Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 26 April 2012 (47th General Assembly, 1st Session, Vol. XLVII No. 22)
2012-04-26
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
April
26, 2012 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS
Vol. XLVII No. 22
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!
Admit strangers.
Before we start proceedings today, I want to welcome back to the House of
Assembly, in the Speaker's gallery today we are joined by former MHA for the
District of Bonavista North, Mr. Harry Harding.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: We are also joined today in the public galleries by two
representatives from the Canadian Cancer Society, Matthew Piercy and Maria
Callahan, as well as a guest from Daffodil House, Mr. Robert Warren.
MR. SPEAKER: I also want to welcome as well, twenty-nine individuals
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Today we also have twenty-nine individuals from the Island
Harbour 50 Plus Club of Heart's Delight and Islington from the District of
Trinity - Bay de Verde.
Welcome to our Assembly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: Today we have private members' statements from the Member
for the District of Humber West; the Member for the District of Mount Pearl
South; the Member for the District of Humber Valley; the Member for the District
of Burgeo - La Poile; the Member for the District of Bellevue; and the Member
for the District of St. John's North.
The hon. the Member for the District of Humber West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRANTER: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to stand in this
House to congratulate the organizers and participants of an event that took
place in Corner Brook during the weekend of March 16. The history departments at
both Grenfell Campus Memorial University and Corner Brook Regional High
partnered to hold a Titanic Symposium.
A Centennial Remembrance was a student-centered event that marked the 100
anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic . Corner Brook Regional High's
participation comes out of the connection between the high school and the
university which is just next door to each other.
The whole aim of the symposium was to promote an interest in history on a
personal and academic level. Three high school students presented academic
papers at the university on many topics associated with the Titanic
disaster. As their former high school principal, I congratulate these students
for presenting their individual research in a public forum at a university
level, academic papers at an academic conference.
I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating students: Melissa
Kennedy, Matthew Evans, and Cohen Chaulk. I would also thank Ms Michelle Park, a
great teacher for always challenging students to go beyond in seeking higher
achievement for all of her students.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.
MR. LANE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is my privilege to stand in this hon. House to recognize the tremendous
success story which is the Mount Pearl Seniors Independence Group. This
organization was established in 2007 with a mandate to advocate, plan, and
promote the independence, dignity, health, and well-being of senior citizens.
They provide programming for 273 members, including weekly activities such as
crafts, bowling, a Tuesday friendship club, fitness, a drop-in centre, and a
walking program, just to name a few. They also administer a summer odd jobs and
snow busters program, as well as other annual activities such as health
awareness day, visits to personal care homes, income tax clinic, flu shot
clinic, and a monthly caregiver respite centre.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask all members of this hon. House to join me in
congratulating the Mount Pearl Seniors Independence Group for the tremendous
work they do to improve the lives of seniors in our Province.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in this hon. House today to commend Mrs. Hilda Beatrice Gillingham on
the occasion of her 100 th birthday. Mrs. Gillingham currently resides
in the seniors' home in Corner Brook and has family members in Pasadena area.
She has had an amazing life, raised six children, has twenty-eight
grandchildren, fifty-nine great-grandchildren, fifty-eight
great-great-grandchildren, and two great-great-great-grandchildren.
Born in Goose Arm on April 26, 1912, Mrs. Gillingham spent the bulk of her
life as a homemaker after marrying her sweetheart in 1932. As a young mother and
wife during World War II, Mrs. Gillingham became an active volunteer and spent
numerous hours knitting socks for the soldiers overseas. She was one of many who
sent care packages aiding the soldiers on the war fronts.
Mr. Speaker, every day, seniors in our Province are working, learning new
skills, volunteering their time, and supporting families and friends. Their
wisdom, their skills, their abilities are being felt in homes and communities
throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. Mrs. Gillingham is a great example of
seniors who have contributed tremendously over the years unselfishly helping
those in need.
Unselfish and noble actions are the most radiant pages in the reflection of a
great life. To this, Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to stand
with me and commend Mrs. Hilda Beatrice Gillingham on the occasion of her 100 th
birthday.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.
MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to recognize and congratulate Kenneth and Mabel LeMoine of
Channel-Port aux Basques, who will celebrate seventy years of marriage tomorrow,
on April 27, 2012.
They started their life together in the beautiful Town of Rose
Blanche-Harbour Le Cou and moved to Channel-Port aux Basques in 1953. They
raised three children: Hiram, Shirley, and Joan. They are the proud grandparents
of three grandchildren and four great-grandchildren. Mr. LeMoine worked with CN
until he retired in 1983.
Mr. LeMoine celebrated his ninetieth birthday on March 11 and Mrs. LeMoine
turned eighty-six on January 5. The LeMoines continue to be very active in their
community. They will celebrate their anniversary with an open house for family
and friends at their residence in Channel-Port aux Basques.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join with me in extending
congratulations to Kenneth and Mabel LeMoine on the celebration of their
seventieth wedding anniversary. What a milestone! All the best to Mr. and Mrs.
LeMoine and family.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. PEACH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate two students from Swift
Current Academy for their outstanding achievement at the 2012 Vista Regional
Drama Festival in Trinity a week ago.
Mr. Speaker, there were fourteen students from Swift Current Academy who took
part in the 2012 drama festival. They took
part in three different workshops and
performed in the play entitled The Big Bad .
Special awards were presented to Janelle Maye for Best Actress in a Comic
Role and Emma Miller for Best Stolen Moment.
I would also like to take this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to recognize Ms Lori
Ann Upshall and Ms Samantha Drover for their time, dedication, and encouragement
to their students. They prepared their students very well for this competition.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members of this House to join me in
congratulating the students of Swift Current Academy for a great performance.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to pay tribute to a man whose sudden and recent death has
brought grief and sadness in direct proportion to the warmth and joy he brought
to this Province.
Tom Fitzgerald, "Big Tom" at K-Rock, died yesterday morning after a short
stay in hospital. My deepest sympathies go to his family, his friends, and his
co-workers at Steele Communications in my district on Kenmount Road.
Big Tom co-hosted K-Rock's wildly popular morning show with Mike Campbell and
Candice Udle, creating a classic radio mix of humour, personally, information,
and music.
On Saturdays, Big Tom's Shed provided a soundtrack for countless camping
trips, backyard projects, weekend drives and, yes, shed parties throughout our
great Province.
To an ordinary classic rock fan like myself, he seemed tireless. He was a
massive on-air presence, but he also seemed to be an active part of every major
fundraising effort in this Province. He even came to the NDP caucus office last
December for a K-Rock office pizza and Christmas party.
A big heart, a big laugh, and a big contributor to local radio, Big Tom will
be missed.
I ask all hon. members to join me in extending sympathies to his family,
friends, and coworkers.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: I would also like today to acknowledge the Mayor of Happy
Adventure, Mr. Jim Warren, who is in our gallery joining us today, too. Welcome,
Sir, to our gallery.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to
recognize and celebrate hope, determination, and courage. Tomorrow is the
Canadian Cancer Society's annual Daffodil Day, when we all have the opportunity
to demonstrate our collective fight against cancer.
With one in three Newfoundlanders and Labradorians being diagnosed with
cancer at some point in their lives, the disease continues to touch the lives of
everyone in this Province. The daffodil, the chosen symbol of support and hope
in the face of cancer, represents the determination that cancer can be beaten.
Indeed, great strides are being made in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer.
Mr. Speaker, we will continue to work aggressively to enhance cancer care in
the Province and to improve quality in our health care system through
investments in equipment and services for prevention, early diagnosis and
treatment of cancer.
Including Budget 2012 investments, the provincial government has invested
over $140 million in cancer treatment and prevention since 2004. Our continued
support for cancer treatment and prevention is helping to improve the lives of
cancer patients and their families throughout the Province as we commend the
dedicated medical professionals, volunteers, and organizations such as the
Canadian Cancer Society, who work tirelessly to help those fighting cancer.
Mr. Speaker, as we pin this little yellow flower to our lapels, we show
support for those fighting cancer and remember those we have lost, but we also
stand together in our fight and perseverance, steadfast that through continued
research, education, effective diagnosis, and treatment, we will find a way to
overcome this disease.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage all members of this House and all Newfoundlanders
and Labradorians to wear a daffodil tomorrow, April 27, as a sign of support for
those fighting cancer, a symbol of hope that we will find a cure and in memory
of those we have lost.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the hon. Premier for an advance copy of her statement today.
I also want to recognize the people in the House of Assembly from the
Canadian Cancer Society and to publicly thank them for the tremendous work that
they do in our Province. There are angels, Mr. Speaker, amongst us everywhere
when it comes to delivering services and treatments to patients who suffer with
cancer in Newfoundland and Labrador.
I also, Mr. Speaker, want to use this opportunity to acknowledge and thank
the government for their recent decision to reduce the age for breast screening
in Newfoundland and Labrador. I applaud your efforts in making that available to
women throughout this Province.
Mr. Speaker, I am always inspired by people throughout Newfoundland and
Labrador that are suffering from cancer, and show us the courage and
determination every day that this disease can be beaten, and are living proof
that it can be beaten. I am also inspired, Mr. Speaker, by all of those people
in communities around our districts who every day are launching fundraising
campaigns, selling tickets, holding raffles, participating in bake sales, doing
whatever it takes in their corner of the world to contribute to the prevention
and the fight against cancer in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Every time I walk into a room and I see this, I am always inspired by the
real compassion and heartfeltness of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to reach
out to others in a time of need. Just this past week, Mr. Speaker, I had the
opportunity to visit Daffodil Place, to meet with a number of the patients that
are there and to listen to their stories. Mr. Speaker, it really is a home away
from home and it is one of the great monuments that we can be proud of in
Newfoundland and Labrador, a service that we are doing for people in their
greatest time and in their greatest need.
I encourage everyone to wear a daffodil, as the Premier has said, to live in
hope of those that are suffering with cancer, to be a testament every day that
this can be beaten, and to remember those, Mr. Speaker, who have succumbed to
the disease.
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I, too, thank the Premier for the advance copy of her statement.
I am very pleased to see us marking Daffodil Day in this House, because I
know there is not a family in this Province that has not been touched by cancer
in some way or another.
We have seen some great progress in cancer treatment in this Province and I
look forward to the continued effort, as the Premier spoke about, to improve our
cancer diagnosis and treatment capabilities to increase everyone's prospects of
surviving.
I also look forward to government's continued advancement of the
recommendations of the Cameron Inquiry to bring detection and treatment
facilities up to the highest possible standards in the country; we owe it to the
people of the Province. I would like to see government, as well, dedicate more
resources towards cancer prevention by providing more on-the-ground support for
people in adopting healthier lifestyles and I think we all agree that that is
something that should happen.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KING: Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, it is indeed my pleasure to rise today to highlight the positive
work being undertaken by the Marine Institute's Centre for Fisheries Ecosystems
Research, in part through funding from our provincial government. The work of
Dr. George Rose and his team, without a doubt, is making a very positive
contribution to our Province's fishing industry of the future.
Mr. Speaker, the work of the centre focuses on offshore and coastal fisheries
studies, international collaboration, and fisheries conservation studies. It
also helps improve our research capabilities, and supports an ecosystem-based
and precautionary approach to fisheries management. To that end, the work of the
centre will undoubtedly give us a better understanding of our marine ecosystem
to address challenges for the fishery of the future.
Mr. Speaker, in July of 2010, the provincial government announced over $11.7
million to establish this centre. That included funding support for human
resources and operational costs, as well as for chartering an offshore fisheries
research vessel, the Celtic Explorer . Again, in Budget 2012, Mr. Speaker,
we have budgeted $3.8 million for the next installment of our government's five
year commitment to this.
The centre's activities in the past year have been quite important and
include the inshore cod survey in Trinity Bay, and work on determining cod stock
distribution and structure. This research supports the development and
implementation of management measures to aid in the rebuilding of cod stocks in
our Province, Mr. Speaker. The centre's staff have also been preparing for the
multi-species acoustic survey, which is scheduled for this May along the South
and Northeast Coast of the Province using the Celtic Explorer .
Mr. Speaker, it is worthy of note that the centre plans to examine further
elements of the ecosystem in 2012 through predator-prey relationship studies and
work to examine the implications of the high abundance of seals on commercial
fish stocks.
Mr. Speaker, our government's commitment to fishery science and ocean and
coastal management speaks for itself Budget 2012 contains investments
totalling $4.5 million to expand on this critical component of our fishery.
Our government, Mr. Speaker, certainly looks forward to the work the Centre
for Fisheries Ecosystems Research will accomplish in the upcoming year and
beyond.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.
MR. BENNETT: I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement,
and I commend the Centre for Fisheries Ecosystems Research for all the work they
have carried out that will help to ensure the sustainability of our fish stocks.
I have to state however, research is an area of federal responsibility and while
we appreciate we do need our own independent research, this government has
failed to press the federal government to shoulder its responsibility in
research obligations. Federal research and fisheries management has been going
downhill over time and it would be more cost-effective and provide greater
benefit if the feds were to jointly participate in this initiative.
The minister has said we are a small player on the world scene in terms of
seafood, which is one more reason why we should not allow the federal government
off the hook in terms of their obligation and commitment. Our limited money is
best spent on areas where we are responsible, such as a comprehensive marketing
strategy, which still has not been advanced by this government despite being in
government for nearly a decade.
In terms of research, I also implore the minister not to overlook nor punish
other organizations such as the FFAW that are also carrying out important
research on our fish stocks. Again, while the centre's work is commendable and
it is a good effort, it cannot replace scientific research that is needed on a
vast expanse of the fishing grounds, over 750,000 square miles. The major
problem we have with the fisheries is that there is a policy vacuum in the
fisheries. There is no solid plan for the fishery. We need to do more but we
must start with vision and a plan.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits - White Bay North.
MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. We
all owe a great debt to the work of Dr. Rose. Government should be doing and
funding this important work; in fact, they should be doing more. Twenty years
after the moratorium we still have no clear answers or a Northern cod stock. The
fishery is our largest sustainable resource and it will be long after the oil is
gone, so government is certainly not doing enough to ensure that our fishery is
developed to its full potential.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yesterday, the Premier revealed that there is another delay in the Muskrat
Falls Project. This time it is related to Manitoba Hydro's work on the Decision
Gate 3 numbers. Just a few weeks ago, MHI was expected to produce this report in
June and now it will not be ready until August.
The question for the Premier is: Over the last few weeks, what has changed to
cause this delay?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Almost from October 12 until the House opened, we heard members of the
Opposition bemoan the fact every day that the House of Assembly was not opened
and issues important to them and to the people of the Province were not being
discussed. Now, Mr. Speaker, we have been here since the first week of March and
there has been a fair amount of discussion and they have not listened to one
word of it not one word. Mr. Speaker, when we talked about the PUB report and
the fact they would not make a recommendation because they did not have Decision
Gate 3 numbers, I said on a daily basis in this House that Decision Gate numbers
would not be available until June. I am sorry you missed that. How can MHI do an
analysis on Decision Gate 3 numbers when they do not have them?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is important that the people of the Province know exactly what MHI and all
the consultants have been asked to do, so I ask the Premier: Will you table the
terms of reference for the work that you have asked MHI and Ziff Energy to
complete on the Muskrat Falls project? Will you please table it?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would be delighted to provide the terms of reference. What I
cannot guarantee to the people of the Province that the members opposite are
going to read them.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Well, I will guarantee the Premier that we will read them and we would like
to have input into them, too.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier recently stated that the governors in New England
are still interested in Muskrat Falls power, so I ask the Premier: Are these
states prepared to pay the same rate as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are
forced to pay?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, this is the kind of foolishness that one has come to expect in
this House of Assembly on questioning around Muskrat Falls. When you understand
how a utility operates, how debt is incurred, how that debt is paid down, and
the responsibilities of rate payers, Mr. Speaker, then we understand what the
cost of electricity is to the people of the Province. We have spent the last
year explaining that. You tried to commission this project twice under your own
Administrations. You think you would have understood that. Perhaps if they were
not trying to give it all to Hydro-Quebec to do, they might have been a bit more
successful and they might have understood some of these processes better than
they obviously do.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The PUB were not allowed to discuss rates. We are not allowed to know what
the rates are. Maybe the people in New England know what they have to pay,
because we certainly do not. We just wish the PUB were allowed to talk about
that, but they were not.
Mr. Speaker, the Innu from Quebec have filed a court action to stop the
Muskrat Falls project. They say that the advice of the federal-provincial
environmental assessment report was ignored.
I ask the Premier: Have you spoken to the federal government about this
issue? Will there be a further delay in the federal loan guarantee?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As I indicated, I think, when I was asked previously about the legal action
ongoing everyone has a right to bring a legal action to court. Bringing an
action to court does not make it valid, Mr. Speaker.
The Province is not named as a party to this action, to the best of my
understanding. What we are dealing with is an action that involves the federal
government. Mr. Speaker, at this point, there is nothing in the courts or any
order from the courts that precludes us from continuing to take the steps we are
taking.
I assume, Mr. Speaker, that the Quebec Innu, like the Grand Riverkeeper and
like the Sierra Club, will take their matter to court. Once the court makes a
decision, Mr. Speaker, we will abide by it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Premier announced in the media this morning that the government is going
to send out a householder to convince people that Muskrat Falls is the best
option.
I ask the Premier: Can the Premier advise the House of the timing of the
release and the budget for this householder?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we are not sending out information to the people of the Province
to convince them of anything. The facts, Mr. Speaker, will convince the people
of this Province that Muskrat Falls is (inaudible).
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, what we are going to do is take the
information, once it is provided by MHI and any other reports that we have, and
we are going to distil that to the people of the Province. The one thing we have
learned, Mr. Speaker, is you cannot distil that information through the lens
provided by the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Well, I can assure the Premier of that maybe when she gets the
next question here.
The government has committed to using their Budget to distribute materials
towards their position in favour of Muskrat Falls. Government should be
committed to providing equal resources, time, and space for all positions on
this issue in order to educate the people of the Province on other options.
I ask the Premier: Will the Premier commit to providing equivalent resources
or half the space in the householder for the Opposition?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Opposition has asked for a debate in this House. We have
provided boxes and boxes and boxes of information; it has been on the Internet.
Not that much analysis has come back, Mr. Speaker. They have not been able to
demonstrate where Nalcor's processes have been flawed. They have not been able
to counter the arguments put forward or the recommendations and the analysis put
forward by Navigant, by MHI, by the Consumer Advocate, by Dr. Wade Lock.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: In any way have they been able to find flaws in the
rationale or gaps in the reasoning or holes in the processes that have been
used. Mr. Speaker, they should be using some of their own resources. First of
all, your grey power would be a good place to start.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Leader of the Opposition.
MR. BALL: The Premier seems to be in a giving mood. We have the boxes,
they were already available on-line, and I do not need someone to tell me how to
print or copy and print.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. BALL: I ask the Premier, now that she is willing to give the
information, I will ask the question again: The terms of reference for Manitoba
Hydro and Ziff Energy, will you give us the terms of reference?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, what we have committed to is to have MHI
review all the Decision Gate 3 numbers, to complete the second tranche of work,
given that the PUB were not prepared to give a recommendation based on Decision
Gate 2 numbers. We will now provide Decision Gate 3 numbers when they are ready,
foregoing hours of debate in this House, Mr. Speaker. We are going to give those
to MHI.
MHI will have a look at those numbers, will do the same type of analysis they
did on the Decision Gate 2 numbers. Nobody had any issue with MHI's work on
Decision Gate 2 numbers. They will do the same work for us on Decision Gate 3,
it will be made available here and to the public, and we will have a debate here
in the House of Assembly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Opposition House Leader.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
During the middle of the election when the Premier was out knocking on doors,
she made no bones about telling people of this Province that she would bring in
a family caregiver allowance for people who have to quit their job, stay at
home, take care of elderly parents and adult children with disabilities.
I ask the Premier today: How could you make that commitment in the middle of
an election and renege on it when you got into power?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the one thing the people of this Province know about this
government is our word is our bond and we deliver on our commitments.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, what we said in our Blue Book and I
come from a background of social work; I worked for the government for a long
time delivering home support to people of this Province, Mr. Speaker. When
people were approved for home support, they were told categorically that they
could not hire family members to do that work, Mr. Speaker, unless they had an
exemption an exemption that was very, very difficult to get. Only under
extraordinary circumstances could you get an exemption. Most people were not
prepared to accept home care under those conditions. They wanted somebody to
live in the house with them. We are going to make that happen.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Opposition House Leader.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, quite clearly in the Blue Book the Premier stated
clients will have the option of receiving care from family members. She did not
say that it was going to be a minor extension of an existing program. Family
members could always get exemptions. I have gotten them for my own constituents
over the years.
Mr. Speaker, people in this Province was led to believe they would have a
cheque in hand as a family caregiver in their homes, in their communities.
I ask you again today, Premier: Why did you leave that impression out there
with the people in the public when you had no intentions of ever delivering on
that commitment?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, I clearly understand the commitment we
made as a party in the election, and the people of the Province understand it.
She talks about a minor extension of a program. Of all of the hundreds and
hundreds and hundreds of people who are in receipt of home support services in
this Province, only twenty have exemptions. That is how difficult it is to get
exemptions.
Mr. Speaker, there are criteria that have to apply to people when they look
for funding under the Home Support Program. Once they meet that criteria and
they are going to get funding under the Home Support Program then it will be up
to them who they hire to deliver that care.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Opposition House Leader.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Last year, the government committed to replace the Waterford Hospital. We did
not see any mention of it in the Budget this year.
I would like to ask the minister today: Is there any money going to be
committed this year for the Waterford Hospital, and what is the timing for the
completion of that facility?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, when we are talking about building a facility such as the
Waterford Hospital, that is mammoth undertaking for this government and we are
committed to doing it. In doing it, we want to make sure that we get it right.
This is a facility that will have to be built in Newfoundland and Labrador that
will have to serve for generations. We want to make sure that we get it right.
So, we need to do the planning. That is underway, that planning will continue to
happen. There is a committee that consists of Transportation and Works, my
department, and Eastern Health, that is working to start that functional plan
and the design plan once the functional planning is done. There is another group
that we are looking to start to get in place right now, which would be an
advisory committee to the original committee. Much work will continue to happen
this year.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, the Province committed to conduct an internal
investigation into the Burton Winters tragedy, and the Premier committed to
further discussions with Minister MacKay on search and rescue.
My question to the Premier is: Has the internal investigation been completed?
Have you received any further correspondence from Minister MacKay, and when will
these documents be tabled in the House?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, immediately following the incident, the government committed to
do a review of our protocols regarding search and rescue. That review has been
completed and reported upon.
Mr. Speaker, I wrote Minister MacKay several weeks ago with a number of
questions with regard to the Burton Winters incident. Mr. Speaker, I have
received a reply, but the reply raised a number of other questions. We have
asked for further clarification the letter left here yesterday. Mr. Speaker,
when I have the complete information I will live up to my commitment to table
both the letters and the responses here in the House of Assembly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yesterday, the Premier said that she would not lower the flags in protest of
the closure of the Marine Rescue Sub-Centre, instead she would press her case
and make real arguments to the federal government.
My question is to the Premier. The phones are now on call-forward to Halifax,
locks are being changed, and, Premier, to whom are you now pressing and for
what?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the issue here is the safety of the men and women who work on
the water in Newfoundland and Labrador. The fear that is being felt by all of us
is that we may not get the same level of response because of consolidation of
services in Halifax. Mr. Speaker, we are not losing search and rescue services.
They are not being diminished in terms of the infrastructure that is available
for search and rescue, Mr. Speaker. So, we need to continue to monitor very,
very carefully what is happening in Halifax, and I have a commitment from
Rear-Admiral Gardam that he will do that in concert with us to ensure that the
maximum standards are all -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.
MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, this week's Budget revealed a number of areas
where this government is seriously underperforming, including in the fisheries.
Estimates show over $2.1 million was allocated for marketing initiatives for our
industry, yet only $1.6 million was used by the government.
I ask the Fisheries Minister: Why was so much money left on the table when
our industry is in desperate need of a comprehensive strategy to market its
seafood?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I certainly take exception with the member's preface to his question, that we
are not putting much money into the fishing industry. I remind him, if he
checked the documents, Newfoundland and Labrador invests more than the
equivalent combination of Quebec and all other Atlantic Provinces. I say to you,
Mr. Speaker, that is representative -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KING: That is representative of a very significant contribution to
this Province and shows our support for the fishing industry.
Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to answer any and all questions that the member
opposite has on anything specific to my department when we go through Estimates;
that is why we do those kinds of things. I can assure him that in the coming
days and weeks he will hear a lot more about the many positive things that we
are going to invest in to support fisheries and aquaculture in this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.
MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, this year the fisheries department is seeking
$5.5 million, over double last year's amount, to support its marketing
initiatives.
I ask the minister: How can we believe that his department can invest over $5
million in marketing when last year they could not handle $2 million? What is
the plan?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KING: Let me say this to you, Mr. Speaker, one of our plans is not to
open fish plants with no fish to process. We are not going into making widgets,
and we are certainly not going to guide the fishery in this Province on the
assumption that we can buy herring for nine cents a pound and take a fifteen
cent can and sell it for a $1 in a dollar store and make a mint, because if we
could do that Bill Barry and many others would be doing it, I say to the member
opposite. Do your research before you come to the House of Assembly if you want
to gain some credibility, but I guarantee you one thing, the investments that we
are going to make in aquaculture, in the Coast of Bays regions in particular,
and the investments that we are going to make in partnership with industry on
marketing in this Province are going to surprise you and they are going to be
positive.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, legislative standing committees are an integral
piece of the democratic puzzle in every province in this country, every province
except Newfoundland and Labrador. Hundreds are describing our Legislature as
immature and most agree using standing committees would lead to better public
policy.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Will she direct the House of Assembly
Resource Standing Committee to study Nalcor's Muskrat Falls project proposal?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
What we have is a province with a population of 500,000 people. We have
forty-eight members who are all equipped to do their job. As a government, we
are elected to govern, Mr. Speaker. It is a Cabinet appointed by the Premier. We
will make the decisions in relation to such things as affect our people on a
daily basis.
The Committees that we have in place, Mr. Speaker, review the Estimates. They
can ask questions. I say to the Leader of the Third Party: If you want to
govern, get elected.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I point out to the minister that I am elected and I am the
Leader of my Party in this House.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Speaker has recognized the hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
As the MHA for Signal Hill Quidi Vidi and the Leader of my Party, Mr.
Speaker, I point out to this government
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS MICHAEL: that this government allocates hundreds of millions of
dollars to Nalcor for an unsanctioned Muskrat Falls project. While they do that,
questions continue to mount about the alternative ways by which we could meet
our energy demand.
Mr. Speaker, there is a belief amongst the public, whether the minister wants
to acknowledge it or not
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS MICHAEL: that this government simply has not considered alternatives
to their preferred Muskrat Falls proposal.
Mr. Speaker, will the Premier direct the House of Assembly Resource Standing
Committee to review the many ways in which we can meet our energy needs?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
There were about three questions in that. In relation to the first one, Mr.
Speaker, the equity investment, what it means is that money will be available,
as the Premier pointed out yesterday. I know the NDP are not involved in
budgeting, at least in this Province. What we have to do is put money in the
Budget in order to allow if we sanction the project that we can proceed, not
lose a construction year. The second question, Mr. Speaker, I am a little bit
lost on that one but what was the second question?
The third question, Mr. Speaker, in relation to standing committees we have
committees which deal with Estimates; we will deal with the issues that have to
be dealt with, but we do not need standing committees in this Province, Mr.
Speaker. We have a Premier, we have a Cabinet, we have Caucus, we have an
Opposition. The member opposite will have lots of opportunity in this House to
debate.
What is interesting, Mr. Speaker, are her comments yesterday that we are
taking our time. What (inaudible)
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, last year in Estimates, we were told by the Department of
Natural Resources that the $348 million set aside for Nalcor was apportioned
75-25 for Muskrat Falls and oil and gas activities. That is $84 million set
aside for oil and gas activities. We see in 2012 Estimates, in fact, none of
that money was spent.
I ask the Premier: Why wasn't the portion of money for oil and gas spent by
Nalcor?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In relation to the money spent, the answer is quite simple; Nalcor made money
last year, the price of oil was up, their operating costs were down, they did
not need the equity. The equity has to be made available, Mr. Speaker, in case
they need it. In relation to the money set aside for the Lower Churchill
development last year
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. KENNEDY: again, what happened was, because of the environmental
assessment delays that were encountered, it took time to get to that stage so
again, that money was not spent. Mr. Speaker, what we are doing is we are
ensuring that there is money there if we get to the point of sanctioning the
project. I do expect that after the debate, I do expect that the NDP we know
the Liberals will be to be voting in favour of this project.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, this year first of all, I am glad the minister actually
answered a question with facts that time. This year government has set aside
$664 million for Nalcor. If the same 75-25 split applies, then this year Nalcor
would receive $166 million for oil and gas activities.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: What percentage of the money is actually
earmarked for Muskrat Falls and how much for oil and gas activities?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, my answer to the Leader of the Third Party
is quite simple; what we have is approximately $650 million that is set aside
for Muskrat Falls if the sanction decision is made. There is $75 million, Mr.
Speaker, for oil and gas if the money is needed.
Mr. Speaker, what we have we need capital costs, and there are operating
costs in relation to our offshore. Let us never forget that the oil and gas
money to a great extent is what is building the hospitals and schools in this
Province, that is fixing up the roads, that is providing all of the social
programs such as poverty reduction programs, Mr. Speaker, that I thought that
the NDP or the Third Party would be very supportive of. Yet what they were going
to do during their election promises was throw the whole thing on its head,
change the deals, and drive the oil companies away.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Families in Newfoundland and Labrador are facing a crisis in child care.
Parents in this Province right now are paying upwards of $1,500 per month for
spaces in regulated child care. Now, the Budget says this government is going to
have some sort of plan for child care eventually, but at this rate, Mr. Speaker,
that is going to be a grandchild care plan, not a child care plan.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. KIRBY: So I ask the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services:
When is this government finally going to act on the concerns of working parents
and provide early learning and care programs that families can actually afford?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
After six weeks I finally get a question, so thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, I will tell you what kind of child care plan we
are going to have. We are going to have a premature child care plan, because you
are certainly not going to have to wait to be a granddad to see this action take
place, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, we have announced in the Budget that we will
spend $457 million over the next ten years. Already we have increased spaces
since coming into power by 50 per cent, but we are not going to stop there. We
are going to increase spaces by 70 per cent more, an addition of 4,800 spaces.
When it comes to quality, Mr. Speaker, we are completely revamping the
quality standards, providing opportunities for ECEs to get their Level 1
training. When it comes to affordability, we will be capping fees for child care
centres that come in (inaudible).
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Provinces that invest in all-day kindergarten are seeing a return on
investment in terms of higher school achievement and fewer students at risk of
falling through the cracks. Yet, there is no mention of all-day kindergarten at
all in this government's Budget.
I ask the Minister of Education: Will he take this evidence seriously now and
see that all-day kindergarten is introduced in this Province as soon as
possible?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, we had a three-hour love-in here this morning
in Estimates that is the only way I can put it trying to educate the members
opposite on where we are going with positive initiatives in education. I have
said it time and time again in this House, and in Question Period, one of the
best areas that we can invest and research shows it is in those early years
from zero to three. That is where we have started.
Kindergarten we are looking at it, Mr. Speaker, but we are not there to
announce it yet. We are investing in the most critical area, the area from zero
to three, for parents and students, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, I am getting e-mails and phone calls from artists
and arts groups all over the Province. They are astounded by the message sent to
them from this government through the cutting of funding to the Newfoundland and
Labrador Arts Council astounded and betrayed; artists who we are very, very
proud of.
Mr. Speaker, they have asked me to ask the Minister of Tourism and Culture:
Why on earth did you cut funding to the already underfunded, beleaguered budget
of the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that they direct their e-mails
to the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council who came out yesterday and
recognized that there will be no cuts to programs or grants for artists in this
Province as a result of the Budget.
Mr. Speaker, in the past three or four years we have doubled the budget from
$960,000 to $2.144 million for artists in this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. DALLEY: There is an additional $300,000 through Cultural Connections
to support artists in this Province. Mr. Speaker, that builds on the $56 million
that we have invested in artists and culture in this Province since 2006. They
do a great job, we have great respect for them, we have a great working
relationship with the Arts Council, and we will continue to support them in any
way we can.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, before he heads out to Gander for the Arts
Council awards, I ask the minister our cultural industry is vital to our
economy and sense of pride. For every dollar invested, two dollars and
eighty-six cents is generated. Our Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council is the
third-lowest funded in the country.
So I ask the minister: Will he reverse these ridiculous cuts, these
short-sighted cuts, and bring the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council funding
up to par with the rest of the country?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, the people of this Province have a great
expectation for us as a government to be fiscally responsible. We are doing
that. We went through a budget exercise, mandated through our departments, to
look at 3 per cent where we can find efficiencies in our department.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council are
an important part of what we do through the Department of Tourism, Culture and
Recreation. They have a budget; we have doubled their budget in recent years. We
have cut $33,000 out of a $2.4 million budget, Mr. Speaker. They can absorb it
through administration. The core piece for artists are their programs and their
grants, and it will not be touched, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The time allocated for Question Period has expired.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Tabling of Documents.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Tabling of Documents
MR. SPEAKER: Pursuant to
section 8 and
section 10 of the Public Tender
Act, I hereby table the report of the Public Tender Act Exemptions for March,
2012, as presented by the Chief Operating Officer of the Government Purchasing
Agency.
Notices of Motion.
Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.
MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House of Assembly today to
present a petition again on high-speed Internet.
Mr. Speaker, the petition of the undersigned humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS with declining enrolment, distance education by Internet is now an
accepted way to deliver educational services to students living in small
communities; and
WHEREAS students have little to no say in where they or their families
reside; and
WHEREAS many families do not have the ability to relocate so that their
children can access educational opportunities in larger centres; and
WHEREAS many small businesses rely on the Internet to conduct business; and
WHEREAS high-speed Internet permits a business to be more competitive than
does slower dial-up service; and
WHEREAS no high-speed Internet service exists in the communities of
Bellburns, Portland Creek, St. Pauls or Sally's Cove; and
WHEREAS there are no plans to offer high-speed Internet to residents of these
communities;
WHERUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to partner
with the private sector and offer high-speed Internet service to these
communities.
And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, the government makes announcements on an ongoing basis about -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Speaker has acknowledged the Member for St. Barbe who is presenting a
petition. I would ask members of the House to respect his time and allow him to
deliver his petition on behalf of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.
MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, in so many of these small communities that have
been overlooked there is literally a line up of communities waiting to sign
petitions. The question then, why can't we send a petition with 15,000 people's
signatures on it? Surely, that would make a difference. I have to explain: no,
it will not really make any difference because it is still only one petition.
I have communities in the northern end of my district - this is the south and
the middle. I even have people coming in this week from government members'
districts asking if they can have a petition to present. There will be petitions
coming forward in the towns from the communities of Lockleven, Highlands,
literally all across the Province, because the small towns and communities are
being left out.
The government is dishing out gobs of money, literally hurling it out of this
building to the big Internet providers without paying any attention whatsoever
to the outcome for the small communities. Mr. Speaker, the small communities are
being left in the lurch. They are very concerned that when the big spending
initiative is over, the high profitability movement is over they will have been
left behind. This is a petition from these small communities, that number no
more than 1,000 people combined, requesting high-speed Internet be considered
for them.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo - La Poile.
MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have a petition.
To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in
Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS hundreds of residents of the Southwest Coast of the Province of
Newfoundland and Labrador, including residents of the communities of Margaree,
Fox Roost, Isle aux Morts, Burnt Islands, Rose Blanche-Harbour Le Cou, Diamond
Cove and La Poile use Route 470 on a regular basis for work, medical,
educational and social reasons; and
WHEREAS there is no cellphone coverage on Route 470; and
WHEREAS residents and users of Route 470 require cellphone coverage to ensure
their safety and communication abilities; and
WHEREAS the Department of Innovation, Business and Rural Development recently
announced significant funding to improve broadband services in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador; and
WHEREAS the residents and users of Route 470 feel that the Department of
Innovation, Business and Rural Development should also invest in cellular phone
coverage for rural Newfoundland and Labrador;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to support the users of Route 470 in their request to obtain
cellular phone coverage along Route 470.
And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, over the break from the House of Assembly, two weeks, I had an
opportunity to travel around my district. This was one of the main areas of
concern that kept coming up, no matter where I went, if I was out on the street,
if I was in the grocery store, if I was in a meeting with the town council. It
is still there, it is still a huge issue.
There are a couple of different fronts I would go at this. One of the issues
that we discussed in the meetings I had with councils actually, I had a
meeting with all the mayors in my district, and one of the things that they are
under the gun to complete are the emergency measures plans for their
communities. Usually number one in their emergency measures plan is
communication; however, they have no cellphone coverage. They cannot even
complete their emergency measures plan. If something happens to the regular
phone lines in those communities, they have no means of communication.
Again, this is just one area which this covers. I am not even going to get
into the employment that people are missing out on because they cannot get calls
from work, whether it be Marine Atlantic or the lake boats, because they are
living in an area with no cellphone coverage.
Now I noticed the minister did put out a press release this morning where he
talked about the rural broadband initiative. I have sent him some letters. I am
looking forward to the reply. Perhaps we are going to get a rural cellphone
coverage initiative. Again, I know that there are areas of concern here you
have to deal with the feds, you have to deal with private industry but it was
done with broadband. I certainly think we can do it with cellphones too, and
again, the cost to do this is going to be minimal for the return that we are
going to get both in emergency and safety and in economic benefits. So, again, I
call upon the minister. I look forward to his reply. I believe he may have one
drafted to me; I look forward to reading it, and then perhaps I will come in
again on Monday and I will add to this petition, and see where we are going with
it then.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the time.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am rising here to present the anti-replacement worker petition.
To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in
Parliament Assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland
and Labrador humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS strikes and lockouts are rare, and on average 97 per cent of
collective agreements are negotiated without work disruption; and
WHEREAS anti-temporary replacement workers laws have existed in Quebec since
1978 and British Columbia since 1993, and successive governments in those
provinces have never repealed those laws; and
WHEREAS anti-temporary replacement workers legislation has reduced the length
and divisiveness of labour disputes and the use of temporary replacement workers
during a strike or lockout is damaging to the social fabric of communities, the
local economy, and the well-being of its residents, as evident by the recent use
of temporary replacement workers by both Ocean Choice International and Vale in
Voisey's Bay;
We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to
enact legislation banning the use of temporary replacement workers during a
strike or lockout.
As in duty bound, your petitioners will every pray.
Mr. Speaker, today this petition has signatures of people from Bay Roberts,
Shears Cove, Colliers, Point Leamington, Carbonear, Corner Brook, Dunville, St.
John's, and Little Harbour East.
Gratefully, the strike ended with the trawlermen and Ocean Choice
International after an unfortunate ten-week lockout. Those folks were without
pay and without work for that length of time because the laws in this Province
permit employers to bring in scab labour through the back door and to disallow
workers from their right to collective bargaining, at least a fair process.
I know the Minister Responsible for the Labour Relations Agency is attentive
to these concerns. I would like to hope that he had some role in the successful
conclusion of that lockout. I would urge the minister to see that we get this
legislation. I know he has talked about that there are varying sides to this and
there are people on one side or the other. I would like to see that all of us
here in the House of Assembly are on one side, and that side is the side of
working families here in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.
MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I present a petition to reinvest in rural broadband initiatives.
To the hon. the House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador in Parliament Assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of
Newfoundland and Labrador humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS in the District of The Straits White Bay North, despite the $4
million Rural Broadband Initiative announcement on December 22, 2011, only one
community, Ship Cove, is slated for broadband coverage; and
WHEREAS the communities of Pines Cove, Eddies Cove East, Bide Arm, North Boat
Harbour, L'Anse aux Meadows, Great Brehat, St. Carol's, Goose Cove, Grandois,
and St. Anthony Bight still remain without services; and
WHEREAS many small businesses within the district rely on Internet to conduct
business; and
WHEREAS broadband Internet permits a business to be more competitive than a
slower, dial-up service; and
WHEREAS broadband Internet enhances primary, secondary, post-secondary, and
further educational opportunities;
We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to
reinvest in rural broadband initiatives in Newfoundland and Labrador.
As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
We certainly have seen the government make a commitment to reinvest, although
it is a lot less than in the previous Budget of 2011, where the Rural Broadband
Initiative was much higher. Right now, it is at $2 million in the upcoming
Budget. Certainly, correspondence that I have received from the Department of
Innovation, Business and Rural Development and its news release shows that the
cost of putting in this broadband Internet is getting higher and not reaching
the greatest number of communities.
This is where we look at doing things very strategically and investing our
tax dollars wisely. That is why I have been calling for an advanced
telecommunication strategy, because we need to look at not only broadband, but
cellular coverage. Other provinces are doing that. They are bridging gaps. They
are really fostering an environment where we can have good, true business
growth. When we have over 200 communities in Newfoundland and Labrador that do
not have access to broadband coverage that is something that we really do need
to step up. I would like to see the government further make those investments.
Other provinces have, like British Columbia. They have invested $100 million
over a ten-year period. Within five years, they would have 97 per cent cellphone
coverage on their highways, with over 1,700 kilometres covered. That is very,
very important.
If we are going to look at advancing education in these communities, we
really do need to look at a broadband strategy and a cellular strategy. This is
something that, if not, we are seeing communities missed. If we look at the
communities of The Straits region, there are two communities there that were
skipped over, but communities in between were covered. There is the Town of
Roddickton-Bide Arm. Roddickton has coverage, but Bide Arm does not; they have
since amalgamated. We have a town that does not part of it does not have
coverage. Going in and implementing that coverage is going to be very, very
costly. So, you need to have a true strategy where you go in and you do coverage
of the area, and not just doing bits and pieces. That is something the
government has been doing when it comes to road work and other things. So, we
really, truly do need an advanced telecommunications strategy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's East.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It humbles me again to be presenting a petition to government on behalf of
some concerned citizens of the Province. I will just read the prayer:
To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in
Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland
and Labrador humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS weather cameras are needed on the Burin Peninsula Highway for the
safety of residents who are travelling during unpredictable weather conditions;
We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to
install weather cameras on the Burin Peninsula Highway.
As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, I can not put too much emphasis on exactly how much importance
this is to the people of the Burin Peninsula, the importance to business not
only in that particular region, but trucking companies and such that are using
that highway on a daily basis who like to keep informed on weather conditions.
Sometimes, whenever some of these companies are even dispatching traffic on the
Burin Peninsula or whatever region of the Province, they like to take a look at
the department of highways cameras that they have set up and see what the
traffic conditions and the road conditions are like in the various areas.
Mr. Speaker, this petition is signed by people all up and down the Burin
Peninsula indeed, from everywhere in the Province. Some of the communities
here: Rocky Harbour, St. Lawrence, Marystown, Marysvale, Clarenville, Conception
Bay South, Burin, Bell Island residents, Bay d'Espoir, St. Catherine's,
Placentia Bay I could go on and on and on. These petitions are of importance
to the people down there, and we certainly hope that government is going to
address it.
I do not think right now that the cost would be too prohibitive when it comes
to setting up a highway camera. We do know, for example, there is some cellphone
service; in some other areas, it is rather broken. So, it is not going to be
hard for government to institute a bit of a survey down there to find out where
the signal is best to get a wireless signal through from one of these cameras
that are mounted.
Mr. Speaker, again, it humbles me to present this one and hopefully
government will address this situation sooner rather than later, and let's get
this one fixed sooner rather than later. It seems to be such a minimal cost that
I think the government can address this one very quickly.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's North.
MR. KENNEDY: I call Orders of the Day, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day have been called.
The motion is on the floor.
All those in favour of the motion?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: Contra-minded?
Motion carried.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to now call the motion before the House for the appointment of
the Members' Compensation Review Committee, Mr. Speaker.
Do I need to read the motion into the record again?
MR. SPEAKER: Please, yes.
MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, the resolution before this House is:
WHEREAS subsection 16(1) of the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity
and Administration Act requires that a Members' Compensation Review Committee of
not more than 3 individuals be appointed at least once during each General
Assembly to conduct an inquiry and prepare a report respecting the salaries,
allowances, severance payments and pensions to be paid to Members of the House
of Assembly; and
WHEREAS in accordance with subsection 16(2) of the House of Assembly
Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act, the Speaker has consulted with
the Government House Leader, the Official Opposition House Leader, and the
Leader of the Third Party on the appointment; and
WHEREAS they have agreed with the introduction of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS subsection 16(4) of the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity
and Administration Act requires that a Report, with recommendations, must be
presented to the Speaker within 120 days of the appointment;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Ms Jacqueline Brazil, a Judge of the Provincial
Court, be appointed to fulfill this requirement, with the appointment to become
effective on August 6, 2012; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Judge Brazil conduct her inquiry and present her
Report to the Speaker on or before December 3, 2012.
MR. SPEAKER: The motion has been heard by the members of the House.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to have a few words on what this involves and why
we are engaging in this process. Most members, if not all members of the public
in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador will be familiar with the report
prepared by Chief Justice Derek Green in 2007, called Rebuilding Confidence:
Report of the Review Commission on Constituency Allowances and Related Matters .
In the introduction, the report goes on for quite some time, and out of that
report comes the piece of legislation which governs us, being the House of
Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act.
Mr. Speaker, it is a large report and there are many recommendations, but in
the introduction and it is not bad if people want to familiarize themselves
with what guided Chief Justice Green in making his decision; he talked about the
need for accountability by elected members of the public.
I am not going to revisit, Mr. Speaker, what led to this. We all know about
the constituency spending scandal. We know how some members were charged and
went to jail. We know, Mr. Speaker, that there was an uproar in the public and
there was a cry for accountability and an acceptance of responsibilities by
members elected in our democracy.
Mr. Speaker, Chief Justice Green outlined the principles, the tough role that
MHAs have, but the recognition that once you have put yourself up for election,
once you say to a member of the public, give me your vote, then you are going to
be criticised; there will be impositions on your family life and your private
life. Mr. Speaker, there has to be a mechanism to ensure that there is full
accountability. That is one of the keys, Mr. Speaker. We are all paid in this
House with taxpayer's money. Our offices, this House of Assembly, it is all paid
for with money that comes from the taxpayer of this Province, in one form or
another.
So, out of Chief Justice Green's report, Mr. Speaker, came a number of
recommendations. One is the establishment of the House management committee.
This is televised. Anyone can watch it. We were here yesterday afternoon
discussing some of the issues that go on. I think an example yesterday, Mr.
Speaker, was someone had not filed their report in sixty days for a twenty-five
or a thirty-dollar claim. Because they were outside the sixty-day period, they
had to come before the House management committee.
Mr. Speaker, I do not think people realize the actual mechanism that is in
place to ensure accountability on behalf of members, the role that the House
management committee plays. The House management committee there are three
representatives of government, including myself, the MHA for Stephenville East,
and the MHA for Cape St. Francis; we have the Leader of the Official Opposition
and the Opposition House Leader. We have the Member for Signal Hill Quidi Vidi
representing the New Democratic Party and yourself, as the Speaker, in charge,
for lack of a better term.
Mr. Speaker, that is televised; people see what is going on. Then what we
have coming out of that is a whole corporate structure, I understand, here, that
if a claim is provided that claim is looked at. They ensure that the claim is
appropriate; we ensure that it is consistent with the rules. Mr. Speaker, even
though there are times as the House management committee that we can change the
rules, there are times that we will say no; we will wait until the next members'
compensation committee.
Mr. Speaker, another thing that came out of Green and out of the House
management committee is all of the expenses of MHAs and ministers are on-line.
Anyone who wants to go in and look at how we are spending our money can go into
the House of Assembly Web site, Mr. Speaker, click on to any individual member
or minister, and see how we have spent our money. Not only is there a
summary,
but I think there is actually if you keep going into it you will find
receipts, you will find the claims, the nature of the claims, where we stayed in
hotels, where we travelled to. Essentially it is all out there for the public to
look at.
Mr. Speaker, there is an openness and a transparency that is required as a
result of what took place in Green. Mr. Speaker, then we get to the point, and I
think all of us will agree, while members of the House of Assembly are not
entitled to special treatment, they are entitled to fair treatment. Contrary to
what some members of the public I have already heard some members of the
public; this Committee is not about wages. What the Committee is set up to do,
Mr. Speaker, is to look at various aspects of the role of the MHA and to prepare
a report respecting salaries, allowances, severance payments, and pensions to be
paid to members of the House of Assembly.
Mr. Speaker, I said the MHAs are entitled to fair treatment, but we do not
want MHAs determining what is fair. That is how we have set up this or Chief
Justice Green under
section 16, led to
section 16 of the House of Assembly
Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act, led to this Members'
Compensation Review Committee.
Mr. Speaker, at times that has been an encumbrance on us doing our work. I
remember something as simple one time, the former MHA for St. Barbe, he could
drive from his district to St. John's, but he was not allowed to stop along the
way to stay in a hotel or to have a meal. It was just something that as you
develop the protocol, it gets overlooked. There are some things we can change
like that.
I remember and I do not know if the current MHA for Torngat Mountains is
encountering this, but I know the former MHA for Torngat Mountains, and I know
the Opposition House Leader oftentimes encounters where she will have to stay in
Goose Bay overnight, because you cannot get back to the coast of Labrador. They
have to come to the Speaker to seek special permission.
Mr. Speaker, a lot of the rules lead to more rules, lead to more procedures,
and sometimes it becomes counterproductive. We are giving the opportunity to
clear up some of these things with the House management committee, or most of
them before the Members' Compensation Review Committee.
I have, Mr. Speaker, with me the report that was prepared in 2009. There was
a three member committee comprised of Joe O'Neil as the chair, Brian Barry as a
representative, and Cathy Bennett. They provide the report which is available
for the public to review. Mr. Speaker, in their report, they outlined at page 9
some of the principles to guide them, which seem to be very sound in terms of
striking "a balance between the obligation to be fair to provincial taxpayers
with the need for our elected representatives to be fairly compensated".
Mr. Speaker, to put things in perspective, I have a fairly tight district in
terms of Carbonear - Harbour Grace. I can drive to my district in an hour; go
from one end of my district to the other in probably twenty, twenty-five
minutes. Mr. Speaker, you will get other members, for example, who have to
travel by helicopter to get to areas of their district. There are members all
around this House. We have to allow them to do their jobs because constituents
want to see their MHAs, Mr. Speaker. We have to have situations where these
issues can be addressed. What we have done as we move along is address some of
the more minor ones.
Mr. Speaker, then the second principle was, "The standard of accountability
and transparency"; and three, "Greater public awareness of MHA compensation,
constituency district funding" and the notorious constituency allowance. Before
I made any comment today, I went in and looked at my constituency allowance. I
said: What have I spent? Zero. We have gone, Mr. Speaker, from where people
spend too much to sometimes where people do not spend anything. Trying to find
that appropriate balance, that is what this committee can do, and continued
enhancement.
Now, Mr. Speaker, even though this was only October 2009, we have to appoint
another committee or person, not more than three persons, because we have just
had an election. Mr. Speaker, the proposal in this resolution is we appoint a
judge of the Provincial Court. People may ask: Why have we chosen a judge? One,
it is a difficult job at the best of times. You take three members of the
public, and I remember appearing in front of them, Mr. Speaker. There were
numerous people and groups who appeared before the former committee. Some of
them were rather strident in their views that MHAs are paid too much, take away
their pensions; the views that we not unexpectedly hear, Mr. Speaker, when we
have people out there who are struggling to make a go. We always have issues
ongoing in relation to issues of people's pensions and things like that.
Mr. Speaker, that committee provided their report, that was two years ago. We
said: well, how do we find someone who can bring that level of respect that is
required? The office of a judge, Mr. Speaker, demands that level of respect.
Some of the qualities of a judge, Mr. Speaker, if there are any judges
listening, and I hope they are not because they should be sitting on the bench
right now, but they might find it somewhat ironic to hear some of these words
coming from me. The qualities demanded of a judge, Mr. Speaker, and which our
judges possess, are those of respect, integrity, objectivity, because that is
what defines a judge. No matter how adversarial a person you may be as a lawyer,
when you go to that bench you have to put it behind you, Mr. Speaker. You have
to ensure that litigants get a fair hearing, that they are treated with respect
and they are given the right to be heard. Oftentimes, Mr. Speaker, that can be
trying, both as a result of the unrepresented litigant and the lawyer or the
person in front of them.
Also, Mr. Speaker, a judge, depending on what you deal with, there are
different levels of court. Our Provincial Court, the cases they hear are
different than our Supreme Court or our Court of Appeal. Also, it has to be a
judge, no matter what level of court, has to possess common sense and
practicality, because what you are doing, Mr. Speaker, is looking at trying to
balance everything. Chief Justice Green did indicate in his report that as we
moved along there would be changes, you could address the situation.
Let me use one example, Mr. Speaker, that I know is of concern to many
members of the House on all sides. It does not affect me because of where I
live. Mr. Speaker, we have members, MHAs and ministers, for example, who stay in
a hotel, and it could be up to 180, 200 nights a year. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is
what they have to do because the rules do not allow otherwise. The taxpayer is
actually paying more money than if we were to say to the individual, here is a
lump sum of money, now you go stay wherever you want. We cannot do that, Mr.
Speaker, nor are we willing to do that as a House management committee, because
it would be seen as accruing a benefit to the individual. So the taxpayer is
paying more money than they should have to pay because we are trying so hard to
comply with the rules. Now that may be a situation, Mr. Speaker, that can be
brought before Judge Brazil and she can look at it and say, balance it all and
say, yeah that makes sense to me. That makes sense because not only are you
looking at the issue of the cost, but you are looking at the ability or allowing
the MHA to do his or her job.
Mr. Speaker, that is just one example. There are all kinds of practical
examples. Anyone who has watched the Management Commission, if you have nothing
better to do - anyone who has watched the Management Commission will hear all
kinds of these situations arise on a daily basis.
Mr. Speaker, what Judge Brazil will be asked to do now, Judge Brazil, by
way of background, I know her. I do not know her that well, and some day I will
have the pleasure of appearing in front of her as a lawyer in the
not-too-distant future. She may not respond the same
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. KENNEDY: No, hopefully not.
Mr. Speaker, Judge Brazil brings with her a wealth of experience. She was in
private practice for many years and I know was involved in different areas of
private practice. She worked with the Department of Justice for a number of
years. I think she was appointed to the bench a couple of years ago. She brings
with her, as all judges do, those varied life experiences.
What the judge will be asked to do will be to examine, listen to what people
have to say. The process will be hers to determine, but we do know that the
previous committee had hearings, allowed people to appear, allowed people to
have their say, both MHAs and members of the public.
Mr. Speaker, she will determine and it is my understanding, and I want
people to be aware of this that the date of August is set because she is not
available to clear up her court cases in conjunction with the Chief Judge until
then. It not a matter of us putting this off; it is a question that she has to
be freed up from her court schedule.
Mr. Speaker, there was a determination to proceed this way. I would certainly
recommend to this House that the appointment of the judge we are complying
with our statutory requirement. I understand the fact that we missed the
appointment by about two days led to media commentary, so it is good that people
are watching this. It is good that they are watching what is taking place
because again, I think we can speak for all members of this House; I see some
members of this House who have been around for a long time, Mr. Speaker. I think
the MHA for the Bay of Islands there is into about his third decade now; I am
not sure about that, but pretty close. I know we have MHAs here
MR. JOYCE: (Inaudible).
MR. KENNEDY: The MHA for St. John's South is into his I think he could
be into his third decade here. Well, it would be 1996, and then (inaudible);
yes, that is decades.
We have other members, Mr. Speaker, who bring a wealth of experience and who
may want to appear before the judge. I would certainly encourage all MHAs in
this House: If you have issues that are impeding your ability to do your job
and they may be minor, they may be irritants to bring them forward so that you
can have them aired in public.
Mr. Speaker, I would certainly support this resolution with the appointment
of the judge, and hopefully the explanation here, that this not about MHAs
looking for more money. This is a statutory requirement, Mr. Speaker, that is
set down. This is not a process that any of us have brought in. This is a
situation that is demanded by statute.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am just going to have a few comments with regard to the resolution that has
been put forward by the hon. Government House Leader today. As the Government
House Leader already pointed out, many of these issues are dealt with through
the House of Assembly Management Commission; however, the review of severances,
the review of pensions and salaries and allowances to MHAs is certainly not a
responsibility that we would take on.
I sit as part of the House of Assembly Management Commission, as do the
Government House Leader and a number of other colleagues here in the House of
Assembly. Mr. Speaker, we deal with a whole range of issues as part of that
Commission. Many of those issues are issues that impact the ability of MHAs to
be able to carry out their duties and their jobs to their constituents.
Sometimes they deserve to be reviewed, they deserve to have another look, to
make sure that government is getting the best bang for its buck in the service
that is being provided, and also that MHAs have the ability and the flexibility
to serve their constituency in the way that is expected of them.
For example, Mr. Speaker, even in the meeting just a couple of days ago, we
dealt with a number of issues with regard to office rentals. Through the
Commission, there is a cap on office rental of something like $7,000 a year with
HST. Many of the tenders that are coming in today and I think it is normal
practice; anybody out there who is in business today in the Province or leasing
space knows what the cost of leasing space is today; the amount of money that we
allocate is far below what you are going to get that kind of space for. Almost
every time an MHA's office has to go up for tender or renewal, we are finding
that we have to look at exemptions to allow for them to be able to rent the
office at the lowest available price that they can get under the Public Tender
Act in their constituency.
That is just one example of some of the things that need to be looked at as a
broader perspective and a broader review, and that is what is happening here.
When we had the Green report, and Chief Justice Derek Green came in to review
the spending and the spending practices of Members of the House of Assembly in
our Province, he not only looked for where there were deficiencies, but he made
recommendations on where we could have more efficient operations and operations
that would be very streamlined, that would provide for the greatest levels of
accountability to the taxpayers of the Province.
Mr. Speaker, while he did a very good job at putting a new format in place,
like every format, you have to learn to work with it to really find out where
some of the deficiencies and the flaws might be and where there needs to be a
little bit of tweaking. What we have discovered is that over time, since we have
had the new act adopted in the House of Assembly, we have found that there is
tweaking on a number of areas that we need to look at and every two to three
years there is a review where we look at a number of these issues.
I am just going to explain a couple of the pieces that I have dealt with.
Just to expand upon one of the issues that the Member for Carbonear Harbour
Grace raised, and that was the one with regard to travel. I remember many times
travelling from my constituency to St. John's or from St. John's back to my
constituency, which happens to be on the Coast of Labrador, but I was not
entitled, if I got stuck, to get a hotel room or a B&B. I was not entitled to
that. I was not entitled to the meal allowance because I happened to be
stranded. Well, you only have to listen to the marine service report to find out
how many times the Apollo is either stuck in ice or stuck with wind on
the Strait of Bell Isle that could cause you to be in a hotel for a day or two
up there trying to get back and forth. That is just one little example.
Then airlines, Mr. Speaker, they have problems as well mechanical problems,
fog problems. I ran into all of that. In fact, I actually left St. John's a
number of times, flew over my district, could not land, went back to St.
Anthony, waited, flew up to Goose Bay to try to get back to my district, could
not get back, ended up in Goose Bay. Guess what is the first thing I would
always have to do? Get on my e-mail, e-mail the Speaker of the House of Assembly
or the Clerk and ask for permission to go and get a bed to lie down. That was
the first thing I had to do, because that is how stringent our rules are with
regard to how we are allowed to spend our money.
Now, I have no problem with that, but sometimes this was 10:00 o'clock at
night. I remember one time driving back from my district and driving across the
Province and running into a fog and rain storm and having to hold up in Grand
Falls in a hotel and this was at 11:00 o'clock at night or something and
trying to get consent before I actually rented the room because I did not want
to have any kind of problem.
Those are the kind of things that we have had to deal with. In my mind, that
is a little bit over the top. You have to have some flexibility. When you travel
from one end of this Province to another, we cover a great geographical
distance; but, not only that, we are prone to all kinds of weather conditions.
So, you need to have that flexibility. You cannot always get permission to get a
bed to lie down when you are stuck or permission to get a meal voucher. Those
things I think were going a little bit too far and they are things that we have
since been able to address in a much more appropriate way.
Are there still issues that we are dealing with? Of course there are. Just in
the Management Commission meeting yesterday, we dealt with a number of claims
that were sixty days overdue. Now, I know that there has to be an accountability
measure. You just cannot go out and wait five months, six months, and never send
in a claim for your expenses, but there are always going to be times and I
have experienced this as well where you are going to be travelling and maybe
you did not get the receipt, or maybe you have ordered something that you need
for your constituency office and the receipt did not come in and all of a sudden
you are over the deadline, or someone invoices you after the deadline for your
claim. That happens all the time. That happens in every single office, I am
sure.
When you remember it I know it happens a lot to me with rentals and I have
to constantly be calling the rental companies to get my car rental receipts
before my sixty days are up and have it mailed to me so I can get those claims
in. Oftentimes, people will be out an invoice or two. When that happens, there
is a whole process that you have to go through. There is an internal process
that we do not see in terms of what the Clerk's office has to do and what the
Director of Finance has to do in approving that particular claim, and then it
has to come to a full public meeting, a televised meeting of the House of
Assembly to get approval for that receipt that did not come for your newsletter,
or your postage stamps, or your rent-a-car in order to get that approved because
it was sixty days past.
So, I think there needs to be, again, some level of flexibility where we do
not have to reconvene a committee of the House of Assembly and order air time on
the cameras to approve a receipt that someone did not get in time. Because that
receipt is already an eligible expense. That has already been approved by the
House, it has already been approved by the Director of Finance, and it is
already an acceptable expense. All we are doing is making the decision whether
we are going to allow it because it is sixty days late. So, I think there needs
to be some flexibility around things like that.
One of the other issues that needs to be looked at, as well, is with regard
to the boundary changes. For example, in the last boundary review and I will
just use two districts, for example. One district is Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune,
which used to have the communities of Ramea and Grey River in that particular
district. Now Ramea and Grey River have been moved into the District of Burgeo -
La Poile. The Member for Burgeo - La Poile did not get additionally compensated
for the extra communities they have to cover, the extra geographical distance
they have to cover in serving their constituency. That revenue is still going to
the member who formerly served the communities in that district.
For example, when you look at Ramea and Grey River, they are both isolated
communities. You can only get in there by ferry or by helicopter. The Member for
Burgeo - La Poile does not even have the permission yet to access helicopter
services because that still lies with the Member for Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune,
even though he is now serving those communities. Maybe he does not want to use a
helicopter, but the entitlement is there. Even using a ferry, the extra mileage
and the extra cost of serving those communities is not incorporated in his
budget. It is still in the budget for a previous district. Those kinds of
adjustments constantly have to be made and have to be looked at in terms of
whether an MHA is getting fair compensation to cover off their particular
district.
Mr. Speaker, our budgets today are done very differently than they were done
prior to Chief Justice Derek Green's report. Before Derek Green's report,
everything was called a constituency allowance. If I had a newsletter, if I
travelled on an airplane, if I took someone for a lunch, if I bought postage
stamps, if I rented a community hall, if I ordered paper, if I bought a new
copier for my office, all of these things were considered your constituency
allowance. Now it is all broken down.
That is why when members' say they did not spend anything out of their
constituency allowance, because what happens now is that everything is broken
down. All of your travel is under one category, all of your office supplies are
under another, all of your district travel is in a separate category, and all of
your per diems are in one particular column. Everything is broken down. Your
constituency allowance is just that small portion, very small portion I should
say, which is basically left for the few other miscellaneous things that may not
be covered. If you wanted subscriptions, if you wanted to order Freedom of
Information requests, take out an ad in a paper, sponsor a lunch for some people
from your district who are visiting, or whatever the case may be, lapel pins,
flags, different things like that are now provided through the Speaker's Office,
and lots of times that does not even have to come out of your expenditure
anymore. It is broken down, it is very transparent, and it is all on-line.
Any person in this Province can go on-line and find out what their MHA is
spending their constituency allowance on. Where you spend it, almost down to
what we eat, actually. We have to even submit what we eat. If I have a hamburger
and fries, it has to be written out on the invoice that it was a hamburger and
fries. I cannot just bring back the bill for a lunch with five mayors in my
district for $50 because they have to know what they all eat now. We have to
even put in if they had hamburger and fries, if they had a club sandwich, or a
bowl of soup and a sandwich. Everything is very detailed. If you are into that
level of detail and you want to see what your MHA is doing and what they are
eating when they go out for lunch, well, it is all on-line. If you want to know
if we ordered seal somewhere, the seal season is open, and if we had a seal
supper, you can go on-line and see if we had a seal supper.
Anyway, that is the kind of transparency that exists in the House of Assembly
today. I am not making any of this up. I am not exaggerating any of it. It is
factual. It is there. That is exactly what it is. Anyone out there who is going
around in the Province complaining that they do not know what MHAs and
politicians are spending their money on in serving their districts, there is no
reason why they cannot know. It is all there. That was done specifically to
ensure confidence in the people of this Province that we are not doing anything
we should not be doing. Everything we do is done by rules, policies, and
procedures. It is documented. It is disclosed. It is fully available to the
public with the click of a button on your computer. Mr. Speaker, I have
absolutely no problem with that. I think that is the greatest level of assurance
and confidence that we can give to the people of this Province that what we are
doing is right and proper.
Mr. Speaker, in terms of reviewing the members' compensation and things like
severance, pensions, allowances and so on, this is all very important. We are in
a public service as well, not unlike any other public service, and anyone who is
in a public service and working in a full-time job - we work long hours, I do
not care what stripe you are in the House of Assembly. If you are an MHA worth
your salt and you are doing work, you are working twelve to sixteen hours a day,
and that is the way it is. You do not go home at 6:00, 7:00 o'clock in the
evening and your day is done. You go home, you are returning phone calls, you
are reading letters, you are writing letters, you are reading reports, you are
getting ready for all kinds of meetings that you have to participate in, and
that is the nature of the business. Our jobs are not unlike any other job,
except our jobs are more public.
Mr. Speaker, we, like everyone else, deserve to have pension plans and we
deserve to have severances. No different than if you were twenty years in a
classroom or twenty years in the House of Assembly. By the way, at the end of
this term, I will have twenty years as an elected Member of the House of
Assembly. I do not feel that my occupation was any different than if I had to
have been twenty years in a classroom or twenty years in a hospital. I worked
hard every single day. I punched the clock. I showed up every morning. I went
home every evening. I did what I had to do. I gave up many weekends and was away
from family for many, many special occasions. At the end of the day, I think I
deserve to get the same benefits as any other person who works in public service
or works in any job in the Province, and I think that is only fair.
What this process is, it is not about salaries for MHAs and, in fact, if
the people out there are saying that it is about salaries for MHAs, why don't
they go back and look at the 2009 review and they will find out that what
happened in the 2009 review is the salaries of MHAs were frozen. Even when the
public service was getting huge increases, our salaries were getting rolled back
and we were getting frozen. It is not about MHAs getting higher salaries; it is
about MHAs being treated fairly and being treated with the same respect as
anyone else in public service and in public life and being treated the same as
any other career.
People think that there cannot be career politicians. Well, I have seen many
career politicians, but you are there at the mercy of the people. The only
difference between me and the person in the classroom is that every four years I
have to go back and ask several thousands of people if I can keep my job and if
I can continue to serve you every day. The day they say that we no longer want
you to serve us, we are going to have someone else serve us, well then I am
finished; and that is the way it works.
All we are doing here is, in addition to looking at how we carry out our
responsibilities as MHAs and whether we have the ability and the flexibility to
do service to the people who elected us, we also look at other things. We look
at the pension plan for members. We look at severance programs. We look at
allowances. We look at all of those things that are normal aspects of any
company, any public service, and any other job or career within the Province. We
are not doing this ourselves as MHAs; it is being done by an independent person.
We have a choice to do this by one person or three people. A recommendation
was made that it be done by a Provincial Court judge; I have absolutely no
problem with that. I have a lot of respect for judges and the role that they
play in society in our Province. I have no problem having a judge do a review of
what is happening in the members' compensation review within the House of
Assembly.
The Speaker put forward a name, a name that is no stranger to anyone in the
public service, because Jackie Brazil actually worked in the Department of
Justice as a lawyer for a number years, represented the Province in the
courtroom on a number of cases. I remember, Mr. Speaker, having to go to court
with her at one point, when I was on one side and she was on the other side, and
I was testifying against her client at the time. I am sure she has earned her
merits as a lawyer in this Province and certainly as a Provincial Court judge. I
am sure she will do a fine job in the review of these aspects of members'
compensation for the House of Assembly. If not, Mr. Speaker, I guess I am
testing fate. So, we will see what happens.
Anyway, having said that, the only thing I wanted to do was to point out a
number of these things and the important pieces of it that often need to be
looked at and often need to be reviewed. One of the things that were raised as
well was the secondary residence allowance, because many of us have two
properties. Many of us have a property in our district; many of us have a
secondary residence in St. John's. Mr. Speaker, I know for me I have often
rented, leased, bought, sold, leased, bought again. I have been through all that
in the years that I have been an elected member in the House of Assembly, but I
could have chosen to have stayed in a hotel and, in doing so, could have been
billing the taxpayers anywhere from$120 to $150 a night for every night I was in
a hotel. In the run of a year, I probably spent close to 200 days in St. John's
close to 200 days especially in my role as a leader. As a Cabinet Minister, I
am sure you spend at least 200 days in St. John's in doing your work. You just
do the math on that. You are talking, if you were staying in a hotel with the
cost of your hotel and your meal per diems, you are looking at $250,000 a year.
That is outrageous. So, why not have a look at what is a better system? A better
system, Mr. Speaker, would be allowing members to have that secondary residence.
To be able to rent a decent apartment in the city now I guess is going to cost
you $1,200 a month, if you can get it. That is if you can get it, that is the
thing; or, if you have to have your family rent a house here, or to actually buy
a house.
Many members get elected; we are not unlike everybody else in society. We
have mortgages on our family homes, we have car payments. We have all these
kinds of things as well. It is not always easy to take out that second mortgage
and buy another property in St. John's. The easy answer is to do what you are
allowed to do, and that is to go and check into a hotel, but the hotel is the
most expensive option. If members had other options, I am sure they would look
at other options. It is not about saying we need to look at this because we need
to pay out every member $25,000 a year in a living allowance so that we do not
have to pay them out $250,000 a year in hotel fees. That is not what this is
about.
This is about looking at another way to do this so we can achieve the same
goal, we can save some money and we do not put the additional financial burden
on members while they are trying to do their jobs as well, and we are not
putting the additional financial burden on the government, either. I think there
are pieces like this that have to be looked at, and it is only smart decisions
by the House of Assembly and by the Director of Finance to want to have these
issues looked at. We recognize as MHAs that while we have a good accountability
framework now within the House of Assembly, there are still some pieces that
need to be tweaked. There is often opportunity for further review and to make
other changes, and changes that can result in savings within the House of
Assembly but also result in a better delivery of services for our constituents
in our ridings and in our districts as well.
Mr. Speaker, I guess I will await the outcome of the review and we will see
what happens. Of course, as a Management Commission we will be open to the
recommendations that come forward. I am sure we will have some debate around
them. I would encourage all the MHAs to provide to Ms Brazil your input, what
your experience is in serving your constituency, so that she has the wisdom of
your experience and what you are dealing with everyday in her deliberations and
in making her recommendations back to the Management Commission and therefore,
through them to the House of Assembly.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am glad to be able to stand this afternoon and to speak to the motion with
regard to appointing the Members' Compensation Review Committee as we are to do
by legislation; a Committee that will review, as both the Government House
Leader and Opposition House Leader have pointed out very well, to do what is
necessary to review the salaries and other compensations that are received by
the MHAs in this House. To review it according to the legislation that was put
in place based on the report of the study done by Chief Justice Green. To do it
so that we will continue in this House of Assembly to be open and transparent,
that everything about our work, everything about our compliance with rules and
regulations is open and transparent.
I think that is probably the most important part of the work of the
Committee, is to help people see that we are not here trying to be secretive. We
are not here to carry on life not aware of the fact that we have to let the
people know I am lost with the word that I want there, Mr. Speaker.
Accountable; we have to be accountable for how we spend the money that is the
money of the people of the Province, and how we do the work as we spend that
money. Putting this Committee in place is extremely important.
One of the things I have always thought, that while it was absolutely
horrible that we had the type of scandal that we had here in this Province and
in the House of Assembly with regard to the expenditures of money, it was a good
thing in the sense that we did have the review that we had
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate it.
We did have the review that we had, we did have the report that came to us
from Chief Justice Green and we have put in place quite a system with regard to
accountability relating to expenditures by MHAs. I will not go into all the
details that my two colleagues have gone into. People watching will have heard
that, we have heard it, but there are just a couple of extra points I would like
to make.
This is our second time doing this since the Green report of course. The
first time I was really quite pleased as an MHA to be able to present to the
Committee that did the review back in 2008-2009. We all had the ability, if we
wanted to, to go and meet with the Committee or write them, as did the public.
The public could do the same thing.
When I went and met with them, because I did do it in person it was
actually August 17, 2009 when I wrote to the Committee and then met with them
there were concerns I had as a member of the Management Commission. They were
not concerns I had as an individual MHA; because when you are an MHA here in the
capital city region, it is much simpler when it comes to accounting for your
expenditures. Our travel is not the same. Nothing is the same.
As an individual MHA, I did not have a lot of personal concerns, but as a
member of the Management Commission it was my responsibility, and it still is my
responsibility, to listen to concerns of all of the Members of the House of
Assembly and to be concerned about how they are impacted in doing the work they
do as representatives from the various districts in the Province. There are some
districts for which it is really difficult.
I actually have the letter here with me. I remember that one of the things I
presented to the Committee back in 2009 which I still think is an issue is
the definition that we have of a commuting distance for an MHA. There are some
Members of the House of Assembly who live just outside of the distance that is
allowed for and who would like to commute, but the rules do not allow it. I do
know that they are commuting a much less shorter distance than what an awful lot
of commuters, people commuting into the city, are travelling on a daily basis. I
did present the issue that there should be a re-look at the distance that was
allowed as a commuting distance in our rules. I did not do it because it
affected me, but I did it because it affected MHAs and they had written letters
to us as the Management Commission.
One of the things I do want to say to Members of the House of Assembly is
that, as a member of the Management Commission myself, and I know from the
discussion we have on the Management Commission as late yesterday, we will bring
concerns that have been brought to us to Judge Brazil as she does her work. When
we meet with Judge Brazil, we will not be doing it just as MHAs; we will also do
it as members of the Management Commission, bringing concerns that we have heard
from members of the House.
There was something else that I brought to the Commission the first time that
I will be bringing to the Commission again this time. Well, it is not a
commission; it is a committee. Maybe some people will not see the connection,
but for me it is really important. We get a lot of criticism as Members of the
House of Assembly, and I think my colleagues have made some reference to that in
their presentations. Sometimes we get criticized because, when the House of
Assembly is closed, people think we are not working. We do know that we do a lot
of work in our districts when the House is both open and closed. There is work
to be done whether or not the House of Assembly is here, but it shows a concern
by the public that we are always involved in work that is related to policy and
related to legislation, that they do perceive that doing that work is really
important and, therefore, earning our money is related, not just to the work we
do in our districts but it is also related to the work we do with regard to
legislation, et cetera.
That was why I made a presentation to the first Committee with regard to
looking at the work we do and looking at the fact that we do not follow our
Standing Orders which say that we have Standing Committees that can meet whether
we are in the House, whether the House is open or whether it is not open, that
Standing Committees have work that they can be doing when the House is not open.
I made that representation to the first Committee, and I shall be making that
representation again to Judge Brazil, that the money that we are earning is not
just as constituency workers. The money we are earning has to do with the House
as well. If we had our Standing Committees really operating, as our Standing
Orders say they may, and if we were really dealing with policy and legislation
on a regular basis, I think it would actually change people's perception of who
we are and of the work we do and of the value of our work.
Every other jurisdiction in Canada does have Standing Committees that operate
all of the time. If you go, for example, on the Web site for Nova Scotia, New
Brunswick, even PEI, who is a much, much smaller jurisdiction than we are, way
smaller, you will see their regular record of their Standing Committees, when
they are going to meet throughout the year, the witnesses they have brought into
the Standing Committees to talk about the issues that the Standing Committees
are studying at any given time. You will see on their Web sites that their
legislative members are working non-stop on legislative issues, whether their
Legislature is open or not. I am going to be making that representation again,
because I think it is really important for us to realize that people do expect
us to be doing more than constituency work all the time, not just when the House
of Assembly is open. We know that there is so much discussion that we could be
having that right now is just in the hands of departments and ministers.
I just want to be on record letting people knowing that I will be speaking to
that issue again. At the same time, I will also be doing, as I said a couple of
minutes ago, I will also be sure that I am representing to Judge Brazil the
concerns of MHAs that we have heard in the Management Commission. Some of those
concerns I heard the first time and they were not dealt with; I am going to make
sure that I bring them forward again. Some are concerns that we are hearing now.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I am glad that we are getting our committee in place.
The public needs to know that we are following our legislation. Though we are a
couple of weeks late in doing this, I am glad that it is happening and I, too,
do look forward to the report that we will get from Judge Brazil. When we were
asked about having a judge do the work, I was pleased with that. Some people may
say: But it is only one person; but as I thought about that, judges are used to
that. Judges are used to hearing evidence, taking evidence, reading, having all
sides of something put in front of them, and they are used to taking all of that
and having to make a decision. So, for a judge, it is not a daunting thing; it
is what judges are used to doing. I do look forward to Judge Brazil doing that
work. I think she understands the system that we work under and she has
experience as a judge when it comes to making decisions that are based on
evidence, and that I would hope would be decisions that will be made fairly and
justly.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The House has heard the motion.
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Motion carried.
The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, I call from the Order Paper, Motion 1, the
General Budgetary Policy of the Government.
MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: It is my privilege now as the Leader of the Opposition and as
the Finance Critic to start the response to the Budget 2012. I understand that I
have up to three hours, or twice the time as the Finance Minister, so I guess
that will take us probably into Monday now. So, I will use up my time to go
through as many areas of government as I can. I have made a considerable number
of notes here. It is tough to put any of this in written form, of course, and
stand here and really think about as I really need to be cognizant of the
members opposite and those who are listening home.
I would like to start by thanking the staff and the minister in the
department for the work that they have done in creating this Budget. The
preparation, of course, for a Budget in excess of $7 billion takes a lot of
time, and really, it is ongoing throughout the year. I have had some experience
with this, both at the government level in a volunteer capacity in the
Department of Health some years ago, but yet in my business life as well.
One thing I would like to recognize is on Tuesday morning, on Budget day, as
we were preparing for the Budget, the staff that was in the room with us, in the
lockup and we spent about four hours there, Mr. Speaker the work that they
did, and how responsive they were in terms of the questions that we had around
the Estimates. There were many questions that day. I must say, they responded to
us and all the questions that we had in that room as the Official Opposition. I
must say, I was really impressed. Some of them, when you asked the question how
long they have been around, some of them were actually very recent employees
with the office. The information that we received, I must say, was good.
With that said, I am looking forward to the committee work within the
Estimates, because this is where a lot of the information based on our Budget
comes out of. For those that are listening, those Estimates Committee meetings
are happening right now in the mornings and the evenings with each day.
Mr. Speaker, as the new leader here and I did mention about the budgeting
process I can remember back about ten, twelve years ago now when things were
very different. There was not a whole lot of money to go around; when you were
looking at making Budget decisions, it was very difficult, with limited
resources, because in most cases, you were looking for ways to make cuts. Since
that time, things have changed a bit, and there is a fair amount of revenue that
we now have available to us. So, the budgeting decisions have become a little
different.
All of what we talk about certainly will require money; when I look back over
the last couple of months, when we had really been paying attention, close
attention to the 2012 Budget, it really all started, in my mind, at the Board of
Trade luncheon. I did go to that luncheon, and I did listen; the impression
coming out of that, amongst people who attended that, was that most of the money
that we have been spending for the last couple of years was referred to as
stimulus money. This goes back, of course, to 2008 when most people, and most
provinces, and a lot of countries around the world as we know, were in very
difficult economic times. The economy was looking for ways where they could
actually stimulate their economies. In most cases, that was actually done by
governments. We have seen the government south of the border and indeed, our
national government, and there is no question that provinces felt and did the
same thing. Keeping the economy vibrant and keeping the economy going, keeping
as many people in work as possible was important, because we did not want to
slip into a recession. That was a concern that many countries were