Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Statements by Ministers; Oral Questions — 4 April 1995 (42nd General Assembly, 3rd Session, Vol. XLII No. 12)
1995-04-04
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
April 4,
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS
Vol. XLII No. 12
The House met at 2:00 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Dicks): Order, please!
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education and
Training.
MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, honourable members will recall
that early in January, I announced the formation of the Provincial Information
and Library Resources Board to oversee the development of a network of Community
Information Resource Centres. This new direction is intended to move provincial
libraries into the new age of technology currently evolving throughout the
world.
Today, it was my pleasure to take
part in the official launch
of the St. John's INFONET at the Provincial Resource Library at the Arts and
Culture Centre, another significant step forward towards the new technology.
With this launch today, the Provincial Information and Library Resources Board
has begun the process of co-ordinating a whole new effort for the delivery of
information to the general public.
Mr. Speaker, the Board has formed a new partnership with the
St. John's INFONET Association, a group of dedicated volunteers, interested in
providing free access to community-based information; plans have been made to
share equipment and resources for the benefit of the whole community. Working
together, the Board and the Association will use computers, modems, and phone
lines to provide that free public access.
The INFONET will be for everyone, and members of the general
public can now begin registering for individual accounts. These accounts will be
established free of charge and will provide access to the full range of the
INFONET's services.
Mr. Speaker, the exciting range of services include: local
library catalogue, social and health service groups, arts information,
recreation and sports schedules, news, science and environment information, and
hobby groups and clubs. Access to government information includes: statistics,
Federal Government information, Provincial Government information, and Municipal
Government information and the Budget Speech, Mr. Speaker, which was presented
in this House by the Minister of Finance just a few weeks ago.
Other services available are virtually unlimited. They
include: Electronic Mail, all registered users will be able to send and receive
messages on the INTERNET (an international computer network that connects over
20 million users in over 60 countries), and expert advice will be available
through an "Ask the Expert: service." These could include: Ask the Veterinarian,
Ask the Lawyer, and Ask the Gardener.
When I announced this initiative back in January, I thought
it would take three to five years to implement it Province-wide. I have been
advised today, Mr. Speaker, that this could be up and running throughout the
Province in a little more than two years.
Mr. Speaker, this launch today is an exciting and interesting
move forward as we continue to prepare and convert to the new age of technology.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford -
Kenmount.
MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise and
congratulate the ministry on a positive innovation by his government. The
electronic age and the computer age is part of the new reality in this Province
and new economy world-wide. I am very pleased to say that a few years ago I was
principal of a junior high school which had the credit of being the first junior
high school in the Province to have its learning resource centre fully
computerized. The school, itself, raised $45,000 to make that happen.
Mr. Speaker, the minister is asked to assure that information
on INTERNET be available to all schools throughout the Province. Now, that is
going to be somewhat difficult in the short term but it is in the long-term
goals that we have to try to make sure that all schools are connected and that
all children have equal access.
Mr. Speaker, I also ask the minister if he can try to assure
that it is available to all areas of the Province between different schools,
between community information resource centres, to adult education centres and I
note that some towns and cities are connected now to INTERNET and they will be
continue to be part of the system. I was pleased - we had a meeting the other
day when the mayor of Mount Pearl announced that the City of Mount Pearl is
already coming on stream.
Mr. Speaker, I have one suggestion for the minister and that
is to say to him that we should also make sure that all MHAs have their offices
connected to INFONET and INTERNET. If we are going to be a part of the
functioning of our communities, we have to make it possible for all MHAs to have
access to it and maybe -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time has expired.
By leave.
MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, if I could just conclude by
saying, we should bring the House of Assembly itself and Hansard and other parts
of the Legislative Library on to the same system.
MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. Member for St. John's East
have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.
MR. HARRIS: No leave?
MR. SPEAKER: No leave.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Minister of Employment and Labour
Relations.
Yesterday, after Question Period, out of earshot and eyeshot
of the media, the minister verbally accosted, made wild accusations and subtle
threats to the spokesperson for the Injured Workers Association of Newfoundland
and Labrador.
Let me ask the minister: What compelled him to do it, why did
he do it and would he stand today and apologize to Mr. Austin Haynes,
spokesperson for the Newfoundland and Labrador Injured Workers' Association, who
is sitting in the gallery today?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and
Labour Relations.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Let me say to the hon. member it is a pity that everything
comes secondhand to him.
I passed Mr. Haynes yesterday and all I said to Mr. Haynes
was: Mr. Haynes, it is too bad you didn't send me a copy of your minutes then I
would have had - that's all, that's all that was verbalized to Mr. Haynes, there
were no extraordinary comments made to the man, I say to the hon. member.
Now, again, Mr. Speaker, he is up today making accusations
thirdhand. The member was up again yesterday talking about his `source' and I
think it is time that the hon. member took some responsibility, cut out the
shenanigans, put his `sources' on the table, put his information on the table or
as he asked me to do yesterday, I will ask the hon. member: will he resign if he
can't?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I say to the Minister of
Employment and Labour Relations, I already put some evidence to the Deputy
Premier yesterday and he better be very careful on this issue; and let me tell
you, that it wasn't thirdhand information. It was not thirdhand information that
came to me yesterday, there were six or several witnesses who saw you do that to
the spokesperson for the Injured Workers' Association.
Mr. Speaker, let me ask the minister this: You are the
minister responsible for the administration of the Workers' Compensation Act,
the Workers' Compensation Review Division, why did you accost Mr. Haynes in such
a manner yesterday? Explain yourself, Minister, stand up and explain yourself,
please.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.
MR. MURPHY: I don't know that that kind of a silly
comment - I made a comment to Mr. Haynes yesterday and it was simply: Mr.
Haynes, if you had forwarded your minutes to me, than I would have known; we
discussed it and he said: No, I didn't want to do that and I said: It is too
bad, we would have had a better understanding of the situation and I carried on.
I didn't threaten anybody, I say to the member. That is incorrect, that is
totally incorrect. It is time for the Member for Mount Pearl to take some
responsibility and to cut out his foolishness -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Kilbride.
MR. MURPHY: Or Kilbride, wherever he is from. Cut out his
foolishness and stop this.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. MURPHY: I'm not threatening anybody, I say to the
Member for Grand Bank. I say it is time for the member to put his information up
on the table or put his source of information on the table, or cut out this
silly foolishness.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.
MR. E. BYRNE: All in time, Mr. Speaker. Let me ask the
Premier this. Mr. Premier, will you meet with the spokesperson for the Injured
Workers Association to get a clarification on what actually happened yesterday?
It was a cowardly bully act by the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.
He pointed his finger and said to him directly that what is going on here, we
will see what will become the end of it. That is exactly what was said to
Injured Workers and to the spokesperson by the minister yesterday. Mr. Premier,
will you meet sometime this week with Mr. Austin Haynes and his group to find
out exactly what happened yesterday afternoon in the lobby of the Confederation
Building?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: I will assume the member has addressed his
question through the Chair, and I will say to Your Honour that anybody who wants
a cause to meet with me or wants to arrange a meeting with me has no difficulty.
People have a meeting and they can't get a matter that is of concern to them
addressed through the minister involved. I've never had any difficulty meeting
with anybody who wishes it, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I have some questions for the
Premier regarding a different topic and it is dealing with the $5 million job
creation program that the government eventually....
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. E. BYRNE: Don't threaten me, Tom Murphy. Don't try to
threaten me. Don't threaten me.
MR. W. MATTHEWS: What is he saying now?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. W. MATTHEWS: What is this? Threats across the House?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition has the floor. I would
like members to give him the courtesy of listening to the question.
MR. SIMMS: Mr. -
MR. E. BYRNE: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. If the
Minister of Employment and Labour Relations has something to -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I haven't recognized the hon. member.
The hon. the Member for Kilbride.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If the Minister of
Employment and Labour Relations has something to say to me he should say it in
this House and not throw verbal barbs and idle threats to me across the floor of
the House of Assembly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: Stand up! Stand up, boy!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman for Kilbride
hasn't made a point of order so I don't need to respond to it. What I would say
to him is as he sows so shall he reap.
AN HON. MEMBER: Exactly.
MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was distracted by
the minister over there. I didn't know what he was doing. His arms were
flailing.
Anyway, I have some questions for the Premier regarding the
$5 million job creation program. Not the deputy Premier - I notice he is nodding
attentively - the Premier. The $5 million job creation program that closed, as
the Premier would know, March 31. That was the deadline. Now, many communities,
and we have heard all kinds of stories, have had to return part or all of the
funding they had originally received. Can the Premier tell the House exactly how
much money has been returned from these communities, and can he tell us how many
communities have returned funding?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and
Labour Relations.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As the program closed out on Friday when we done the
Estimates this morning the indicator was that there is some $4,720,000 spent in
the program. I am sure the member understands that in most of these programs
there are some slippages and we have not fully concluded the program yet, and as
soon as we do, I say to the Leader of the Opposition, we will be bringing a
report to the House and showing all members exactly what the total is and what
was spent in the respective districts.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. SIMMS: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.
My supplementary is to the Premier, and this is precisely the
reason I am asking the Premier the questions, because the minister has been
stonewalling on these types of questions for the last several weeks. It is not a
difficult task to try to find out how much as been returned. Just as an example,
I say to the Premier for his own information, we did a quick investigation over
the last day or so of just seven out of fifty-two constituencies and we found
approximately $225,000 has had to be returned from just seven districts.
Now, Mr. Speaker, that is money that the Premier and his
government allocated to create jobs for people who were desperately in need. We
understand from fairly good sources, and these indications are that there will
be at least $1 million that will be returned to the government. That is a
significant amount of money, so I want to ask the Premier if he will check into
this a little more closely and if he finds that the information I am giving him
today is reasonably accurate, will he consider creating a new emergency job
creation program with those returned funds, especially if it is in that area of
$1 million or so, and make the effort worthwhile by relaxing the criteria of a
new program?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I have no doubt the minister
will do a complete assessment and will in due course advise the government as to
exactly where matters stand. If there is any justification for the government
taking a different course of action we will advise the House at that time.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. SIMMS: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.
I am disappointed that the Premier isn't taking this a little
more seriously.
PREMIER WELLS: (Inaudible)
MR. SIMMS: You are not. That is my point.
You have an example here. In Bonavista South there was
approval for $143,000 in projects to create seventy-three jobs. In essence what
happened was $82,000 was returned and only eighteen jobs.
MR. EFFORD: Everything was completed in my district.
MR. SIMMS: Well, I can say to the Minister of Works,
Services and Transportation, everything wasn't completed in every member's
district over on your side of the House, nor on this side.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. SIMMS: Yes, silly.
Mr. Speaker, the only successful job creation program that
this government has created in the last year was the one for Eric Gullage.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, speaking of patronage, that
brings me to my next supplementary question. I see the Premier shaking his head.
That's too bad. He doesn't like it, but that's too bad. It brings me to my next
question. Is the Premier aware that there were three or four staff people hired
to administer this job creation program over in the Department of Employment and
Labour Relations? Is he aware of that? Can he tell us who they were? Is he aware
that Mona Morrow, the defeated Liberal candidate in last year's Placentia
by-election, was one of the chief people put in that particular program to
administer the job creation funds?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and
Labour Relations.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, when the program was announced, of course, the
Department of Employment and Labour Relations, like any other department, has
applications on file, and I was very happy to learn that we had satisfied our
people, that there were competent applicants out there. I really find it
difficult to understand why the member would rise and pick on... Is Mona Morrow,
because she took a temporary job, less competent than somebody else? What is it
the member is trying to say? I don't know Ms. Morrow that well, but I was happy
that she got the job - very happy.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I don't know what is wrong with
the minister. I asked him if he would - I asked the Premier; he couldn't, so he
asked his minister, to tell the House - who now can't - who were the people that
you hired to administer the program? I understand Mona Morrow was one of them;
that is what I said. Was I wrong?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: You confirmed that? Who were the other two or
three?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. MURPHY: I will find out for the hon. House Leader.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I would just like the hon. minister to have the floor.
The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.
MR. MURPHY: Let me say that -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. MURPHY: Perhaps it's not advisable for the Leader of
the Opposition to retire at this time, until he gets his blood pressure under
control. Perhaps he should stay on a little while.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will find out who the individuals
are. I don't know outside of Ms. Morrow, and the only reason I know that was
because I met her one day, well into the program, in the hall. I didn't know
what she was doing there.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I can tell him one thing, at
least this is the right face you are looking at, not the one on the back of your
head.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, let me ask the Premier, if I may
- it seems to be a testy day, or something is wrong today; I don't know. I don't
know what the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation had for breakfast,
but he should have more. He is much more pleasant every day when he eats this
stuff.
To the Premier, Mr. Speaker, a final supplementary on the
questions that I have been raising about the job creation program, which turns
out has not worked out very well. The people have not been served well, because
hundreds of people have not been able to get the work that they need, and the
government acknowledged that by having the program in the first place. The
minister has been stonewalling by joking and answering his questions in an
offhanded way. I want to ask the Premier this question: will he assure us that
he will personally check into the matter that I have raised? Will he assure the
House, the members of the House, that the report that the minister refers to
will be tabled in this House before the House closes for the Easter break?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I have answered most of the
question but I will answer the second part. The first part of it is that I have
complete confidence in what the minister will do and has done and -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WELLS: - I have no doubt whatsoever that in due
course the minister will provide the Cabinet with full information and the
Cabinet will take its decision as to what it does, if anything, with the
circumstances that are reported to Cabinet as a result of the application of
this program. As to whether or not we will table a report in the House, that
will depend on whether or not it is a public report. If it is than a public
report will be tabled but if it's a report for Cabinet, the answer is no, Mr.
Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Speaker, my questions are to the
Minister responsible for Municipal and Provincial Affairs.
Over the past couple of years there has been much discussion
and concern about the financial status of municipalities in the Province, Mr.
Speaker. I understand that the department has done a review of the
municipalities around the Province concerning their financial state. Could the
minister tell the House today how many municipalities were involved in that
review and what were the results?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and
Provincial Affairs.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, we did approximately sixty communities. I am not sure if
it was fifty-eight or sixty-one but around sixty communities that we identified,
the staff in my department identified, as being either in rough financial shape
or about to be there. We found the sixty that we picked were basically in the
position that most of the departments people had thought they were, which
basically meant that in relationship to NMFC debt and current account debt - and
the hon. member knows what I mean when I say current account debt. That is
something that is not the responsibility of the government, it is the
responsibility of the community - that most of these sixty communities have
found themselves, early in 1995, in a very serious economic financial situation.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for
Humber Valley.
MR. WOODFORD: Can the minister tell the House what he
plans to do about those approximately sixty communities and municipalities
around the Province, Mr. Speaker? What is he going to do? In order for a
municipality around the Province to borrow any amount of funds they would have
to get a guarantee or a commitment from the Department of Municipal and
Provincial Affairs in order to do so. So if those people cannot arrange their
lines of credit, cannot get permission to borrow and cannot get capital funding
from the department, could the minister explain to the House how those
municipalities are going to function in the near future?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and
Provincial Affairs.
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member asks a very good
and I suppose educated - from his point of view - question. I really am not in a
position right now to say what I am going to be able to do. I met with one of
the communities this morning and the plan by the department is to meet with each
individual community. I have assigned a number of people from the department as
well as the hon. member sitting behind me, Fortune - Hermitage, he is helping me
with it as well because of his background in municipal politics and we are
meeting on an individual basis with every one of those communities starting with
the community which finds itself in the most difficulty. We met with one this
morning and we made the commitment to these communities that we will send our
people into the community, to sit down, help them with their budgets and look at
the overall financial picture of the community.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I will say to you that I know that there
has to be a solution to this. The solution will have to come I guess with
deliberations with the hon. Minister of Finance, with Cabinet, with
municipalities, with the Federation of Municipalities and all the people
connected. I cannot say to the hon. member today, Mr. Speaker, that I can give
him an answer. All I can say is that we are working on the problem and hopefully
within the next month or so we will be able to sit down with some
recommendations to Cabinet, to Treasury Board and all the other people on what
we actually can do to help these communities.
MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Member
for Humber Valley.
MR. WOODFORD: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker.
Could the minister tell the House today - I know it was
announced in the Budget earlier last week or the week before last, that there
would be no capital funding this year for municipalities around the Province -
whether they have re-assessed that particular decision, and will they be
offering any - the municipalities that can support themselves and pay their way,
especially after doing this review - will they be offered any capital funding
this particular year?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and
Provincial Affairs.
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, yes, probably it will give me the
opportunity to tell the House that the federal government just last week has
come back now and asked us to save up to $15 million of this year's
infrastructure funding. That would basically mean that there would be
approximately $10 million left in the fund. We are in the process right now. The
Minister of Finance and Treasury Board and myself are meeting tomorrow morning
with some of our federal people to discuss that possibility. If that doesn't
happen, and we are hoping that it doesn't happen, then there will be
approximately $25 million left in the infrastructure program that will be made
available this year.
On top of that, there is a statement in the Budget basically
saying that communities that can afford to pay 100 per cent of the recoverable
debt on water and sewerage, monies will be made available to those communities.
The hon. member knows the communities I'm talking about. They are basically the
communities out there that are below the $335 range, are paying their own way
anyway. If there was a regular capital works program this year they would
automatically come in and probably qualify for the money and pay it back over a
period of ten or fifteen years themselves. We are assuming, looking at the
requests, there could be as much as $25 million spent on that as well. So the
overall capital works budget this year could reach as much as $50 million.
There is a problem with that, of course. In so much as we've
already decided, and the hon. House knows, Mr. Speaker, that we've already
decided that any of the communities that I mentioned before that are in serious
financial difficulty, we cannot as a government keep giving money to these
communities to incur future debt. Those are the only communities that will be
made available money this year, plus the infrastructure money that will go out
to the other communities besides.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.
MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday the
Minister for Finance and Treasury Board was good enough to table some answers to
questions I put to him last week in Question Period dealing with the Trans City
contracts. He gave us some information dealing with the lease payments.
It also indicates - and I've not had an opportunity to go
through it in detail; I will be doing greater analysis on the numbers provided
by the minister and will be no doubt getting back with further questions to him
- but on the surface it indicates that the sinking fund payments that we were
told amounts to some $16 million over the term of the thirty-year lease are
included in the lease payments. Yet the information the minister tabled on
November 30 1994 dealing with the stream of lease payments didn't even mention,
in fact, the sinking fund. Would the minister confirm that the sinking fund
payments are indeed included in those payments that add up to $96 million over
thirty years? Why were we not given this information in November?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and
Treasury Board.
MR. BAKER: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I believe if the hon. member
checks back he will find he was given the information back in November. As a
matter of fact, when he asked me questions about whether this was a total cost I
said yes, it was a total cost. He refused to believe me. He said: No, there is
some big pay out at the end, and so on. In actual fact, this time when I tabled
I tabled the breakdown - the monthly total, for instance, for years one to five
for Burgeo was $55,567, made up of $53,500 for monthly lease and $2,004 sinking
fund. The amounts I tabled were the total amounts, the monthly totals, which is
all I was asked for before. I indicated to the hon. gentleman at that point in
time that that was the total payment. That is in fact true.
MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. the Member for Mount
Pearl.
MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The document I have
here that was tabled by the minister on November 30, 1994 did not make any
mention whatsoever of sinking fund. In fact, it was quite a bit later than that
that we even found out there was a sinking fund. The first time the minister
indicated was last week when I questioned him. He did indicate that the sinking
fund might be included in that payment. It is only now that we have it in
writing that it appears to be. I wanted the minister to confirm that that is
included.
The minister also talked about present day value and the
comparison of the leases based on fixed rentals and escalating rentals over a
thirty-year period, and related that to present day values. That changes
considerably when you are talking about a portion of that being put into a
sinking fund which earns interest. Would the minister tell us if his analysis of
that, which indicates at least in his opinion that the Trans City proposal was
the best one, indeed includes provision for that sinking fund building up
interest over that thirty-year period?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance.
MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, the numbers I have given the hon.
gentleman are accurate comparisons. It is the fairest comparison that can be
made and includes everything. I will repeat that again for the hon. member, it
includes everything. In the calculations, it is the same comment I made back in
November when the question of this big balloon payment, came up, and I told the
hon. gentleman, I am sorry, all of that is included in the numbers you were
given, but I wasn't believed.
It is the same situation, Mr. Speaker, everything has been
taken into account, as far as I know, in terms of the comparison, the present
value costs that I have provided him. The hon. gentleman can peruse it, I
suppose, over the next few day and add more questions on it.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.
MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, a final supplementary to the
minister. Since Confederation Life, we now know, benefits from this sinking fund
- this money is put on deposit with them in order to have a sinking fund there
that is capable of paying off 60 per cent of the purchase price at the end of
the thirty-year period. Would the minister tell us what that sinking fund is
earning by way of an interest rate from Confederation Life as compared to the
9.41 per cent the minister has already told us, and does he still think that is
more favourable than the 9 per cent borrowing rate the minister had available to
him on October 15, 1991 when he borrowed $200 million U.S. on a thirty-year
lease term, about the same time as he entered into this contract at 9.41 per
cent?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance.
MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, the calculations have been done
on the Province's cost, I think, of 9.58 per cent, but I will check into that
again. The wording the hon. gentleman uses about Confederation Life benefiting
from the sinking fund and the interest it will earn - no more, Mr. Speaker, than
the bond holders in New York benefited from other borrowings we have done. This
is a borrowing and when we go to the U.S. market, or the Canadian market, we pay
interest to bond holders, and this is the way we get money, as the hon.
gentleman understands.
I think one of the numbers mentioned there was the
expenditure for Newfoundland Enviroponics. There is $75 million over the next
thirty years going to be paid out to these bond holders in interest, so this is
a normal cost of doing business, Mr. Speaker, and not to anybody's great profit.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte - White
Bay.
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Minister of Health. The minister is
aware that at the health care centre on the Baie Verte Peninsula there has been
a downgrading, especially as it relates to acute care beds. As a matter of fact,
there are now six acute care beds left in that facility and that is for 10,000
people and for twenty-one communities on the Baie Verte Peninsula. The overflow
in case loads since them have either gone to Grand Falls or Corner Brook.
Can the minister tell me if he is satisfied that these case
loads are being handled by Grand Falls and Corner Brook?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MR. L. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
There has been, in the health care facility in Baie Verte, as
there has been in many of the other acute care institutions around the Province
over the past number of years, a re-adjusting of services that are being
delivered from those sites. What is happening, of course, is that we have some
pressure in the long-term care side for nursing home type beds, and on the other
side we have some diminished requirements for acute care beds, given the way
that health care continues to evolve in terms of its delivery and so on.
Now, in respect of the circumstance to which the minister
refers at the Baie Verte facility, I happened to have had the opportunity to
visit there in January as I was going through that region looking at some
facilities, and I can tell the member that there was absolutely no expression of
concern as to the level of service they were able to deliver. There was no
expression of concern as to the programs they were providing, and I can tell the
hon. member that from a health care perspective that facility, in conjunction
with the hospital at Grand Falls, and in conjunction with the facility in Corner
Brook, is adequately and appropriately meeting the health care needs of the
people in that region.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for
Baie Verte -White Bay.
MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, I can assure you that it is far
from adequate what the people receive in Baie Verte, and it is far from adequate
when they go to Grand Falls and Corner Brook. A case in point, Mr. Speaker, is a
call I had just a few hours ago which is very disturbing. A fifty-four-year-old
logger in Burlington, who has a chronic back problem met a specialist in Corner
Brook in January, and the specialist told him the only way to get rid of the
problem was to have surgery on his back, but first he had to have a myelogram -
no problem. The only problem is, that the myelogram was scheduled for November -
eleven months later he can have his myelogram and then he can have the problem
corrected.
Yesterday, the pain was so unbearable his wife had to call
the hospital in Baie Verte. They called an ambulance at 12:15; at 5:45 the
ambulance showed up in Burlington and took him to the Baie Verte hospital - and
the reason why the ambulance was delayed, by the way, was, at the Grand Falls
hospital there were other Baie Verte patients waiting to get into beds, and two
ambulances were held up in Grand Falls. When they finally got him to the Baie
Verte hospital, Dr. Ewing, at the hospital, said: `We would like to take you in
and treat you,' they understood the situation, she simply said there was no room
at the inn - `we can't do anything for you,' and they sent him on the same
ambulance, back home, where he sits right now in pain that is unbearable and
waits for a November appointment for a myelogram.
You can tell me that adequate services are still available in
Baie Verte, Mr. Speaker? What can the minister say in those circumstances?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MR. L. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have no reason to question or doubt the circumstances that
the hon. member just described as with respect to a specific situation and one
of his constituents.
What I can say to the member is that, he certainly has every
opportunity to bring these `unusual situations', I would term them, to my
attention on an urgent basis, and I will do what I can to expedite service; but
I have to say this also to the member, that the new health care board, the
Central West Health Care Board that is in place in that area, has primary
responsibility for delivering health care services, and if there is on even one
MR. TOBIN: You don't have enough money to do it, boy -
that's the problem.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. L. MATTHEWS: If there is even one situation where
treatment or service is not available on a timely basis or is not appropriately
delivered, then I am sure that board will take due cognizance of it and address
the situation, and if it is necessary for the member to bring it to my
attention, I will assist in any way I can. I will repeat to him again though,
that the health care services in that region are adequate, and I can just refer
him to a conversation I had last week with a delegation from the town of LaScie.
At no time in my discussion with that delegation, did they refer to any
inadequacies in that region for health care. So, there may be situations where
people may be inappropriately suffering or not timely attended to but if there
are, we will do all that we can within our resources to take care of them and
address the needs.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Question Period has elapsed.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
On behalf of hon. members, I would like to welcome these
guests to the galleries: Mayor Clarke, Deputy Mayor Philpott, Councillor Wilton,
and Town Manager Moyles, of the Town of Lewisporte.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Presenting Reports by
Standing and Special Committees
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and
Labour Relations.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am pleased to present the Annual Report of the Labour
Relations Board for the period, January 1, 1994 to December 31, 1994.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo - Bay
d'Espoir.
MR. GILBERT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to present the report of the Government Services
Estimates Committee. The Committee have considered the matters to them referred
and have approved, without amendment, the estimates of expenditures of the
Departments of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, Works, Services and
Transportation, Finance, Employment and Labour Relations, the Newfoundland and
Labrador Housing Corporation, and the Public Service Commission.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and
Treasury Board.
MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the following
list of guaranteed loans paid out by the Province since my last report to the
House. As well, I wish to table a list of temporary loans raised under
section
48 of the Act, between the period February 28, 1994 and March 15, 1995. These
are the daily overdrafts.
MR. SPEAKER: I just want to put a motion on the report of
the Government Services Estimates Committee. When shall the report be received?
On motion, report received and adopted.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, in accordance with the
understanding we gave the House at the adjournment time yesterday, we will -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. ROBERTS: I am sorry?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. ROBERTS: That is not what Hansard says. I took the
trouble to look at it. I wasn't sure myself, I say to my friend, but I concluded
by saying we would do Supply today, if my hon. friend refers to Hansard.
With that said, I would ask if Your Honour would call Order 2
(
a) to put us into Committee of Supply to deal with the Estimates. That is also
a note I sent across to my hon. friend three-quarters of an hour ago, but I did
say it, if he looks at Hansard.
On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of
Supply on a Resolution and a Bill Respecting the Granting of Main Supply to Her
Majesty, the Queen, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.
Committee of the Whole
MR. CHAIRMAN (P. Barrett): Order, please!
The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman, there are three heads that are
debated in the House. Could we start with the one on the Executive Council? That
begins on page 13 of the printed Estimates. We will come back to CFS if my hon.
friends wish to deal with that in more detail - we have lots of time. Let's
start on page 13 with the first vote there, Sir, and go through them.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Executive Council; accounts centred at
1.1.01.
The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.
AN HON. MEMBER: Carried.
MR. SIMMS: (Inaudible) explain that?
MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Chairman, I thank government for that
detailed explanation of their estimates. It is quite an introduction. Are we
going to go through it in detail or are we going to do it generally? We are
going to do it as we go, are we?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. ROBERTS: We will do it if the hon. gentleman wishes
but the practice varies, as he will acknowledge. We will do it as members of the
Committee wish, of course, but normally there is not much debate on the
Lieutenant-Governor's establishment. That is, I think, what my colleague had in
mind.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.
MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Chairman, all I can say is that
generally we get into a department and we call the minister's salary. We debate
the minister's salary for a day or two and then we finally start moving through
the subjects. I would like to debate the Premier's salary for three or four
days, but I don't care, we can go through the subheads.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: If the hon. member wishes, you will notice
the President of the Executive Council has left to go to a meeting. I have a
commitment at about 3:20 that I have to go to. So if - to the extent that you
would prefer that I answer any questions, I will be here until about 3:15 anyway
and I would be happy to do it. I would be happy to talk about the
Lieutenant-Governor's salary because we don't pay it.
MR. ROBERTS: Let's pass subhead (1) and go on to subhead
(2).
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. SIMMS: In that case, Mr. Chairman, perhaps the
Premier can leave now. There is no need to stay until 3:20. We don't want to
hold him up or anything like that. He is always talking about how he has a lot
of confidence in his ministers and they are competent.
PREMIER WELLS: The President of the Council has just
stepped out for a meeting and I agreed to stay (inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: So you are the Acting President of the
Council.
PREMIER WELLS: I am the Acting (inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: Anyway, we will leave it to our Finance critic
and go through the headings and we will stop.
On motion, 1.1.01 through 2.1.01, carried.
MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.1.02 - Executive Support?
MR. ROBERTS: No (inaudible).
MR. WINDSOR: It doesn't matter, Mr. Chairman, I just
wanted the opportunity to reduce the Premier's salary to a dollar but we can
reduce his support staff. That was done once before, as we recall. We seem to be
going through it quickly. There are a few things I wanted to get into and you
were moving so quickly, I wanted to make sure we stop before 2.2.02, which is
the salary of the Government House Leader, Mr. Chairman, and this is a new
subhead. If one would look at the 1994 Budget, you will find there was no
appropriation for a salary for the Government House Leader. In fact, there has
never been an appropriation for the Government House Leader, but all of a sudden
we find that last year we spent $48,000 on that. I guess the real question is
now, who is the real Minister of Justice? Who is being paid to be Minister of
Justice? Where is the Special Warrant for that $48,300? It was not appropriated
last year, so there had to be a Lieutenant-Governor's Warrant in order to cover
that.
PREMIER WELLS: (Inaudible).
MR. WINDSOR: He isn't back.
MR. SIMMS: Like we said, you can go on.
MR. WINDSOR: Obviously, the Minister of Finance doesn't
have the same confidence in the Premier that the Premier has in the Minister of
Finance.
PREMIER WELLS: (Inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: No, we don't want you to answer (inaudible).
MR. WINDSOR: No, we just want to point out that all of a
sudden there is an appropriation of $150,000 this year for the Government House
Leader and I guess it begs the question of when are we going to deal with the
position of Minister of Justice?
Now, the Premier is not in the Province enough to justify the
salary of $99,000 that is there under his subhead as Premier. He certainly can't
justify the salary that is there for the Minister of Justice, too. And now we
are paying a Government House Leader $150,000 - we are not paying him, but
providing $150,000 for the operation of his office as Government House Leader
and Minister responsible for government's legislative program. A wonderful new
terminology that was invented this year to make sure that the minister gets
paid.
It is a good opportunity to ask the minister - and I ask this
very seriously and without any malice - what is the standing on the whole
pharmaceutical supplies deal, the investigation into that? When can we expect a
resolution so that the minister's name can either be cleared, or we can be clear
of the minister is a better -as the case may be?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: I am happy to have the opportunity to
address the matter, Mr. Chairman. I guess, to explain it in a nutshell, it is
simply this: without any allegation or suggestion of any knowledge or
involvement whatsoever of the Government House Leader, some individuals at a
company in which the Government House Leader owns shares were apparently or
alleged to have been misbehaving in an improper way that attracted police
consideration first in Ontario.
When we became aware of that, because of the minister's
position as Minister of Justice, we felt that he should stand aside as Minister
of Justice, and not have anything whatsoever to do with anything relating to the
direction of public prosecutions in the office, which ministers have virtually
nothing to do with anyway - the DPP does it all on its own. The role of the
Attorney General is simply to see that he is acting properly, but to have no
involvement in the day-to-day direction, and secondly, the direction of the
police forces in the Province, which normally comes under the Minister of
Justice.
What I asked the minister to do, in order to relieve me of
the excess burden, because it would be too much for me to cope with, was to do
everything that he would ordinarily do as Minister of Justice except anything to
do with the role of Attorney General or the direction of the police. I do that,
and I have asked him to do all of the others.
Now, technically, there has to be provision for him in the
Estimates to be paid as Government House Leader, but I can assure the House, or
the Committee, that he is not being paid for both Government House Leader and
Minister of Justice. I can equally assure the House that neither am I.
My problem to answer the question as to timing that the
member raises legitimately is sort of a difficult one. There are two aspects to
this. One is the RCMP investigation that is centred in the main in Ontario about
certain allegations respecting an individual in Ontario and his relationship
with the individual who was formerly managing Pharmaceutical Supplies and has
since, I believe, been dismissed from that position.
The second was as a result of information turned over to the
police by the directors of Pharmaceutical Supplies; they carried out an
investigation locally and certain other involvements of some management people
at Pharmaceutical Supplies are under investigation currently.
I would hope that they would get it done very quickly so we
can end this difficulty and, as the member says, either clear the minister's
name or clear the minister, one or the other, and he is quite right when he
casts it in that way. Mr. Chairman, I have not asked the police to speed up
their investigation, and I don't intend to, because I don't want it ever to be
suggested that they had anything less than adequate time to do whatever
investigation they felt was necessary. So I have said nothing about it in the
hope that the investigation that is being done within the Province will be
completed with the least possible delay. As soon as that is done and I'm aware
of it, I will advise the House of it. Then, I don't know how long that
investigation in Ontario may take, but once the matter is cleared up within the
Province it may resolve the matter for us, in any event, but that remains to be
seen.
MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.
MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Chairman, I thank the Premier for that.
My purpose in asking the question was really just to set the record straight and
know where we are now. I should point out, though, that it is very difficult for
the Premier in his capacity as Premier to also fulfil any responsibilities of
the Minister of Justice. This is a lengthy period of time now that we've not had
a full-time Minister of Justice and, as the Premier just told us, and
understandably so, it could well be months, perhaps another year - who knows? -
before we have a resolution of the matter.
Would the Premier not consider putting in place an Acting
Minister of Justice if he obviously wants to leave a position open? I realize
the Premier is Acting Minister of Justice, but in all honesty, the Premier seems
to be spending more time travelling than being anything else. He can hardly
fulfil some of the responsibilities of Premier here in the Province, let alone
take on additional responsibilities of Acting Minister of Justice. The people of
this Province need service from government in the right of the Minister of
Justice. I'm sure there are matters that are being delayed because of this
temporary arrangement. And one can accept that on a short-term basis, but when
it becomes extended such as it is, I think it really should be reconsidered.
Maybe the Premier would like to address that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: The hon. member is quite correct, and if I
had to fulfil all of the duties of Minister of Justice I would be hard-pressed
to find the time. All I am doing is filling the responsibilities of Attorney
General and anything that relates to the direction of the police, and there is
very little, to be honest, that relates to the day-to-day direction of the
police.
I announced the appointment of a new Chief of Police the
other day, and I was involved in the signing of a policing agreement with
respect to arrangement at Davis Inlet, and occasionally a variety of things like
that. It is true, it does add an additional burden, and I don't think I have
worked harder and put in more time at any time since I have been in office than
I have in the last two to three months for a variety of reasons, one of which is
having this additional responsibility.
Fortunately, the Government House Leader takes on all of the
other responsibilities, the direction of civil litigation, responding to the
day-to-day operations of Justice Department matters that don't in any way
involve the direction of the police or the Director of Public Prosecutions. So,
it is not as though I had all of the duties to do, I don't. It is just those
two, and I have to say, Mr. Chairman, that my experience is that we have a
first-rate Deputy Minister of Justice and a first-rate Director of Public
Prosecutions, so I have a high level of confidence that we can manage it without
any undue difficulty. It takes some extra time, and takes some extra effort on
my behalf but I think it is the best way to deal with it, at least for the next
little while. I will see where it goes from there.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.
MR. WINDSOR: Well, Mr. Chairman, obviously, what we have
is a Government House Leader who is still the Minister of Justice but not the
Attorney General, basically, he is not dealing with any of those matters; so I
assume he still occupies the office of the Minister of Justice.
MR. ROBERTS: No.
MR. WINDSOR: He found another perch, that is very good.
It is probably much more lavish than that of the Minister of Finance or the
Minister of Justice.
MR. ROBERTS: If the hon. gentleman will allow, Mr.
Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman, I can speak to that with
knowledge. I don't know how lavish the digs are. They are the digs formerly
occupied by the Minister of Finance. My friend, the Member for Mount Pearl may
be familiar with that, but because my friend for Gander is both Minister of
Finance and President of Treasury Board there is an empty ministerial room down
in the west part of this wing so I operate out of there. I have been on the
fourth floor once since November. It is inconvenient because it means officials
come to see me, but I have not - the office is empty up on the fourth floor, as
far as I know.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.
MR. WINDSOR: I am familiar with the office. It is not
very lavish but it is tastefully decorated, if I do say so myself.
MR. ROBERTS: Well, Tory blue, you know.
MR. WINDSOR: That is what I thought - not bad.
Mr. Chairman, I will move on from that. We will leave that
for the moment. I have a question now that I am sure the Premier can't answer
and I wish the Minister of Finance were here. Under 2.3.05 Social Policy
Analysis, that is on page 17, surely, that is an error there under
Transportation and Communications. We are not increasing that from $2,500 to
$502,000 this year. Surely, that is a typographical error. No, it is not?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: I can explain, if you would, Mr. Chairman.
The member will probably remember that when we developed the
Strategic Economic Plan, the original consultation paper was largely developed
by a committee of senior public servants, mainly deputy ministers. Ideas were
put forward and so on, then we asked the Advisory Council on the Economy to take
it around the Province and get provincial input, and it worked very well,
because we greatly improved what would have been produced without that
discussion around the Province. It also created a great level of awareness, and
incidentally, a kind of ownership of the Province's Strategic Economic Plan, so
in all counts it worked fairly well.
The Strategic Social Plan consultation paper is now at the
stage where it is getting ready for consideration by Cabinet. I don't know when
Cabinet is going to consider it, but this money is put in place to allow that
consultation to take place on exactly the same basis as we did for the Strategic
Economic Plan, and we intend asking an agency outside of government - we got the
Advisory Council on the Economy to do it in the case of the Strategic Economic
Plan - we intend having an agency outside government so that people can express
their views, tear strips off government, if they want, without any concern about
speaking to government representatives.
MR. SIMMS: There is no chance of that happening.
PREMIER WELLS: There is not much chance because it is not
deserved. There is very little chance but we want to make sure there is the
freedom to do it if they are so disposed. But that's what that amount is there
for and it is a one-time thing that would finance that public consultation for
the Strategic Social Plan.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.
MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It seems like a lot of money for that kind of a consultation,
I must confess, and I am not sure that is the appropriate subhead for it, but I
guess it doesn't matter where it goes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: Well, the Strategic Economic Plan went to
some (inaudible) communities and there were a number of people involved and we
had to rent halls, and travels and so on. I didn't determine the amount, it was
on the basis of advice from public service. It may not cost that much, but I can
assure hon. members if it doesn't we won't spend it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.
MR. WINDSOR: What group would the Premier like to suggest
might do that other than a government group; I mean, what group or what
organization in the Province is available that can do that kind of social
consultation?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: I would say to the Committee, Mr.
Chairman, that we have had only a preliminary discussion with the committee that
is developing it, as to what group, and there is a group that is independent of
government that we could ask to organize this, but not having had the discussion
with that group yet, it would be a bit difficult to discuss it here now.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.
MR. WINDSOR: I am thinking about going into partnership
with our leaders, Mr. Chairman.
MR. ROBERTS: If Lynn Verge doesn't win, you might as
well.
MR. WINDSOR: I have no concern about that, I can assure
the hon. Government House Leader.
Mr. Chairman, Native Policy, professional services $250,000
this year. Could somebody address that? Perhaps the Government House Leader, who
has been involved I think, in Native policy. Can you tell us what we are doing,
whom we are hiring and what for?
MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman, if I may -
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. ROBERTS: We don't know whom we are hiring because we
haven't hired anybody yet but, the Committee will recall that in the Budget
Speech, my friend, the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board made reference to
one-half million dollars for matters connected with Aboriginal affairs. One-half
of it appears here, the other half appears in Justice, and we have a number of
extensive aboriginal issues to be looked at, without trying to enumerate them in
any particular order. We are in the midst of an extensive negotiation process
with the Labrador Innuit Association; we are somewhere in the midst of a process
with the Innu nation; we have extensive dealings with the Micmac Band at Conne
River and there are a number of other issues that are coming out of the Makkovik
people, who are the Innuit in Northern Quebec, who have put in a claim which
embraces part of Northern Labrador and so forth. So the allocation is here and a
companion allocation in the Justice estimates to allow us to retain outside
consultants. Some may be lawyers, some will be researchers, because much of what
we want to do this year
PREMIER WELLS: Historians, in the main.
MR. ROBERTS: Historians, the Premier reminds me.
- is research, historical research, because much of this area
of law, as I am sure the hon. the Member for Mount Pearl knows, depends on the
record. The work has never been done, it has to be done, and we decided this is
the year to get on with it; so that's what the money is for essentially.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.
MR. WINDSOR: (Inaudible) finally and then I will pass on
to somebody else.
Constitutional Affairs: Mr. Chairman, we had a Budget of
$123,000 and thankfully we didn't spend any of it last year; we finally got away
from the Constitutional issue, but probably very much is going to be involved in
a Quebec debate over the next twelve months so there is nothing - there is a
small amount of $1,000, a token amount in there in Constitutional Affairs, page
25, I say to the Premier, the bottom of the page, under Intergovernmental
Affairs, Secretariat for which the Premier is the Minister of Intergovernmental
Affairs, I believe, still, if I am correct?
PREMIER WELLS: Oh, yes.
MR. WINDSOR: What does the Premier envision by way of
involvement in the Quebec debate? Any involvement here, are we going to have any
requirement here for support and travel and whatever, dealing with that? That
probably will be one of the greatest issues facing this nation in the next
twelve months. Is there any provision anywhere or should there not be a
provision here and, can the Premier give us his views on how he sees that debate
arising and what role we may be expected to play here?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: I should qualify any comments that I make
in this regard as I frequently do whenever I am asked the question. I don't have
an adequate personal knowledge of the state of affairs in Quebec to express a
judgement. I can only express the views that I've heard others express whose
judgement on these matters I trust.
As nearly as I can judge, the indications are that it is
highly improbable that there is going to be any significant level of involvement
by other provinces in constitutional issues at this point in time. Undoubtedly,
there is going to be some substantial public debate and activity within Quebec.
But I have no reason to foresee any significant expenditure by the Government of
the Province in relation to constitutional issues, or any involvement that would
involve expenditure in constitutional issues at this time. I suppose it is
theoretically possible there could be some debate or discussion at a first
ministers' conference or something of that nature, but those expenditures would
be covered otherwise.
When we were in the middle of the Meech Lake debate and that
kind of thing, we needed and incurred this kind of expenditure specifically for
constitutional purposes, but as you can see, we had budgeted $123,000 last year
and spent absolutely none of it. This year, there is just a token $1,000 in
there. I don't really anticipate any expenditure but I acknowledge the
possibility that it could arise. If it could arise, then we will have to go to
the Lieutenant-Governor with cap in hand and plead for a warrant to provide
whatever is necessary. Our best judgement is it is not likely to involve any
expenditure on the part of the government this year.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.
MR. WINDSOR: Just one more, if I may. Around that issue,
I would ask the Premier to give us his opinion on this issue related to that.
Many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and I tend to be one of them, are growing
a little tired of this whole Quebec debate, quite frankly. I've been in this
House now almost twenty years and it has been an issue that we have had to deal
with for all of those twenty years. There have been thousands of hours and
millions of dollars expended one way or another - the whole Meech Lake affair
-and every two or three years there seems to be another referendum. Somebody is
campaigning across the country is support of one position or another.
and in policies, favouring the Government of Quebec in order to make it more
attractive for Quebec to stay in Canada. I think that is clear, and I think it
was clear in the last federal Budget, that many of the policy decisions that
were encompassed there were designed pro-Quebec, in the knowledge that a
referendum was about to be held in Quebec. Does the Premier share that view? I
can tell him that many Newfoundlanders are growing weary of it. It is time the
Quebec issue was dealt with once and for all, one way or the other, and it is
time for Quebec to decide whether or not they want to be part of Canada.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: I agree with the general observation, Mr.
Chairman, that the time has come to make a decision on this and get it behind
us. It affects the ability of the whole country to grow and expand and prosper,
so it is a matter of concern for the whole country and it is time to be decisive
about it, put it behind us, and get the decision made.
work in that direction. I would be hard pressed to point to any particular
federal budgetary decisions that were said to be specifically pro-Quebec or to
create a very favourable position for Quebec. I think that everything I've heard
the Prime Minister say - and while I haven't examined in detail everything that
he has done - he has been pretty straightforward about it, so I assume he has
been - he has performed in a manner consistent with what he said, that everybody
gets treated equally, no special treatment for anybody. That was the policy he
has enunciated, and he said that was the course he was going to follow.
Now, by the same token, I wouldn't be surprised if you could
probably point to a particular approach in the Budget that may reflect a
national policy development that was done in that way on a national basis,
because maybe it avoided any head-on conflict with Quebec. I don't know. I
wouldn't be surprised if you could probably look at the Budget and find
something of that nature. I don't think there was a preferential treatment for
Quebec as opposed to other provinces. I know the hon. member is right when he
says that some people believe this is the way it is being done and have that
level of concern, and I think that his observation in that regard may well be
correct. But I would be hard pressed to point to anything specific in the
federal Budget that would justify people holding that point of view.
I share his general conclusion that it is time to bring this
to a head and make a decision so we can get on with causing Canada to prosper in
all of its parts.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I know the Premier has to go in a few minutes, so let me ask
him my question. I was going to comment on the Quebec issue, but I think I will
take the Prime Minister's advice and keep my nose out of it. It seems to be
going well by taking that approach, so I will take his advice.
MR. W. MATTHEWS: If you want them to stay, it's going
well.
MR. SIMMS: Pardon?
MR. W. MATTHEWS: If you want Quebec to stay, it's going
well.
MR. SIMMS: Absolutely, and I want them to stay - I make
that clear.
The question I have of the Premier, and it's under his
responsibility as Premier and may not be under the heads that we are discussing
specifically, but in general terms, has to do with the appointment or
appointments that he has made since last August, since the uprising in the
caucus. I am sure he remembers fondly the fusses back last August and September
within the Liberal caucus.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: If the Premier can't remember the uprising in
the Liberal caucus, then he is sitting too close to -
MR. W. MATTHEWS: The Minister of Finance.
MR. SIMMS: He is sitting too close to the Minister of
Finance, who can't remember signing Cabinet papers. So, I would say, stay away
from him.
PREMIER WELLS: (Inaudible) uprising (inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: You don't remember? Anyway, as a result of -
MR. ROBERTS: You were listening at the wrong keyhole.
MR. SIMMS: No, I would say I was at the right keyhole and
I was at the right door. Anyway, the question, because I know he has to leave
and I want to get an answer - I could have a lot of fun with this. During that
time, or since that time, since last August, since the Cabinet shuffle, there
were appointments of legislative assistants, or parliamentary assistants - I
can't even remember what they were - they made such a profound impact on the
Province that I can't remember the names of them. Were they parliamentary
assistants?
MR. W. MATTHEWS: Legislative advisors.
MR. SIMMS: Legislative advisors? Okay, legislative
advisors. I am not sure how many there were because, I think, there were a few
done at one time and then a couple of more. If I am not mistaken, almost every
second person over there in the back bench may now be a legislative advisor, I
don't know, but if I were to look at - the Member for Mount Scio - Bell Island,
I know, is one. The Member for Harbour Main is one. I am not sure about the
Member for Port au Port; I don't believe he is; that's two. Fortune Hermitage is
one; that's three. Lewisporte is four, and LaPoile is five.
AN HON. MEMBER: Six.
MR. SIMMS: That's six, is it? Anyway, whatever it is,
there are five or six of them.
The question I would like to ask the Premier, and I don't
expect him to have it at his fingertips, but I would ask him if he could provide
the House, during the debate on the Estimates and Supply, with a breakdown of
the expenses incurred, travel expenses and so on, entertainment or whatever, of
each of those five or six legislative assistants since their appointment in the
last four or five months, and a breakdown of any trips they have taken, where,
what purpose was served, and so on.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: I will ask the Minister of Finance and
President of Treasury Board to provide that information to the House, but let me
tell the House, there is no salary or other pay. If there were some expenses
incurred, there are no salary or other emoluments of any kind.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. SIMMS: Just as a supplementary, I guess, Mr.
Chairman, we understand there was no salary, but we are interested in seeing
what travel they have done - what trips they have been on, for what purpose, and
so on.
May I also ask him, in a supplementary question: Where are
these expenses taken from? Is it from the individual department's estimates, as
part of the minister's office?
MR. BAKER: Minister's travel.
MR. SIMMS: Minister's travel, part of the minister's
travel budget.
PREMIER WELLS: If they travel on behalf of the minister,
then the minister would have (inaudible) so there is no additional expense
incurred, no allowance put in place (inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: Okay, so if a minister's office travel is, and
I haven't looked at it lately, $40,000, for argument sake, for the year, budget
PREMIER WELLS: It would come out of that budget.
MR. SIMMS: It would come out of that budget, okay.
MR. BAKER: Yes, that is correct. But I will provide the
information.
MR. SIMMS: The Minister of Finance will provide the
information? I would appreciate that. It would be helpful to us to have a better
understanding of how it is working, if it is working well. It seems to have
worked well from a political perspective, because there doesn't seem to be as
much uprising or as much racket as there was last fall. So maybe the Premier has
made a smart political move here, whether it has done anything else -
PREMIER WELLS: There will be an uprising in his own
Caucus (inaudible).
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SIMMS: Mr. Chairman, I can say to the Premier, he
would love to have the same uprising as I have in my Caucus. He would love it
because I tell you it is like Sunday school over here in terms of what is
happening over there now. In terms of what is happening over there now it is
like Sunday school over here but in terms of what is going to happen over there
is probably even worst. Worst things on the horizon but then again the Premier
won't have to be concerned about that. The Premier won't have to worry about
that concern.
I say to the Premier, he should have a talk to his friend
from Eagle River because he quelled the Minister of Employment and Labour
Relations when he was sitting in that seat as parliamentary assistant. He told
him how to talk: Don't be shouting across, you shouldn't be shouting across the
House. It worked fairly well but it is not very effective for the Member for
Eagle River, you can tell him that. Not only is it not very effective, it is not
effective at all. Anyway, Mr. Chairman, if the minister will provide us with the
answers on the financial part of it - from the political part of it will he also
provide the information as well, whether it is serving a good purpose? If he
could give us that answer in the absence of the Premier, when the time comes to
answer, we would appreciate that.
The other question I have for the Premier is an elaboration
of the question I asked him today although the Question Period degenerated, I
think, and deteriorated somewhat as we went on. I am not quite sure what caused
it but in any event, I was asking about the job creation program, the emergency
job creation program. I don't know if it was Efford that detracted me or if it
was the minister over there or who it was but in any event I was quite serious
about it because we have done a quick calculation over the last day or two - and
the minister can comment on it if he wishes as well - but we have found that in
the seven and part of an eighth district, $225,000 being returned. Now if there
are fifty-two districts it looks like it could be about $1 million, maybe it is
more, I don't know. That is why we were asking the questions. If we could get
that kind of a calculation one day by a few phone calls then it should not be
too hard to get the rest of the information. We would like to have a handle on
it to see what is going on with it because if the funds were provided to create
MR. BAKER: We're after accurate numbers though. We don't
know (inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: Well exactly. We're after accurate numbers to,
I say to the Minister of Finance, and that is why we have been asking questions
for the last three weeks. We cannot get the answers and for the Minister of
Finance to say he's after accurate numbers it must be something new. It must be
a new approach for it. In any event, these were funds that were provided to the
people of Newfoundland or to the organizations and so on, to try to create some
jobs for people who were in desperate need of some jobs and some help. If there
is $1 million coming back from it then obviously it has not worked even though
$4 million has been spent and there have been some jobs, a couple of thousand
jobs or whatever created. There is a big demand and a bigger demand than that. I
want to say to the Premier today, I had a -
MR. BAKER: That is very successful.
MR. SIMMS: Pardon?
MR. BAKER: If over $4 million has been spent that is
pretty successful.
MR. SIMMS: No, there should have been $5 million spent
that is why you allocated $5 million you see, I say to the Minister of Finance.
You should have had $5 million. You would not have had $4 million if we had not
kept pushing you in the House of Assembly, the Minister of Finance.
MR. BAKER: You had nothing to do with it.
MR. SIMMS: Oh sure we did. The minister would not admit
it if we did but we did.
I had a letter today from a constituent of mine actually, who
happens to be a unique person, I think, in many ways. I phoned her as soon as I
got the letter. She is a person who is the mother of four children. The youngest
one is two years of age. Her husband worked at the mill in Grand Falls as a
millwright and was on the call in list. He went away to upgrade himself to
become a millwright while he was on the call in list on a temporary basis.
During the restructuring at the mill of course the call in list basically is no
more because of the cutbacks in the jobs and all that kind of thing. So the
husband has no income or had no income. She had in fact worked - she has some
training, post-secondary education training in computer work. She had worked as
a program coordinator for CEIC. Not full-time, on one of these short-term
programs. I tell you. She has four children. They are now on social assistance,
they are on welfare, but she has an attitude unlike that that you normally might
expect. She hasn't given up on life, she hasn't given up on trying to better
herself or anything else, for her or her husband, for that matter. She had a
little bit of an idea.
The idea was for Social Services. She offered herself - the
minister is here, I'm glad she is here, she might care to listen, because I
might drop her a note on this - as a - you can go ahead. I will talk to the
Minister of Social Services. I understand the Premier has to leave. I understand
that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WELLS: I thank the member for being
understanding. I do have a commitment that I have to meet. I will leave that now
in the capable hands of the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.
I was sincerely hoping you were going to ask about the
expenses in my office, and not a question. Here I am all ready for it, and about
to be totally disappointed. I will leave the information with the minister in
case they get the courage to ask about the expenses in the Premier's Office.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
PREMIER WELLS: Oh, my travel is there too. Absolutely. It
provides for everything, including my travel. I was just hoping they would ask a
question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. SIMMS: (Inaudible) Premier's travel just to find out
where he has covered it up, because I'm sure it is not there in the Premier's
Office. I'm sure it is not all being shown. Can't be.
Anyway, I'm not sure who to speak to over there now. Maybe
the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations. Relating to this serious
situation that I was talking about a moment ago. This serious situation of this
mother with four children.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
MR. SIMMS: The mother with four children who was
unemployed, whose husband is unemployed, can't get back to work at the mill, for
obvious reasons now because of the restructuring, four children, and they are on
social assistance.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: Yes. I say to the Minister of Finance and
Treasury Board, she had an idea. My first thought was to write the Minister of
Employment and Labour Relations because I think there may be some interest in
his department, in one of those divisions that he has in his department, about a
job creation. She had her own idea. What she was doing was she was trying to
create her own job, obviously. She was suggesting that maybe the Department of
Social Services could hire her as a special project coordinator for the specific
purpose of identifying people on social assistance who have qualifications,
experience, post-secondary training, computer experience, computer training,
something other than a lot of those people who we know who have had hard times
and haven't got the education and have had to depend on low-paying jobs all
their lives in a different field. If the minister gets my drift.
I spoke to her personally about it. She was hoping that she
might be able to go in that kind of a position and be able to talk to people on
social assistance who are in that group, who have more experience and more
interest to want to better themselves, prepared to better themselves, and might
be prepared to be a bit more open about it if somebody with a similar situation
was the one that she was talking to. If you follow me.
I said to her: Maybe if you contacted the Department of
Employment and Labour Relations under one of their job creation projects -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: I'm sorry. For my two colleagues here back and
forth, I can't hear what the minister is saying.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: Yes, well maybe you can comment on it too. I
would like to hear your comments on it. But the new job initiative. So obviously
then Social Services would have to agree to hire her to do that kind of a job,
and maybe get their funding for that particular job project from the Department
of Employment and Labour Relations under new job initiatives. I think it was a
great idea.
What is more interesting, I say to the minister, is that this
lady was like no other whom I've spoken to in a similar situation, and I have
spoken with a lot of people over the last twenty years who are, unfortunately,
recipients of social assistance through no fault of their own - many, many, many
people, mothers, single mothers, and others - but this particular individual
struck me as the type of person who wanted to try to do something. By the way,
she told me specifically, and it is in her letter, she was prepared to work for
$5.68 an hour - whatever significance sixty-eight cents is, I am not sure what
that means - close to -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: Okay, $200 a week, okay. I said: $5.68; you
would think you would be looking for something that might pay... `Well,' she
said: Look; $5.68 would give me enough to make it livable. My four children will
still be able to go to Guides. I will still be able to pay their Guide fees. I
will still be able to do reasonable things - not a lot - but it would be livable
for me.
Her husband is unemployed - not only unemployed, but he has
no income, so they are getting whatever they are entitled to, I guess, from
social assistance, but it must be pretty similar to what she would get working
at $5.68 an hour, but she would be prepared to do that. She would be prepared to
communicate with the media. She is a very articulate person, but not pushy, and
we had a very interesting conversation.
She understood - that is what struck me - she understood what
it was all about because she had gone through it; she was going through it now.
Yet, she had a lot of good qualifications and she was interested in trying to
help others in the same kind of position that she is in, help boost up their
morale, maybe, by talking to them and saying: Look, if I can do this as a
project co-ordinator, advising you where to go, or how you might want to proceed
to try to find a job, and all the rest of it, because I am in your category; I
am making $5.68 an hour, fairly low wages, but I have four children, and a
husband at home who is not working, but we can manage it. Now that is not where
I want to finish the rest of my life, but I want to get out of the rut; I want
to get out of the social assistance rut. I want some meaningful work. I want to
do something for whatever income I am going to get.
I just thought it was a very interesting idea. As I said, I
took the time to telephone her as well, to discuss it, and I am going to be
writing to the minister, and I will probably copy the Minister of Social
Services on it, and maybe you could get somebody in your department to follow up
with it. Maybe the minister himself might like to give her a call because, I
tell you, she is worth talking to in terms of understanding.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Employment and
Labour Relations.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The hon. Opposition Leader presents a case that is not
totally unique, but certainly one that requires support, I would suggest to the
member. As he is probably aware, the department now has again re-established our
50/50 cost shared funding and, of course, we do have a program that would
address that particular situation as the member explained it, from a standpoint
of unravelling the situation in her situation with our program.
What I would suggest to the member is if he would send me a
copy of this very interesting letter, as he explained it. Perhaps he can do an
appropriate letter over the top of it and forward more information. Then I would
have people in our department contact that individual. I sense what he is
saying, that this is unique. I sense that it is - well, it certainly is a new
way or a new approach that she offers.
She mentioned $5.68 because obviously she has already looked
at the situation, and she knows that is the funding that initiates that kind of
program, so she understands it; so she has taken that initiative. The mere fact
that she has taken that initiative on her own is, I say to the member,
encouraging from my point of view and the departments point of view, and I would
be more than happy to look at it and try to accommodate that woman as soon as
possible.
If we do have a program that suits her, and in conjunction
with my colleague, the Minister of Social Services, I would be more than happy
to respond, and I ask the member to forward that information.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. SIMMS: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the response from
the minister. I will certainly do that, I can assure him, and I hope that
something positive comes out of the initiative.
I didn't mean to imply that it was unique. What I meant was
that in my conversation the lady struck me as being a unique person, not
absolutely unique, I have talked to others like it but there are far too few,
unfortunately. She seemed to be somebody who really wants to get out of that
rut, really do something, and would go so far as to suggest the type of job she
could do and make it sound sensible and attractive, and beneficial to the
Department of Social Services. To try to identify social assistance recipients
who have post-secondary training and education, I am sure if we have any figures
on that, any statistics, or any information on that, it would be interesting to
have because we have 50,000 or 60,000 on social assistance.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)
MR. SIMMS: Isn't it 45,000 caseloads? There are 40,000 or
50,000 people, so quite a few of those must be people who already have some
training and some background, and maybe some post-secondary education. There
might be quite a few of them. This lady certainly was one. I do not know what
the numbers are. I do not know if we have any numbers or if we keep any kind of
a statistical breakdown. The Minister of Social Services is not here right now
but I think it would be an interesting thing to pursue. Her idea, this lady who
is my constituent, her idea was to try to identify those people and then meet
with them, maybe in the form of seminars. Try to get them together in one room,
try to bring them out of their rut.
That is what she was interested in doing, to try to motivate
them, and her way to motivate them would be to say: look, here is what I did and
I am a mother with a husband who is unemployed with no income, other than what
we get from social assistance, and I have four children, three in school and one
two year old, but I did it. I went out and did it and got this job. Here is what
I did. As a motivational force I think it would be exceptional. Anyway we will
leave it at that for now and see what transpires with it.
The other question I want to raise with the minister, since
we have him on his feet now, is a follow-up to the Question Period today,
dealing with the jobs program. I briefly mentioned it to the Premier but he had
to leave so I could not elaborate. I want to say to the minister that aside from
what transpires in Question Period, where sometimes things get heated and
short-tempered, you only have thirty minutes and are trying to cram it all in, I
have to elaborate now because it is an important issue. I think the real issue
is, first of all, the long fight - and the minister may not want to give us any
credit for it, or outside sources any credit for making sure there was a job
creation program eventually put in place, but there was, and whoever wants
credit for it can take it, but the fact was that eventually there was one put
in.
Now, first of all, day after day, after day, in this House, I
say to the Minister of Finance, you got up there and said, no, no, we are going
to Ottawa. You stonewalled for months. You did not want to do it until you were
forced to do it. Now, finally you did it. Then you brought in place a $5 million
program which was less than you had last year by $1 million, but this year,
acknowledged by everybody over there and here, is a worse year than last year,
more difficult, more tough, so you would expect more, but you did not get more,
you got less than last year by $1 million, so that wasn't satisfactory to us to
begin with. Then, to top if all off, of course, the criteria was such that,
especially the first set of criteria, even the minister finally acknowledged
that and changed it, somewhat. He made some changes. Even he recognized it was
too restrictive.
AN HON. MEMBER: A small move.
MR. SIMMS: Yes, it is a very small move, but what we
argue to the minister is that it is still very, very restrictive. He must know
that. Surely, he has heard that. Members on that side of the House, his own
colleagues, have spoken to me about it personally, privately, about the problems
they have been facing, and I hear it certainly on this side. I have a list of
seven districts in the community that had to return funds, just from the short
number of phone calls we made today all over the Province, there are dozens of
communities who have had to return the funds because they could not find the
workers in that area, in my own district, by the way, I say to the minister, so
this does not just apply to a rural district or something. In my own district of
Grand Falls the Exploits Valley Tourism Association were allotted $20,000 to
hire two workers for twelve weeks. They only used $9,000, they have to send back
$14,000 - coming back to the government. They couldn't find the other worker;
imagine that, they couldn't find somebody unemployed.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: No, it wasn't that they could find somebody
unemployed, they couldn't find somebody unemployed who fell into that category,
that very restrictive category. Now, in all seriousness, if the numbers we have,
$225,000 approximately, of seven districts, just multiply it by four for
argument sake, you can't do that but just to give you a rough idea, of course,
there could be more in some and less in others, but let's say the number is
about a million bucks that comes back, what I am asking the minister is, would
the government then consider using that $1 million -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SIMMS: Well, I am asking the minister now, he is the
one who has to make the case to him. You have to be forceful and go in and make
the case and say: By God, there are people out there starving contrary to what
the Premier says, there are people out there starving; quote the Member for Fogo
and others who have used the same terminology as I have and say: Look, we have a
million bucks, it went back to general revenue, fine and dandy; it is a small
amount anyway. We still have a serious problem out there, very serious, it
hasn't dissipated at all, I am sure the minister must know that. It is a very
serious employment problem no question .
Maybe, just maybe, the government might be prepared to do
something on their own initiative and do it earlier, because he is going to be
faced with the same bloody problem this fall as he has been faced with and as we
were faced with I suppose going back for I don't know how many years. The fall,
emergency, job creation program and try to help people get some work so at least
they could get enough work to qualify for some help from the unemployment
insurance program or whatever. The same think is going to happen this fall.
One of the problems last year, by the way, the minister might
acknowledge it or he might not, was that, by the time you finally did make a
decision, that was too late. There were a lot of things that were eliminated in
terms of the ideas for projects because it couldn't be done, January, February,
March - you know what I mean? The minister knows what I mean and that was
probably part of the plan, to try to cut down the odds as much as you could -
well, I shouldn't imply that there are any other motivations other than the best
of intents but, nevertheless, that's the way it worked out, the minister knows
what I am talking about so that took away from it too.
But I say to him in all sincerity, it is a very serious
problem, I have no axe to grind any more at all, so it is not rhetoric, it is
not just politics; it is a difficult situation around this Province, everywhere
in this Province but particularly in rural Newfoundland. It is a desperate
situation in many places and I mean desperate, so maybe, the minister might look
at saying to the Premier or to the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, who
did such a great job in that last one, you gave me five I only spent four, how
about this year, let's do something a little earlier, let us announce it a
little earlier so we don't start getting the pressure and the heat, we can avoid
all of that, let's take the initiative ourselves because we are going to have to
do it anyway -
MR. W. MATTHEWS: Do it right.
AN HON. MEMBER: Be proactive.
MR. SIMMS: Yes, be proactive, we are going to have to do
it anyway. The minister wants me to sit down, I will sit down and let him make
the announcement now.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Employment and
Labour Relations.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me say to the hon. member that, you know, looking at the
whole problem throughout the Province of people looking for meaningful and
gainful employment. Now what the member should realize and didn't allude to, was
that, social services have provided all year a program to have recipients go to
work, to take people out of the social assistance environment and put them to
work.
The minister and the previous minister have administrated
that fund and what we did this time I say to the member, was, provided some
funding with a criteria that gave people who had been out in the workplace were
seeking work, and the criteria was done with a purpose and if there is some
slippage, and the member indicates there will be and there probably will be, I
would say to the member that we intend to do an extensive follow-up on the
program this year to gain as much information to find out what these types of
programs do in the Province, how they impact the public. We understand the need.
There is no one over here who doesn't understand the need out in rural
Newfoundland and in urban Newfoundland too, I might add, so if the member will
bear with the study, we are going to do it behind this one, we are going to do
certainly a more comprehensive look at this type of program and the impact it
has. Hopefully from that information I can get together with my colleague the
Minister of Finance and Treasury Board and we can review these kinds of things,
and make sure that we are doing the best thing by the people and the best thing
for the dollar that the government doesn't have, I would say to the member.
In those few words, Mr. Chairman, thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Looking at the
Estimates for the Executive Council there are a few questions maybe the minister
can answer - the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board is in his place. I will
go through them first, and he can either answer them now as I go through or he
can stand after and do so.
One of the questions I would like to ask is 2.4.03, Executive
Support, for Professional Services. This heading was for the appropriations
provided "for senior level advice on financial, personnel and administrative
functions of Government to the Treasury Board Committee of Cabinet, as well as
direction of the operations of the Treasury Board Secretariat." Would the
minister I wonder explain why there was budgeted $1 million for Professional
Services, it was revised to $1.5 million, and there is nothing for Professional
Services budgeted for this year? Is there some explanation? That is a fairly
large sum of money. Maybe when the minister rises in his place he can probably
explain that particular heading to me. If he wishes to do so now it is okay with
me. It is entirely up....
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Finance and
Treasury Board.
MR. BAKER: Yes, Mr. Chairman. That expenditure was in
relation to the privatization initiatives, NLCS and some other privatization
initiatives that are ongoing. Treasury Board was handling these initiatives, the
privatizations, NLCS and so on. Since then the responsibility has been passed
over to Industry, Trade and Technology, so there is no amount in there this year
because Treasury Board is no longer leading the privatization initiative.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
MR. WOODFORD: So what the minister is saying then is that
the privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador Computer Services -
MR. BAKER: And some others that we (inaudible).
MR. WOODFORD: Would any of the privatization of Hydro
money be in here at all?
MR. BAKER: No.
MR. WOODFORD: Nothing. So they have no plans this year,
although it was announced in the Budget plans for some other privatization
efforts. It will be done through the Department of Industry, Trade and
Technology.
MR. BAKER: Yes.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. WOODFORD: Yes.
MR. BAKER: Yes, and NLCS.
MR. WOODFORD: NLCS, that will be done through the
department of -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. BAKER: Sorry, Farm Products, yes.
MR. WOODFORD: Farm Products, yes. That will be done
through -
MR. BAKER: Industry, Trade and Technology.
MR. WOODFORD: - the Department of Industry, Trade and
Technology.
Mr. Chairman, under 2.4.06, Collective Bargaining. I don't
know. It was budgeted for $117,000, went to $202,000, and this year it is back
to $105,900 for Professional Services. What is included in those Professional
Services under Collective Bargaining, under that particular 2.4.06 heading?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Finance and
Treasury Board.
MR. BAKER: That is for lawyers, for arbitrations, and all
this kind of stuff. Quite often you have to hire outside expertise, in legal
expertise as well as accounting expertise, so sometimes we have to hire outside
expertise. That is what that is all about.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
MR. WOODFORD: Mostly for lawyers, I suppose mostly - only
a couple of hours work. One hundred and five thousand dollars, that is only a
couple of hours work, Mr. Chairman.
If there is going to be a lot of discussion this year when
you are talking about collective bargaining - I know it is not actual collective
bargaining - but there is a process that will have to take place this year,
especially as it pertains to the pension programs and so on.
That was also mentioned in the Budget about getting together
with unions, with the whole general service, public service and teachers, the
NTA and I suppose with members and so on to discuss and see what they are going
to do with regards to the unfunded liability in the pension funds, Mr. Chairman.
So I would suspect that probably this year that figure may be down a bit. So it
depends I suppose, if it goes smoothly and we don't encounter any problems then
we won't need any lawyers. Then again if the lawyers find out about it, it won't
be long creating some problems and then that amount will rise rather quickly,
Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Finance and
Treasury Board.
MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In relation to that
very point, as we go on with discussions about the pension plan and so on there
may be need to get more actuarial studies done in terms of how exact changes
will affect the unfunded liabilities and so on but it is not only lawyers, it is
probably actuary expenses as well that may be involved here.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Chairman, the minister could move on to
Treasury - still under Treasury Board Secretariat, 2.4.07, this is the
organization and management part of it, appropriations provide for the
coordination of the organizational design function and financial and human
resource systems in government, as well as undertaking Executive Council
information technology services. This information technology, what was the big
item there last year budgeted for $4.594 million, spent over $5 million, they
revised over $5 million and still an estimated figure, a budgetary figure there
this year for $2.56 million. Could the minister explain that? That is a fairly
large sum of money for that particular heading.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Finance.
MR. BAKER: Yes, I could provide I guess some time in the
near future a detailed breakdown of the $5 million that was spent last year. We
budgeted $4.5 million and spent $5 million on information technology and that
relates to some financial human resource design systems as well as the Executive
Council IT. This year we don't intend to spend as much on IT and the amount has
dropped considerably. I don't have it off the top of my head but I could get the
member a detailed listing of the IT expenses for the coming year compared with
last year and I will try to do that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
MR. WOODFORD: Yes, would the minister at his first
opportunity, Mr. Chairman - I would like to have a breakdown of that particular
section and particular item.
Under Government Accounting, 2.4.12, appropriation provided
for the management of government accounting services and the development and
enhancement of financial accounting systems in government. Could the minister
tell me what changes? It is Purchase Services, so obviously it must be some kind
of expertise from outside of government that was used last year, $304,000
budgeted revised down to $277,000 but this year it is up to over half-a-million
dollars, $531,000 for Purchase Services under government accounting. I wonder
could the minister just give me a little explanation of that?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Finance.
MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I cannot give you the details because I don't have them off
the top of my head but there is going to be more activity this year in terms of
enhancing the financial accounting systems in Treasury Board and Executive
Council. So again, I could provide the complete listing but we just are doing
more in that area that is all I can say. We are doing more in that area of
enhancing financial accounting systems in government. We have to be a little
more careful in the way we plan now then we used to. Each year of course the
Auditor General makes comments in terms of financial accounting and we try to
accommodate the Auditor General as the reports are issued and so on. Many of the
comments have to do with tightening up, in terms of the accounting systems and
new procedures and so on. So this is an attempt to deal with these issues and
there is more activity next year but again I could - a detailed listing is
available in Treasury Board if the hon. gentleman wants to see it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Chairman, I was under the impression
that there was always enough government accounting covered by each government
department but when you look at a figure of $531,000 it is obvious that the
minister is planning on tightening up somewhere in some departments. What they
are, who they are or who is running them, I don't know but $531,000 for outside
expertise to try to tighten up some departments, Mr. Chairman, makes you wonder.
I don't know if some of the other ministers over there realize that the Minister
of Finance and Treasury Board is starting to look at some of their books a
little more closely, and keeping a closer eye on some of the other government
departments. Maybe one of the reasons he has to keep a closer eye on some of the
other government departments is since they announced and put in place the new
legislative assistant positions.
I notice - and I won't mention any names, or anything like
that - that over the past year or so there have been some fairly nice trips for
the legislative assistants. I won't mention any names, or anything like that,
but maybe we could look around at some of the faces in the House and see some of
the -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. WOODFORD: Yes, and see what monies were spent for
legislative assistants this year. It would be very interesting to look in the
headings of some of the departments this year.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. WOODFORD: No, that's true, a parliamentary assistant
couldn't even get out - he had a job Friday evening getting out of the airport.
Legislative assistants are positions provided last year by
the Premier to quieten some of the backbenchers and, if it keeps up, if the
ministers that the legislative assistants are responsible for over the next year
get some of the nice trips that they got this year, they are going to have no
trouble with the Premier passing some legislation in the House, I can assure
you.
Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board
looked ahead to another heading, 2.4.14, Information Technology Management. I
notice that last year there was a very small amount budgeted for this particular
heading of $57,000. It was revised at $142,200; but now this year there is a
very, very big jump, especially as it pertains to salaries, which would mean
quite a few new positions, which is good to see. At least it shows that there is
probably going to be some new hiring done in one particular part of government,
and not lay-offs.
This particular heading there, could the minister explain
that to me, why, under salaries, there is $451,900 now for Information
Technology Management?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the President of the Council.
MR. BAKER: I think, Mr. Chairman, to give a proper answer
you have to go back to the Budget for 1994-'95, which showed a small amount for
salaries but a large amount for professional services, and this, perhaps,
typifies the situation as it existed before the privatization of NLCS, where the
coordination would be done in terms of the government departments, but it would
be done through NLCS, and we would be paying NLCS for the coordination.
Once the privatization was done, and that accounts for the
shift, there was very little actually paid for professional services under this
heading for the year, but there was an increase in salary because towards the
end of the year we hired on people, and these are people who previously worked
with NLCS.
We need government coordination in terms of our information
technology. We need people in government with expertise to provide us with
advice on matters pertaining to computers, and all of this kind of stuff. So, in
actual fact, in this coming year, you see $451,900 for salaries. These are the
individuals who are now in place in government as a whole - not just Treasury
Board, but in government as a whole - to provide some coordination in terms of
information technology, computer expertise. You can see that we are no longer
going to professional services to get that expertise, so it is a shift in
funding. Instead of paying NLCS, we now have the individuals hired ourselves,
and they are now working for us as government employees, so that accounts for
that shift.
MR. WOODFORD: So I would suspect, then, that the
information technology is part of the same thing; that is why the big increase
there.
MR. BAKER: Yes, (inaudible).
MR. WOODFORD: It is all tied in with the one thing since
the privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador Computer Services.
Mr. Chairman, under 2.5.07. This comes under
Intergovernmental Affairs, but I would say probably the minister can answer for
that. The "Appropriations provide for projects approved under the
Federal-Provincial Planning Agreement. As projects are approved during the year,
funding will be transferred to the applicable Department."
Would the minister, under that particular one - there was
$250,000 allocated last year. It was revised to $87,900. That is all that was
spent. This year there is an allocation of the same amount that was allocated
last year, $250,000. I would ask the minister to explain why $250,000 was
allocated last year, $87,000 spent, and again this year there is $250,000
estimated or budgeted for that particular heading, 2.5.07, under the Cooperation
Agreement - Development and Planning. It also says here under the heading that
this "... funding will be transferred to the applicable Department." Is that all
the federal-provincial agreements that - does that have to do with the
federal-provincial agreements all told, whatever work is done there, or what?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Finance and
Treasury Board.
MR. BAKER: Mr. Chairman, I'm not knowledgeable about the
details of these particular federal-provincial agreements. This is the one on
Cooperation Agreement - Development and Planning. It is the cooperation
agreement that is in place. I think the Minister of Industry, Trade and
Technology probably knows more about it than I do. This is a lump sum that is
put here so that as projects get started during the year it is just transferred
out to the individual departments that are actually carrying on those projects
under the agreement, this cost-shared agreement. As you can see, last year there
weren't enough projects to take up the amount that was here. Hopefully this year
we can perhaps spend a bit more of the money. This is cost-shared money.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
MR. WOODFORD: The minister could probably take a look at
2.5.08 on the Encouragement of Military Training (Labrador): "Appropriations
provide for the Province's support for the continuance of low level military
pilot training in Labrador." Especially under Professional Services and
Purchased Services. I noticed that last year there was $60,000 allocated under
Professional Services, $81,200 approved and spent, I should say, revised. There
was a little heading there under Purchased Services as well, but there is
nothing there this year. Is that an indication that everything is okay or that
there is a study being done and funded by someone else, or what? Could the
minister explain that particular heading?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Finance and
Treasury Board.
MR. BAKER: Again, this is something that I haven't worked
on directly myself. Maybe the minister from Labrador could deal with it in more
detail. There has been an environmental impact study process under way
concerning Goose Bay and the use of the airport at Happy Valley - Goose Bay.
During that process we felt the need to provide support to the community, to
provide support to them to go and talk to the users of the airport at Goose Bay,
to talk to the federal government, to talk to people across Canada, to try to
develop support for the training activities.
That process is now at an end, is the point. If there are
expenditures related to it this year, related to the final results of the EIS,
and I think they are talking in terms of getting another agreement with the
Dutch and German and whatever to continue to use the air base, if there are any
expenditures needed then obviously I guess we will provide it. That EIS process
is beyond the point now where we need to convince people. The report is in and
now we have to respond to the report.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia
West.
MR. TOBIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I was just looking under the heading, the Hibernia Project -
Implementation and Monitoring, 2.8.01. For Professional Services, last year the
revised budget was $20,000 and this year it is $68,500. I wonder if the minister
can tell me why the increase in that?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the President of the Council.
MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
There is not really an increase there. In the Budget last
year there was $80,000 and we are now reducing that to $68,500. We didn't spent
the $80,000 last year so we feel there is no need to put as much in this year's
Budget. That is an amount that may or may not be spent. It is actually a
reduction from last year's Budget numbers.
MR. TOBIN: It is a reduction from the Budget but it is
not a reduction from the revised, I say to the minister.
Mr. Chairman, Salaries there is $186,300. What does that
salary entail from the Executive Council for the Hibernia people?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the President of the Council.
MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I was just looking through here. When the Budget was tabled
there was also a document called Salary Estimates, which the hon. member has,
and can have a look at and see exactly who the individuals are. I just went to
look for mine and I think some hon. member has absconded with my copy. I am sure
the hon. member has a copy and he can have a look and see exactly the number of
people employed in the Hibernia project implementation and monitoring.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia
West.
MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, I know there is a lot of work
that is carried out under Industry, Trade and Technology, I would imagine, for
the Hibernia people, as well as the Offshore Petroleum Board, but why would
these people be included under the Executive Council? Why is there a $500,000
Budget for the Hibernia project coming under the Executive Council, most of it
in salaries, employees benefits, transportation, and professional services?
MR. BAKER: Would you repeat that, please?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia
West.
MR. TOBIN: I say to the minister, there is $278,000
budgeted there basically for the Hibernia project, implementation and
monitoring. Why does that come under the Executive Council as opposed to under
ITT, or some other government department?
MR. BAKER: If the hon. gentleman would look back he will
recognize that under Executive Council comes a number of areas. We just went
through Treasury Board, Item 2.4, and then Intergovernmental Affairs
Secretariat, 2.5, and then after the IGA, which has within it - that goes as far
as 2.5.07, I guess, the encouragement of military training, and then the total
for Intergovernmental Affairs, so there we come to the end of Intergovernmental
Affairs. Now, in addition, under Executive Council, there are the Strategic
Economic Initiatives, and we have a Secretariat and Appropriations for that.
Then there is the Women's Policy Office, which doesn't really
fit under any of the previous ones, and the Provincial Advisory Council on the
Status of Women. Then there is the Hibernia Project - Implementation and
Monitoring, and then the Advisory Council on the Economy. All of these
organizations operating separately - they are separate organizations operating
individually - are simply dealt with separately at the end of Executive Council.
They don't properly fit under anything else.
This is not an organization that has to do with
Intergovernmental Affairs, for instance. It simply has to do with the
relationship between the Hibernia management, what is happening on the project,
where the jobs are going, how the contracts are going, and to keep track of all
this stuff for government. So it is not really an IGA activity. It is not really
a Treasury Board activity because it is different from expenditure control, so
it doesn't really fit under any of the other headings. And it is the same with
the Women's Policy office, the same with the Advisory Council on the Economy,
they don't really fit under any of the other headings in Executive Council so
they are provided with their own heading, No. 2.8.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia
West.
MR. TOBIN: I have just been skimming through this here
now and I am looking at the Protocol Budget, but before I really get into that,
I would like to ask the minister, Mr. Chairman, where are the cars the Premier
uses, where are they budgeted in this? I know there is a chauffeur and a big
Oldsmobile that picks up the Premier right in front of the building basically on
a daily basis. Where is the Budget for the chauffeur, how many chauffeurs does
the Premier have and how many cars are allocated to him in terms of providing
him with transportation?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the President of Council.
MR. BAKER: Mr. Chairman, as far as I know - although the
hon. gentleman is free to look through the Departmental Salary Details because
all of our employees are there. As far as I know, there is no heading of a
chauffeur, a Premier's chauffeur. I believe from time to time - and I don't
think we have a big, stretch limousine or anything in our fleet but I will check
and see.
MR. TOBIN: What would you say (inaudible).
MR. BAKER: What was it?
MR. TOBIN: I said it was an Oldsmobile.
MR. BAKER: Which kind, do you know?
MR. TOBIN: An `88' or a `98'.
MR. BAKER: I am not familiar with that vehicle, to be
honest with you, Mr. Chairman, but as far as I know, from time to time the
Premier needs a driver to drive him to occasions that he can't drive himself or
doesn't want to drive himself for one reason or another and somebody, I believe
on the staff of Work, Services and Transportation, I am not certain where they
are now, and I believe the car is associated with the car pool where all our
cars are, in Works, Services and Transportation. So I think that's where that
would show up, but there is no sort of Premier's chauffeur and special Premier's
cars, I believe. I believe the hon. gentleman used the plural. I believe he is
going back a bit. As far as I know - and I stand to be corrected - as far as I
know, there are no cars, plural, that are in existence.
The Premier may have used different cars at different times,
I have no way of knowing that and would suggest to the hon. gentleman that there
is an individual who drives the Premier around when he needs to get somewhere
during the working day or when he is going to an occasion where he simply does
not want or can't drive himself, and that has been known by everybody. I would
like to point out to the hon. gentleman that gone are the days of the
$1,200-a-day limousines, gone are those days. Gone are the days when there are
large numbers of people following a Premier around and carrying his briefcase
and so on, and looking over their shoulders, gone are those days. We don't do
those things anymore, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia
West.
MR. TOBIN: Now, Mr. Chairman, for the minister to get up
here, in his sanctimonious tone, and say the Premier of this Province doesn't
have a chauffeur - Mr. Chairman, he has the cap, the big hat he wears, he wears
the uniform, he gets out and opens the back door and the Premier gets in.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. TOBIN: Someone else, Mr. Chairman, chose (inaudible).
Don't you talk about back doors, you have been going through them a lifetime;
you have been going through back doors a lifetime, don't you start talking about
back doors, you are the expert on them.
I asked what the Premier of this Province has, Mr. Chairman.
He has a chauffeur and it is covered up in the Department of Works, Services and
Transportation and his car is covered up, the big Oldsmobile is covered up in
that; that's what's going on here. The Premier of this Province does have a
chauffeur; the Premier of this Province does have a big car, Mr. Chairman, and I
don't quarrel with it.
MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).
MR. TOBIN: I don't quarrel with that. There are times
when the Premier of this Province needs to be chauffeured around, I don't argue
with that and I don't argue with the Premier of this Province having a car, Mr.
Chairman. The