PDF Version

November 14, 2019

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIX No. 18

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Reid):

Admit strangers.

Order,

please!

Today in

the galleries, I am pleased to welcome Gail Thorne from the STAND for Hannah

foundation, as well as Sarah Pittman and Frankie Ralph.

Also in

the public galleries, I welcome Ms. Murphy's grade eight class from Amalgamated

Academy in Bay Roberts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

MR. SPEAKER:

Today, we will hear

statements by hon. Members for the Districts of Conception Bay South, Mount

Scio, Mount Pearl North, Lake Melville and Stephenville - Port au Port.

The hon.

the Member for Conception Bay South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Wednesday, October 23, I had the pleasure of attending the eighth annual Bright

Business luncheon awards ceremony at the Manuels River Hibernia

Interpretation

Centre.

This

annual event is hosted by the Town of Conception Bay South, and it's a great

opportunity for local entrepreneurs to network and showcase their individual

businesses in our community. Since the inception of this event in 2012, the town

has recognized the achievements of 372 local businesses.

The

Bright Business Achievement Awards help recognize the contributions of local

businesses that have gone above and beyond. This year's award winners are:

Beautiful Business - New Found Inn and Suites; Community Pride & Partnership -

Sisters in Fitness; Dave Murphy Leadership - Eastern Safety Services; Noseworthy

Award - Sandra Walsh for Michael's Jewellery; Established Business - Bill's

Muffler & Brake Shop Ltd.; Main Street Business Improvement Member of the Year -

Regular Power Clarke Bennett Lawyers; New Start Up of the Year - Ninepenny

Brewing.

I would

like to extend my congratulations to the award winners, nominees and sponsors.

Conception Bay South has grown significantly and it's great to see that the

business community has also shown tremendous growth.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Scio.

MS. STOODLEY:

Mr. Speaker, I would like to

recognize last week, November 3 to 9, as National Francophone Immigration Week.

J'aimerais reconnaître que la semaine passée a été la semaine nationale de

l'immigration francophone.

Among

the accomplished schools in the District of Mount Scio, I would like to

recognize l'École des Grants-Vents. Cette école francophone est spéciale parce

que, en plus d'être une école, le bâtiment abrite également tous les organismes

francophones de la province.

semaine passée j'avais l'opportunité de visiter cette établissement, en

particulier l'Association Communautaire Francophone de Saint-Jean.

When I

was learning more about the francophone residents of the province, I discovered

how welcoming and inclusive the community is. To be a member, you only need to

have an interest in speaking French.

Je suis

fière d'avoir ces organismes dans le District de Mount Scio et je tiens à

remercier les dirigeants pour leur direction dans notre communauté,

particulièrement en reconnaissant la semaine nationale de l'immigration

francophone.

I am

proud that Mount Scio is the administrative home to the francophone

organizations in the province, and I would ask my colleagues to join me in

thanking our French speaking leaders for creating an active and inclusive

community for residents no matter where they're from.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

Mr. Speaker, during this

year's inaugural Best in Mount Pearl Awards ceremony, three lifelong best

friends were nominated: Agnes Murphy, Barb Predham and the late Bernice Miller.

The

calibre contribution and commitment to the community of these ladies has been so

great that the selection committee could not pick one and, therefore, awarded

collectively the 2018 Life Time Achievement Award to all three.

Agnes

Murphy was the founding member of the Mount Pearl Figure Skating Club, and the

Frosty Festival in 1982. She has also served on many other volunteer groups over

the years.

Barb

Predham was an active member of the Ladies Auxiliary of the Knights of Columbus

for 40 years, as well as an active member of the Mount Pearl Skating Club

committee. She too has served with various other boards and organizations over

the years.

The late

Bernice Miller served with the Frosty Festival for over 27 years and also served

with the 2000 Newfoundland and Labrador Summer Games, Knights of Columbus

Women's Auxiliary and Scouts Canada. Miller also was awarded Citizen of the Year

in 1992, and served on the Mount Pearl City Council from 1997 to 2003.

I ask

all hon. Members to join with me in congratulating Agnes, Barb and Bernice for

all they have done for our community.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Lake

Melville.

MR. TRIMPER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Without

doubt, the most inspirational group in Lake Melville is that of the Howling

Huskies, a Special Olympics Team that has been active for 20 years. The team is

part of a global movement where every single person is accepted or welcomed,

regardless of ability or disability.

Any team

is backed by inspirational leaders, and the Howling Huskies are no different. No

team can operate or compete without volunteers, family, friends and many

partners who themselves show great community spirit.

For the

last six years, Susan and Kevin Lamond have led this team in athletics, bocce,

figure skating and snowshoeing, depending on the season. The team enjoys great

profile, whether at regional or provincial sporting events, the Law Enforcement

Torch Walk, or anywhere there is a dance.

As the

Lamonds have decided to relocate to the St. John's area and have passed the

baton on to others – on behalf of a grateful community, I wanted to thank them

for their dedication – providing opportunities for athletes to build confidence

and make our community a better, healthier and more joyful place.

The

Special Olympics oath should inspire all of us: Let me win, but if I cannot win,

let me be brave in the attempt.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

MR. WAKEHAM:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Kathleen

Jean of Harmon Sea Side Links in Stephenville, for the second time in four

years, has claimed the triple crown of provincial women's amateur golf

championships.

According to Golf Newfoundland and Labrador, Kathleen scored a 76 for the low

round for the day to capture the women's amateur, mid-amateur and senior titles

with a three-day total of 241. The tournament was held at Glendenning Golf.

Kathleen

moved to Stephenville at the age of eight years old. At 10, a neighbour brought

her to the golf course to try the game. Even though she didn't like the game of

golf at first, she didn't give up, and by the age of 12 she played in her first

provincial junior championship.

Two

years later she made her first provincial team and represented Newfoundland and

Labrador at the nationals. This was the beginning of a very long and impressive

golf career.

Kathleen

has won 17 provincial titles, along with representing Newfoundland and Labrador

over 30 times. She is truly a great ambassador for the sport of golf in our

province and country.

I ask

all hon. Members of the House to join me in congratulating Kathleen Jean of

Stephenville on her remarkable golf career in our province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Service NL.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in

this hon. House to recognize the National Day of Remembrance for Road Crash

Victims.

This

annual event honours the memory of those who have been tragically taken from us

or injured on Canadian roads.

Mr.

Speaker, I doubt there is anyone in our province who has not been touched in

some way by a motor vehicle accident. Individuals and families have had their

lives forever changed because of incidents on our highways.

We are

constantly improving the Highway Traffic

Act to ensure that roadways are safe for motorists, cyclists and

pedestrians. In fact, just last week in this House, we proposed changes to the

act to allow for highway cameras to be used as a means of increasing compliance

with the rules of the road.

We will

remain vigilant in our efforts, Mr. Speaker. Together, with law enforcement

agencies and all stakeholders, we will continue to bring the importance of road

safety to the forefront.

Every

time we consider making changes to strengthen the

Highway Traffic Act , Mr. Speaker, I am reminded of the people I have

met and their stories of pain and loss. I invite all Members of this hon. House

to join me tomorrow as I stand with family and friends in honour of road crash

victims.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

MR. O'DRISCOLL:

I thank the minister for an

advance copy of her statement.

Mr.

Speaker, the National Day of Remembrance for Road Crash Victims is an important

event that honours those individuals who have lost their lives or been seriously

injured on our roads. Road crashes have a profound impact on individuals and

entire families that last forever. Road safety is a shared responsibility, and I

encourage all road users to adopt safe behaviours while sharing our roads.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

MR. BROWN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for an advance copy of her statement.

I echo

the minister's sentiments that all of us in this hon. House and across the

province have been affected in one way or another by a tragic road accident.

Friends, families, co-workers, we all know someone lost to our highways. We must

keep working to make our roads and highways safer for everyone.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

The hon.

the Minister of Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.

MR. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House today to congratulate Genesis – known to many as Newfoundland

and Labrador's innovation hub – on being named a Top Challenger in North America

by University Business Incubators Global at the World Incubation Summit held in

Doha, Qatar last week.

A Top

Challenger is a university-linked incubation program that stands out from its

peers due to its impressive overall impact and performance achievements relative

to its respective regional peers. Only three such organizations are recognized

in each continent in the category.

Located

in the Emera Innovation Exchange at Memorial University, Genesis is certainly

tuned in to the needs of the province's business start-up community. It provides

a supportive, mentor-driven environment where companies can thrive, with

supports for pre-incubation and business model development, through to investor

readiness.

For over

20 years, Genesis has proven to be a leader in building and strengthening the

province's emerging tech sector. They have a growing list of graduates which

include many home-grown companies such as: Verafin, Mysa, Rutter, Genoa,

HeyOrca! and so many more.

Mr.

Speaker, supporting business start-ups helps create new jobs and opportunities

and fosters innovation in our provincial economy. Through our Business

Innovation Agenda and Technology Sector Work Plan, we are partnering with

organizations such as Genesis to provide supports to innovation and

entrepreneurial companies and to help create new businesses and employment

opportunities.

Congratulations once again to Genesis.

Thank

you Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra

Nova.

MR. PARROTT:

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for an advance copy of his

statement.

behalf of the Official Opposition, I join with the minister in congratulating

Genesis on being named the Top Challenger in North America. This is indeed a

tremendous accomplishment. I am also reminded that last week we recognized

Memorial Centre of Entrepreneurship for their amazing successes in the House of

Assembly.

Memorial

University serves not only as a centre of education in this province, but also

helps to channel energy, resources and creativity to develop new business ideas

and industries in the province. Genesis is an impressive example of this.

Mr.

Speaker, I congratulate those who support and avail of the programs offered by

Genesis and I encourage more young innovators in this province to get involved.

Innovation and business creation helps to develop our economy, create jobs and

ensure a bright future for our province.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

MR. BROWN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I like to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. I

join with all hon. Members in congratulating Genesis on a well-earned

international recognition as a leader in innovation.

This

province's growing tech sector is something we should all be proud of. We

support the vital role in fostering the growth and innovation at Genesis.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

The hon.

the Minister of Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This

government requires that all natural resources projects in Newfoundland and

Labrador have benefits agreements which include gender equity and diversity

plans. These agreements maximize job and business opportunities for

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

In our

province, more than 14,000 people are directly employed on projects including

White Rose, Hebron, Hibernia, Terra Nova, IOC, Vale, Canada Fluorspar Inc.,

Tacora and the Lower Churchill Project. More than 90 per cent of those are

residents of Newfoundland and Labrador.

We take

a strategic, project-specific approach to everything we do. We are committed to

continuous improvement and work diligently on behalf of Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians.

Mr.

Speaker, over the last two years, we have had over $18 billion in investments

announced for mining and oil and gas in our province. Through

Advance 2030 and Mining the Future, we

are focused on plans for growth and development of our natural resources

industries. To meet our vision and to maximize our benefits, we must globally

compete, innovate and be environmentally responsible.

We will

do this with the support of our industry partners and community leaders

throughout the province.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for

Conception Bay East - Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I

thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement.

While

the minister speaks today of benefits agreements for all natural resource

projects, the government should go a step further in ensuring that all residents

and our workers benefit from all projects that take place in our province. That

is why we have argued that the government should require community benefits

agreements to be included with contractors' bid packages for every incidence

where the new public facilities are being constructed by using public funds.

Mr.

Speaker, requiring community benefits agreements would assist with the

employment of apprentices, underrepresented groups and the development of the

local labour force. It would provide certainty for the local supply and service

industry and ensure that our communities are the true beneficiaries of the

economic activities created by public funds.

Mr.

Speaker, it's time that we all stand up for the workers of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for Labrador

West.

MR. BROWN:

Mr. Speaker, I thank the

minister for an advance copy of her statement.

This

province has a great abundance of natural resources: mining, forestry, oil and

gas, fishery. We are a very rich province in this regard. It's vital that these

resources benefit Newfoundlanders and Labradorians first. We owe them this.

We must

continue to work with all residents to make benefits agreements standard on all

projects now and into the future.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

Oral

Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Torngat Mountains.

MS. EVANS:

Mr. Speaker, racism has been

the focus of much of the conversation this week. Why wasn't racism raised last

month when the former minister and Member of Lake Melville had to step down as a

result of racially charged comments directed at the Innu Nation and their

request for translation services?

Indigenous people in Labrador, especially speakers of their language, have asked

me: Why is he still allowed to sit in the House of Assembly?

racism is truly an important issue to this government, I ask the Premier to show

leadership and remove him from the Liberal caucus, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well,

first of all, for those that are watching, I've got a lot of blue on today, but

it's really about World Diabetes Day. And like racism, Mr. Speaker, we really

need to see this. It's not tolerated within our society.

Mr.

Speaker, I met with the Innu leadership on many occasions. The Member has

apologized for what's happened. He was removed from Cabinet. And the Innu

leadership then, we put in place a working group that we know will take quite

some time.

So, Mr.

Speaker, I think all of us really do not want to politicize this. I've offered

yesterday that we open up this very Chamber so that leader members could

actually come inside of this Chamber and stand at the bar and talk to all of us

decision-makers about racism and how we could deal with it. Let them have their

say; they deserve that. That's a suggestion that I put out there just yesterday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

MR. CROSBIE:

I, too, have dressed in blue,

Mr. Speaker, in honour of World Diabetes Day. Perhaps even bluer than the

Premier, since I don't have a white shirt on.

On June

12 – to get more serious – this House passed unanimously a resolution calling

upon the Standing Orders Committee to take a hard look on the Standing Orders

around Question Period with a view to reform and to report back in time for

these recommendations to be considered by this House in the fall session. Well,

here we are in the fall session and no such recommendations are forthcoming

because, Mr. Speaker, the Committee has not been summoned to meet by the Chair.

When

will this occur? Can the hon. House Leader provide us with a list of government

Members of the Committee?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Government House

Leader.

MS. COADY:

Thank very much for the

question.

The

Standing Orders Committee did indeed take this very seriously. We know that the

Officers have been doing a tremendous amount of work on this issue. As the

Member opposite does know, I'm a very new House Leader and Chair of this

Committee. I can assure the Member that this Committee will meet in very short

order.

To his

second point, I have already reached out to the Opposition Parties for their

list of names for committees. If that's to which he's referring, that has

already been in the hands of the Opposition and very forthcoming we'll be

presenting that to the House.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. CROSBIE:

In case this has been

misunderstood, our list of Members has not changed. It remains the same.

The

Jenny Wright affair has damaged relations between the minister's Office for the

Status of Women and various Status of Women Councils around the province.

What

plan does the Minister Responsible for the Status Women have for repairing

damaged relations?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Minister Responsible

for the Status of Women.

MS. HALEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I

do thank the hon. Member for his question.

Mr.

Speaker, allow me to say that our government had no interference in the

departure of the former executive director for the Status of Women Council in

St. John's. My deputy minister was a signatory to that letter. She brings with

her some four decades of experience working with women's groups and

organizations in this province. She has been a valuable asset to my department.

In fact,

what I will say, she travelled with me over the summer and just a couple of

weeks ago I believe the number of groups that we met with in this province, the

Island portion and Labrador, are some 25 groups, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MS. HALEY:

All I can say, Mr. Speaker,

is that these meetings were very productive and those groups showed her the

utmost respect.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. CROSBIE:

Does the minister agree that

those who work for public bodies should avoid any appearance of interference in

private employment relationships?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister

Responsible for the Status of Women.

MS. HALEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I

will say to the hon. Member opposite, government had absolutely no involvement

in the departure of the former executive director for the Status of Women in St.

John's, Mr. Speaker.

With

respect to my deputy minister, as I've said, she brings with her four decades of

hard work and experience to various women's organizations in this province. She

is a valuable asset to my department.

In fact,

Mr. Speaker, I'm very proud to say that we are currently in the process of

organizing and hosting another leadership conference. This time we will take it

to the West Coast, since the first one was very much a success, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

MR. CROSBIE:

The minister refers to the

history of the present deputy minister in signing the letter that she referred

to, the letter of complaint.

Is this

history of her deputy minister interfering in any way with the task of repairing

relations with the Status of Women Councils?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister

Responsible for the Status of Women.

MS. HALEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Absolutely not. She isn't interfering at all, Mr. Speaker. As I said, she brings

with her decades of experience working with women's groups in this province,

many of which I have met with over the summer, some 25 groups. I am prepared to

table those groups here to this hon. House today, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

In April

2019, the Privileges and Elections Committee of this House produced its final

report on the Development of a Legislature-Specific Harassment-Free Workplace

Policy.

I ask

the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women: Will this report be retabled

and debated in this fall sitting of the House?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's

interesting, I have actually a resolution before me to actually bring that

report back. We were waiting for all committees to be reassessed and redeployed.

Mr. Speaker, that will indeed be a part of our agenda this fall.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

I thank the

minister and the Government House Leader for that information. We look forward

to this being presented, especially given that fact that it has been seven

months.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, this year both Labrador ferries went into service with

deeply-concerning results.

I ask

the minister: Will he table an analysis conducted by his department to determine

the suitability of these ferries for both the Strait of Belle Isle and the North

Coast routes?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker, and I thank the hon. Member for the question.

Mr.

Speaker, the report I think that the Member is referring to was a report by

Poseidon, and I can certainly get him a copy of that report.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, many members of the public have expressed concern over these ferries

and their suitability for these routes. It's our understanding that these

ferries were purpose-built for two crossings to islands in the coastal waters of

Estonia.

I ask

the minister: What does he know about the conditions of those two crossings?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, these ferries are actually 1A Ice Class, something that we hadn't seen

before in the use on the Strait of Belle Isle or the North Coast. So these are

ferries that were built for northern climates.

Actually, Mr. Speaker, one of the challenges that's been had, even by the

previous administration when they went out to try and find replacement vessels,

because you have to remember, the vessels we were replacing here, the

Apollo was 49 years old. There's a

very limited market in the world that contains passenger ferries and roll-on,

roll-off ferries to ice class. So these ferries were built for 1A Super.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, both ferries were purpose-built for very shallow crossings. The average

sea depth is 4.7 metres. This is shallower than the deep end of the Aquarena

pool.

I ask

the minister: Are you 100 per cent confident that these ferries were the right

choice for both Labrador routes, considering the people who rely on these

ferries are saying otherwise?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

MR. CROCKER:

Well, Mr. Speaker, thank you

very much, and I thank the hon. Member for the question.

Mr.

Speaker, the reality is the numbers on these ferries this year are all up. We've

delivered over 2,100 extra tons to the North Coast.

Mr.

Speaker, the reality is one year ago when shipments were stopped being received

at the freight shed in Goose Bay and in Lewisporte, there were five trips

remaining to get the supplies to the North Coast. As of the close of shipping

last Friday, November 8, there are three trips left. So we're ahead of

schedule

from last year.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, it's our understanding that these two ferries were moved from their

shallow routes along the coast of Estonia to service a river in Germany.

Obviously, this is also a very shallow and protected route.

I ask

the minister: Are you 100 per cent confident that these ferries are able to

navigate the Labrador seas? If so, why then has the

Kamutik W not been able to keep its

schedule since September?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation of Works.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

reality here is these vessels are Transport Canada certified, and in order for a

vessel to navigate these waters and navigate these conditions, there's a

Transport Canada certification required here. These vessels have met the

Transport Canada certification, Mr. Speaker.

For the

first time, we have vessels on these runs that are 1A Super. We didn't see this

before. We didn't see anything coming forward from cancelled RFPs in the past.

It didn't get us anywhere. These vessels are quite able to do the run.

You have

to realize some of the challenges we face. Today, the

Kamutik W is in Nain, and we're facing, I think, 12-metre seas

today. Is the Member opposite suggesting that we take our crews and the

passengers on those ferries and subject them to those conditions that aren't

going to assure safety?

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Our

concern is safety, but there's also reliability. These ferries are a dismal

failure. This week alone, I think the

Qajaq has ran the Straits probably two days of the five. The minister needs

to look at his own records and talk to his own people. We're hearing this from

others; we're doing our homework. Maybe he should do his.

Mr.

Speaker, a report prepared by Aker Arctic Canada outlines a ferry's suitability

for ice conditions and mitigation strategies. However, there are no analyses on

sea depth, wind conditions, wave height or horsepower. These factors are

critical for the navigation of the Labrador seas.

I ask

the minister: Did his department award a tender for these vessels without

analyzing these factors? If an analysis was conducted, will you table it?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I need

to remind the hon. Member that the analysis on the replacement of these ferries

was done sometime in 2013-2014. This is not something that was new to the

department. The department, it existed, Mr. Speaker, when we were actually –

there was an RFP done, Mr. Speaker.

The

Member opposite talks about a record when it comes to ferries and ferry design.

The reality is today, if you were to go to the St. John's dockyard you will find

the Veteran on dry dock again, Mr.

Speaker, and it was this Member who was in the department at the time all that

analysis was done.

The

reality here is there was a report done. These vessels are Transport Canada –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

reality here is these vessels are 1A Super Class, they're Transport Canada

certified, and we delivered more freight to the North Coast this year than we

have in the past.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

MR. WAKEHAM:

Mr. Speaker, over the past

decade there's been an average of 2,400 housing starts annually in this

province. When you factor in numbers for 2019, it's expected to drop well below

a thousand. That's a 50-year low. The average sales price of a home has dropped

more than $8,500 when compared to a year ago. This is a consequence of a weak

economy.

I ask

the minister: What do you say to the people of the province who cannot afford to

buy an existing home or build a new one because they're afraid of what the

future holds?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There

are two sides to this question that I'm going to answer; one is the stress test

that was put in place by the federal government, the local building industry

will say that is perhaps the largest impact on new home starts. The real estate

industry is actually picking up.

In terms

of people not knowing what the future holds, Mr. Speaker, that's something this

side of the Legislature inherited. The reporter this morning on CBC I think did

a very balanced story. Part of that story, he said everybody he asked said the

bogeyman in the closet was Muskrat Falls.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

MR. WAKEHAM:

Mr. Speaker, Muskrat Falls is

the problem of everything, apparently, in this province.

Mr.

Speaker, the Minister of Finance has allocated $22 million in a contingency fund

for unplanned expenditure in Budget 2019 .

I ask

the minister: Has anything been transferred out of the contingency fund in this

fiscal year?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Minister of Finance

and President of Treasury Board.

MR. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

preamble to that question is Muskrat Falls is the problem to everything. Mr.

Speaker, our bond-rating agencies tell us it's the biggest contingent liability.

Our lending agencies, every time we meet with them, tell us it's a concern.

This

year alone, we have paid $98 million in interest on the borrowings to Nalcor for

Muskrat Falls. Mr. Speaker, yes, it is a problem.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

MR. WAKEHAM:

Mr. Speaker, I asked about

the contingency, the $22 million contingency fund and whether anything has been

transferred out of it this year. At the same time, we heard earlier that this is

World Diabetes Day. We know that Diabetes Canada says that by expanding the

program for insulin pumps, the program will not only pay for itself, but will

provide the province with a net savings of approximately $1.3 million.

I ask

the Minister of Finance: Will he commit funding from the contingency fund to

provide full coverage for insulin pump therapy, given today is World Diabetes

Day?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

It is

indeed World Diabetes Day. I have my blue ribbon on to show support and

solidarity.

Our

diabetes action plan has many threads to it. We've started with foot care for

the elderly. We have a diabetes registry. We have an interest in and a desire to

reduce the number of amputations and we have plans under each of those.

We were

asked to lift the age cap on the Insulin Pump Program, and we did that. We have

engaged in buying modelling to see if we can get better value for money. We wish

to expand that program. We'll do it as and when we can from a fiscally

sustainable point of view, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Grand

Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

MR. TIBBS:

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of

Finance's vote had just as much clout in Muskrat Falls as everybody else, I can

assure you that.

question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Environment. Mr. Speaker,

last week the community of Lodge Bay was left scrambling after every piece of

equipment in the fire hall failed during a major blaze. Thankfully no one was

hurt, but three buildings were lost and in neighbouring fire departments, one

travelled 80 kilometres to assist. Residents of Lodge Bay, including many

seniors, are fearful of what may happen if there's another future fire.

Mr.

Speaker, what is the minister doing to address this emergency situation?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. DEMPSTER:

Mr. Speaker, I'm very happy

to answer that question because I was in the community of Lodge Bay on Saturday.

I met with the chair of the local service district, I met with a good many

members of the community and I did a number of household visits to seniors.

What's

important for the public here to know, Mr. Speaker, is that the community didn't

have a fire truck nor are they asking for a fire truck. They had some equipment

that failed at that time. They've reached out. They're looking for a couple of

generators to pump, Mr. Speaker.

They're

seven kilometres from a much larger community, Mary's Harbour, that have agreed

to provide support. I spoke with the chair of the local service district again

yesterday, Mr. Speaker, and we are working with them. There was no active

application in the system in advance of this fire. We're certainly working with

the community. Our thoughts and prayers have been with the community because

they did go through a difficult time, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Grand

Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

MR. TIBBS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Aside

from the total failure of their equipment, media reports have noted the fire

brigade lacked proper basic protective gear including pants, coats and boots

that did not fit properly.

Mr.

Speaker, this is an urgent and critical matter of life safety for residents of

Lodge Bay. What is the minister doing to address this situation on both short

term and long term?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. DEMPSTER:

Thank you.

Mr.

Speaker, sometimes, and especially in rural communities, when things happen, you

realize that you have to go back and you have to take a deeper look. Lodge Bay

is a community of around 70 people, many of which are older.

Sunday night past, the chair of the local service district held a meeting and

they saw a need to restructure their local fire brigade. They now have 22

members of that community – a population of 70 – 22 members who are on the

local. This is what they're doing.

I've

already reached out to a number of partners. We're bringing some partners to the

table and we're confident that we're going to be able to meet the needs of what

that community is looking for right now, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Grand

Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

MR. TIBBS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mayors,

town managers and clerks are living with fear of being hauled off to jail for

not meeting the new federal waste water regulations; 86 per cent of waste water

systems in Newfoundland discharge untreated water. This issue is bigger in

Newfoundland than any other province. For municipalities in this province,

compliance is practically impossible.

What is

the minister's plan to address the requirement for municipalities across the

province to deal with waste water issues?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Mr. Speaker, this morning I

spent four hours with community leaders across our province. We spent four hours

going to every single table asking members what the number one priority was

amongst their communities in Newfoundland and Labrador. Not one of them – not

one leader in this province today, at the municipal level, brought up a fear of

them going to jail – none.

As a

matter of fact, they very much appreciated that this was the opportunity for the

first time in the history of this province, no other premier has done this, Mr.

Speaker, and not one of them brought up a fear of going to jail over waste

water.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Grand

Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

MR. TIBBS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just

last month, we attended the meeting at the Holiday Inn up here, where it was on

every municipalities' mind. This is a huge, huge issue that needs to be

addressed both federally and provincially as well. It's something that we have

to get ahead of because people are really scared.

There

are approximately 200 communities across this province with boil-water

advisories. These municipalities are more concerned about clean drinking water;

waste water concerns are secondary.

What is

the minister doing to ensure that all municipalities across the province have

clean drinking water?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs and Environment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAGG:

Mr. Speaker, thank you very much for the question.

As many

here would know, I've spent a lifetime working in the industry of dealing with

boil orders and issues in small towns. So we are very concerned about the number

of boil orders.

We are

at a record low, but I'm not going to shock you because I'm going to give you

the details. The record low is appalling. The record low is 190 boil orders in

this province. On any given day, 190 boil orders. It is a major concern.

The

Premier alluded to earlier about the session this morning. I sat to a table this

morning where the lady said the last time our boil order was lifted was 1964,

the year I was born, Mr. Speaker. Fifty-five years on a boil order. It is a

major concern; it's a major concern to everybody who lives in this province. We

are determined to make a difference to that.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The minister's time has

expired.

The hon.

Member for St. John's Centre.

MR. J. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In a

2018 ATIPP licence application from Northern Harvest Mowi, the plan for dealing

with high water temperatures and low oxygen levels was blacked out.

I ask

the minister: Will he release that plan or direct Northern Harvest Mowi to do

so?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. BYRNE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Our

Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act is very specific. Whenever

there is a third party harmed, there is a provision for a redaction. If there's

ever an issue or dispute about whether or not the act is being applied, there

can be a reference to the Commissioner and there are further recourses that are

available.

The act

has been debated and has been passed on the floor of the House with the

revisions. This is not the Bill 29, this is the new bill. It does provide

methods that if there is a dispute as to whether or not a disclosure should have

been made under the requirements of the act, it can be asked for. I would

encourage that all methods be available.

I want

to say as well, Mr. Speaker, we have a suite of additional methods that provide

further protections to the environment and to the aquaculturists themselves. I

would be happy to (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for Labrador

West.

MR. BROWN:

Mr. Speaker, the independent

chairperson of the Minimum Wage Review Committee sits as an executive of the NL

Liberal Party.

I ask

the Premier: What is the best interest in appointing a highly placed party

insider on this committee?

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Advanced Education, Skills and Labour.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have

a statutory requirement every two years to review the minimum wage here in

Newfoundland and Labrador. As a government, we made a commitment that we would

look at minimum wage and we would tie it to an inflationary measure. That was

the last minimum wage review that took place and it was tied to a CPI.

We right

now have committed to striking a committee in September. The committee was

struck. It's led by an independent chair and it has a representative from

employers and a representative from labour. It's a very balanced approach. The

chair is eminently qualified, has been the mayor of a municipality, deputy mayor

of a municipality, councillor, served in various boards and provincial –

MR. SPEAKER:

The minister's time has

expired.

The hon.

the Member for Labrador West.

MR. BROWN:

Mr. Speaker, I ask again,

this independent chairperson on the Minimum Wage Review Committee is an

executive of the NL Liberal Party.

I ask

the Premier: Is this in the province's best interest?

MR. SPEAKER:

Time for a quick answer.

The hon.

the Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Labour.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In terms

of the Minimum Wage Review Committee, there's a terms of reference that was

constructed and the independent chair, along with a representative from labour

and a representative from the employer council, which are public names Brenda

O'Reilly and Allison Doyle, along with Steve Tessier, will serve, and they will

do a tremendous job. They will provide the balance between employers and

employees and present a report with recommendations.

They're

going to seek input from stakeholders and provide that information so that we

can make a decision on minimum wage here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Humber - Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, there have been

a number of concerns raised by the parents with children attending grade six J.

J. Curling Elementary in my district. There are two grade six classes with 31

students in one class and 32 in the other. These class sizes are over the

students and the hard cap of 30.

These

overcrowded classrooms are causing concerns, affecting proper instructional

time, safety concerns should a fire occur and against the department's own

guidelines. I have been there in these classrooms and they're very small and

cramped spaces. The parents have requested a meeting with the school board but

were rejected.

I ask

the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development: Will you review these

concerns and put the extra resources in place to ensure a safe and healthy

learning environment for these students, because the concern now is what they

proposed is just not working?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. WARR:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I

thank the hon. Member for his question, very important question.

Mr.

Speaker, teaching resources are assigned in May with regard to provisions in the

collective agreement. Because student enrolments can change over time, the

allocation model allows flexibility for those allocations.

Mr.

Speaker, the situation at J. J. Curling is that one class – the information I

received, one class exceeds the cap by one student. The Member is saying

something different. I will check on that.

The

school district has been working with the school administration to actually have

a look at that situation. We've added the extra teaching supports, Mr. Speaker.

To my understanding, three-quarters of a unit right now. I will check that and

get back to the hon. Member.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl - Southlands.

MR. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, child care

operators provide a very important service to many families throughout our

province, allowing families to earn a living while at the same time providing a

safe, caring and nurturing environment for their children. Like any business, in

order to operate these centres depend on timely receipt of revenues in order to

pay for ongoing expenses, including mortgage on the facility, electricity,

children's snacks, employees' wages, et cetera.

One

important source of revenue for these centres comes in the form of child care

subsidies from the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. A

number of centres have reached out to me and indicated there has been an ongoing

problem in this regard where centres are waiting several weeks and even months

to receive payments from government.

I ask

the minister: What does he plan on doing to address this serious matter?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. WARR:

Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member

again raises a very important question with regard to child care subsidies and

the child care centres that we have throughout the province.

We value

these valuable resources to families throughout the province, Mr. Speaker, and

I've had the opportunity to speak to the hon. Member on several occasions now

that he's addressed concerns. I think the hon. Member would agree that I've

taken the time to address every one of his concerns and we've gotten back to him

in a timely manner. I will continue to do that.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period

has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling

of Documents.

Tabling of

Documents

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant

section 26(5)(

a) of the Financial

Administration Act , I am tabling one order-in-council relating to a funding

pre-commitment for fiscal years 2020-2021 through to 2024-2025.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further tabling of documents?

Notices

of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. WARR:

Mr. Speaker, I give notice

that I will ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Provide For

Damages And Recovery Of Opioid-Related Health Care Costs, Bill 17.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

The hon.

the Government House Leader.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give

notice that I will on tomorrow move, pursuant to Standing Order 11(1), that the

House not adjourn at 5:30 o'clock on the afternoon of Monday, November 18, 2019.

Mr.

Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow move, pursuant to Standing Order

11(1), that the House not adjourn at 5:30 o'clock in the afternoon of Tuesday,

November 19, 2019.

Mr.

Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow move, pursuant to Standing Order

11(1), that the House not adjourn at 5:30 o'clock in the afternoon of Thursday,

November 21, 2019.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Further

notices of motion?

Answers

to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Humber - Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House today to present a petition on behalf of Route 450 in the

Humber - Bay of Islands. I'll just read the petition:

WHEREAS

the rainstorm of January 2018 caused major flood damage to Route 450 South Shore

Highway in Bay of Islands, and there are areas of the highway that still has not

been repaired including pavement repairs to sections of John's Beach, clearing

of debris from gabion baskets, the tender for Cammies Brook Bridge replacement

and other necessary work throughout the region was not done, and where the

condition of the road is causing safety concerns for motorists;

THEREFORE we, the undersigned, call upon the hon. House of Assembly to urge the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to ensure all urgent repairs and other

upgrades are included in the Department of Transportation and Works tender call

for the 2020 construction season and carried out immediately in the spring to

ensure the safety and well-being of the motorists using the highway.

Mr.

Speaker, I asked a question last week of the minister and I just want to make it

quite clear to the people, I was not trying to embarrass the minister. I

actually gave the minister a copy of the question because I wanted answers.

I know

the minister now, we had a chat about it since. One of the statements he made –

and I don't know which official or how he got this information – is Route 450

was given $6 million, the flood damaged area.

I just

want to read where that money was spent. It was spent on Lewin 450A. Route 450A

on the site, also known as Lewin Parkway, is an alternate route of 450 to the

City of Corner Brook. The route runs from 450 through downtown Corner Brook.

There

was not $6 million spent on Route 450 where the damage was. In actual fact, I

say to the minister, part of Route 450, just within, probably about thee-tenths

of a kilometre – I asked that it be spent because that was the worst rutting in

the area. On one side marine contractors were doing Route 450A. On the other

side they were doing some water and sewer, federal money, to put in a water –

and in between that was the worst part of the whole section. It wasn't done.

There

was no money spent on Route 450 out of the $6 million. I know the minister

understands that now and I thank him for that, but the part about that is – I

asked the Minister of Tourism, he was down last week and, of course, I sent

pictures to the staff. The gabion baskets are just not cleaned out. There are

rocks on top that are coming down the hills. They're hitting the gabion baskets.

If they're not cleaned out behind, they're going on the road.

There

were concerns last week just before I asked the question. I sent pictures, I

called the minister's office and I was down with the staff. I stopped with the

Minister of Tourism and I said: if you don't believe me and you don't believe

the pictures, ask the Minister of Tourism who was down there.

I asked

the Minister of Tourism when we were in Lark Harbour – and I thank the minister

for coming out to Lark Harbour and doing that. That was great news. I asked the

minister, what was the number one concern that you heard on the way out for

tourism in the area? Was the concern –?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member's time is

expired.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you.

And I

thank the minister for his (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First

and foremost, I do apologize to the Member. Last week I did refer to Route 450A.

I wasn't aware of the As. It wasn't in the information I had at the time. The

other thing is the Minister of Tourism just verified the comments of the Member

opposite.

Mr.

Speaker, this fall we did have an approved business case under northern and

rural for that

section of John's Beach on Route 450. I can assure the Member

that in our first group of early tendering, this coming construction season that

will be in the first tenders called.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CROCKER:

Also, Mr. Speaker, as the

Member alludes to about the gabion baskets, he did provide me with some

information again this week showing some of the work hadn't been completed. That

is work that we can do immediately, Mr. Speaker, and we certainly will.

Obviously, as the Member would understand, slope stabilization is a big

challenge on Route 450, and we're dealing with it on a regular basis. I can

assure the Member that the work – and there is work remaining from the January

2018 storm – all has been tendered, though, with the exception of the Cammies

Bridge. I can also assure the Member, that route was one of the first –

MR. SPEAKER:

The minister's time has

expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia West - Bellevue.

MR. DWYER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This

petition is about the Bull Arm site, and the background of the petition is as

follows:

WHEREAS

there are no significant current operations at the Bull Arm Fabrication site;

and

WHEREAS

the site is a world-class facility and has the potential to rejuvenate not only

the local economy but the provincial economy; and

WHEREAS

residents of the area are troubled with the lack of local employment in today's

economy; and

WHEREAS

the operation of this facility would encourage employment for the area and

create economic spin-offs for local businesses; and

WHEREAS

the site is an asset of the province, built to benefit the province, and a

long-term tenant for this site would attract gainful business opportunities; and

WHEREAS

the continued idling of this site is not in the best interest of the province;

THEREFORE we, the residents of the area near the Bull Arm Fabrication site,

petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows:

We, the

undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to expedite the process to get the Bull Arm

Fabrication site back in operation. We request that the process include a vision

for a long-term viable plan that is beneficial to all residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador.

Furthermore, we request that government place an emphasis on all supply,

maintenance, fabrication and offshore workover for existing offshore platforms,

as well as new construction of any platforms, be they GBS or FPSO in nature.

Obviously, we saw in the last few days, Mr. Speaker, of the amount of people

that were here in the gallery, they were very concerned. This is a fabrication

site that we've already invested in. It's an asset to the province. To let them

see what's happening out there right now is a disgrace, to be quite honest. We

have a world-class facility that we're letting deteriorate to the point where

it's not going to be usable without a lot of money put into it to get it back up

and running.

There

are so many people that will depend on this. It's not just for my District of

Placentia West - Bellevue, but Terra Nova, Bonavista, Harbour Main. All these

districts have quality people, quality workers that can do quality work. We have

a history of doing it already and, as I said yesterday, we have a history of

being able to do it throughout Canada. It's about time we picked up our

bootstraps and started doing it for ourselves.

The

economic spinoffs alone will prop up these towns and this area of my district

tremendously, but the people that are tradespeople, 16 unions – and now we're

trying to split up the unions and get them to pit against each other. That's not

what's in the best interest of the province, Mr. Speaker. What's in the best

interest of the province is to get our people working on our projects.

Like the

Member for Terra Nova said yesterday, to have 110 workers working in the Kiewit

facility in Marystown and have 750 working in Corpus Christi, Texas, on the same

project is obviously not in the best interest of our province.

I would,

through this petition, call upon the government to do better and to give us more

significant work and utilize the assets we already have in our province.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

completely agree with the Member opposite when he says we need to have people in

our province working on projects in our province. I completely concur. That's

why we have Advance 2030 , Mr. Speaker,

that does lay out a plan for how to grow the oil and gas industry in this

province. I know the Member opposite will be supportive of that plan to ensure

we maximize the return of the resources we have in this province. We also have

Mining the Future that does exactly the same thing for the mining industry.

To speak

specifically to the Bull Arm site that the Member mentioned today, there is a

very short-term lease at the Bull Arm site to retrofit a rig, a small change out

of a thruster, Mr. Speaker. This is new work for the province. Most importantly,

keeping that rig in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, ready to go right

back to our offshore rather than sailing away to some other jurisdiction.

Mr.

Speaker, this is not about pitting one union against another. This is about

ensuring the people of the province have work, and we're going to continue to

make ever effort possible to ensure we maximize the benefits to this province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

I rise

to present a petition on restoring flights to Ireland. The reasons for this

petition are as follows:

It is

critical that non-stop international flights to strategic locations be

reinstated, particularly in the era of the CETA agreement. The Dublin non-stop

connection is essential for forging and maintaining international business

opportunities, growing the tech sector of Newfoundland and Labrador and

broadening our tourism industry. This connection would help retain our youth,

stabilize and possibly grow our population, and in order to achieve this, the

connection should be year round and not on a seasonal basis.

THEREFORE we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows:

We, the

undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to advocate to the St. John's International Airport

Authority to strenuously lobby for the reinstatement of the non-stop flights

from Newfoundland and Labrador to Dublin, Ireland.

Mr.

Speaker, in early 2018, Nova Scotia announced Halifax Stanfield International

Airport –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MS. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

– would have $11.1

million to attract new flights from Europe and other destinations.

November 2018, WestJet cancelled its non-stop flight from St. John's to Dublin.

In April 2019, WestJet began its inaugural non-stop flight from Halifax to

Dublin, a key link in the Nova Scotia-European engagement strategy.

The

$1-million McKinsey report warned us that our province, if we want to grow, we

have to make air access a priority. This government doesn't have an active air

access strategy and it shows. That has to change. It is critical that non-stop

international flights to Europe and other strategic locations be restarted,

particularly in the era of the CETA with the EU, so this province stops getting

left behind.

The

Dublin non-stop connection is essential for nurturing international business

opportunities, growing our tech sector, broadening our tourism industry, and

ultimately expanding our economy to retain youth and grow our population.

Tourism

is a billion-dollar-a-year industry, Mr. Speaker, offering small and large

communities a new lease on life, but only if we seize the opportunity. Without

direct international flights to minimize travel time, many potential tourists

are looking elsewhere.

Mr.

Speaker, lacking non-stop, year-round flights to Europe is a disincentive for

businesses to set up here, expand or remain in our province. St. John's is

strategically located as the gateway between European and North American

markets. Those are strengths we ought to capitalize on, just as McKinsey said.

So, Mr.

Speaker, let's heed the call from so many in our province to fight harder, to

restore the connections we had and make new connections so Newfoundland and

Labrador can grow. We don't need to be losing out, we have so much to offer.

Let's make it happen.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.

MR. DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, thank you, and I

thank the hon. Member for the petition.

I met

with the petitioners on the front steps of Confederation Building a couple of

weeks ago, received their petition. It's a priority for this government. I can't

be clearer than that.

It was

the Conservative government that she represents now that cancelled the Air

Access Strategy in 2013. So from that standpoint, it was a priority for me, it's

a priority for our department and a priority for our government. From that

standpoint, it was early in our opportunity to be sworn in as minister, we

realized how important it was. I've met with both Air Canada and WestJet a week

and a half ago in Montreal. Very much good meetings with those operators.

addition to that, I assured the petitioners that I would take their petition and

bring it to the decision-makers that made the decision to cancel the flight in

the beginning. I tabled that petition with both WestJet and Air Canada. It's not

just about the Dublin flight, it's about air access. When I met with the

individuals on the steps of Confederation Building, they all said it's about air

access to the European market, which is so key.

I agree

fully with the hon. Member from across the way that says it is important for our

province and our people to have a direct access (inaudible) –

MR. SPEAKER:

The minister's time is

expired.

MR. DAVIS:

– European market.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

Mr. Speaker, in 2016,

Advanced Education, Skills and Labour changed their policy to specify that in

order to qualify for a bus pass, people need to have a minimum of eight

specified medical appointments a month. This creates a barrier for low-income

and vulnerable people to obtain basic necessities like food and essential

medical services.

The

requirement of eight doctor's appointments a month ignores the needs of those

living with chronic illnesses and disabilities who may not need to see the

doctor, but often have no ability to travel by their own means.

We, the

undersigned, call on the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to allow bus passes to all income support recipients,

all seniors who receive the Income Supplement and all low-income recipients who

are in receipt of the NLPDP.

Mr.

Speaker, I presented this petition last week and I was most pleased to hear the

minister in his response saying that this is in the plan of this current

administration. As a matter of fact, it was a part of their party platform for

the 2019 election.

I took

some time to read through this document, and by way of accident I came across a

2015 party platform. Mr. Speaker, as the minister has said, this was part of

their election promise platform. So I started looking through 2015 and I

realized that I'm a little bit hesitant to believe that this will actually take

place.

There

was opportunity, when we came back in the House after the election, to put this

money-saving, lifestyle-changing program in place for the people who need it,

but it was ignored. It was deferred –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

There's

too much noise.

MR. LESTER:

As I said, I question the

credibility of an election promise versus an administrative action. Let's think

about some of the election promises that were made in 2015 that were not kept.

Let's think about the HST. The HST was branded by several Members as a job

killer, economy killer. That was going to be rolled back immediately. Guess

what, that didn't happen.

The

administration was going to simplify the tax system –

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible) better.

MR. LESTER:

Yes, they did. They create,

the people pay. Not only did they not touch the existing tax system, they

complicated it and burdened the people further.

Mr.

Speaker, while the minister, I'm sure, will get up and say we didn't know what

kind of a situation we were facing, I think everybody in the province knew it. I

look forward to the minister's response.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Minister of Advanced

Education, Skills and Labour.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I

said the last time a petition was presented in the House, in 2019 it was the

Liberal Party that made a commitment. We formed government. We are firmly

committed to providing all people on income support in the St. John's metro area

with the option for a bus pass through a pilot program. This cannot just happen

immediately.

Our

staff at AESL has had to meet with the City of St. John's; they've had to meet

with Metrobus to have discussions and dialogue as to how this program will roll

out and be available. It is our goal to have this available to all income

support clients in the St. John's metro area region by early 2020, and we're

assessing our options for delivery.

This is

something that is really important, because if you give people an opportunity to

be able to have access to transportation options, they'll be able to not only

get to medical appointments, but to assess other opportunities for work or

employment, to look at opportunities to avail of prices of things that may be of

lower cost, given that people are on very fixed incomes. These are

opportunities, and we're all about finding better opportunities here, Mr.

Speaker, for people in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member's time is

expired.

The hon.

the Minister of Transportation and Works.

MR. CROCKER:

Mr. Speaker, I call from the

Order Paper, Order 2, second reading of Bill 5.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I

like to say, it's always a pleasure to get up in this House of Assembly, which

it is. It is a privilege to speak on any piece of legislation, especially

legislation, I guess, that – well, all legislation has an effect on the masses,

and some more so than others.

Bill 5,

An Act to Amend the Highway Traffic Act, it's an interesting piece of

legislation. For the most part, I think it's a good piece of legislation. A lot

of things in it, I think, we all in this House and throughout the province agree

with and support. Cameras within school zones, construction zones; those things

are issues that are out there and they're prevalent, and you hear a lot of

conversation about it.

For

example, I know in my own district, the local media carried a story a while

back, and it was almost embarrassing, actually, that it happened, but it was a

fact that people were just passing school buses with their signs out for

stopping. In the school zones, we got increased patrols constantly in our school

zones throughout my district, because Route 60 runs right through several

elementary schools. It's a huge concern.

I know

as an MHA, I get constant calls coming in the spring and in the fall of the

year, especially with schools open, worried about line painting, and I'm sure

the Minister of Transportation and Works hears those complaints a lot. You're

limited by the number of crews, but a priority has to be on school zones for the

reasons of protecting our children, the most vulnerable in our society.

Having

camera technology to monitor people passing school buses within school zones, I

applaud that and I think most people would. As for construction zones, I guess I

could say the same thing with construction zones. We've had unfortunate

instances over the last number of years of several serious deaths in our

construction zones throughout the province, some actually provincial government

employees. That's difficult – that's very difficult. It's not something you ever

want to happen. You want to eradicate but there's no eradicating that,

unfortunately. You try to mitigate, you try to minimize everything of that

nature but, unfortunately, they are accidents – most are preventable but they

are accidents and they will occur.

I think

putting cameras there will give people more awareness of their surroundings.

Right now, I use construction zones as probably a bit behind, which shouldn't

be, but let's be honest they're a bit behind where we are with school zones.

School zones, should be anyway – I know it's entrenched in my mind and it should

be in most people's minds, and it's getting there now, that you slow down.

The

posted speed limit is only a guideline. In my opinion, you need to go below the

posted speed limit. You're only looking at 200 to 300 metres and you get out of

that area where kids are walking to and from school, especially our younger ones

because they have less awareness of the roads. To me, that's where construction

zones need to bring us to.

there's a lot of awareness around school zones now. Bringing in the camera

technology – because some awareness will never get you where you need to be.

Bringing in the camera technology will help that and hopefully – hopefully – get

to a point that we have this to the minimal.

My fear

is – and it always has been and I stood in this House on many occasions and I'll

stand here today, safety has to be your number one concern with most all of

this. It's not about issuing tickets, it's making it so people can drive, walk,

to and from wherever they're going in a safe manner.

I say it

for the 1.6-busing policy, it's all about safety, it's not about politics. This

here is a step in the right direction in protecting our children, making it

safer. There's lots more government can do but you can't get it all in one day,

of course. This here, with school zones, I think we all fully support.

To the

construction zone piece, though, we're not there yet. We're not where we need to

be. I'm probably going to throw a brick towards construction companies and maybe

the department itself, maybe all of us collectively. Too many construction zones

in this province – I'll be on record as saying this – signs are left up. I know

the minister got up in this House and he said it's still a construction zone and

I totally get where he's coming from.

We have

some areas in this province, signs will stay up for two months and there's

nothing, there's no activity, zero. Under the law, under the

Highway Traffic Act , you're still in

violation if you break those posted speed limits and the Minister of Advanced

Education, Skills and Labour is nodding in agreement, and I don't disagree with

that. I think we're all on the same page, but that's kind of a pet peeve to most

of the motoring public. You can still post a construction zone, you can raise

the speed limit a bit because that's where you get anxious drivers. I don't mind

going through a construction zone and taking my time; I have no problem. I know

it's a pet peeve to people.

Then you

come to a point, you got two months, the signs are up and they're posted and

there's nothing happening. So after 30 days of this, day 31 the crews are back

working, so people got into their bad habits of picking up their speed and

saying there's no one there and ignoring that and, heaven forbid, they're out

working.

That's

all wrong, by the way. I'm saying they shouldn't speed on day 30, no more than

31 or 20. My point is that's human nature. That's what we're up against. That's

human nature.

I think

a

part can be played by construction companies and Service NL when it comes to

occupational health and safety. Everyone can do this better together. There are

ways around it. I don't have the answer here today, but I know that when you

speak about this stuff, that it is an annoyance to most of the motoring public.

I know Members of this Legislature drive a lot on the highways and experience

this probably more so than me, but I know that's been an issue.

My time

in the department with the former minister, my good friend and colleague next to

me here, the Opposition House Leader, we dealt with that, when he was minister

of Transportation and Works, we dealt with that issue. We talked about it, and

the Minister of Transportation and Works, I'm sure, still deals with it.

It's a

pet peeve, but I get the fact that it's a construction zone, but we have to do

better and try to find a way when these areas are going be – it could be two to

three months tied up. Find a better way to get the traffic moving at a better

pace and prevent the possibility of something unforeseen happening because

people get conditioned that way.

Bringing

in camera technology in those areas, I think is a good move. There are lots of

unanswered questions. A part of the problem is – it happens a lot in this

Legislature – the regulations. We don't really know, we stand here, we debate,

we discuss, we sit in our caucus and we debate issues and debate this. We've had

a lot of debate on this amendment, this

Highway Traffic Act amendment, but we lose sight of what is in the

regulation. What are we really voting on? What are we really debating? That's a

question we've asked, not only on this piece of legislation but on a lot of

legislation. Regulations will come later. What will they be?

you're kind of voting on something and you're hoping that it works out all

right, but you don't have the full guts of what you're voting on. You're only

voting on the frame of something. That can be problematic, Mr. Speaker.

We'll go

through the rest of second reading, we'll go through Committee and we'll try to

highlight those concerns through our debate, through our Committee. Those are

issues that – I know we do it in this Legislature and I know how this works;

I've been on the other side. I know officials from the minister's department

watch these debates, they hear the questions we ask, people make a note of those

questions and try to get answer, prepare for Committee to try to get the

legislation through. I know, I've been on all sides of this equation. I do hope

they listen to a lot of the questions, because a lot of good questions come up

in second reading. Outside of our Committee stage, we're going down in our list

of questions that we all do. That's not the first time I've seen this happen;

I've watched it for a lot of years.

But it's

about getting it right. We've had a lot of discussion, probably not so much here

in this Legislature, I know we've had a lot of discussion behind the scenes with

the Members, some Members opposite. I'm sure the minister is aware as well.

Putting

traffic cameras on highways. So we're talking school zones and construction

zones – we're okay with that. But putting it on highways, I'm not so sure how,

outside the fact I do know our roads are not the safest – I do know there are

tragedies happening. I've experienced them, I've witnessed them, I've been too

close to some, and everyone in this Legislature have experienced it one way or

the other.

I just

think that's one you have to be very cautious with. You're putting cameras up –

where are you putting them? If you're putting them in school zones and putting

them in construction zones, we can live with that, and I think most people could

because they're real problem areas. But to put them up on all our highways,

different areas on our highways, are we getting to technology – and I mean, I

have yet to see that be implemented in any province yet that it hasn't been met

with a lot of opposition, a lot of issues and a lot of concerns.

What

about calibrating these? What about monitoring these cameras? What about the

court time? Everyone's going to challenge it. That'll be the norm. The courts

will be full of people complaining and challenging these tickets, testing the

legislation. You have to look at that. These are the fallouts for these issues,

these bills we bring in when you're doing stuff like that.

What

role do the police have now? Are we cutting back on our police force? Is this a

way of hiring less police officers? We're going to get cameras to do our work.

Because that's really where we're going. You go into a supermarket now and

you'll get three cashiers and 10 self-checkouts. Now you're going to go on the

highway and you'll see less police officers and more cameras.

AN HON. MEMBER:

Valid point.

MR. PETTEN:

I think it's a valid point.

Again, I

know people listen and watch this debate that goes on – those are questions

we're going to be putting out to the public if this is the way this legislation

progresses. So I think that's a fair point – that's a fair point. That's the

world we live.

realize as you move with the times – I mean, my children might tell me

differently, but I try to move with the times. But some of this stuff is a

challenge. Really, at the end of the day, what are we gaining? What are we

accomplishing?

I've

been here long enough now to know that certain things I've stood up and debated

and probably voted on, and when I left after, when it came into practice and

different things, I probably should've read it closer; I probably missed

something. I don't know if reading close – I think we all kind of try to do our

work here, but you miss stuff and you say, after the fact, I wish I would've

picked up on that. You almost feel bad because we do have an obligation here.

We're

lawmakers. You're bringing laws that affect every single person in this

province. It's 40 people affecting 500,000. Think about that for a second. Forty

people here can change the laws of 500,000 people. That's pretty powerful

numbers.

As the

Members opposite like to point out on occasion, I was attached to the former

administration. I wasn't in this Legislature, but I was close. I was friends

with most all of them and I had some input – not a lot, but I had some. We've

all done these things. We've all come in with trying to make the right

legislation. You're in government; you feel like you have all the answers, and

the Opposition feels like they want to try influence itself on you. It's the way

it is.

Government is opposed to Opposition; Opposition is opposed to government. At the

end of the day, though, we have to try to do what's best. I know that sometimes

it's hard, and in this environment in this past week there's evidence of that.

It's very difficult at times. We have to try to do the best piece of

legislation.

I'd like

to go back, and give me 30 seconds, Mr. Speaker, on relevance. We've debated the

Child and Youth Advocate Act here.

That was what I believe it was called. That was the title. There was a lot of

really, really good debate. There were some things we wanted changes to, we felt

strong about. Everyone supported the legislation, but there are certain issues

that people feel strongly about. We're dealing with our children, our youth.

Through

the debate, we actually arrived somewhere. We got to a place that we said we

could all live with the legislation. We all applauded this legislation, and the

Child and Youth Advocate has been very happy about the legislation – I think

everyone generally in this Legislature. That's one example.

I know

there are different times you feel this is working, this Legislature is working.

We're in a minority government now – minority Parliament. We got a long ways to

go, but I think there are possibilities we could still make this Parliament

work.

By us

proposing changes or asking for changes or asking for improvements in a piece of

legislation like this, we're highlighting concerns we have. There's no

government going to fall on this. There's no government going to form on this.

It's about a better piece of legislation. That's all. There are no politics

involved. I think they're valid concerns that we express. Whether I'm expressing

them or any other Member on this side expresses them, I think everyone's

concerns are valid.

When we

look at this legislation, outside of raising fines – another moment I think is

important to highlight, too, and it's never lost on me. You see families coming

into this Legislature, you read it on the news, who lost a loved one. My own

colleague here last week was very emotional talking about his own brother.

That's never lost I don't think on me, and no one in this Legislature. How could

it be? It's never lost. We've all had personal experiences, some we're closer to

than others.

In no

way are we saying we don't agree with cameras on the highways; everywhere on the

highways, are we saying we're against improving safety on our highways,

absolutely not. We think there are things that could be done to improve it.

Maybe more enforcement, maybe better policing. I don't say it in (inaudible)

because I have a huge amount of respect for our police forces – more policing. I

don't think we can get too much policing, to be honest with you, Mr. Speaker.

I have

serious concerns about having cameras on every corner, and I'd like to be on

record. I will stand on record wherever I stand on that issue, because I think

it's a very controversial issue. I don't think we're ready for that yet. Maybe

we need to start with construction zones. Maybe we need to start with school bus

zones. Let people get into the process. Too much, too quickly is never good on

anyone.

Change

is always a problem. We all suffer through change. Change is a bad word to

people. As we start to get older – and, unfortunately, I'm getting there –

change becomes very difficult.

AN HON. MEMBER:

You're getting there.

MR. PETTEN:

My colleague says, getting

there, but he's older than me. So I'll forgive him for that.

We have

to get it right. I think by saying we need better enforcements as opposed to

cameras, we're not condemning this legislation. We're applauding lots of the

legislation. I do want to make a point – to anyone who may be watching,

listening – anyone who experienced the death of a loved or had a bad experience

on our highways, we do all sincerely on this side of the House, and I think in

this Legislature, our hearts go out to you.

We're

not going to be opposing anything in this bill that's going to cause grief to

anyone. We want to make this legislation better. Will it prevent those serious

things from happening? Maybe not. Again, I'll say it's about minimizing,

lowering your risk. I don't think you ever eliminate that chance.

In my

final couple of minutes, I want to applaud government for a step in the right

direction on school bus zones and construction zones. I'd like for them to go a

step further and eliminate the 1.6 busing policy. Again, every opportunity. I

had a petition on that today, but I figured I'd spare the minister and I'd throw

it in when I was on my debate of this bill. Me and the minister spoke many

times, both ministers and I speak a lot to him about it. Safety is a huge

concern of mine in our school zones. Again, I won't get elected or whatever;

that's not about politics when it comes to that. We'll talk politics a lot of

times in this House, but when I think about the safety of our children, it's

paramount.

I always

say this, and I say this openly, seniors and our youth, our most vulnerable

people, we have to protect them. We have to protect them. Forty of us in this

Legislature are responsible for 500,000 people. If we don't look after our

seniors and our youth and let them live in a safe environment, we're failing our

500,000 people, Mr. Speaker, because it's all a broader family.

So on

that note, I will take my seat. We have lots of questions for Committee, and I

look forward to listening to the remainder of the debate.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Bennett):

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

MR. BROWN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's a

pleasure to speak on this. It's very important that we do put the safety of

individuals on our highways and in and around school zones. This also protects

pedestrians, too, especially children walking to and from school buses, people

running red lights, things like that. Pedestrians are around. So this also

protects motorists and pedestrians.

We also

have to look at the importance of using technology in this kind of sense.

Privacy of individuals and stuff must be also adhered to. Like the Member, my

colleague said, we can't rush into it and put cameras everywhere. We do have to

be very cautious with that as well.

I do

agree starting with construction zones and school buses is a great way to

implement such technology. We also have to look at the importance of convincing

motorists, also with this as a deterrent, but we also have to look at other

options, too, to convince individuals to slow down, pay attention and follow the

simple rules of the road.

There

was a New York-based research from a corporation that did analysis on this kind

of issue. They said that as a result, they saw a reduction of accidents,

injuries and loss of life, regardless of enforcement. So it also shows that this

technology does have an impact on the individuals and an impact on motorists to

slow down, follow the rules of the road and abide by them.

Another

quote there, they did a similar study in Edmonton. They said the complaints of

dangerous drivers was a big issue for the City of Edmonton. Then they moved

forward with this technology and they saw a large reduction of road accidents

and also collected a large amount of fines from people evading the law. So now

with this they have a deterrent in place to keep people from being reckless and

use their brain to actually make decisions that are in the best interest of

everyone around them.

I have

seen people fly through construction zones. I've seen people run the stop sign

on school buses. I've seen people run red lights. This is an epidemic in this

province. We need to move forward in enforcing rules of the road. We have to

move forward in this. We also have to work with our partners, with the police

forces, municipalities, construction companies and associations so that we can

implement such technology.

Even the

department here with TW have had incidents with people disregarding the rules of

the road, tragic incidents. So this is upon us now to work towards, but we do

need to make sure that every precaution is in place, every respect to

technology, data collection and photographic data collection. We have to make

sure that we're not harming while we're trying to do good.

support the idea of this, I support it 100 per cent, but we have to make sure

that when we implement this, and when it rolls out that the individuals and

everything are – all the key parts are in place.

This is

good stuff. This is what we want. This is what we want to see. We want to make

sure that we have every absolute thing at our disposal to enforce the rules of

the road and the law. We can't not do it, and that's the big thing about it, we

can't not do this; but we need to make sure that when we do that, it's rolled

out in a fashion – the regulation is there that makes sure that everybody, every

single person in this province, has the protections and has it all in place,

that we don't see anything – so that's the key is the regulation behind this to

make sure that it's all in place, that the identity of individuals are

protected, all the data collected is collected in a fashion that is protected,

but also pedestrians and motorists, alike, are protected.

That's

the cusp of all this. This is the key part of all this. That's where I feel that

we need to make sure that everything – our i's are dotted, our t's are crossed,

this is done in a manner that there are no qualms about it.

With

that, Mr. Speaker, I'll take my seat now.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Humber - Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'll

just stand and have a few minutes and support this piece of legislation. I know

when I was minister of Service NL there was a very serious movement afoot to

come up with cameras in these areas for protection of the children, for the

protection of the workers.

I have a

few brothers that work in the industry and they say it's a serious situation,

the number of cars that go by at high speeds and refuse to obey the people who

are actually doing the work on the road and also the people who are directing

the traffic. We all know about the school bus incidents in the province. With

the timing of when school opens every year, we always get people to stop for the

red arms that come out and the lights that come out, and we're all in support of

that.

I hear

some of the concerns from the few Members of the Opposition about are we doing

the police officers' work. I don't think we could take the job of the police

officers, but we can put deterrents in. Mr. Speaker, if we knew that there are

police on the road on a May 24 weekend, we have a tendency to slow down. If we

know there are going to be cameras in the important areas like the school buses

and also on the construction areas where there's a potential for danger for the

workers, if we know that – I know one of the changes that we made back a while

ago is that if you get a licence plate and it was changed, some can say I wasn't

driving, it was somebody else.

With the

change to the licence plate back then, it showed, okay, whoever owns the car, so

we'll find out who was driving because we're going to get whoever owns the car,

they'll get a ticket and pretty soon they will tell you it wasn't me who was

actually driving the vehicle. So that's all good.

Mr.

Speaker, I had one concern and, to be upfront, I already brought it to the

minister and the Government House Leader on it, is the registrar. I'm going back

to an issue – and it was not from me. It's definitely not from me but it's an

issue that's going to relate to this. I'm going back to the Kubota issue. The

issue that I'm raising here is what regulations are put in place for the

registrar. It says here in this

section that the registrar can lift it and give

15 days, and I'll explain why this is a concern for me.

Under

60.14: “The registrar shall confirm or set aside the suspension and provide

reasons for his or her decision in writing within 15 business days after the

hearing.” So if someone comes in and wants to appeal their suspension, are there

guidelines set up of what you can appeal? Are there guidelines set up?

I'll

give you the reason why I'm asking this. I'll tell you the reason why and I

think people in the province understand the Kubota issue that's been ongoing.

There's a lot of (inaudible) in people's district, I know they've been talking

to and I just spoke to a couple of individuals again out in Chapel Arm that has

major concerns about this.

I'll

explain this. This is not me personally. I'm out of the issue, but it's the

other people. There are going to be major concerns if this is not addressed now

and the answers aren't given to the House of Assembly, I can assure you. I'll

just tell you why.

When the

Kubota issue came up, the minister – and I have to just let the people know I

already gave the ministers my concerns. This is not standing up trying to

embarrass anybody. It's not standing up trying to blindside anybody. I actually

went over and told the Government House Leader here's my concern; get your

information together for it because it is a concern for me.

When the

Kubota issue comes up, under the all-terrain and snowmobile act, Kubotas aren't

allowed on the road. That's under the act, passed in this House of Assembly –

illegal to be on the road.

In a

letter from the minister, it was dated March 20 from the Minister of Service NL,

Kubotas travelling were viewed on the Lewin Parkway in Corner Brook during peak

times. Operation on public roads increases the risk of the vehicle being

involved in a crash with cars and vehicles. While passenger cars can have safety

features designed to protect occupants from a collision, such as crumple zones,

side impact protection and airbags, all-terrain vehicles do not. If a collision

occurred, the driver could be killed or severely injured. Can't be on the road.

Then

here's another one: The assessment decision of the registrar was communicated to

the registered owner that the Kubota could not be used on the road because it

falls under the all-terrain snowmobile act. I just want to repeat another one

here. This is, again, from the Minister of Service NL to an individual

concerning it: Accessories such as lighting, snow kits and snow blower

attachments added at the dealership does not change the manufacturer's

specification of these vehicles.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

We ask

that you stay relevant to the bill.

MR. JOYCE:

It is.

MR. SPEAKER:

To which section?

MR. JOYCE:

No, this is about the bill

because what it is – by the time I'm going to get to the point is that the

registrar overruled the all-terrain snowmobile act, overruled the Minister of

Service NL. The Minister of Transportation and Works just wrote a letter to the

City of Corner Brook saying they can't be on the road over on Route 440 on the

North Shore Highway. He just wrote that letter to the City of Corner Brook.

point, Mr. Speaker, is if the minister is stating that they can't be on the

road, if the act says it can't be on the road, but the registrar says she has

the authority to put them on the road under this

section of the

Highway Traffic Act . Under the

Highway Traffic Act it says: “The

registrar shall issue, in respect of a vehicle that has been registered, (

a) a

numbered vehicle licence in a form prescribed by the registrar; and (

b) one or

more identification plates as determined by the registrar.”

So what

you find here is that we have an all-terrain snowmobile act approved by this

House of Assembly that these vehicles cannot be on the road. I have seven or

eight letters from the Minister of Service NL saying they can't be on the road.

I have a letter from the Minister of Transportation and Works to the City of

Corner Brook saying they can't be on the road, but you have a registrar saying,

no, no, I have the authority to override the minister, the act, the House of

Assembly.

relevancy on this is that under 60.14(1) of the bill: “The registrar shall

confirm or set aside the suspension and provide reasons for his or her decision

in writing within 15 business days after the hearing.”

Under

that act I'm saying, what restrictions does the registrar have? What are the

guidelines for the registrar to do that? Because if I go in tomorrow – if I have

a suspension, I can go in tomorrow to the registrar – what are you saying the

guidelines are going to be, say, for me? I'll tell you why I say that; I tell

you what I said under the act.

Under

the all-terrain and snowmobile act, it can't be on the road. The minister stated

it seven or eight times in letters, okay. The registrar just approved one in St.

John's, against the act, against the minister – two ministers – in this House of

Assembly. So if the registrar can make their own decisions, what's going to

happen if someone comes in with these suspensions? What's going to happen? Are

there guidelines in it for suspensions, or do you just say, I know you, here, go

on and make up.

This is

my point on this here, this is my point. Is if the registrar already did it –

and I have proof and it's public knowledge, and I have it here – and the reason

why the registrar did it: unique commercial needs. Yet, you have a letter from

the minister – and this is very important, Mr. Speaker, because it relates back

to the duties of the registrar and the ability of a registrar to make decisions

affecting everybody's life. Here's a letter to a Minister of the Crown: Will the

vehicles purchased for commercial use be allowed to be used on the road?

Here's

what the Minister of Service NL wrote back: The intended use of the vehicle is

not considered on the registration process. Vehicles are registered based on

their design. If an individual purchased a vehicle designed for off use only,

then the vehicle is not eligible to operate on a highway, regardless of the

intended use of the purchaser.

But he

registrar just approved one –

AN HON. MEMBER:

We'll give you a little

leeway.

MR. JOYCE:

And that is my point, is that the registrar just approved it. The minister was

either wrong in these letters, the Minister of Transportation and Works is wrong

on these letters, on the letter that he wrote the City of Corner Brook, or the

registrar has more power than the House of Assembly and the ministers in this

House.

What

gives me or any person in this House any assurance that if someone passes a bus,

they move on and someone almost gets hit, because you know – this is no

reflection, this could be a registrar 10 years down the road, 15 year down the

roads. What gives me any comfort or anybody else: okay, you almost hit a kid,

but, listen, I'm going to be a bit lax on you now because I might know you or

know your friends or your mother or your father; okay, I'll write up something

that I can delay the decision a bit.

That's

my concern. That is my concern, and until I get that rectified, until I find out

what guidelines are in here to protect people – what this bill is intended to do

– have a deterrence for people to make sure kids are safe on school bus routes

when they're getting on and off the bus; making sure in construction zones,

people who are working, that they are protected. This is one of the concerns I

have with this.

So, how

anybody could stand up in this hon. House, and I ask either one of the

ministers, because both of them are right now being –

MR. SPEAKER:

Talk to the Chair, please.

MR. JOYCE:

Pardon me?

MR. SPEAKER:

Direct your question to the

Chair.

MR. JOYCE:

Yes, I'm just saying, either one of them could stand up and answer how the

ministers of the Crown could write letters to the general public saying, no, and

here's the safety reason for it, not allowed on this road; but, the registrar

can turn around and say: unique commercial purposes, we're going to allow one

now. The hell with you, ministers; the hell with you, regulations, the

all-terrain snowmobile act; the hell with you, the House of Assembly. That's the

concern, and it's a fact.

anybody wanted any of these letters to prove what I'm saying, they can have

these letters. If you want the email from the registrar, I could also provide

the email from the registrar where, on behalf of the people in Chapel Arm, I

wrote and said: They have businesses.

One in

particular called me, he said: I use it all the time going back, I got a little

shop set up in the summertime selling a bit of food. He showed me water in the

back. It's great, haul it down. I could drive it down. He's been using it for

four or five, six years, not a problem.

I wrote

on his behalf, and said: Can he use it for commercial? The Minister of Service

NL said: No, he can't because the design of the vehicle is unsafe. It's unsafe

to have it on the road.

This is

my point, Mr. Speaker – I know you're paying attention very attentively, and

this is why I'm saying it. Here are the people in Chapel Arm, who I wrote on the

minister's behalf, and the Minister of Service NL wrote back and said: No, you

can't do it. Someone here in St. John's put an application in, and the registrar

said: Because of unique commercial purposes, I'm going to approve it. A double

standard. An actual double standard, Mr. Speaker, and this is my concern with

this act.

This is

no reflection on this registrar. I have to say, this could be any registrar. If

there's any reflection on this registrar, it's not, okay? It's just the

documentation that I have where both ministers have said, no, you can't do it,

but the registrar is saying, no, because you're in St. John's, Sir, I'm going to

approve this one in St. John's for unique commercial purposes. Anybody else in

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, can't go under unique

commercial purposes, only if you live in St. John's. That's the ruling of the

registrar.

Now, all

documentation – this is not me. I use the Member for Baie Verte - White Bay.

What happens if someone almost hits a kid down your way because they're speeding

and pass the red arm stuck out? What happens if you find out a week later they

got their licence back because the registrar happened to know somebody? How

would you feel? How would anybody in this House feel? This is a serious question

that I have.

This is

not me; this is the documentation I have from other people to proving the fact

that – I hope it's in the act. I don't know if it's in the act. I'm asking the

minister if it is in the act – either one of the ministers, Mr. Speaker, either

one of the two ministers – if it's in the act. Because I can assure you one

thing, the act that we approved in this House of Assembly, the all-terrain

snowmobile act, the registrar says she can override it, and she has done it. She

has overridden the act, and even with the minister – her own letter sent to the

people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, that you cannot use it for

commercial operations, but if you live in St. John's, you can get it done. That

is wrong.

I'll sit

down, and hopefully the ministers will come up with assurances that, yes, she

cannot or he cannot – the registrar, whoever it is – override the legislation in

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Because if we're going to put in

safety for the children in this province, if we're going to put in safety for

the workers, we have to make sure the act is enforced.

I, for

one, Mr. Speaker, don't want to say because I know someone, I can get something

done, released off the suspensions. I definitely don't want that done. I just

need assurances that it won't be done as it has been done very recently and I

can tell the people in Chapel Arm that if you move to St. John's, you can get

special treatment. If you live in Chapel Arm you can't get special treatment and

you have to go by the act, but if you live in St. John's we can overlook the act

for you.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER (Reid):

The hon. the Member for

Bonavista.

MR. PARDY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

pleasure and a privilege to stand and engage in the debate on this particular

act. I go back to last week in the first reading. I know the Minister of Service

NL had stood and said we'd begin the debate, the dialogue on this, which is

wonderful.

I know

the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port had stated: What tools do we have in

our box, what else can we deploy with this act or give thought to? He also

stated that education needs to continue and is paramount, which is wonderful.

colleague from CBS had stated that safety is the number one issue. The Minister

of Education and Early Childhood Development stated the same thing and then my

friend and colleague for Labrador West stated the same thing. I concur. It's a

wonderful initiative that we amend the act because anything we do to increase

safety, that is paramount and we will.

I just

want to throw out a perspective. Within that realm of where we're going with the

Highway Traffic Act and, in

particular, school bus safety and construction zones, I just want to throw out a

perspective in relation to the dialogue that we started today.

The

Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development mentioned last week – she

had stated that there were many people in the province that are watching. I

think she referenced her own district. I was surprised at the number that are

engaged and watching as to what we discuss and what we state in the House.

I can't

help but think today that, for example, a constituent in Bonavista is most

interested in the Highway Traffic Act ,

Joshua Clarke. He has a child RaeLynn who utilizes the bus safety and always

provides feedback. To him, I'm sure, safety is paramount as well.

In order

to bridge – just my perspective and for the dialogue, if I can share just one

occasion, a story that does mesh in with what the perspective would be on the

act. I, like many administrators in the last years of my tenure as a school

administrator, would meet the children and the parents each morning in front of

the school doors.

In our

complex, which was Clarenville Middle School and Clarenville High School joined

and sharing one lot, we had 14 buses that came each morning. Between the two

schools there was in excess of 780 students; some driving their own vehicle,

being dropped off by parents.

When I

first started in front of the door, there was a crossroads where the pedestrian

traffic dropping the children off would cross with the school buses when they

dropped off the children that would leave the lot. On this one particular

morning there was a vehicle with children aboard that missed the stop sign that

was emblazed in on the pavement and when they passed in front of the school bus,

the school bus operator – the school bus was vacant at the time – had stuck the

horn down on the driver of the vehicle who had two children aboard.

They

pulled up in front of the doors to drop the children off, the bus passed and I

greeted the occupants of the car. It was two grandparents dropping off the two

children when their daughter and her husband was away. They weren't familiar

with the parking lot. They missed the stop sign that was on the parking lot and

I would think that we can probably forgive such an occasion as that.

When we

talk about the education, like the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port had

mentioned, part of the education was that maybe those who are not familiar with

that school parking lot will miss, occasionally, the stop sign. So the education

would be, what can we do differently?

started that year, we met with the 14 drivers and contractors each year. At the

start of each year, we met with them and the perspective would be: People don't

purposely pass bus stops or buses. Sometimes they are distracted by something

other. There's something, either they're not familiar with it, new to the area

or there's something that's occupying their mind. When the bus drivers met, they

engaged and said there were strategies they could deploy to enhance the safety

at the bus stops. They discussed it.

While we

talk about cameras, yes – and I agree because if cameras enhance the safety,

it's good, but what these bus drivers came up with and said that we need to make

sure we give every vehicle operator that is approaching that bus ample notice

that that bus is prepared to stop. What they all discussed was that a

significant distance ahead of that stop, they would activate their red lights to

give people the indication that they were approaching the stop. They never let

children out when the bus stopped. The arm went out; when traffic was to a full

stop, only then did they let children off the bus.

In 2008,

there was legislation brought by the government at the time that each bus would

have an additional set of lights on it, which would be amber lights, along with

the red lights. The amber would go on before the red for the purpose of alerting

the drivers, the vehicle operators, that they are getting close to a particular

bus stop, and that's a good thing. I think there was a 12-year period that was

given from 2008, which, if it is 12 years, it would be about 2020 that every bus

that we would have in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador would have the

amber lights in addition to the red lights – a very good practice.

It was

stated last week that – again, just a perspective – people blatantly pass the

bus. I'm not sure of that. I don't think that's the case. I know that the piece

that we ought to be looking at is what can we do in addition to the cameras to

make it safer at these stops. If I ask the Amalgamated students that were here

today that if we sit at bus stops in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador,

if we had a digital sign that was flashing, as opposed to a sign that would be

12 by 18, what do you think would capture the vehicle operator more. I would

think those students from Amalgamated would say, surely goodness, the flashing

digital sign would better alert that there is a bus stop occurring and there

needs to be caution in relation to that. I would assume that would be the case.

I think that would be safe to do so.

So when

we look at a lot of things we're going to put into the

Highway Traffic Act , I appreciate the dialogue and I know here's our

chance to make sure that what we can do to

an act to make it safer, not only on

the punitive side, but to what we can put in there as a province to make it

safer, this is a good opportunity to do it.

To give

you a little bit of data; I stated that we met 14 buses deliver to Clarenville

Middle and Clarenville High per day. Twenty-eight runs, some from an hour away

that came into Clarenville to drop the children off. Twenty-eight each week,

that's 140 runs. In the course of 185 school days we're looking at over 5,000

runs, as a sample. Sixteen years as an administrator, there weren't too many

that came up in those meetings concerned about people passing the bus with the

practices they had.

Now,

keep in mind, I know the Member for Cape St. Francis spoke well about four-lane

highways. We don't have those in the District of Bonavista. So I know there are

different perspectives in different areas and always the same does not cover

everybody, but in those areas where we have it, we found that wasn't an issue.

The issue was often a behaviour on the bus that was concerning, or the child who

was in fear of having an anaphylactic reaction that might be 45 minutes outside

of town, and that could be an issue. Those were the big ones we grappled with.

So while

I appreciate the concern with the school bus stops – and I concur, because just

one incident is one too many that we need – we just want to make sure we're

comprehensive in how we look at all this, and the education continue. I think

that is what we do.

The last

note before I take my seat; the construction zones, I know it's been said. My

colleague from CBS just mentioned about if the signs are not removed from

construction zones, then I would say there is a greater probability, regardless

of how miniscule that greater probability may be, that someone is going to think

there's not a lot of action or not action on that particular site. If it is 1 or

2 per cent increase in the odds, that's 1 or 2 per cent going in the wrong

direction.

So I

would say, why in the world if it's not construction ongoing, why do we have the

signs erected? Maybe if there is no construction and not a construction site,

then those signs should be taken down and mandatory they be removed at that time

to not give someone the false expectation there was work, when really there

isn't.

Anyway,

thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Service NL, if she speaks now she will close the debate.

The hon.

the Minister of Service NL.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Over the

past several years our government has made public safety a top priority. We've

made a number of improvements to the

Highway Traffic Act . It is our government's belief, Mr. Speaker, that any

attempt to improve road safety should be done now.

Mr.

Speaker, I listened intently to the debate earlier in the week. I heard the

Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands, specifically, and I went back to my

department and spoke to my staff. I really took his concerns to heart because I

truly understood what he was talking about.

Mr.

Speaker, in an effort to keep the momentum going in this very important piece of

legislation, I will be introducing an amendment here today. Right now, I would

just like to say that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador takes highway

safety extremely seriously. We look forward to continuing making our highways,

our roads safer for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Is the House ready for the

question?

MS. COADY:

Ready.

MR. SPEAKER:

The motion is that Bill 5 be

now read a second time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK (Murphy):

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Highway Traffic Act. (Bill 5)

MR. SPEAKER:

The bill has now been read a

second time.

When

shall the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole?

MS. COADY:

Presently.

MR. SPEAKER:

Presently.

motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act,” read a second time,

ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, by leave. (Bill 5)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MS. COADY:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Minister of Transportation and Works, for leave to introduce a

bill,

An Act To Amend The Public Trustee Act, 2009, Bill 11, and I further move

that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded the

hon. Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, An

Act To Amend The Public Trustee Act, 2009, Bill 11, and that the bill be now

read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety to introduce a bill, “An Act

To Amend The Public Trustee Act, 2009,” carried. (Bill 11)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Public Trustee Act, 2009. (Bill 11)

MR. SPEAKER:

The bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the bill be read a second time?

MS. COADY:

Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 11 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Minister of Transportation and Works, for leave to introduce a

bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Enforcement Of Canadian Judgments Act, Bill

12, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the hon. the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Enforcement Of Canadian Judgments Act, Bill 12,

and that the said be now read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety to introduce a bill, “An Act

To Amend The Enforcement Of Canadian Judgments Act,” carried. (Bill 12)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Enforcement Of Canadian Judgments Act. (Bill 12)

MR. SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the bill be read a second time?

MS. COADY:

Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 12 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MS. COADY:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, for leave

to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Liquor Corporation Act, Bill

15, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the hon. the Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Liquor Corporation Act, Bill 15, and that the said

bill be now read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to introduce a

bill, “An Act To Amend The Liquor Corporation Act,” carried. (Bill 15)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Liquor Corporation Act. (Bill 15)

MR. SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

first time.

When

shall the bill be read a second time?

MS. COADY:

Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, Bill 15 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Minister of Health and Community Services, for leave to

introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Registered Nurses Act, 2008, Bill

16, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.