April 20, 2005 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV

No. 14

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have members' statements as follows: the

hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans; the hon. the Member for Gander; the

hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune; the hon. the Member for

Burin-Placentia West; the hon. the Member for Labrador West; and the hon. the

Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde.

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MR. GRIMES: On a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: A point of privilege has been raised by the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I would like to take a minute or so, if I

could, to outline what I believe again has been the breach of a privilege of the

members of the Legislature.

Yesterday - and you will be ruling on a point I raised yesterday, and I

appreciate that. I do appreciate having been involved in a discussion with Your

Honour, as the Speaker, after the fact, with respect to the ID system and some

security measures and so on. I would like to raise, though, another point as a

result of comments made in the Legislature yesterday, right in this Legislature,

that in my view impacts and infringes upon our ability to do our jobs as MHAs,

and particularly as members of the Opposition on this side, because there are

issues, I understand, with the ID and the government restricting access to the

galleries by restricting access to the building, which they have a right to do.

Again, yesterday - in my view, Mr. Speaker - the Premier went much further, in

terms of trying to use the Legislature and things that are happening here as an

excuse for a government decision that they have complete control of outside.

Mr. Speaker, we find it difficult, and I find it difficult to do my job as a

Member of the House of Assembly, because the one thing that the fundamental

rules ask us to do in here is to accept what a member says in this Legislature

as being the absolute truth. If I suggest that it is not true -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. GRIMES: I ask the Premier, again, to pay serious attention to this.

If I suggest that it is not the truth and if I say it is a lie, or if I call

someone a liar, immediately Your Honour, rightfully so, stands up and asks me to

withdraw the statement. If I refuse to do so, even though I am convinced with

every bone in my body that it is not the truth, than I have to leave. Now, that

is the fundamental principle on which we operate here, is that what we say in

here has to be true. It has to be proven to be true if it is challenged, because

we have no other recourse.

I would like to mention a couple of incidents that the Premier raised in this

Legislature yesterday, and he referenced again outside. The first one, Mr.

Speaker, is he seems, as the Premier, to want to treat this place like a court

of law and a bit of a police state and so on. If that is the standard that he

wants to try and apply we will have to see if that is acceptable in

democratically elected Parliaments or not.

Yesterday the Premier made statements that by inference and insinuation left

the impression that there are dangerous projectiles somewhere up around here in

the last few days, and the words he used is that: We have found empty alcohol

bottles - right in Hansard. We know there is additional security in this

building, additional surveillance, hand-held cameras so that people are being

monitored and if there was actually an empty alcohol bottle found, than I

believe, Mr. Speaker, it should be produced because my understanding is that no

such report went to you, as the Speaker. That there was no report to the Speaker

of the House, who is ensuring some security in this Legislature and who does

have some additional security in the precincts of the House, and has for a week

or so, which I concur with, but there has been no report to the Speaker of the

phrase that the Premier used: Empty alcohol bottles being found somewhere in the

precincts of this House.

So, if we want to use the Premier's view, he wants to treat it like a

courtroom, I say to him, produce the bottle. In his view, if he wants to turn

this into a CSI like on the television programs, if he wants to identify some

people, go get it fingerprinted to find out who left it there and where it came

from, because he wants everyone in the Province and wants all of us to believe

that there is a crisis here, that we are under some kind of threat and that

there are projectiles up there. People are supposed to envision, I suppose, an

empty sixty ouncer of Lambs or something that someone could throw down on top of

our heads. That is the vision that he wants people to have, Mr. Speaker, and it

is not fair and it is making it difficult.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: My understanding, Mr. Speaker, is that there has been no such

report to the Speaker's Office from the security that you have assigned to

these precincts. One way or another, if there is a difference in the information

that should be clarified.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, yesterday - and these are the Premier's words again.

He suggested that there has been spitting from the galleries. Spitting from the

galleries - in Hansard. Now if he said it in this Legislature, that means we are

supposed to believe it happened, it is definite, it is true. I can tell you,

having been here sixteen years, that if that happened to any member in this

Legislature any time in sixteen years, the first thing that would occur is, that

member would stand up - because you have control of this House - and bring it to

the attention of the Chair and say: Mr. Speaker, I believe I had been spat upon.

gallery has landed on my head.

Now, the Premier wants everybody in the Province to believe that is

happening. I have heard no member report that to the Chair at all. If it did

happen, then I would suggest that the member should stand up today, on his or

her own two feet, and say: Yes, I believe I was spit upon from someone in the

gallery. It happened on such-and-such a day, at around such-and-such a time, and

I would like for the Speaker to make sure it does not happen again, because that

should not be tolerated, Mr. Speaker. That should not be tolerated.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. GRIMES: The Premier, Mr. Speaker, wants to make a joke of it and say:

Oh, yes, boy, and produce the spit. That is how seriously he takes this. That is

the problem we have with a Premier who has no respect for the Legislature, no

respect for the processes in here, and thinks he is above the law in any event

and can set up his own rules, cast his own aspersions, make his own inferences,

leave his own false impressions, without having any proof.

Mr. Speaker, let me finish by saying this: If the spitting action occurred

while the House was recessed - because it has been recessed several times -

then, again, I believe a member has an obligation to report that to Your Honour,

to make sure that Your Honour, as the Chair and the Speaker, knows that it did

occur. We should raise it in the public and the member should identify

themselves. Never mind having the Premier stand up - because I will tell you how

much it has gotten out of hand. Media representatives yesterday have taken that

story and have gone as far as to say: Well, I have heard that someone had gum

stuck in their hair.

Now, if there is a member here who had gum thrown at them, and stuck in their

hair, from the galleries, again, for the rules of this House and for the

procedures, to make sure that we are dealing with issues seriously instead of

fabrication, stand up and identify yourself. It did not happen to anybody here

that I am aware of. I have not heard anybody over here suggest that they have

had spit on them or that they had gum stuck in their hair, but the Premier and

his particular cronies want to tell the media that, oh, it is so bad that

someone had gum thrown at them and it stuck in their hair.

I say, if that is true, it should not be tolerated, and the member should

stand up today and identify himself or herself, find out for sure that it is

true, act like a court of law, if the Premier wants to, and get to the bottom of

it.

If we have to believe, as members, that what the Premier of the Province says

in here is true - because we doubt it. I will not go as far as to say that it is

a lie, or that he told a lie, or that he is a lair; it is just that, in

discussing it with the Speaker, I know of no report of any of those incidents to

the Speaker, who has his own security in and around the precincts of this House.

Is it a fabrication from the Premier? I do not know that, but the insinuation

is there. It suggests that everybody who is in the gallery, that they are some

kind of criminal element up here, that they are not to be trusted.

If we have a problem and it has been reported to the Chair - I am just saying

it for every member, Mr. Speaker - our protection is through you. If these

inappropriate actions have occurred, then all a member has to do is stand up,

say: It happened to me, Mr. Speaker. I think it is wrong and inappropriate, and

I would like for you - not the Premier, because he has no control in here. He is

just one member in this House, like the rest of us. Never mind going to the

Premier. Go to you, as the Speaker, identify the infraction that has occurred,

and ask for protection so that we can all do our job in here as democratically

elected members.

I would ask, too, Mr. Speaker, that you would take that point of privilege

under order and give it a ruling at your appropriate time.

Thank you very much.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I will not be as long and as theatrical as the Leader of the

Opposition in an attempt to play for the galleries. When I rose and got on my

feet yesterday, concern had been expressed to me by members of the Royal

Newfoundland Constabulary that there was a serious situation, a volatile

situation, that could explode into something more serious.

As Premier of the Province, when I am made aware of something by our Justice

officials, by our law enforcement officers, it is incumbent upon me to act. It

is not so much to protect myself as to protect the people who work in this House

of Assembly. It is to protect the people who actually are in the House of

Assembly. It is to protect the employees who work in this building, the

employees who work in our offices in this building, for the safety of people in

the galleries, the fishermen and other people in the galleries who may be here

as observers. This place has to be secure and has to be protected, and that is

what this is all about.

It was indicated to me by the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, and I

indicated yesterday - my words, actually, my exact words that I said here in the

House yesterday were, "There has been evidence of spitting from the

gallery. There is evidence of empty alcohol bottles being found outside..."

- not inside, outside. You have this; you know what I said. You know exactly

what I said, but you stood on your feet and you tried to distort what I said.

This is exactly what I said, "There is evidence of empty alcohol bottles

being found outside, of flasks being found outside, where people are consuming

alcohol. Threats are being made on Open Line..." - we have all heard those

- "...and threats are being made in the parking lot of this building."

None of that has been attributed to fishermen. Threats are being made. I can

tell you that I personally witnessed the gum, and felt it. I personally

witnessed a threat, and heard it, and saw it, and saw the attitude. I can give

evidence before this House right now, if you want it from one of the members, as

to exactly what is going on.

My job, as Premier, is to protect the people of this Province, the people in

this building, and the people in this House, and I intend to do that. Whether

you like it or not, that is exactly what I intend to do.

We are not going to allow a situation because you want to inflame it and you

want to make it volatile and you want to incite these people who have a

livelihood at stake in the galleries. If that is your game, you are playing a

dangerous game and I would suggest that you stay away from that attitude, that

line of questioning, the way you are proceeding, because you are creating a

dangerous situation.

Mr. Speaker, there is no point of privilege.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Speaking to the point of privilege, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, the point that I was making could not have been

made any more succinctly and clearly about the abuse of our privilege than was

just made by the Premier. He talked about his responsibility to protect what

goes on in this Legislature. Therein lies a complete breach of our privileges.

Outside the House, in the Province generally, absolutely. In this House of

Assembly, Mr. Speaker - and I will make this point one more time - in this House

of Assembly, it is incumbent upon any of us - the Premier, any one of the

ministers, any one of us as MHAs - when something like he says happened, to

report it to you, not to run off myself and try to do something about it. You

decide what the appropriate action is to be taken in this House, whether we

should have additional security, and he just admitted that he, because he is the

Premier, says: I have to take care of people in this Legislature.

Not true. There was somebody elected by the forty-eight members to take care

of us in this Legislature. He does not own the House of Assembly. He does not

run the House of Assembly. He does not decide the rules and the procedures for

the House of Assembly, and he has breached our privileges by doing so and

imposing things that, in fact, are an insult, I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, and

an affront to yourself, as our Speaker and our Chair, and I could not make the

point any more strongly than he made with his own words and his own lips.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Nobody has suggested - certainly government has not suggested - or interfered

with the Speaker's office, no matter what the Leader of the Opposition says.

MR. GRIMES: He just said (inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: No matter what the Leader of the Opposition says.

MR. GRIMES: (Inaudible) he said.

MR. E. BYRNE: I listened to you. I would ask you for the same courtesy.

Would that be alright?

MR. GRIMES: That is fine.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you very much.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) sooky.

MR. E. BYRNE: It is not about sookiness. It is about having the

opportunity to speak, as I just provided the same courtesy to the Leader of the

Opposition, as I do for the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

The fact of the matter is this, Mr. Speaker: To the best of our knowledge,

nobody has interfered with your right to put protections in the House of

Assembly. Government has not interfered in any way, shape or form, with the

Speaker's absolute authority to decide for matters of security, and any other

matters related to the House, number one. The Speaker will be able to speak to

that issue himself. I certainly will not propose or take up the responsibility

to do that for the Speaker of the House.

Secondly, just because the Leader of the Opposition who, today on a point of

privilege - there is no point of privilege on this, in my view - very delicately

and in a very sort of cute way, has called into question the factual statements

made by another member. Here is the fact of the matter of what he did. He says,

on the one hand, that when a member speaks in this House we are all to assume

that it is true. Then, immediately following that, on the other hand, calls into

questions the credibility, in this case of the Premier, about statements he

made, and then leaves impressions that the Premier said something about

sixty-ounce bottles. That is not what he said. It is clear in Hansard what he

said: Evidence found outside. He didn't say evidence in the gallery, he didn't

say in the precincts of the House; outside. That is an important distinction.

That would be an important distinction.

Thirdly, Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition says no member stood on

their feet and said anything was thrown down from the gallery. We have all

witnessed that. There have been t-shirts thrown from the gallery, there has been

paper thrown down, and we have all seen that. Just because the Leader of the

Opposition says, no member stood up and talked about it here in this Chamber,

does not mean that members have not talked to you. Mr. Speaker, I know that

members have come to see you personally about those situations. Members have an

obligation, and it is not for the Leader of the Opposition or any other member

to decide how they fulfill that obligation. If they wish to say it in the House

and stand on their feet, that is their ultimate and personal right as a member

of the House. If they choose to go to the Speaker privately and deal with it,

that is their right.

MR. GRIMES: I couldn't agree more.

MR. E. BYRNE: Well, I am glad you couldn't agree more, because I think

you can acknowledge members have done exactly that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just to respond: First of all, the Government House Leader made a comment,

that just because the Leader of the Opposition says it, doesn't make it

necessarily so. I say the same thing: Because the Premier asserts something,

doesn't make it so. I comment in that regard. No question here, no cutesy

stuff about the Leader of the Opposition as to what he said the Premier did do.

He was very explicit about it, as to what the Premier did in this House

yesterday. So, no fancy dancey stuff here. He called it like it was.

In terms of the security, also, Mr. Speaker: Regardless of what the Premier

might think, I personally don't need his protection when I walk through this

door. I have a card that I use to access this building and I comply with the

rules when I come through. This member right here will not comply with the photo

ID requirements. If I am going to be denied access to this House right here

because of this stupid photo ID ruling that has been made and if there is

nobody, who works out on that front desk, who knows Kelvin Parsons, MHA, without

me - as was done this morning - being told to take my picture and put it on my

chest, something has gone too far here. I have worked here for six years and if

I am going to be told all of a sudden that I am only allowed into this building,

our building, that I was elected to come to, if I follow this man's order and

wear my picture on my chest, it is just not going to happen. So, we have a

bigger problem facing us than these innocent people who are sitting in the

galleries.

With regards to the policy, you wonder about how well thought out some of

this stuff is. What about the kids who come to visit this House? What about the

school groups who come here? Photo IDs, they do not have them. Someone quipped

yesterday: well, do not worry about it because whenever they come here they come

with their MHAs. That is not always the case at all. Are we going to insist now

that veterans and seniors have to show an ID out here as well, people who have

been frequent visitors to this House all of a sudden have to show a mug shot to

get in here? What kind of police state are we turning this place into because

this man makes certain assertions? That is just unnecessary. It is absolutely a

matter of our privilege in here. Absolutely!

Talk about consistency. The rule was imposed yesterday about the photo IDs

without any notification to anyone, to members here, certainly without any

consultation and without any notice to the public. After it was made public

yesterday, as a result of commentary in this House, a ruling was made that: yes,

we might have overshot it. We might have jumped too quickly and should have

given people some notice before we implemented that rule. So they put a sign up

out here saying: As of today, April 20, thou shalt show a photo ID to get in

here. Yet, two people walk into my office, on the fifth floor of this building,

at 12:20 today. I said, did you show a photo ID? What are you talking about? So,

if we are going to have a policy - they are not even consistent about their own

policy. That shows in and of itself that the people here do not even want to

enforce what they are being told they have to enforce.

The Premier is trying to control the confines of this House - which you, and

you alone, have control over - by enforcing the rules about the building. He is

saying that because he controls the access to the doors to this Confederation

Building and he is going to impose rules on whoever walks through the doors of

Confederation Building, the hell's flames with what happens in here. His rules

will comply. But, I say, Mr. Speaker, that is not the way this system works.

This system is not subject to, we get our rules after we get through his doors.

If he has to change his rules for his doors to make this democratic system work

properly, he has to change them. That is where you have an obligation. An

obligation to insist upon that, on behalf of everybody here. This is no small

matter, and it is indeed a matter of privilege. I do not think we need to

dilly-dally about making a complicated investigation and ruling on this. It is

very commonsensical, and I think a very quick and common sense decision ought to

be made on this matter very quickly.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I am at a loss for the Opposition House Leader

to stand and say: I am not going to comply with a photo ID to come into the

House of Assembly, when since 2002, when his colleague was Minister of Works,

Services and Transportation introduced - and here is what he said: Effective

April 15, employees in the Confederation Building complex will be required -

AN HON. MEMBER: Employees.

MR. E. BYRNE: I am an employee in this building. I am an employee of the

people, and I am an employee in this building. Everyday, since that time, when I

come into work, to come through here, I scan my photo ID because that is the

rules; everyday.

Mr. Speaker, to say that we are imposing rules, the fact of the matter is

that for people in the House and people who work in the building, which we do,

we have had these badges, which we have had to show, since April 15, 2002. This

is not a new rule imposed by government. This is the enforcement of a rule that

you brought into effect April 15, 2002, and that is the truth of it. Whether you

like it or not, that is the truth of it. Whether you have complied or not, that

is an issue for you and the security building out there. When I walk in here

every morning, I scan my badge and when the green arrow appoints for me to go, I

go through it. That is the way it works.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Facts are so important. First of all, for the information of the Government

House Leader, I do not consider myself a government employee. I am, first and

foremost, an employee of the people of Burgeo & LaPoile district.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: That is where my obligations are, and as an employee of the

people of Burgeo & LaPoile, I have a right to get in here.

The Government House Leader knows full well these little passes have been in

existence for a couple of years. No time ever has anybody told me that I had to

wear it on my chest like I was told this morning. That is the extremes that we

are gone to. They knew me yesterday. They knew me six years ago. All of a sudden

when I have to comply and tape this to my chest - that is what I am saying, this

system has gotten ludicrous. It is just absolutely crazy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Speaker thanks the hon. members for their representations on this very

serious issue. The Speaker will take these matters under advisement. On

tomorrow, before we have our general session, the Speaker will make a statement

on this particular matter.

Proceeding to members' statements.

The hon. the Member for the District of Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate a constituent of mine, Mr. Leo

Power of Grand Falls-Windsor, who was inducted into the Newfoundland and

Labrador Bowling Hall of Fame during a ceremony in St. John's on March 14 of

this year.

Mr. Speaker, Leo Power has been inducted into the Hall of Fame as a builder

of this sport. Over the past thirty years, he has spent countless hours

compiling stats for local bowling leagues and he has also contributed his

talents as a coach in many levels of this sport. He still continues today as a

statistician for youth bowling, the Monday night men's league and the jackpot

league at the Holiday Lanes Central in Grand Falls-Windsor.

Leo Power is to be commented for his commitment to the sport of bowling over

the many years. He has given freely, countless volunteer hours and his

enthusiasm has been an asset to bowling in Central Newfoundland, and I am

pleased to recognize his contribution during National Volunteer Week.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join with me in

congratulating Mr. Leo Power on his induction into the Bowling Hall of Fame and

I wish him continued success in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Gander.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my pleasure to rise today to bring to the attention of all members of

this hon. House the accomplishments of two very fine athletes from my district

of Gander.

The Canadian Powerlifting and Bench Press National Championships were held

recently Calgary, Alberta. This year our Province was represented by a number of

athletes from various districts, including Ms Christa Power and Mr. Brian George

of Gander. I am proud to say that their hard work and long weeks and months of

training has paid off, as they came home from Calgary, having competed against

the country's best, and winning bronze medals in their respective classes.

Mr. Speaker, I stand here today to recognize Ms Power and Mr. George for

their many sacrifices that they and their families had to make in order to make

these accomplishments happen.

I ask that all members of this hon. House join me in saying thank you for

representing our Province in this competition and congratulation on winning

those medals for themselves and for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the accomplishments of Ms Megan

Buffet, the St. Ignatius Youth Choir of St. Alban's and the Bay d'Espoir

Academy High School Choir.

At the Kiwanis Music Festival this year, on many occasions, sixteen-year-old

Megan Buffet captured the audience with one of her individual performances and

then hurried to the next venue for her next performance. Megan's solo

performances as a pianist included a complete major solo works, seventeen years

and under, and a romantic piece, sixteen years and under. She showcased her

vocal abilities in Songs from Broadway, Songs from Movies, and Newfoundland

Music, all sixteen years and under. In addition, her accompanying

responsibilities included 130 pieces for a number of festival performers. She

also directed the St. Ignatius Youth Choir and was a member of the Bay d'Espoir

Academy High School Choir.

The winning of numerous awards recognized the outstanding musical talents and

efforts of Megan and the choirs. Megan won the vocal

section achievement award.

The Bay d'Espoir Academy High School Choir won best choral performance,

fifteen years and over, the adjudicator's award for choirs, and was also

presented with the Bruce Reid Memorial Award for best performance by a choir.

The choir was also recommended for the George S. Mathieson Trophy presented

annually by the Federation of Canadian Music Festivals.

Mr. Speaker, the St. Ignatius Youth Choir received the Howell Memorial Award

for best performance by a church choir and was invited to perform at the

Highlights of the Festival Concert.

I ask all hon. members of the House to join me in congratulating Ms Megan

Buffet, the Bay d'Espoir High School Choir, and the St. Ignatius Youth Choir

for their hard work and continuous dedication to music excellence.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Normally Wednesdays are Private Members' Days and under Standing Order 63,

sub-section (7), we should commence the Question Period, as I understand it, at

two-thirty. We certainly have no objection to continuing with Members'

Statements and Ministers' Statements beyond - and I assume that we have

consent that we do the thirty minutes standard Question Period whenever we are

finished the normal business, even though it goes beyond three o'clock.

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

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

Absolutely, Mr. Speaker. That is in everyone's interests. From time to time

these things happen, so fair enough we will go through the Standing Orders. We

will let Question Period be what it is going to be in terms of the time length

and then we will get to the Budget Debate immediately following that, whether

that be ten after three or three thirty, whenever it may be.

MR. SPEAKER: So, agreement has been reached.

The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the School of the Human Kinetics and Recreation recently held

its annual presentation of awards in which it honours some of its finest student

athletes. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure today to stand in this House

and offer congratulations to Grant Handrigan of Marystown on winning the Jubilee

Cup which is awarded annually for the most outstanding performance in distance

running.

Mr. Speaker, Grant is the son of Ursula and Garrett Handrigan, and for the

residents of Marystown it is a common sight to see Judge Garrett Handrigan

running along the road - who, by the way, is a gentleman who has placed well in

numerous long-distance races himself. When he is not away at school, it is a

common sight to see Grant running alongside his father.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask all members of this House to join me in passing

along congratulations to Grant Handrigan and his family.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to inform members of a special event which took place in my

district on April 1 and 2. I am referring to the fourth annual seniors excursion

to the Miron River Outfitting Lodge. We have to remember, Mr. Speaker, most of

these seniors are in their seventies. Half of them are in their eighties. Mr.

Speaker, many people of the Province may have seen the show that was done two

years ago, that was filmed by Land and Sea.

There were eight seniors, all women, who travelled sixty kilometres from

Labrador West to the Ashuanipi River, thanks to J & S busing. From there,

they began their forty kilometre trek aboard a 1957 twelve-passenger Bombardier

Snowmobile, owned by Phil Brake, to the Miron River where an hearty lunch

awaited them.

Once settled in, they started their traditional afternoon card game where

only the bravest of the brave non-seniors would sit at the table with them.

Again this year, Mr. Speaker, the main meal served was fit for a king, with

turkey, moose, ptarmigan, caribou and rabbits, with all the trimmings.

Later in the evening, the music began with entertainment provided by Pat

Carrol on the keyboards, Gerard Gear Guitar, and Alvohn Morris with his

accordion. Throughout the evening dancing took place, Mr. Speaker, and we had

several visits by mummers, some of whom arrived on their Ski-doos.

Mr. Speaker, it is a real treat to socialize with the seniors. Their outlook

on life and their ability to enjoy themselves is something we can all take a

lesson from.

This year's trip was an astounding success, and I would like to thank

George Pardy, owner of the Miron River Lodge, the musicians, J & S Busing,

Phil Brake, owner of the Cindy 2 , and Lo-Lo Foods, and many others who made the

weekend so successful.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to read the names into Hansard, of the seniors who

attended: Ms Myrtle King, Clemmie Parsons, Daisy Pelley, Marion Walsh, Blanche

Preston, Ella Hoffe, and Ella's daughter, Glenys Hynes.

Mr. Speaker, if I could, I would like to say that Mrs. Edna Loder, who

normally attended with us every other year, hurt her leg this year. She will be

ninety-one in November, and vows right now that she will be attending next year's

excursion with us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. COLLINS: Seeing that today is Wednesday, Mr. Speaker, I waited for

today to read this statement because every Wednesday the seniors meet at their

home in Labrador West, at their club house, and they are watching the

proceedings today. So, on behalf of all of us, I would like to say hello to you

all.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I am sure the member will recognize that he had far exceeded his allotted

time, but that I would not interrupt his greetings to his constituents,

particularly the seniors in Labrador West.

The hon. the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, each year students from all over the Province recognize the

price paid for freedom in our country. The Royal Canadian Legion's Remembrance

Day Literary and Poster Contest is an annual event that helps to promote the

theme of remembrance. It is through creative writings and drawings that

participating students pay tribute to the soldiers who have sacrificed so much

for our freedom.

Recently, the provincial winners were selected for this contest and, as

usual, students from Trinity and Conception Bays did remarkably well. It gives

me great pleasure to recognize Megan Delaney of Gull Island, my home community,

as the winner of the essay contest. Megan is a Level I student at Baccalieu

Collegiate in Old Perlican. Her award-winning essay, titled Making a Difference,

entitles her to visit the historic site of Beaumont Hamel on July 1. Megan says

this trip is of significant importance to her because her grandfather, Bernard

Delaney, fought in that war and was taken prisoner, and eventually made it home.

In her essay, Megan says Remembrance Day is, "...a time to celebrate the

accomplishments of our soldiers, those who lived and those who died." She

went on to say, "Remembering is not enough.... We need to realize the

sacrifices they made and do as much as possible to show our appreciation and our

gratitude. We need to take advantage of our freedom and the way of life our

soldiers have given us."

Other contest winners who will be travelling to France include: Robyn Newhook,

a Level III student at Crescent Collegiate, for her black and white posture, and

Randye Lynch, a Level III student at Ascension Collegiate for winning the colour

poster contest.

I ask all members to please join me today in recognizing Megan, Robyn and

Randye, along with all other winners in the Royal Canadian Legion Literary and

Poster Contest, and wish them a safe and meaningful voyage to France.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity today to update hon.

members on an initiative which we announced during Budget 2005, the Community

Enhancement Program. This program is extremely valuable to the people in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador who are unemployed or underemployed.

This $4.25 million program will highlight employment projects which have a

community infrastructure or economic development focus. We will fund projects

for municipal, environmental and recreation improvements. We will also fund

projects related to forestry, agriculture and fisheries infrastructure

improvements. These projects will be labour intensive. Although the employment

may be relatively short term and small scale, the projects will have long-term

benefits to municipalities.

Mr. Speaker, we hope to notify municipalities, organizations and other groups

by the end of this month or the beginning of May, that we are ready to roll out

this program. We will be asking these proponents to submit proposals for

projects resulting in sustainable benefits to our communities. It is our hope

that we will have individuals in rural Newfoundland and Labrador working on

various projects for the summer and fall.

This program is similar in scope to the Job Creation Program; however, there

are some notable differences. Because the deadline to submit proposals is August

31, 2005, municipalities and organizations have much more flexibility in

preparing their proposals. Once an application is successful, the proponents can

choose when they want to start on the project as long as it is completed by

March 1, 2006. However, we would encourage them to get their proposals in early

so they can start projects as soon as possible.

Another improvement, Mr. Speaker, is that individuals who are receiving

survivor benefits as their sole source of income can apply for projects. Under

the Job Creation Program, only those receiving Employment Insurance could apply

but we recognize the hardship individuals go through when they lose a spouse. We

have heard time and time again about the frustration people who are in receipt

of survivor benefits have felt when they learned they could not get work through

the Job Creation Program. We felt it was unfair to exclude these individuals

from the Community Enhancement Program, so we have listened to what they had to

say.

This is the first year for this improved program, so it is still evolving. I

think we have made good first steps which will offer meaningful work to

unemployed and underemployed individuals. We want people to be proud of the work

they are doing in their communities, and benefit from their work for years to

come.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for a copy of the news release, and say to him

that it is an improvement over the Job Creation Program of other years, in the

fact that they have made two flexible steps to it. One is more flexible time

limits, which is great, where people can go out and work earlier. The other one

is, people who are survivors and have lone source of income can apply for the

project.

What I want to say to the minister though, is this, that these types of

programs give no continuity to people who are in the rural communities and they

give no long-term security, because it is really, in a sense - once you have

your 400 hours earned, then you are off the program. At $6.25 an hour, and you

get your 410 hours, then when you receive your unemployment insurance you are

looking at $98 a week. That is not a lot of money for people to live on. I

recognize that $4.25 million is a significant number, but I realize that this

year with the situation that we have with the fishery, you will need much more

than $4.25 million unless we can find a resolution to it.

So, Mr. Speaker, it is something that has been going on for a long time; glad

to see the improvements, but much more is needed for the rural part of the

Province to ensure that there are long-term jobs rather than short-term programs

like this.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advanced copy of his statement. I say that any

money that goes into rural Newfoundland and Labrador will certainly be utilized

to the fullest. However, it is very difficult, with the amount of money that

people will receive working under these programs, to be able to provide for

their families and enjoy a decent lifestyle. Much more is needed to be done and

I encourage the minister, and all Cabinet ministers of government, to look at

the rural areas of this Province to put in and attract meaningful long-term jobs

so that people can provide for themselves and their families and have a standard

of living that puts them on par to people in urban centres of the Province.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers.

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I rise today to advise of my appearance yesterday in Ottawa before the

Standing Senate Committee on Energy, Environment and Natural Resources on Bill

C-15,

An Act To Amend The Migratory Birds Convention Act and the Canadian

Environmental Protection Act.

Mr. Speaker, as most of my hon. colleagues know, Bill C-15 outlines

significant legislative changes to strengthen existing federal legislation that

deals with marine pollution and the illegal dumping of bilge oil in our oceans.

This discharging of bilge oil is an issue that this Province takes very

seriously. Such neglect for our marine environment and our valuable wildlife

resources by passing ships who deliberately dump their bilge oil is absolutely

deplorable. These incidents have gone on too long in our waters - they are

environmental crimes that must be stopped. We believe that Bill C-15 is critical

to helping end the environmental travesty that continues to take place in

Canadian waters.

Mr. Speaker, besides raising the issue several times in the past with the

federal government, I also appeared before the Standing Committee on Environment

and Sustainable Development before the House of Commons in November of last year

in support of Bill C-15. Indeed, the recent incident last month where literally

hundreds of oiled birds were discovered on our shores, including within the

sensitive Witless Bay Ecological Reserve, demonstrates, once again, the need to

urgently proclaim Bill C-15.

Mr. Speaker, my recent message to the Senate Committee was simple - speedy

passage of Bill C-15, without further amendments, is critical to the protection

and future survival of our marine environment. During my presentation to the

committee, which I am pleased to table today in the House of Assembly, I

reminded members that over 300,000 birds die each and every year off the coast

of Newfoundland and Labrador from the deliberate discharge of bilge oil into the

ocean. I also reminded the committee that for every oiled bird that is found on

our shores, there are at least another ten that are not. I also informed the

Senate Committee that the 300,000 birds that fall victim to illegal bilge oil

dumping each and every year, is equivalent to an Exxon Valdez disaster each and

every year. This comparison clearly shows the insurmountable negative impact

from illegally dumping bilge oil at sea.

The bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is that those who are responsible for such

environmental abuse must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. They

must be sent a strong message that there will be zero tolerance for such

heedless actions.

I am confident that our Province's continued involvement in this extremely

important issue and my recent appearance before the Standing Senate Committee

will help move the passage of Bill C-15 forward in an expeditious manner. In the

meantime, we will continue to do what we can as a government to address the

illegal discharge of bilge oil in our waters.

Mr. Speaker, government is committed to the protection of our environment,

whether it is marine, land or air. We will continue to work diligently to ensure

that our environment and our natural heritage are protected for the benefit of

present and future generations.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We on this side of the House agree and compliment the federal government on

Bill C-15 - it is a very important bill - but I would like to ask the minister

if he had any discussions with his federal counterpart, when he was in Ottawa,

about putting independent observers and monitors on the offshore platforms of

our coast. We have had several major spills to date and this government has not

given any response in this area where we have control. We have had major spills

off our platforms where we have control.

I asked a question a year ago in the House, to the minister, about putting

independent observers and monitors on our platforms, and they have not

responded. That is a provincial control and they have not done anything about

it.

I compliment the federal government on Bill C-15, but this government is

negligent when it comes to our environment.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

This is a very, very important issue, Mr. Speaker, and one, I say to the

minister, that is very critical for the future of our Province; because, once

the oil starts coming ashore, it takes many, many years for it to be dispersed

before we see the effects start to reverse. It proves, Mr. Speaker, that there

is a need for greater surveillance off our offshore areas of our Province.

I think, Mr. Speaker, there should be heavier fines and penalties imposed for

people who intentionally dump their bilge water within our waters or anywhere

within the oceans. The fines and the penalties that are there now, even with the

new bill, still do not go far enough to dissuade ships from dumping their bilge

water, because it is a chance that they can take. Their chances of getting

caught are very slim; thus the need, Mr. Speaker, for greater surveillance.

I agree with the previous speaker about our offshore drilling platforms, and

we have had spills recently, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

MR. COLLINS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. COLLINS: The offshore oil platforms in our own Province, we have

seen, in recent days, where we have had spills. I acknowledge that the minister

has responded to that and has reported that to the public of the Province, but I

would like to say, Mr. Speaker, that there is still a need for independent

observers on these platforms. I believe that is a possibility, because that way

it takes some of the onus off the minister so that the independent observers can

report to the people of the Province, through the minister, from a neutral

perspective, what the causes really were.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In questioning the Minister of Health and Community Services on the 270

recommendations in the HayGroup report, that would see the closure of important

health care services in Western Newfoundland, the Northern Peninsula and

Labrador, the minister responded, and I want to quote, "There are no

decisions made. There are no prejudgements. There are no biases."

Yet, today we have what I can only term as the firefighting tag team, the two

PC members from the West Coast of the Island, the Member for Port au Port and

the Member for Stephenville, out in the media, Mr. Speaker, saying that

government will not eliminate obstetrics and surgical services at Sir Thomas

Roddick Hospital - an announcement which I welcome, I say to the members

opposite - but I want to ask the minister: Tell me, Minister, is there no bias

in this decision, or is this just another example of the chaos and the

corruption that exists within your government?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, it is most unfortunate that the member would make

those statements.

Mr. Speaker, the Hay report was done. It was a report that put

recommendations to the boards with what they can do regarding health care. Mr.

Speaker, I attended countless meetings. I have analyzed the information, and I

met with interested parties over there. There were some recommendations that

could come off the table; and, Mr. Speaker, there were some recommendations that

interfered with the health of women, and that women need quality health

services.

Mr. Speaker, we looked at those issues and there were some recommendations

that just frankly did not make sense. Mr. Speaker, the people in the area have

had a lot of anxiety over that. The government looked at those, said they do not

make sense, and we took them off the table.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, may I remind the members opposite that what the

minister said - and I am going to quote him again. He said: The strategic

decisions will be made by our new health care authorities and our new CEOs, Mr.

Speaker, not by the Member for Port au Port or the Member for Stephenville.

Evidently, Mr. Speaker, the process that the minister speaks of -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has recognized the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair. I ask

all members for their co-operation.

The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Evidently, the process that the minister spoke of only a few weeks ago is now

out the window and government has decided that they will make the decisions, not

the boards they have put in place.

Mr. Speaker, my question is in relation to the Northern Peninsula. We know

that the Member for Stephenville has already been out in the media saying that

we will dismiss the recommendations in the HayGroup report as it relates to the

Stephenville area.

I now want to ask the Member for The Straits & White Bay North if he will

stand in his place today and tell the people of his district, and the people of

the St. Anthony Region, that we will not withdraw the services of the psychiatry

department, obstetrics, gynecology, pediatrics, and radiology from your

hospital.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as Minister Responsible for the Status of Women, we look at all

issues that affect women. One of the most important issues that women face today

is in health care. Mr. Speaker, women in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador need quality services when it comes to gynecology and obstetrics. Mr.

Speaker, if there are any recommendations that come from any types of reports

that go against the needs of women, and the needs of women need to be protected

in health care, as the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women I will speak

up for those issues.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask the Minister Responsible for the

Status of Women to put her money where her mouth is. Stand up today and tell the

people of St. Anthony and the people of Southern Labrador that you will not

withdraw the services from their hospitals either, because they need the

services every bit as much as the one in the minister's own district.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, as the Minister Responsible for the Status of

Women, the issues of women and health care in this Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador are important, whether it is in Labrador, whether it is on the West

Coast, or whether it is on the Avalon Peninsula. Mr. Speaker, as the Minister

Responsible for the Status of Women, as there are issues and as there are

decisions put forth that affect women's health issues, I will be monitoring

those issues and I will make sure that women's issues are protected in this

Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: I ask the minister, today, to show the same level of respect

for the women in my district, in the great Liberal District of Cartwright-L'Anse

au Clair, and stand in your place and tell them you will not honour the

recommendations of that report as they relate to the Labrador Straits and the

St. Anthony Region.

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

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, as the Minister Responsible for the Status of

Women, I am concerned about the issues for women in all of this Province, in all

of Newfoundland and Labrador. Without being political, Mr. Speaker -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Colleagues, I -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has recognized the hon. the Minister for Human Resources, Labour

and Employment. I ask that she continue with her answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, without regard to the political stripe of any

district, last summer I visited Coastal Labrador. I met with the health care

professionals, I talked about women's issues, I met with women's groups, and

we talked about the shelters. Mr. Speaker, in this Budget this year, without

regard to the political strip of any district, we committed money to the women

of Labrador to make sure their concerns are being addressed.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I am glad to see the services at Sir Thomas

Roddick Hospital are going to be protected, but I think it were done to save the

minister's own hide. I really believe that, because this government has a

record of saying one thing and doing another thing, and health care has been no

exception.

Tell me, minister, will other regions of this Province have to do like the

people in Stephenville did, go to the Open Line shows, rally in the streets,

launch an anti-government campaign, before you people start speaking up for the

other districts in this Province?

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

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member that we

have made decisions that affect all parts of Newfoundland and Labrador, whether

it is central Newfoundland or whether it is the West Coast.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about saving your political hide in the

Stephenville area. When the Leader of the Opposition came over, during the

election in 2003, and did an official opening of the new Sir Thomas Roddick

Hospital, when there were no patients and no staff in that hospital, it was

nothing but a media ploy to do an official opening. They were in such a hurry to

do the opening, they even spelled officially wrong on the sign and did the offical'

opening.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: I hope you are ready for the Estimates tonight. It is

good to see you are ready for the Estimates.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question was for the Minister of Health, whoever that might happen to be

today. In the event it is the Member for St. George's-Stephenville East, my

question - I am very pleased to say that she did this because she is also the

Minister Responsible for the Status of Women. She is also the neighbouring

district to my District of Burgeo & LaPoile and many of her constituents, in

fact, use the LeGrow Health Centre in Port aux Basques for obstetrics. There are

only two recommendations in the Hay report that particularly concern the

hospital in Port aux Basques, LeGrow, and one of them is that they are going to

remove obstetrics.

I say to the good minister who, despite all of her visits everywhere else in

the Province, has declined to accept the invitation of the Gateway Status of

Women many times, notwithstanding that, her comments she made today, would she

undertake here now, today, to exert the same influence on her government that

she exerted in the case of Stephenville, to ensure that these same women - some

of them were her constituents - will not have obstetrical services taken from

the LeGrow health care centre in Port aux Basques?

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

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, as I have said, the health care issues of women in

this Province are very important. As Minister Responsible for the Status of

Women, I want to make sure that any decisions by any boards or any departments

take into consideration the needs of women, and that the women in Newfoundland

and Labrador have access to appropriate obstetrical services.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I see the minister can be quite definitive when she wants to be, but she yet

cannot give a simple yes answer to a very simple question that I have put.

I say to the minister, her announcement today - from her, by the way, and not

on a government website, or from the Minister of Health, this came from her

personally today - had more to do with a meeting that was scheduled in

Stephenville last night and her fear of showing up without an answer for those

people than it had to do with her alleged concerns for women.

Mr. Speaker, I just spoke today to Dr. Tony Genge, the Chair of the Western

board, and asked him when did he find out about this announcement today about

the taking off of the table these recommendations concerning Sir Thomas Roddick

Hospital. Dr. Genge, who was recently appointed by this government to chair the

Western board, tells me he found out this morning. Do you notice he did not have

any consultation on it, he did not have any input into it? He found out this

morning, he was told this morning.

Now, I say to whoever is the minister over there today: How can you suggest

that this is not a political decision when the man who chairs the very board,

who is supposed to be considering due process here, was not himself informed

that this was done today?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I first want to make a comment, that I have never

been afraid to meet with any constituents in my district, nor will I be. I have

been meeting with people in my district for over a year regarding health care. I

have not always been able to deliver what they wanted to hear, but I do get

there and I do listen and I do take their issues into consideration. Mr.

Speaker, I have had many meetings.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to make clear that the issues of women in Port aux

Basques are just as important as the issues for women in any other part of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: As I have said, Mr. Speaker, we will look at the health issues

and we will look at any recommendations that come forward that address the

issues of women and health anywhere in Newfoundland and Labrador, and, in doing

so, we have to make sure that the rights of women are protected.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier.

Recommendation 172 of the Hay report is to move patients, who are in acute

care beds waiting for long-term placements, from Corner Brook to Stephenville

until placements become available back in Corner Brook.

The Minister of Health and Community Services told this House that he cannot

make any decisions on the Hay report until the board completes its assessment

and reports back to him by the end of June. This government has bowed to public

pressure once again and removed the three controversial issues in the report for

Stephenville.

When will the Premier make the humane decision and not separate spouse from

spouse and spouse from the children and take this issue off the table?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member is aware, we have taken

the long-term heath care issue to the forefront in this Province. As a matter of

fact, during our last Budget, we confirmed the initiative on the West Coast,

which you are very familiar with, we have confirmed the initiative in

Clarenville, and we have confirmed the initiative in Labrador. All of those are

now proceeding. You know what is being done on the West Coast. You know when you

were in power, when your government was in power, there were all kinds of

waffling, and going back and forth, and public-private partnerships, and it was

going to be private, it was going to be public, it was going to be a $70 million

exercise. We are going about it right. We are going to do it right. We are

planning it properly.

What we have done is asked the Western Health Care Corporation to prepare a

plan for us as to exactly what they wanted, and, of course, they did that. We

then proceeded to the second phase which is the process of identifying somewhere

to build the facility. We are in the process of doing that now and some sites

have been identified.

The third thing we have done, of course, is we have allocated $2.7 million in

the Budget and that will be used to design the facility properly and to prepare

a proper facility that will accommodate the needs of the residents, and,

finally, we will build the buildings.

We are doing, on the West Coast, exactly what is necessary to take care of

the needs of patients on the West Coast. For us, health care is the number one

priority.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: I say to the Premier, you also committed to having the

facility built in four years which now you know cannot be done. It was nothing

but a political promise which you could not deliver in the first place; just to

get elected..

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: So don't go telling me what was said on the West Coast. I

was there.

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that the Premier, nor the Acting Minister of

Health, have even read the Hay report. Recommendation 172 was only possible if

the government eliminated obstetrics and surgical services from the Sir Thomas

Roddick Hospital, which created extra space. Through public pressure the

government removed these recommendations and now this government is moving ahead

with Recommendation 172, which is inhumane to put these seniors through this.

I ask the Premier: Where are you planning to house these seniors, in trailers

in Stephenville?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows the difference. I

mean to accuse us of political ploys and playing politics with health care

issues is absolutely ridiculous.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: It is ridiculous. What we have done is we have

committed -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Members know we have a time limit of thirty minutes for Question Period. The

question has been asked and I would ask the Premier now if he could complete his

answer.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, what we are doing when it comes to health

care is we have identified it as a huge priority. Of course, as the Minister of

Finance and the Acting Minister of Health knows, we put a lot of money into

health care this year - $26 million basically - towards diagnostic equipment and

to shortening wait times. We have a major focus. We have a plan, unlike hon.

members opposite and their government who just went out recklessly and decided

they were going to build things and announce things and do things just for

political reasons so that they could stay in power. Our goal here is to do it

properly and taking into consideration the needs of people around the Province,

and nobody knows that better than the Member for Grand Falls yesterday. I

acknowledge the Member for Grand Falls, and I thank you. She came up yesterday

and she shook my hand for what we did for the people of Grand Falls with the

Grand Falls cancer clinic. That is what we will do all over the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is a follow-up for the Acting Minister of Health to yesterday's

question, when I raised with the minister the issue of prescription drug

coverage in this Province. I want to say to the minister that in Atlantic Canada

there was a recommendation that the drugs used to treat Alzheimer's be added

to the provincial drug formulas. Most of the Atlantic provinces have done that.

I want to ask the minister, given the effective nature of these drugs,

contrary to what the minister stated yesterday in conversations with the

Alzheimer's Society - who the minister had met with and they gave a report to

- there are stated benefits for these drugs in treating patients with Alzheimer's.

I want to ask the minister, in view of that fact, when is this Province ready to

add these drugs to our provincial formulary?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Atlantic Advisory Committee did -

MR. BARRETT: A conflict of interest develops.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance, and President of Treasury Board.

MR. E. BYRNE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order -

MR. E. BYRNE: I am not going to let that member malign any member in this

House without any evidence. If you believe that the Member for Ferryland is in a

conflict of interest than you table it. If you cannot table it, than zip it up,

I say to the Member for Bellevue. If you have no evidence whatsoever, you have

no right to malign members in this Legislature just because you want to play to

the galleries in the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I do not want to belabour the point, but the Government House

Leader knows full well we try not to raise these points of order in the middle

of Question Period because he is taking our time. I realize the government are

having a tough time today in Question Period but please, stay with us Mr.

Government House Leader and we will be back to you right after Question Period.

Don't you worry.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance, and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Colleagues - I ask all hon. members, on both sides of the House, if they

could control their dialogue. The Chair has recognized the Minister of Finance

and President of Treasury Board in response to a question by the Member for

Labrador West. I ask all colleagues to permit the minister to give his answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will give the same answer I gave the last day. I will repeat it again.

There was a recommendation in 2003 from the Atlantic Advisory Committee which

indicated that would be put on the list. Subsequent to that - and I said this in

response to a question the other day - subsequent to do that new research, I

indicated it was published in (inaudible) 2000. An AD 2000 study confirmed that

there is no delay in instutitionalization because of that and very little

benefit. I said Memorial University of Newfoundland, the Department of

Epidemiology also confirmed those results, that there are no known benefits from

it and it does not delay instutitionalization.

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, I said many provinces across this country did move

quickly and put it on the list. You will have to ask them whether they agree

with putting it on now or taking it off. I had a conversation with all these

health ministers across the country in this last week. I might add, Mr. Speaker,

nearly everyone of these provinces put it on the list on the eve of an election,

not based on clinical evidence that we know today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Before we began the rotation normally allocated to the members of the New

Democratic Party, which is four minutes, we began that about seventeen minutes

into Question Period. The four minutes have expired. I also owe an apology to

the Leader of the Opposition because I do believe that he was the third

questioner and we should have recognized him ahead of the Member for Labrador

West. I will go now to the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker -

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

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order has been raised by the Member for Labrador

West.

MR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I may have four minutes but during the entire

period of Question Period, the thirty minutes that is allocated, I sat here. I

do not take

part in a lot of the calling back and forth, and I listened

attentively to the questions and try to listen to the answers, but most of the

four minutes that was allocated to me today was taken up by talk from across the

floor, points of orders responding to, and the Chair having to settle it. So, I

would ask you to keep that in mind for future, Mr. Speaker, because that is not

fair to our party when we have four minutes allocated and most of that four

minutes is taken up by bickering back and forth.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the point of view put forward by the

hon. member. However, in the rotation the Chair recognizes, as well, that he

should have recognized the Leader of the Opposition as the third representative

from his caucus.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Finance Minister has stated that he did not leave the

Cabinet Table when the decision to implement production quotas was taken and he

is stating that he will not leave the Cabinet meeting when the crab production

quota issue is discussed in the future. He is taking this action even though he

has brothers who may directly benefit from this government policy.

I ask the Premier: Is the Premier aware that two of the Finance Minister's

brothers are on the Board of Directors of the Association of Seafood Producers,

an organization that has lobbied hard to have these production quotas

implemented? If he did know that, why did he then still permit his Finance

Minister to be actively involved in these discussions with such an obvious

conflict of interest in play?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, the reputation, the

honesty, the ethics, the integrity, of the Minister of Finance is not in

question. It is not questioned by members on this side of the House; it is not

questioned by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. For you to continue on

this particular attack, which you are doing, is not only libellous and

defamatory - as I have said to you before - it is scandalous and it is

embarrassing to you and to your Party.

Now, having said that, there is a double standard. What happened in your

Cabinet when things were discussed, when your brother was a negotiator for CUPE?

What about when things were discussed concerning Abitibi and forestry, when your

brother or brothers were working with that organization? What happened when the

hon. gentleman from Twillingate & Fogo was Minister of Education and his

good wife was a teacher, and he did allocations? What happened there?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: What about when the Member for Torngat, whose brother

was a negotiator for the LIA -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We are dealing with a serious issue, which is the perception of a conflict of

interest. We are not taking about anybody's character or integrity. We are

talking about a perception of a conflict of interest.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot understand the position taken by the Premier and the

Finance Minister. I hold here the Municipalities Act, which sets the standard

for people elected to municipal councils, and it states in

section 207.(2) of

that act - this is what town councils have to do - it defines a brother as a

family member, and states that municipal councillors shall not vote or speak to

matters before the council or committee that may impact on their brother.

Now, that is what councillors all over Newfoundland and Labrador have to do.

Why is it that the Premier is not enforcing the same standard that has been

there for the last fifteen years in the Cabinet, where the highest level is

required, that if it directly impacts, as it does in municipalities, you

withdraw from the debate?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is trying to impugn that this

government is doing something wrong. We are not doing anything wrong. We are

following the rules. We are following the guidelines. We are following the same

rules and regulations and guidelines that government opposite and that Cabinet

followed.

If we want to start talking about the siblings of everybody in this House,

nobody would be able to sit in Cabinet. My sister is a teacher, so what do I do?

I cannot have anything to do with teachers? I cannot discuss anything in Cabinet

that has anything to do with a teacher?

Where are you going to take this? Where does it end? I mean, I can go down

the line and start naming relatives who are involved in Cabinet, but where does

that get us? We did not take this kind of an issue and try and make something of

it, to try and smear the reputation of an hon. gentleman in this House. I am not

going to stand here and allow you to take him to task like that!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

[Comments from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair will today, as he has done on other days in recent sittings, speak

to visitors in the gallery, visitors to our House, and ask them for their

co-operation. Visitors who have been here in the last week or so know that they

are not to participate, either favourably or otherwise, in any discussions that

occur on the floor of the House. I ask them for their co-operation.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Premier stated in this House that I would be

facing a lawsuit regarding my conflict of interest questions of the Minister of

Finance. I ask the Premier today if he could please provide me with any further

details of this pending lawsuit so that I could prepare to defend myself; and,

why is it that he thinks he can come in here and use a stale, old, intimidation

tactic to try to stop me, as an elected member, from asking legitimate questions

about an obvious conflict of interest for his Finance Minister?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have indicated that whether a lawsuit takes place or not is

not within my control. That is in the control of somebody else. I have indicated

that the kind of thing that you are saying is libellous, defamatory. That makes

you liable in court, quite frankly. When you try to imply that this hon.

gentleman here is getting some direct or indirect benefit, of putting money in

his own pocket, that is despicable. That is even lower than you and the rest of

your cronies have gone over there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time assigned for Question Period has expired.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I guess sometimes in these exchanges in Question Period we all

lose our cool from time to time, but we also have a set of rules here that we

try to live by. Each of us, I guess, keeps the other in line. You, as the

ultimate referee, tries to keep us all in line. Although there are no definitive

rules as to what is or is not unparliamentary language - I think Your Honour was

certainly able to hear what the Premier uttered.

Again, the point we have been trying to make for the last few days is, we are

all equal in here. He is no better or no worse than any one of us in here. He

must live by the same rules as the rest of us, Mr. Speaker. Before he got up on

his feet the last time, he uttered the word despicable across the floor. You

must have just heard what he said again, he referred to members over here as

despicable and as cronies. I do not care what kind of dictionary Your Honour

might wish to consult but in any common sense language that I have ever heard,

to refer to someone as being despicable and as cronies I do believe that is an

unacceptable use of a word in this Parliament.

I would ask the Premier, if he is a man of his word, which I believe him to

be in character, he should stand on the floor and withdraw that remark.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

In dealing with unparliamentary language, the Speaker takes into account the

tone, the manner, the intention of the -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask members for their cooperation.

In dealing with unparliamentary language, the Speaker takes into account the

tone, the manner, the intention of the member speaking, the person to whom the

words were directed, the degree of provocation, and, most importantly, whether

or not the remarks created disorder in the Chamber.

During Question Period today, there were a number of occasions when words

were exchanged across this House that I do believe members could take as being

insulting and would take away from the integrity of hon. members.

I quote from page 525 of Marleau and Montpetit. "Thus, the use of

offensive, provocative or threatening language in the House is strictly

forbidden. Personal attacks, insults and obscene language or words are not in

order."

I do believe, in that context, I would ask the hon. the Premier if he could

withdraw those words.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for that ruling which I

certainly honour.

I do indicate to this House, and I do indicate to all members opposite

though, that I will stand in my place and I will defend the honour of any of my

members at any particular point in time, whether that is the hon. minister or

any of the other thirty-two people.

On that basis, Mr. Speaker, I hereby withdraw my remarks.

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

MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I would like to raise a point of order, as

well, from an issue that arose during Question Period. I did not do like the

Government House Leader, interrupt the Question Period and kill some time from

the Question Period.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment made a

statement which was factually, absolutely incorrect when she indicated that I

was in Stephenville for the opening of the new hospital during the election.

That did not occur. I was not in Stephenville for the opening of a hospital. I

would ask her, on the basis of the fact that she has made a false statement in

this House, if she would now stand, do the honourable thing, and admit that she

has told something that was not the truth and withdraw the statement.

MR. SPEAKER: Members will know -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I am asking members for their -

MR. E. BYRNE: You have done it a thousand times. If you want to go down

that road (audible) forever and a day, I can guarantee you that.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Government House Leader for his co-operation.

[Comments from the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would ask the gentleman -

[Disturbance in the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

[Disturbance in the gallery]

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

This House is in recess and the Speaker orders that the galleries be closed

for the balance of the sitting day.

Recess

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Before the House recessed, the Speaker was about to rule on a point of order

raised by the Leader of the Opposition relative to comments made in Question

Period by the hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment. The

Speaker has listened to the point of order, he rules there is no point of order.

A disagreement between two hon. members as to facts of the situation do not

constitute a point of order.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Just to mention, Mr. Speaker, I accept your ruling in terms

of it not being a point of order, but again if the unfactual' information -

MR. J. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. GRIMES: I suggest to the Minister of Municipal Affairs that the

Speaker will suggest when I should stop speaking, not the Minister of Municipal

Affairs. Maybe he is taking his lessons from the Premier and thinks he is

running the House. He is not running the House anymore than the Premier is, I

say, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, let me make this point. I accept your ruling,

that it is not a point of order, but again if these kinds of absolutely

unfounded false statements are going to be made in this House and no apologies

rendered, then I give notice I will raise the issue again at the beginning of

the session tomorrow as a point of privilege.

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

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I just want to make a point that when the Sir

Thomas Roddick Hospital was opened in October 2003 it was the former minister of

health, Gerald Smith, who did the official opening, and I acknowledge that.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I intended to rise on this issue, but, of course, the House was

adjourned for some time there. I raised the point of order with regards to the

Premier's comments when he used the word: despicable, and called the members

of the Opposition cronies. The Premier stood, and it is our position over here

that it was not a proper withdrawal. A withdrawal, as I understand it, under the

rules, is intended to be and ought to be unequivocal.

The Premier stood on his feet today, he made a speech, and then he said he

would withdraw. That was not proper, it was not unequivocal, and if the man is

going to withdraw his words he should do it properly, and we request that the

Chair enforce it and that he do it properly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair will review the tape and the comments and come back with a ruling

on tomorrow.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just looking for some clarification and direction, I guess, from the

Government House Leader and from the Chair.

Normally - and I raise it today because tomorrow is the last day we have for

this week and I figure we might get it resolved before that time - normally, of

course, when it comes to Private Members' Day, whichever party it is going to

be their Private Members' Day, they give notice pursuant to rule 63 (3) of the

Standing Orders. I find myself, I guess, in a do not know what the rules are

going to be', because I understand Monday may or may not be a holiday.

Subsection (3) specifically says, "On the Monday before the

Wednesday..." Next week, of course, would be Private Member's Day for the

Opposition.

Not knowing - and I have asked the Government House Leader, and he is going

to get back to me as to whether Monday is or is not an official holiday - I

raise the question now, because I would not want us to find out that Monday is a

holiday and then on Tuesday, when I go to raise it because Monday was a holiday,

I am told that I am not complying with the rules. However the Government House

Leader wants to deal with the matter, I would just like to be on record as

having asked the question today so that we do not be found to be wont when

Tuesday comes and we have not given notice under this particular rule.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Monday is a holiday to the best of my knowledge. I said

that to you yesterday, to the best of my knowledge Monday was a holiday. The

Estimates Committees reflect that. The next time they are meeting is Tuesday

morning because Monday morning was out because it was a holiday.

With respect to Private Members' Day, there are a bunch of motions that you

have on the paper. I assume one of those are the ones that you are dealing with.

Would that be correct? I just asked the question: Any of the motions that you

have listed, are some of those what you are dealing with?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Pardon me?

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

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, again for the record, this is the first time I

have been told definitively by the Government House Leader that Monday is a

holiday. I know the Government House Leader does not decide holidays, but we can

only operate here based upon wherever

schedule we all agree upon.

All I am saying is, I did not know until now - when does the Chair want us to

give notice of our private member's motion? Do you want it on Thursday, or is

it okay if we give in on Tuesday? That is all I am asking. I am not trying to be

difficult here. It is a simple question. If the House is closed on Monday, I

cannot do it, so when would the Government House Leader or the Chair - somebody

tell me, please, when would you like me to give motion of the private member's

motion? Tomorrow or Tuesday?

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I am certainly not one - seeing that he has

asked, I would never assume to tell the Opposition House Leader and his caucus

what they want to do or could do with their private member's motion, whether

it is tomorrow or Tuesday. I would assume the earlier you can get it together

and table it for the members of the House, the more opportunity there would be.

Let me say this to the Opposition House Leader and to the Leader of the

Opposition: If you cannot get it ready until Tuesday, we are magnanimous enough

over here, and big enough, to allow you to go ahead, even though Monday is a

holiday, unlike some members opposite.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is no sense in anyone getting upset here. The Government House Leader

apparently has been in a snit all day. I asked a very simple question. Now, he

still has not given me an unequivocal comment here - the sooner you can get it

together, the better.

Can we do it on Tuesday and still be deemed to be in compliance -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair understands, and the Chair will state what he understands. That is:

If the Opposition House Leader cannot have his notice of motion ready until

Tuesday, the Chair understands it to have been said by the Government House

Leader that he will then accept that motion on Tuesday for debate on Wednesday.

That is my understanding.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present another petition on behalf of the fish harvesters in

this Province with regard to the concerns with the raw material sharing system

that has been placed on the back burner of everybody here lately, because it

seems to be a stalemate. The minister is saying that he is going to proceed with

it, and the Premier says the same thing, but here we have the plant workers, the

harvesters, and now the processors, coming on side saying they do not agree with

this system.

Mr. Speaker, the question has been asked on several occasions why this raw

material system was not put in place in 2004. The response was that there was

not time to put it in place for the 2004 season; there was not enough time to

get together with the harvesters so that an orderly fishery could be put in

place for that year. I say, I do not think there was much consultation done

since that time either, because here we are now in the 2005 fishing season and

there is more turmoil now, for sure, than there was in 2004.

Mr. Speaker, we hear talk of other reports, whether the Cashin report or the

Dunne report, and in

Chapter 7 of the raw material sharing arrangement there is

a report there from the Fishing Industry Renewal Board, and we hear talk that

there are four or five different reports and studies that said we should

implement this system. Well, the one from the FIRB in April, 1996, states very

clearly that when that study was done they had concerns about too much control

by processors over the activities of fishermen, and saw lower prices as being

the only result. That is one of the reports that came back at that time. We read

the Dunne report and the same information was provided, that this system is

going to cause problems with the harvesters and they have major concerns.

We heard the minister yesterday say that if that is what the people want,

they would pull back. I know he might not have finished his statement at that

time, and I think he went on and elaborated a little further in the scrum, but,

Mr. Speaker, that is what those people want. I think it is growing every day. We

hear reports that there are other processors who feel the same way as one of the

major processors when they announced it yesterday.

Mr. Speaker, I stand out of concern for all the businesses and individuals in

my area, the plant workers, the fish harvesters, because it plays a major

part

in that area and there are major concerns there. The quicker the Premier and the

Minister of Fisheries can get back to the table with all those people who are

involved, with sincere negotiations in mind - sincere negotiations in mind - I

think that would be the best for us all. I know there are many hon. members on

the other side of the House who feel the same way. It is a major thing for this

Province, and it will be detrimental to rural Newfoundland if that is not taken

care of.

I thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition to the House on behalf of residents of

Fogo Island. The gist of the petition, Mr. Speaker, is that they are calling

upon this government to open the ten beds that they refuse to open in the brand

new facility that is located at the center of Fogo Island.

Mr. Speaker, when we were in government we realized the need for such a

facility on Fogo Island. According to the officials in the Department of Health,

they determined that twenty beds were required; ten acute and ten chronic care.

When the government of the day took power back a year or so ago, they only

opened ten of the twenty beds, even though the Premier, when campaigning on Fogo

Island, said that he would open all twenty beds.

Mr. Speaker, what really brought it home today is at about 10 o'clock this

morning I received a call from a gentleman in Gander to tell me that his

eighty-five-year-old mother was admitted to the facility on Fogo Island a few

weeks ago, or a short time ago, because she was dying with cancer. They admitted

her and they were going to keep her there. She was informed yesterday, or this

morning, that they had to discharge her because they did not have a bed for her

because the ten beds were not available that the Tory government had closed

belonging to them out there.

What I found today really surprising and somewhat disconcerting was to sit

here today and listen to the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women

announce publicly that she will not be closing the obstetrics ward and other

parts of the Stephenville Hospital because of the dramatic impact it would have

on women in the area, when we know the real reason is that 1,000 people are

ready to protest in her district tomorrow night and she does not want to go home

and face those protestors.

Mr. Speaker, she stood on three or four occasions today, in this House, when

questioned and said: Anytime the health and safety of women in this Province is

called into question, that her government would act. Well, I beg you, minister,

as a woman yourself today and in keeping with the words you used in the House of

Assembly, to do something. At least - if not to open the ten beds in the

hospital on Fogo Island, do something to accommodate that lady so that she is

not sent home with no care and have to die at home rather than to be looked

after in a brand new facility that was built on that Island and you refused.

You, as part of that government, and part of that Cabinet, made the decision

that you would not open those beds. Those beds were not put there on a whim for

political reasons. Those beds were put there under the recommendation of the

Department of Health. All I am asking, minister, if you really have the women of

this Province at heart, that you relent and call up the people on Fogo Island

and inform them tonight that you are going to open the ten beds in that facility

so that people do not have to leave the Island or go home to die.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions.

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

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

I know there is no formal motion for adjournment put before the House on

Wednesdays - because it is Wednesday, which is normally a separate day for

private members' motions. As opposed to starting Budget debate, with three

minutes left in the day, I wonder if we could just assume that it is 5:00 p.m.

and adjourn the House and be back tomorrow? That would be by consent, if not, we

can wait for three minutes and do it anyway.

MR. SPEAKER: I do believe that there is consent on Wednesday. As members

would know, pursuant to Sanding Order 9, that at 5:00 o'clock the House would

adjourn without the question put and the adjournment would be caused by the

Speaker.

It being Wednesday, and with agreement, a few minutes left, this House now

stands adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, at 1:30 of the of the clock on April

This House is now adjourned.