heavily in affordable
housing in this Province. We have invested right through Newfoundland and
Labrador Housing in the rental supplements and a suite of programs that we have
within Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, as well as Advanced Education and
Skills.
We will continue to do that, I say to the hon. member. We will do whatever we
can as a government to alleviate the added burden to our most vulnerable people
in this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The government did not put any additional money into the Rental Supplement
Program this year and for people who are not living in Newfoundland and Labrador
Housing, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing does not help somebody who is renting
privately.
Mr. Speaker, constituents who are on Income Support in my district are
struggling to maintain shelter, given the restrictive rental rates under the
Income Support Program. The maximum rate of $522 per month will not secure an
apartment in many areas of the Province.
I ask the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills: Do you intend to
increase the rental rate under Income Support to help the most vulnerable keep a
roof over their heads?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, when I reflect, and certainly in my past life,
poverty was always an issue in regard to affordable housing or whatever it may
be; it was always a concern of mine in the pharmacy profession.
We have invested heavily in regard to our most vulnerable people, people on
Income Support. We are seeing less people on Income Support now than we ever did
in our Province. People are moving into meaningful work and meaningful careers,
coming off Income Support because of the opportunities that we are creating.
Certainly, my officials and I will be working diligently in regard to
alleviating any other hardships that a person would have, as a vulnerable person
in this Province, as we have
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The 2011-2012 Annual Report of the Department of Advanced Education and
Skills described the Poverty Reduction Strategy activities and said the strategy
was moving into a next phase, but this year's report says nothing about the next
phase and only mentions the strategy in passing.
I ask the Premier: What is government's plan for the Poverty Reduction
Strategy, if indeed there is one?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, the Poverty Reduction Strategy plan has been
the hallmark of this government. When we took government in 2003, one of the
MS SHEA: We had the highest rate of poverty in Canada.
MR. O'BRIEN: Absolutely, we had one of the highest rates of poverty in
Canada. Now we are seeing people move into meaningful jobs. We are seeing people
who are able to take advantage of the opportunities that have been created in
this Province, Mr. Speaker, and we continue to invest $148 million annually,
each and every year for the last number of years, across a suite of departments.
All was cognizant and all was addressing the issues in regard to poverty in this
Province. We will continue to action that and we will continue to improve on to
it as we move forward.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In Estimates we were told that out of seven positions in the Poverty
Reduction office, the director and two policy positions were vacant, and a
client services officer position was eliminated.
I ask the minister: What is the current status of staffing in the Poverty
Reduction Strategy division?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, poverty is not about the number of staff who
are in a particular office in AES. This is about investing in the most
vulnerable people of our Province and getting the money to the people who need
it the most. That is what this is all about. This is all about affordable
housing. It is about addressing the issues these people face.
It is giving them opportunity, Mr. Speaker, and we create the opportunity. We
move them into skilled labour. We give them opportunity to go back to school. We
give them opportunity to have meaningful lives. That is what the Poverty
Reduction Strategy is all about.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
So they do not need a plan, and now they do not need staff to do anything
because there is no plan.
I am asking the minister to tell this House, Mr. Speaker, how many staff are
currently working in the division of Poverty Reduction Strategy?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: I am sorry to tell the hon. member, but she does not
understand exactly how the Poverty Reduction Strategy works. It works across all
departments by a lot of staff, I say to the hon. member, who are doing some
great, great work on behalf of those vulnerable people, Mr. Speaker. We will
continue to invest in the vulnerable people of this Province. We will continue
to see the impact we are seeing right across this land, as one of the best
poverty reduction strategies ever implemented in Canada.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Since the minister will not tell the public how many, we will just have to go
further to find out that information.
Yesterday the minister stated we have fewer people on Income Support and more
people working. He said it again today, but we still have 35,000 people on
Income Support, 26,000 going to food banks, and 24 per cent of children in
poverty compared to 18 per cent in Canada. Our unemployment is twice the
national average and there are fifteen people for every job compared to six for
every job in Canada.
I ask the minister: With these realities, why is this department downsizing
the Poverty Reduction Strategy?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: This is all about getting the investment to the people who
need it the most, Mr. Speaker. I commend the people in my department, Advanced
Education and Skills, as well as Justice, and Health, who are delivering that
strategy and delivering the programs that help the most vulnerable of our
Province. That is exactly what this government has been doing right from the
get-go in 2004 when we implemented that strategy.
We will continue to do that, I say to the hon. member, because it is not
about people listen, they deliver it well in regard to the public service that
is here in this building and across Newfoundland and Labrador. We will continue
to invest in the people who need it the most.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Lucy is a sixty-six-year-old homeless woman who has been couch surfing for
two years. She has worked all her life and is on a very limited pension. She
applied to Newfoundland and Labrador Housing two years in a row. She has a
doctor's note urging housing to help her. They keep saying there is nothing
available. Lucy is not the only senior in this situation.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: What is he going to do today for seniors
like Lucy who cannot afford basic shelter?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing have invested
heavily right across this Province. As a matter of fact, we have over 1,700
units in St. John's alone. They have invested heavily in regard to the
maintenance of those units as well.
If the hon. member has a particular case, I have not seen it yet. She has not
forwarded it to me, as I know of it. If she wants me to have a look at that case
in particular, I will have a look at it, absolutely, and see can we find a
solution.
I would say here, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing is always seeking
solutions for people who are vulnerable, people who need the service, and they
do a great job in doing so, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS: That is two years for Lucy, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, Sarah's husband died five months ago. She lost his pension, hers
is small, and now she cannot afford the rent. Housing says they have nothing to
offer her. She has to move by January and has nowhere to go.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: What is he going to do today to help Sarah
and others like her?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, what we are going to do is continue to invest.
We are going to continue to invest in regard to affordable housing, rental
supplements.
As a matter of fact, something that is usually forgotten is we invested in
new residences for Memorial University that freed up about 500 rooms in the City
of St. John's for affordable housing. That took those people out of that
category, freed up those rentals, gave us more housing available, and that is
what we will continue to do.
We will continue to invest and we will continue to address the issue.
Hopefully, in time, as we grow with our economy, we will be able to bring it
down as low as possible, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The time for Question Period has expired.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Tabling of Documents.
Notices of Motion.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KING: Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I move pursuant to Standing Order 11 that this House not adjourn
at 5:30 p.m. today, Tuesday, November 26, 2013.
I further move Motion 3, pursuant to Standing Order 11 that the House not
adjourn 10:00 p.m. today, Tuesday, November 26, 2013.
MR. SPEAKER: Could we defer that to Orders of the Day? This is Notices of
Motion.
MR. KING: I am sorry.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice was given yesterday on those, if you would.
Are there any further notices of motion?
The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KING: I read the wrong one, sorry.
Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I give notice under Standing Order 11, I shall move the House
not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, November 28, 2013.
Further, I give notice under Standing Order 11 that I shall move the House
not adjourn at 10:00 p.m., Thursday, November 28, 2013.
MR. SPEAKER: Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.
MR. BENNETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
A petition to the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned humbly
sheweth:
WHEREAS the offshore of the West Coast of the Island of Newfoundland is
recognized as a region containing potentially billions of barrels of oil; and
WHEREAS hydraulic fracturing could be an accepted and effective method of
petroleum discovery and exploration, and it is compatible with the protection of
the natural environment and water sources when executed within the context of a
comprehensive regulatory framework; and
WHEREAS the petroleum exploration sector needs the certainty and confidence
of a stable regulatory regime; and
WHEREAS with that regulatory regime oil discovery and industry development
could provide unprecedented economic opportunity and bring people home to a
currently economically challenged area; and
WHEREAS the undersigned support properly regulated exploration and
development of the oil and gas resource in the Province;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to
introduce a regulatory framework immediately under which hydraulic fracturing
could proceed safely, and move this industry forward in Western Newfoundland.
Mr. Speaker, this region of the Province all up and down the West Coast of
the Province has been shown to have potentially unprecedented oil reserves.
These oil reserves stretch in the north in my district from Bellburns all the
way to the south down to Cape St. George. Recently, a company started to
proceed. They wanted to do horizontal drilling from onshore to offshore and this
would require hydraulic fracturing.
Hydraulic fracturing, Mr. Speaker, has been used for approximately sixty
years without significant incidents in this country. Over the years the process
has been improved, regulated, and upgraded. This government has backed away from
dealing with this issue. This is an issue that requires courage on the part of
the government, courage and insight. Other jurisdictions have proceeded forward.
We have an opportunity here, but it requires leadership from government to
introduce the regulatory regime so this could proceed safely.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.
MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in
Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland
and Labrador humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS government has a responsibility to ensure that Internet access is
broadly available so people have the right to be able to access the Internet in
order to exercise and enjoy their rights to freedom of expression and opinion
and other fundamental human rights; and
WHEREAS Bide Arm was bypassed under the Broadband for Rural and Northern
Development initiative, which saw high-speed Internet added to thirty-six
communities on the Great Northern Peninsula in 2004; and
WHEREAS nearly a decade later, Bide Arm still remains without broadband
services, despite being amalgamated with the Town of Roddickton; and
WHEREAS residents rely on Internet services for education, business,
communication, and social activity; and
WHEREAS wireless and wired technologies exist to provide broadband service to
rural communities to replace slower dial-up services;
We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to
assist providers to ensure Bide Arm is in receipt of broadband Internet service
in Newfoundland and Labrador.
As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, it would be very interesting to know, of the close to 200
communities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador that do not have access to
broadband Internet, how many of them are municipalities? I have two in my
district: the Town of Goose Cove and the Town of Roddickton-Bide Arm.
Bide Arm was a municipality before it amalgamated. Now the other part of the
town, Roddickton, has the high-speed Internet and Bide Arm does not. It is
creating such a difficulty when you are trying to provide equitable services to
people when it comes to education, when it comes to business opportunity, and
when it comes to communication and social activities to really look at the
development that needs to happen.
There is a significant opportunity to use varying technologies. The Town of
Roddickton is only about eight kilometres away so, even in very archaic form,
copper wire would be able to reach eight kilometres. There are technologies that
can exist. We have more advanced technologies. We could be using wireless as a
form. There are various backhauls through the fibre lines that are there.
I had some very good conversations with the Department of Innovation,
Business and Rural Development and their officials. I look forward to working
with the minister, as I have with the past minister, to see if we can find a
solution to providing broadband Internet to the town that includes Bide Arm at
this point.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.
MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have a petition. To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of
Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the
undersigned humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS residents of the Southwest Coast must travel the Trans-Canada Highway
between Channel-Port aux Basques and Corner Brook for work, medical,
educational, and social reasons; and
WHEREAS Marine Atlantic ferries dock at Channel-Port aux Basques at various
hours on a daily basis resulting in extremely high volumes of commercial and
residential travellers using this
section of the TCH; and
WHEREAS the world-renowned Wreckhouse area is situate along this
section of
the TCH; and
WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador initiated a
twenty-four-hour snow clearing pilot project in 2008 that excluded the
section
of the Trans-Canada Highway from Channel-Port aux Basques to Stephenville.
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to include
the
section of the TCH from Channel-Port aux Basques to Stephenville in the
twenty-four-hour snow clearing project.
As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to stand here again in this House, for the sixth
day running, and put this petition on the table. Some might question why I do
that, and the reason is I take my orders from the people of Burgeo La Poile.
One of the major concerns that they have is that they are not getting proper
snow clearing after 9:00 at night on this
section of the roadway. It is very
dangerous. I have made it known. There is no reason that this is not done. I
have heard from so many people on it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. A. PARSONS: That is the beauty of petitions is that you can continue
doing it. It is a known, tried and tested parliamentary format for putting this
in, and I am going to continue doing so.
I have sent a request off to the minister's staff to sit down and discuss
this issue. I know that the minister has been very accommodating with any other
requests that I have made. I know he is going to make sure that it is done so we
can discuss this and make sure that the right thing will get done. Until that
time, I will continue putting in these petitions on behalf of the people of
Burgeo La Poile.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in
Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS the residents of the Pynn's Brook area are facing dangers in turning
their vehicles safely off the Trans-Canada Highway Route 1 into their own
driveways; and
WHEREAS it is common practice among TCH Route 1 to impose speed reductions
for traffic travelling through communities such as Badger, Deer Lake, Bishop's
Falls, Gander, Clarenville and Whitbourne; and
WHEREAS highway traffic accidents along the stretch of TCH Route 1 through
Pynn's Brook have caused deaths and injuries;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to urge government to reduce the maximum speed limit on TCH
Route 1 through the Pynn's Brook area from the present 100 kilometres an hour to
sixty kilometres an hour.
As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, I am very honoured to be able to stand today and present this
petition on behalf of dozens of people from the Pynn's Brook community, people
who have faced what happens because of the dangers of having to turn off the
Trans-Canada Highway. As the petition points out, they have had both deaths and
injuries because of the fact that cars are zooming by at a minimum of 100
kilometres an hour as they are trying to go in and out of their community.
In the House this past couple of days we have passed legislation some we
have passed and some we are still discussing with regard to safety on the
highways. The government is showing itself to be concerned about safety on the
highways; the move-over law, for example, for emergency vehicles and other
vehicles that are described in that piece of legislation; the discussions that
are ongoing right now, we are still discussing the legislation with regard to
speed limits in school zones, with regard to slow- moving traffic, et cetera, to
make our highways safer.
I find it very difficult to understand why government, both the Department of
Justice and the Department of Transportation and Works, would not look at this
petition and realize it makes all the sense in the world to do for Pynn's Brook
what has been done for other communities. To make sure that they can feel safe,
that they know they are not going to have other members of their community
maimed or killed, or anybody else maimed or killed because of the traffic going
through their community.
Mr. Speaker, I just ask the ministers involved to look at this petition with
justice and with concern. A very simple thing, it will not cost any money except
for putting up a new speed limit sign. I really beg them on behalf of the people
to pay attention to this petition.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in
Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland
and Labrador humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS the Family Violence Intervention Court provided a comprehensive
approach to domestic violence in a court setting that fully understood and dealt
with the complex issues of domestic violence; and
WHEREAS domestic violence continues to be one of the most serious issues
facing our Province today, and the cost of the impact of domestic violence is
great both economically and in human suffering; and
WHEREAS the Family Violence Intervention Court was welcomed and endorsed by
all aspects of the justice system including the police, the courts, prosecutors,
defence counsel, Child, Youth and Family Services, as well as victims,
offenders, community agencies and women's groups; and
WHEREAS the recidivism rate for offenders going through the court was 10 per
cent compared to 40 per cent for those who did not; and
WHEREAS the budget for the court was only 0.2 per cent of the entire budget
of the Department of Justice;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to urge government to reinstate the Family Violence
Intervention Court.
Mr. Speaker, I was not sure whether or not I should be up here doing the
Family Violence Intervention Court petition or a petition that has also been
handed to me repeatedly about Bill 29, because repeatedly I have asked the
minister
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Repeatedly, I have asked the Minister of Justice to table the review of the
Family Violence Intervention Court and that was refused, saying that we have
also asked, Mr. Speaker, for the review of the Family Violence Intervention
Court. We have tried to get access to it through ATIPP and we have been told it
is a Cabinet document and therefore protected as Cabinet secrecy.
Mr. Speaker, no one has given us a viable reason as to why the Family
Violence Intervention Court was cut. A program that was so vital, so crucial, as
part of working against family violence; supporting women and children, victims
of family violence. The review that was done, we know that review was positive;
that the court was totally supported by all stakeholders who were involved in
the justice system around family violence.
We have repeatedly asked for that, and I ask the minister again: Will he
table that review? Because there is no justifiable reason for having cut that
program; a program that was working well, that was fulfilling its mandate as was
reported in the review of the Family Violence Intervention Court.
Mr. Speaker, again, I am not sure whether I should be presenting a petition
on Bill 29 or on the Family Violence Intervention Court, because they are
intersecting at this point. I think that it is crucial, Mr. Speaker. If this
government says it is committed to family violence, they have to show why they
closed this court.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.
MS DEMPSTER: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. House of Assembly of the Province
of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the
undersigned humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS most communities in the District of Cartwright L'Anse au Clair do
not have cellphone coverage; and
WHEREAS residents of Coastal Labrador require cell coverage to ensure safety
and communication abilities; and
WHEREAS the opening of the Trans-Labrador Highway has increased our
dependency on mobile communication;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to work
with the appropriate agencies to provide cellphone coverage along the
Trans-Labrador Highway and to all communities in Coastal Labrador.
As in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, I spoke to this petition yesterday. I will continue to speak to
it until I see some progress and some action, and at least until we see an
interim plan. As I said yesterday, I did speak with department officials. There
seems to be a plan in place for 2016. We are still only into 2013.
We need an interim plan. We cannot wait. There are twenty communities in my
district, and there are three that have some patchy cell service. We have had
private groups come in and say the cost would not be big to put a tower into the
region. That could go a long way in serving the district.
Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate the harsh winter conditions that we live
with in our remote communities. What cell coverage would do for the safety of so
many residents, especially our youth, Mr. Speaker, who are travelling on buses,
and at night, for school and sporting events, things like that. With our snow
plows going off the road at 9 o'clock at night, we are talking eight, nine
hours, lives could be lost. Hopefully, that is not the case, Mr. Speaker.
Medical emergencies happening in storms and things like that. Yes, we do have
satellite phones.
I want to say, Mr. Speaker, the Department of Transportation has satellite
phones that you can pick up in each community to help with this in the event of
not having cellphones; however, every time I went to pick up a phone last year,
because I am travelling a lot on the road myself, no phone was available. I did
address this at Combined Councils and talked about how simple it is to make sure
that one store in every community has a stock of satellite phones. There are
people on the road every single day transportation workers who could ensure
that there are, but this problem still exists as well. So we not only do not
have cell coverage, but the backup plan that is in place clearly is not working
either.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY: To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland
and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents
of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS autism spectrum disorder has been estimated to occur in as many as
one in eighty-eight children; and
WHEREAS individualized and intensive early interventions are important for
improving outcomes for children with autism; and
WHEREAS long wait lists are forcing many parents to wait up to two years
before their children receive needed pediatric assessments and diagnostic
services; and
WHEREAS the Intensive Applied Behavioural Analysis Program is not available
for children after Grade 3 while research supports the use of Applied
Behavioural Analysis throughout the lifespan; and
WHEREAS a coordinated multi-agency approach among key government departments
and agencies is needed to ensure that individuals with autism spectrum disorder
are provided with services that will promote independent living; and
WHEREAS a comprehensive Province-wide strategy for autism spectrum disorder
will decrease the lifetime costs of treating and providing services for persons
with autism;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to urge government to develop a comprehensive Province-wide
strategy for autism spectrum disorder in consultation with parents, advocates,
educators, health care providers, and experts in the autism community.
As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, this is a petition that people all around the Province have
signed today. We have people from Carbonear, Bristol's Hope, Harbour Grace,
Victoria, all around the Province. There are people from the West Coast on this
one as well, and Paradise. It is an issue that affects families all across
Newfoundland and Labrador.
Members will recall that yesterday I gave notice of a motion with respect to
a comprehensive strategy for autism spectrum disorder. This is something that
families and experts in the field, advocates for individuals with autism
spectrum disorder, have been asking for for a number of years now. Several
Ministers of Health and Community Services ago, I would suggest, this issue
started to come to a head.
We do have ABA now up until the end of Grade 3. I certainly recognize that is
really a latter day thing for Newfoundland and Labrador, but there is lots of
evidence to suggest that is useful later in life. I think the key here is to
bring together all of the expertise among government agencies, departments,
everything from schools to health care providers, government departments and so
on, to bring this strategy
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I remind the member that his time has expired.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KING: Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I move Motion 2, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that the House
not adjourn 5:30 p.m. today, Tuesday, November 26, 2013.
Further, I move Motion 3, pursuant Standing Order 11, that the House not
adjourn 10:00 p.m. today, Tuesday, November 26, 2013.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that this House do not
adjourn at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, November 26, and it has been further moved and
seconded that this House do not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 26.
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Motion carried.
The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KING: Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health and Community
Services, that Bill 10,
An Act To Amend The Pharmaceutical Services Act, be now
read a third time.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
third time.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that Bill 10 be now read
a third time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Motion carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Pharmaceutical Services Act. (Bill 10)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill is now read a third time and it is ordered that
the bill do pass and its title be as on the Order Paper.
On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Pharmaceutical Services Act", read a
third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 10)
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KING: Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Service Newfoundland and
Labrador, to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled
An Act To Amend The
Insurance Adjusters, Agents And Brokers Act, Bill 21, and that the said bill be
now read the first time.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Service NL shall have leave to introduce a bill,
An Act To Amend The Insurance
Adjusters, Agents And Brokers Act, Bill 21, and that the said bill be now read a
first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the minister shall have leave to
introduce Bill 21 and that the said bill be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Motion carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador to
introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Insurance Adjusters, Agents And Brokers
Act", carried. (Bill 21)
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Insurance Adjusters, Agents And
Brokers Act. (Bill 21)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time.
When shall the bill be read a second time?
MR. KING: On tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 21 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KING: Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I call from the Order Paper, Order 4, second reading of a bill,
An Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act No. 2, Bill 13.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 13,
An Act To Amend The
Highway Traffic Act No. 2, be now read a second time.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Oh, it is continuing from yesterday.
The hon. the Member for St. John's North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is the second time now when we were getting towards the end of the day
that I think I accidentally tried to close the Legislature instead of ending the
debate. I apologize to the members if anybody was as confused as I was. We
certainly managed to conclude the debate on time. That is good. It is always
good to find ways to co-operate.
I will just have a few more words to say about Bill 13,
An Act to Amend the
Highway Traffic Act No. 2. One of the things that are accomplished here in the
legislation is to limit the number of occupants in a vehicle to the number of
seat belts in a vehicle. That is logical; there is no question about that.
I was a bit surprised to hear from the minister's officials in Transportation
and Works that there was a technicality at present that permits four people to
travel in the back of a vehicle, if you will, where there are only three seat
belts in the vehicle. That will not be a problem any longer because this will
limit the number of passengers to the number of seat belts that are actually in
a vehicle.
It seems like it was not a whole long time ago that seat belt usage was not
really the norm in the Province. I think it is important to bring this change in
to ensure that there are not any loopholes, that people do remain safe.
There was a great tragedy in our Province just recently where a young man
lost his life in a vehicle accident and he was not wearing a seat belt at the
time. His family has been out there publicly, quite courageously I think,
cautioning people in the Province around seat belt usage.
I hope people will heed their call to make sure that whenever you get in a
vehicle you put that seat belt on and remain safe. I think this is an important
issue, and I think recent events shine a light on just how important and vital
this change can be. That was one thing.
Another thing I just wanted to comment on is the issue of people riding on
parts of a vehicle not intended for seating, for example, riding in the back of
pickup trucks. I know the Member for Cape St. Francis gave us sort of humorous
anecdotes from his life when people would customarily ride in the back of a
vehicle. It could be a dozen people jump in the back and go up to the store, the
bank, or what have you.
We certainly do not see a whole lot of that any more, but I was a bit I
grew up on a small farm and when we were doing things like making hay or hauling
kelp for fertilizer, or we were doing various things around, trying to deal with
livestock and those sorts of things, when you are slaughtering large numbers of
animals, there are often times where there was reason to ride in the back of a
pickup truck, and to have a number of people there.
If you were just more or less trying to keep animals, like I said, that have
been slaughtered, or vegetables, or hay, or equipment, there was certainly cause
to ride in the back of a truck, if not only just to secure what it is you are
carrying there. Sometimes, it is really not practical in agriculture to be
strapping everything down tightly, because you are not driving a long distance.
The way it was for my family's farm, and it still is, the place where my
father hauls his kelp from, and the place where he hauls his hay from, and the
place where he hauls a lot of his vegetables from, all require him to travel
over a short portion of road between the communities of Taylor's Bay and Lord's
Cove in order to transport whatever it is he happens to be transporting.
This extends to other things as well not only agriculture, there are still
lots of people out there who transport turf, peat, wood, and so on. I am just
wondering if there are any exemptions to this, maybe only with respect to
agricultural vehicles that are used in agriculture situations, whether the
minister or his officials have thought much about the implications here for
those who are working in agricultural industries, or, as in the case of my
family, working in farming on a relatively small scale. Like I said, sometimes
having to travel in the back of not only a pickup truck, but other sort of farm
vehicles and so on.
So I think it is something that is worth considering. Beyond that, I do not
have any other concerns about this bill on the whole. As I have said earlier, I
am happy to support this because I think these are really positive changes.
It really goes to show that as the Province changes, as vehicles change, as
the nature of our use of vehicles change over time, it is important for us to be
in here in the fall sitting of the Legislature to have an opportunity on the
legislative calendar to bring in these sorts of things and deal with it, outside
of all of the machinations that go on in the House of Assembly after Christmas,
in the spring sitting, where we are very occupied with dealing with issues
related to the Budget and any associated legislation that sort of falls out of
major changes that government decides to proceed with.
I think it is a really good lesson in why we are here and why we need to be
here to do this sort of work in the fall.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER (Verge): I recognize the hon. the Member for St. John's or
for Bonavista North.
MR. CROSS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thought my population just went up.
It certainly is indeed great to stand today, no matter which district one
might be from, to talk about this bill,
An Act to Amend the Highway Traffic Act
No. 2. Again, it is one of these bills where most people who speak are speaking
to support it, but each of us brings a distinct point of view to this as well.
When we were talking to the officials at the department, they talked about
this amendment as closing gaps or harmonizing and clarifying certain sections of
this bill. Believe it or not, there are probably 215 provisions in the act in
total, and they are always needing to be revised.
There are particularly six sections referred to by most of the members when
we talk about this, and most of us have talked about them in the same order. We
talk about the school zones, the slow-moving vehicles that is from sections
110 and 111 the ambulance and fire trucks, emergency vehicles at the stop
signs, in
section 123. There are two sections here from
section 178, subsections
on seatbelts and riding in non-passenger parts of vehicles; and
section 170(1),
the threshold for insurance. There is quite a gamut of ideas or information that
can be addressed in looking at this.
In the old act, we understand that they did have some provisions made for
doubling of the fines for speeding in school zones, but the act was vague in
what they referred to as these zones. Even with some of the thoughts that we
might have in the last couple of days, when you are referring to a school zone
the old
section referred to buildings and grounds around the school buildings
and referred to times between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. in the old act. The new
time reflects the wider use of school hours and the fact that it is now from
7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
We all realize there are even times outside of these hours that school is
probably in session in some way. I know two of the high schools in my district,
Pearson Academy and Phoenix Academy I know because I spoke to their
administrators gym practices in the morning start at 6:30. The gym is usually
booked for school teams, right up to 9:00 at night. By extending it the amount
of time we did, it takes into account some of the extensions of the hours that
may exist.
The other thing is you might even have a very, very small community. I know
Heritage Academy in Greenspond is a very small school, one of the smallest
populations of any school in the Island probably, or even in Labrador. They
would need more than two signs to designate the school zone because there are
two roads that pass the school, one behind and one in front. You cannot just
look at a couple of signs.
In different situations there may need to be more signage around, or there
might be a lane coming down by the side of the school where you have to
recognize the school zone. Even when we are trying to clarify and tighten this
language up, we still know that there are times when it might not fit all
situations.
The
section that deals with slow-moving vehicles is
section 111. Most of the
ideas that have been talked about
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. CROSS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
A couple of comments are all I would really like to add here and these are
comments from the officials. Most of our hon. members when they spoke, they
spoke about antique motor vehicles receiving an exemption for the slow-moving
act.
One thing is most people who have the antique cars, they are for show. They
are not on the street in the busiest of times and they are mostly for Sunday
drives. It is a recognition in the act that these vehicles cannot maintain
eighty kilometres an hour. They are allowed on the highway in the lane, not
driving on the shoulder but driving in the lane, unless they are really
obstructing traffic. At that point I understand any of our enforcement officers
can approach them and either ask them to move off the road or to ask them to
speed up. If they cannot speed up then they can receive a fine or they will be
recognized but it is an odd sense.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. CROSS: The other peculiarity about the antique cars is that they also
fit in with the seat belt legislation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I would ask all members for their co-operation, please, as the Member for
Bonavista North continues with his speaking time.
The hon. the Member for Bonavista North.
MR. CROSS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The other peculiarity about the antique vehicles is that many of them do not
have seatbelts at all. If we had to strictly go by saying you can only carry
your passengers where you have seatbelts, then some of these vehicles have to
receive an exemption for that part of the act as well. That has been omitted or
no one else has referred to that. So, I am just looking at my notes.
If I jump right quickly ahead again I will go to
section 178(5), riding in a
non-passenger section. The hon. Member for Cape St. Francis referred to it
yesterday about carrying a full ball team in his Chevette. I never, ever thought
I would get the time to mention my uncle Eldon's name here, but when we were
kids we would travel to the swimming hole on Sunday afternoon in the back of the
dump truck. It was the only dump truck in the town and he would take about
twenty to thirty of us in the back of his dump truck. Believe it or not, the
small kids, Mr. Speaker, would get on the shoulders of some of the others who
were standing up in the dump just to see out over. It was really, really safe at
that point.
We talk about the good old days, but there are times that there can be
exemptions and exceptions. When we look at that today, the only exception to
people riding in a non-seat belted
section of a vehicle, or a portion of a
vehicle that is not designed to carry passengers is on private property. The
officials at the department, the questions asked a few days ago when we were
there, it was said that if they are on farm, you are off the regular highway
the highway is anything that is officiated by the police and recognized as a
driveable section, but if you are on a farm and going across the back road of a
farm, you can still actually carry people in the back of your pickup. Again, it
is on private land and it is not on regulated highway.
Again, safety is still an issue there. It certainly suggests that they not do
that, but they still have that ability on private property on a farm.
The other
section that was referred to is when you have your emergency
vehicles approaching a stop sign or a red light. There was no comment or no
reference to that in any legislation before. In fact, the official said the
legislation was quiet on that effect, meaning if there is nothing written then
you just go by your good common sense approach.
Right now, it shall be written in there and the wording says: a driver of an
emergency vehicle shall not proceed past a red light or a stop sign unless the
vehicle yields the intersection to someone who is already in it, or someone who
did not see them coming, or a pedestrian. At that point, then they proceed.
Now, that is a new thing. Apparently, Eastern Health was requiring all of
their drivers to do this all along. Now it is uniform across the Province when
it is put into this legislation.
I intended to stand just to bring up the things that the perspective that I
would have brought to this from my thoughts at the briefings. I do not want to
take up much more time of the Legislature on this because all of these points
have been handled.
I would say at this point, most of the loose ends that can be tied up, are
tied up here, Mr. Speaker, and this is a good piece of legislation that we will
all support, I would hope.
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I am happy to stand and speak to Bill 13,
An Act to Amend the Highway Traffic
Act No 2.
I specifically want to spend a few minutes speaking about clause 3, "The Act
is amended by adding immediately after
section 110.1 the following:
"110.2
(1) Except where a lower maximum speed limit is prescribed by this
Act, a person shall not drive a vehicle at a speed greater than 50 kilometres an
hour in a school zone.
"
(2) In this section, school zone' means the portion or length of highway
between the two posted signs indicating a school zone.
"(3) Subsection (1) only applies between the hours of 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. on
days when school is regularly held."
Mr. Speaker, I know this is about increasing safety. As we have evolved as a
car and automobile culture we have had to amend our laws. We have had to amend
our regulations to update them to the increasing use of vehicles, the increasing
traffic on our roadways all over the Province, and this is a good thing. It is
important to amend our regulations and our laws to accommodate the demographics
and the modes of transportation in our communities.
I am concerned, and I would think that it would make sense to have our school
zones in effect twenty-four seven, and why not? This is about safety. It is
about the safety of our children. It simply means reducing speeds through
communities where there is a school on a roadway. Simply reducing speed for a
very short period of time. Why would we not do that?
One of the reasons I would push for this, Mr. Speaker, is that in schools we
have extracurricular activities. Perhaps not as many extracurricular activities
as we did have years ago, with that in and of itself is a shame, but we have
drama, we have sports. We have all kinds of extracurricular in schools, and it
would make sense that a school zone be designated as a school zone to cover all
possibilities.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS ROGERS: The other thing is that we see an increasingly mixed use of
schools, that other groups use schools. Hopefully, we will see that increasing
as well in a number of communities, Mr. Speaker, where the schools are used by
groups that are not specifically students or teachers.
We know that people know how they are to act when they come to a stop sign.
People know what the laws and regulations are when they come to a yield sign.
Why would we not extend that same kind of conditioning and automatic response to
a school zone?
I am thinking not even of the road traffic, Mr. Speaker, because in road
traffic drivers have to become used to new regulations and legislation in terms
of directions on how to use a zone, the roads where there are speed zones, where
there are slower areas, but also then for the people in the schools, whether it
be students or parents, so that students and parents, and anybody who uses a
school knows that automatically drivers have to slow down in those zones.
It is a win-win situation, Mr. Speaker. Nobody loses on this. By making our
school zones in effect twenty-four seven, everybody is safer. Then again, not
only are we conditioning drivers, but we are also conditioning people who are
using the schools, again, students and teachers. Students have an expectation.
Parents or drivers coming out of the schools have an expectation that the school
zone is a slower speed zone.
The other thing, is this in effect just during the school year? What about
the summer? In summer we know that schools are used for community activities. In
the summer we also know that schools are used for summer school. So why
complicate it?
One would think that simplifying it and making it automatically a school zone
twenty-four seven imprints on people that they slow down at all times entering a
school zone and throughout the school zone. There is no negative by-effect of
doing this. I believe it would be safer to have a school zone as a constant.
Again, it is about the safety of our children. It is about the safety of
people who use the school zone. Then it takes the ambiguity out there. There is
no need to have ambiguity around this. All it is, is a very short piece of road
that is designated at the school zone. We set the parameters and people have
expectations that they would approach a school zone, no matter what time of year
it is, no matter what time of day or evening it is, that one has to slow down
for that particular piece of road.
I would think, Mr. Speaker, in fact, what this would do is it would enhance
safety for the drivers. It would enhance safety for students. It would enhance
safety for those who are coming in and out of schools, for everybody who is
using a school.
I would like to highly recommend the minister look at this, because what we
are doing let's take the guess work out of it. Let's make it across board.
There are no losers if we do this. The school zone then would be imprinted on
people's driving habits the same way that a yield sign would be or a stop sign
would be. It would be constant and it would take the guess work out of it,
thereby increasing the safety for everyone concerned. I see no valid reason why
not to do this, only the pluses of increasing safety for all concerned.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.
MR. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak on Bill 13,
An Act to
Amend the Highway Traffic Act No. 2.
I am going to take a few minutes of my time this afternoon to mention just a
few matters in regard to this particular bill. First of all, I would like to
respond and mention a matter that was brought up by the hon. member opposite a
few moments ago regarding her suggestion that school zones be twenty-four hours
a day instead of what has been proposed in the legislation as applying between
the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
I appreciate her suggestion, but I would point out to her that in most all,
probably all school zones there are posted speed signs that go along with school
zone signs. Quite frequently you will see that. You will see school zone signs,
A speed sign is in effect twenty-four hours a day. A school zone sign is
being recommended from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. They are the normal hours; 7:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m. is the normal hours during which school is sitting, when
school is in place, in session. That is the normal hours for when that would
take place.
The problem with expanding that beyond those normal school hours is a similar
problem as we have seen, as a government, in construction zones. It is a
frustration. I have heard it many, many times from people in the Province when a
construction zone is set up, a work zone on a highway, either a Transportation
and Works highway or a municipal roadway throughout the Province, and it is set
up after hours when there is no action taking place and no activity, no work
taking place in that construction, or there is no danger that exists.
Now, there are times when a construction zone is erected and left up
overnight to identify, maybe there has been a crosscut in the road and there is
a portion of gravel there, or the asphalt has been cut or is creating a danger,
or some other aspect of that construction zone after hours could create a danger
or concern for motorists, and they still have to reduce their speed in that
construction zone and function as if people were working there.
There are also times when construction zone signs have been left up. When the
workers leave, there is no obstruction; there is no issue in the area. That is
not allowed under the Highway Traffic Act. That is not permitted. In those types
of circumstances, a construction company is required to take them down. For the
very reason that when those types of circumstances happen and a person drives
through a construction zone where they see the signage up and the warning signs
and there is no construction, and they go through it and there is no
construction, and the next day they go through it and there is no construction,
and the next day they come through and they say, ah, there is no construction, I
am just going to keep driving normally because those signs should not be up
there, then it creates a danger, because that may be the very time that
construction is happening.
So, under the act it requires construction zones to be properly marked and
posted on a highway when construction is taking place, or when some work on the
road after hours is still a danger to the motoring public; but if none of that
exists, for the signs to be removed.
I would suggest to the member opposite that school zones should be treated a
similar way. If you expect to see, or could see, or could be a time when
children are coming to or leaving the school between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.,
that is when the school zone should be in effect, during the times that the
children are coming and going from the school, and that is the whole intent of
it. Other than that, there is the opportunity, as in my colleague, the Minister
of Service NL, believes that if not all, pretty much most all of the schools in
the Province have both a school zone sign and a speed sign the speed sign is
in effect twenty-four hours a day anyway.
Mr. Speaker, I also wanted to just mention on reference to slow-moving
vehicles, and it is under the
section for slow-moving vehicles. It indicates
that the act is amended by adding immediately after
Section 111 the following,
and then it refers to a person shall not operate a slow-moving vehicle on a
highway with a speed limit of greater than eighty kilometres an hour, and it
goes on to say that it does not apply to a bicycle, snow clearing equipment and
so on. Also, that the minister may issue permits to people for agricultural
purposes and farming and those types of things as well.
What is important on this particular
section is that we see from time to time
on our highways, ninety kilometre zones, 100 kilometre zones, vehicles that are
not designed or able to reach the speed of eighty kilometres an hour and sustain
the speed of eighty kilometres an hour and operate in a safe manner under those
speeds.
That is what this is getting at here. That is what this legislation is
getting at here, quite commonly seen on the Outer Ring Road. I drive across the
Outer Ring Road every day, most every day, back and forth to work. I use the
Outer Ring Road early mornings. Quite often 6:30, 7:00, 7:30 in the morning, you
will see a piece of slow-moving heavy equipment travelling on the Outer Ring
Road and you will see the same thing in the evening. It is a traffic hazard, Mr.
Speaker. I say it is a traffic hazard; it is a serious hazard.
I have seen times when collisions have occurred with slow-moving vehicles
like that on highway speeds, and we have to assure the safety of the public,
assure the safety of the operator of such vehicles, and also of other vehicles
that are trying to manoeuvre around these slow-moving vehicles in a highway
situation.
I go back to what it says, it is amended immediately after
section 111 and
it would be important to just take a second to look at
section 111, because 111
is still going to exist in the Highway Traffic Act. What
section 111 says now
is, "A driver shall not drive a vehicle at such a slow rate of speed as to
impede or block the normal reasonable movement of traffic then existing on a
highway, except where it is necessary to do so for safe operation".
When a person does that, that particular
section goes on to say that a
traffic officer can order a person to speed up or take your vehicle off the
road. It actually says under paragraph (2) "A traffic officer may order a diver
referred to in subsection (1) to increase his or her rate of speed, pull into
the curb to allow other vehicles to pass or remove the vehicle from the
highway."
Then if a person fails to abide by the orders of a traffic officer, then a
charge could be laid. That currently exists in the Highway Traffic Act. This is
in addition to that.
I know that members opposite yesterday raised a point regarding concern about
antique vehicles or other slow-moving vehicles such as an antique vehicle,
because an antique vehicle is one of the exceptions here. In a case where that
antique vehicle is causing a disruption on traffic, the police still have the
option under
section 111 to order that vehicle off the highway or off the
roadway.
I just wanted to highlight for the members opposite who raised those concerns
yesterday that still does exist in the Highway Traffic Act.
Mr. Speaker, this piece of legislation and I heard members opposite earlier
say that they believed that everyone would be supporting this; I hope they
certainly do. There are a number of other pieces involved with this, one other
that I want to mention before I finish up my time this afternoon. It is a good
piece of legislation, and that is the one regarding increasing the reportable
accident damage threshold to $2,000.
Under the current legislation, under the current Highway Traffic Act, persons
are required to report accidents where there is damage. What this
section is
doing is increasing that liability or increasing that responsibility to report
accidents when there is a damage of $2,000 or greater. That does a couple of
things. One is there are a lot of accidents or collisions that occur now where
you may have $1,200, $1,300, $1,400, $1,500 damage; it can be a very minor
collision. Under that circumstance the person is required to report that to the
police. It is a very time-consuming process for police officers throughout
Newfoundland and Labrador. It is also time consuming for the people involved.
When there is a collision of a lesser amount, $800 or $900, $950 of total
value, people have the right to sort that out between themselves without
reporting it to the police and without reporting it to their insurance company.
What we are doing here is we are raising that threshold to $2,000. The damage
now is greater so a fewer number of those minor accidents will now be reported
to the police.
It is going to reduce the burden on police services in taking reports of
minor collisions. It is going to reduce the burden on the people of Newfoundland
and Labrador who find themselves in circumstances where they have had a minor
collision, no injuries, and a small amount of damage. It also decreases their
responsibility as far as their insurance responsibilities go.
Mr. Speaker, I think this again is a good piece of legislation for the people
of Newfoundland and Labrador. I have received favourable responses on it. I have
received some inquiries from people after the debate yesterday and I was quite
pleased to respond to some of those. It is a good piece of legislation to make
our highways safer and also good for the people who use our highways and the
motoring public, the people of the Province.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I agree a lot with the member opposite, to the Minister of Child, Youth and
Family Services in his statement, especially around the school zones. It is a
great opportunity to speak to the amendments in the Highway Traffic Act because
they are all about enhancing the safety mechanisms.
I will try not to go back and repeat what other members said, but just to
raise a few additional points or concerns that I have based on these amendments.
One in particular with the Schools Act amendment, which I think is great to see,
you are changing the hours now for reducing speed from 7:00 a.m. down previously
from 8:00 a.m. in recognizing that students can be arriving at school before the
8:00 a.m. hour. That is really positive to see that expanded.
One thing I would like to know from the Minister of Service Newfoundland and
Labrador, how are people going to be informed about this particular change? When
drivers' licences are renewed or when plates are renewed? Will there be may be
something sent out in the mail highlighting this particular change so the
general population knows that they would indeed have to slow down an hour
earlier?
That is a good way to inform them and not necessarily have to increase costs
because these mail outs will be happening anyway on a periodic basis, beyond
what we are doing when it comes to how the media, public, and the advisories
that are put out there. That could be a cost-effective way of getting these
changes out there to the general public.
When it comes to looking at prohibiting slow-moving vehicles from being
driven on a highway at a speed limit that would be greater than eighty
kilometres an hour, my district in particular has Route 430, which is the Viking
Trail. It is the primary highway going up the Great Northern Peninsula. In many
cases, sometimes a slow-moving vehicle may have to drive on that main highway
just because there is no alternative. There is no secondary route they could go
to get to their destination.
In it, it does state a notwithstanding clause, "the minister or a person
authorized by him or her may issue a special permit" I would hope, and I
believe it was mentioned in the briefing, there would be a mail out for
commercial operators or those who would be operating this type of heavy
equipment, a backhoe or whatnot, who potentially could be using the highway
would get a letter or something directly in the mail. That would be important
for people to be aware of this amendment and this change, that there is an
option in cases where they would have to be driving on the particular highway.
It does not limit them, but there may be a process of which they have to use it.
Maybe in some situations there is an exception. Maybe the minister could
further explain that. If, indeed, that is the only option for something like
Route 430, that those users would not have to have a special permit because
there is no other alternative to get to their particular destination. I would
like to have that clarified because this may increase red tape. If there is a
fee associated with it, it could slow down progress of getting work done by a
particular construction company, or of that nature if they are doing a
particular job.
There is a limited window of opportunity to get work done, especially in
rural communities. I would not want this legislation to hinder rural economic
development and construction and things like that which would be happening. I do
not think that is the intent of this legislation, but I do want to put my
concerns into the debate here on Bill 13.
Also, one of the other points that was raised in the briefing was around
limiting the number of occupants in a vehicle to the number of seatbelts. I
think it is important to recognize the safety of wearing seatbelts to the
occupants. I was a little surprised that the current legislation did not have
that built into it. I did acknowledge and did make the point that there may be
some situations or circumstances, given the lack of public transportation that
exists in many of our rural communities, for an ability where there may be a
situation where someone could not drive and they may need to have additional
members in a vehicle.
I think it is important to acknowledge, when you make legislation, that this
is meant to be the overall rule. There may be an exception that would happen,
but it would be dealt with on a case-by-case basis and upon the discretion of an
enforcement officer as to how strongly they want to enforce the legislation that
is there. As we see in many cases when people are maybe doing higher than the
prescribed maximum limit, in some situations officers do issue warning tickets
and things like that. There may be a period of which a warning or whatnot,
depending on the situation, would be issued. It is important to have legislation
that does protect and enhance safety of lives of people in Newfoundland and
Labrador.
I am also pleased to see the threshold for reportable accident damage
increased to $2,000, given that in many cases accidents even those that have
no injuries can significantly have over $2,000 of damage. Previously, it was at
$1,000. In most cases you are going to be well over $1,000. If it is a fender
bender, you likely can fall under that. It can reduce the resources that are
needed when it comes to dealing with other more relevant and pressing issues
when it comes to our traffic enforcement and how those resources are being
utilized.
One of the things that is not in this particular amendment to the Highway
Traffic Act, but it is kind of alluded to, is looking at slow-moving traffic. I
think it is something for the government to maybe consider is to also look at
we have highway maximums. What about minimum travelling speeds?
Slow drivers are likely among the most dangerous on our roads. They should be
treated as well as speeders because in many cases slow drivers cause people to
overtake. It can, in many cases, cause people to make very poor decisions and
put lives at risk. We have maximum speeds. In other jurisdictions they also have
minimum speeds. That might be a road we would want to go down and to look at and
pursue as we debate and develop legislation in Newfoundland and Labrador.
I thank the minister for putting this forward, and it is something that I can
support.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
If the Minister of Service NL speaks now he will close the debate.
The hon. the Minister of Service NL.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
These amendments to the Highway Traffic Act are very important pieces of
legislation. It is great to hear the commentary that has happened over the last
couple of day. I would like to thank all of the speakers on both sides of the
House. I think we are all unanimous that this is a good piece of legislation.
There were a few questions that were asked. I am going to get into that in a
few minutes, not in too much detail because we will go into Committee shortly;
that is my understanding. I just want to say it is a solid piece of legislation.
I would like to thank my staff at Service NL who helped draft this legislation,
for putting this together.
A couple of questions, Mr. Speaker, and I have my notes here in front of me.
The school zone questions, it came up a couple of times from members opposite.
There seems to be some confusion there. I would like to make a few
clarifications. Again, it might come up in Committee but I would like to call it
out here now.
We are including a more specific definition of a school zone. It will clearly
define it as a portion of highway between the posted signs that indicate a
school zone. Before, in the old act, it was not clearly defined. That is the
first thing we have done is clearly define in the act exactly what a school zone
is.
Secondly, Mr. Speaker, a new subsection states that expect were a lower speed
limit is prescribed you have to keep that in mind except where a lower speed
limit is prescribed, a person shall not travel at more than fifty kilometres an
hour in a school zone.
I have heard some commentary on the other side that perhaps and we talk
about the hours of operation as well, Mr. Speaker - that this subsection shall
only apply between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on days when school is
in session.
There is a reality to what is happening here, Mr. Speaker. Basically, what we
are doing here now is putting what pretty much already exists and is happening
out there in practice on our roadways, in our municipalities, in legislation, in
black and white legislation.
The maximum is normally fifty kilometres an hour that is happening right now.
That is posted in school zones, on our roadways, and throughout the Province. In
many municipalities actually the posted speeds are lower than fifty kilometres
an hour and there are many of examples of that, certainly in my district, in the
City of St. John's, in St. John's West.
Again, in putting together this legislation, we looked at what is happening
outside in other rural areas. I have yet to find an example I had my officials
looking into it as of yesterday that we do not have signs that are posted in
rural areas with the maximum speed limits.
This is just again to put it in legislation, to make sure that we are
following our own legislation, Mr. Speaker, and that municipalities are
following legislation as well when they do post the speed limits.
Again, these speed limits that are in place in school zones that are posted
there are in effect twenty-four seven, 365 days a year. To say that we should
make this legislation 365 days a year, Mr. Speaker, we are there. Truly, we are
there. There are not many areas that we do not see this happening and we have
yet to find them, to be honest with you.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to talk about the antique cars and the new
slow-driving legislation. I just want to give a definition of what is in our
regulations of what an antique vehicle really is. An antique vehicle means a
motor vehicle twenty-five years or older, maintained as nearly as possible with
original components, certified by the Newfoundland Antique and Classic Car Club
and owned as a collector's item and operated solely for the use in exhibitions,
club activities, parades and other similar functions and used for occasional
family pleasure, but in no event used for general transportation or business
purposes.
Mr. Speaker, we also know that a lot of antique cars do drive at regular
speeds and there are no issues around them, but this references certainly the
antique cars that are often slower moving, they drive infrequently, and I think
a few of the members over here had mentioned that they are only used in good
weather, in spring and summer, they are much valued by the owners, and they take
them out on a nice sunny day for a bit of motoring, as they used to say back in
days gone by.
It is important to note as well that in
section 111, which still exists in
the act that we have made some amendments to but still exist, and this applies
to antique cars and other vehicles, it must be noted as well, "
(1) A driver
shall not drive a vehicle at such a slow rate of speed as to impede or block the
normal and reasonable movement of traffic then existing on a highway, except
where it is necessary to do so for safe operation or to comply with this Part.
"
(2) A traffic officer may order a driver referred to in subsection (1) to
increase his or her rate of speed, pull into the curb to allow other vehicles to
pass or remove the vehicle from the highway.
"
(3) A person who fails to comply with an order given under subsection (2) is
guilty of an offence."
So, that exists in legislation right now. In practical purposes most people
who are on our roadways, on our highways, and on our streets, if they are in an
antique vehicle that is moving slowly, and I have witnessed it, they will pull
over and let faster moving traffic by. Most of these people are very responsible
car owners. They understand the rules of the road. They love the vehicle that
they are in, and they certainly do not want to be a hindrance to the free flow
of traffic. Those are my experiences. We feel that this is common-sense
legislation, a common-sense amendment, and a common-sense application.
Mr. Speaker, I just quickly want to touch about questions around enforcement.
In Newfoundland and Labrador we have highway enforcement officers, we have weigh
scale inspectors, we have RNC officers, we have RCMP officers, and we have
municipal police. We have more enforcement officers in our Province today than
any time in our history. We have I think it is almost 200 160 more RNC
officers alone in our communities and in our Province versus just a few short
years ago.
Just for a little example I have a few stats to throw out there. In the
Northeast Avalon in 2012 there were 18,000 hazardous moving violations that were
given out just in 2012. Last