PDF Version

March

26, 2014

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVII No. 8

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman):

Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER:

Today we have members' statements from the Member

for the District of Fortune Bay Cape La Hune; the Member for the District of

Baie Verte Springdale; the Member for the District of St. John's Centre; the

Member for the District of Lake Melville; the Member for the District of

Carbonear Harbour Grace; and the Member for the District of Lewisporte.

The hon. the Member for the

District of Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MS PERRY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House

today to recognize the outstanding public speaking abilities of youth in the

Coast of Bays region who participated in the thirty-ninth Annual Speak Off,

hosted by the St. Alban's and Milltown Lions Clubs.

The first place winner was

Jordan Collier, second place was Bianca Stokes, and third was Julie Young.

These youth continue to show outstanding ability for public speaking, and

they certainly make us all very, very proud.

Through these speak offs, you are certainly developing very important

life skills to think and present your opinions on relevant issues effectively,

and I highly commend you for the great job that you are doing.

I would also like to thank

the Lions Clubs, teachers, parents, and volunteers who assist the youth in any

way for this important event, which provides an excellent opportunity for young

people to develop their oratory talent and skills.

I ask all members of this

hon. House to join me in delivering accolades to these fine young students.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the District of Baie

Verte Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. POLLARD:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A special event took place

on December 5, 2013. I rise in this

hon. House today to congratulate the Baie Verte and Area Royal Canadian Legion

Branch 54 upon the celebration of its fiftieth anniversary.

From its humble beginnings in 1963, when the legion received the Official

Proclamation from Provincial Command, President Sidney Newbury is proud of the

contributions made by the legion and the impact it has had on people's lives.

Fifty years later, they are

still going strong, caring for veterans, their spouses, educating the youth of

our history, and promoting peace. It

grew from having meetings in their vehicles to having their own building, helped

along the way by Bowaters and Baie Verte Mines.

I applaud the outstanding

efforts of past presidents. They

include: Bert McCabe, Thomas Lundrigan, Ernest Nelson, Anthony McCarthy, William

Eaton, Robert Carey, Willis White, Nigel Brake, H.R. Bowers, Joe Gillis, Eric

Pennell, Roland Spurrell, Eric Lacey, Leo O'Reily, Elizabeth O'Reily, and

present President Sidney Newbury.

I invite all colleagues in

this hon. House to help me to convey congratulations to the Baie Verte and Area

Royal Canadian Legion Branch 54 upon its fiftieth anniversary.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

March is Social Workers

Month, a perfect time to acknowledge the vital work being done by the resilient

social workers of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Specifically, I thank

THRIVE, an innovative, charitable youth organization in my district for

providing direct support and services to youth service providers through their

community support and development programs.

Last year social workers

from all over the city attended a THRIVE session on Compassion Fatigue, led by

Heidi Edgar. The room was packed as

dedicated social workers shared strategies and ideas, balancing their code of

ethics with the role of burnout in relation to vicarious trauma.

It was an inspiring morning many said, the best professional

development session they had ever attended.

The moral distress felt by

our professionals when work obligations disagree with personal moral values is

very real. The session concluded

with a fantastic discussion on the role of the organization in burnout and the

importance of workers being able to speak to their managers about establishing

reasonable caseloads.

Our social workers work with

the expertise, dedication, and commitment to social justice, often under

crushing caseloads. On behalf of the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador I thank them, Mr. Speaker.

Bravo to our brave social workers.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to recognize

the Labrador Woodward's Selects hockey team from Lake Melville on winning gold

at the Canadian Cup International Hockey Tournament, held in Montreal, Quebec,

March 14-16.

The team went undefeated

through the round robin portion of the tournament, before moving on to the

finals where they played the Oro Thunder from Northern Ontario, beating them 6-1

in the final to capture the championship.

The team, their coaches,

parents, and their sponsors should certainly be proud of such a great

accomplishment. Being able to bring

back a provincial, regional, or national championship is one thing, Mr. Speaker,

but being able to bring back an international championship is all the more

special.

The team consisted of Chris

O'Dell, Nick Robinson, Brad Robinson, Bradley Ellsworth, Ben Roberts, Matt

Patey, Garrett Chaulk, Nick Taylor, Andrew Tee, Leo Ford, Adam Anderson, Cody

Normore, Rylan Bent, Dominic Mullaly, Tyler Hynes, Michael White; and the

coaching staff Arnold Kelly, Grant Patey, Myron Roberts, Dave White; their

sponsor, Mel Woodward and Director of Operations, Liz Battcock.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all

members of this hon. House to join me in congratulating the Labrador Woodward's

Selects on winning the Canadian Cup International Hockey Tournament.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Carbonear Harbour

Grace.

MR. SLADE:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to

congratulate five young people of Carbonear Harbour Grace District who

participated in the Newfoundland and Labrador Winter Games in Clarenville.

Kristen Shute, Kelsey Shute,

and Samantha Pike were members of the Avalon Female Hockey Team who won the

bronze medal at the Winter Games.

Matthew Hoyles and Ryan

Williams were members of the Avalon Male Hockey Team, and they finished the

games with a silver medal.

Mr. Speaker, the

Newfoundland and Labrador Winter Games have proven to be an excellent

opportunity for young people in our Province to excel in their sport and to make

life-long friends from around the Province.

This year was no different and I want to congratulate the Town of

Clarenville for hosting the greatest asset the young people of our Province.

Mr. Speaker, Kristen,

Kelsey, Samantha, Matthew, and Ryan represent a large number of youth in my

district who are active in sports, arts, academics and are using their expertise

to make their communities better places to live.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon.

members to join me in congratulating Kristen, Kelsey, Samantha, Matthew, and

Ryan on their achievements and wish them every success in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the District of

Lewisporte.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to recognize

the great work done by a family farm in the Town of Comfort Cove Newstead.

Triple E Farms began ninety years ago when Raymond Eveleigh set up the

enterprise. Today, Raymond's son

Junior and grandson Dwight run this 115 acre farm that employs thirty people at

peak season and eight people for ten months of the year.

In total, they produce 2.5 million pounds of product for the Newfoundland

and Labrador marketplace.

Recently, Triple E Farms was

awarded certification from the CanadaGAP food safety program.

This is the first family farm in Newfoundland and Labrador to receive

this certification. The process of

being certified involves a third party auditor who inspects every aspect of

farming from the time the seed goes into the ground to when the final packaged

product is placed on store shelves.

Mr. Speaker, Triple E Farms received an overall grade of 96 per cent.

This is a tremendous accomplishment and once again demonstrates the

quality work that we can do right here in our Province.

I ask all hon. members to

join with me in congratulating Junior Eveleigh, Dwight Eveleigh, and all the

employees of Triple E Farms.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Before we move to Ministerial Statements, I want

to acknowledge a special guest in our gallery today, Ms Cassandra Singleton from

Clarenville, who is this year's ambassador for the Purple Day for Epilepsy.

Welcome to our gallery.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

Today we have a Ministerial Statement from the

hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MS SULLIVAN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House

today to recognize Purple Day for Epilepsy in Newfoundland and Labrador, and to

raise awareness of this neurological disorder in an effort to reduce stigma and

improve the quality of life for those living with epilepsy.

During a recent proclamation

signing recognizing Purple Day in Newfoundland and Labrador, I had the pleasure

to meet with a remarkable young lady who shared her story of inspiration and

hope and how being affected by epilepsy has changed her life.

Mr. Speaker, Cassandra

Singleton, a nineteen-year-old from Clarenville, was diagnosed with epilepsy

five years ago and did not fully understand the complexity of this disorder when

she experienced her first seizure as a teenager.

What Cassie did discover, however, is that while having epilepsy poses

some challenges, it does not define who she is as a person.

In fact, Mr. Speaker, this

young lady has faced her challenges head on.

She graduated from high school and is currently a student at Memorial

University. Cassie is a true

ambassador for individuals affected by epilepsy and is demonstrating through her

own personal success, that people living with epilepsy are not alone and can

lead fulfilling lives.

Mr. Speaker, epilepsy is one

of the most common neurological conditions with approximately one in twenty-six

people expected to develop epilepsy at some point in their lifetime.

More than 10,000 people are affected by this disorder in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

People are encouraged to

visit the Epilepsy Newfoundland and Labrador Web site at

www.epilepsynl.com to learn more about

Purple Day, the different types of seizures, and to become familiar with the

correct methods of first aid.

Mr. Speaker, today, during

Purple Day, I encourage residents to wear the colour purple and to participate

in Purple Day activities in their communities as a show of support for people

like Cassandra living with epilepsy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the District of Burgeo

La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an

advance copy of her statement.

Certainly we would like to welcome Ms Singleton to the House.

It is an honour to have her here with us today.

We are very happy to stand

here today and talk about epilepsy.

Myself, the Leader of the Opposition, all of the caucus, and many members on all

sides of this House are happy to wear purple today to show our support and help

raise awareness about epilepsy. It

is important to raise awareness because of how it affects those living with

epilepsy, and their family and friends.

We have about 10,000 people

in our Province today with epilepsy.

That is a huge portion. It is the

fourth most common neurological disorder and there is no known cure yet, but

right now the cost can often be managed through medication and through surgery.

I am urging everyone today

to get behind Purple Day and to help people understand epilepsy better and the

people who live it. Hopefully one

day, through research, we will better understand it and a cure will be found.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the

advance copy of her statement. I,

too, am very happy and pleased to be standing here today wearing purple in

solidarity with those living with epilepsy and their families.

With 10,000 people in the Province affected, it is obvious many of us

have been touched by epilepsy in some manner, either within our families or

sometimes even in organizations we are part of.

I remember children with epilepsy in school when I went to school.

It is important, therefore,

that we make the effort to become trained in the correct methods of first aid.

I congratulate Epilepsy Newfoundland and Labrador on the work they do in

that regard. I also congratulate

them on the scholarship program they have, scholarships for young people who

have epilepsy themselves or whose parents have it.

It is great work that they do.

Today, I do encourage people

not only to wear purple in support, but to also take the time to become more

aware of the issues surrounding the condition and to learn the appropriate first

aid for seizures that Epilepsy Newfoundland and Labrador has put on cards for

all of us.

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Justice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KING:

Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to

discuss the significant accomplishments of the Combined Forces Special

Enforcement Unit Newfoundland and Labrador, which was formed last year to

strengthen the fight against child exploitation, illegal drugs, and organized

crime across our Province.

This provincial, joint law

enforcement effort between the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Royal

Newfoundland Constabulary partners with other law enforcement agencies, and

consists of crime analysts, investigators, computer forensic specialists, and

other specialized members. By

working together to tackle serious crimes involving complex networks of

criminals that often recognize no boundaries or borders, the Combined Forces

Special Enforcement Unit is making our communities safer and protecting our

children and our families.

Since its formation, the

unit has made significant progress in fighting crime.

To date, illegal drugs with an estimated street value of more than $2

million have been seized along with more than $500,000 in cash.

Three firearms and other illegal weapons have also been removed from our

streets and our communities. In

terms of child exploitation, investigators with the Combined Forces Special

Enforcement Unit have laid forty-one charges related to Internet offences

against children.

Under the guidance of RCMP

Superintendent William Malone, the officer in charge, as well as RNC Staff

Sergeant Joe Gullage, the second-in-command, the unit also has many ongoing

cases currently under investigation.

Mr. Speaker, the provincial

government is committed to protecting residents and to safeguarding them from

the criminal element in this Province.

Since 2004, approximately $920 million has been invested in policing

services and more than 140 additional police officers have been deployed

throughout our Province. By

continuing to support policing services, we strive to ensure that the Province

is as safe as possible for our residents and our communities.

The nature of organized

crime is evolving and this government is responding by meeting the requirement

for specialized and focused policing in the areas of organized crime, drugs, and

child exploitation. We will continue

to support the hard-working officers and investigators of the Combined Forces

Special Enforcement Unit as they face these critical issues head-on and

endeavour to provide a safe place for all of us to live in.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister of an advance

copy of his statement.

Mr. Speaker, on March 24

The Telegram reported that police in

Newfoundland say two males have been arrested after a six-month investigation

into cocaine trafficking, money laundering, and firearms possession.

The RCMP says they used search warrants

in two residences and seized cocaine and $335,000 in cash, and a loaded 9mm

handgun from a vehicle. That loaded

handgun was a Kel-Tec P-11 designed for concealed carry, with maximum 9mm

hitting power.

Mr. Speaker, where are they

today? Well, yesterday one of them

was let out on $7,000 bail. Seven

thousand dollars bail got one of these accused, organized criminals out on the

street. Mr. Speaker, I call on the

Minister of Justice to instruct his prosecuting attorneys to insist that there

be no agreement on bail on organized crime, and a complete confiscation of the

proceeds of crime.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his

statement, Mr. Speaker.

Congratulations to the

Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit of the RCMP and the RNC for their hard

and, I suspect, often dangerous work.

Regarding their drug work,

the police know, as important as their work is, they are only treating the

symptoms. Government could help ease

the burden on this unit by treating the root causes of drug addiction, but all

we see from this government is cutbacks and privatization of the care of some of

our most vulnerable people. As the

police will agree, prevention and treatment is absolutely crucial in this area.

With regard to the unit's

work with Internet luring of children and child exploitation, there are really

no words, except to say thank you for your dedication and compassion.

This is tough, tough work.

With regard to the unit's work, I would like to say once again, bravo for all

the very difficult work they do on behalf of the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Newfoundland Power's report

on DarkNL identifies that the availability of backup power generation as a

long-term issue. As we know, once

Muskrat Falls comes online, there will be very limited backup power available on

the Avalon Peninsula; however, Newfoundland Power has said that the Eastern part

of our Province, as we all know, has the largest and the fastest-growing power

demand needs.

I ask the Premier: What is

your plan for backup power on the Avalon if the lines on the isthmus go down?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER MARSHALL:

Mr. Speaker, hydroelectric systems are very large and very complex.

One of the concerns that have been expressed right across the country is

the lack of capital investment that has gone into them.

One of the things we have done as a government since 2007 is ensure that

the profits being earned by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro remain in that

company so they can in turn make capital investments.

I know the government

opposite, when they were in power, extracted those funds, extracted those

profits as dividends, and therefore did not allow enough capital investment, and

that exacerbates any problems that we are having today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

I thank the Premier for his comments but he

obviously was not in Question Period yesterday when we clearly outlined in the

reports that came up, the DarkNL process already talked about maintenance last

year. As a matter of fact, the

Minister of Natural Resources quite clearly said he was not even aware that was

happening.

Newfoundland Power's report

says that more backup power supply on the Avalon would have reduced the system

and customer distress that we experienced in January.

Meanwhile, government's own consultant, MHI, said that outages up to one

month are possible if the Muskrat Falls line goes down.

I ask the Premier: Why are

you rolling the dice and not proceeding without a clear backup power plan for

the eastern part of our Province?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER MARSHALL:

Mr. Speaker, we have come up with a major plan for the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador, and that is through Muskrat Falls.

That will provide power to the people of this Province at a lower cost

than any other alternative and also provide an opportunity for surplus power;

surplus to our needs will be able to be sold down in other markets and provide

wealth and opportunity for the people of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, obviously, we

are not experts in hydroelectricity operation.

We hire the experts to do that.

Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro has a team in place.

Ed Martin and his team, is a team I have confidence in.

They have a board of directors and they have consultants with

SNC-Lavalin. They have a big project

team. They are doing major projects,

and I have confidence in them and in the report they are now going to do to look

at the needs of this Province as we come connected to the Canadian system.

I look forward to what they

do, and I look forward to the report coming out of the PUB who are looking at

the blackouts and also looking at post Muskrat Falls.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, the Premier did not

answer the question. He clearly

missed the point on the Manitoba Hydro and clearly missing the point of what

Newfoundland Power was saying yesterday.

We are talking about a very sensitive area of this Province where

transmission as a matter of fact, the backup power that you are talking about

from Muskrat Falls, the imported power that you are talking about cannot get to

Eastern Newfoundland without another transmission line in place.

That is what I am talking about, I say, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Chair of

the Legal Aid Commission says that government's reversal on legal aid cuts will

do little to solve chronic problems in the system, including long wait times.

As they say, justice delayed is justice denied.

I ask the Premier: After

more than a decade in government, why have you failed to adequately address the

chronic problems in our justice system?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER MARSHALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when we came

into office back in 2003, I became the Minister of Justice.

I discovered that at that time, under the previous government, the amount

of investment per capita in legal aid in Newfoundland and Labrador was the

lowest in Canada.

In nine years, we increased

spending; we doubled the spending in legal aid in this Province.

Now after nine years, the spending per capita on legal aid is the highest

in the country.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER MARSHALL:

Mr. Speaker, we doubled it.

The Chair of the Legal Aid Commission did release a report in response to the

Roil report. He talked about the

federal government's decrease in money for legal aid, he talked about the

provinces have to step up, and he talked about ours did.

He talked about the Newfoundland and Labrador legal aid system.

He said we are now considered to have one of the best legal aid plans in

Canada, which means the world. Mr.

Speaker, I think our record in legal aid speaks for itself.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Clearly, the Chair of the

Legal Aid Commission was saying the news report that came out there is one

thing about spending money, you can spend all the money you want but if you do

not get outcomes, it does not matter.

Mr. Speaker, according to

the Chair of the legal aid, government's pre-Budget announcement on the justice

system will do nothing to fix the big service gaps in Labrador.

He says that something big has to happen there and it needs to happen

soon.

I ask the Premier: What are

you going to do to fix the problem in Labrador?

Remember, justice delayed is justice denied.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER MARSHALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A number of years ago, a

young woman from Saskatchewan was retained to come in and take a look at the

legal aid system in Labrador and we followed her recommendations.

We accepted her recommendations.

We brought in additional funding for more facilities and more resources

in Labrador, including

interpretation, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we will

continue to do it. We cannot do it

all at once. The Leader of the

Opposition said we need the big bang.

Fortunately, we have a priority.

We have to determine our priorities.

We cannot do it all at once.

It is something we did when

we came into office with the policing system.

The policing system was not the most stellar.

We could not do it all at once, but we did it surely, steadily, and now

we have one of the best police forces in the country in our RNC.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, despite the snow accumulation and

the bone-chilling cold we have experienced this winter, many young students are

expected to endure a dangerous and difficult walk to school.

Meanwhile, government is sitting on a $75,000 school busing report which

says that few parents agree with the current 1.6 kilometre policy.

I ask the Minister of

Education: When will you act in the best interest of children and make the

changes to school busing that parents want to see?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where the member comes

from when he keeps talking about we are sitting on a report.

The report is on our Web site.

The first thing that was recommended in the report is before you can make

further decisions you need to know what is happening out there.

The first recommendation was to purchase routing software so you can make

some decisions about the busing system.

I do not if the member

realizes it or not, but I believe it was on March 12 or March 13 we announced we

had purchased that routing software.

We have installed some pilot projects around an outside apparatus that provide

protection for students, Mr. Speaker, so we are moving on the report.

I do not know where the member comes from saying that we are sitting on a

report. We are moving on it, it is

out there, we have purchased, and we are moving ahead.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY:

That is all cold comfort for those kids, Mr.

Speaker. The minister's $75,000

school busing report recommended that he look at reducing the 1.6 kilometre

eligibility policy for primary and elementary students.

He asked the parents for their input; now he is ignoring their feedback.

I ask the minister: Will he

heed the advice of his high-priced consultants and change the busing eligibility

policy for the safety of our students?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Mr. Speaker, let me very clear with the member.

There is no price that is too high for the safety of our students in this

Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

There is no price.

We put no price on what we can do to provide for our students.

I have said in this House once we review and we get the data coming in

from this routing software, then we will make some decisions, and we may in fact

be able to address the issue the member is talking about.

We are about providing the best-quality service for our students, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very glad to hear the

minister say that.

Mr. Speaker, many students,

parents, and teachers in the Mount Pearl school system will see their school

communities unnecessarily destroyed when there are other, less-disruptive

solutions. One of the core issues is

government forcing the school board to jam students into every inch of space,

regardless of the numerous negative impacts, before any consideration will be

given to capital improvement or school expansion requests.

I ask the minister: Is he

financial flexibility to develop more suitable options?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Mr. Speaker, his method of posing questions has

certainly changed since he crossed the green carpet; I have to say that.

Mr. Speaker, a process has

been put in place. The school board

has gone out and consulted with the parents.

We are not putting limitations on the school board.

Is he asking me to get

involved in the middle of this?

Because, Mr. Speaker, this is exactly why we have the board.

Government is hands off. We

are letting the school board and the parents make the decisions, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that my method of

asking questions has not changed. My

ability to ask questions certainly has.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, we all realize that the school board

has a process to follow in addressing the overcrowding issues at St. Peter's

Elementary

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. LANE:

I will start again, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we all realize

that the school board has a process to follow in addressing the overcrowding

issues at St. Peter's Elementary and Mount Pearl Senior High.

However, the absence of any financial commitment from government is

having a significant impact on the board's ability to develop suitable options

for the reorganization of the Mount Pearl Paradise school system.

I therefore ask the

minister, once again: Will he commit in this hon. House today to provide a

them in dealing with this very serious issue?

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Mr. Speaker, I have to say, I certainly did not

think I did anything while he was over on this side to inhibit his questions.

Mr. Speaker, just look at

our record in this particular area.

Two new schools in Paradise, a school in CBS underway, another one in the

planning for Portugal Cove-St. Philip's, and Torbay.

Mr. Speaker, I can go on and speak until you tell me to sit down and get

up, and I will sit down again, the list of school projects we are undertaking in

this Province.

We want to provide a quality

education to the students of Mount Pearl.

We will let the process unfold, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are on

the lack of accessible housing.

Debbie, who uses a wheelchair, is living in an apartment that is subsidized by

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, but the stove is not accessible and she is

nervous using it. Debbie has had

injuries because the bathtub is not accessible, the doorways will not

accommodate her wheelchair, also causing injuries.

I ask the minister: What

plans do government have to make more accessible housing available to those who

need it?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and

Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN:

Mr. Speaker, the cornerstone of this government

is addressing the needs of the most vulnerable people in our Province.

I take that with heart and soul, Mr. Speaker, because in my past life of

thirty-odd years in pharmacy, I served a lot of them.

important to the client, really important to this government, Mr. Speaker.

We have invested over the last number of years a lot of money in regard

will continue to support them, both in Advanced Education and Skills and

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. OSBORNE:

She is waiting three years for an accessible

unit. I still wonder what the

minister's plans are.

Debbie, who lives on the

third floor of a building, had to call the fire department to be helped down the

stairs during the DarkNL crisis because the elevator was not operating.

During slippery conditions she is confined to her apartment because her

building is on a hill.

I ask the minister: Debbie

has been waiting three years to get a transfer to an acceptable unit; doesn't

the minister think it is time for more accessible housing?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and

Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN:

Mr. Speaker, I will first start by saying if the hon. member could get Debbie to

call me, I will certainly look into her needs because it is really important to

me as the minister responsible and also, she did not call me.

You have her call me directly, is what I say to the hon. member.

MR. SPEAKER:

I ask the minister to direct his comments to the

Chair, please.

MR. O'BRIEN:

In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, in regard to those

people, those most vulnerable people with disabilities in this Province, I have

recently funded COD-NL to look at that program in regard to these kinds of

issues, in regard to outages and whatever it may be, Mr. Speaker, and adverse

events in Newfoundland and Labrador.

They are going to do a piece of work for me.

They are going to report to me and we are going to do something about it,

Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay

North.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Mr. Speaker, the launch of the Open Government Initiative was a bunch of

hoopla resulting in no new information being made publicly available.

The minister said government will now engage the public over the next few

months to find out what data people would like posted.

Why would the Minister of

Public Engagement think it wise to spend thousands of taxpayers' dollars

announcing information that was already publicly available?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Intergovernmental Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, the Centre for Law and Democracy has

stated more than once that to be successful in launching an open government

strategy you have to engage the public in developing your Open Government Action

Plan. That is what we announced last

week. It is unfortunate the member

opposite continues not to understand the fact that we are beginning a process.

We have launched the pillars of our plan, and we will now, over the next

number of months, seek public input so that we design the best possible Open

Government Action Plan to move this government forward.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay

North.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Public Engagement confirmed in the House

yesterday what we have known for some time.

Instead of developing a plan through public engagement this government

would rather dictate to the people what it needs and listen later, case in point

is its Open Government Initiative.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the

Minister of Public Engagement: Why government feels it is responsible and

reasonable to tell people first and listen later, only to spend more in the

process to fix their problems?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER MARSHALL:

Mr. Speaker

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER MARSHALL:

Mr. Speaker, I think it is incredible the hon. member does not get it.

We are bringing in an Open Government Initiative in order for us to

provide more information to the people of the Province and then engage in public

engagement so they can get back to us

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER MARSHALL:

so that our decisions can be better, and our policies, our services,

and our programs will be better.

Instead of ramming it down people's throats the way the hon. member would like

to do it, the first thing we are doing is establishing a system of public

engagement.

We are going to ask the

people of the Province how they want us to engage with them, how they want us to

communicate with them, what is the best way for them to get back to us, and what

information do they want us to provide?

That is what we are going to do.

When we finish this process we will come up with a framework and an

action plan, and that will be systemic right through government, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Member for

Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

MS DEMPSTER:

I was a bit humoured myself with them all out

with those clickers. Yes, we want

more open government.

Mr. Speaker, the Department

of Advanced Education and Skills are undergoing significant restructuring over

the next year, but the minister says the staff complement will remain at its

current size.

I ask the minister, let's

talk about people: Will anyone lose their job as a result of this

reorganization?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and

Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN:

No.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the District of

Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

MS DEMPSTER:

Mr. Speaker, on Monday I asked the Minister of

Advanced Education and Skills what was the fate of Employment Assistance

Services Agencies serving women in non-traditional employment and persons with

disabilities. His answer was vague.

I ask the minister: Are

contracts with these EAS Agencies being renewed for 2014-2015?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and

Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN:

Mr. Speaker, I have been working with yes,

absolutely. How is that?

Get up and ask your question.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Two and a half years, and we finally get a straight answer, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, after a

three-year fight with the Department of CYFS that ended at Supreme Court, CBC

finally got access to a secret consultant's report on a family in the CYFS

caseload.

I ask the minister: Why were

you keeping this report so secret?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family

Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In 2008, there was a report

that was sanctioned, invited, ordered, and directed by the Minister of Child,

Youth and Family Services at the time to review a case file.

We review case files on a regular basis.

It is a really good way to learn how we have done casework in the past

and how we should do it in the future.

It helps us reflect on what we have done in the past and it helps us

determine new ways to advance and improve the services we provide to children

and families throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

That is our goal, Mr.

Speaker, is to provide the best services possible to the children, youth, and

families in Newfoundland and Labrador, and we are quite prepared to do that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

I ask the minister: Why did you make CBC go to Supreme Court?

Why did you try to keep it secret for so many years?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family

Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the member opposite

is referring and stating here in this House, the report was not secret.

The report that was carried out was well known.

I can tell you there is information in that report that must remain

confidential.

I will tell this hon. House

and I will tell the members opposite, that I will, as the Minister of Child,

Youth and Family Services, do everything in my power to protect the privacy of

children, youth, and families in this Province that are involved with Child,

Youth and Family Services. If that

means we have to go to Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador to protect

their interests, we will do that.

That is what the Supreme Court upheld, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I would note that the government ignored the initial Access

to Information report and that they actually dismissed recommendations by the

Privacy Commissioner that most of the report should be made public.

That is why they had to go to court.

According to CBC, CYFS set

the parameters of the review so narrowly that the family involved was not even

interviewed.

I ask the minister: Why did

you not want the consultant to hear the family's side of the story?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family

Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is obvious the member

opposite is not aware of the circumstances, what unfolded here, and what took

place. There was a review conducted

that involved how we interact with other agencies, government agencies, and

other government departments. This

was a very complex case that was handled very well by social workers, front-line

workers, and Child, Youth and Family Services qualified, hard-working social

workers in the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services.

What we have done since the

development of the new department because it was this government, Mr. Speaker,

who knew the best way for us to provide the best services to children, youth,

and families in Newfoundland and Labrador was to create a new department, the

Department of Child, Youth and Family Services, a mainline department for the

government. Mr. Speaker, that is

what we did so we could provide those services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Government has ignored the

recommendations of the Minimum Wage Advisory Committee which included annual

increases based on the cost of living, and instead legislated a paltry

twenty-five cent increase for next October and October, 2015.

I ask the Premier: Why has

his government not followed the committee's recommendations?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Justice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the member opposite would

know, we commission reports on a regular basis, following a pattern of

governments before us, and we receive all kinds of recommendations.

We are never obligated to accept recommendations, and we never set up

reports when we commission them to say we are going to accept the

recommendations and be bound to what is offered to us.

We simply take them as recommendations and we consider them.

That is what we have done in this particular case.

I think if you check the

history since we have come to government, we have done more to help minimum wage

and low-income earners in this Province, more than any other province in Canada,

Mr. Speaker. In the particular raise

that I introduced not long ago in this Province, we provided some lead-up time,

because many of our seasonal industries need time to prepare for the

implementation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

What the minister said does

not really give any enthusiasm to somebody who gets appointed to a body to give

advice to them is all I can say.

Government has reversed its

position on a number of issues, such as Bill 29, Justice funding, and Muskrat

Falls oversight.

I ask the Premier: Will he

reverse government's decision to maintain the minimum wage at a poverty level

income?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER MARSHALL:

Mr. Speaker, sometimes I do not understand the Leader of the Third

Party. She criticizes us for making

cuts, now she is criticizing us for putting the things back.

You cannot have it both ways.

It has to be one or the other, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL:

I am not criticizing, Mr. Speaker, saying if they

are putting things back, then put back all the things that they did, because

they really cut too much.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the

Premier spoke of government being in a position to help distribute wealth.

One-quarter of minimum wage earners are the sole earners for their

household.

I ask the Premier: Would not

raising the minimum wage be the best way you could better distribute wealth,

giving people a chance at a living wage?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Justice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KING:

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the questions being

raised. I think the record of this

government on supporting low-income earners and people who are financially

challenged in this Province speaks for itself.

The member would certainly be well aware, given her history with this

issue, that the wage a person earns is only one piece of how you distribute

wealth in this Province and you look after people.

I refer to my colleague, the

Minister of Advanced Education and Skills, who provides countless funding

support to entice people back to school so they can avail of the thousands of

job opportunities occurring every other day in this Province, Mr. Speaker.

I refer to my colleague, the

Minister of Health and Community Services, we brought in more enhancements to

drug plans and emergency transportation plans to support these people who are

financially challenged. All of that

goes together with the minimum wage to provide support (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

In November 2012, IOC

workers expressed concern the silica dust levels in the Labrador City mine were

eight times the acceptable level. We

now know that dust levels are worse than ever.

I ask the Minister of

Services Newfoundland and Labrador: Will he ensure that IOC is complying with

minimum silica dust levels, as established in the provincial Silica Code of

Practice?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Service NL.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL:

Mr. Speaker, our OSH inspectors do rigorous work

in Labrador. They are up there on a

regular basis. They make sure that

IOC and other mining companies are in compliance with regulation and

legislation.

We are aware of the

situation, the work is getting done, and we are getting results.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last year, this government

privatized Adult Basic Education and certain Eastern Health food services, and

they are still at it this creeping privatization.

Monday, the minister rolled

out his new delivery model for staffed residential placements for children and

youth, neglecting to mention many well-paid public sector jobs will be lost.

I ask the minister: Exactly

how many well-paying public sector jobs in our communities has he cut with this

move?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family

Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It has been almost a year

since the NDP asked a question about Child, Youth and Family Services in this

House that I had an opportunity to get up and answer.

It is my first time as the minister getting up and answering.

It is quite obvious why, Mr. Speaker.

Because the hon. member opposite has no idea what she is talking about,

and that is as clear as I can put it.

Staffed residential

placements are currently carried out by service providers that provide the

service to the department and to the government.

We have gone through a competitive process to ensure that we are getting

the best services we can in Newfoundland and Labrador, best services for

children, best services for youth in those staffed residential placements.

We have new contractors that will provide those services into the future

and they are still private contractors outside, the same as they were before.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, there are forty-four public sector

jobs, for sure, that will be cut by this.

Mr. Speaker, youth with

complex needs require the highest level of care, obviously stability and

continuity of care are of paramount importance.

Many of the experienced staff that government are cutting has been

working for years with these children; they are like family.

I ask the minister: Why does

he think moving the care of these children to private providers with short-term

contracts, lower paying jobs, and higher staff turnover is better for the

children?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family

Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, now she has confirmed it.

She actually has no idea what she is talking about.

Staffed residential services

in Newfoundland and Labrador for many, many years has been provided by outside,

private entities: private not-for-profit organizations and private for-profit

businesses in Newfoundland and Labrador.

That is not going to change.

They are not public sector employees who provide those services.

I have no idea and cannot

understand where the member opposite is getting her information.

She either clearly does not understand what she is talking about, or is

intentionally trying to mislead the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre, time

for a quick question without

preamble.

MS ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, when is the minister going to tell

these children exactly where they are going to live?

Many are devastated and afraid now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of

Child, Youth and Family Services, for a quick response.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member opposite I would

be pleased to provide her with a briefing on what Level IV foster care is about.

It is part of our four-level foster care system in Newfoundland and

Labrador, Mr. Speaker. It is a great

project. When we announced that

Monday, it was a good day for the children in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period has expired.

The hon. the Member for

Burgeo La Poile, the Opposition House Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, during Question Period, upon questioning by the Leader of

the Official Opposition, the Premier clearly referred to and quoted a document

in answering a question. So, I would

ask that the Premier table the document.

PREMIER MARSHALL:

Yes, I will. I would be very

happy (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER:

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select

Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Transportation and

Works.

MR. MCGRATH:

On March 23, the Member for St. John's South

asked that I table the expenses associated with the lease of the

Norcon Galatea , and I would like to

table those today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of

Treasury Board.

MS JOHNSON:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to

section

26(5)(

a) of the Financial Administration Act I am tabling seven

Orders-in-Council relating to funding pre-commitments for the 2014-2015 to

2016-2017 fiscal years.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will very quickly table a

number of documents related to questions posed yesterday related to the Humber

Valley regional planning process and the Northeast Avalon regional planning

process.

A member opposite asked for

a list of current committee members for the Humber Valley regional planning

authority process. I am pleased to

table that.

Related to the Northeast

Avalon Regional Plan, I am pleased to table the original Request for Proposals

that went out that led to the initial consultant work being done.

I am also tabling a list of committee members from the original

committee. I am also tabling a list

of committee members for the committee that I put together in recent months.

I am also tabling the Terms

of Reference that has been agreed upon for the process moving forward, a

summary

of costs to date, and also the report that was never finalized or accepted that

was prepared by the consultant in recent years for the Northeast Avalon Regional

Plan.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for

which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of

Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled,

the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly

sheweth:

WHEREAS in the 2011 Blue

Book, the Progressive Conservative Party committed to fully replacing the

provincial student loans program with a full system of up-front, needs-based

grants; and

WHEREAS the average student

debt in Newfoundland and Labrador remains at approximately $25,000, the highest

average student debt in the country; and

WHEREAS student debt

prohibits many graduates from contributing to the economy through purchasing

homes, automobiles, et cetera; and

WHEREAS student debt is

disproportionately borne by students from low-income backgrounds and students

from rural areas; and

WHEREAS student debt is a

primary cause of out-migration, as many students must move out of the Province

in order to pay off their education related debt;

We, the undersigned,

petition the House of Assembly to urge government to follow through on its 2011

general election commitment to replace the provincial student loan program with

a system of up-front, needs-based grants.

As in duty bound, your

petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy

to stand and support this petition which has been sent to us, a petition asking

this government to keep its promises.

In the Speech from the Throne three weeks ago, this government, through

the Lieutenant Governor, said that they will continue to support and care about

post-secondary students in this Province.

Well, one of the ways to

really show that they mean that, Mr. Speaker, would be if tomorrow in the Budget

we see a provincial student loan program being announced.

If they are going to show support for the students in this Province, then

they have to do it by keeping their promises.

They have said that they

would have a full system of up-front, needs-based grants and they have done

nothing about it. The student loans

continue. We have not had

forgiveness of debt. Even though we

have a moratorium on the tuition fee in terms of raising it, at the same time

students continue to accumulate debt.

On behalf of the students of

this Province, some of whom signed this petition, Mr. Speaker, I am asking this

government to show them concretely that they do care about them, that they do

not want the students of this Province going around carrying thousands of

dollars of debt. Especially at a

time when in this Province it is very hard for young people in their twenties

and even in their thirties to be able to find adequate housing and jobs.

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A petition to the hon. House

of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament

assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS there is a waste

recovery facility being proposed by Eastern Waste Management in the Peak

Pond-Reids Pond area; and

WHEREAS such a site will

drastically impact the pond and general area in a negative way from an

environmental perspective; and

WHEREAS there are many

species of wildlife that will be negatively impacted by such a site, such as

moose, rabbits, loons, ducks, Canada geese; and

WHEREAS such a site will

result in litter and strong odours from the general area; and

WHEREAS there are a

significant number of cabins and permanent homes in the Peak Pond-Reids Pond

area which will be negatively impacted by this site; and

WHEREAS the Eastern Waste

Management has many sites available to them for such a facility, including

former dump sites in the area;

WHEREUPON the undersigned,

your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to intercede in the matter and advise

Eastern Waste Management to withdraw this proposal and find a more suitable

location for this waste recovery facility.

As in duty bound, your

petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, this is the

third time now in the same number of days that I have presented this petition to

the House. I have many more

petitions to present. They are

coming in on a daily basis. I

actually received a couple of e-mails from people impacted by this again this

morning asking me about where to send more petitions.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said

in this House on other occasions, there are many suitable locations where this

facility can go. Nobody is disputing

the fact that we need such a site; it is the location that is being disputed

here. I am calling upon the Minister

of Environment and the Minister of Municipal Affairs to intercede here in this

matter with Eastern Waste and have them find a more suitable location than what

is being proposed here now.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT:

A petition to the hon. House of Assembly of the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of

the undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS there is no

cellphone service in the Town of Trout River, which is an enclave community in

Gros Morne National Park; and

WHEREAS visitors to Gros

Morne National Park, more than 100,000 annually, expect to communicate by

cellphone when they visit the park; and

WHEREAS cellphone service

has become a very important aspect of everyday living for residents; and

WHEREAS cellphone service is

an essential safety tool for visitors and residents; and

WHEREAS cellphone service is

essential for business development;

WHEREUPON the undersigned,

your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to partner

with the private sector to extend cellphone coverage throughout Gros Morne

National Park and the enclave community of Trout River.

As in duty bound, your

petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, this petition

is signed by quite a number of people from Trout River and also some people from

St. John's. By their names, they may

well be Trout River residents attending university or visiting St. John's.

Mr. Speaker, cellphone

coverage is seen more or less in many areas now as a necessity.

It is not so very long ago when telephones were seen as a new invention,

then seen as a convenience, a newfangled contraption, party lines, and then

people had their own individual telephones.

Ultimately, they had large cellphones that went in cars.

Nowadays, cellphones are pretty much everywhere.

Unfortunately, you cannot

use them everywhere. The cost is

still the same whether you can use the cellphone or not if you are actually

paying for the service. The

expectation by people who live in Trout River, who visit Trout River, and who

travel through Trout River Gulch, is that we should be able to use a cellphone.

It is an absolute surprise and a shock to an awful lot of people who come

to a modern Province, one of the leading national parks in Canada, and one of

the icons of tourist advertising in this Province.

Our Province spends millions

and millions of dollars on advertising, spending that in my submission is well

spent. However, you can spend on the

advertising, but if you cannot deliver the product, if you cannot deliver proper

access and proper utilization of the product, then really you have wasted a lot

of the advertising dollars that have gone to entice people to come here.

Mr. Speaker, the people of

Trout River keep on sending their petitions and I keep on petitioning the House

of Assembly to ask the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to partner with

the private sector and provide cellphone coverage in the Town of Trout River.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Day

MR. SPEAKER:

This being Private Members' Day, I now call upon

the Member for Humber West to introduce the motion that stands on the Order

Paper in his name.

MR. GRANTER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by my

colleague from the District of Lake Melville, the following private member's

resolution:

WHEREAS senior officials of

our government have been involved in oversight of the Muskrat Falls Project at

every stage; and

WHEREAS our government has

just announced further mechanisms to provide oversight of the Muskrat Falls

Project; and

WHEREAS the Government of

Canada provides oversight of the project through its role as guarantor of the $5

billion in project financing; and

WHEREAS our government has

subjected this project to a greater level of scrutiny than has been brought to

bear on any other project in our country; and

WHEREAS the board of

directors provides oversight of Nalcor, and Nalcor is also required to account

through its internal audit department, its regular reports to the government,

its regular audited financial statements, and its public annual general

meetings; and

WHEREAS these oversight

mechanisms reflect our government's commitment to ensure the public is provided

with such information on the Muskrat Falls Project as possible, without

jeopardizing commercial interests;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED

that this hon. House supports the government's actions to provide greater

oversight of the Muskrat Falls Project.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to be

able to stand in the House this afternoon today and bring forth this private

member's resolution supporting greater oversight on, I would say, the greatest

and largest and one of the most important infrastructure developments in the

history of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, the Muskrat

Falls Project belongs to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

It is being developed, first and foremost, for the benefits of

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and to meet our Province's growing energy

needs. That is the underlying

principle that we must all remember.

Every Newfoundlander and Labradorian that I speak to today must remember that

underlying principle. That is

something from the very beginning that this government has fostered and

promoted, Mr. Speaker.

As everyone knows, our

government announced just a couple of days ago earlier this week the oversight

process for the construction phase of the project which will focus on cost,

scheduling, and risk management.

What this process does, Mr. Speaker, is it further strengthens our government's

commitment of ongoing oversight efforts.

Government oversight right across this great country of ours on programs

of similar investment, similar scale and similar complexity, typically include

the establishment of an independent accountability and oversight committee, and

that is what we did earlier this week.

I say to my hon. colleagues

in the House, and indeed, to all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, there are

many megaprojects across Canada, and indeed around the world, that have had

government oversight in order to review cost, in order to review scheduling and

risk management. We all need to

understand that we are not the first government in Canada, nor the first

government around the world, Mr. Speaker, to do just that.

There are many examples, and

I just ask the members of the House and the public to bear with me just for

minute or two to highlight a number of projects and examples across Canada:

Infrastructure Canada program, which includes $70 billion of government funding

for provincial, territorial, and municipal infrastructure; the Government of

Canada's $36 billion National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy is another

example; the Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail Transit program, which includes $7.2

billion in provincial funding from Ontario; New Brunswick's $2.4 billion

refurbishment of the Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station; Infrastructure

Ontario's $1 billion expansion of Highway 407 and its $500 million Pan Am

athletes' village program are all examples.

As you see, Mr. Speaker,

from these examples, it is typical for significant stakeholders, actually

prudent and important for stakeholders such as the Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador in Muskrat Falls, and in this case, to be an active stakeholder

participating in the oversight of such an important project.

There exists, I say to the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador, the people of my district, and all the

Members of the House of Assembly here, established and documented protocol and

processes that are already out there for the collection, analysis and

communication of information. Such

processes, I would say, typically would focus on quality of planning and quality

of execution. In actual fact, there

are whole bodies of research that exist out there, university courses I am

sure when people studied business and engineering at the university level, they

have come across quality of planning and quality of execution principles, Mr.

Speaker. I would say quality of

execution largely depends on the quality of planning.

I want to take a few moments

just to talk about some of these aspects, and I know some of them are academic.

The quality of project planning include a number of aspects and we can

do some research on that; it is all out there for people in the general public

to know. One of the aspects, Mr.

Speaker, is the quality, integrity, and accuracy of the program business case.

That would include, for example, the demand, capacity, pricing, risk, and

cost of the particular program.

Mr. Speaker, another aspect

deals with aligning program benefits with long-term strategic vision.

For example, employment opportunities is a long-term vision, tax base,

infrastructure development and just to use an example: Newfoundland and

Labrador coming out of the Energy Plan of 2007 outlines those kinds of things in

relation to Muskrat Falls and the Energy Plan for the Province.

Another aspect would be the

quality, integrity, and accuracy of the cost and scheduling estimates.

Examples would include: Are the plans realistic?

Are they sufficiently detailed?

Another aspect of the quality of a project planning program would be the

quality of the people, the quality of the process and technology framework, Mr.

Speaker, to effectively plan and execute, for example, a stage gaining approach.

We had Decision Gate 1, Decision Gate 2, and Decision Gate 3.

Another aspect with regard

to dealing with large-scale projects in Canada and around the world, Mr.

Speaker, has to deal with the quality of project execution.

Just as I outlined for project planning, I want to talk about a number of

aspects for project execution.

One aspect deals with

compliance with policies, compliance with procedures, and compliance with

regulatory requirements; for example, the projects dealing with procurement in

the Province, health and safety, environment, local bylaws, and getting permits.

Another aspect would deal with monitoring and controlling of the scope,

the cost, the schedule, and the quality of the particular project, plan versus

actual forecast, contingency management, and course correction if corrections

need to be made.

Another aspect would be

expenditure and cost appliance, with authorization of expenditure being a top

priority. Aspect number four under

quality of project execution, Mr. Speaker, would be dealing with monitoring of

the project financing, and monitoring of the drawdowns of that particular

financing. Aspect number five deals

with adequacy of the assurance program.

That is very, very important.

Independent, scope of assurance activities and tracking of management actions

are very critical in big-scale projects like Muskrat Falls.

Another aspect, number six,

effective risk management, for example, risk identification from the very

beginning, assessment of that risk, prioritization, mitigation, and monitoring

of residual risk, Mr. Speaker.

Another aspect with regard to that particular program would be adequate

transparency and visibility in reporting such as level of details that are

involved in the project, accuracy of information that is involved in the

project, and delivering that effective communication to the stakeholders such as

the project team, Mr. Speaker, the owner of the project, financiers of the

project, government agencies, community groups, taxpayers, and the list goes on

and on.

Mr. Speaker, oversight on

large-scale resource projects such as our Province's Muskrat Falls Project

usually includes independent verification and assurance over specific areas of

the project as the project unfolds.

Depending on the stakeholder needs and the stakeholder would be the Government

of Newfoundland and Labrador typically we deal with project management,

compliance, and financial monitoring mechanisms.

Mr. Speaker, let me take

just a few moments to briefly talk about the oversight models that exist out

there. Some of the oversight models:

one, various models exist of governance and oversight in the private sector,

where the project team, the operations teams, internal audit, and board of

directors play different roles. I

want to take a few moments to provide my hon. colleagues in the House, and

indeed the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, to look at mandates of

governance and oversight on large-scale projects what is generally accepted,

Mr. Speaker, out there in the world of business and out there in the world of

construction.

Usually, Mr. Speaker, there

is an executive steering committee when we look at these large-scale projects

and even small-scale projects. That

executive steering committee has the responsibility in areas of setting and

approving strategic direction of scope, execution strategies, direction of

scope, contracting strategy, monitoring planned versus actual performance, Mr.

Speaker.

Another aspect would be a

technical steering committee, consisting of engineering and operations personnel

responsible for providing technical input into the project's design and

technical review of design, designing the quality assurance, quality control

program, and approving design changes, Mr. Speaker.

Another aspect would be a

project leadership team, which is typically responsible for a daily oversight,

tactical leadership, dispute resolution, and active risk mitigation.

Another committee on these large-scale projects, or even small-scale

projects, as I said, would be an internal audit group, or an in-house internal

audit group. They would be

responsible for auditing the supply chain, finance, human resources, and

information technology processes.

Also, there would be an

independent third-party assurance group responsible for providing a program

assurance function, which typically includes reviews and audits, including

program or protected controls review, contract performance, program baseline

review, project performance review, contract closeout reviews, and performance

management functional reviews, such as scheduled management, cost management,

resource management, and risk management.

As a shareholder in the

Muskrat Falls Project, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has

exercised, Mr. Speaker, I would say to the people of this House and to the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador, oversight throughout all of the stages of

the project to date. From initial

planning, to early engineering, to our agreements with Emera, and most

importantly, to sanction and financing.

Many departments in this government have been involved in oversight,

including the Departments of Natural Resources, Justice, Finance, and

Environment and Conservation.

There has been more

information made public about this project than any in the Province's history,

Mr. Speaker, providing the opportunity for a good many people in the Province to

become aware of what this project is all about.

Including members of the public, government and independent experts,

including the Public Utilities Board, reports from MHI, Navigant Consulting,

Wood Mackenzie, Ziff Energy, Dr. Wade Locke, and the Newfoundland and Labrador

Consumer Advocate. So there have

been a number from the beginning of this project, right up to and including the

current date, Mr. Speaker.

As an example, in October,

2013, the Province released the projects Decision Gate 3 numbers, cost estimate

and the findings of a report conducted by MHI, Mr. Speaker.

That report confirmed the engineering.

It confirmed the cost and project planning completed by Nalcor and

affirmed Muskrat Falls as the least-cost option for electricity generation for

the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

MHI's report, Mr. Speaker,

included the most up-to-date information on load forecast and cost estimates.

Including capital cost of the project, operating cost, financing cost,

fuel and interest up to date, Mr. Speaker, out of that report from MHI.

After project sanctioning in

December 2012, the Departments of Natural Resources and Finance implemented a

number of project oversight functions to ensure responsible development in the

best interest of the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

For example, we require that

Nalcor provide us with monthly benefit repots on the Muskrat Falls Project and

make these reports publicly available on its Web site.

These reports include a wealth of information on construction and

procurement activities, construction costs, safety and environment activities,

and details on stakeholder and community consultations and engagement

activities, Mr. Speaker.

Another example and I know

my first bit of time is running out is we require Nalcor to provide project

financing information to us on a regular basis.

Senior staff with the Department of Natural Resources and Finance have

met regularly with Nalcor's CEO and their staff.

As well, the provincial Cabinet have had regular meetings and ongoing

reports from the CEO of Nalcor.

Mr. Speaker, in the last

thirty seconds, I just want to say to all of us and to the people of the

Province, to reaffirm again that the Muskrat Falls Project belongs to the people

of Newfoundland and Labrador. It is

their project. It is their project

for today and for generations and generations to come, Mr. Speaker.

Our government's

announcement on the oversight process for the construction phase of this

project, Mr. Speaker, which will focus on cost, scheduling, and risk management,

further strengthens our government's ongoing oversight of this particular

project for the entire population of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I look forward to my colleagues and members of the Opposition and the

Third Party speaking to this resolution today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Verge):

The hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au

Clair.

MS DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very pleased to have

the opportunity to stand today and to speak for a few minutes on this resolution

that is happening in my backyard, from my district, that we have been following

closely and that we have lots of concerns about.

It is a little bit too

serious to be humoured over, but I could not help but smiling as I was

listening. Over $5 billion committed

already, I think it is a little bit late to realize that oversight is needed, to

say the least $5 billion in.

Proper management, Mr. Speaker, includes the provision of oversight from the

start, even on the smallest of projects, let alone a multi-billion dollar

initiative of taxpayers' money. We

are halfway through the construction season and it is a little bit of window

dressing.

Mr. Speaker, what is needed

here is accountability. There are

two options we can look at: one is to call in the Auditor General to look at the

books, as pursuant to

section 16 of the Auditor General Act; and the other one

is to allow the PUB an ongoing oversight rule, as is happening in Nova Scotia.

Yet, we know government has repeatedly refused both of those options,

instead focusing on an internal bureaucratic review which reports to Cabinet

to Cabinet not to people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I feel it is a little bit like asking the fox to watch the henhouse, and

now we are supposed to find some comfort in that.

The only two groups that

came back with a report, Mr. Speaker, two independent public reviews, both

failed to endorse it. I want to look

at, for a minute, what those two reviews came back with.

First of all, we had the Joint Review Panel.

I will just share a paragraph from the Joint Review Panel.

the Panel concluded that Nalcor had not demonstrated the justification

of the Project as a whole in energy and economic terms, and that there are

outstanding questions related to both Muskrat Falls and Gull Island regarding

their ability to deliver the projected long-term financial benefits to the

Province, even if other sanctioning requirements were met.

Just imagine, Mr. Speaker.

I know members opposite have been happy to stand many times and say what

a robust project this is and the bonds have been filling and it is all

wonderful; but, Mr. Speaker, the only thing robust about this was Bill 61.

Legislation guaranteed it to be a robust project.

Because regardless of the project cost, of the overruns, of the

mismanagement, the fact is legislation guarantees that the ratepayers will pay

for 100 per cent of this project.

Mr. Speaker, it is like giving Nalcor a blank cheque, so why wouldn't the bonds

be good on the market?

The information back to the

PUB was the second report and they denied it.

This was what the PUB concluded: The board does not believe that it is

possible to make a least-cost determination on the interconnected option based

on a feasibility level of information generally from November 2010 which was

intended to ground the decision to move to the next phase of the generation

planning process, especially given that so much additional work has already been

done to better define the project and costs and further eliminate uncertainties.

The PUB concluded the

information provided by Nalcor in the review is not detailed, complete or

current enough to allow the board to determine whether the interconnected option

represents the least-cost option for the supply of power to island

interconnected customers over the period of 2011 to 2067 as compared to the

isolated island option. Here we see

the only two independent public reviews of the project and both fail to endorse

it, Mr. Speaker.

I want to talk about the PUB

for a minute, Mr. Speaker.

Government gave the PUB very limited scope and time for their review of the

project, unlike the luxury that Nova Scotia had.

The Public Utilities Board in our Province were denied the right to a

thorough review of the Muskrat Falls Project after this Premier and government

imposed unreasonable conditions on what was nothing more than a pseudo review of

the biggest multi-billion dollar investment in our history.

The Chair of the PUB himself

indicated there was no way a proper view could be completed under such stringent

restriction. In fact, the PUB could

not deliver a proper ruling on the project because they were under such a tight

timeline and they could not gain access to the same resources as Nalcor and

government.

Mr. Speaker, the UARB in

Nova Scotia was given an opportunity that our own PUB was not a luxury denied

the PUB in our own Province by this government.

Mr. Speaker, two years in with $5 billion committed, the government now

decides we need oversight; that, perhaps, given that it is the biggest project

in our Province's history, it might be important to have oversight.

Mr. Speaker, just February,

just last month, the Minister of Natural Resources stated that he did not need

to see a report from the independent engineer on Muskrat Falls.

The independent engineer is part of the federal loan guarantee, and it

was the only independent oversight on the Muskrat Falls Project.

The report was completed in November as part of the federal loan

guarantee, but government did not ask for a copy until February, after many

media requests.

In the wake of this

controversy, government announced they would set up a bureaucratic committee to

perform oversight and report to Cabinet; but, again, it is an internal

bureaucratic review which reports to Cabinet, and not directly to the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador. The board

of directors, Mr. Speaker, needs to include directors who have technical

expertise or experience in at least one of Nalcor's business lines.

We have heard the members

opposite talk about the complexity of this mega industrial project, yet you look

at the board of directors and I am just wondering what the board of directors

can do more than token seats and rubberstamping, gambling with the future of

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians with something that we are talking about of

this magnitude.

I want to go back to what

the minister said in the paper and it was

The Telegram when he said he did not

need to see a report from an independent watchdog.

The provincial government did not bother to ask just last month to see a

key report from the only body assigned to do ongoing independent oversight of

the Muskrat Falls Project.

Mr. Speaker, he felt they

did not need to see a report from the federal loan guarantee, but he did

acknowledge that the independent engineer is the only body doing any independent

oversight of the Muskrat Falls Project.

Beyond that, we don't have anyone in place and I am quoting the

minister to provide oversight over the construction.

There is no one he went on to add within the Department of Natural

Resources who is studying Nalcor's engineering and design work in detail.

Yet, Mr. Speaker, we are

supposed to find some comfort to the fact that there is a board of directors set

up that is overseeing this as well.

Well, we are certainly not taking any comfort from that.

Mr. Speaker, I want to look

the project through its role as a guarantor of the $5 billion in project

again, we go back to the only independent engineer that was going to provide

oversight, but the minister confirmed that they did not need to see the report

and now we see this big 180 change, and I reference

The Telegram article.

I want to look at clause 4,

Mr. Speaker, our Government has subjected this project to a greater level of

scrutiny than has been brought to bear on any other project in our history.

Mr. Speaker, I think all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who have been

following the Muskrat Falls Project would agree that $8 billion the most

expensive undertaking our Province has ever had certainly deserves a lot of

scrutiny.

Mr. Speaker, it is seriously

concerning that the only two independent public reviews that were done, both of

them failed to endorse it. Then we

have government not even asking to see reports, and we are talking about such an

astronomical amount of money.

Mr. Speaker, I took a look

down through the board of directors and their bios, everything is posted and

attached, and I did not see where I could take any comfort that there were

people sitting at that table who would be able to challenge people on the

technical expertise. The Board of

Directors of Nalcor needs to include directors who have the technical expertise,

as I said earlier in one of the business lines, because the current board is

unable to do this.

I would like today to

propose two amendments to the motion.

Because, Mr. Speaker, it is really concerning.

I have to say that, repeatedly, we have heard that this government has no

respect for the PUB, their own appointed body.

In fact, it was maybe about a year ago that the minister said he had no

confidence in the PUB to do their work.

In fact, the minister even

discussed dismantling the PUB because of its inability to make a decision on the

Muskrat Falls Project; but it is evident that rather than grant the PUB an

opportunity for a full review of the multi-million dollar cost to the people,

this government was prepared to stifle one of its own bodies.

Now we are on to this new thing; we are all about openness and

transparency, Mr. Speaker.

The amendment that I will be

moving, and it will be seconded by the Member for the Bay of Islands, the

resolution is amended at the last

WHEREAS.

It is amended at the last

WHEREAS clause by adding the word and at

the end and by adding immediately after that clause the following:

WHEREAS the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador deserve to have complete openness and

transparency regarding oversight of the Muskrat Falls Project.

Mr. Speaker, we are happy to

see this government come out now, although we have $500 billion committed and we

are half way through the construction phase, we are happy to see that they are

going to provide some oversight. We

are not sure how effective that is going to be, given where we are right now,

but we want to take it one step further and we want to have the complete

openness and transparency that the people of this Province deserve.

The resolution is further

amended by deleting the period at the end of the last clause and substituting a

semicolon and the word and, and by adding immediately after that clause the

following: THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this hon. House also urge the

government to engage the Auditor General, pursuant to

section 16 of the Auditor

General Act, to undertake a special oversight review of the Muskrat Falls

Project.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The House will take a brief

recess to consider the amendment put forward by the Member for Cartwright

L'Anse au Clair, and make a determination whether it is in order or not.

Recess

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I have considered the

amendment as put forward by the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair and have

determined that the amendment is not in order.

The hon. the Member for Lake

Melville.

MR. RUSSELL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is an honour and a

privilege to stand up here in the House again today and speak a little bit to

this resolution concerning oversight for Muskrat Falls.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk a little bit about the overall sanction

of the project and the financial close associated with the project if you will.

On December 10, 2013, we

announced the completion of the federal loan guarantee, Mr. Speaker, and

financing in total for the Muskrat Falls Project.

Just let me say this, what a great day for Newfoundland and Labrador, for

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians everywhere to be able to sit there and be able

to contemplate our future in terms of how we are going to become an energy super

warehouse if you will, and just to talk about our energy future in general.

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague

for Humber West has already said here in our hon. House today, this project is

built first and foremost to meet the long-term needs of Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians. The homes and

businesses we have right here in our Province, it is built to service that.

Then we look out at the extension of that in industry, into Labrador

specifically when it comes to my District of Lake Melville.

We are excited about the prospects of more mines, more employment, the

generation of more money into our economy and the success of our people, our

youth if you will, in getting those good, high-paying jobs I might add.

Not only will we be looking

to meet our own growing energy demand, Mr. Speaker, but we are going to have an

asset here in terms of Muskrat Falls for 100 years.

Just think about that, 100 years of water flowing down the river to

benefit not only this generation and the next but the generation after that as

well. When you look at clean, green

energy and you put 100 years as the life of the project on that, it is

absolutely fantastic. Not to mention

the fact that we are only looking forty years out in terms of our financing of

it as well.

Mr. Speaker, the loan

guarantee was a significant achievement for the project and it results in and

we have said it time and time again in this House about a billion dollars in

savings to the ratepayers. That is

where they are going to achieve that savings.

In terms of the hydro bills, they are going to save a billion dollars

over the life of this project.

What you end up seeing, Mr.

Speaker, is that will be now a billion dollars that did not have to go into

people paying those utilities. That

is a billion dollars that can be used as direct income if you will, disposable

income, Mr. Speaker, that people can put back into our communities, back into

the businesses, and back into the amenities that they want and need as families.

The level of external due

and all the satisfaction they required prior to issuing that loan guarantee and

the $5 billion. So simply put, they

were satisfied. They are satisfied

by all the companies that were engaged, all those independent people who

basically said we put our stamp on the fact that this is the best option for our

Province.

This effort by Canada was

supported by experienced external legal advisors, independent financial

advisors, an independent engineer, an independent insurance consultant, and they

are all engaged directly. It is

In terms of that independent

federal loan guarantee agreement that happened in November of 2012, MWH Canada

Inc. was engaged as that independent engineer that IE as we will refer to him

guarantor to assist Canada's due diligence in the Muskrat Falls Project.

Following the required

technical review, MWH issued an IE report to Canada in November of 2012 to

facilitate satisfaction of the related condition precedent of the federal loan

guarantee agreement. The government

and Nalcor are currently reviewing this report, in consultation with both the

will release further details at a later date.

Mr. Speaker, in August,

2012, MWH was established as the independent engineer, the IE for the Lower

Churchill Project. In terms of

looking at the generation, the transmission assets, the Labrador Island

transmission link, (inaudible) in place during the construction phase and well

into the operation of the asset as well.

So what we achieved there is consistency.

You have the same body looking at it during the entire construction

phase, making sure the i's are dotted, the t's are crossed, and going right into

the actual operation when we flick that power switch, Mr. Speaker.

Phase one, Mr. Speaker, of

the IE agreement was for the pre-financial close phase of the project.

This enabled MWH to get on-site to visit the actual location of where the

dam is going to be and where the generation assets are going to be placed, to

become familiar with the projects because we have several little projects going

on with the engineer, and to identify required documentation and commence that

initial report.

The phase one scope of work

required MWH to review the project design, the projected performance,

construction plan and schedule, capital budget, commercial operation maintenance

services, project agreements, permits, licenses, the basis of the project,

perform a financial model, and finally, prepare the IE's report to support

financial close and start making it a reality.

The work provided

the loan agreement. To get that $5

billion loan agreement, all of this stuff had to take place prior, and that is

where they are. Basically, we have

the biggest project in our Province's history and we keep hearing from the other

side, time and time again, nobody is looking at this.

not going to guarantee $5 billion to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador

unless they have their i's dotted and t's crossed.

It is as simple as that.

Moving on here, I want to

talk about phase two of the IE agreement, and that commenced with financial

close in December 2013. The phase

two scope of work requires that MWH attend project review meetings, monitor the

engineering, the procurement relative to the milestone schedules in the project,

conduct regular site visits, review quality control documents to assess

compliance with milestone schedules as well, review change orders to

construction contracts, prepare periodic and final reports and other

documentation, and verify project completion.

The IE also provides confirmation of monthly funding requests and

construction reports, Mr. Speaker.

So we start to get into the

nuts and bolts of exactly how this is being done and handled as the project is

commencing because we are only getting started in terms of the project.

As the project moves forward, what you see is that for every allotment of

money that it takes to move forward from one phase to the next, Mr. Speaker,

many, many rounds of reporting analysis has to be done until the Government of

Canada is satisfied and, of course, until eventually the banks will be satisfied

that they release the money to engage in the next phase of construction.

In accordance with the

project finance agreements executed in November 2012 and here we go.

In order to draw upon the required funds for the project, Nalcor, through

the related subsidiaries, are required to submit detailed information to the

collateral agent, in this case TD Bank, acting on behalf of Canada and MWHC, the

independent engineer.

This includes a requirement

to submit quarterly and annual financial statements, construction reports,

funding requests, and budget information, Mr. Speaker. The independent engineer,

MWH, will review the submitted information and if it is acceptable, then they

issue a certificate to the collateral agent, being Toronto Dominion Bank,

indicating that the project is being conducted and here we go, Mr. Speaker

in accordance with good utility practice in Canada.

Basically, they are saying

we need more money to keep moving and doing different things in the project.

If everything is up to par, everything is up to snuff, then the bank can

release that money and they move to the next phase and to the next phase.

So, it is being chunked out, if you will, Mr. Speaker.

It is not an open free-for-all, as the members across the way might

suggest.

In terms of MWH, if anybody

out there has a question, whether you are there in TV land or across the way,

about who MWH is and whether or not they are qualified to be that independent

engineer, I will say absolutely, yes, but I will give you a bit of a background

about them anyway.

Mr. Speaker, they are

located in Vancouver, BC. They are

part of MWH Global and they are headquartered in Broomfield, Colorado, down in

the States. They have over 8,000

employees in over 180 offices in thirty-five countries.

They have services within their global corporate umbrella dealing with

program management, management consulting, engineering design, environmental

health and safety management, sustainability and construction management, Mr.

Speaker.

With respect to engineering

and that is the biggest component of the project such as Muskrat Falls, Mr.

Speaker. With respect to engineering

and design specifically, MWH Global is involved in a lot of different sectors

they are very diversified including hydro power, dams, mining, oil and gas,

power delivery, transportation, water resources, water treatment, waste water

treatment, clean energy and sustainability, so more than qualified to be the IE

Mr. Speaker, I would just

like to take a few minutes here, while I have a couple of minutes left, to talk

The collateral agent, the financial institution that holds the collateral

on behalf of the Government Canada, as I have already mentioned, is the Toronto

Dominion Bank, the TD Bank as we refer to them.

TD was selected to act in this capacity, Mr. Speaker, as a result of a

very, very rigorous and competitive selection process, bid process, if you will.

Their role is to oversee the lending security arrangement, the various

project accounts, and the compliance and covenants associated with the bit of

business we are talking about here.

Mr. Speaker, what you see is

that any bank cannot just do this.

This was a very rigorous process as I just indicated.

People were fighting, not only for the business associated with the

Newfoundland and Labrador as well.

In seeing that, the selection process brought forth the one that could get the

job done. If you look at that loan

guarantee for us as a Province in terms of the rate we got, it speaks to this

government's willingness to be hard-nosed in our negotiations, to get what we

can for this Province resulting in that $1 billion in savings for us.

Mr. Speaker, in accordance

with the project finance agreements in order to draw upon the required funds for

the project, Nalcor, through the project entity borrowers, is required to submit

detailed information to the collateral agent and to MWH Canada.

Every step of the way the process is monitored.

This includes the requirement like I said before to submit those monthly,

quarterly, annual financial statements, the construction reports, and those

individual funding requests included with the budget information so that the

collateral agent may request that and release the money for the next part of

work that has to be done.

As part of phase two

obligations MWH will review the monthly loan request and supporting

documentation, compare the actual budget and

schedule against the contract

budget and schedule, request changes or supplemental information as required and

approve drawdown requests, Mr. Speaker, and prepare monthly independent draw

certifications which include a recommendation regarding the payment due.

If the submitted information

is deemed acceptable, MWH will issue an approval certificate to the collateral

agent and the collateral agent will release the funds to the borrowing entities,

Mr. Speaker. What we see here is

oversight throughout the whole process.

We see variances looked at.

What we see are actual numbers coming across looking towards budgeting numbers,

seeing what is being done with the project, and making recommendations for

change, additional information at any point during the whole process.

I would just like to note,

too, that in addition to internal staff at Natural Resources Canada, Finance and

Mr. Speaker, and financial advisors, insurance advisors to assist with

facilitating and completing its due diligence in order to conclude conditions

precedent of the loan guarantee. It

is not just us in terms of the oversight here.

People have to understand that when people from across the way say

certain things about what is happening this is much, much bigger than just the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador involved here.

Mr. Speaker, all of the

arrangements to secure the loan guarantee, the long-term debt financing, equity

financing is all successfully completed.

Achieving this milestone gives us certainty with respect to how the

project is going to commence and what the cost of the borrowing is going to be

over the next forty years.

When I gave my

preamble to

the guts of my statement here, Mr. Speaker, I talked about the life of the asset

being 100 years, financing being there for forty.

We can imagine now what is going to come back to the Province when the

financing terms are done for this.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker,

with my last little bit of time here I will just say that the project is going

to provide a tremendous economic and employment benefits package, if you will,

to our Province and indeed this side of Canada.

Muskrat Falls is creating those significant job opportunities and

Newfoundland and Labradorians, we are getting that work here today, Mr. Speaker.

We hear time and time again

from the people across the way and I am specifically going to reference the

Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair here.

We hear her get up in the House day after day and she talks about how we

demand those benefits we demand those benefits.

I tell you what, you can demand those benefits for the people of

Cartwright L'Anse au Clair and that is great.

I do the same for the people in Lake Melville, Mr. Speaker, but the

difference is I publicly support this project.

I think it is the right way for our Province.

Why don't you guys over

there get off the fence, get up and tell us now where you stand in relation to

this project and whether or not your party is here in support of Muskrat Falls

energy for this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bay

of Islands.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I will stand

and have a few words. I was not

going to speak on this, but after being challenged by the member to stand up and

say where you stand on this project is the member serious?

When the member is asking me to vote for a motion put forth by their

private member to oversee it, after $5 billon being committed, and he is asking

me: Where do I stand?

Mr. Speaker, go build a

house and say: Oh, tell me how much it costs.

Tell me if the engineering is good.

Oh, we need someone to oversee your house now that it is built.

Is the member serious, where do I stand?

I thought it was April

Fool's Day when he asked me where I stood on this project, after having $5

billion already committed to this project.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, do not go challenging people, especially when you

look at the facts of this.

I will get back to my

original statement, Mr. Speaker. I

can tell you right now, if you want to know where I stand, I do not support

putting in an oversight committee after $5 billion has already been committed.

I do not support it. Now your

next question, stand up and ask me; you will get an answer pretty quick.

Mr. Speaker, I will just go

back and talk about senior officials who oversee the project.

This is what this is about, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I know the

members opposite do not want to listen, I gave them all courtesy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. JOYCE:

I gave them all courtesy, Mr. Speaker.

When the Member for Humber West I did not say a word.

I actually expect the same courtesy from the members opposite.

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible)

MR. JOYCE:

No, the Member for Humber East is not, I am just

saying your colleagues.

AN HON. MEMBER:

Humber West.

MR. JOYCE:

Humber West, sorry.

Mr. Speaker, here we are

setting up an oversight committee of bureaucrats, the question has to be at no

time am I saying that the bureaucrats are not qualified; they do not do a good

job. I am not saying that.

My question is where do they report to?

It is to Cabinet, Mr. Speaker.

I will get into this a bit later.

When you have a bunch of

bureaucrats who are going to go do a report, report it to the minister, who is

going to report it to Cabinet. Now,

Mr. Speaker, and I said it before, I am not a genius by any means but the last

report the minister got he never even read.

The minister admitted he did not even read the report.

He never even asked for a copy of the report.

I have to vote for something that is going to the minister that he

publicly stated, I did not even ask for the report.

Now I have to vote and say yes, let's do that.

Mr. Speaker, if you want to

know where I stand, Member for Lake Melville, keep asking.

That is one of the questions that I have on this, Mr. Speaker.

Now we are looking for

greater oversight. Greater

oversight, Mr. Speaker. I will get

in later how this all came about. Do

you want me to tell you how it all came about?

I will just tell you how all this came about, Mr. Speaker, why all of a

sudden we need greater oversight. It

was embarrassment by the government.

It was an omission by the minister who said: this was not my greatest interview.

Mr. Speaker, on February 25,

here is what the minster said, The Independent engineer is providing the

oversight. Beyond that, we don't

have anyone in place to provide oversight over the construction.

That is what the minister said in his own statement, Mr. Speaker.

When the media got hold of

that and people started asking questions: Well, who is overseeing it?

It is the independent engineer who put a report in that the minister did

not even ask to see a copy of the report.

He said: Uh-oh, we have to change this.

This public opinion is pretty bad on this here because we have no one to

oversee it, by the minister's own admission.

This is where all this came

about. This has nothing about

overseeing the project. This has

nothing about protecting the people in Newfoundland and Labrador.

This is about saving face from the interview that the minister the

people in this Province, all the people in this Province are saying, we are

asking you to oversee the project for us, you are the minister.

This is where all this came from.

This has nothing to do because, Mr. Speaker, any responsible

government, any responsible person, before they would go ahead and build

something they would have an oversight somehow.

If it was your own personal

endeavour of building a house, you would have a budget.

You would have to make sure that if you are going to get a plot plan for

your house, that it is done properly.

You would oversee it. You

would not wait until you spent your money and come back and say: Uh-oh, I better

go oversee this now, and set up a committee to oversee it.

That is what this is all about.

I remember, Mr. Speaker, we

were in here in a filibuster. We

went for days, and they were talking about we were wasting time.

We were wasting all kinds of time in this House.

There is no need. This is the

greatest project for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

It received the most scrutiny.

Former Premier Dunderdale

stood in this House on many occasions and said we do not need any more.

This is the most scrutinized project in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador. The minute she goes out

the door, they are over there now: we need more oversight.

I guess the former Premier was not correct.

I guess the former Premier,

after standing in her place, defending every person opposite, defending them

all, saying we do not need any more oversight, we have great oversight, now all

of a sudden once she goes through the door, let's change Bill 29.

We do not agree with that any more.

Let's get some oversight now for Muskrat Falls.

We do not have enough oversight for Muskrat Falls.

So, Mr. Speaker, this is

where all this is coming from. We

fought for oversight. We fought for

independent we fought to ensure that the taxpayers were protected.

We asked that the taxpayers be protected from the beginning, not $5

billion committed into the project.

Mr. Speaker, here is

something funny, and the Minister of Natural Resources, I have a lot of respect

for him. I think he is a great guy.

I am sorry, but your interview and I agree with you was not your

best, indeed. I have to say, Mr.

Speaker, the information he got I think he is a great guy.

In this resolution, Mr.

Speaker, it says it is going to have oversight by the board.

Now let's pick, say Terry Styles on the board, who is supposed to be the

chair of the board. What expertise

does Terry Styles have to oversee this project?

I will give you an example, Mr. Speaker.

Here is what the Minister of Natural Resources said in the same

interview. Here is what the minister

said.

The Minister of Natural

Resources said it would be a waste of resources to have anybody in the

Department of Natural Resources do a hire with that kind of detail oversight.

The Minister of Natural Resources is stating in his own department that

they do not have the expertise in the department, but they are going to ask

Terry Styles to oversee Muskrat Falls.

Now, Mr. Speaker, like I said, I am not a genius, but am I missing

something?

From my understanding, there

is a young twenty-two-year-old student on the board.

The Minister of Natural Resources admitted that his own department does

not have the expertise, yet we are going to ask Terry Styles and we are going to

ask a young and other people on the board, not just those.

There are others on the board.

They are already overseeing the project, but the minister said: We do not

have the expertise in the Department of Natural Resources to oversee it.

Do you wonder where I stand

on this, I ask the Member for Lake Melville?

Do you want to know where I am standing on this?

Mr. Speaker, I will just go through it again.

We will just take the $5 billion already spent $5 billion already spent

and now we are going to oversee the project.

I have to ask one thing, Mr.

Speaker. In the whole part of it,

when you get this report and you send it to I will bring my voice down, I am

sorry, because the Member for Lake Melville wanted to know where I stood and I

have explained where I stood. The

way Cabinet works, and I will explain to the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador, once the report is done, whichever minister is responsible, it goes to

the minister, then the minister brings it to Cabinet, and I guess Cabinet

discusses it.

Mr. Speaker, here is what

the minister said: We did not need to see a report from an independent watchdog.

The provincial government didn't bother to ask to see a key report from

the only body assigned to do ongoing independent oversight of the Muskrat Falls

project, according to Natural Resources Minister.

Now, Mr. Speaker, how can

you ask us to go ahead and vote for a motion when a report is going to come up

and when the minister himself says we do not need to see it?

We do not need to see it. I

am not going to read it anyway if you did bring it me.

Yet, we have to go and support this private member's motion.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say

this is the kind of thing that happens when you get a government after a

minister makes a few faux pas in the media about the most major project in this

Province spent. There is no doubt

this project has been scrutinized absolutely no doubt but when the minister

himself, who is supposed to be the guard of this project, stands in the media

and says, I did not even read the report, our department does not have the

expertise to oversee a project of this size, we have major problems.

Mr. Speaker, seriously, when

that happens, we have major problems.

If you want to know why we had filibusters in this House to try to

protect the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, you do not have to go any

further than look at the report, what the minister said, in

The Telegram February 25.

If you want to see how serious this project was and why we said, and we

said it from day one, what we need to do the only two independent bodies that

were even going to look at this was the PUB, and they said themselves we did not

have enough information to make a decision because they were waiting Decision

Gate 3 numbers. What did the

government do? They said: You will

not make a decision, see you later, adios.

That is what happened, Mr. Speaker.

That is one of the independent bodies.

Then we had the joint review

panel. Guess what happened to them,

Mr. Speaker? Once again they came in

with a report, they were rejected they were rejected.

The two independent bodies that are going to protect the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador and its shareholders, who are the taxpayers, were

rejected by this government. They

were rejected by this government.

Now, me as a parliamentarian, I am asked to vote for a motion to agree to put in

an oversight committee after $5 billion has been committed, to give the

impression that all of a sudden this project is being overseen after the

minister stated himself: No, that is the only one; I did not even read his

report.

To me, it would be a sham if

I stood up here and voted for this and give all the people the false impression

that all of a sudden that I, and this party here, the Liberal Party, the

Official Opposition, are going to stand up in this House and say that we agree

with all this oversight now all of a sudden because everything is protected.

It is not protected, Mr. Speaker.

Because right now it is almost like letting the horse out of the barn;

now let's close the gate. Okay,

let's say we close the gate we do not know how the horse got out, but it was

already gone, like your $5 billion was gone gone with no proper oversight.

Mr. Speaker, there are two

things we could have done; we could have asked the PUB, like they did in Nova

Scotia, to come in and oversee the project.

We will not do that. Do you

know why? The PUB is going to

scrutinize the project. The people

in Nova Scotia it went to the PUB and the PUB in Nova Scotia went through the

project, they came back to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and said:

Listen, this is not good enough.

What did the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador because we never had our PUB to defend our interest,

what did we do? To get this project

we went on bended knee. What else do

you want here Nova Scotia to make this project go?

Whatever you need, you are going to get because we are too far committed

in this project already. That is

what the job of the PUB in Nova Scotia did for its people.

I say congratulations PUB in Nova Scotia; shame on the government, Mr.

Speaker, for not including the PUB here in Nova Scotia to protect the taxpayers

of this Province, which they are obligated by law to do.

The second we could do and

I was on the Public Accounts for a number of years.

I hear the Premier saying: Oh, the AG can go in at any time.

That is true. If the AG goes

in now, Mr. Speaker, he reports to Cabinet.

I challenge members opposite to stand up now and say yes, under

section

16, the AG can go in and report back to the House of Assembly, not going to the

Cabinet. Report back to the House of

Assembly which reports back to the people of this Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. JOYCE:

I challenge them to do it, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. JOYCE:

The member for Humber do you want to know where

I stand? I think it is a sham to

bring this in now (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

Mr. Speaker, theatre is alive and well in the

House of Assembly today. You have to

love a challenge. I will lay out for

the member opposite and to all the people of the Province, the Auditor General

has an open invitation any time. Any

time the Auditor General wants to come in and do a report on Nalcor, this

government provided that in the legislation, we guaranteed it for the people of

the Province. The AG has an open

invitation any time. That settles

that point.

Mr. Speaker, the member

opposite would want people of the Province to believe that this major

development is about me, the minister.

Just a revelation here, it is not about me the minister, it is not about

politics, this is about the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

This is about a need, Mr. Speaker.

This is about a need that we identified.

This is about a major investment for the people of the Province.

This is about hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue in years to

come. This is about meeting a power

need. Would you argue that we do not

need power? Obviously you would not.

This is about the least-cost

option. It was laid out to the

member opposite. It was laid out for

the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

To all members opposite, where do you stand?

Where do you stand on Muskrat Falls, Mr. Speaker?

Now, Mr. Speaker, I will be

right up front. It is quite obvious

that as you go through a process, the Opposition does not necessarily agree with

your process. Their job is to

criticize and question; I understand that and I accept that.

It keeps us on our toes.

Their job is to discredit us so they can try and become government.

That is how this works, and the people of the Province understand that,

but where do you stand on building Muskrat Falls?

Are you serious?

Are you serious when you stand in this House, Mr. Speaker, and you make a

joke of it? We are not sure which

side the Liberals stand on building Muskrat Falls, not about the issues of

whether how we are doing it but to build it.

I am not sure if the member opposite was in government in 2002, but the

Liberal government almost sunk the Province when they tried to build Muskrat

Falls in 2002.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

When they did a deal to give the resources and

give the benefit of the resources that belongs to the people in Newfoundland and

Labrador, and they did a deal in 2002 to give it to Quebec. The record shows

that it was such a mess. The single

finance committee that they had in place to provide oversight, it was such a

mess that two boards of directors resigned over the fact that this was a wrong

deal for the Province, Mr. Speaker.

That was 2002.

So you have to be careful

when you are throwing rocks because you have been a part of something and you

have always believed that we should build Muskrat Falls.

Now it has changed? Has it

really ch