Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 29 November 2004 (45th General Assembly, 1st Session, Vol. XLV No. 48)
2004-11-29
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
November 29, 2004 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 48
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!
Admit strangers.
This afternoon we would like to welcome a special visitor to the Speaker's
gallery, Harold Collins, a former Member of the House for the District of Gander
from 1967-1979 and a former member of Cabinet in six different portfolios, and a
recent author of a book entitled, Always A Straight Shooter . We want to
welcome Mr. Collins to the Speaker's gallery.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have members' statements. The hon. the
Premier wishes to have leave to make a member's statement. We also have notice
from the following members: the hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans; the
hon. the Member for Terra Nova; the hon. the Member for Grand Bank; the hon. the
Member for Lake Melville; the hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace, and
the hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
Does the Premier have leave to make a member's statement?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to pay tribute to a colleague, friend and a great Newfoundlander
and Labradorian, who passed away this past Wednesday at his St. John's home
after seventy-six vibrant years.
William Chafe, better known as Billy, was a dedicated member of the public
service of Newfoundland and Labrador. Billy began working with the provincial
government at the age of fifteen and during a career that lasted more than fifty
years, he held many positions, including court crier and bailiff in the Supreme
Court of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, it was in his capacity of working with the Supreme Court that I
had the privilege of first meeting Billy. Our professional relationship quickly
turned to a personal one and I was very proud to count Billy as a friend. Billy
is perhaps most famous for a stand that he took during a labour dispute in the
1970s, when he decided that he wanted to continue working.
As most of you know, Billy started a precedent setting case that went all the
way to the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court agreed with Billy that his
duty was to the courts as his employer; a ruling still referenced today.
This morning I attended Billy's funeral at the Basilica of St. John's.
The Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, among many others, was there. It was a
touching ceremony attended by his many friends, his colleagues and family. Today's
service was a tribute to Billy's life, and a tribute to the contribution that
he made to Newfoundland and Labrador throughout his seventy-six years.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to extend, along with me,
our condolensces to the family and friends of Billy Chafe and to recognize his
considerable achievements throughout his life.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.
MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the many individuals and businesses
who were recently honoured at the Grand Falls-Windsor Sixth Annual Business
Excellence Awards and Hall of Fame Induction Ceremony, held October 21, 2004.
During the ceremony, Central Pharmacy was named Business of the Year. Susan
Frampton of Scoop and Save Foods was named Business Woman of the Year. Sonny's
Flowers was honoured with the Small Business of the Year Award and D & K
Computers, owned and operated by Keith Hayley, received the Customer Service
Award.
The Ambassador Award was presented to the A.N.D Company Players and Windsor
Pharmacy received The Helping Hands Award. Roger Barnett, who is a familiar
voice in Central Newfoundland, received the Rotary Personal Excellence Award.
Two long-time businessmen were inducted into the Business Hall of Fame and
now join thirty-three previous inductees from over the past five years. The
newest members include Sonny Hawkins and Joseph H. Sharron.
As the owner of Sonny's Flowers, Sonny has provided this community and the
region with top quality products and services for some thirty years. Joe Sharron
took over his father's business in the 1960s and has been a major contributor
to the economy of the Exploits Valley ever since, having established some
fifteen companies in the region.
Mr. Speaker, the Exploits Valley continues to enjoy economic prosperity and I
would like to thank all businesses, including the recent winners of these
awards, who continue to contribute to the success of the region.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. ORAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to congratulate Mayor Tony Keats of the Town of Dover, on
receiving a Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Municipalities Torngat
Municipal Achievement Award for 2004, in the category of Municipal Awareness.
The Municipal Awareness category recognizes organizations or individuals who
are helping to raise public awareness of the important role played by municipal
government and municipal leaders. This is the first year for this category.
Mr. Keats has been a strong proponent of increasing public awareness of the
vital role of municipal governments. His hard work and dedication to the Town of
Dover, his impassioned knowledge of the municipal process, and his exceptional
leadership skills are just a few of the reasons why he is so deserving of this
award. It is a pleasure to have Mayor Keats in the public gallery today.
I ask all hon. members to join with me in congratulating Mayor Keats on such
a prestigious award and commend him on his commitment to municipal government
and the Town of Dover.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a young woman from the
District of Grand Bank, who recently completed a most worthwhile program
designed to give back to the community.
Samantha DeGruchy of Grand Bank has been awarded the Bronze Award of the Duke
of Edinburgh Award Program. The award is designed to encourage and motivate
youth over the age of fourteen to voluntarily become involved in a variety of
personal development activities, including community experience, expedition
skills and physical recreation.
Samantha said the sea cadets program, through the summer training camps, was
instrumental in affording her the opportunity to win this award. Much of her
expedition training in such things as hiking, canoeing and map reading was
completed through her involvement in sea cadets.
Mr. Speaker, in the phys. ed. component, Samantha helped with swim practices
at the Grand Bank swimming pool and participated in school sports. In the
leadership component, she was involved with the John Burke High School Student
Council and participated in the leadership conference in Marystown last October.
Mr. Speaker, I am so proud of all the work Samantha has done and I am pleased
she has been recognized by the Duke of Edinburgh Awards Program for her work.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join me in
congratulating Samantha DeGruchy of Grand Bank on her award.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honour Labrador as a whole for sweeping this
year's Economic Development Awards which were held recently in Rocky Harbour
the beginning of November. It is no surprise that out of six awards, Labrador
brought home four!
I want to say congratulations to Mr. Brian Fallow and the staff of the
Labrador North Chamber of Commerce for winning the Excellence in Partnership
Award; Ms Carol Best and the organizing committee of the Big Land Fair for
winning the Innovation in Education Award; the Labrador Fishermen's Union
Shrimp Company Limited for winning the Excellence in Fostering Entrepreneurship
Award; and Mr. Jamie Pye of Southern Labrador, who works with Smart Labrador,
for winning the Excellence in Youth Leadership Award.
I ask all members of this hon. House, Mr. Speaker, to join me in
congratulating these individuals and organizations in their efforts and
excellence in the Economic Development Award sector.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to recognize a citizen from the District of Carbonear-Harbour
Grace, who recently celebrated a tremendous milestone. Mr. William Powers of
Salmon Cove, last week, celebrated his 100 th birthday.
On November 3, his sisters, Florence Baggs and Myrtle Kennedy, and his
brothers, Ches and Jim, were among the approximately 100 nieces, nephews and
friends, who turned out at Riverside United Church to help him celebrate his
birthday.
Mr. Speaker, I was glad to attend this birthday party and extend
congratulations, and share in this very memorable occasion. I cannot help but
say how wonderful it was to hear Mr. Powers recount +some of his many
experiences.
Mr. Speaker, along with the significance of his 100 th birthday,
also came the distinction of being Newfoundland and Labrador's most senior
driver. Officials from the Department of Government Services and Lands presented
Mr. Powers with a plaque and certificate recognizing this tremendous
accomplishment.
Mr. Speaker, 100 years is certainly something worth celebrating, and I ask
all member of his hon. House to join me in extending Happy Birthday wishes to
Mr. William Powers of Salmon Cove on the occasion of his 100 th
birthday.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS GOUDIE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 30 th
Anniversary of the Reidville Volunteer Fire Department.
I want to thank and commend everyone associated with the Reidville Volunteer
Fire Department, past and present, for the outstanding service they provide to
the entire community. I know that their unselfish dedication to keeping the
people of Reidville safe and sound, day and night, is appreciated by everyone
throughout the Reidville area.
In addition to the fifteen members who make up the Volunteer Fire Department,
I would like to acknowledge Art Reid and Eric Reid, who have been with the
Reidville Volunteer Fire Department since its inception thirty years ago.
The Reidville Fire Department not only services their town. Since their
beginning, they have always worked closely with neighbouring communities and
fire departments such as Deer Lake, responding whenever needed to make the
entire area a safe place to live.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members to join with me in congratulating the
Reidville Volunteer Fire Department on a wonderful thirty years of service.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform this House that the
Premier and I have recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding to agree to
implement a passport system of securities regulation in Canada.
All provinces and territories, except for Ontario, has either signed, or have
agreed to sign, the MOU. The passport will proceed with the participation of all
signatory provinces.
Mr. Speaker, this a major step towards improving securities regulation in
Canada. A passport systems means that firms wishing to access capital markets in
more than one province or territory will deal with one set of rules and one
regulator.
The passport system will streamline securities regulation in Canada, making
it more efficient for industry participants and eliminating duplication of
efforts by the provinces.
Essentially, companies will only have to deal with one principal regulator
where their head office is located, and the other jurisdictions will recognize
the approval of that regulator. By eliminating this duplication of work,
regulators will be able to devote more time to areas of consumer protection,
such as enforcement, in their own jurisdiction.
Mr. Speaker, I am confident that by working together with the other provinces
we can have an effective, streamlined and efficient regulatory structure that
provides a high standard of investor protection across the country.
The target for the implementation of the passport system is by August 2005.
All jurisdictions will continue to set their own fees. In addition to this, the
provinces and territories are working on new harmonized and simplified security
laws to be implemented by December 2006. In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, my
department is taking steps to eliminate duplication of regulation and improve
efficiencies in our operations.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for her advance copy of her statement. It is good to see
the Premier and herself sign off on this initiative. I remember being involved
in the discussions that brought this together a year or so ago and, as the
minister has said, sometimes dealing with government is an onerous task, and
when you have to deal with two levels of government, I guess, it is twice as bad
or three times as bad, so anything we can do to facilitate companies doing
business in this Province certainly bears merit. I am pleased to see that the
fees are still being administered to and charges set by our own Province.
On that note, now that the minister has completed this onerous task, I ask
her to revisit some of the fee structures in her own department making them more
affordable for the ordinary people of this Province.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This is a step forward. The harmonization and simplification of security laws
across the country has been something talked about for many years, so I am
pleased to see this progress on all provinces.
I would make two comments, though: that we are now in an era of heightened
need for corporate and directors' responsibility and I hope that is part of
the discussions that the minister and her officials will be having with other
securities regulator across the country, and also a concern that access to
information be available readily in each province. If we are going to be relying
on securities regulation with another province there should be full and adequate
disclosure of information and availability of information here in the Province,
because this Province has pre-approved, in a way, the passage of regulations by
other provinces.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: Further Statements by Ministers?
Oral Questions?
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, last month we had the announcement of the closure of the Harbour
Breton Plant and the Premier's silence on the issue continues to be deafening.
He has avoided answering any questions here in the Legislature and when
questioned in the media on Friday he danced around the issue without providing
any real answers at all.
I have been told, Mr. Speaker, that the Premier has already met with Mr.
Derrick Rowe of FPI and is remaining silent because he told Mr. Rowe, in a
private meeting, that he agrees as a matter of principle with FPI's business
case to close fish plants.
I ask the Premier, Mr. Speaker, if he will confirm that he supports Mr. Rowe's
business case for the closure of the Harbour Breton fish plant?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. Leader of the Opposition must be talking to himself,
because he is starting to believe his own nonsense. I mean that is really what
it is when you come right down to it. There is nothing further from the truth.
That is absolutely incorrect, completely untrue. There have been no meeting with
Mr. Rowe. I can inform hon. members opposite, though, that myself and the
Minister of Fisheries have requested Mr. Rowe and Mr. McCurdy -
MR. JOYCE: (Inaudible).
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Absolutely untrue! Absolutely, totally incorrect, Mr.
Joyce! Maybe you gave him the information. That explains it all, then, if that
is the case.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, what we have done this afternoon is we
have invited Mr. McCurdy, who is returning from Harbour Breton today, and he was
down there this morning and I spoke with him this morning. He is coming in for a
meeting with myself and the Minister of Fisheries today and we are going to
continue to explore this, we are all over it. The minister has had several
meetings with the stakeholders. If I stand up and I get totally involved, I am
accused of a one-man show; if I am not involved, I am not interested at all.
Well, you cannot have your cake and eat it, too, boy. Get a life (inaudible)!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, his own minister, in this Legislature - if the Premier would pay
attention - indicated that the Premier has been in meetings with FPI. It is in
the record of the Legislature.
Mr. Speaker, FPI, as well, is planning to sell off the very valuable and very
profitable, value-added marketing division of the company. The Premier has also
indicated to FPI that he agrees with this decision as well. However, rather than
admit that he agrees with it, he says he is willing to bring it to the House of
Assembly for a free vote.
I ask the Premier, Mr. Speaker, why is he talking about bringing this
decision to the House of Assembly for a free vote when even Mr. Rowe himself
admits that the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture already has the authority
to deny or approve this sale?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Does the hon. the Leader of the Opposition want a few minutes to check with
Mr. Joyce to make sure that second question is accurate?
Obviously, your information is totally and completely incorrect. I have been
on top of the FPI file and I have been for some considerable period of time
because, unlike yourself, I was interested enough in asking a lot of questions.
That is exactly what I have been doing and, unlike the former Minster of
Fisheries, who stated in this House, on this side of this House, that he is just
as much in the dark today as he was yesterday. We are in the light all the time.
We are in the know and we are asking questions. You need to understand that
first of all.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Now, we are very concerned about some of the actions
that FPI were prepared to undertake and we are trying to protect the people of
the Province. So we have asked a lot of questions, we have gotten a lot of legal
opinions. We have gone back to that company time and time and time again to get
concessions before they move forward. Then, if we are unable to be satisfied on
behalf of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, we are going to put it to the
Peoples House and have a free vote and let the people of this House and let the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador decide.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask hon. members, when they refer to other members of the House, if they
would refer to them by their district name rather than by their regular
Christian names.
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: Thank you again, Mr. Speaker.
I am sure that Mr. Rowe and the representatives of FPI will be interested in
hearing the new answers from the Premier in the Legislature today.
Mr. Speaker, last month FPI launched their newest factory-freezer trawler
that allows our resource to be caught and processed at sea without ever being
landed to create jobs in towns like Harbour Breton. In their election blueprint,
Mr. Speaker, the Premier stated there would be no more resource giveaways. The
processing of our fish at sea is the biggest resource giveaway of them all.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Why is your government willing to allow FPI
to continue expanding their factory-freezer trawler fleet and ship their product
directly out of the Province while fish plants in the Province close down? What
happened to no more resource giveaways, I ask the Premier?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition's question clearly demonstrates
how little he knows about the fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador. The
launching and the christening of the new vessel by FPI a little over a month ago
was the Newfoundland Lynx . It is a shrimp trawler. It is geared to carry
on the same fishery that they have been carrying on for just about thirty years
now on Northern shrimp. It is a factory-freezer trawler, yes. It allows them to
process shrimp at sea just as they have done since the late 1970s early 1980s,
Mr. Speaker. Just as it has done for the fifteen years that they were in
government.
The only difference in FPI's operations today versus what it was ten years
ago, for example, is based on an agreement that they reached with their
trawlermen and their plant workers on the South Coast in groundfish, where they
are freezing their groundfish at sea so it can provide stable and consistent
work to their plant workers and give decent working conditions to their
trawlermen. They are freezing at sea and processing in Newfoundland and
Labrador, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
Mr. Speaker, last week when asked if he would ensure that the quotas
traditionally proceeded in Harbour Breton would remain in that town, our
Minister of Fisheries said that the only person who could make that decision was
the federal Minister of Fisheries. Minister, I ask you, have you had any
discussions with Minister Regan on this issue?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the member is right; that decision is the responsibility of the
federal government. As far as we are concerned, we are adamant that no fish
shall leave this Province; no quotas from this Province shall be taken to
another province. Unlike when the previous Administration were in government and
we saw fish leave Burgeo and end up Canso, we have taken steps over the past
number of months to prevent that from happening.
That is the position of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. As for
fish moving between communities, that is a separate issue. As we have said to
the people of Harbour Breton, we will work with them to try and find a solution.
As we have also said to Fishery Products International, we would hope - however,
we recognize that we cannot force - we would hope that if there is a solution
able to be found for Harbour Breton, if a piece of the quota is necessary to
make that solution possible, we would hope that fish would remain in Harbour
Breton.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Bill Matthews, the federal member for towns like Harbour
Breton, Fortune and Marystown, supports community quotas for those towns and
says he has lobbied the federal government to implement them. I ask the
minister: Will he support Mr. Matthews in his effort to secure quotas for those
towns?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, our position, as I just said in answering the previous question,
is that we are adamant that any fish that has been allocated to Newfoundland and
Labrador-based companies remain associated with the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador, that they be landed and they be processed in this Province.
As it relates to whether it should be tied to any one community, that is not
a position that we have adopted. If we were to adopt that position, I would ask
the member: How, then, will we deal with the communities who have lost quota and
had it hauled into operations right now? What about quota that used to be
processed in St. Anthony? What about quota that used to be processed in Port
Union?
It is not as simple as the Opposition makes it. These issues are much more
complicated. As long as we keep the quota in Newfoundland and Labrador, that is
our primary concern.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
So, the minister has clearly stated that he does not support a quota for
Harbour Breton. Thank, you, Minister.
Mr. Speaker, FPI has closed Harbour Breton, put Fortune on notice that there
will be -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair has recognized the Member for Twillingate & Fogo, and asks
members for their co-operation.
The Member for Twillingate & Fogo.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Like I said, the minister does not support the quota for Harbour Breton.
Mr. Speaker, FPI has closed Harbour Breton, put Fortune on notice that it
will not do any more H and G in that town, and in an independent newspaper
yesterday in an
article entitled: Sacrifice a Little Piece, Derrick Rowe, CEO of
FPI, hinted that the crab plant in Bonavista could very well be moved to Port
Union.
What discussions have you had with FPI about the future of the plant in that
town?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I certainly did not say that I would not support Harbour Breton
having a quota. Mr. Speaker, what I did say is that I would not stand idly by
like some previous ministers and some previous administrations did and see fish
moved from this Province into Nova Scotia.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: That was the reason why we took the action we did in Arnold's
Cove, and we stand by that policy, Mr. Speaker.
As for Bonavista, I have had numerous discussions with FPI on Bonavista. The
position has been articulated to me from FPI, as it relates to Bonavista, that
they will continue operating in Bonavista. It is well known, Mr. Speaker. I
assume if he asked any questions of FPI when he was the minister, it is well
known by him that FPI has wanted for a long time, under this board and under the
previous board, under this executive and under the previous executive, to move
the crab operation from Bonavista to Port Union. That is not something that is
in the works right now but has always been a wish of the people at FPI for many
years, Mr. Speaker, for many years.
As it stands right now, their intent, as I understand it, is to keep it in
Bonavista and to continue sharing the product, as they have done for the past
number of years, between Triton and Bonavista.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, last week I asked a series of questions about the
airports in the Province. The Government House Leader said that government is
not in the airport business. He also went on to say that we are going to hold
the federal government accountable.
If that is the case, Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if the Government House
Leader can tell us why it is that the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural
Renewal is funding a study to look at divesting of the airport in St. Anthony,
which is owned by the federal government?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the root to this problem lies in 1998 when the then individual,
who was Minister of Rural Development, I believe, at the time, and her
colleagues, and the Cabinet of the day, and the government of the day, did not
utter a peep or a squeak where airports that were under federal responsibility
were downloaded to rural communities; and she has the gall today to stand up and
say we are the problem.
The fact of the matter is this, Mr. Speaker: We are very concerned about what
is happening in rural Newfoundland with respect to transportation issues. We
have assisted where we can, whenever we can, with respect to regional airports -
Stephenville and otherwise.
I say to the member opposite: Had you done your homework in 1998, you would
have no need to ask a question today.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, obviously the Government House Leader does not
know what he is talking about, as usual. He is wrong again, as usual, but that
is nothing new for this Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that this government has
no plan for rural Newfoundland and Labrador; no plan whatsoever. We are looking
at divesting of airports that are instrumental to ensuring that rural
Newfoundland is successful.
Mr. Speaker, Gander is another airport which has a long history -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I remind members that supplementary questions really should have no lengthy
preambles. I ask the member now if she would get to her question.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, Gander is an another airport which has a long
history of being vital to the economy of rural Newfoundland and Labrador. What
is the government going to do to ensure that Gander, which is now using its
transitional money for operating purposes, does not fall into the same situation
that we are seeing in Stephenville?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is very clear to me, and I think to my colleagues in the House and those
who are watching, that don't let the truth interrupt with a question that the
Opposition may wish to ask.
The fact of the matter is this, with respect to the funding of the study for
the airport corporation in St. Anthony, we did because the airport corporation
itself requested it. We are only too glad to assist when a request comes by from
the town. Fact number one that is lost upon the member's question.
Secondly, to the best of my knowledge, the member has made the allegation
that the Government House Leader does not know what he is talking about. To the
best of my knowledge, I suggest the member have a chat with the airport
corporation in Gander, because I do understand that they are in a profit
position this year.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank, on a final
supplementary.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I would assume from the Government House Leader's
answers that, again, he does not know what he is talking about. On the one hand
he says they are not in the airport business, and on the other hand he says that
they are going to hold the federal government accountable, but at the same time
they are supporting a request for a study to divest of the airport. We need to
know, Mr. Speaker, exactly where this government stands on airports in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, if the member wants to stand and swallow
herself whole anytime, I will give her the opportunity to do it.
Two questions ago she said: We have no plan for rural Newfoundland. Now, when
a particular part or a community in rural Newfoundland comes and asks for
government's assistance and we provide it, she says that we should not do it.
So, which is it? Do you want us to help when communities come to assist or do
you not?
Unlike the member opposite, Mr. Speaker, we do have a plan, but it is not
aeroplan.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Premier. On Friday it was revealed by Petro-Canada
that the -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask members to my left for their co-operation. I am having difficulty
hearing the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
The Chair recognizes the hon. member.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
On Friday Petro-Canada confirmed that the oil spill on the Terra Nova
platform was running for five hours before offshore workers noticed the
overpowering stench of oil. Mr. Speaker, disturbingly, there also seems to be
somewhat of a culture of ignoring or passing off alarms as being related to
weather, vessel movement or production flow rates.
In light of both safety and environmental condition considerations in our
offshore, what confidence does this government have in the equipment and
procedures used by Petro-Canada in the operation of the Terra Nova platform?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the questions asked by the hon. member because
these are obviously very serious, given the fact that there was a spill last
week.
MR. RIDEOUT: (Inaudible).
MR. E. BYRNE: Yes, I say to my colleague, the Minister of Transportation
and Works, well thought out questions.
Let me say this, in terms of the response to the question. Like the member
opposite, we, too, have seen all of the public commentary provided both by the
Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board and also Petro-Canada. We have also
read and heard and seen all of the ancillary sorts, reports and opinions that
have been brought forward, but I do want to reiterate to the member what I said
last week: That in the absence of the investigation being completed, we have a
duty - and it is a very serious one - not to prejudge or predetermine exactly
what took place. While we do have a sense today of what happened - and I think
everyone in the Province does - it is our obligation to ensure that once the
investigation is complete, that once government is briefed, then we will be in a
position to talk in a more detailed fashion.
I believe the member, given his legal background, would understand that the
investigation, whatever may come out of it - and I am not saying that this will
but there is a possibility - that there could be criminal sorts of charges laid,
depending on what the investigation concludes. We are not going to predetermine
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the minister if he could complete his answer now rather quickly.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We are not going to predetermine what the cause was. We are not going
prejudge. We are not going to act as hangman and jury all in one breath. When we
get the investigative reports and we are briefed, then and only then we will
take action.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Environment Assessment Panel that did the Terra Nova, chaired by Dr.
Leslie Harris, recommended zero tolerance policy for oil spills; two, the most
stringent achievable standards for discharged and processed water, and dedicated
independent observers to be on board the platform.
Mr. Speaker, Dr. Harris this morning said that he felt cheated and was mad at
what has happened at Terra Nova, and that the C-NOPB had not followed his
recommendation for having independent observers on board.
Will this government ask the C-NOPB to immediately demand that both Terra
Nova and Hibernia have, as condition of operations, independent observers on
board their platforms while operating in our offshore?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I do not know if there is any concerned Newfoundlander or
Labradorian in the Province today with respect to this issue who does not feel
cheated, who does not feel outraged, who does not feel mad, because they should
be.
To the extent that we can determine it, there are risks associated with
offshore development, and I think we all acknowledge that; but, having said
that, with respect to the spill itself, we all wish it did not happen. The
investigation will determine what exactly happened, what protocols need to be
put in place.
Should the information coming out of that investigation require a number of
recommendations, we will look at any and all recommendations, Mr. Speaker,
including the one that the member has put forward in terms of observers. But, I
will say this, Mr. Speaker, and it is important, it is very important for the
reasons that I have outlined in my previous answer, that we are going to wait to
ensure that the investigation is complete, that all of the details are before
us, and then we will take whatever action we can, within our powers as a
government, to ensure that this type of spill, or any other for that matter, Mr.
Speaker, does not occur in our waters again.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
On September 14, 2004, the Premier inked his name to a deal on behalf of all
the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, committing to improvements in health
care starting immediately. Can the Premier commit to us today that all this new
money will be spent directly on improvements in the health care system, or will
it be used to pay down the provincial debt?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is an important question. As I indicated the other day in the House when a
similar question was asked, the health summit that was held back in September,
an FMM meeting, this Premier, along with his colleagues in the rest of the
country, came to an agreement with respect to important priorities with respect
to health funding across the nation, and some of these priorities, Mr. Speaker,
included wait lists, wait time, home care, Aboriginal health. Another point that
was mentioned last week was transportation; in particular, transportation of the
North. I can say to the hon. member that these are the issues of priorities that
have been identified, and that these are the issues of priority that will be
recognized when important key critical decisions with respect to health funding
are made in due course.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse
au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
When the Premier accepted the cheque from Ottawa, he also confirmed to show
accountability and transparency to the people of the Province in spending of
this new money. The minister admits that there have been priorities that have
been identified, so I say to him: Other provinces are now rolling out the new
investments for health care. Can you tell the public of this Province how this
new money is going to be invested into the health care system in Newfoundland
and Labrador?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
When the federal Parliament, when the federal House of Commons, finds it
appropriate to enact the enabling legislation - which, I understand, may come as
early as this fall - when that is done, this Province will have some clear
understanding as to when the flow through of funds will be expected and
anticipated.
Mr. Speaker, when we receive the funds, and with the legislation in hand, and
to allow the funding to come through, then will this government be in a position
to apply and recognize the priorities that have been set and identified by this
Premier and his colleagues.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, it is unusual that some Provinces are actually
spending the new investment dollars while the minister opposite is trying to
tell me that they still haven't confirmed when and how much they are getting.
Mr. Speaker, also coming out of this so-called, what he calls, health care
summit, they announced more dollars for a medical travel program in Labrador. I
talked with members of Executive Council in the week following this announcement
by the Premier but they had no details, no dollar figures, on the program at
that time. So, can you tell the people today the amount of the investment we
will see for a Labrador medical travel program, and if there will be conditions
on this money coming from Ottawa?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, unlike the former government, we will spend
money when we have it. We will not spend money when we do not have it, I say to
the hon. member.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, we will receive, this Province will
receive, over the next six years, approximately $50 million per year. I
understand that the amount to be received in year one is closer to $32 million
or $34 million, but, on average, approximately $50 million a year, a total of
$293 million over the next six-year period. When we receive the funds we will
apply the priorities that have been recognized by this Premier and his
colleagues and we will exercise due diligence in ensuring that the public health
interests of the people of this Province are protected.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the question was with regard to the Labrador
medical travel program, so I ask the minister this: If this is a program of your
own design, by your own government, can you commit today that it will not be
used to replace the provincial contributions being made to that program but
rather be used to broaden the existing program which includes all areas of
Labrador such as Labrador West which has been brought up by the member for that
area on numerous occasions, to cover off the increased costs to boards with
regard to air Medivac services and to pay the cost of travel for patients from
Labrador who are being referred to St. John's and Corner Brook health care
facilities?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, medical transportation, particularly
transportation of the North, as I mentioned just a few moments ago, was
recognized as a priority area. It is included in that list of priorities, and I
can assure the hon. member that particular priority that has been identified
will be included with all other issues and the appropriate decisions will be
made in due course.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Minister of Education. Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of
fear within the post-secondary education system in our Province about the
direction this government is headed, especially given the minister's comments
in the Independent of October 17, 2004.
Can the minister today stand on his feet and tell us: Are there campus
closures expected by this government? Is this government going to close campuses
of the College of the North Atlantic?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: I say, Mr. Speaker, to the hon. member on the other side,
if there is any fear I expect it is coming from her direction and from nowhere
else.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: This government is committed to looking forward to, I
guess, the process which the White Paper is going to bring about, that we are
going to look at the aspects of the public post-secondary system, so that we can
make sure that the future of that system is certainly in an area where - I am
sorry, let me just back up a little bit. We want to make sure that the public
post-secondary is under a plan that will cater to our needs and the needs of
this Province for the next five to ten years.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.
MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I guess it is clear with the new minister, he will know the direction of the
Premier because he did blurt it out in the October 17 edition of the Sunday
Independent . He did blurt it out! That was his first public statement.
Mr. Speaker, the Senate of Memorial University are in the process of
preparing a paper for this government talking about tuition increases in the
range of 60 per cent to 85 per cent.
I want to ask the minister today: Can you allay the fears of students in this
Province by telling them that this government will not increase tuition and they
will not cut programs?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
There is time for a very brief answer.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, in the interest of time I would like to
assure the member on the opposite side that this government is moving forward in
a very positive way.
When it comes to public post-secondary, let me tell you that our White Paper
process is looking at three things: quality of programming, affordability and
accessability. Unlike the previous Administration, we are going to deliver.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The time for oral questions has expired.
The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: A point of privilege, Mr. Speaker.
In a question earlier from the Leader of the Opposition to the Premier on the
meetings with Derrick Rowe, the Premier said there was nothing further from the
truth about the meetings and on two occasions -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair is recognizing the hon. the Member for Bay of Islands who has risen
on a point of privilege. I ask hon. members for their co-operation.
MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, the Leader of the Opposition
asked the Premier questions about meeting with Derrick Rowe. The Premier said,
and I quote: there is nothing further from the truth. The Premier used my name,
Eddie Joyce, twice and the Speaker asked him to use the Member for the Bay of
Islands - that there was nothing further from the truth about those meetings,
giving the impression that I was giving the Leader of the Opposition false
information to pass on the questions to the Premier of this Province.
Mr. Speaker, on November 25, when the Premier was not in this House, he was
up in his own office having meetings, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture
- and I will read from Hansard. "The Premier has been fully involved in the
FPI file since last April. He had a number of meetings with Derrick Rowe."
That is the minister who said that.
Earlier in Question Period the Premier gave the impression to the people of
this Province that the Leader of the Opposition was getting false information,
and he was getting it from the Member for the Bay of Islands. I ask the Premier
to stand up and withdraw those statements. I ask for a ruling from the Speaker,
because it is an attack on my character, that I am giving the Leader of the
Opposition false information, which came from the Minister of Fisheries and
Aquaculture. I either ask you to withdraw those remarks or a ruling from the
Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This is not a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. I could go ahead and quote to
you all afternoon why it is not, but it seems to me it is more of a point of
foolishness or a point of frustration, to be honest with you.
The fact of the matter is this, that the Leader of the Opposition's
question today referenced a meeting that took place in the last several days
with respect to it. If the member says it was not him who provided the
information, we apologize to the member. This is really a disagreement between
two members, Mr. Speaker, not a point of privilege whatsoever.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair will review the transcripts and come back to the House either later
today or tomorrow with a ruling on the point of privilege.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Notices of Motion.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair has recognized the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. I
ask members for their co-operation.
The hon. the minister.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a
bill, "An Act To Amend The Municipal Elections Act." (Bill 55)
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,
"An Act To Amend The Pension Benefits Act, 1997." (Bill 52)
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion.
The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask
leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act Respecting Court
Security." (Bill 54)
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion.
The hon. the Member for Gander.
MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, on tomorrow I ask leave to move the following
Private Member's Resolution:
of inland waters; and
WHEREAS poaching is a very serious problem in this Province, so much so that
the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador had to step in and protect the
Province's dwindling Atlantic salmon resource, despite the fact that
responsibility of enforcement and conservation rests solely with the federal
government; and
WHEREAS the success of the Province's Fisheries Enforcement Program is
evidence that more enforcement resources are desperately needed; and
WHEREAS a need for increased enforcement is further evidenced by the laying
off of eighty-seven charges after a fifteen-month undercover investigation by
the Department of Natural Resources;
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly call on the Government
of Canada to live up to its responsibility and implement an effective inland
fisheries enforcement program which would include special investigations,
enforcement officers who are non-river based and a substantial increase in the
funding currently provided to the DFO for enforcement.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion.
Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present a petition on behalf of people who live in the
Labrador health region. This is with regard to the debt that the new health
board in Labrador and the Northern Peninsula has acquired as a result of the
amalgamation.
Mr. Speaker, this new board is actually starting off with a debt somewhere in
the range of $14 million and they are being asked, at the present time, to pay
down this debt and carry forward with a reform in health care in that particular
region. Now, this is one of the most northern, most rural regions in our
Province and the whole reason that they have accumulated a debt over a period of
the past number of years has been in the delivery of the health care in such a
difficult geographic area. They will tell you, themselves, that a lot of the
debt that has been acquired over the past two or three years is due to serving
the community health needs in some of the most rural and northern areas of that
health board region. They do not see how they can actually pay down this new
debt without affecting programs and services to residents in this particular
area.
MR. TAYLOR: (Inaudible).
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, maybe if the Member for The Straits & White
Bay North would like to speak on this issue, he could get up and speak on behalf
of his constituents at any time but I ask him to listen to what I have to say
now because it is in the best interest of the people he represents, as well as
the people whom I represent.
Mr. Speaker, the people in this area are already experiencing enough
difficulty with this transitional process. I have talked to a number of people
in the Labrador region and the Northern Peninsula region, as I am sure other
members in this House have, and the MHAs for those districts have, Mr. Speaker,
and they are feeling that it is going to be quite difficult to be able to
continue with the level of programs and services that they currently have
without having the debt addressed.
Mr. Speaker, when the boards were amalgamated some years ago, the debt for
these boards was then paid down by the government of the day and it allowed them
to have a fresh start in the delivery of health care in those regions. That is
what this board is currently asking now.
Mr. Speaker, the needs, the health needs in this area, are increasing. The
cost is escalating; it is not going down. The transportation costs alone, to
serve the Labrador region and the Northern Peninsula region, are increasing on a
daily basis.
Mr. Speaker, these are all fundamental to the delivery of a good health care
service in those areas, and if they are going to be forced to make the savings
then that means they are going to be forced to make the cuts.
Mr. Speaker, already the government has in its possession a review that was
done of the Grenfell Regional Health Services Board a year ago, of the Labrador
Board a year ago, a Best Practices Review, that compared it to other hospitals
and boards of that size in other parts of Canada. Mr. Speaker, the conclusive
results of the study showed that the board in Labrador was already delivering
one of the best health care services and programs it could at very marginal cost
to the government and to the taxpayers.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's allotted time has expired.
MS JONES: Could I have leave, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Has leave been granted?
MR. E. BYRNE: A few seconds, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: A few seconds have been granted.
The member has leave.
MS JONES: Thank you for leave, as this is a very important issue, no
doubt.
The review, Mr. Speaker, showed that they were already providing the best
services in Labrador under that board at a very marginal cost. Now, that Best
Practices Review outlined all aspects of delivery of health care for the
Labrador region and it indicated, Mr. Speaker, that there was no room to make
cuts or restructure the programs in that particular region in order to bring
costs down. The only solution being that more money was needed to be invested
into the boards to see those things accomplished.
Now, Mr. Speaker, the minister has in his possession, I am assuming today, if
not the final copy of the Best Practices Review on the Grenfell Regional Health
Services, he certainly has a draft copy in his possession. Mr. Speaker, I do not
have a copy of that particular report, but I would think that the report again,
in its conclusion and conclusive estimates, would show that board, as well, in
comparison to most boards and hospitals in Canada, is probably providing the
most effective and efficient services for the costs and investments that they
are presently having.
Mr. Speaker, there is the petition that I present today, and I will be
certainly making further comments on this subject in future days in this House
sitting.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the youth in Labrador,
regarding their request for an auditorium in the Upper Lake Melville area. Mr.
Speaker, I present the petition today on behalf of the students from the
beautiful Town of Makkovik, Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, the youth of Labrador have been asking of this government for
quite some time, along with the town council and parents from all over Labrador,
the need to build a auditorium in the Upper Lake Melville area.
There are many programs that youth and adults alike take
part in, in the
Upper Lake Melville area, from time to time during the year which enhance the
economy of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and it certainly gives people from all over
Labrador and Newfoundland and other parts of the world the chance to come to
Labrador and to perform.
Mr. Speaker, such a facility is badly needed in the Upper Lake Melville area,
and it is certainly one that I fully support and the previous government fully
support.
Mr. Speaker, I say to the Minister of Tourism today, and the Minister of
Municipal Affairs, and to the Ministers Responsible for Labrador Affairs and
Aboriginal Affairs, that they should take the lead on this, because I know the
Member for Lake Melville has encouraged them and has requested that such a
building be put there.
Mr. Speaker, when we look at our youth in Labrador, and know that they lack
such a facility, I think the onus is upon this government, regardless of the
timing, to announce that the auditorium be announced immediately so that the
children in Labrador can look forward to the coming years, and groups can book
events in the Upper Lake Melville area.
Mr. Speaker, this is a very, very important issue. I think it is a sad day,
to know that today, in 2004, a portion of Labrador lacks this facility.
I can say to the Minister of Municipal Affairs, when I was there money was
identified in your department. I understand from a conversation with the town
council from the Upper Lake Melville area last year that the money was still
there.
Minister, I say to you, now is the time, with the Christmas season
approaching, plans being made for next year, announce the money today, Minister,
your government. Even though I was the minister who lobbied my government for
it, I will give your government full credit; because this is not about politics.
This is about providing a facility to the children in Labrador.
Minister, I call upon you and your Premier today, before this House closes
for the fall sitting, that you and your government do the appropriate thing and
announce the funding and give the children of Labrador this building that they
so rightfully deserve.
Mr. Speaker, I will be back again tomorrow and the day after that to speak on
their behalf again.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?
The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present a petition on behalf of a number of residents of
Labrador West concerning medical travel within the region, namely to Happy
Valley-Goose Bay, to obtain medical services that are not available in Labrador
West.
Mr. Speaker, all other areas of Labrador can travel to either St. Anthony or
Happy Valley-Goose Bay for the nominal fee of $40 return airfare. The people of
my district have to pay nearly $500 to do the same thing. That is highly unfair,
Mr. Speaker, to people who live in Labrador West. We should be treated the same
as other people in other regions of Labrador when it comes to having to travel
to Happy Valley-Goose Bay for CT scans or other services that are not available
within our area.
I listened today, Mr. Speaker, to the question to the Minister of Health
concerning money obtained recently, or in the process of being obtained from the
federal government, when the plan for that will be developed so that people in
Labrador can look forward to a more comprehensive form of subsidy for medical
travel, Mr. Speaker.
I also asked the minister last week, myself, on behalf of the residents of
Labrador West, the very same question. Mr. Speaker, it is important for this
minister to fully understand what the needs of people are, particularly those in
my district who now are paying through the nose while other people in the same
area are getting their transportation for a nominal fee. That is discriminatory
in nature, Mr. Speaker, and I ask government to address this problem
immediately.
The number of people from my area, from my district, who have to travel to
Happy Valley-Goose Bay, I think the latest number that I heard is a little over
100 per year. At the cost of $400, Mr. Speaker, we are looking at probably in
the neighbourhood of $40,000; not a huge sum for government to implement a
policy covering air travel, but certainly, when a person is sick, it represents
a lot of money from their personal pocket, their personal banking, in order to
obtain the necessary medical treatments that they need.
Mr. Speaker, I urge government today to immediately review the medical travel
subsidy plan with a view of including Labrador West in the travel subsidy
package that currently exists and has existed in Labrador for the past thirty
years, where people in Labrador West really did not know there was such a plan
until a few short months ago, Mr. Speaker.
I ask government to do the honourable thing, to include Labrador West
immediately in the plan that is in existence right now while a further
comprehensive plan is being developed.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Orders of the Day, Mr. Speaker, is that where we are?
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day have been called.
The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 2, that the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board ask
leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act to Enhance The Transparency And
Accountability Of The Government And Government Entities To The People Of The
Province. (Bill 39)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Finance and President of Treasury Board shall have leave to introduce a bill
entitled,
An Act To Enhance The Transparency And Accountability Of The
Government And Government Entities To The People Of The Province. (Bill 39)
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Finance shall
have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to
introduce a bill, "An Act To Enhance The Transparency And Accountability Of
The Government And Government Entities To The People Of The Province,"
carried. ( Bill 39)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time. Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a
first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Enhance The Transparency and Accountability Of
The Government And Government Entities To The People Of The Province. (Bill 39)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time?
MR. E. BYRNE: On tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 39 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 3, that the hon. Government House Leader, myself, ask leave to
introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The House of Assembly Act And The
Elections Act, 1991. ( Bill 40)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Government House
Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The House
Of Assembly Act And The Elections Act, 1991. ( Bill 40)
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Government House Leader
shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Government House Leader to introduce a bill, "An
Act To Amend the House of Assembly Act And The Elections Act, 1991,"
carried. ( Bill 40)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time. It is the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a
first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill, "An Act To Amend The House Of Assembly Act And The
Elections Act, 1991," Bill 40.
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time?
AN HON. MEMBER: On tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 40 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 6, the hon. the Minister of Government Services to ask leave to
introduce a bill entitled,
An Act Respecting The Government Purchasing Agency,
Bill 41.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Government Services shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act
Respecting The Government Purchasing Agency, Bill 41.
It is the pleasure of the House that the hon. Minister of Government Services
shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Government Services to introduce a bill,
"An Act Respecting The Government Purchasing Agency," carried. (Bill
41)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill, "An Act Respecting The Government Purchasing
Agency," Bill 41.
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time?
AN HON. MEMBER: On tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 41 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 9, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to ask leave
to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The Jury Act, 1991, Bill 50.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Justice and Attorney General shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, An
Act To Amend The Jury Act, 1991, Bill 50.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Justice shall
have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to introduce a
bill, "An Act To Amend The Jury Act, 1991," carried. (Bill 50)
MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that the said bill be now
read a first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill, "An Act To Amend The Jury Act, 1991," Bill 50.
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time?
AN HON. MEMBER: On tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 50 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 10, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to ask leave
to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Revise Various Acts Of The Province With
Respect To Certain Functions Of Justices Of The Peace, Bill 49.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Justice and Attorney General shall have leave to introduce a bill,
An Act To
Revise Various Acts Of The Province With Respect To Certain Functions Of
Justices Of The Peace, Bill 49.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Justice and
Attorney General shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to introduce a
bill,
An Act To Revise Various Acts Of The Province With Respect To Certain
Functions Of Justices Of The Peace," carried. (Bill 49)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Revise Various Acts Of The Province With Respect
To Certain Functions Of Justices Of The Peace. (Bill 49)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time?
AN HON. MEMBER: On tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 49 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 11, the hon. the Minister of Government Services to ask leave to
introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The Securities Act. (Bill 47)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Government Services shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To
Amend The Securities Act. (Bill 47)
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Government
Services shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Government Services to introduce a bill,
"An Act To Amend The Securities Act," carried. (Bill 47)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Securities Act. (Bill 47)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time?
AN HON. MEMBER: On tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 47 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 12, the hon. the Minister of Government Services to ask leave to
introduce a bill,
An Act To Amend The Insurance Companies Act. (Bill 48)
MR. SPEAKER: It is the moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Government Services shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To
Amend The Insurance Companies Act. (Bill 48)
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Government
Services shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Government Services to introduce a bill,
"An Act To Amend The Insurance Companies Act," carried. (Bill 48)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time. Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a
first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill,
an Act To Amend The Insurance Companies Act. (Bill 48)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time?
AN HON. MEMBER: On tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 48 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Order 6, second reading of a bill,
An Act To Establish The Fish Processing
Licensing Board. (Bill 36)
I believe the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair has several minutes
left where she adjourned debate the day before.
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse
au Clair and, I do believe, there is about seven minutes remaining in her
address to the House.
The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I just rise to have a couple of comments again today with regard to Bill 36,
An Act To Establish The Fish Processing Licensing Board.
Mr. Speaker, I will not reiterate a lot of the comments that I made when I
adjourned the debate last week, only to say that the legislation is not in line
with the recommendations that were made by Mr. Dunne when he looked at this
particular matter on behalf of government and the Department of Fisheries and
Aquaculture. The legislation, in fact, still gives the minister the final veto
power or approval power with regard to any licences within the Province. The
intention of Mr. Dunne, and those that he consulted as part of the stakeholder
process, was simply to set up a licensing board that would review and make
recommendations as to how the licences should proceed.
Mr. Speaker, I guess, like with any legislation, it is only as good as the
government of the day is to enforce the legislation that they bring forward. I
think that what we are seeing in this Legislature these days, with regard to the
FPI Act, is a reluctancy to use the act and to use the legislation to push
forward with the company to keep fish plants open in this Province.
Mr. Speaker, if you are not going to use the legislation that you enact here
I guess it is no better than the paper that it has actually been written on.
Mr. Speaker, I guess it is really unfortunate for people in the Harbour
Breton area, and in the Fortune area, that while there is legislation in the
House of Assembly which could probably allow them to keep those plants open, to
keep people in jobs in those communities, that it is not being used to the
fullest extent, to the greatest power and control that the government has to
implement those provisions within that act.
Mr. Speaker, I have listened to the explanations by the Minister of Fisheries
and Aquaculture and I have listened to the explanations by Fishery Products
International, and I do not find either to be all that acceptable when you look
at the rationale that they have for closing these plants and laying off workers.
I am going to give you a very good reason, Mr. Speaker, because they talk about
the currency level with regard to the Canadian-American dollar and the exchange
rate, but the reality is, that every company in this Province and in Canada that
exports outside has to deal with the currency issue. It is not an isolated issue
to the fish business or to the fishing industry. It is an export issue that
pertains to all those in the manufacturing sector and the export sector in
Newfoundland and Labrador and in Canada.
The other reason they talked about was with regard to the processing sector
in China and not being able to compete. Well, you can take that to whatever
level you want because if that rule of thumb were to apply we would have no
processing going on in Newfoundland and Labrador right now. In fact, Mr.
Speaker, we would not have new developments and expansions within the fishing
industry, and it is happening.
Actually, on Friday I was on the Northern Peninsula and I stopped into Main
Brook, and I was completely surprised to find in this community the actual
starting up of a new processing facility, a processing facility that will do
value-added fish product for export. Now, does that sound like a company which
feels that the competition factor with China or that the exchange rate on the
dollar is inhibitive of doing business and creating opportunity in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador? No, this was a private sector company investing well
over a million dollars in private sector money to create a hundred jobs in a
rural community in Newfoundland and Labrador. In what, Mr. Speaker? In the
processing of a fish product and a valued-added product to export out of the
Province, out of Canada.
Now, Mr. Speaker, that is going on today as we speak. I toured the facility
on Friday and it is giving new hope and new opportunity to this community. Do
you think that a private sector individual would be investing well over a
million dollars in the fish processing business in this Province today if they
did see opportunity, if they did not feel they could be competitive, that they
would be able to compete in a marketplace? I do not think so.
I talked to the gentleman who is doing this operation, who is investing this
money. A very intelligent individual with thirty years invested in the fish
processing sector in Newfoundland and Labrador. Very optimistic, Mr. Speaker. He
comes into this new investment, in this new business, with a wealth of knowledge
of the world markets; has travelled and worked in various countries in the
fishing sector. This is an individual who knows that he is putting his money in
the right place and making the right investment, and he is not deterred by the
currency and the exchange rate on the Canadian dollar. He is not deterred by the
fact that there is competition in China. He is not letting that stop him, but we
are allowing FPI to use it as an excuse to stop their processing in Harbour
Breton and Fortune, and possibly other communities like Bonavista.
That is not right, Mr. Speaker. If that was the case and that was the
reality, and the minister when he stands and says that really believed it, we
would see more companies in this Province closing down and shutting their doors.
Right now he has the power of legislation to stop FPI from doing this, to allow
them to give these other communities like Harbour Breton an opportunity to move
forward and to invest for the future in the fishing sector, just like is
happening in other places like Main Brook, in small communities in this Province
where investments are being made in the fishery to move forward. They see a
future.
No, Mr. Speaker, I think that what this is on FPI's
part is an opportunity
to offload some of these fish plants, to get rid of some of these workforces and
to downscale its entire operation, not to make it profitable but to make it more
profitable, because last year alone they earned $24 million in profit. This is
not the sign of a company that is on the verge of bankruptcy. No, it is a sign
of a company that is giving up on rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and rural
communities, and the government over there opposite is allowing it to happen.
Allowing it to happen, because they are not using the act that has been
enforced, voted on and supported by them in the House of Assembly.
Yet, today, we call Bill 36 another piece of legislation to enact in this
Legislature for the Minister of Fisheries to be guided by, but it is only as
effective as those who stand behind the legislation and are prepared to enact
it.
Mr. Speaker, all I am saying is that we have to use the legislation that we
create here. We have to use the (inaudible) we have to keep plants like those in
Harbour Breton open and working for the people in those communities.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's allotted time has expired.
MS JONES: By leave?
MR. SPEAKER: The member has requested leave. Does the member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This is a very important bill. I did get an opportunity to say a few words on
it last week, and it is important that I reinforce my comments today, because
this bill was created out of a report that was done by Eric Dunne. Mr. Speaker,
the recommendations by Mr. Dunne are not evident in this legislation. In fact,
what Mr. Dunne recommended was that the licensing board would be separate from
government. That was what he heard when he did the consultations around the
Province. That was what committees reported to him. They wanted an arm's-length
licensing board. What this legislation does, under Bill 36, is, it gives the
minister the opportunity to veto or approve any recommendations of the licensing
board. It is indeed not arm's-length, but rather it leaves the final decision
with the minister again. Therefore, that is not concurring with the
recommendations that were in the Dunne Report.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, it is all right to have legislation, but portray it
in the light that it should be. Also, Mr. Speaker, if you are going to enact it
in this House, be prepared to use it, just like the FPI Act. I say to the
minister that he should be prepared to use that act right now to keep those
plants open in those rural communities, because the reasons being given by FPI
are not acceptable; the reasons being given by him, as the minister, are not
acceptable. In fact, Mr. Speaker, there are other private sector companies in
this Province investing in the fishery today for export out of this Province,
and they are not deterred by the exchange rate and they are not deterred by the
processing sector in China. In fact, Mr. Speaker, they see a prosperous, bright
future in the export industry in terms of the fishery and valued-added products
in this Province.
Maybe the minister needs to use the power that he has in the Legislature,
under the FPI Act, to show FPI that they will not be able to close down rural
communities in this Province and lay off people at their own whim just so they
can make their company more profitable, Mr. Speaker; not to generate a profit,
but to be more profitable, because last year alone they generated more than $24
million in profits, if you can believe that, Mr. Speaker. Yet, they say they
have to be more profitable.
Well, Mr. Speaker, it is not acceptable to me and I want to push the minister
to make sure that he uses the FPI Act to keep those plants open in the Province.
If he is not going to use the legislation, there is no point in bringing it to
this House.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I want to speak to Bill 36 because of what I feel
is the impact it will have certainly in rural Newfoundland. As the critic for
Industry, Trade and Rural Development, I think it is incumbent upon me to speak
to this piece of legislation.
AN HON. MEMBER: What rural development?
MS FOOTE: My colleague says, what rural development?, but let me get on,
Mr. Speaker, with this bill.
When we talk about the legislation itself, and we talk about what is being
proposed here by the government, and that is this whole idea of taking the
board, or an advisory board, and having it report to the minister, that, I
think, is cause for concern, Mr. Speaker.
The irony in all of this is that the Minister of Fisheries constantly refers
to the political involvement by the previous government in anything to do with
fisheries in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The irony here, Mr.
Speaker, is that, when you look at what is being proposed, that is exactly what
is being proposed. Contrary to what is recommended in the Dunne Report, that
there would indeed be an arm's-length independent board, the minister and the
government have chosen to ignore that particular recommendation by Mr. Dunne and
instead look at an advisory board that would report to the minister. Now, Mr.
Speaker, looking at that objectively, anyone would have to say that certainly
does smack of political interference, and it certainly does not take into
account all the work, all the research, that was done by Mr. Dunne in terms of
putting together this report.
What we are seeing here in Bill 36, I think, can only be harmful to rural
Newfoundland and Labrador. It can only be harmful to the people who fish and the
people who rely on the fishery and who are looking to the government for
responsible decisions.
We see enough happening in rural Newfoundland and Labrador today, Mr.
Speaker, that it is harmful to the people who live there. Of course, I speak
specifically today about what is happening in Harbour Breton, and the protest
that is taking place in response to actions and decisions being taken by FPI, a
company that existed, at least to my recollection, for the benefit of the people
of Newfoundland and Labrador, not to the detriment.
What we are seeing happening today in rural Newfoundland and Labrador,
especially in Harbour Breton, is cause for concern, because when I look at what
Mr. Rowe, Mr. Derrick Rowe, has said, the CEO of FPI, is that we can sacrifice a
little piece. In fact, the headline in The Independent newspaper quoted
Mr. Rowe as saying: Sacrifice a little piece' Harbour Breton plant must
shut down for greater good of FPI operation, CEO says.
Now, I can guarantee Mr. Rowe that the residents of Harbour Breton certainly
do not consider themselves to be a little piece. In fact, they would consider
themselves to be very much a contributor to what is happening in FPI in terms of
the bottom line, not a detriment or a deterrent.
Mr. Speaker, it is sad when you hear the CEO of FPI say: With the
state-of-the-art Marystown plant not "anywhere near capacity," Rowe
admits that FPI will be taking a closer look at its stable of aging plants.
Well, why didn't they take a closer look at the plant before now,
especially in Harbour Breton, and invest, make the necessary investments in a
plant like the one in Harbour Breton, so that instead of looking at a stable of
aging - and I am assuming he means dilapidated - plants, that they would have
made the investment and made sure that the plant was, in fact, safe and
operable.
Mr. Speaker, we are talking about rural Newfoundland, and I can speak
personally about Fortune because Fortune is in my district. I know that when all
the news broke about FPI and its plans with respect to its plants in rural
Newfoundland, that the people in Fortune and surrounding communities were
petrified; not sure of what to expect, knowing that they were waiting with
abated breath as to whether or not the plant would actually operate in 2005. I
stand here today having been told that, in fact, it will operate in 2005, which
is good news for the people of Fortune and of Lamaline and of Point May and of
Point au Gaul and all of these communities, and Grand Bank - people who, in
fact, earn a living with FPI through the plant in Fortune. I am hoping there
will be long-term benefits for the people who work in that particular plant, but
today all we know is that in fact it will operate for 2005. We do not know yet
what it will process. We know that FPI is not buying anymore H and G cod, but we
do not know what other source of raw material will be processed in Fortune.
I am hopeful that, in fact, Fortune will be around for a long time, but when
I hear comments by Mr. Rowe about the state-of-the art facility in Marystown and
the fact that it is not full to its capacity and, therefore, they have to look
at the stable of aging plants, I really do get concerned because I know the
impact it will have on a rural community like Fortune if the one major employer
in the community shuts its doors. And it will not be just the 350 people who
work in the fish plant in Fortune who will be impacted, it will be all of those
other businesses that will be impacted because they rely, of course, on the
people who work in the fish plant to buy at their businesses. What we will see,
of course, in addition to the closure of a major employer - if they shut their
doors - you will then see the closure of other businesses because there will not
be the money available to spend in those businesses.
I have a real problem with FPI and its decision when they talk about selling
off the profitable arm of the company. Well, my concern will be is that if you
have an arm that is being profitable, take the money and reinvest. Reinvest some
of that money into the plants in Newfoundland and Labrador. Isn't that what
FPI is supposed to be all about? I recall speaking with the former CEO of FPI,
and that certainly was his understanding, that there was very much a social
conscience connected with FPI. At the end of the day, we have to make sure that
this government does what it is supposed to do under the FPI Act and ensure that
plants operate in Newfoundland and Labrador.
How much wealth is too much wealth? How much wealth does a company expect to
get? The last annual report that my colleague from Harbour Breton read when he
was in the House last week - and today he is in Harbour Breton representing and
walking with his constituents, where he should be, but I remember he quoted in
an annual report that they had a profit of $22 million. Twenty-two million
dollars. Well, how much money is enough money for the shareholders of FPI? I
think it is about sharing the wealth. I think it is about recognizing why FPI
exists and ensuring that the people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador get to
benefit from some of that wealth. There must be a social conscience with this
company. I recognize it is a business, but I also recognize that it is a
different business. It has two elements: one, of course, where it creates a
wealth and, on the other hand, where it recognizes that it has a responsibility
to the people in Newfoundland and Labrador.
When you talk about people who are involved in the fishery, these are people
who work very hard. These are people who look to companies and who want to be
able to trust their employers. These are people who go to sea under very
hazardous conditions and make sure that they earn a living and thereby work as
hard as they can for the companies that employ them. I know people who go out on
these boats and they are out there in the most treacherous weather and hope to
make a living out of it. Sometimes they go out and they fish for days and days
and days and do not get their quota. Other days they go out and, of course,
depending on where they go to fish, they do meet their quota and that is a good
time for them.
Speaking of these men who go to sea, tonight in my district in Grand Bank, we
have a fundraising event going on for the seamen's memorial, the Mariner's
Memorial, which is a very unique memorial that is being erected to the memory of
those men who go down to the sea in ships. I am sorry I cannot be there this
evening but it is a wonderful opportunity to pay tribute to those men and to
their families. It is a memorial that has a different approach, in fact, when
instead of using a seaman as the monument - Luben Boykov, in fact, was the
sculptor - we have a woman waiting, and those of you who visited Grand Bank
would be very familiar with the homes in Grand Bank where they have a widow's
walk. The sculpture is, in fact, a woman who is standing at a widow's walk
wondering and waiting for her spouse or her brother or her son to come home from
fishing.
Fishing is an industry. It is probably one of the most treacherous industries
that you could be involved in. I know that there are so many in my district,
which is primarily a fishing district, but you have to look at everybody who
will be impacted by decisions to close down plants, and that includes our
students, it includes our teachers, it includes everybody else who has a
business in a community. We are talking rural Newfoundland. It is the lifeblood
of rural Newfoundland. Yes, there are other opportunities in rural Newfoundland,
and we need to cultivate those opportunities, we need to identify those
opportunities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, but at the same time we can
never lose sight of that most traditional of industries that has made
Newfoundland and Labrador what it is, and that is the fishery.
I am fearful, Mr. Speaker, that the decisions being taken by FPI, in concert
with this government - because we have not heard anything to the contrary. We
have not heard anything to the contrary, that they have spoken out, because we
have not heard them speak out against the decision of FPI. They have the
authority. Even the CEO of FPI has said he has two bosses: the shareholders of
FPI and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. Well, we have called on one
of the bosses, who is supposed to have the social conscience, to make sure that
FPI lives up to its commitment under the FPI Act.
To date, unfortunately, we have not heard a lot in the sense of the
government being concerned, or speaking to FPI, or ensuring that plants in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador continue to survive. Whether it is an issue with
China, or whether it is an issue with the value of the dollar, or whether it is
an aging plant, we need to work together. We need to find a solution and not
just automatically say we are going to close a plant - we being FPI.
To have a comment like, Sacrifice a little piece' for the greater good,
that really concerns me, that anyone would suggest that closing down a plant
that employs in excess of 400 people is sacrificing a little piece. What are
they going to say when it comes to Fortune, where we have 350? What are they
going to say when they come to Bonavista? What are they going to say when they
come to Marystown? Because right now they are looking at Marystown as a
state-of-the-art facility that is not filled to capacity. Well, when will the
day come that they will no longer be able to continue to operate Marystown?
Mr. Speaker, with Marystown and with Fortune, and those major employers in
those two communities not operating, that will be the death of the Burin
Peninsula as we know it. Even though we are looking at an oil industry taking on
there, and indeed other initiatives that are happening there, the fishery is so
important to rural Newfoundland and Labrador.
You know, I talk about a rural plan, and the lack of a rural plan by this
government, and I honestly believe that there is no plan. We have yet to see the
vision, the vision that this government campaigned on, or what they said during
the election, that, in fact, they had a plan. We are still waiting for it. All
we have seen is closure of government offices. We have seen fee increases. We
have seen failure to live up to health care commitments; and, of course, one
that is very close to my heart is in Grand Bank where we have what is now called
the largest gazebo in North America because we have steel standing up to what
was meant to be a new health care facility, which was part of a seniors' home
as well as a clinic to replace a dilapidated cottage hospital. The irony is that
we have the CEO of FPI saying that they have to close down the Harbour Breton
plant because it is in such dire state. If anyone were to walk into the clinic
in Grand Bank and recognize that is where people go for health care, you would
have the same thing being said.
My concern, Mr. Speaker, is that is exactly where this government is going in
terms of making sure that decisions they are taking have some kind of basis for
them, making up reasons why we should not do, or they should not do, things that
they do not want to do, instead of being up front and honest about exactly where
they are going, what their plan is for Newfoundland and Labrador, and rural
Newfoundland in particular.
I am really concerned that the message that is being sent by Derrick Rowe of
FPI is very much in keeping with the message of this government, that you
sacrifice a little piece for the greater good.
Either you believe in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, either you believe in
those communities that make us who we are and what we are as a Province -
because, when we talk about tourism, we can talk about St. John's and we can
talk about Corner Brook, but in reality when people come to Newfoundland and
Labrador they come to visit the rural parts of our Province, those parts that
make us different from Montreal, Halifax, Toronto or Vancouver.
Rural Newfoundland is what makes us who we are and what we are. It is our
roots, our families, our ancestors. It is what we are about, hard-working
individuals, particularly people who worked in the fishery and continue to work
in the fishery.
My fear is that if we go down this path, if FPI is allowed to go down this
path, Newfoundland and Labrador will never again exist as the Newfoundland and
Labrador that we know and love. My concern is that those small communities that
have worked so hard to survive, that have been here for hundreds of years, will
find themselves going by the wayside, because the closure of one plant in a
community like Fortune or Harbour Breton or Bonavista or Marystown would have a
devastating impact on those communities and people will have no choice but to
leave those communities, and where do they go? Where do they find employment?
Where are you going to find 350 jobs in rural Fortune? Where are you going to
find 400 jobs in Harbour Breton?
As much as we want to see the economy diversify, and as much as we worked
hard as a government to work with the manufacturing sector and the tourism
sector and every other sector that we could possibly work with people, there is
a recognition that there is only so much that you can do. Therefore, we need to
hold on to those industries that presently exist in rural Newfoundland and
Labrador, the fishery being the main employer.
My fear, Mr. Speaker, is that if the fishery goes by the wayside, if we see
more and more plant closures, then we will see more and more out-migration. I
recall being very excited a year ago when, in fact, we stemmed the flow of
out-migration; when, for the first time in years, we actually saw people moving
back to the Province. That is what we need to see continued, but I am afraid
that with decisions like this, with the lack of a rural strategy, with the lack
of any kind of vision for Newfoundland and Labrador, especially for rural
Newfoundland and Labrador, we will once again see Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians leaving this Province and looking to Alberta and looking to other
provinces.
My concern again, Mr. Speaker, is that there does not seem to be any
recognition, any kind of acknowledgment, by the government that this is a very
real problem; that, in fact, if we do not act, if we do not exercise our
authority under the FPI Act, then, in fact, that is exactly what will happen.
More plants will close, because if they get away with one, if they get away with
the closure of Harbour Breton, then is Fortune next? Is Bonavista next? What
plant will be next?
Here we are talking Bill 36 and we are talking about legislation. Well, the
FPI Act, we have a piece of legislation that deals with FPI. Here we are now
talking about a piece of legislation where the minister is asking to have the
authority, or to have established an advisory board that would report to the
minister. For what purpose? We have
an act now with respect to FPI and they are
not enforcing that. So, why don't we just call a spade a spade? This piece of
legislation is nothing more than to give the minister the political clout to
influence decisions with respect to the fishery. Why don't we instead just do
what the Dunne Report recommended, and put in place a board, an arm's-length
independent board, so that we never have to be concerned about political
interference?
It is time, Mr. Speaker, for this government to recognize that it is falling
down on the job, that many of the commitments that were made to people in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador that resulted in them being elected and forming the
government have not been adhered to. People recognize it. You can go anywhere in
Newfoundland and Labrador, and even people who voted for this government will
say to you: Why did we do that? How did we do that? How did we ever let
ourselves be talked into voting for change just for the sake of change?
We know it happens. We know that after governments have been in for awhile
there is a sense that we need to change. We don't know why. Even though things
were going good, we don't know why, but let's vote for a change.
Unfortunately, the change that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are
experiencing -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's allotted time has expired.
MS FOOTE: Leave to clue up, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SHELLEY: By leave. Half an hour (inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted for some concluding comments.
MS FOOTE: I thank the Minister of Tourism for the half an hour to clue
up.
Mr. Speaker, we really do need to pay serious attention to what is happening
under the direction of this government, and I call on them to use their
authority to work with FPI to make sure that the plants in rural Newfoundland
and Labrador continue to survive. I also call on the government to recognize
what the Dunne Report says, and to go with the recommendation in the Dunne
Report instead of the political interference that I think would come from
establishing an advisory board that would report to the minister.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.
MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I stand today to make a few remarks on Bill 36,
An Act To Establish The Fish
Processing Licensing Board, and I will confine most of my thoughts, Mr. Speaker,
to the bill itself.
What this bill does is very simple. What this bill does, and I will state it
here - I will read directly from the bill - the objective of this bill is to
appoint a board, and, "The objectives of the board are (
a) to assess and
make recommendations to the minister regarding fish processing licensing
applications including applications for new licences, and the consolidation and
transfer of fish processing licences...".
Also, what this bill does is allow for the appointment of a five-member board
to look at applications that are submitted to the minister's office to look at
the establishment of new fish processing licences or the transfer of licences or
the consolidation of licences within the fish processing sector of Newfoundland
and Labrador.
Unlike some of the other comments said earlier, Mr Speaker, this gives the
minister the right to refuse the application as it is submitted. The board has
the right to make recommendation. The minister has the final say. That is normal
with just about every other piece of legislation that you see brought into this
House here, but it will not be able to be done in a secret way. In fact, it
clearly states, "The minister shall consider a recommendation of the board
made to him or her under paragraph 10(2)(
c) and shall, following his or her
decision with respect to the application, release both the recommendation of the
board and his or her decision regarding the application first to the applicant
and then to the public."
So, not only will the recommendations of the minister be known, but the
recommendations of the board will be known as well. So, it will not be a
situation as we have seen in the past where the minister, without any due
recognition to what anybody says, go out and start granting processing licences
or the transfer of licences. We do not have to think - in fact, many people who
are sitting on that side of the House today know full well what happened within
our shellfish processing sector a few short years ago when the then Minister of
Fisheries and Aquaculture, the now minister representing Newfoundland and
Labrador in Ottawa, went out and doubled the number of crab licences in this
Province.
I did not hear anybody over on that side of the House at that time get up and
have any problem with what was happening in the granting of processing licences.
All that minister did at that time, all was done at that time, and with the full
consultation and the full agreement that people who are sitting opposite today -
and try to point holes in a piece of legislation, which is a good piece of
legislation. It is transparent. It is open to the public. What they did at that
particular time was acknowledge the former Minister of Fisheries and
Aquaculture, the now minister representing Newfoundland and Labrador in Ottawa,
go out and double the number of crab licences, and I will tell you what was
done. There was not one job created. It was the transfer of jobs from one area
to another. In fact, many people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador will tell
you that it was the transfer of poverty from one community to another, because
today in communities that had crab licences and were the only licences for that
particular company in that particular town would have seen their plants, today,
operating for probably eighteen or twenty weeks a year. Today, we see them
operating for ten, eleven and twelves weeks a year, processing half the amount
of crab that they would normally process.
Mr. Speaker, I am not going to stand here and name communities that should or
should not have a licence, but I will talk in particular about Bonavista. When I
hear Bonavista mentioned by members opposite, talking about Harbour Breton being
closed today, Fortune tomorrow, Bonavista the next day, I say to people that we
should not go out fearmongering.
The Leader of the Opposition was on Open Line Friday morning - I did not hear
it, so I am only talking about the story that was told to me by somebody else -
talking about the announcement of Harbour Breton being closed, talking about
Fortune being cut back and probably closed, and went on to say: Bonavista is
next because Triton ordered double the number of boxes that they ordered last
year. How silly, because Triton ordered double the number of boxes. Mr. Speaker,
I worked in the fishing industry for thirteen years and it was not uncommon for
any plant to order quadruple the number of boxes one year than they had in the
first year. It was stored in a building. It was stored in dry storage. When
production time came it was taken and shipped to the plants where it was needed.
I was flooded with phone calls from people in Bonavista saying: What is this
I am hearing about the Leader of the Opposition, the former Premier, talking
about Bonavista closing? So my thoughts were: boy, look, you can only talk about
what you heard the member say. As far as I know it is untrue. Every meeting that
I have had with Fishery Products International they said it is business as
usual, but I picked up the phone. I said maybe there is a new development. Maybe
something has happened since three weeks ago when I sat in the boardroom of FPI
and we talked about Bonavista. Maybe something has happened. I picked up the
phone and asked for a couple of individuals, and within ten minutes I had a
phone call back. I said: Boys, this is what I am hearing. Is there any truth to
it? The Leader of the Opposition was on Open Line and I am being flooded with
calls. They said: Roger, there is not one iota of truth to what the Leader of
the Liberal Party said about Bonavista. Not one iota of truth.
Mr. Speaker, what do you do? Is that fearmongering? Well, I suggest to you
that it is. Maybe something will happen tomorrow. Maybe something will happen
two years down the road. There is always a struggle. There is always a challenge
with fish plants in every one of our districts, and me, having a plant in
Bonavista, another one in Port Union, another one in Plate Cove, I know what
people go through when they even hear a rumble, a rumour, of what might happen.
I would say it is irresponsible to throw those - not facts, this propaganda out
there, those untruths and put people's lives in agony just for the sake of
scoring political points. That is not the way things should be, I say to members
opposite. If you have facts, then put them forward, but do not go putting people's
lives and their livelihood on the line just to score political points. That is
not the way it should be done.
Mr. Speaker, that is what has happened in relation to Bonavista. That is what
has happened with my phone call to Fishery Products International. Now, none of
us here in this House takes any comfort, none of us here in this House, whether
you sit with the Opposition, whether you sit with the New Democratic Party or
the Progressive Conservation Party, not one person here wants to see anybody
lose their jobs. That is not what we are all about. I understand that, and
everyone of us here. People watching the House of Assembly telecast on
television last Wednesday heard people speak one after the other in support of
the people in Harbour Breton and the need to keep that plant open, and the
importance of the plant to the community, and the 350 people who work there, and
the 2,000 people who live there. Everybody here in this House would like to see
some resolution brought to that problem, but that is not what we are talking
about here today in this particular debate. We are talking about a piece of
legislation. We are talking about a piece of legislation, Mr. Speaker,
an act -
I cannot even find the piece of legislation now, somebody must have taken it
from me.
Mr. Speaker, it is Bill 36,
An Act To Establish The Fish Processing Licensing
Board. We have debated this piece of legislation in caucus. We have talked about
it. I have talked about it privately with the minister and I think it is a good
piece of legislation. It is encouraging for me as a member, as a backbencher, to
see the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture bring forward a piece of
legislation that says: Before I make decisions that are going to affect people's
lives, affect communities, I would like to be able to refer it to a board to
make recommendations so that I might have some help in determining whether I
should grant a new fish processing licence, or whether I need consultation on
whether we should transfer a licence. We need to get other people involved. That
is all this particular bill is doing, I say to members opposite. It is going to
appointment a five member board. That board, Mr. Speaker, will elect its own
vice-chairperson. The Lieutenant-Governor in Council will appoint the
chairperson to that board. That particular board, this five member board that
was set for a four-year term, will advise the minister. Now that is what I
thought we were all about. I thought that is what people wanted, for us to reach
out and ask people to give us advise; to advise the minister where processing
licences should be established or if they should be transferred. That is what
this piece of legislation does. To tie it in with all of the other things that
are happening within the fishing industry is not what this bill does and it is
certainly not doing justice to this particular bill.
Mr. Speaker, I certainly support Bill 36. I speak in favour of it and we can
talk about the fishing industry until the end of the day if we want to here. We
all have plants and we have people involved in the fishing industry, most of us
who live in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and nobody here will belittle what
the fishing industry means to the people who live in those communities or live
in those towns. It is their livelihood. It is the only job that they know.
People have gone to work in those fish plants for some thirty-five and forty
years. They find themselves fifty-five years old now without a job, without an
education, well trained fisheries workers. Where do they find a job? None of us,
Mr. Speaker, are numb to what is happening in places like Harbour Breton and
other places where the axe might fall in years to come, but let's not go out
and use what is happening in one or two places today, let's not use that as
propaganda. Let's not use it for political purposes, to put other people's
lives in jeopardy and to put fear in them that they could be the next, even
though they may, but we will deal with that when those decisions are made.
Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, this is a good bill. It is a bill that tells what
this government is all about. It is a government that reaches out to consult and
ask for advice, and to look for information, and to take advice, and to make
good, clean decisions, not like what happened back a few years ago when the
present Minister of Natural Resources in Ottawa doubled the number of crab
licences and left many people in some of our towns without enough work weeks to
qualify for EI. We see a dwindling resource in the crab industry today. We see
the proud people who never, ever, had to go and look for a make-work project.
Well, they always looked for EI because most of those places were seasonal
operations, but they did not have to go and look for make-work projects.
I said the other day, Mr. Speaker, that in some of our fishing communities we
have the most artificial economy that you could ever create, because not only do
you have people receiving EI, but in a lot of those communities today - and it
all relates back, for the most part, in some of them, for decisions that were
made by a former minister who sat over here, who is a member of that party that
sits over there. Now you are having people having to reach out and access
make-work projects, access job creation projects, in order to qualify for EI.
You talk about an artificial economy; that is the kind of economy that was
created by decisions made by that party over there when they were in power over
here, and they decided to go and double the number crab licences.
All they did - and I will repeat again - is transfer jobs from one area to
another. Not one new job was created. Well, we are not going to do that. We are
not going to do that. The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture is not going to
do that, I can assure you, because he is going to appoint a five-member board
and he is going to take advice. He will accept their recommendations and make it
transparent, and will advise everybody in this Province of what the
recommendations of the board were and what his recommendations will be. It will
not be done in secret. It will not be done behind closed doors. It will be
transparent and everybody in this Province will know what the recommendations
were and what decisions were made.
Mr. Speaker, I support Bill 36.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I stand today to speak to the bill as well. I can say to the member who just
spoke that today I will speak of fear, but I can assure the Member for Bonavista
South that it is not fearmongering but rather, Mr. Speaker, I will tell the
truth.
Mr. Speaker, just as we listened to the members on the government side now
talk of us when we were in government, let me go back in time. When the Labrador
fishery was on the go and CBC had the documentary of the Labrador fishery, we
saw men and women from Newfoundland board the coastal boats and come to Labrador
for the fishery, Mr. Speaker, and we welcomed them there. We saw the government
of the day, the Progressive Conservative government, build (inaudible) the best
plant that money could buy, for Newfoundland fishermen, while the community of
Rigolet couldn't get five cents to put into a stagehead. We watched when the
government of the day hooked up running water and the Town of Rigolet couldn't
get five cents for water and sewer. Mr. Speaker, that was then.
If we made mistakes, or if I made a mistake when I was on that side, then I
will live with that for the rest of my life, but there is something far more
important here today, Mr. Speaker. We have a chance to fix things.
Mr. Speaker, blame is something that is very easy, but I was very hesitant
today to speak on the fishery because, to me, it would open up a lot of hurt and
a lot of wounds. Perhaps I should go back to the closure of the cod fishery, Mr.
Speaker, when the governments of the day outlined the criteria for the cod
moratorium and for the TAGS program.
Mr. Speaker, when the governments of the day outlined the criteria for the
TAGS program, it was based on your catches over a two-year period; and, Mr.
Speaker, during these years that they based the moratorium or the TAGS program
or NCARP, there was not one fish to be caught on the North Coast of Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, during these years that they based the moratorium, or the TAGS
program, or NCARP, there was not one fish to be caught on the North Coast of
Labrador, the pride of the cod fishing industry for many years.
Mr. Speaker, we faced devastation. We had an all-party committee that was
selected to go to Ottawa to fight for more money for the TAGS program. I was
there, and the Member for Bonavista can recall, I spoke very passionately about
the people and what it meant to them.
Mr. Speaker, when the cod fishery came into effect, or the moratorium, where
the people on the North Coast never received any funding, let me say this:
Imagine the hurt and the anger that these people had, when they could not afford
to buy their spouse a Christmas card, Mr. Speaker, let alone a Christmas
present.
If that is fair, Mr. Speaker, it is fair, but I can guarantee you it is the
truth, because that is what happened to the people on the North Coast of
Labrador.
We saw the salmon fishery fail on the Island portion of this Provin