PDF Version (Day)

PDF Version (Night)

April 27, 2023 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. L No. 28

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

SPEAKER (Bennett): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

SPEAKER: Today, we'll hear from statements by the hon. Members for the Districts of Conception Bay South, Exploits, Ferryland, Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans, Harbour Main and St. Barbe - L'Anse aux Meadows with leave.

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker, on April 20, I had the pleasure of attending the Conception Bay South Annual Volunteer Appreciation and Awards Night ceremony. Ms. Norine Taylor, an exceptional lifelong volunteer was named the 2023 Citizen of the Year. This is sponsored by the Conception Bay South Lions Club and the Town of Conception Bay South.

Norine's dedication to our community is second to none. Her volunteer work includes volunteering with the Big Brothers Big Sisters, Canadian Cancer Society, Girl Guides of Canada, CBS Minor Softball association, CBS amateur sports organization and a school council representative on St. Edward's School, Frank Roberts Junior High school and Queen Elizabeth Regional High School councils. For over 10 years, Norine has been a member of the Conception Bay South

Chapter of the Children's Wish Foundation and she is also a Special Olympics coach.

Conception Bay South is a great place to live and raise a family. Our community continues to thrive because of dedicated volunteers such as Norine Taylor.

I ask all hon. Members to join with me in congratulating this outstanding individual on receiving this well-deserved award and to thank Norine for her unwavering commitment to our community and our province.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker, on April 15, I had the privilege to present Mrs. Clara Reid of Bishop's Falls with her certificate and helped celebrate her 98th birthday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

P. FORSEY: Born and raised in Fortune, at the age of 17 she left and attended summer school in St. John's to start her teaching career. She taught in Hare Bay, Twillingate, St. John's, Bell Island and Bishop's Falls.

On July 18, 1950, she married Mr. Raymond Reid at the age of 20 and together they had five daughters. Mrs. Reid resides by herself in her own home in Bishop's Falls and is the oldest living resident in the town.

Mrs. Reid is still very independent, cleaning and cooking for herself. There is always an assortment of bottled soups, which she has every day and says it's what keeps her healthy. She is known to have a great social life and enjoys going on excursions with her friends, the Bubble Buddies. She loves doing puzzles, reading and watching game shows when she has the time.

Speaker, I would like for all Members of this House of Assembly to join me in wishing this remarkable lady, Mrs. Clara Reid, a happy 98th birthday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL: Thank you, Speaker.

Just this past weekend, the Southern Shore Senior Breakers were awarded Newfoundland and Labrador senior hockey glory –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

L. O'DRISCOLL: – the Herder Memorial Trophy for the second consecutive year as they defeated the Deer Lake Red Wings in a thrilling five games.

Following an impressive year in the Avalon East Senior Hockey League and finishing in first place, the Breakers defeated the Conception Bay Blues and the St. John's Caps to win the league championship and advance to this year's Herder final.

The Breakers are a phenomenal team that have captured the hearts of many with their incredible talent, passion and dedication to the game. Not only are they exceptional on the ice, but they also serve as fantastic role models for aspiring athletes along the Southern Shore.

It was great to see so many passionate fans pack the Ken Williams arena in Mobile this past weekend to show their support for their home team.

Congratulations to the Breakers on another stellar season. I can't wait to see you all on the ice again next year in search of their third consecutive Herder.

Go, Breakers, Go!

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

C. TIBBS: Thank you very much, Speaker.

On June 16, 2012, near Red Cliff, then six-year-old Bradley Reid was on an ATV with his grandfather, Walter Small, when a moose distracted them. The ATV turned over with Mr. Small pinned underneath. Bradley did not panic; rather he sat with his grandfather all day, despite it being very hot.

Later in the evening, they heard a truck on the trail and Bradley ran for help but despite his best efforts, he unfortunately never got the driver's attention. It was not until the following day that they heard another vehicle and Bradley managed to flag down the occupants of the truck. Two men came to help and managed to remove the ATV off Mr. Small and call an ambulance to the scene.

Bradley, never leaving his grandfather's side, other than to seek help, displayed bravery well beyond his years during the entire ordeal.

Please join me as we honour a true hero at a tender age, who loved his grandfather enough to remain by his side. Bradley Reid, we are very proud of you as a community for ensuring the safety of someone so important to us all.

Great job young man.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER: I am honoured to stand in this House of Assembly today and recognize George and Bertha Youden from Georgetown in the District of Harbour Main.

On April 22, 1923, George and Bertha, who lived almost next door to each other walked to the Brigus United Church to be married. Seventy glorious years later and they are celebrating their platinum anniversary.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER: As a jack of all trades, George supported his family by working a lifetime at H. B. Dawe, while Bertha was a stay-at-home mom who raised five children: one son and four daughters. Today, they are grandparents to 10 and great-grandparents to eight, with number nine on the way.

George and Bertha are both healthy, active and so youthful looking, you never believe that he is 90 and she is 87. They both still have driver's licences and it is not unusual to see George up tarring the roof of the family home, or Bertha out mowing the lawn. As their daughter Jessie described, they live a modest and simple life and are good parents to their children.

Please join me in congratulating George and Bertha on this milestone occasion and wish them many, many more years of love and happiness together.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe - L'Anse aux Meadows, with leave?

Leave granted?

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe - L'Anse aux Meadows.

K. HOWELL: Speaker, G. William Fitzgerald settled in St. Anthony as a general surgeon in 1976. With his wife, Dr. Trudy O'Keefe, a general practitioner, they committed 40-plus years of dedicated service to people of the Great Northern Peninsula, Labrador and the Quebec shore.

As a Member of the Order of Canada, recipient of the Royal College's James H. Graham Award of Merit, President of the Royal College and Canadian Association of General Surgeons, Dr. Fitz demonstrated selfless dedication to patient care, vast scope of practice, technical wizardry, a love of teaching and service to profession and his community.

Students and professionals from all over the world flocked to St. Anthony, despite its remoteness, to learn and work with him. He had an international reputation. His impish sense of humor and unwavering support of his colleagues created a system of care second to none. A patient referred was a patient accepted. No question was too silly; no task was too small, if it meant learning or improving patient care. We all felt safe and supported when he was present.

He passed away on April 17, 2023. It was my pleasure to have known and worked with such a incredible human.

I ask all hon. Members to join me in celebrating and honouring the life of Dr. G. William Fitzgerald.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: I ask all Members to rise for a moment of silence.

(Moment of silence.)

SPEAKER: Thank you.

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.

J. ABBOTT: Speaker, access to stable and affordable housing is key to improving health and social outcomes. This is why our government has prioritized the creation of new housing options, with more than 750 new housing options constructed or under construction or subsidized over the past two years.

Speaker, everyone deserves a home and a safe place to live. We will continue to work with federal, municipal and Indigenous governments and community partners to address the diverse housing and homelessness needs in this province.

Thank you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

C. TIBBS: Thank you, Speaker, and I would like to thank the hon. minister for an advance copy of his statement.

Though we look forward to this, Speaker, I am shocked that this government would stand to pat themselves on the back for this. As we learned in Estimates, the minister has overseen a period of exploding wait-lists and growing desperation among people trying to find affordable housing. The wait-list has exploded from 1,523 to 2,352 families, a 55 per cent increase over two years. That is an extra 829 seniors and low-income individuals and families who are desperately trying to find safe and affordable housing.

Yes, incredibly many of the housing units sit empty. We are in a housing crisis while 290 Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation units sit empty. That is right; 290 units should be home to seniors and families; they sit empty waiting on repair. If you are wondering why that is, some 20 per cent of the minister's staff positions at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing are vacant still and these are the positions who would repair the vacant units and get families put in place.

So while the government touts their success, maybe they should talk about the 1,000 Ukrainians living in hotels or hundreds placed in hotel rooms every single night around our province and our emergency shelters.

Yes, Speaker, this is not quite a success story just yet.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

J. DINN: Thank you, Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for an advance copy of this statement.

I remind the minister that the New Democratic Party caucus has been a champion of accessible housing in this province. Since he has become minister, emergency shelter housing has increased. If you look at the dashboard of End Homelessness St. John's in the last few months, we've experienced the highest rates of chronic homelessness in over a year.

We called for housing expansion last year. Government was too late to act and people suffered. It is easy to make announcements, but it takes real work to address the inequalities and social determinants of health.

Thank you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: Are there any further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

D. BRAZIL: I apologize, Mr. Speaker; I was under the impression there was going to be more Ministerial Statements here, so we'll take the one.

Speaker, another day, another increase in the cost of living for the people of our province. Marine Atlantic has announced a 4 per cent increase in their fuel surcharge, just in time for the carbon tax increase.

I ask the Premier: What does this increase mean for grocery store prices in our province and the effect it will have on the people of this province?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

A. FUREY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Of course, as the Member opposite knows, it is the federal agency responsible for that, Mr. Speaker. We share his concerns. We share his concerns with respect to this increase. I know the Minister of Tourism has concerns. We all have concerns with how this will impact the supply chain to Newfoundland and Labrador. I can tell you we will continue to advocate on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador so that the federal government hears and understands our concerns, Mr. Speaker,

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

D. BRAZIL: Thank you, Speaker.

It's ironic that when there's something that they can tout is positive for Newfoundland and Labrador, it's a rah-rah pat on the back but when it's something that is detrimental to the people of the province, all they say is, well, it's a federal responsibility. It's not good enough, Mr. Speaker, and they support them going through.

Speaker, the cozy relationship between the Liberals and their federal cousins pays off once again. Flights are inaccessible and ferries continue to increase in cost.

How are tourists supposed to get to our province this summer?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS: Thank you, Speaker.

I just want to stand up here as someone who has had a bit of history in this House when we talk about cousins. I can point out that when we talk about Marine Atlantic, it was the Member's federal cousins that actually started cost recovery and increased it over their time in office. And, in fact, did nothing while they were in government to take care of it.

I can tell you it's still an issue today. It's an issue that we want to take care of. It's an issue that we have advocated for and we will continue to do so, but for anybody on the other side to take the moral high ground that they got something done is absolutely false and has been for some time.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

D. BRAZIL: Mr. Speaker, three, maybe four elections later, I thought we were beyond what's gone on in the past and they were going to have the future, (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL: But I will clarify, an 18 per cent increase during the Liberal reign just in the last 7½ years, Mr. Speaker. So that's what's been done for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Terra Nova FPSO is back in Bull Arm, Suncor has refused to provide a timeline as to when all production will resume. When the vessel left our province it was supposed to return to production in late 2022.

Premier, please tell us what is going on with this production platform.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture, Arts and Recreation.

S. CROCKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to take –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

S. CROCKER: I just want to take a minute, Mr. Speaker, to address the

preamble and address the earlier question about tourism. This –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

I heard the question; I want to hear the response.

The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture, Arts and Recreation.

S. CROCKER: The Member raised an important question and it's a question that the department that I represent and my colleague in IET have been, quite frankly, on to for quite some time.

Access is a major challenge. We see Marine Atlantic as a challenge and we expect the federal government to step in here, similar to what they did for Prince Edward Island, Mr. Speaker, and we'll continue to advocate for that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

D. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I agree, we all should be supporting that, which I know on this side we are, but an 18 per cent increase over the last 7½ years is not actually getting their federal counterparts to do what's good for the people of the province.

I ask again: Premier, the Terra Nova FPSO is back in Bull Arm, Suncor has refused to provide a timeline as to when all production will resume. When the vessel left our province it was supposed to return to production in late 2022.

What will you do to find out what's happening and get this production up and running?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

A. FUREY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Happy to address this question, Mr. Speaker. Of course, we recognize that the Terra Nova FPSO is an incredibly valuable asset. We have made sure that we supported the hard-working women and men who work on it and work around it, Mr. Speaker, and we will continue to do so.

I would point out to the Member opposite, had we taken their strategy, had we taken their plan, we would now currently own 20 per cent of the liability that is continuing to build with respect to that particular project. We took a different tact, so we will enjoy the royalties without the liability; very different than the equity approach that they demanded, Mr. Speaker, in this House when we were debating the FPSO.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

D. BRAZIL: Mr. Speaker, had they taken our advice, the production and all the work would have been done in Newfoundland and Labrador by Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and any equity share we would have been getting our return on that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL: That's how we would have done business in this province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

D. BRAZIL: Government allowed refit work on the Terra Nova FPSO –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

Both sides, I can't even hear the question.

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL: Thank you, Speaker.

Government allowed refit work on the Terra Nova FPSO to go to Spain. Now Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are working on the FPSO in Bull Arm. These are the people who should have been working on the vessel all along.

Are we now redoing work which was supposed to be completed overseas?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to make a few points about this project, which I will point out, without the investment of this government, would not have had happened.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

A. PARSONS: It would not have happened and 70 million barrels of oil would have been left stranded offshore.

I will point out a couple of things. Number one, as of December, there were 658 Newfoundland and Labrador residents working on the Terra Nova .

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

A. PARSONS: The second thing I'm going to point out is yes, we want the production to start up right away, but we know, and we're quite comfortable knowing, that the resource is not given away, it's not going away and it will be there and this will happen.

I will point out lastly that the Members know when they talk about work being done here, it was the PC administration in 2006 that sent the Terra Nova to Rotterdam to get their work done.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

D. BRAZIL: I'm glad the minister reminded me of seven elections ago of what was being done by the administration there. Well done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL: Speaker, I also want to acknowledge, at the end of the day, what we were proposing is for the last year when that FPSO was in Spain, that work could've been done in Newfoundland by Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and the communities that were adjacent to those construction sites –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

D. BRAZIL: – would have also benefited from that in this province.

Speaker, we hear all or part of this work may go to Houston.

Does the Premier have any assurance that Suncor will not ship the Terra Nova off again to have work done which could be completed by Newfoundlanders and Labradorians done in Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me continue on from the first answer. The Members know that the reason that work went overseas then, back under a PC administration, was because there were no facilities that could handle it. Again, I will point out that this vessel was in dry dock. There has been no oil coming out since 2019.

If it wasn't for our administration, we wouldn't even be talking about the hundreds and millions of dollars of capital expenditures that are benefiting Newfoundland and Labrador right now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

A. PARSONS: Before I'm going to take a lesson from the Member opposite about work going overseas, how are those boats that you bought in Romania when you were the minister?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

D. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I had asked and expect the minister to take a reference to the Auditor General's report and the Public Accounts that outlines exactly the two best vessels built for passengers in Canada and in the world and delivered on time, on budget and qualified to do exactly what they're done for.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

D. BRAZIL: I will clarify for the minister who is here; his predecessor and the predecessor there could not manage a contract.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

You have another 20 seconds.

D. BRAZIL: I'll clarify before I go to the next question.

They could not manage a contract, Mr. Speaker, and we lost millions because they could not put the quality assurance program here, that's now in use in Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker, we hear the Terra Nova FPSO was supposed to be back in production months ago, but now Cenovus has removed all production from its 2023 forecast. This is alarming.

When will the vessel return to production?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, when I was in university I was a history grad and I have to tell you I love a bit of history. He's over there trying to defend the hypocrisy of talking about work going outside when he was the minister that bought boats in Romania and then forgot to put a wharf there. That is the lesson that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians need to remember when we talk about that Member and that administration and what they did.

But what I will point out, again, a little bit of history. It was just less than two years ago that every Member on that side stood up and applauded the decision of this government to invest in Terra Nova . It's going to happen and it happened because of our decision-making.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

D. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I think the minister is deluded when it comes to talking about history because we were here. We talked and supported what was going to happen with the Terra Nova . We stood on the steps, we protested and stood firm with people who wanted to work here. We wanted the proper investment that would benefit the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

We didn't get the proper investment; we didn't get a good deal. We got a sell-out deal. Unfortunately, now we have to come back and fix it at the expense of delay in our industry here in ensuring that we get our royalties, Mr. Speaker. Not a good move here, not good management, but not uncommon for that administration over there.

Speaker, uncertainty now surrounds the Terra Nova and the timelines for its return are uncertain. Government invested hundreds of millions of dollars and royalty concessions to kick-start the project.

How much of a hole will this delay put in our provincial budget?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm going to continue to talk about it, because I took a lot of questions in the fall of 2020 and Members on the opposite side talked about how we should be buying equity in various projects, about what was going on with West White Rose, what was going on with Come By Chance, what was going on with Terra Nova .

I can just point out a few things. Terra Nova , that work has contributed thousands of jobs and hundreds of millions to Newfoundland and Labrador. In fact, I would say to the Member for Terra Nova, because we've talked about it extensively, his district is booming right now with the Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that are working on this project.

We could talk about West White Rose, another decision we made, and the incredible amount of work and capital expenditure and Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who are working on that. We could talk about Come By Chance and talk about the hundreds of workers that are going on that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

A. PARSONS: So, again, I say to the Member, please ask another question asking us about the investment and the support we have given to the energy industry in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

B. PETTEN: What a performance. They all say it's theatrics in the House of Assembly; you just seen it.

The LSPU will be calling this evening looking for the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Because we live in the present, we learn from that past and I think government should take a lesson from us. We knew, maybe you should go on and do the same.

Speaker, last night, I was happy to attend MUNSU's student forum –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

B. PETTEN: It's them, not us.

SPEAKER: It's both sides.

B. PETTEN: – at the university. Unfortunately, the Premier and the Minister of Education were missing in action. Strange, you've heard me say that before.

Speaker, if the Premier and the minister are so concerned about the plights of our students: Why couldn't they attend as well?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Education had a medical issue that he was dealing with. I'm not sure the question is appropriate.

I was there; I was representing government, as former Minister of Education, Mr. Speaker. I believe I was quite capable of speaking to the issues.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

B. PETTEN: Mr. Speaker, I'm not the minister's attending physician so I did not know he had a medical appointment last night that took him away. That is a low blow because I have a lot or respect for the Minister of Health and he should know better.

I also asked where the Premier was. We know where the Premier is to all the time; he's only good for a photo op.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

B. PETTEN: The proof is in the pudding, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

Move on with the question.

B. PETTEN: Yes, the Minister of Health was there, quite interesting, he confirmed the $68 million cut from Memorial has directly resulted in a 19 per cent drop in enrolment. This is exactly what the Students' Union said would happen.

Would the minister now admit the Liberal government made a mistake?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That is not at all what was said last night, Mr. Speaker. I did say did tuition have an impact? Yes, it's quite possible. Did declining enrolment in our schools over the years have an impact? Yes, that's quite possible. I believe the acting president of Memorial last night had also said that the enrolment for next year is at pre-pandemic levels, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: No, no, that's not what he said.

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, so to say that it is directly related to one issue without studying and understanding. What I said last night is we need to look at these numbers, we need to understand these numbers and we need to look at all factors that have contributed to these numbers.

I do believe that Dr. Bose did say that the numbers of enrolment for next year is at pre-pandemic levels.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Speaker.

I'll clarify for the minister, because I was there and I listened intently. What the president said was they're at spring levels, which is less full-time students. So they're not comparing apples to apples.

We read the article. I was there last night. The minister can't cherry-pick, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

B. PETTEN: I enjoy the banter, I really do. I love the banter, actually. You know that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

B. PETTEN: Quote “The Raven” now. I'll quote more than “The Raven.”

Massive cuts in funding has doubled tuition and made post-secondary education inaccessible. The numbers don't lie, Speaker.

How many more students is this Liberal government going to turn away before they admit their mistake?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I need to set the record straight.

The former president of Memorial University presented to government a plan to increase tuitions. Government had then reacted by saying the tuition freeze money should not go back into operating revenues for the university, it should go towards student loans, student grants and student support services.

Mr. Speaker, to simply allow that funding to remain and go into operations would not have kept tuitions where they were. Tuitions were going to increase in any event.

Mr. Speaker, I believe the Premier has been very clear in saying that this is a time for all parties to come together, for all parties to work in a very conciliatory manner to work towards solutions to identify how we can bring stability back to an institution that is very important to this province.

SPEAKER: Order, please!

The minister's time has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Speaker.

I'll repeat and reiterate what I said yesterday: We have one Premier. He's looking across the way at me there now. That's the person that people want to see. Unfortunately, they'll see a minister and they'll see an MHA. They want to see the Premier and they want to hear what the Premier has to say. The Premier should have been there.

To your note on tuition, the former president told me in a meeting she was advised on budget day of the tuition cuts. So whatever conversations had between that, they found out budget day and that's not good enough.

Speaker, international students now pay the highest tuition in Atlantic Canada. Again, under this government, we have lost our competitive advantage to attract students to our province.

Is the minister worried international students who can't find housing or a family doctor will turn away from Memorial?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I can tell you emphatically and entirely honestly, which is the way I operate, that the president of Memorial University had several meetings, was well aware of what was happening. Why she said what she said, I can't account for that, but I can account for the truth. The truth is she was well aware of what was happening.

Mr. Speaker, I can also say that there's a 16 per cent increase in international enrolment at the university this year.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: Speaker, a constituent has asked me for help, after being ignored by the Premier and his Liberal ministers. The gentleman was airlifted to Ontario for a heart transplant, a service unavailable in this province. However, the medical transportation program will only give him $3,000 a month for accommodations but the cheapest he can find is $5,700.

Why is the government forcing this family to fundraise to access a lifesaving procedure?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There's been some changes, recently, to the MTAP in the department. In fairness to the new minister, Mr. Speaker, I'm probably better equipped to deal with this because I've been dealing with it for a number of months.

I asked the Member to bring this particular case. I don't know if there are any exceptions that can be made, Mr. Speaker. I know that the MTAP is under review. We are looking at the policies of the MTAP with the hope that it will provide the best possible service and reimbursement to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that we are able to provide.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: The Premier needed advice in Central and put a new office but we can't hear it.

Speaker, this individual is forced to go out of the province in order to save his life. Even worse, because the province does not have a transplant coordinator, the man is overwhelmed and have paperwork and forms with nowhere to turn for help.

Why are we abandoning transplant patients?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labrador Affairs.

L. DEMPSTER: Thank you, Speaker.

I thank the Member for the question, a very important topic. As most here in this Chamber would know, the MTAP was transferred under Labrador Affairs, effective April 1, as my colleague just referenced. We're currently undergoing a review. I don't know the details of the case and if I did I wouldn't discuss it here on the floor, but I encourage the Member to reach out. I've already heard from a number of folks from across the way.

We are digging deep into the medical transportation program, the Income Support medical transportation program and we're going to be making some changes to support the end-user in a timely manner. I encourage the Member to reach out to me and have further discussion.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: Changeover shouldn't be affecting people's lives, Speaker.

Speaker, a transplant coordinator is essential for the success of these patients. This is a life-and-death situation.

When is the government going to fully staff a transplant coordination program?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will take that under advisement. I know that this province has worked hard on not only looking for people to provide their permission under MCP to be transplant individuals and agree to that. We put a great deal of effort into the transplant program, Mr. Speaker, but I will take the question under advisement and see what, if any, improvements can be made to the program.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN: Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker, the Health Accord has made numerous recommendations for changes to our health care system. One of these recommendations was to “Design a long-tem evaluation plan related to the implementation of the Health Accord … to determine whether the actions undertaken are achieving the objectives of each strategy.”

Will the minister table this plan?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, we've accepted the Health Accord about a year ago. We have implemented a number of the recommendations in the Health Accord. A number of improvements such as Heart Force One, Mr. Speaker, the travelling orthopedic surgeons. We are looking at other specialties and other surgeons that we can bring to the people of the province in areas where the population doesn't support a full team. We have same-day joint replacement, Mr. Speaker. We are looking at Carbonear as the next site for that. We've brought the four health authorities into one Health Authority. We have announced the integration of ambulance services, Mr. Speaker, in this province.

There's money in this year's budget – the list goes on and on in terms of what we've done. I think the record in terms of our response to the Health Accord is clear.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN: Thank you, Speaker.

To find out whether any of those are working, you need the evaluation plan. So I assume there's obviously no plan. Cart before the horse.

Speaker, another recommendation was to “Develop and implement provincial legislation, regulation, and policy required to provide appropriate, quality and accessible care and protection for older persons in Newfoundland and Labrador.”

Will the minister provide an update and the timeline for this legislation?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I'm glad he reminded me of that because we do have an expert panel put in place to look at long-term care and personal care, also coming out of the Health Accord, Mr. Speaker. We're not sitting on our hands. Once that work is done, Mr. Speaker, and we get the recommendations, we will better be able to look at what changes need to happen.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN: I would beg to differ there. The minister already spoke to this being out for a year already. So someone sat on their hands for a year before they came in with this six-to-eight-month study.

Seniors are suffering while we're waiting. The Health Accord also recommended to “Develop and implement a formal Provincial Frail Elderly Program to address the critical need of our population.”

Will the minister provide an update and timeline on this program?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I need to address the

preamble. We have implemented a number of the recommendations of the Health Accord already. We've got it about a year; it's a 10-year plan. I'm not sure if the Member is expecting all of the recommendations and all of the 10-year plan to be done on one day or one month or even in the first year.

I think the record speaks for itself, Mr. Speaker. We have undertaken numerous improvements, a number of announcements and a number of initiatives dealing with the Health Accord and as a result of the recommendations of the Health Accord.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That's interesting because some of these actions call for immediate action and we're a year in. That's not the definition of immediate to me.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

P. DINN: So let me ask this question.

The Health Accord also asks for – which is critical – create a strategic recruitment plan. Can you table that plan?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I'm glad he reminded me of that as well because we've put in a world-class recruitment office at the Provincial Health Authority. We've put an assistant deputy minister responsible for recruitment, Mr. Speaker, in the department. We've put staff in the department. The recruitment office, Mr. Speaker, which –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: You've got six minutes left to Question Period. I can stand here for six minutes, no problem.

The Minister of Health and Community Services, you've got another 30 seconds.

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So each of these items that the Member's raised, I'm glad he's reminding us of the good work that we are doing in these areas. The world-class recruitment office has been put in place at the Health Authority, Mr. Speaker, which I will say should be able to go head to head with any recruitment office of any firm or any health authority in this country.

SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

J. DINN: Speaker, thank you.

Today on Labrador Morning , the Minister of Education stated that shortfalls in teaching staff doesn't appear to be an issue in Labrador. Spoken by a minister who obviously has no idea of the challenges facing schools. Based on the message we received, teachers in Labrador West were angered by the comment and consider his remarks a slap in the face. Many were switched at the beginning of the year due to shortages and have been covering off classes internally almost every day.

I ask the minister: Will he take his head out of the sand and admit there is a problem and address the teaching staffing shortage in Labrador West?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I met with officials in the Department of Education today who have confirmed that the information and the details that were provided by the minister were in fact provided by the school district. Just to be absolutely certain, Mr. Speaker, because this issue is too important to the residents of the area.

The assistant deputy minister of Education is going to be travelling to Labrador to make an assessment of what's happening on the ground, Mr. Speaker, so that if there are deficiencies or if there are issues, we can deal with it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS: Thank you, Speaker.

Social and economic marginalization continues to contribute to the ongoing intergenerational trauma in my district. The loss of the freight boat from the Island to my Northern Labrador communities means that my people have to live with higher costs for everything such as healthy food and building materials. Worse, much is no longer available.

I ask the minister: Will he commit to reinstating the freight boat to the Northern Labrador communities and take real action towards ending and addressing the inequities faced by people in my district?

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure.

E. LOVELESS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you for the question.

I tell the hon. Member that in my consultations with the stakeholders in Labrador and with the MHAs that represent it on this side, that great work has been done; strides have been made in terms of improving the system in Labrador. We get it from stakeholders who are in Labrador. The only one that I know that looks at it from the glass as half full is the Member opposite.

There are great strides. There's an increase in freight. There's an increase in passengers. It's a success story and we're continuing to build on that.

Always can do more and we will do more.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS: Speaker, I'd like to point out that the MHA for Torngat Mountains represents the six communities that are actually serviced by the Kamutik W . If I'm raising concerns based on the community, basically that means that the entire district is not satisfied. There are a lot of costs, high costs, for food and building materials and it's just not working. We need that freight boat back.

Elders in my district are unable to heat their homes because of the cost of stove oil and other fuels are way too high.

Will the minister commit today to removing the provincial tax on all forms of heating fuel? It would be a step towards addressing the cost-of-living crisis in the province.

Thank you.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY: Thank you, Speaker.

Our government has worked very hard to ensure that home heat is not impacted by carbon tax, for example. There is no provincial tax on home heating. I think the Member is referencing Harmonized Sales Tax, which is of course a harmonized tax across the country. We don't have controls of what it is imposed upon with using HST.

But that is why we implemented the home heat rebate program. I know a number of people in her district took advantage of it. I know we work very closely with the Member opposite to ensure that they could take advantage of the $500 that this government is providing back to the people of the province to assist them with their home heating needs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS: Yes, Speaker, and I would like to acknowledge and thank the Finance Minister for helping to make that one-time payment of $500 available to people in my district. But people pay between $1,000 to $2,000 a month just for stove oil and a one-time payment of $500 really, really is not enough, Speaker.

Access to housing is yet another example of marginalization fueling intergenerational trauma in my district. The Canadian Housing Advocate visited my district and called the housing situation a human rights violation. She said the housing conditions were abominable and “in some cases, I still have nightmares.”

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing has a 25 per cent vacancy in Torngat Mountains. Some units sat vacant for 10 years only because they had not done repairs. I know the minister has been working on this.

But I ask the minister: Will he commit to making the seven homes in Nain and the three homes in Hopedale, that's only 10 houses, available by October, the end of the shipping season in my district?

SPEAKER: The Member's time has expired.

The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.

J. ABBOTT: Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to respond.

Over the winter, the Minister of Labrador Affairs and Minister Responsible for Indigenous Affairs, myself and staff visited the communities of Nain and met with President Lampe and his executive to talk about many issues affecting social and economic life in Northern Labrador. One of the things we did talk about was housing. The minister and I did visit many of the housing units in the community.

I have been saying publicly and I am committed to making sure we address all the housing needs, along with the Housing Commission set-up by the Nunatsiavut Government, to make sure we work in tandem to address all the housing needs in Labrador, including the rental units that we own and operate.

We have committed money in the budget this year to address most of those units. I cannot commit to what the Member asked about by October because that's going to be an operational decision made on the ground when supplies are in this spring.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The time of Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM: Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development spoke after I had spoken and asked me for –

SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the Member have leave to present a document?

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.

SPEAKER: Leave is granted.

Okay, go ahead.

T. WAKEHAM: This is a document that the minister asked for yesterday during my speech so I just wanted to table it here.

SPEAKER: Thank you.

Any other tabling of documents?

I do have one.

In accordance with

section 23 of the Auditor General Act, 2021 , I hereby table the Monitoring Report on Outstanding Performance Audit Recommendations 2014 - 2020 .

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

J. HOGAN: Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow move, in accordance with Standing Order 11(1), that this House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, May 1, 2023.

SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?

The hon. the Government House Leader.

J. HOGAN: Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow move, in accordance with Standing Order 11(1), that this House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, May 4, 2023.

SPEAKER: Are there any further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for Which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Speaker.

The reasons for this petition:

Many residents of the District of Harbour Main are struggling with the constant increase in the cost of living. The working poor, who are living paycheque to paycheque, are experiencing turmoil with whether to heat their homes or buy food for their children. This is having a serious impact on the mental well-being of many families.

The supports that government have recently implemented are failing families who are working hard but yet fall within a lower income bracket and are unable to avail of government supports.

Therefore we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: We, the undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to immediately create an emergency plan for the working poor to ensure that no Newfoundlander and Labradorian is left behind.

Speaker, the petition today is mostly driven by the fact that my constituents in Harbour Main have been reaching out and they are struggling. They are struggling with the high cost of living and I fear that the high cost of living in Newfoundland and Labrador, and in particular in the District of Harbour Main, is pushing more and more people into poverty.

We're seeing grocery prices going up. I've been at many events, even in the last constituency week last week and that's all I seem to hear, in addition to health care, grocery prices and the cost of living and how they're not able to sustain the livelihood that they have been used to in the past.

There are concerns about the rental costs rising on affordable housing; gasoline is so expensive; home heating fuel bills. All of this, Speaker, is praying on the minds of the constituents of Harbour Main.

It was interesting to note, as well, when I spoke to many of the seniors who I was talking to, even though they're struggling, Speaker, they lamented, they were concerned and they spoke with such regret because of their fears for young families and the young parents and wondering how they're able to raise their families, their young children. How are they able to live under these circumstances?

I raised this today as well because we know that next week is Mental Health Week. Speaker, there is no doubt in my mind this is having a serious impact on the mental well-being of so many families, not only in the District of Harbour Main but throughout the province. So there needs to be more done to help low-income earners, to help the working poor. We urge the government to do that.

Thank you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS: Thank you, Speaker.

I present this petition for fairer electricity rates for Northern Labrador communities. It's been a petition that I've been presenting now for a while.

We, the undersigned, are concerned citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador who urge our leaders to ensure that fairer electricity rates be provided to the residents in Northern Labrador communities.

The electricity rates charged to Northern Labrador are cost prohibitive to using electric heat and are a barrier to adequately heating their homes. The rationale for this petition is to bring electricity rates more in line with what our neighbouring residents of Lake Melville region pay.

The first 1,000 kilowatt hours, Torngat Mountains' residents are charged the same rate as neighbouring residents of Lake Melville region. However, above the ceiling of 1,000 kilowatt hours Torngat Mountains' residents pay six times the rate Lake Melville residents pay. Six times the rate, jumping up to 19 cents a kilowatt hour. This is the highest rate in the entire province, preventing most residents from being able to afford to hear their homes with electric heat. Low-income families and households that do not have the manpower to haul wood are the greatest impacted.

Poorly heated houses often results in damage, creating expensive repairs for frozen pipes, moisture damage and mould. Poorly heated houses also creates social and mental health issues that can be long lasting. We strongly believe that changes to the electricity rates need to be made for Northern Labrador residents of Torngat Mountains.

Unfortunately, our reality hasn't changed and who's being impacted the greatest is our elders, the elders in the community. I talked about the price of stove oil in Question Period earlier today. What ends up happening is the seniors on Old Age Security, their entire cheque goes towards heating their house.

In 2019, when I was campaigning, one of the people stopped me on the road in Nain and said: We help our parents. But he said to me: Lela, I don't know what other people are doing. That was back in 2019, when the cost of stove oil and gasoline was much, much cheaper.

Now, what's happening is our elders, our seniors are struggling. So what ends up happening is they are hit with cold houses because they can't afford the stove oil. Also, a lot of the seniors are not able to haul wood. Even if they are physically able to do it, they actually don't have the means a lot of times because of the high price of gasoline and then, of course, the maintenance of a snowmobile.

For us, that's a serious issue, but in addition to that, I look at the women. There are a lot of women in my communities that are reliant on using stove oil or having to get somebody to haul the wood, because a lot of times there are physical barriers.

Yesterday, I talked about the –

SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Member's time has expired.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista.

C. PARDY: Thank you, Speaker.

With the release of the Atlantic Seal Science Task Team and the significance of the commercial harvest to the fishers and plant workers in the District of Bonavista, we feel that the seal population is far greater than the ecosystem can sustain. As a result, the large population of seals is certainly preventing the rebuilding of our valuable groundfish stock and negatively affecting the significant landed value of our commercial harvest.

We, the undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to address the seal population by taking proactive measures on fulfilling our current provincial quota of seals and enhancing the markets of seal products within the province and other jurisdictions. Action is long overdue.

Mr. Speaker, I spoke at length to this yesterday and I wanted to raise it today in petition form, knowing that the minister was here this time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

C. PARDY: Oceana released a statement of release. In the release they stated about arresting and stopping the commercial capelin fishery. As I stated yesterday in 2J3KL, coming all down the East Coast of Newfoundland and Labrador, seals consume one million metric tons of capelin. The commercial harvest consumes 1.2 per cent of that.

Oceana, in their news release, which I'm sure the minister will agree, never mentioned seals one time. They had mentioned that our species is being threatened by mismanagement and overfishing. Mismanagement, yes, and by predation. Never once did they mention seals.

I would say my hon. Member for Stephenville - Port au Port has said we've got an ecosystem crisis on our shores and we're silent. We weren't on October 19. On October 19 we stood united in this House to make sure that we would rise on a PMR and make sure that we stand to support our fishery in research and making sure that the science was good.

I would say to you that we need action to make sure commercial overfishing is not depleting the capelin stock. News alert: It is the seals that's predating on the capelin.

I think we need action, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much for your time.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG: Thank you very much.

I did have the opportunity yesterday to listen to the Member's petition. I think it's the very same petition that came forward today.

I remind the Member of the petition he put forward in this House here over on March 22, which is a letter from the Professional Fish Harvesters Board. Not only is the wording of this petition factually inaccurate and misleading, its spirit and intent represents a threat to the independent owners and operators of the fisheries in our province.

That was the last petition that Member puts forward, who got up and talked about all the great – I agree, we have trouble with seals. Our federal department are the ones who did the seal quota. Most of the hunt will be done in this province.

I come back to the former petition in which the Member stood up here, incited a riot just about, in this House, in which my life was threatened that day, Mr. Speaker, which I took great offence to. I have a letter here signed by the Professional Fish Harvesters Board saying the petition was not only wrong but not factual.

SPEAKER: Order, please!

Before I move on, I just want to remind Members they're not allowed to identify if Members are in or out of their seats. There are times they're on meetings or ministers may be out, so I'll just remind all Members, please.

The Leader of the Third Party.

J. DINN: Thank you, Speaker.

I have a petition here, another 160. So we're approaching 700 now, regarding tuition at Memorial. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador ended Memorial University's historic tuition freeze, resulting in a tuition increase of 150 per cent for domestic students. The cost of the degree is over $25,000 compared to the $10,200 students paid during years when the province froze tuition

The average undergraduate tuition for international students has increased by 97 per cent, meaning they will pay $41,810 more for their Memorial University degree than they did before the cuts. This means that Memorial University will be the most expensive university in Atlantic Canada for international students.

Students are currently facing unprecedented threats to accessible and affordable education in Newfoundland and Labrador. Young people and families across this province and country are terrified for their futures as their ability to access even a marginally affordable post-secondary education is being ripped away. Low-income students and folks from marginalized backgrounds are watching as their opportunity to attend university disappears.

Residents of Newfoundland and Labrador believe that historic commitments to funding accessible and quality post-secondary education must be honoured and protected to ensure prosperity for future generations that wish to study in the province.

Investments in post-secondary education and affordable tuition have supported the growth and health of diverse communities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador for over 22 years. Cuts to post-secondary education have jeopardized the growth of these communities.

Education is a public right that all students, both domestic and international, have the right to a quality and accessible education in the province.

Therefore we, the undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to uphold the province's historic commitment to accessible education by committing to free education for all and eliminating all differential fees. Eliminate all student debt for existing and provincial student loans. Sustain the college and Memorial University with healthy funding levels that secure good jobs and uplifts the post-secondary sector.

Speaker, it's interesting that the calls for collaboration and a collegial approach to basically resolve this issue are being put forward now that we're in this chaotic and unstable situation for Memorial. Basically, created by the decisions of government when it comes to funding. Now that we have this problem, there is a call for this.

I will say here, if we're going to avoid such things, then it's prudent to bring in, to have that consultation, meaningful consultation with the students, with the university and with the post-secondary institutions beforehand and we wouldn't have this situation.

Thank-you.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL: Thank you, Speaker.

The background to this petition is as follows:

WHEREAS the residents from Cape Broyle to St. Shotts are lacking a full-time family doctor; and

WHEREAS Eastern Health is failing to accommodate a physician who is willing to practise full-time in the area; and

WHEREAS the Trepassey region is the furthest away from the primary care hospital on the Island portion of the province; and

WHEREAS the Trepassey region has only one ambulance, the Cape Broyle ambulance service has some major staffing concerns, the region can be under a red alert for multiple hours at a time;

THEREFORE we petition the House of Assembly as follows: We, the undersigned, urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to immediately address the doctor shortage in our province by accommodating those who wish to practise here, and to immediately address the physician shortage in the Trepassey and Ferryland area by accommodating physician to practise in that area.

Speaker, in regard to this, there was a doctor who was looking to go in the area to practise and for some reason Eastern Health didn't see it as the best interest to put her in the area to do it.

I spoke to a lady Tuesday who had blood work done on March 23. She got a call back two or three days later to say that they will attend to her or give her an appointment for May 4 to look at blood work. So now she has that concern, worried about that for a month's time, if there are any issues there or not.

We had a physician that was looking to go there and they haven't accommodated her. They sat down and then they just watched and every time I spoke to it, they've came up with a different reason why. There's some problem here that they haven't got to. I said it last year myself, that we can fix this problem, we can get to address it, but they don't seem to want to do it. Eastern Health met with the mayors in the surrounding area; said there was no need for it. They didn't really need it.

One lady calls up, gets nine days for an appointment. Another lady calls up, gets 23 days for an appointment, and there's no need for a family doctor in the area. Well, they're wrong. The people in the area are calling me and letting me know it's wrong. It's not proper to not have a doctor who's willing to go in the area.

Now, they can figure that out. They had a meeting. We figured out the ambulance issue in Cape Broyle, to a point, but we sat down and met. They haven't sat down and met with her. They were going to arrange a meeting. They met with the town, said they didn't need a doctor, and then they didn't have a meeting with the doctor after. So it's their decision. So we have some problem internally with Eastern Health. Somehow the minister has to get that fixed.

Back to the petition, we stand by our petition that he got up and presented. Our Member did get a response back, but we still stand by him. You should sit down and try to fix the problem with the petition that he presented and then we'll be able to talk about it and see if we can fix the problem.

Thank you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER: Thank you, Speaker.

These are the reasons for this petition:

The Dr. William H. Newhook Community Health Centre is located in Whitbourne and provides services to residents of the area, in addition to incidents that may happen on the province's largest highway.

The Dr. William H. Newhook Community Health Centre's emergency room has experienced frequent and numerous closures over the last year.

The emergency services offered by the health care centre are often not available for residents, leading to significant amount of concern and worry among residents, in addition to residents having to drive to another emergency room.

Therefore we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: We, the undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to immediately enact a plan to ensure the Dr. William H. Newhook Community Health Centre is fully staffed, open and available to provide emergency health care services.

I have presented this several times, Speaker, on behalf of the people of Whitbourne because while Whitbourne is not physically in my district but it services the people of my district. I also have people, like nurses and support staff, that work at this Community Health Centre. Like I said, it was strategically placed for a reason many years ago.

We seem to have taken the initiative now to go and add, let's say, hip and knee replacement surgeries out in Carbonear, which is already a pretty-close-to-capacity hospital, when this could have been something that we could have done in Whitbourne. It would probably even be a closer distance for a lot of people where they're not having to leave the highway for too long.

The thing is that it might have given us a better incentive of keeping this hospital open and staffed. Like I said, I know the minister is making efforts to keep it up and hopefully we'll get an update soon here in the House as to what levels we're at. I know that we were at three days a couple of weeks ago; I just haven't heard yet that we've gotten to four days, five days, six days, seven days, that's consequently what we want.

Like I said, to make my point even stronger, it is strategically placed and in the Health Accord they say that any hospital is supposed to be in a catchment area of 6,000. This health care centre already is in a catchment area of 6,500 and that's if nothing happens on the highway.

I would ask the minister to make sure this needs to be a priority and it needs to be done for, not only the people of Placentia - St. Mary's, but for the people of Placentia West - Bellevue.

Thank you, Speaker.

SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER: Thank you, Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Motion 1.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Speaker.

It is a pleasure and we all say it a lot of times, I know a lot of my colleagues say it. I don't know if they're copying, I think I copied off someone. When I started doing that, I think I copied off my former colleague for Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: That's right, a good man.

I'd leave out the beautiful District of Cape St. Francis; I would just say I'm always proud to speak for my District of Conception Bay South. I say it a lot more often these days than probably ever. It's the privilege of representing my hometown in the House of Assembly. It's something that I take great pride in and I'll continue to take pride in it when I leave this House, Mr. Speaker. I think we all should do that.

On the main motion I spoke and on the amendment I spoke, so this is actually on the Budget Speech my third opportunity to speak and pass along my commentary. Sometimes my comments are appreciated and sometimes they're not appreciated. I appreciate that, I really do.

But it comes with the territory. Sometimes you ask the tough questions, sometimes you throw yourself out there and you throw yourself in the line of fire and that's also fine, too. I said it in Question Period and I've said it in this House many times, I love banter. I have no problem with arrows coming my way; it's no problem. As long as they don't land too hard, I can take ever so many. That's my personality. I'm easy going, but I love to have debate.

This is off the topic for a second. My Grade 5 teacher told me, I met him years later, he said he had 30 students in his class and I was vividly – I have a lot of respect for this man – he said I'll never forget you. I said why is that? I don't know if that's a good or bad thing. He said we were in science and I said you can't see in the dark. But he said, you said you could and I never convinced you why you couldn't see in the dark. He said you were one of 30 who left the classroom and never did agree with me.

It was years later, it was 20, 30 years later, he ran into me and that was the first question he asked me: Can you still see in the dark? I think that's a testament – sometimes it's my Achilles heel. Sometimes I'm – I call it – too principled, but maybe it could be called very stubborn as well.

But I make no apologies; I guess that's who I am. I've been accused of being a dog on a bone many times, too. Sometimes it's successful, sometimes it's not successful; sometimes it gets you in trouble. At home it can be very dangerous sometimes, ask my wife. But so be it.

Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of things as we go. I talked during Question Period, I was at this town hall last night with MUNSU, and in Question Period yesterday as well, I know the Minister of Fisheries stood in his place and the Minister of Health last night was at this MUNSU town hall. I respect it and I said it yesterday in Question Period. I told the minister last night and I think I said it today, to go and stand up in the line of fire as a minister of the government is not an easy thing to do.

I know the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture last week – and I could be quoted, my colleagues could tell you – I commended him. Actually, I meant to send him a text and tell him good on him for going out and standing up in front of the protestors.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Yeah, exactly.

AN HON. MEMBER: It takes guts.

B. PETTEN: That takes guts is right.

When we get in the House of Assembly, we'll have our banters. The Minister of Health, last night, it wasn't a comfortable situation at that MUNSU town hall. He did remarkably well, but again, you're government, you're in the line of fire. I get that and I commended him as well.

The story I'm trying to tell here – and I am going to make my curve to that now. When I stand here – and I've said this many, many times in the House of Assembly – on this side of the House is a challenging role. Some Members opposite have been over here. They've occupied these seats and they can understand what I'm saying. You're asking questions. Some of them are tough. Some of them are uncomfortable. Some you don't really want to be asking, but they're necessary because of the role you play in government in Opposition, obviously; it's our role.

I go back to yesterday. I just commended two ministers for having the guts to stand up and go out. It's not easy. We have to stand up here in our place and ask those questions sometimes. That's not easy, collectively.

Yesterday, during Question Period I asked a tough question about MUN enrolment dropped, tuition costs increased. It's a back and forth; it was debated all last night who is responsible. Ultimately, it takes two, but regardless this is what happened. That's the reality.

So you're asking tough questions but the Premier decides, in his wisdom, to tell me, along with the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development, I'm weaponizing MUN. I'm demonizing MUN. How dare you ask those things? Who are you to ask those questions? Shameful. It's quite shameful. Hansard will tell you – I think those were his exact words: I was shameful.

Can someone explain to me what was shameful about it? That I asked questions? Is that what I asked? Did I ask questions? I asked questions. Last time I checked, right now, on this side of the House and in most other legislatures we're on the other side, but we're backwards here. We're on the Opposition side; it's where government is everywhere else. This is Opposition. We're in Opposition. That's what we do. That's our role.

I have to ask those questions. Just imagine. The Minister of Education follows the Premier and he follows with the same words: that the Member opposite is whipping us and he's demonizing MUN. I never said MUN was a scud missile. Nowhere ever did I say that – weaponizing. You ask questions in this House. We're also said to be fear mongering. You ask a question about a health issue, you're fear mongering. It's almost like you've got to hang your head in shame and walk away because you wanted to ask a question.

Just imagine if government went unchecked, because that's what it comes down to. We know that can't happen. It's a healthy democracy. But I think it's important – and I say this a lot in the House and it bears repeating. It's not that I'm planning on changing the world tomorrow, but again, to my original comment about seeing in the dark, I can't let certain things go. There will come a time, hopefully – I mean maybe I'll be around here, maybe I'll be around to sit on that side of the House. But I'll tell you this, Mr.

Speaker – and if you happen to be here, if you happen to be watching if that does happen, I will show a hell of a lot more respect for this side of the House than that side shows us right now. Mark it down.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: That's what's missing in this Legislature. There are clear roles in this Legislature we all have to uphold. There are clear roles we all have to do. Right now, I don't think that happens in this House.

I put out a news release a week or two ago and I stand behind that release that I don't think we sit enough. I don't think the debate is meaningful. I don't think it's sincere. I think it's get it done, get in and get out. That's what we're doing here. As quick as we can get in here and the faster we can get in here, the faster we get out, we're all good. That's not the way this needs to be.

You bring a bill into the House and it's almost like they're disgusted because everyone wants to speak on it. How much longer is this going on for? When are we getting out of here? This is the Legislature. Do I like to come in here some days? No. If you want me to be brutally honest, no. Is that what we're elected to do? Yes. I'm no different than any other Member in this House. There are things you'd rather be at? Sure, it would, but this is your responsibility. It's what we're supposed to do. You're supposed to sit in the House.

I worked behind the scenes and I worked with ministers opposite when we were in government. I tell you there were some days you almost had to push them out of the office. The last place they wanted to come was sit in their seats there and be on the receiving end of questions and grilling, tough questions and hard questions. It's not an easy role. I respect that. I get that. Trust me; I really get it. I'm principled but I'm also a traditionalist. Everything I do and say – but I respect what I do. I respect the roles. I respect the roles opposite.

I stand in the House today and I'll say it again here now, we have one Premier. That's everyone's Premier. We're not in the same party but it's one Premier. It's not mayors and towns, it's one Premier of the province. It carries a lot of weight. Highest office in the province.

But I have a right to ask the Premier questions and the Premier has a right and an obligation to answer those questions. He also should be more public on issues of importance. Instead of going to a public meeting, you want to do it privately. Say you had a phone call instead of meeting with someone. These are the questions I get asked. But then don't be lecturing and accusing me of weaponizing and demonizing people because I am out actually doing my job.

That's not cool, Mr. Speaker. That's not where we need to be but that is where we're to. When I say there's no respect in this House, the respect levels in this House, for what we stand as a Parliament, is not being adhered to.

I can give lots more examples but I am not going to because I got a few other things I could talk about. It's important to point out and I may have other opportunities to point it out again because I think sometimes you need to be a dog on the bone. You need to get your point across in here because if you're not throwing it out there, if you're not throwing your issues out and hammering away at them, unfortunately, they fall on deaf ears and that's unfortunate.

My colleague, our leader, is asking serious questions about the Terra Nova FPSO . We gave $200 million to save that, which we supported; we compliment the government. Currently, we're up to, we're not sure, probably $300 million in equity royalties we're going to surrender to get that FPSO back out pumping oil, getting Newfoundlanders and Labradorians back working.

The answers from the minister opposite, stands up – these are good questions. That's what we're here for. We get a performance. We go down the road of the ferries and Romania, what happened in 2006, what happened in 2011 and what happened in 2016. Sweet Lord. Who are you helping? Who is that really helping in the province? If you're listening to someone speak here – if you're home and you're listening to people at home, our leader is asking legitimate questions. It's in the public domain; it's in the news, people care. You know what; maybe we'd like to get an answer from the minister. What do you get? A performance. That's all that is.

I know Members opposite say, oh, its theatrics, the House (inaudible) here. Sure, there is lots of theatrics, but remove the theatrics. Sometimes that's an overused word because that discredits this House. Remove all the theatrics. I've seen lots of theatrics from Members opposite – lots of it.

Ask the question. Pull back all the theatrics and listen to the question. You can go back and you flick on the webcast and you go listen to our leader ask questions about Terra Nova. You're going to hear me ask questions about MUN. You'll hear my colleague for Harbour Main ask questions about pay equity. I can go on.

My colleague for Ferryland loves to talk about ambulances. They are legitimate questions. I don't care how the theatrics come out, how they sound, how they do it, how they deliver it. You can stand on your desk, if you lie the floor, they're questions and, as an Opposition, we have the responsibility to ask those questions. I will remind government again, it's their responsibility to provide answers. If they can't provide answers, if they're challenged to get answers and challenged to deal with the issues, well move aside, move aside, we'll go over and fix it up. We'll take over tomorrow. If you can't do the job, go on, but don't be offended by the question.

I know Members opposite don't appreciate some of this commentary and it bothers them. But I'm only speaking factual. This is recorded. What I'm saying here now is nothing – it might be theatrics but it's all recorded. These questions are there.

Sometimes when you're called out, and people do these things and they try to be a little bit cheeky, I call it, sometimes a bit cute. The saying up my way, sometimes they say: you're cute by half. Sometimes that happens in this House and it's not so cute when you're listening to it after.

A good friend of mine, a former premier of the province, and you will know who I'm talking about, obviously, he had a lot of training in communications. He told me one time, he said: When you speak, just go back and review, it's one of the tricks. You go back and look at the tape, listen to what you said, listen to your debate. You'll find things you may like. You find things you might not like. That's how you transform and you realize what you're saying, whether you believe it or not. Is there improvement to be made? Sometimes you go and look, my God, what was I saying, that was terrible.

But as long as you're confident in your message – I'll go out and I'll do interviews, I'll talk on the radio and you ask anyone around me or my colleagues or any of our staff what do I say? I'll say to them: Did I get my message out? Because that's what's important.

Whether I get up and I review my hand motions or I'm confident in whatever I do, all that means nothing as long as you get your message out. I learned that along the way from a lot of experienced people. I don't always get it out. I try my best to get my message out, but it don't always be that way. But I do everything in my power to get that message out.

That's what we do here in the House of Assembly. It's about getting your message out, because it's very important and it's a responsibility that I take very serious and I'll continue on. I'm sure I'll get other times to speak before the budget is all done. I'll go on to a couple things in my last few minutes.

Mr. Speaker, May 17, 2016, the current Minister of Finance said, “It took us 66 years to accumulate” – this is all from Hansard – “$11 billion in debt, but if we followed the path that we were on under the former administration, in the next five years, we would have doubled the debt.”

I looked at budget documents, in six, seven years we're up to $18 billion. “If you took a look since 2004,” – these are her words – “if you take into account our Crown corporations, the former government actually doubled our public sector debt to a record of $15 billion.” That's a heck of a lot of money. Do you know what it is today? Twenty-six billion dollars.

Those figures come from the budget documents. This here is Hansard . In 2016, I, along with six other colleagues, stood in this House of Assembly, sat in this House of Assembly and listened repeatedly to Members opposite: You're drunk on oil. You're crazy on oil. You're spending like drunken sailors.

Now, if you look at a few announcements we've seen over the last few months, the government have cut a couple of loads, too: St. Clare's, think about it, all that infrastructure announced, every day we're getting new announcements.

Money's good, we're in the oil business. They were very critical of that. This is where the hypocrisy kicks in. When it's them, it's fine. When the Minister of Education wants to take the child care operators around by the nose, that's fine. But when it's something that doesn't fit, they're private operators, how dare you, how can I get involved with them.

MUN is over there, it's chaotic – it's chaotic. But when government are pressured, maybe government should have an input, maybe government should have something to say. We have to respect MUN's autonomy. How dare we question MUN's autonomy; MUN is an institution, we have to respect that. How can we get involved in that? Hands off. It's only good if it suits you.

We hear it; we heard it in Question Period today: Only when it suits you. That's the only time it works, when it suits you. Is that for the betterment of anyone? Is that for the betterment of the people of the province? I don't think it is.

We get up sometimes and I get up sometimes, I know sometimes it irritates government. We've been accused along the way of what we spent money on. But we invested in education, reduced classroom size; we hired teachers, actually, we actually hired teachers back then. Now we have a crisis in teaching. A freeze on tuition fees, plus student grants to educate our youth; no, that's gone. Improved access to health care, retained health professionals, rural dialysis; now look at the health care crisis. We were covering medications.

Poverty reduction: we went from the worst to the best in Canada in child poverty in a decade. But when 2015 came, government heralded one of the best poverty-reduction strategies in North America, in the world really. What did the government do? The first point they had to do was scrap our poverty reduction strategy. Why? I've heard from a lot of people in the know who said that was one of the biggest mistakes government made, because the Tories brought it in. That's the only reason. We're not letting them out. Why would we let the Tories take credit for that? We're not going doing that. Cancel that.

We hear from Crown Lands. We often hear of nightmares in Crown Lands. There was a review done in 2015. There are lawyers out there that supported this review. They thought it was a wonderful idea. It deals with a lot of the same issues we're dealing with. Eight years later and everyone thought this was the real end to it. It was the head of the legal association, at the time, who told me in person that they can't believe it's still not implemented.

Why wasn't that implemented, Mr. Speaker? I'll tell you why. The Tories brought it in. There's nothing wrong with that report. Just take the dust off it and implement it and we'll be all right. But no, no, no, the Tories did that. We're not going to follow that. We'll let everything spiral away and eight years later we're trying to figure it out.

Go back and get the report. I'd say it over in the minister's office somewhere under a box or down in a corner. I don't know.

Go and dust off some of the reports. No problem. I mean, they've got a way of hiding reports. We've got the Rothschild's report. We don't know where that's to. There are a lot of reports we don't get to see; millions of dollars of reports we don't get to see. But this was an actual report that actually made a lot of sensible recommendations. What did the government do? No, squash it because the Tories brought it in.

Speaker, thank you for your time. I'm sure I'll have more opportunity. I appreciate it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

D. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, it's a privilege to stand in this House and talk to the financial woes of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, but, particularly, how we can frame up – and I say we, collectively, those in the House of Assembly, all of us – a budget that addresses the needs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and gives a brighter future for Newfoundland and Labrador and encourages former Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to come back to Newfoundland and Labrador, invest in Newfoundland and Labrador and acknowledge the potential this great province of ours has.

Myself and the Minister of Finance over the last couple of weeks as we debated back and forth around the budget processes, it came to a difference of opinion of what her version was what we weren't supporting. I want to clarify that.

It isn't that we're not supporting the good things in this budget, and there are a number of good things there that we've advocated for on this side of the House, that we've outlined in our Blue Book, that we've acknowledged in petitions, that we've heard from our constituents and from constituents from, you know, other Liberal Members' districts, also, about things that needed to be done. We were very happy to see that a number of those had been enacted and had been put in as financial supports within the budget process. So we welcome that. There are a number of those that we see that are a positive step forward.

Our debate, and why we've made motions here so that there could be an open and transparent debate, and that there'd be more time spent on educating, informing and having open dialogue by the general population in this province, about what's really going to impact them from a financial point of view. If we're going to spend nearly $10 billion of the taxpayers' money, we would hope it's going to be used to benefit them to the nth degree, to whatever can be done to ensure that they benefit immensely from the monies that are invested.

No doubt, $10 billion is a major investment, but there's much more needed to be able to address all the issues people face. So the immediate priorities have to be what we debate in this House, should and have been in the past, I know from our administration, the priorities in our budgets and I would think and hope it would be the same. I have no doubt that the minister, when she sat with her officials and looked at what they had heard were the priorities and what were necessary, that they tried to frame some of that up.

I would think and hope that their Cabinet, when they sat down and had a discussion around what the priorities would be and how they could improve people's lives, that they outlined what their processes would be. I would have hoped that when their caucus met and said here's what we're hearing from our constituents, that it would have reflected what came out in the budget. In some cases, not as many as we would like and definitely not as many as the people of this province need, reflected some of the changes and some of the proper investments.

What we're talking about now are some of the things that we haven't seen. That's the concern we have on this side of the House. It's not about bashing the minister or her department or the Cabinet or the Premier or the Liberal administration about what's going on in that budget. It's about outlining issues that were not addressed and maybe there's a rational reason. If it's a financial one, well tell us because we're spending $10 billion, the most we've ever spent of the taxpayers' money to address issues that are facing Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

So if there is a rational reason for why something isn't funded or why it isn't a priority, I do hope and I do expect that Members on the government side will stand up and outline exactly what's happening. This is not about defend or criticize. That's not what the House of Assembly should be about in a budget process. It should be about open debate. It should be about clarifying information and discussing potential alternatives, if there are identified gaps in services or gaps in the priorities that have been identified in a budget process.

I've said it a multitude of times, I've been fortunate that I've been through 40-plus budgets in my lifetime and got to see some that were very detrimental to the people of this province and some that were bewildering as to how an administration thought that would be beneficial to the people of the province; that it would not in any way, shape or form enhance developing the economy here or encourage Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to stay or former Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to come back and invest in our great province.

I've seen ones where it was hard to criticize a lot of things. There's always room for improvement, no matter what you do, but there were a lot of good things added and identified. A lot of increased spending in programs and services that have been identified over the last number of decades that have been beneficial. A lot of developed partnerships with the not-for-profit sector and the private sector to develop our economy, and an acknowledgement that there was a plan of action.

Unfortunately, what I see here is a number of gaps that don't identify major priorities that have been outlined by the people of this province. They're simple. My colleagues have talked about it, the Third Party has talked about it, the independents have talked about it, it's consistently about how we're addressing health care needs, how we're addressing the cost of living, how we're addressing stimulating the economy and how we're addressing the reality of Newfoundland and Labrador getting its fair share in this Confederation.

There are four key things that we have some major challenges with. Built in those are all the others things that affect people. If it's about Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, if it's about Crown lands, if it's about infrastructure, all of the key components there fit under one of those debates or headings that should be identified and addressed. No doubt, in some of those four main headings that I just identified, there are some investments or there are some particular programs that will be beneficial to the people in this province. But there are a number of things here that are not clarified.

They're not clarified because it's either not clear on what's happening or there hasn't been a determined plan of action.

That's the biggest criticism that you've heard from this side of the House. It's not about what you want to do; it's the lack of a plan of how you're going to do what would be in the best interests of the people of this province. That's what we've been talking about.

I just left a scrum early so I could come in here and take the opportunity to speak to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and speak to my colleagues in the House of Assembly about how we have to find ways to improve the financial situation in Newfoundland and Labrador. But more importantly, the financial situation of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

The way we'd do that, the way I say we, as the House of Assembly, should set the tone, we should set the philosophical approach, we should set the policies that stimulate Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to feel comfortable that this is the place to stay, live and flourish and that we encourage businesses outside to come to Newfoundland and Labrador and invest. We need to do that by using the assets that we have and the resources that we have to benefit the people of this province.

I talked about an issue just now outside, about the increase in Marine Atlantic. Now, again, if you're not going to be proactive and you're going to try to be reactive after the fact, after it's too late, you're only doing more damage to our economic situation. Keep in mind what's happening now. There's going to be a 4 per cent increase in Marine Atlantic costing across the board. The impact of two major issues here. The big issue is the cost of living. Everything is going to have to increase. Everybody has to pass it on because they have a certain costing that's relevant to them or they have a profit margin that they must make to sustain their overhead.

The second is going to be, we've got a billion-plus-dollar industry in tourism. You think this is not going to have an impact on that? People are trying to find the most economical, beneficial return on their investment when they go out for their vacations. Well, if they're not saying there's another 4 per cent added, when I already have to come to Newfoundland and Labrador, where the cost of everything from fuel is much more costly than some of the other jurisdictions, some of the other costing of food and that because of the cost of freight already when we get here, then that's going to have an impact.

We're only into the budget debate, now, most of these programs and services will not be implemented until mid summer, some later in the fall. Let's add what's coming again July 1, a 17 cent increase per litre of home heat fuel. Now, this is Newfoundland and Labrador, traditionally we perhaps have the highest percentage per capita of those people, particularly in rural, remoted areas who heat their homes with home heat fuel. Look at the cost that's going to be incurred by them.

Fair enough, it's being brought in in July, people might not notice as much, but you just watch what's going to happen to the people in this province when, come mid-November, the cost is going to skyrocket again. We'll see it on the Island; we'll see it in Labrador. It's going to have a detrimental effect.

So now we're adding 4 per cent because that's what's going to happen. People have to pass on that expense that they're going to incur if they get freight coming here. So we have instability from a tourism point of view because of the additional cost. We already have the fact that we're not being treated properly by the airlines when it comes to providing proper flights, ensuring it's a timely fashion, that it's reliable going here.

I mean, we, I say we, collectively, the taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador, the taxpayers of Canada, have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to upgrade an airport, particularly in St. John's. We've done it in other areas out in Deer Lake and Gander now there are some investments there and there are some discussions of what can happen also in Stephenville. There have been improvements in Goose Bay and in Wabush.

So we're trying to do this to make it more accessible for people to come here. We spend hundreds of millions of dollars, but then nobody went and advocated with the airlines and that to ensure that they come here. So if 4 per cent goes on Marine Atlantic, you think the airlines are not going to be too far behind, because if we allow that to happen, the general population, who are the corporate world in the airlines, are going to say well, Newfoundland and Labrador have let that – if the government, because it's a government entity, it's a Crown agency owned and operated by the federal government.

And if you know your history, the Terms of Union with Newfoundland and Labrador was supposed to be free, accessible, provided, quality access for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians for freight and transportation to the Island itself.

So if we falter and not be proactive and stand up for what's right, then obviously other entities who are the private sector, who have all kinds of extra freedom and flexibility, can obviously then say we're going to impose and extra 4 or 5 or 6 per cent because they're also going to say whatever happens to Marine Atlantic has an impact on them.

Look at the impact it is going to have on our tourism industry. Look at the impact that will have on the freight industry too because not everything comes by road. There are certain things here that come by air that will also have an impact on the cost of living for other additional individuals from Newfoundland and Labrador.

There are just some immediate things that are happening right now. They're happening in real time. So let's look at the bigger things that are happening that we are not even debating right now, that we're not quite sure how it's going to be impacted by the budget itself. What impact it is going to have; what other jurisdictions are doing that would impact us here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I have to give kudos to the Liberal MPs in PEI, the Liberal caucus in PEI and, particularly, the PC government in PEI who are being very proactive to ensure that the additional cost that would have been incurred by the people of PEI, the residents of PEI, when it came to them being able to get their freight across the Confederation Bridge has been stopped. The federal government stepped in.

They didn't do it out of the goodness of their heart because that was already being put there as part of that. It was the lobbying by their federal MPs, which are four Liberal MPs, I suspect by the handful of Liberal MLAs they have, but, particularly, by the Progressive Conservative government in PEI who said this is not right and put a business plan that makes sense. Do you know what the federal government did? Finally, they saw that if they invest in the right way, it will be a benefit to everybody, not only the people of PEI but also the people of this great country of ours. In this case, they did it.

We didn't see that in this province. What we have seen now is people are upset, and they should be upset; they don't agree with it. We wrote a letter; we made a phone call. But you saw this coming. You knew what was happening in PEI. You saw this coming for the last number of months. Where are the six Liberal MPs? How come they're not talking to their caucus members? Where are the two federal ministers?

There was a tout here that the prime minister had appointed two federal ministers out of Newfoundland and Labrador, out of six elected officials. That's a good rationale so you would have thought that would have meant more influence, more discussions around the topics and issues that are affecting Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and more return on the fact that there were two people at the Cabinet table.

Also add in, where are the other four Members of the Liberal federal caucus lobbying for what's right for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians? They seem to become very silent again when it's something that's happening in Newfoundland and Labrador, but when there's an opportunity, when a federal minister is coming down or the prime minister is coming down to acknowledge something or re-announce something from the last four or five years, they're all huddled around. They're all ready to say what a great opportunity this is.

They're all ready to get on Open Line to say what a wonderful thing; the photo ops are everywhere. That, then, to me, questions the real validity here of picking exactly what is beneficial to the people of the province or, as mentioned by my colleague here today, cherry-picking what are things that you can get the most exposure.

Politics is not always about exposure. It's about, at the end of the day, doing what's right. Sometimes you even have to go against your own party, your own colleagues; maybe even sometimes your own philosophy. As long as you know, at the end of the day, what's being proposed is right for people. It may not be what you agree with but it's right. That's what I thought we did here in the House of Assembly.

We've all debated, and I thought that's what debate was about. Debate would have been about: I'll outline my views, you have your views but if my views outline facts and figures that you weren't aware of or a different perspective that you can look at it from a different angle, then that might then change your approach to it. It may not necessarily say that you totally agree with it, but it might change, particularly if you're in government, the way that you implement the program or certain things. There may be still gaps left in that provided service.

So that's what's disappointing in what's happening in this House of Assembly right now. We've seen that today, we seen it on what happened with some of the other investments that we talked about today. Myself and the minister had an open discussion, debate about what's happening with the Terra Nova and the impact that may or may not have as part of it. I would have preferred not to go back seven elections, but that's fine, if that's how we're going to debate in the House of Assembly, well that's a different thing.

We, on this side, try to live in the here and now and talk about what it is we can do collectively that will be beneficial to the people of the province? What can we suggest to the minister on a nearly $10-billion investment of people's taxes that would be beneficial to the people of this province and open us up for better investments? That's what I would have hoped we would be debating in the House of Assembly.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) here now.

D. BRAZIL: That's right. Here and now is how we deal with the people of this province. Here and now is how we address the province. Here and now is how we're going to develop a brighter future for the people of this province. We do that here in the House of Assembly.

So I want to look at that and some of the things that we've been critical of, the fact of some of the gaps here, some of the real gaps in addressing the cost of living for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Now, have there been some identified things? Sure there have been. There are going to be some seniors' rebates that will be beneficial to a sector of our society, but there are a number of unknowns that are related to that, the impact it's going to have as part of that.

There's been some supports for agencies and other programs that will benefit certain sectors of our society and that's welcome and, no doubt, needed by certain individuals. What we're missing here is the bigger picture, the vision, the long-term plan that specifically outlines spending this money, what's going to happen and how we're going to benefit the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

They talk about the Future Fund. I'm not adverse to it. I think I might have spoken to it a year ago or two years ago when it was first proposed. Liked the concept, I think we all should have been thinking about it for years and years. Unfortunately, this province, right now, as we face on a day-to-day basis things we are not having control over because we're not advocating and don't have a plan in advance about the cost of living, potential health care crisis, education crisis, all of these things, we should be looking at how do we take the moneys we have and invest them to solve the immediate problems of today?

Plan for the future, but you can't plan for the future by putting money in a pot that's needed now to put people in a better position so they can have a brighter future. If you have a brighter future, what do you have? A better opportunity to put more money in that pot to make it sustainable down the road.

So from an economic point of view to borrow $160 million or so, but to put $147 million in a pot to hold there, pay your interest and still not use this money to address the particular issues we have in Newfoundland and Labrador, I can't balance that out from a financial point of view. I can't balance it out from a social, moral, investment point of view, how it benefits anybody at the end of the day. But particularly when there are still a number of issues at a crisis level that people in Newfoundland and Labrador are facing and we're not addressing them by using the equity and the finances, the tax revenue we have to be beneficial to the people of this province.

Let's just talk about one thing the Liberal administration has been noted for which is getting outside entities to do reports and hearings, consultations on issues and that. That's not necessarily a bad thing. My only argument to a lot of that is: Do you know what? I've be around 40-plus years as a civil servant, we've done it all. Not a lot of things have changed dramatically over the last number of years. There are a lot of reports, phenomenal reports that have been done that hit on things that were futuristic, that looked at what would happen five, 10, 15, 20, 30, 50 years down the road that we should be pulling out now, dusting off and having a look at.

One of them is Royal Commission on Employment and Unemployment done by Dr. House and his team three decades ago, four decades ago now. I remember being involved as part of that process. Phenomenal amount of work done. Phenomenal amount of recommendations around what could be done in particular industries. A lot of them I go back and read now and I am going: if we had started doing that 10, 15, 20, 25 years ago, we would have been not only trend leaders, but world leaders when it came to certain industries as part of that process.

Again, we spent a lot of time – or the Liberal administration spent a lot of time putting together reports. We, unfortunately, have spent a lot of time over here having to debate those reports when there are other things that we could have been doing, from setting some visionary processes to identifying the issues for people in Newfoundland and Labrador.

But with that being said, I'll just note the Mackenzie report came out and said let's focus on ocean technology, aviation, international education, et cetera: stuff we all agreed to. Unfortunately, 30 years ago we were hearing the same things and we did very little – no matter what administration, very little – to be proactive and visionary when it went to move things forward. We didn't need to spend time and delay another year or so; this should have been acted upon. If there was debate in this House about how we move ocean technology in the right direction, 100 per cent.

What we would be asking here would be for clarification, hopefully that the ministers or the government responsible would have the professionals who we'd give the data so that we can share that with the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and say, you know what, here's how. There's a plan of action for a bright future when it comes to ocean technology.

Aviation: fortunately enough, I get to talk to some people who are in that industry and get some great visionary pieces of advice about what they'd like to do. But for them to do what they want to do – and I know it's private sector. I'll keep saying any government should be setting the atmosphere for the private sector to flourish. That doesn't mean giveaways. That doesn't mean spending $40-million more on a mental health hospital than you should have to. That's not what I'm saying when I say setting the tone here.

What I'm saying is we need to be setting the atmosphere, the philosophy, the checks and balances, and sending the message that we're open for business in Newfoundland and Labrador as long as we all benefit from it: the businesses that are engaged, the people of this province and then local businesses who helped build this great province of ours. Sustainability at the end of the day, that there's not a burden on the taxpayers after a certain industry falters or its life expectancy is done. So there are things like that.

International education: we're at a lull now. I'm hoping we can fix it with what's gone on over the last number of months with our university here, particularly around our reputation from an international point of view. I said it a number of months ago, my shadow minister said it a number of months ago: one of the key concerns we had was the issue around what was happening within the university and all the other challenges that are in there, and the rights of the students and the rates of tuition freezes and the cost affordability.

One of the particular ones was around our reputation from an international point of view. A multitude of people, so many students, so many professors, so many administrators, even past presidents, so many ministers, had done a wonderful job to get our reputation as an international post-secondary institution to come to study many disciplines that we were second to none.

When I travelled around people would come to me and say: I understand there's a university in Newfoundland; we're hearing good things about it. I'm hearing sons and daughters of people internationally, or even domestically, who would never think of Newfoundland and Labrador as a place of higher education that would be equal or surpass any other province are now at that level. They'd come and see the disciplines we have here, the engagement by the students, the whole process we have as part of that process. Unfortunately, because it hasn't been managed properly the last number of years, there have been a couple of issues that are now putting us in a negative light internationally.

We need to rectify that. We need to move beyond this and we need to do that. There are things there when we talk about international education. There has to be a plan of action. When you do a plan of action you've already got to anticipate what may happen. It's not all going to be rosy, never ever going to be rosy and everything going well. Ten things will happen; eight or nine may go well. You have to anticipate what's going to happen that's going to be negative on the tenth thing and you got to have a plan of action to address that. Minimize the impact that it has on that program, that institution, the people of this province or our reputation as part of that process.

Let's talk about tourism. I just mentioned it, unfortunately, from a fare point of view that the costing increase on Marine Atlantic may have an impact on that. We need to have a plan of action. How do we dispel that? How do we change that? How do we still encourage people to come here?

Last year, the Come Home Year, even though it was put together in a very quick (inaudible), I think the people of this province took control of that. The not-for-profit agencies and all those small businesses that rely on the tourism industry took the leadership and had the foresight to be able to see at the end of the day we make this a great Come Home Year. They did that. I know it was a bit more successful than people would've thought, partly because people were looking forward to coming back; they hadn't been back in a couple of years.

They came back and said we'd like to do this every year. Let's build on this, let's make this an annual event. Because if a million people came home, there are 10-more million out there that would love to come to this connected to Newfoundland and Labrador in some way, shape or form. Expats or connected to expats or just people who are world travellers who'd love to see this beautiful province of ours, because they've heard so much about it from Come From Away and all the other things that are happening here.

We just saw what Disney are doing here with Peter Pan. You think that doesn't go through the industries there? Tens of thousands of people are all in these industries. They read articles, they see, they talk to people who've worked. The next people who produce this will probably be working on another film and they'll say: If you're looking for a location, if you want to go somewhere for a vacation, let me tell you about the place I was.

But to do that, we need to have a plan of action so that we don't get caught up on the negativities of some of the things that are happening here. So we need to plan for the future in our tourism industry while we work at it immediately, right now.

Our mineral prospects: we've talked about that before. It's ironic that the rest of the world talks more about what we have here, from a mineral development point of view, than we do in Newfoundland and Labrador. It's alarming. You know I listen to the open-line shows and hoping every day I'm going to hear this is what's happening, here's the great potential and that. I don't hear it. I'm hoping more we'll have Members on the Liberal side phone in about what's happening.

My colleagues here phone in and talk about the great potential in Central Newfoundland and Labrador. I know my colleagues in Central Newfoundland on a daily basis are in contact with those who are developing that. I know what's happening there. I know what the potential in Labrador is and what's happening up there. I know the potential in other parts of this province that people didn't even think would be resource-based geographic locations. It's phenomenal what can happen here.

We need to heighten the discussion here. Not the rhetoric, the discussion – the positive discussion about what's happening. Too often, we get caught up in the rhetoric than we do on what's more important; the valued assets that we have and how do we make them work. Collectively, how do we do it?

The social development here, the personal development that we have as part of these things. The financial development we have in these. The communities themselves working together. Regionalization that people talk about can be done in a multitude of different ways. Economic regionalization can be done just in picking eight, 10,12, 15 communities have a commonality of promoting a particular asset that's in the area. Our natural resources that we have from a mining perspective. There are a number of mining expos that are happening now, a number of mining conferences that will happen. That speaks volumes.

When I go to one of these functions and I talk to people who are from Asia who are coming here looking at it, people from Australia, from New Zealand, from Norway, that speaks volumes. From the United States that are coming to Newfoundland and Labrador and we would say coming – one time you'd always hear coming over to little Newfoundland and Labrador. It's not about little Newfoundland and Labrador because the respect level and the potential that the world sees out here is second to none. We need to find a way to tap that, get it out there even broader than it is, so that there are a multitude of companies coming here who are going to bid on what we get.

It took us 20 years to do that, maybe 25 with the offshore, but we managed to do that. I'll give credit. It was under our administration. I'll give credit when something happens under the Liberals. Under our administration, by standing our ground, ensuring that we knew what the value of the parcel of development would be because of doing the seismic, that was a very important key component.

I know myself and the minister bantered last year and the year before about the seismic issue, particularly when it was taken out of the budget. Didn't see the rationale for it. Still can't see the rationale but, you know what; don't care about what the rationale was then. Happy, glad to see. It's well received that it's in the budget now, because it's an asset for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and it shows that we have the ability to have control over what feel is the value of that industry.

Not a multinational who doesn't care, after five years, if we're making money or not and they can go. Or if they don't like something we're doing, they can go on and say here's what we'll give you for that. No, no, they now know the value because not only do they know the value, we've managed to do some of the work for some of these companies so even another company who is not familiar with Newfoundland and Labrador can assess those reports and say I wouldn't mind investing in that province. I wouldn't mind sitting down with their officials to find out what's happening.

I wouldn't mind talking to other companies that have done business there to figure out what the atmosphere is there and what the resource development is.

We all know there have been hundreds of billons of dollars over the last three or four decades in our oil industry generated by a multitude of companies and generated for the taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador and the taxpayers of Canada. So there has been a lot of people benefit from us being proactive in looking at how we develop our resources. The oil industry was one of the small, key components. I say small only because there is a multitude of other ones that can be done. The leasing of a seismic ship and ensuring that data was ours and we shared it with companies when they bid on parcels of land, so that is a very important component as we look at that.

Let's look at – as the world evolves here – the new nickel development, cobalt and lithium. Now when we're talking about getting into a green environment, we're getting into electric cars and the impact that has right now is dramatic. But we're one of the key areas that could be developed, if developed properly, that addresses the environmental impact and the footprint but also addresses the financial benefit to the people of this province from a development point of view. So there is a proactive approach that needs to happen here as we move that further.

As we know, there is a multitude of other rare earth elements that are only now coming to light, that people would have never known Newfoundland and Labrador would be a place to get it. We're blessed with a geographic set-up sometimes that we feel curses us because of the physical layout and the terrain itself and the environment from a climate point of view. But if we weigh that and put that aside, the benefits, because of the geographic make up, what we have here is a blessing. We just have to maximize that blessing so that it becomes something financially beneficial to the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

What we're talking about and what I spent the last 30 minutes talking about and I would hope the message has been sent over there is about having a plan of action. That is all we're asking for: a plan of action that addresses the particular needs that we have in Newfoundland and Labrador. But a plan of action that also addresses the resources, the assets we have that can be developed so that we have immediate, sustainable financial security, but we have long-term security and we have an ability to take revenues when the time is right and put it into our Future Fund so that when there is a dark day, when there's a slip in the eco