December 7, 1998 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIII No. 56

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Before we begin routine proceedings, the Chair would like to welcome a

number of groups to the gallery today. First, we have thirty-eight Grade IX students from

MacDonald Drive Jr. High, accompanied by their teacher, Mr. Doug Gosse. As well we have

thirty-eight Level II students from Ascension Collegiate in Bay Roberts. They are

accompanied by their instructors, Mr. Ed Wilding and Ms. Corinne Ellsworth, along with bus

driver, Mr. Don Sullivan.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, every year, preventable accidents occur with the onset of

winter. Freezing rain and snow conditions dictate a change in driving habits.

In conjunction with the Department of Government Services and Lands,

the Department of Works, Services and Transportation has begun an educational campaign to

make drivers aware of the hazards of winter driving. This campaign begins in conjunction

with Safe Driving Week, with important messages delivered to drivers in the electronic and

print media.

Motorists have an important part to play in safety. They can make a

significant contribution to reducing the number of accidents by becoming better informed

before they drive.

Information on road conditions can be very helpful. It is updated

regularly and available in several ways. Most of our main depots in each region of the

Province have updated information available on a 24-hour basis.

Beginning tomorrow, a 1-900 number will be in service during business

hours. This service provides information on road conditions for all of the selected

regions. It requires a Touch-Tone telephone, and callers will be billed seventy-five cents

for each call. The information will also be available on the highway conditions segment of

the weather channel as well as on our Web site.

Mr. Speaker, we also ask that drivers be patient. We know that this

winter there will be times when the roads will be icy and roads will be blocked due to

heavy snowfall, regardless of the amount of equipment or crews assigned to a particular

area.

I strongly encourage all motorists in the Province to drive safely. The

Department of Works, Services and Transportation does its best to ensure the Province's

roads are safer in winter. I take this opportunity to remind motorists that they must also

do their part too.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank the

minister for sending me a copy of his statement when I sat here in my chair. I appreciate

it.

Listen to this, now; I will read directly from this: Motorists have an

important to play in safety. They can make a significant contribution to reducing the

number of accidents by becoming better informed.

Talk about stating the obvious. The minister talks about a 1-900

number. It is a good idea, and I think we would agree with that, but to charge

seventy-five cents a call, there are some problems there. To me, it might be just another

way to grab a few bucks.

He talks about the drivers being patient. "...we also ask that

drivers be patient." To me, the minister is probably hinting at a pre-emptive strike,

because we all know that very seldom is the department ready with snow ploughs, sanding

equipment and what have you, each year at this time of the year. That is basically what is

going on here.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government and Services and

Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As members are aware, we recently gave third reading in this House of

Assembly to a new Credit Union Act for the Province.

Part of this act deals with the Credit Union Deposit Guarantee

Cooperation, a provincial Crown corporation providing deposit insurance protection to

credit union members. This deposit protection is backed by a guarantee from government and

is evidence of the strong commitment we have to the credit union movement in this

Province.

Mr. Speaker, the credit union movement consists of fifteen credit

unions operating from thirty-four locations throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. The

credit union movement has 34,300 members, employs 195 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians,

and has $295 million in assets. It is an extremely important component of the financial

services industry, not only in this Province but also throughout Canada.

I am pleased today to announce the appointments of Wilfred Letto,

William Dilny and George Cull to the Board of Directors of the Credit Union Deposit

Guarantee Corporation as credit union representatives. These are volunteer positions, and

these three men have spent many years providing volunteer services to the credit union

movement in this Province. The Board of Directors of the Corporation consists of six

members, and there are also three government representatives on the board.

The Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation is an excellent example

of how Government provides effective regulation to a financial industry through

cooperation with the industry.

It is through the efforts of close to 200 volunteers, such as Mr.

Letto, Mr Dilny and Mr. Cull, that the credit union movement has grown and prospered to a

point where it provides a full range of financial services to residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador.

I wish the new appointees every success.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for a copy of his

ministerial statement before I sat down. What is in this press release or in this

ministerial statement is basically what was discussed last week when we approved the most

recent bill with respect to the credit unions.

With respect to the individuals appointed, I want to congratulate these

individuals for being appointed to the Directors of the credit union board. I know one of

the individuals personally and he has the experience and qualifications to do a good job,

and I look forward to that. It is about time, I would say, and I said it last week, that

the banks received some competition from the credit unions.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, does

he have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. The

Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation plays the same role with respect to credit

union deposit as the Canadian Deposit Insurance Corporation does with the banks. It is a

very important role, and I think the track record of credit unions in this Province will

show that no one has actually lost money that they have deposited in a credit union, which

is a very good record indeed. I do not think that can be said for the banks historically

in Newfoundland and Labrador.

We are pleased with this legislation. I do want to congratulate the

credit union appointees to the Corporation. They are all experienced, in some cases

pioneers -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: - in the bringing about of credit unions. I hope that

the work of the Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation continues effectively.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair,

doe she have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to see this House passed revisions in the Credit Union Act

unanimously, but I am also pleased that the minister has selected such high-calibre

individuals to be a part of the Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation. I want to

congratulate all of them on their appointments.

Particularly I want to point out Mr. Letto who is a member of my

district, a prominent business man both across Labrador and on the West Coast of

Newfoundland, and also one of the founding members of the Eagle River Credit Union. I

applaud the remarkable efforts and contribution he has made to that particular movement -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MS JONES: - and congratulate the minister for seeing fit that he be

placed in a capacity at a provincial level.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Labour.

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to inform hon. members of my

department's active involvement in a Canada-Russia Cooperative Environmental

Decision-Making Project sponsored by the Canadian International Development Agency, CIDA,

and the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, CCME.

I am pleased to say that Mr. Haseen Khan, Manager of Surface Water,

with the Water Resources Management Division of the Department of Environment and Labour,

visited Russia in October of this year as a member of the Canadian delegation representing

CCME. He, along with other Canadian experts, organized a workshop and Mr. Khan presented a

paper on the topic of river basin management and water quality improvements at Peter's

River, Newfoundland. His paper focused on local efforts to work cooperatively to resolve

water management problems. He described the process where stakeholders in the Peter's

River area came together to discuss their concerns about water quality and to resolve the

issues to their mutual satisfaction.

The project came about as a result of CCME's involvement in the

Canada-Russia Federalism Project in 1995, during which time environment ministers from

Alberta and Prince Edward Island went to Russia to discuss the decision-making model we

employ in the organization. The primary objective of the project is to demonstrate

cooperative and shared decision-making by focusing on two important issues: municipal

solid waste management in Moscow City and the surrounding area, and water quality and

quantity management issues in the Angara River area.

The Russian people are facing waste management and water quality

management problems similar to those faced by other countries. As is the case throughout

the world, environmental problems often entail numerous issues, involving many

jurisdictions and the interests of many stakeholders. Yet, in few cases is there a process

for stakeholders to come together to resolve these problems.

The project involves the establishment of broadly based task forces in

both Moscow and Irkutsk. These task forces will attempt to apply the CCME model to build

cooperative approaches to solve waste management and water quality management problems. In

addition, Canadian experts on these topics are visiting Russia to participate in workshops

and work with Russian counterparts on technical issues.

This project is important for many reasons, but mostly because it was

the first time all stakeholders in both Russian communities were brought together to have

a meaningful discussion on a cooperative decision-making process that would significantly

improve waste management and water quality in Irkutsk.

In time, members of the Russian Task Force will visit Canada where they

will familiarize themselves with the development of our work in water quality management.

Let me say here today that I am proud of the work done by the staff of

the Department of Environment and Labour. Mr. Khan's involvement in this international

project speaks well for his abilities and for the expertise that exists within my

department to deal with water quality management. But also, Mr. Khan's work has showcased

the willingness and capability of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to come together to

resolve issues cooperatively. I believe that the lessons learned here and in Russia will

continue to flourish and will assist us all in dealing with many issues, environmental or

otherwise.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I too would like to show appreciation for the cooperation between our

country, and in particular our Province, and Russia. The minister said, "As is the

case throughout the world, environmental problems often entail numerous issues..."

One of the things we can learn from Russia and other areas of the world is that fact that

there is, and will continue to grow, the problem of water shortage throughout many areas

of the world, and the problem with water quality throughout many areas of the world.

Newfoundland is about to embark on a fantastic new industry of dealing

in water, water exports and water bottling. I hope that our Province can learn from the

problems that other areas throughout the world have in water shortage and water quality

problems, that we should maximize our resources for the people of our Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, does

he have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to see that officials of our government are working

actively in a cooperative project with Russian officials in doing something that needs to

be done. We know Russia has incredible problems in the environmental area and hopefully

they can learn something about process from us, and perhaps we can learn something about

the kind of things that have gone on in Russia.

I would be remiss if I do not point out that we have our own

environmental issues to deal with here. Issues of water quality, for example. If the

provincial government would pay water tax to the City of St. John's, perhaps they would

have a better means of looking after the water quality in St. John's and looking after St.

John's Harbour. There are lots of issues we could pay attention to here as well, as well

as the one the Member for St. John's South has talked about with respect to the export of

bottled water.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question today is for the Premier. Warnings about the year 2000

millennium bug problem were issued more than ten years ago, as the Premier is aware.

Certainly by 1996 it was clear that a failure to take decisive action to dedicate the

resources right away to correct the problem could potentially have disastrous consequences

for every operation dependent on technology and computers, which is virtually everything

in our society. This is an issue that had been explored over a year-and-a-half to two

years ago in the House.

I would like to ask the Premier today: Can the Premier tell us whether

he has commissioned and received a comprehensive report on this Province's preparedness in

the face of what some are saying is a looming crisis? Has he commissioned a report, not

only on the government preparedness, but also on the preparedness of the private sector

companies on which our citizens rely for essential services, like electricity, food,

banking and transportation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I have to make a confession to the

Leader of the Opposition. He caught me without my millennium bug response ready. It is a

serious question and it deserves a serious answer. I make humour of it only to cover my

own embarrassment at not being properly prepared to give the Leader of the Opposition the

full and complete response this serious question demands.

I can tell him I have made enquiries repeatedly over the last several

years about this particular file. I have asked the Clerk of the Privy Council, Mr. Malcolm

Rowe, to ensure that all government departments are taking the necessary measures and

making the necessary investments to ensure that Newfoundland and Labrador, this

jurisdiction along with others, is not caught unprepared for the millennium bug problem.

I have been informed that the Province and the infrastructure of

government is largely on track, that we should be ready to be compliant in advance of

2000. I don't have a briefing note right in front of me where I can give the Leader of the

Opposition more detail, but I would be very happy to get my hands on it as soon as

possible and share the information with all members of the House.

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

Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: While the Premier may not have a briefing note right

at his fingertips, surely this is an issue Cabinet must have been dealing with over the

last two years. I would just like to ask him some specific questions, if he can take some

time to recollect from his own memory then.

Does the Province, for example, have in place a high level coordinating

group, including the public and private sectors and police, to ensure that it is doing the

most it can to be ready for the year 2000, both in fixing the computer code problem on the

one hand, and being ready for problems that will result by not being ready on the other

hand in some sectors?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, in fact there is a high level

group. The group is chaired by the Clerk of the Privy Council, Mr. Malcolm Rowe, and it is

comprised of the appropriate deputies within government, looking at the agencies and

departments most seriously affected, or potentially affected, by this problem.

I would point out that while we haven't listed departments or services

in order of priority, certainly the health care services of the Province are amongst the

highest priorities for government. There has been collaboration and work between the

central agencies of government, Treasury Board, the Clerk's office, the appropriate

ministers and deputies, and for example the health care institutions, to be ready for

2000, to be compliant in that regard.

Obviously all of the payroll and other functions of government,

including the provision of assistance programs - in particular, for example, through the

Department of Human Resources and Employment. It is also important in that regard that we

not have a breakdown there in the direct level of services being provided to individuals

who are the recipients of government aid. I have a note which says: Table of Contents,

Treasury Board, Tab 2. I am very happy to see.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the Opposition would

be so kind as to ask me another question I could get the bugs out of this book.

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

Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Maybe the Premier could be so kind as to enlighten me

on who sent down the note so I can turn to the gallery and ask that person the questions,

Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: It is an important problem. It is a problem that is

going to pose serious consequences for everybody in society. My understanding is that

there is much left to do within the provincial government circles to eliminate the error

at the root of this. My understanding is that there is much left to do within the

provincial government and what it is responsible for, whether directly through departments

or within its Crown entities, health care institutions, educational institutions, et

cetera.

My question is: Has there been any pilot testing done on any solutions

that have been put forward? Have any converted programs yet been tested and have any

failed under testing? What sort of specific things have government been trying, department

by department?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: I can undertake to give the Leader of the

Opposition, when I have had a chance to assemble that information, as to whether or not

there have been tests in individual departments, and whether or not those tests have met

with success or failure. I would undertake to get all that information back to the Leader

of the Opposition. I can tell him that unquestionably this issue has been a very

significant preoccupation of government, as it has been for every other jurisdiction in

the country and every other private sector company.

The Leader of the Opposition knows that through the NISL arrangement

which is the privatization of the Newfoundland Information Services and the relationship

with NewTel and, of course, their association with Anderson Consulting, that a lot of the

provision of computer services and computer related services within government are

provided through the private sector.

NewTel I think has established themselves and is recognized as an

industry leader, both within this Province and certainly, arguably, around the country, in

providing information solutions, including solutions to the problem of the 2000 millennium

bug.

I want to assure the Leader of the Opposition that government is taking

very substantial steps, and I now can apprise him of some way of quantifying those steps.

Thus far by department: the Department of Education has spent $540,000 in preparation for

this problem; the Department of Works, Services and Transportation, $900,000; the

Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, $72,000; the Department of Development and

Rural Development, $70,000,; the Department of Government Services and Lands, $200,000;

the Department of Mines and Energy, $100,000; the Department of Health and Community

Services, $100,000; the Department of Human Resources and Employment, $1 million; the

Department of Justice, $1.5 million; the Executive Council, across the board, $7.2

million, for a grand total of $11.7 million getting ready to beat that bug right into the

ground.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A year and a half ago, when the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board

was asked questions directly, it was at a time when they were just assessing what the

potential problems would be. Obviously, the Premier is enlightened, and has given more

information to the House, and through the House to the people of the Province, on what

various departments are doing.

The question I have then is this. What actions have the Province taken

specifically in terms of ensuring emergency preparedness, in terms of ensuring that water,

food, power, health care, telephone and other services continue? This is a serious issue,

no matter what happens to the systems. The question is: Is there a continency plan by

government in that regard? If there is, are you in a position to be able to table it today

or sometime in the near future for all to have a look at?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I do not think the government is

planning for a huge breakdown of the capacity of government communities and private sector

to function, such that we would have - we are contemplating at this point emergency

measures for food, shelter and so on. We think it is a computer bug, not the next world

war we are dealing with.

I would say to the Leader of the Opposition I now have more information

in my hand. Let me go through some of the areas that are compliant.

The teachers' payroll - this will be important to the teachers - is

ready; high school certification is ready; student aid administration is ready; the

Department of Justice ticket management system is ready; Motor Vehicle Registration is

ready; the Newfoundland Medicare MCP Information system is ready; the municipal assessment

agency is ready; the Department of Works, Services and Transportation purchasing is ready;

capital spending, same department, is ready; highways maintenance system, same department,

is ready; finance taxation collection system - wouldn't want that to break down - ready

September 1999; pension system ready, in December 1998; financing accounting system,

Treasury Board, ready December, 1998; Treasury Board payroll system, very important, ready

in December 1998; the Department of Human Resources and Employment, financial assistance

computer terminal systems, ready in September 1999. Aye, sir, we are ready.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Opposition.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: I tell you, Minister, I won't even respond.

Within government departments, certainly, there is a move towards being

ready, as the Premier outlined. I would like to ask him this: Are Newfoundland Hydro and

Newfoundland Power Y2K compliant? I believe it is the government's responsibility to get a

guarantee from the utility companies that it regulates that they are either Y2K compliant

or else prepared with an adequate continency plan. Has government received any such

guarantee that power services will continue uninterrupted?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the member to my left, who retains a

sense of humour, notwithstanding the circumstances of the last week, says that Hydro and

Newfoundland Light and Power are more worried by the extra load brought on by the light

bulbs outside the building than they are by the Y2K problem.

I want to assure the Leader of the Opposition that yes, there has been

discussion with Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, which is a Crown corporation, and

discussion as well with some of the major utility providers, in this case the - you have

mentioned Light and Power; you could have mentioned as well the telephone company - to

ensure that they too will be compliant with the Y2K problem. I cannot give the Leader of

the Opposition today an assurance that compliance has been achieved but I know they are in

the process. They either have achieved compliance or are in the process of achieving

compliance.

With respect to all of these specific questions, I will ask staff to

note the specific areas raised by the Leader of the Opposition and give him a full and

complete report, and through him and the House the people of the Province a complete

report in the days ahead.

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

Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There has been, to my knowledge and also in some recent reports within

the media some time ago, about efforts of the Health Care Corporation to address the Y2K

problem. Can the Premier tell us when preparations for this conversion began, where they

are now, whether any corrected systems have been tested, and whether they will be ready?

Is there a backup plan in case key health care systems face serious challenge or even

possible failure?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: I can tell the Leader of the Opposition that in our

Province the Newfoundland and Labrador Health and Community Services Association have

established a provincial Year 2000 Committee and they have assigned a full time project

coordinator to that Committee to work with all of the health care groups. Of course, that

measure will support ongoing efforts in the health care boards to determine the extent of

the impact on respective organizations. This group, in our Province, is also working with

the national health year 2000 secretariat that has been established to coordinate sharing

of information between health care institutions all across the country.

Now, Mr. Speaker, with respect to the Leader of the Opposition's

request that I update him on what stage of preparation are they at, I would have to beg

the indulgence of the Leader of the Opposition to check, for the Leader of the Opposition,

with the health care boards and to table that information in an appropriate time.

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

Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A final question. It is obvious that the systems within the health care

system involve not only network computers but stand alone systems that include computer

chips, for example. These systems are everywhere, especially in the health care system. I

guess the Premier, when he updates us further, can update in terms of what the magnitude

of our exposure is to this problem and what government intends to do about it.

The question is this: Has government made a commitment, in terms of

what the financial consequences are in dealing with this problem and the serious

challenges that it faces in particular to the health care system, that the financial

resources that are required will be put in place to address it so that essential health

care services will continue to be delivered as they are now or if not, in a better

fashion?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I want to give an assurance to the

Leader of the Opposition that government has every intention that there will be no

interruption in the provision of health care services in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador. I think we all recognize in this House that Y2K problem or not - and it does

present a real challenge. The Leader of the Opposition is right to ask the question. It is

a large challenge for this Province, its agencies and a large problem countrywide. I do

not think anybody would be foolish to stand and say that they are 100 per cent certain of

full compliance, until we find out just how much of our computer based technology is

affected by the problem. I, for one, will be at home. I will not be flying at 30,000 feet

on January 1. No offense to the airline companies, but I will just take a day off that

day.

Mr. Speaker, the reality is it is a large challenge. A large number of

people are working diligently to solve it. There is no question that in critical areas

like health care we will take all efforts and make whatever expenditures are necessary to

ensure that we are Y2K compliant.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are for the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs. Will the minister confirm that after announcing in June the provincial home

repair program he produced a memo in September announcing that homes in desperate need of

repair would be placed at the head of a six-year RRAP program waiting list? Will he

confirm and explain why this memo was only sent to MHAs in his own Liberal caucus? Were

the constituents of the other twenty-five per cent of districts in the Province not

eligible to be placed at the top of this list even if their homes were in urgent need of

repair?

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

Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, as you can remember, first of all I made

a statement in the House pertaining to a new RRAP program or provincial housing program,

and then subsequent to that went outside and held a press conference. There is not one

single person in this House who did not know about that new RRAP program and what it

entailed. In fact, if you go back through Hansard and see what I tabled that day when I

made the statement it would include all the things that my hon. colleague has suggested

that I provided to this side and never to them.

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

Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister that is bad enough to keep a memo announcing a

significant policy change from a quarter of the MHAs in the Province, denying their

constituents that new information. Will the minister also explain why a quarter of the

projects approved on the Avalon region this year were approved in is own district? Will he

confirm that many of the projects approved in his district did not meet the criteria for

jumping to the top of the list, but that he directed his officials to approve these

projects anyway?

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

Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, from the Avalon regional office, which

takes in all the Avalon Peninsula and part of the Burin Peninsula, there were 2,200

applications made for the whole of the Avalon Peninsula. I say this to my hon. colleague

here and you, Mr. Speaker, because the Carbonear office represents you has well, that

1,200 of the 2,200 came from the Carbonear office. That indicated to me, and indicated to

the people who for this Government and for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, that there

is a more serious need for housing repair in the Carbonear office then there would be in

the St. John's office. Therefore, for the past fifteen to twenty years that the RRAP has

been ongoing more houses have been done from the Carbonear office on a percentage basis

than the St. John's office. It is logical, when you sit and you think about that for a few

minutes. That would explain itself to you.

Let me say about moving and doing something he mentioned about

special... I have a list here, a memo from the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing I

received this morning, with over forty applicants that were inspected by Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing. They are not all from my district, by the way. They are from a number of

districts around the Province, one including the member's own district. Out of this list -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. REID: Yes, out of this list only four were actually done. I

say quite honestly to the hon. member what he is getting at here is something he heard

from a media person. He did not bring this up. A media person went to him on Friday

morning and asked him a question. In answer to that question he had, I suppose, to make a

few comments. The bottom line here is he does not really know what he is talking about.

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate you today, just you. Because even

though I as the member only got twenty-two, you managed to pull thirty-two out of it, and

I congratulate you for doing a good job as a member (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Will the minister also confirm that he and his political staff sat down

and manipulated a province-wide program to ensure his own constituents would be placed

ahead of others who were assessed as being in a far more desperate need of home repair?

Can he explain to this House and to the public of the Province why he abused his power as

minister to oversee a gross misappropriation of taxpayers' money for his own political

gains?

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

Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, if there is anyone sitting on this side

of the House that needs more congratulations and criticism it is me. Each member of this

House, both on this side and that side, and quite my hon. colleague who sits to my right

condemns me for doing as much for my hon. colleagues across the way as I do for my hon.

colleagues here.

Mr. Speaker, let me give some you some information. I only need a

minute or so do it. The member made references to exceptions. Yes, I made exceptions. I

made two exceptions for the hon. Member for Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. A. REID: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South just

admitted I made an exception for him. The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis, I made an

exception for him. I made an exception, Mr. Speaker, for the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition. Can I for the record - to prove what I am doing in regards to the Housing

Corporation and the Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs of being fair - can I

just read this quick statement to you? It says: I am writing this letter today, as per our

conversation regarding -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. REID: - an eighty-year-old constituent.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the minister to conclude his answer quickly.

MR. A. REID: It goes on: Recently her house insurance was cancelled

because of bad wiring and a bad chimney. Due to the lack of heat, Mrs. X had to leave her

residence. She has applied to the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing for help.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the minster to finish his answer.

MR. A. REID: May I have leave?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer quickly.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, the cost of repairs to this particular

house is $14,500 and this is the note that I wrote on the top of it. It is to Mary

Marshall, who is the head of the housing (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. REID: `If you can accommodate Mr. Byrne, please do.' This

came in on Friday, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to take his seat.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the

Premier and they have to do with the issue of public service pensions.

Until the Wells' Administration changed its policy in 1989, when public

servants got wage increases, these increases were extended to Members of the House of

Assembly and to public service pensioners. This year, public servants got their increase;

this was extended to Members of the House of Assembly; but, Mr. Premier, that is where it

stopped. I say, two out of three is not good enough. Many people were left out. I would

ask the Premier: Will this government use its power to rectify this most inequitable state

of affairs?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite has put this very

question to the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board who is not in the House today. The

Minister of Finance and Treasury Board has made clear that if the public service unions

wish to put this question on the table for the process of collective bargaining, it is an

issue that he is open to.

The point that the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board has made - I

think very eloquently - is that to provide an increase, one has to identify the dollars to

pay for it. I stand to be corrected but I believe every 1 per cent increase is costing $20

million. To give an increase over the next number of years, equivalent to what was

negotiated for the public service, one would have to assume you are looking at $140

million to pay for a 7 per cent increase. Given that the member opposite has just put the

position that there ought to be an identical treatment of public servants, given that it

costs $20 million per 1 per cent, the member opposite needs to identify where the $140

million is coming from.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's

East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The 1997 Public Service Pension Plan Annual Report shows that almost

$96 million was paid to pensioners that year. I have some difficulty, Mr. Premier, and I

would ask you to show me where 1 per cent of that amount comes anywhere near the -

actually $22 million, I believe, was the figure used by the Minister of Finance and

Treasury Board, but according to your figures some $20 million.

Mr. Premier, you are reported - and in fact many political commentators

indicate that the Premier can be flexible. He can be, from time to time, a very flexible

man. We have seen it. We saw it a few months ago on the issue of the National Child Tax

Benefit, where a decision was reversed and many children in this Province received benefit

therefrom. I would ask the Premier to exercise similar flexibility and at least entertain

the concept, the idea, of welcoming not only, Mr. Premier, union representatives, but

representatives of the Public Service Pensioners' Association, to sit down with you with a

view to the possibility of reviewing what is, for thousands of our public service

pensioners of this Province, a very difficult situation. I would ask you to exercise some

of that flexibility which you have shown in the past to help reflect the concern and the

needs of so many of our senior public service pensioners.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the member across the way knows that

there is as much concern on this side of the House for the plight of those who live in

poverty, or near poverty levels, as on that side of the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: The member also knows that governing and government

is about making choices. I have no hesitation, none whatsoever, in saying that were the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador in a position today with a surplus today, that one

of the areas to which that surplus would be committed would be a discretionary decision by

the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to provide a pension increase for those who

have retired with public service pensions. That is an easy statement for me to make.

The harder statement for me to make, the more unpleasant one, is to

remind the House that if you talk about an increase of 7 per cent, equivalent to what

public servants, including MHAs, have received, based on the analysis by the Department of

Finance, we need in excess of $100 million to afford that.

Members of the Opposition began this particular session of the House a

few weeks ago by making the argument that the Province was drifting toward, I think, to

quote them accurately, $150 million deficit. That is what the Opposition across the way

were saying. The Minister of Finance pointed out that was wrong, that while we will have a

larger deficit than we had planned, as do most other jurisdictions, our situation is

within control.

We now have a request today, one that I would love to be able to say

yes to, to take an action which would cause a dramatic increase on an annualized basis, as

the full 7 per cent kicked in, over $100 million, to have that commitment made today by me

in the name of being flexible. Mr. Speaker, I am flexible, I am a Liberal, I want to reach

out and help those most in need, but I won't make them a promise I know I cannot keep, and

I will not cry the tears of the crocodile when I know the truth is what they need, not

just the sound of my compassion but my capacity to respond.

The only capacity we, as government, have to respond is to look at

something more generally applicable to all seniors in the Province, be they public service

pensioners or not, or look at something that we can negotiate at the table because we can

pay for at the negotiating table.

The member knows that. I know he is concerned about this. He knows that

I am concerned about this, but he also knows that the speech he gives and the request he

makes is not funded, not on this side of the House and not on his side of the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for

the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women.

Friday here we joined the Federal and Provincial Ministers Responsible

for the Status of Women in a declaration of the commitment to end violence against women.

Today I would particularly like to deal with women who leave abusive situations and find

themselves at Kirby House. They have to wait two weeks before they get their comfort

allowance. Now, we know that many of the women arrive there with just the shirts on their

backs. They have absolutely no money, and they are left for two weeks without money.

I understand that the administration at Kirby House have written in the

past couple of months two or three times about this problem, with no response. The

allowance is a mere $25 a week. It is cost negligible. We know that many women return to

abusive spouses out of fear or mistrust.

Does the minister feel that we are now creating another reason for them

to return to abusive situations?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and

Employment.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, there is very close communication between

my department and the Department of Health and Community Services around the issue of the

transition homes, and around being able to provide timely service to women who are in

crisis and are being provided with assistance through these transition homes.

Now, the specific issue with respect to the comfort allowance is one

which, of course, crosses over both departments because of the nature of the services

being provided at the transition homes themselves. It is one that both departments are

looking at in terms of trying to increase its efficiency. During the time that the women

who are at the transition homes are staying there, and of course in crisis, I would have

to say that every effort is being made by both the staff at the transition homes, the

staff of my department and the staff of Health and Community Services, to try and ensure

that they receive the best possible service and assistance that they require at that time.

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Labour.

MR. LANGDON: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask

leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act Respecting The Management Of Waste

Material."

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask

leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Quarry Materials Act."

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I always defer to the elder

brother.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to

introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Pippy Park Commission Act".

(Bill No. 46)

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask

leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Provincial Court Act,

1991."

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will no tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill

entitled, "An Act To Amend The Private Training Institutions Act."

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask

leave to introduce the following bills:

A bill, "An Act To Amend the St. John's Assessment Act".

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act."

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that I will on

tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following motion:

WHEREAS the provincial government retired pensioners have sought an

increase in their pensions because increases in the cost of living have diminished their

value and many pensioners live in dire financial circumstances; and

WHEREAS the provincial government had an established practice of

granting a pension increase to coincide with or follow public sector pay raises, thereby

creating a reasonable expectation that this would continue to be a feature of their

pension entitlement; and

WHEREAS this practice was discontinued after 1989, thereby hurting all

pensioners but especially those on low fixed incomes; and

WHEREAS a pay raise has recently been negotiated for public sector

workers through their bargaining representatives passed on to non-bargaining unit

personnel of government; and

WHEREAS the House of Assembly has just passed legislation that has not

yet been given Royal Assent, authorizing a similar pay increase for Members of the House

of Assembly while government had not acted on the pensioners' reasonable request for

consideration;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly urge the government

to delay the implementation of any pay increase for Members of the House of Assembly until

it has addressed the reasonable demands of the pensioners for a pension increase,

particularly those long-time retirees whose pensions are grossly inadequate;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that government be urged to immediately sit down

with representatives of the retirees to negotiate an increase in retirement pensions.

MR. A. REID: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will rule on it

after you hear it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, on a point

of order.

MR. A. REID: I have to apologize to the Chair. I said earlier that

the Chair was the one who had the most approved. I just had a note passed to me. The

Member for Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair is the highliner right now in the Province in

regards to RRAP programs. She has exceeded the thirty-five as of today, and still

climbing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Petitions

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a further petition

from the people of Labrador West:

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

legislative session convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of Labrador City;

WHEREAS the residents of Labrador City condemn the provincial

government in supporting the Iron Ore Company of Canada's decision to process Labrador

resources in Sept-Iles, Quebec;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador to reverse this decision immediately and support a policy of secondary processing

within the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador;

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I have spoken to this petition on a

number of occasions, and today is no different. The stand that I take on this petition is

the stand that I take with the resources of Newfoundland and Labrador. Probably since time

began, since Newfoundland has been inhibited by people, we have seen our resources go for

the benefit of people and countries elsewhere.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have seen our resources go for the benefit of people in other

countries and other provinces of Canada, and many, many times not to the benefit of the

people of this Province. We have seen the resources of Churchill Falls go to the benefit

of Quebec. We have seen the resources of our fisheries go to the benefit of many

countries, including Canada, when not so much to the benefit of the people of this

Province. We have seen the benefits of our iron ore resources, of our other mining

resources, of our forestry resources, of our oil resources - it looks as though now

perhaps our water resources.

What we as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have to do is stand up and

take a strong position that our resources are going to give benefit to the people of this

Province. We can start with the pellet plant in Labrador West. We can start with the

pellet plant in Labrador City.

The people of Labrador City have worked for the Iron Ore Company of

Canada for many years. The people of Labrador City have seen the Iron Ore Company of

Canada take hundreds of millions of dollars in profits from our resource, and still based

on a royalty regime for the iron ore resources in Labrador that is perhaps meagre at best.

The Premier has taken a stand on Voisey's Bay, saying that the smelter

must be placed within this Province; and if there is no smelter, there is no mine, there

is no mill, the resources will stay in the ground. Yet, Inco say that the smelter is not a

viable project on its own.

While we will all admit that the overall project is viable when you

include the mine, the mill, and the resources from Voisey's Bay, the same stands true for

the Iron Ore Company of Canada. While the pellet plant may not be as profitable if put in

Labrador as it would be in Sept-Iles, Quebec, while the Iron Ore Company of Canada say

that it would not be as profitable and maybe not even profitable put in Labrador, the

overall project, the mine, the resource, and the pellet plant placed in Labrador would be

a viable project.

That is exactly the stand taken by this government, taken by this

Premier: that if the overall project for Voisey's Bay is profitable, the smelter stays in

this Province or they are not getting our resource.

There is absolutely no difference in nickel, copper and cobalt from

Voisey's Bay as there is in the Iron Ore Company of Canada's interest in iron ore. If the

overall project is viable, that pellet plant should stay within this Province, give full

and maximum benefits to the people of this Province, the people who own the resource. It

is time we stand firm and take a solid position and say that our resources -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. T. OSBORNE: - give full benefit to the people of our Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to support the petition put forward by my colleague, the

Member for St. John's South. The Member for St. John's South has been presenting petitions

on this matter for some days now. He is basically asking the provincial government if they

would reconsider their decisions relative to the pellet plant operations in Labrador City

and, of course, in Sept-Iles, Quebec.

I remind the House of Assembly that a few weeks ago we had visitors to

this House from Labrador City. A delegation representing the Town of Labrador City and the

Town of Wabush, the Combined Council of Labrador were here as well, with the United

Steelworkers of America Local 5795 representatives, Newfoundland and Labrador Federation

of Municipalities representatives, the Federation of Labour and Labrador West Chamber of

Commerce. They were all present here in the people's House to address the issue that this

petition raised to the government, to be addressed by all the members of the House.

We know that last year the Minister of Mines and Energy made some

commitments to the people of Labrador West, that they would be able to make some changes

on the energy side, the power side, to make sure that jobs would stay in Labrador West and

that they wouldn't be having a situation develop whereby their ore would be shipped down

to Sept-Iles, Quebec, and the jobs that would be developed in Sept-Iles, Quebec, would be

at the expense, either directly or indirectly, of the employees in Labrador City and

Wabush. Mr. Speaker, the leaders that were here that day, community leaders, were saying

to the government: Would you please do something about the situation and would you hear

our petition?

Mr. Speaker, we on this side at that time made a commitment. The

commitment was that we would continue to bring that position forward to this Legislature;

we would continue to remind the government side of the commitments made to the people of

Labrador West last year. When we listened to the private member's resolution put forward

by the Member for Labrador West, we on this side of the House found that the resolution

called upon the government to support the people of Labrador West to the extent that they

could. Mr. Speaker, the people of Labrador West believe that they have not been treated

fairly.

Mr. Speaker, I listened to some news reports just a few days ago, over

the weekend in fact, whereby the Mayor of Labrador City is still not satisfied that all

has been done that could be done to support his community in this time of crisis.

Mr. Speaker, we all know what is happening to the Province's

out-migration, and we hear the Mayor of Labrador City saying that his population base is

going to be detrimentally affected by the decision that this government has permitted to

be made.

Mr. Speaker, we have tried to put forward alternate proposals that have

not been accepted by the government. The members on this side have had extensive

discussions. We would ask the government again: Is it possible that we could do something

about this particular situation? The Mayor of Labrador City is leading the charge. He is

trying to do the best he can to make sure that his voice gets heard in this particular

Legislature.

Mr. Speaker, we on this side will continue to bring forward these

petitions and we believe the government should be doing a little more to help the people

of Labrador West in this time of crisis, to make sure that the jobs that should be in

Labrador West continue to be there, and that we do not see our resources going out of this

Province to create jobs and employment opportunities anywhere else, and that includes

Sept-Iles, Quebec.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. DECKER: Order 16, Mr. Speaker, Bill No. 37.

MR. SPEAKER: Bill No. 37, "An Act Respecting Child, Youth And

Family Services".

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to pass a few

comments, say a few words, on Bill 37,

An Act Respecting Child, Youth And Family Services.

Mr. Speaker, I have had a chance to review this bill and read it, and

there are certainly a lot of good things in this bill, a lot of good things that will

bring us a long way from where we are today to where we want to go.

Mr. Speaker, it stops a little bit short, I think, of what we would

like to see. We on this side of the House have been advocating for a child advocate. That

is the concern that we have been putting forward. We have continued to say here on this

side of the House that anything less than a provincial child advocate would fall far short

of what is really needed today in order to pay attention to the problems that we are

experiencing in this Province today as they relate to students and children.

One other thing that we continue to say on this side of the House is

that we should look at having social workers in our schools. If we believe in protecting

the rights of children, then we should reach out and try to protect those rights and try

to provide that protection at the earliest possible time. What better place to reach out

and touch that child or attend to the need than right in the classrooms of our Province.

Today in many rural Newfoundland communities - especially, we see

school counsellors, education counsellors, in our school. Far too often those counsellors

are far too busy to be able to attend to the social needs of the children in taxing their

skills, I suppose, or their time, to the limit. It is not uncommon for one of those of

people to have to attend to many different schools and for the most

part concentrate on

the efforts of counselling towards a vocation rather than helping the social needs of our

children.

Back in 1994, a committee was struck here in this House, a non-partisan

committee that was represented by both sides of the House, to travel this Province. In

fact, I believe they travelled the country and received in excess of 200 submissions from

interested people who came forward and brought forward concerns that they saw in the

community, in the school, and in society today. They brought forward suggestions and

opinions of what should be done and what should be implemented and what should be brought

into legislation right here in this House in order that the government of the day, in the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, would be able to or should pay special attention to

the problems that we are experiencing today with some of our troubled youth.

I suppose it is a reflection of our economy. I think it is a proven

fact - it is a given fact - that as our economy weakens, and as work opportunities become

much, much less, then those problems are filtered on down the line and for the most part

go right to the youngest in our society, the children, the sons and daughters of the

people affected.

It was only the other day - I think World Food Day was the name they

had associated with the special day - I turned on the radio and heard somebody talking

about the problems that we are experiencing in the world today, as it relates to our

troubled society and our young people. It did some comparisons. One of the statistics that

they put forward was that in excess of 1.3 billion people today live on less than $1 a

day. In excess of 1.3 billion live on less than $1 day.

It talked about the consumption of meat and it made a comparison of: A

Canadian or a North American consumes something like 260 pounds of meat in one year,

compared to a person living in Bangladesh who consumes less than six pounds of meat in one

year. That is a vast difference. It talked about the amount of money that the Europeans

spend on ice cream. It went on to say that in excess of $11 billion is spent on an annual

basis in Europe on ice cream, an amount of money that would provide the world, if you

would, with a good water and sewer system. The needs in the world today that fall short of

a good water and sewer system could be financed by less money than the Europeans spend in

one year on ice cream. In excess of 750,000 Canadians go to the food banks each month; in

excess of 750,000. That is 250,000 more people than live here in the Province of

Newfoundland.

We talk about our own children, right here in this Province. We are not

living in any pocket of heaven when we are living in Newfoundland and Labrador, I can tell

you, when you hear of in excess of one-quarter of the children in Newfoundland and

Labrador today going to school hungry. I think it is time that we take a look at what is

happening. It is time we take a look at what is happening in our society, and if we are

really reaching out and filling the need and touching the people we should be touching and

we should be helping.

The child interest committee travelled across the Province and did up

their report. It was a substantial report, actually, started in 1994 and presented in the

House of Assembly in 1996. That is two years ago now. Up until now that report has been

allowed to sit on the minister's shelf and gather dust. There has been absolutely nothing

done in order to bring forward the suggestions and concerns that have been echoed by the

Select Committee on Children's Interest. There has been absolutely nothing been brought

forward.

The minister stands here and talks about Bill 37 as being a bill that

she holds up and says is a wonderful bill that will go a long way to attending to the

needs of the children in our society today. She is probably right, it will. It will

certainly be a beginning. When you hear the minister talk about the child welfare bill

that is presently in existence, that was brought into a House of Assembly in Newfoundland

back in 1944, that is fifty-four years ago. I suggest there are very few people in this

House who were even born at that particular time. In excess of fifty-four years ago, and

we have done absolutely nothing in order to attend to the problems that have been existent

in this Province today.

You talk to the school teachers and some of the social workers, and

they will tell you the need is there today like never before. There is no point in

bringing forward a piece of legislation, there is no point in us getting up in the House

of Assembly and saying we are concerned, paying lip service to the problem, unless we are

going to make a commitment to do something about that particular problem.

I think the first commitment we should make is to make sure we put the

right people in the right places in order to attend to the problems we have today. If we

are going to get involved in solving problems then we have to put our money where our

mouth is. It is not good enough for the Premier or the minister or anybody else to stand

in his place and always say: We cannot attend to it because we do not have the money to

respond to it.

If we are going to respond to the problems in social welfare today, the

first thing the Premier will say or the minister will say is: In order for us to get the

money, would you support the closure of hospital beds, would you support a hike in taxes?

What is always thrown back at you is: If we are going to do this, then we must take

something else away from you.

That is not good enough, I say to the members opposite. We have to look

at innovative ways and we should all pull together and try to come up with some resolution

in order to help those who need to be helped most of all. It is certainly discouraging.

You do not realize it until you go to the schools. That is one place you see it

first-hand.

I remember just a few short months ago I went into a school in my

district. It was Canada Day, that is when it was. I was invited into the school to take

part in a little exercise the Grade VII class had planned where people were issued

citizenship certificates, and people talked about how proud they were to be a Canadian and

what being a Canadian meant to them.

When I went into the staff office before we had our little meeting, I

saw two refrigerators. One of the schoolteachers happened to open the door and I saw it

packed with those little packs of juices and little packs of UHT milk. I had to enquire as

to why it was there. I was completely immune to the fact that those kinds of things were

kept in schools in order to be given to children who came to school hungry. I was immune

to it until that time. The conversation went on that this was milk, juices and snacks that

were brought from donations that people would make to the school in order to provide food

to the children who came to school hungry, who came to school without breakfast, who came

to school without lunch. They would pack it and the child would be given the lunch in a

little brown paper bag in a way that was done very discretely so that he would not be

singled out from other people.

Now up until that time it never really struck me that this was

happening right in my own district, right in the communities that we know so well. We see

people getting on the bus and going to school in the morning, and we take it for granted

they have had their breakfast, they have been well clothed and they are being looked

after. That is not happening. It is not happening in our own districts, it is not

happening in the Province, and it is certainly not happening in many other rural areas.

All we have to do is look at some of the stories that we see happening. I will not single

out any area of the Province . The stories I am referring to are certainly known by

everybody here if they watch television at all.

We have to reach out to help those people. We have to reach out and

provide the help and the funding that is needed in order to address the problem. It is not

going to go away. It can only get worse. Removing somebody from their families or from

their community or putting them in another school is not the answer to the problems we

have. Taking them and putting them in an institution is not an answer to the problem. Many

times you take young people and put them in an institution that was put in place to

penalize people and to bring about reform. Usually that puts out a person, at the end of

the day, who is much more hardened, the person you will continually find frequenting your

prisons and causing you the problems that afflict everyday society.

This particular bill is a good bill. It stops short of what we feel

should be done. It stops short of a child advocate, which I think is badly needed in this

Province, somebody who would operate at arm's-length from the government of the day,

operate at arm's-length from the House of Assembly.

Some of the goods things that are in it is that there is going to be a

board or a committee put in place that will be responsible and answerable, I suppose, to

the minister and her department. It is another situation where those people will be

appointed. I don't know how you could do much less than appoint somebody in this

particular area. At least the minister had the foresight to include somebody who has

accessed child welfare. From my understanding, it is an arm's-length advisory committee

comprised of individuals who have an interest in children's issues, including a lawyer and

two persons who have received child welfare services.

That is important. Many times we see people put in place because they

have done somebody a favour or they are of some political stripe, or because we feel they

will bring back a report that we want brought back, and somebody that the minister or the

department can control. I hope that is not the case with this particular board or

committee. It is good to see the minister at least having the foresight to be able to come

out and say that if we are going to receive a report that is going to reflect the needs of

children and reflect the needs of people, then we must have two people on that particular

board who have received child welfare services.

It also talks about dispute resolution, something that if there is a

problem it can be solved before you have to go through the procedure of going to court and

have a situation where, before you get an answer or a resolution to your problem, you are

going to see it dragging through the courts, and the timely and costly process that that

will certainly entail. A dispute resolution mechanism is certainly very important.

I do not know if there have been some comparisons done, comparing

unemployment levels with problems in social programs. There certainly must be. I would

think there is a direct comparison there. I would think that as your economic problems and

your unemployment problems become greater, then I would think social problems become

greater as well.

There is another reason that I firmly believe has probably brought on

some social problems as well. It is brought about through necessity, but I think it is a

problem that has allowed our social problems, especially in our youth, to increase. That

is where today it is very common and it is a necessity to have both parents in the

household working. It is a necessity. Unfortunately, when you have two people in the

household working there is usually a need for that to happen. Usually the need is

shortchanged by the fact that in allowing that to happen we have not reached out and

filled the void at the bottom of the pole by allowing a daycare program, allowing people

that find themselves working at meaningful jobs, but not jobs that pay well, a situation

where they cannot afford to pay for a baby sitter. They cannot afford to have somebody

come in. Or if they do, then it is only for the least amount of time that can be allowed

in order for them to be able to afford that particular luxury, if you would, or that need.

Far too often, when you get two people in the same household working,

making a small amount of money, you find children left by themselves and fending for

themselves at a very early age. Because you and I know that the children of today are

probably a whole lot smarter than we were when we were growing up, but their basic needs

are certainly not a whole lot different, Mr. Speaker.

At the time when we were growing up you would always find somebody in

the home. I do not ever remember coming home from school and not finding somebody in my

house when I was growing up. I do not ever remember coming home from school and finding

the door locked, or going into an empty house. It was always a situation that when you

came home one of your parents were there waiting for you. One or the other. You had to do

your family chores or you were chastised for something you should have done. It was a

situation that you were receiving guidance on almost on an hourly basis, or minute by

minute while you were home. You were always under direct supervision.

Times have changed. I do not even know if we would want to go back to

some of things you had to do in order to survive. Many of the things you had to do then

are not accepted today. They are not acceptable. Because of that, because people reached

out and wanted to take on new challenges and wanted to acquire more, it finally became a

necessity that two people - in order to survive and in order to attend to the needs and

pay the bills - had to find jobs. I think that is where a lot of our problems have started

from.

If we could provide funding at the lower end of the totem pole, to

provide funding for daycare, we could provide funding or have the parents who are working

being able to make enough money in order to pay for a baby sitter or somebody responsible

to be in the home all the while the children are there. I am not talking about two- and

three-year-olds. I am talking about twelve-year-olds, ten-year-olds, nine-year-olds. If we

could provide that kind of funding then I would think it would go a long way to addressing

some of the needs of our young people today.

I don't know what the workload is for social workers in this Province.

I know their talents, their efforts and their time are taxed to the limit. I know that it

has almost gotten to a point now with the Department of Social Services that the financial

assistance officers probably carry on a greater amount of work than the social workers can

attend to. Because they are the people who write the cheques and supply the money for the

immediate need. I am sure in talking with people, and knowing the small amount I know

about child welfare, that there is certainly still a great need there to supply and to

provide more child welfare, child social workers, than we presently employ today.

I fear that all we are doing, for the most part, is attending to the

need as it exists and not getting into preventative maintenance, if you would, not trying

to reach out and tend to the problem and solve the problem before it happens. I don't know

even how we compare with other provinces. I don't know how we compare with other provinces

with the workload that is put forward.

This piece of legislation is certainly a step in the right direction.

It says in the bill, as well, that the reports from the committee that the minister will

appoint will come back here to the House of Assembly. They will be presented to the House

of Assembly. So it will not be a situation, hopefully, like other reports that have been

brought here and reported to a department or to a minister, where the minister accepts the

report and does not make it known, keeps it within the protection of her own department

and says: It is not the right thing to do to make it public. Or else: It is not something

we are prepared to do at this time. Or: We are studying it. Or: It has not been passed by

Cabinet. I understand it is going to come back to the House of Assembly and be scrutinized

by members on both sides of the Legislature.

While it is a step in the right direction, it falls short of what we

would like to see happening. We will continue to put forward our need, and we will

continue to put forward the needs of the people who are expressing the desire to us to see

an advocate. We think that is something that should be there. The child advocate is put

forward by six other provinces in this country, and from what I understand it is working

well. It is somebody who can operate independently of the minister, independently of the

House, to go out and work as a protector, if you would, an ombudsman.

We did away with the ombudsman. This government has seen fit to do away

with the ombudsman as well. I suppose it would work like an ombudsman, and it would almost

be like the Auditor General. It would be a watchdog to go out there and make sure we

protect the most vulnerable people in our society today. They are our future. They are the

people who will someday sit in this House of Assembly. I fear for the most part a lot of

them, if we do not provide the protection, will go by the wayside and will cause us grave

problems and great grief in trying to deal with them in another way.

There is nothing more discouraging than to go out and visit the

Whitbourne youth centre, I say to the minister opposite. Go out and see the young people

who are presently in that particular institution. I have gone there as well. I have gone

to the Whitbourne youth home, the Newfoundland and Labrador Youth Centre. I have toured

the place and talked to some of the residents there. It is certainly an eye-opener to go

there and talk to some of those young people, find out why they are there, talk to them

about how many times they have been back there, where they are from, and what their

parents do. You can sit there and I will tell you, when you come away you certainly have a

whole new feeling for the problems that are existent there.

I do not think that is the answer. I do not think taking people,

putting them behind chain-link fences and putting them behind cameras to have them watched

on a twenty-four hour basis, is the answer to solving the problems in our youth care

today. We have to be much more progressive, if you would, than that. We have to attend to

the needs of those young people at a much sooner stage.

The place to reach out and do that is in the schools. I fear that until

government takes the approach of putting social workers in schools, especially in troubled

areas, it is not going to change. I will repeat what I said earlier, that where you find

your highest unemployment levels, where you find your least amount of opportunities, that

is where you find your troubled spots. The problems of the parents, the problems of the

guardians, are taken back to the school and reflected in the child.

Far too often that goes unnoticed, it goes unattended. What you allow

at the end is a troubled youth, and we wonder or should ask ourselves who was responsible.

Because they are certainly not responsible for where they find themselves. They are a

product of society, I suppose, if you would. This act, while attending to some of that

need, certainly will not fill the whole void that is left behind.

I suppose we were brought to an understanding of what can happen in

society, and what can happen with youth, through the Mount Cashel shenanigans, the Mount

Cashel affair. Up until that time I think a lot of us were blind towards what was really

happening out there in society. We thought that because we lived in Newfoundland we were

living in this pocket of heaven where nothing could go wrong. I can assure you that what

is happening in the Torontos, the New Yorks and Calgarys of the world is happening in the

Bonavistas, the Clarenvilles, the Hatchet Coves and every other place in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador. We can see that more and more everyday, that we are not

protected from the demons of society because we live in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

The need is there just as well as it is in St. John's or in any of the

other larger places. Until we attend to that need, then we are always going to have those

problems. We are always going to be faced with grief and with a situation that when

something happens we should look at ourselves in the mirror and say that we could have

done more. We could have done more because we should have reacted. We should have acted

instead of reacting. We should have acted sooner and it should have been done right in the

classrooms of this Province.

If government in their wisdom is going to put money into child

protection, or if government in their wisdom is going to really attend to this problem, I

suggest that where they first set their sights is on the schools of the Province, and

fulfil the need at that particular level. Then I think the next higher levels, in all

likelihood, will look after themselves.

With that I will conclude - I think my time is up, anyway - my remarks

on Bill 37, and say through you that it is a beginning, it is something I think many

people will be able to take some comfort in. At least after fifty-four years we have

identified and we have admitted that we have a problem and we have brought it right here

to the people's House in order to be addressed.

While most of us here in this House are younger than fifty-four years

old - some of the people in the front benches there, Mr. Speaker, I am sure are more than

fifty-four years. In fact, some of the people have probably around much longer than that,

but even those people here, I am sure, who cannot remember anything related to the act

that was brought here about fifty-four years ago -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: It is a beginning. I congratulate the minister for

making that beginning. It falls short to where it should be, but we will support this

particular bill. We may bring about some changes, but it is a beginning and I thank the

minister for that.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to have the opportunity just to engage for a few minutes

in the debate on this particular piece of legislation. I feel obligated to do so because I

had the occasion some time ago to work as part of a select committee of this House which

brought forward a number of recommendations. The impact of these recommendations and the

influence of our deliberations and the number of people we heard from throughout the

Province, I feel are reflected in the piece of legislation which is currently before this

House.

Mr. Speaker, in June of 1996, this document was produced and was a

comprehensive piece of work. It came about after fifteen months of work by the committee

of this House that travelled extensively throughout the Province, received some 215

briefs, and in all heard from some 600 people.

In examining this piece of legislation, I could not help but reflect

back on many of the hearings which we participated in, in various corners of this

Province, and reflect back on the many stories, horror stories in some cases, that we

heard from people, from parents and young people themselves, of their experiences as a

result of the lack of protection that was being provided by the legislation which existed

at that time, or even today, in this Province.

When I had the privilege to present the Report of the Select Committee

on Children's Interests in the House in 1996, I stated in my remarks in presenting the

report that I felt that certainly we, as a committee, felt genuinely that all of the

members of this hon. House were determined, as legislators for this Province, in our

capacity as representatives of people of this Province and as the people at this present

time in power to make laws for this Province, that we were in fact, all of us, determined

we would make a difference.

Mr. Speaker, I think this piece of legislation, as we have been hearing

for the last number of days from the various hon. members who have participated in the

debate, is a progressive piece of legislation. There is no question about that. Not only

is it being recognized as such by members of this hon. House, but indeed by members of the

legal community, and indeed by legislators from outside of this Province who are looking

at this piece of legislations and are seeing it for what it is: a progressive piece of

legislation and a fundamental change in what has been, up until this point in time, the

practice in this Province, and certainly I think can, in many ways, be seen as a

trailblazer or a trendsetter for the rest of this country.

This piece of legislation is truly child-centred. In referring to the

legislation itself, in

Part II,

section 7, under Principles, "This Act shall be

interpreted and administered in accordance with the following principles...". The

very first principle identified and outlined there. "(

a) the overriding and paramount

consideration in any decision made under this Act shall be the best interests of the

child".

First and foremost this legislation is stating quite clearly that it is

in fact child-centred. This legislation has been developed to protect the rights of the

children in this Province and to try to ensure, as the hon. member opposite just mentioned

before me, that we do take steps necessary to protect this very important and valuable

resource of this Province, our young people, our children, our future, the people who will

be coming after us and the people who will be making a difference.

In subsection (b), "every child is entitled to be assured of

personal safety, health and well-being." Mr. Speaker, I can assure you and the hon.

members of this House that when we travelled this Province and heard presentations in

various areas of the Province this was certainly not the reality being experienced by many

of our young people. This was not the reality of many of the children. Far too often we

found cases of abuse that were nothing short of horrendous. It was really difficult at

times to sit and listen to someone relate to the committee their experience and the fact

that they felt that nowhere within the system was there protection being provided for

them. They felt that they were victims, first of all, as a result of the abuse that was

inflicted upon them, and then they very often found themselves further victimized by the

very system that was designed to protect them.

Mr. Speaker, in subsection (

c) of

section 7, "the family is the

basic unit of society responsible for the safety, health and well-being of the

child." What this legislation does is clearly identify and lay out the importance of

the family unit. Mr. Speaker, one of the things that we have to be aware of is that the

family unit - very often when we hear people speak of the family unit we think in terms of

the traditional family unit, mom and dad and the children, but we have to recognize that

in today's world the family unit very often takes on many different forms. Nonetheless,

regardless of the form that it does take on, the family unit is still very, very

important. The family unit is the basis of our society, and the family unit has a very

important responsibility in developing these young men and women into the mature adults

that we hope one day they will become, and the productive members of society that we hope

they will one day become.

Mr. Speaker, beyond that, what this legislation further does, in

subsection (d), it recognizes not only the importance of the family itself but also points

out the importance of the community generally. Because basically everyone, all of us

within the broader community, have a responsibility to support the family and try to

ensure that in fact the job of raising children is something that we all have to play a

role in. It is important to all of us, because the job that is done, whether we do a good

or bad job, reflects on all of us. For that reason it is important that the community,

generally, is being recognized.

In subsection (e), "prevention activities are integral to the

promotion of the safety, health and well-being of a child...". Here, Mr. Speaker, we

get to the crux of it, because as much as we want to believe and would like to envision,

all of us I am sure, a society in which all of our children and indeed all of our citizens

feel safe, healthy and happy, that is not the reality. So we must provide protection for

children who find themselves in a situation where they are being abused or their rights as

individuals are being neglected. We must provide that protection for them, to ensure that

they are provided with the basic necessities.

Mr. Speaker, prior to getting into politics, I worked for many years as

an educator, and as an educator I had occasion to see, many, many times, incidents of

outright abuse. When we hear of abuse, most of us think of the worst case scenarios. We

think of physical abuse and sexual abuse, but abuse comes in many forms. I saw, as a

school administrator, many cases where young children were not being afforded the

opportunity to get a basic education because the family and the parents were not taking

the necessary steps to ensure that these children were in regular attendance at school.

That sounds like a very simple thing but, if you look at it, it is very, very important

because with these young children, if they don't have the opportunity to get a basic

education, we know that their opportunities will be restricted, that their chances to

succeed in life later on will certainly be negatively impacted upon if we do not provide

them with that basic education which they so require.

It is also self-evident that this starts from the very beginning. I saw

over the years, as an administrator, the number of bright and talented boys and girls who,

when they went on, and later on in adolescence, ended up dropping out of school. All of us

sometimes hear the schools talking about the dropout problem. What we very often do not

recognize is that dropping out is a process. The actual act out of school has begun many,

many years in advance.

Under law in this Province right now, children are expected to remain

in school until they are age sixteen. Well, I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, and the members

of this House, and anyone who has been in the teaching profession, will know that very

often the die is cast when the child walks through the door. I used to find very, very

disbursing when teachers would say to me: A child arrived at school, in kindergarten -

they could say to me and very often, with real accuracy: This child will never graduate

from high school.

That is a real tragedy. It is the sort of thing, I think, that this

legislation is trying to - and we have heard that there are certain areas where we perhaps

should be going further. Personally, I am a strong advocate of early intervention of the

preschool programs, and had occasion on the West Coast of the Province, and in my own

district, in the district that I now have the privilege to represent, Port au Port, to

have worked actively in developing preschool programs. Now in that area of the Province we

have basically universal preschool, junior kindergarten, if you will, where children are

beginning school a year earlier and hopefully through that early intervention their

opportunities and their possibilities for success in later life are further enhanced.

Mr. Speaker, further under the Principles, subsection (f),

"kinships ties are integral to a child's self-development and growth, and if a

child's safety, health and well-being cannot be assured in the context of the family, the

extended family shall be encouraged to care for the child provided that a director can be

assured that the child's safety, health and well-being will not be at risk".

Mr. Speaker, again reflecting on my own personal experience, some of

the most moving experiences that I ever saw as a school administration were situations

where families were apprehended, were broken up, and where brothers and sisters were

parcelled out very often in different areas of the Province, sometimes as much as 300 and

400 miles apart. I often thought how difficult it must be, having had the privilege of

coming from a very close family, how difficult it must be as a small child not only be

taken out of your family, away from your mom and dad, but also to be separated from your

brothers and sisters and shipped off to live with strangers.

This is one of the things that our committee pushed strongly and really

recommended that we should take a hard look at: wherever possible, trying to keep the

children who do come into care, within the extended family, whether it is with aunts or

uncles, grandparents or whatever, because Mr. Speaker and members of this House would be

aware that under the previous legislation one of the very negative things was that if a

child went into care with a member of the family, if it were with an aunt or uncle or

whatever, then right away we would not provide or not be prepared to provide the same

level of support. So, in fact, the legislation as it presently exists discourages this

very sort of thing which by common sense I think is a given - that all of us would

recognize as being an important thing to do - trying to keep the child within the extended

family wherever possible. So that if, in fact, reconsolidation at some point in time is

possible then that transition will be much easier. But beyond that we all recognize - and

certainly in this Province more so than in many areas of this country and this world -

that the family and the extended family is recognized as being so very important.

Under subsection (g) "the cultural heritage of a child shall be

respected and connections with a child's cultural heritage shall be preserved". Mr.

Speaker, this certainly strikes a cord for me, because I have the privilege to represent

an area of the Province that is unique in many ways in the fact that it is the only

bilingual district on the Island portion of the Province. It is an area of the Province

where there is a large segment - a large number of my constituents, their heritage is a

French heritage going back many hundreds of years.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind hon. members that it is unparliamentary to sit with their back

to the Speaker.

The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is an area of the Province where in recent years we have seen

tremendous efforts on the part of the community generally to preserve and promote -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The reminder was for all hon. members, that it is unparliamentary to

sit with their back to the Speaker.

The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is an area of the Province where in recent years tremendous efforts

have been made to try to promote and preserve the language and culture of these people.

Now, in this legislation here, where instances arise where these children, children from

these cultures and background, have to be taken into care, now, by legislation, we are

directed to try to ensure that every opportunity is made to try and place these children

in care within a home situation that is common to that from which they were taken; where

the language and culture that is so much a part of them, also will remain part of them

while they are in care.

Under

section 7, subsection (h) "in the absence of evidence to the

contrary, there shall be a presumption that a child 12 years of age or over is capable of

forming and expressing an opinion regarding his or her care and custody." All of us

who sit in this hon. House who are parents, will certainly know today, as the hon. member

who preceded me mentioned, that children today are very, very mature. I am amazed, when I

visit schools and I listen to children of twelve and thirteen years of age, with the kinds

of knowledge that they have. In today's modern world, with their access to the Internet,

the things that they know and talk about at age twelve and thirteen - when I was that age,

certainly I have to say that my maturity would nowhere measure up to that. I would not

dare to venture to say what was on my mind when I was twelve or thirteen years old, but

certainly it would be a far cry from these young people.

What this legislation is pointing out, and rightly so, is that we do

not ignore these people. If we are going to act in and on behalf of these young people,

they have a right to speak for themselves. This again is something that we, on the select

committee, heard repeatedly as we sat down and listened to young children who are in care,

and these were the kinds of things they were saying to us: Don't decide for me. Give me an

opportunity to speak for myself.

Mr. Speaker, these principles, as they are outlined here, certainly get

to the crux of what this legislation is all about. Certainly, I guess, the test of time

will ensure whether in fact the legislation that has been crafted here will in fact

succeed in delivering and ensuring the principles that are outlined here are in fact the

principles that will purvey this legislation and will be evident in every action on the

part of this government and future governments down the road as they try to act on behalf

of the young people of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, we have also heard reference over the last number of days

in terms of the debate. There has been significant reference to the fact that the

children's advocate - which was one of the centrepieces of the legislation, the Children's

Interests Committee, the decision has been made to, at this point in time, not include

this in the legislation. I think in reading through the legislation - and I understand the

concerns that are expressed opposite, and I understand where people are coming from, and I

am sure they are genuine in the sense of what they are saying -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. SMITH: I am sure they are genuine in what they are saying in

terms of the children's advocate, and the importance of it, but I do feel that the

legislation has tried in some part to address - I recall our own discussions and debate,

as members of the select committee, when we were trying to determine what would eventually

be in the report. One of the concerns that we had - we saw the need for advocacy as being

an important element. What we brought forward was a model, and just that. There is no

doubt that it is a model that we borrowed from other areas of the Province, but the idea

was that there would be someone or there would be a mechanism whereby there could be a

second look.

In this legislation, under

section 4.(1) "Each board shall appoint

a director of child, youth and family services to exercise the powers and perform the

duties given to a director under this Act."

I think, Mr. Speaker, this is an attempt to try to provide for that

sort of support and that sort of recognition that we were calling for in our report when

we referenced the office of the child advocate.

Mr. Speaker, further to that, the

section of the act,

Part X under

Accountability Provisions,

section 75, subsection (1), "The minister shall establish

an advisory committee whose function is to review every 2 years the operation of this Act

and to report to the minister concerning its operation and stating whether, in its

opinion, the principles and purpose of the Act are being achieved."

That, Mr. Speaker, indicates to me the importance of this piece of

legislation, that we will not again see a situation where we will be, in this Province,

living under a piece of legislation that has been outdated for years, that we have not

seen fit to move forward and deal with it. This ensures that this will not happen again,

because as a part of this act it is clearly pointed out here that this review will take

place.

Mr. Speaker, to my way of thinking, the way to look at this piece of

legislation, as we should indeed look at any piece of legislation that is intended to

protect the rights of any of the citizens of this Province, we should perceive it as a

living document, a document that has the means to change and grow to respond to the needs

as we see them develop in this Province. This accountability, that is outlined here as a

living document, I feel will ensure that if in time, as we start to work with this piece

of legislation, if experience suggests that it is falling short in certain areas, then

this will be addressed.

Mr. Speaker, again in conclusion I have to say that this is a

progressive piece of legislation. I think many of the things that we dealt with in our

deliberations are reflected in this piece of legislation and indeed some of the action was

initiated prior to this legislation. I think it certainly recognizes the needs of the

children of this Province, and I am sure it is a piece of legislation that will be

recognized by children, by their parents, by the school system, and by the citizens

generally of this Province. They will recognize it for the effective and efficient piece

of legislation that it is.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to join in the debate on second reading of Bill 37,

An Act

Respecting Child, Youth And Family Services. I want to say that I support the general

thrust of the bill and the reform of the child welfare legislation in the Province. There

has been a tremendous amount of work done on this bill by officials going back many years,

and also in recent years through the assistance of the Committee on Children's Interests

which looked at a lot of these issues. The former Speaker and the Member for Port au Port,

of course, actively participated in that committee, along with others, including the

Member for Waterford Valley and other members of the House. I don't need to name them all.

That committee had a very, very long and hard look at the policies,

practices and legislation that was in existence, and made a whole series of

recommendations which were designed to improve the welfare of children in this Province.

As other speakers have said, we had an old act, or the basis of the

present act is quite old legislation. I had occasion a few years ago to go back into the

legislative history, to go through the provisions of the act - the legislation - to see

where they were weak and where they caused problems. Of course, also to examine the

practices of the Director of Child Welfare, or several directors of child welfare in the

department. That was, of course, in my representation of former residents of Mount Cashel.

In addition to their stay at Mount Cashel, many of these individuals

had also been in foster care, sometimes previous to their stay at Mount Cashel, sometimes

after their stay at Mount Cashel. As a result, of course, I had occasion to look at a lot

of files and saw the kind of things that took place. We are talking, I suppose, mostly

quite a few years ago, but to see the kind of things that took place; the centralized

Director of Child Welfare role and the bureaucratic structure which allowed a tremendous

number of individuals and circumstances to be ignored. Even when they were known of, the

department did not respond appropriately and in some cases was unable to respond

appropriately because they did not have the legislative authority to do so.

We have seen government, of course, take responsibility in that

particular case not only for Mount Cashel but in some cases for the consequences to

individuals who were in foster care and whose supervision of that foster care was badly

managed and neglected by the government of this Province.

There have been a number of legal cases giving rise to close scrutiny

of the available legislation. I am not going to go into the legal case, but suffice it to

say that a lot of very difficult circumstances - whether they be in terms of whether a

parent can withhold medical treatment for religious reasons, whether they be fight battles

over custody, custody orders, whether they be over whether or not children can be taken

from this Province to meet the family needs - a whole series of issues have been litigated

in this Province and they have not been easy. They have not been easy for the courts to

handle; they have not been easy for government to handle. This is not to suggest that the

government minister may be at fault in a particular situation. It is just that these

issues are highly divisive in some cases. The legislation was inadequate to give proper

direction to the courts, and in some cases the courts themselves were uncertain as to what

the common-law principals that applied would be.

The consensus certainly would have to be that the child welfare

legislation of this Province had to be overhauled in a major way, and that is what has

happened. We have had advice from outside. The Child Welfare League of America have some

very qualified experts who have been here on a number of occasions writing reports, which

in some cases were quite critical of government in terms of the amount of supports that

were put in place to deal with particular issues.

To be fair to government, they invited the same people back to review

changes that have been made and to suggest alternatives and to suggest ways of doing

things. Certainly, I would have to agree that government has exposed the child welfare

rules and regulations and legislation of this Province to a fairly high degree of

scrutiny.

This is second reading, of course, and we are talking about approval in

principle. I have not analyzed each and every

section of the legislation in detail, but I

want to say that there are some things that I think are quite useful that appear here, and

having them spelled out will certainly be an improvement over what was there before in

terms of what expectations people had of the child welfare legislation, of the family

services, support services, and the relevant factors to be considered in determining a

child's best interests. That is the first time that I have seen these spelled out in

legislation in this Province. Obviously that is the "overriding and paramount

consideration in any decision" - it says here - "made under this Act..."

Obviously that is borrowed from the common law where the courts have said for many years

now that the overriding and paramount consideration in any decision with respect to child

welfare or child custody shall be the best interest of the child. If that means taking

them away from the family unit, that that is in the best interest, then that is what a

court will do.

I am very pleased to see it spelled out that the

interpretation and

administration of this act includes the principle that prevention activities are integral

to the promotion of the safety, health and well-being of a child. I think that is a very

important consideration. Obviously, we do not wait around until a child is seriously at

risk before measures are taken. We have an obligation as a society to recognize that there

are, for economic and social reasons, a lot of children in this Province who, without

identification and support from government, whether it be in the school, whether it be in

a school lunch program, whether it be in a supportive environment for the parents or

family who are looking after the child, whether it be in economic terms, whether it be

nutrition - that all of these things are vital to the promotion of the safety, health, and

well-being of the child.

I have received on many occasions representations from people involved

in the nutrition field who have told me that our Province is sadly lacking in appropriate

policies to ensure that children receive an adequate diet in this Province, whether it be

policies that ensure that proper food is served in the schools, or whether it be that

proper advice is given to the parents and families as to what kind of foods are necessary

to ensure the healthy growth and development of a child, or whether it be in policies for

promotion and ensuring that people have enough to eat.

We have had legislation in this House in the last couple of years

giving special consideration to the operators of food banks and those who donate to them,

relieving them of liability for negligence, establishing two standards of care: one for

families and individuals who buy their groceries in a grocery store or eat a meal in a

restaurant, and another standard, a lesser standard, for those who have to go to food

banks in order to survive. I think in principle that is a very backward step, and it sends

out a very strong and wrong signal to people who are poor that reduced standards are good

enough for them. I say that for people who are in those circumstances they need the value

of higher standards, even higher than we have now, if opportunities for them are going to

be anywhere equal to that of other children.

We have to make it sure that not only do children have an equal

opportunity, but that we ensure as much as it is possible that those who have a lesser

chance in life have an opportunity to achieve an equal outcome in terms of schooling and

education. That being, of course, the basis for future life and opportunities to prosper

in our society, support a family, and carry on and make a contribution to society.

In looking at the factors here to be determined in looking at the best

interest of the child, obviously first and foremost here is the child's safety. I have

just spoken about the child's developmental needs. The child's cultural heritage, I think

that recognition is very important. I suspect that progressive judges have being finding

creative ways of ensuring that the cultural heritage of individuals is a consideration.

Sometimes there may have to be an evidentiary basis of that called by lawyers representing

the child, or representing one party or the other, to ensure that these factors are put

before the court properly, and a proper evidentiary basis for making a decision on the

best interest of the child is made.

We have seen examples, time and again, where children from Aboriginal

descent, for example, had been brought up in a culture that is totally foreign to their

early childhood and foreign to their fellow Aboriginal group in Labrador, on the South

Coast of Newfoundland, elsewhere in Newfoundland, or elsewhere of course in the country.

We have seen that despite on the surface many things going along well, there comes a point

in time when the cultural heritage of that individual and the Aboriginal heritage of that

individual plays a very decisive role in that young person's adjustment to adolescence or

young adulthood, or the challenges that young people face growing up. Obviously now we

have some recognition of that in this act.

Obviously, as the Member for Port au Port has said, the cultural

heritage is very important in his district and on the West Coast of Newfoundland where we

have, in additional to an Aboriginal culture, a strong historic and important culture

based on the French history and experience, and language and oral history, and all the

other things that go with that. Clearly, if at all possible, that cultural heritage should

be preserved and promoted in the best interests of the child so that that child has

respect for his or her roots, and understands that coming out of that experience and

heritage is something that is important to that person and can't be just ignored when

taking into account other factors without weighing into the mix the value of the child's

cultural heritage.

The child's views and wishes, I think that is a very interesting one.

Because there is also a presumption here in the act, under

section 7(h), that "there

shall be a presumption that a child 12 years of age or over is capable of forming and

expressing an opinion regarding his or her care and custody." That is in the absence

of evidence to the contrary.

Of course, there may well be circumstances where the child has problems

with mental or emotional capacity. There may be times where a child has been so subject to

manipulation by a party that the child's wishes have been distorted by that manipulation,

but where possible the child's views and wishes are an important factor. Because the child

knows, himself or herself in many cases, which parent, or in some cases whether it isn't a

parent but a grandparent, that person feels more comfortable with. Sometimes a very strong

statement by a child can indicate that a child may not have come forward with any

allegations of any problems or any difficulties with a particular parent, but this may be

the key to understanding what is going on in the background that may be affecting that

child's life. A strong statement of preference by a child could be a very important factor

in saving that child from a continuation of abuse or other form of child neglect.

There are many, many issues that are raised in this legislation. It

would be difficult for me to even try to summarize them and do justice to the individual

issues. There are a couple of principles or practices that I think we are seeing here, one

of which is good but it has an element of bad to it. The idea of having directors of youth

and family services, several of them throughout the Province, on the surface looks like a

positive thing. I think that one of the weaknesses of the previous circumstances was that

there may not have been people in the regional offices or regional areas throughout the

Province with a sufficient degree of authority and training to make decisions and be

properly trained in the importance of family and child intervention and the things that

may need to be done, and have the degree of consistency and continuity without that degree

of authority and training. I think there is something positive about that. In the previous

legislation there was a provincial Director of Child Welfare. There still is here, a

provincial Director of Youth and Family Services, with the ultimate, overall

responsibility.

I would say that there is a problem here too. That is, that these

individuals who are directors - on a regional director - are responsible to a board so

there may be divided responsibilities, I say. I have a concern about that because while

formerly, despite the flaws in the legislation, when the present Minister of Fisheries was

the Minister of Social Services, the buck stopped there. He had the authority and the

power to make decisions in the interests of children and played an interventionist role

himself in a couple of cases; but the Director of Child Welfare was there with provincial

responsibilities, with the responsibility here in this House of Assembly to answer for the

work of the officials and the social workers in the field.

Here we have a little bit more loosey-goosey. The responsibilities are

divided. The regional Director of Family Services has a board that hires this person. He

may provide reports to the provincial director who has responsibilities, but I have a

grave concern that particularly in the area of provision of services, in the area of

numbers, of caseloads and workloads of individual workers, and the ability of the system

to respond to people, that there is not enough direct line of authority to the minister

and to this House of Assembly.

I have talked to some social workers who agree with me, who have

contacted me and said: You are right, the responsibility for child welfare and direct

responsibility for child welfare is a governmental responsibility. The minister is

responsible in the House, and as long as that responsibility is there then there is a

better chance of having it exercised for reasons of bureaucracy, politics, and everything

else.

When you have the spreading out of authority, the spreading out of

responsibility, the spreading out of budgets, the spreading out of numbers, what I am

afraid we are going to hear as an excuse, if a problem comes to the floor, that

insufficient service has been provided and that has resulted in a disaster, that has

resulted in children being harmed or left in neglect and abusive situations, and even

worse: that the minister is going to stand in this House and not take responsibility for

it, but say: We gave these health care boards a budget; it was up to them to determine the

priorities for their region.

That is what I am concerned about. I have raised it in this House

before on Ministerial Statements. I am concerned about it because I think there is a weak

link here and that weak link is the relationship between the minister, the provincial

Director of Child Welfare, and the regional directors who do not have a direct line of

responsibility to this House and the minister herself.

Just as the Minister of Education tries to blame the school boards for

problems that come up, `Well, it was their decision; it is not ours.' The Department of

Health and Community Services, when the hospital board is not doing what the local people

want, `Oh, that is the board's responsibility. That is not government. We are passing out

money.' When the regional economic development boards get active and make decisions that

people do not like, the Minister of Development and Rural Renewal is going to say, `Well,

you know, they have their own plan, and they have their own autonomy. I am no longer

responsible.' We have government again and again saying: We are getting out of

responsibility for implementing decisions consistently crosses the Province. We are

getting out of taking personal responsibility as ministers in the House. We are passing

the buck to somebody else, saying: Government has no authority and power.

These boards - some of them are appointed, some of them are partially

elected, some of them are elected - are going to be taking the heat and the government is

going to be saying: Well, we have done our bit; we have no control over the situation.

I do not think that is good enough when it comes to the health and

welfare of young children, any more than I think it is ultimately good for the health of

people who are in health care facilities. At the end of the day there has to be a full

responsibility of the minister here in this House to ensure that minister and that

department has the authority to give directions to the Youth and Family Services Division,

to make sure that children in this Province are not at risk and that children who have a

need for, whether it be family support; whether it be protection; whether it be a custody

decision that has to be made in their best interests; whether it be nutritional support;

whether it be a school lunch program, or whether it be the things that are necessary to

give them a chance in our education system, all of these things ultimately come back to

provincial government responsibility, to the responsibility of the minister.

In saying that there are a lot of progressive things in this bill, I

note the notion that family support is provided now in terms of dollars in a fostering

situation where it was not before. I think that our government was a bit miserly with its

policies when in fact the family could not necessarily look after an additional child

without public support. That meant that the child was taken to a stranger or a strange

family, in many cases a strange community, in order to receive the basics of life. That is

wrong when there is an opportunity where a family member is available who is capable and

who is a qualified caregiver. When that person is available, the same level of family

support should be there for them. Indeed, we have seen situations over the years where

young people, maybe adolescents in particular, are happier to be in care than with a

parent because they get better treated in terms of monies available than they would on

social assistance. I think that is a very wrong thing.

I know the Member for Port au Port has probably heard of circumstances

where a young boy or young girl would do something to get themselves into care so that

they would get an allowance for particular clothing or sneakers, or that sort