March 26, 2007 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 41

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

This afternoon we would like to welcome to the gallery, twenty-one students

from the Ecole Des Grands-Vents in the District of St. John's North. These

students are accompanied by their teachers: Madame Emmanuelle Tessier, Madame

Agathe Robichaud, and Monsieur Ted Bonnah.

Welcome to our House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today on a point of privilege.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier read a letter into the record of the House of

Assembly on Friday, which he said was from the Concerned Citizens Committee of

Fortune. The letter was signed by Jake Thornhill, the Chair of the Committee,

and the Vice-Chair was not even aware that the letter had been written. I had

not seen a copy of the letter, and requested that it be tabled. The letter

contained false information, and Mr. Thornhill had to know that when he wrote

the letter.

I called Mr. Thornhill and asked him why the letter was written in the first

place. He told me that, after I asked a question of the Premier in the House of

Assembly last December about not responding to a request for a meeting with the

Concerned Citizens Committee, he received a phone call from someone in

government, but he would not tell me who it was who had called him. He did tell

me, however, that he did not hear me ask the question, himself, of the Premier.

I also asked him why he said in the letter that the Concerned Citizens

Committee have had no dealings with me since March 2005 when he knows

differently. At first, he insisted the Committee had not, until I told him that

my office records every telephone call and the action taken on behalf of my

constituents. In fact, fifty calls had been recorded from the executive of the

Concerned Citizens Committee in 2005 alone, several of which came from Mr.

Thornhill. It was then Mr. Thornhill told me that the executive of the Concerned

Citizens Committee was told in no uncertain terms that, if the Committee wanted

a meeting with government, their MHA could not be included or the meeting would

not go ahead.

I do not believe the Premier knew the information in the letter was false,

but what he did on Friday was further evidence of his attempts to bully into

submission anyone who dares to question him.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS FOOTE: The letter from Mr. Thornhill was written last December and had

nothing to do with the serious question I put to the Premier on Friday, on

behalf of the Town of Fortune. It would appear the Premier was waiting for the

opportunity to use the letter written last December; a letter, by the way, that

Mr. Thornhill told me he never expected the Premier to raise in the House of

Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, if I cannot ask a question in this House without someone calling

my constituents and questioning them about it, and if a directive has gone out

that meetings my constituents are seeking with government will not go ahead if I

am to be included, certainly my ability to do the job I was elected to do by the

people in the District of Grand Bank is being impeded by government.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, it does not appear on the surface that there is any question of

privilege here. The member may take a different view, and a difference of

opinion may exist between the view of the hon. member and the view of the

Premier. The fact of the matter is that the Premier quoted from a letter - a

letter that had been sent to him by an individual in the Province - and, on

request from the Opposition, the letter was made public.

I do not see anything here that constitutes a point of privilege. There may

be a difference of opinion. The hon. member may want to put her spin on it, and

that is her right, but there is certainly nothing here, Mr. Speaker, that

constitutes a point of privilege. Therefore, I would rule there isn't a point

of privilege, or ask you to rule that there isn't a point of privilege.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would concur that it is not the position of the Speaker to rule on a point

of privilege. My understanding is that it is the Speaker's place to decide if

it is a point of privilege, that the Speaker does rule upon points of order but

not upon points of privilege. That is, of course, the reason why any member in

this House is allowed to stand on a point of privilege, to make his or her case

to the Chair so that Your Honour can make a decision, if it is indeed a point of

privilege.

I think we are just at that stage right now. I would assume that the Chair

wants to take it under advisement and decide if it is, indeed, a point of

privilege. If it is, fine, we will deal with it in due course, and if it is not

a point of privilege, we will await your ruling in that regard.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair will take the matter under advisement. The Chair

will need to review the transcripts of the House and also look at the

correspondence that has been referenced. We will look at our precedents in this

House, together with other precedents in the Canadian jurisdictions, and we will

make a ruling at the earliest possible opportunity.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have members' statements as follows: the

hon. the Member for Topsail, the hon. the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile, the

hon. the Member for Conception Bay South, the hon. the Member for Torngat

Mountains, the hon. the Member for Port au Port, and the hon. the Member for

Grand Falls-Buchans.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Topsail.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS E. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this House today to pay tribute to an outstanding individual in

Conception Bay South.

Mr. Scott Crocker is the principal of Holy Spirit High School in Conception

Bay South. In January 2007, Scott was selected as one of Canada's outstanding

principals for 2007. He was one of thirty-two principals from across Canada and

the only principal from this Province to receive this prestigious award.

Last year, Scott was chosen as this Province's school administrator of the

year, and was nominated by his regional office for the national honour of one of

Canada's Outstanding Principals.

Since Scott became principal of Holy Spirit High School six years ago, he has

spear-headed many initiatives, including a Community Outreach Program for

students, participation in the Run for Cancer, other fundraisers and many other

school events, including the Frog Pond Ecological Restoration Project that was

raised in this House on a previous occasion.

Mr. Speaker, I ask this hon. House to join with me in congratulating Mr.

Scott Crocker on being selected as one of Canada's Outstanding Principals in

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile and Opposition

House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to pay tribute to a dear friend, a devoted mom and a faithful

soldier in her church, Mrs. Elsie Keeping of Port aux Basques. Mrs. Keeping

passed away yesterday morning at the age of eighty-six. Except for a brief

illness these past few weeks, Mrs. Keeping lived a very active life.

It has been said that Mother's Day was patterned after Elsie Keeping. By

the time her husband had died in 1965, when she was just forty years old, she

had given birth to seventeen children. We jokingly call them Elsie's finest,

and indeed they are. Despite the financial challenges she faced, being left with

a large and young family, the Keeping's home had a surplus of love and

nurturing from Elsie Keeping. There were, no doubt, many meals of homemade bread

and butter, and whoever got up first in the morning got the mitts and the vamps,

but they were, and still are, a very close-knit family.

Mr. Speaker, Elsie Keeping was a friend to everyone, young and old alike. She

was devoted to her church, the Salvation Army, visiting the sick, playing her

accordion in church and for extended care patients at the LeGrow Health Centre

or the seniors' homes, or countless hours at the army's kettle drum in the

Grand Bay mall.

A small woman physically, but with a gigantic heart. She was not a doctor, a

minister, a nurse or a social worker, but she touched hundreds of lives in a

positive way. Our community has lost a shining example of kindness, compassion

and caring, but heaven has gained an angel. God bless you, Elsie Keeping.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to inform my hon. colleagues about four exceptional individuals

from my district who have been inducted into the Conception Bay South Sports

Hall of Fame.

The eleventh annual ceremony inducted Derrick Baggs and Graham Tibbo in the

Athlete category, and Robert (Bob) Hillier, as we call him, and Mont Pritchett

in the Builder category.

Derrick Baggs is a talented athlete who has participated in hockey, softball,

soccer and a variety of high school athletics. On many occasions Mr. Baggs has

taken on the role of team captain and is an award winning member of many

championship teams. He even had the privilege of coaching me one time, Mr.

Speaker, which I am sure he never got over yet.

Graham Tibbo is also a multi-talented athlete who has taken

part in fast and

slow pitch softball, volleyball, swimming, soccer and darts. Mr. Tibbo has

competed at the provincial and national levels, including the Canada Games.

Graham has also won many awards and has been a strong member of several

championship teams. I must have played with him on the teams that he did not win

championships with.

As well, Mr. Speaker, Bob Hillier is a soccer enthusiast who, among other

responsibilities, was the president of the first Minor Soccer Association in

Conception Bay South. Mr. Hillier helped grow this organization to 200

participants. Due to his hard work and dedication, local soccer registration

through the association now exceeds 1,200 athletes.

Mont Pritchett has received many awards in his role as a dedicated badminton

coach. Mr. Pritchett's success is well known throughout the community. He is

unwavering in his commitment to volunteer his personal time in the development

of sporting talent in our community.

I would like to congratulate the Hall of Fame Board of Governors on an

excellent banquet again this year and, of course, the selection committee on

their choices for induction.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate a gentleman from the North Coast of

Labrador who has played a vital role in maintaining our history, our culture and

way of life in the Province, especially in the Labrador Region.

The year 2007 marks the sixty-third consecutive year that Douglas Jacque,

from the little community of Postville on the North Coast of Labrador, has

owned, operated and maintained a team of sled dogs known as the Labrador

huskies. At the young age of thirteen years he owned his first dog team, and

today, at the age of 76, he still continues to maintain and operate a team of

Labrador huskies.

This past weekend, in the community of Hopedale, I had the opportunity and

pleasure to witness the annual Labrador Heritage Husky Dog Team race, which was

won by another veteran dog team driver, Frank Dicker from Hopedale.

In the early 1960s and mid-1970s, the snowmobile took over from the dog team

as a way of transportation. Mr. Speaker, had it not been for the efforts of Mr.

Jacque, the Labrador husky today would probably become non-existent.

Uncle Doug, as he is affectionately known up and down the Labrador Coast,

proudly boasts, with a twinkle in his eye: 63 years, boys, a record that even

Wayne Gretzky will never beat.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me today, not only to

congratulate Mr. Jacque but also to sincerely thank him for keeping a vital part

of our culture, history and way of life alive and well in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. CORNECT: Monsieur le pr sident

- Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to congratulate the newly formed Bay St. George Folk Arts

Council. The mission of the council is to promote folk art in the Bay St.

George, Stephenville, Port au Port areas. Through this association, it will be

able to promote and celebrate our culture and heritage by offering workshops in

such things as step-dancing, music, storytelling, songwriting and so on.

The plan is to hold monthly folk nights in the area. This will be of

significant economic and social benefit to the region. It will highlight the

French, Acadian, Irish, Scottish and Mi'kmaq cultures. It will showcase our

musical and storytelling talents. It will encourage our youth to participate and

share their culture and heritage. It is the goal of the association to bring

together as many of our artists and artisans and promote their talents to the

rest of the Province, the country, and the world.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the efforts of Cal McNiven, Doug Benoit and Don

Dunphy on their commitment and determination to bring together the proud and

talented artists of the region.

Monsieur le pr sident,

le d funt

Emile Benoit, musicien de l'Anse- B -Canards,

a toujours dit que pour appr cier

et vivre la musique et la culture il faut que a

vienne du coeur.

Mr. Speaker, the late Emile Benoit once said that to appreciate and live our

music and our culture it has to come from the heart.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, congratulations and best wishes to the executive and

membership of the Bay St. George Folk Arts Council.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Gordon Pinsent, a

Grand Falls native, who has been inducted into Canada's Walk of Fame Honour

for his impact on Canada's cultural heritage.

Mr. Speaker, Gordon Pinsent is an icon in the Canadian entertainment

industry. This Grand Falls-born actor and writer has participated in stage,

radio, television and film. He left Grand Falls at the age of seventeen and

began his career on stage in Winnipeg.

From that moment on, he acquired a great deal of experience with the first

live radio drama out of Winnipeg. He returned east, working in Toronto and

Stratford. Radio, television and movies have taken his talents across Canada,

the United States, and even Greece. He has since won numerous credits and

awards, and is one of Canada's most respected artists. In addition to acting,

he directs and produces, and has written a number of novels and screenplays.

Mr. Speaker, Gordon Pinsent received the Order of Canada in 1980, and the

Companion Order in 1998. He has receive several honourary degrees from

universities across Canada, and we were delighted to see our own Arts and

Culture Center in Grand Falls-Windsor named in his honour during our Centennial

Celebrations in August 2005.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join with me in

congratulating Gordon Pinsent, who has been inducted into Canada's Walk of

Fame.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works, and

Labrador Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to congratulate the competitors of the

Second Annual Cain's Quest Endurance Race that recently took place in

Labrador.

The Cain's Quest Endurance Race is a snowmobile competition in which teams

of two traverse over 2,000 kilometres of Labrador wilderness. The race begins in

Labrador City, continues to Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and ends back in Labrador

City.

Mr. Speaker, this race is not for the faint of heart. The terrain in Labrador

can be as gruelling as it is majestic. Teams have to travel over deep gorges,

across open waterways, and brave Labrador winter nights, relying only on the

supplies at hand.

I am delighted to say, Mr. Speaker, that eighteen teams took

part in the

challenge, with some coming as far away as Maine and New Hampshire. I was also

very pleased to see several teams from Labrador City and Wabush, as well as the

team of Roland Barth and Jason King from my own district.

The race took an unexpected and exciting turn halfway through the event.

Teams realized, in order to complete the journey, they would need to work

together, and the standings reflect the team spirit of this competition.

Mr. Speaker, first place was shared by three teams from Labrador City: Toby

Myles and Jocelyn Tremblay; Dixon Clements and Dion Hancock;, Garrett Hunt and

Kent Careen.

Mr. Speaker, a race of this caliber can only happen with a large volunteer

base. The people of Labrador City and Wabush, Happy Valley-Goose Bay and

Churchill Falls, made this a world-class event. I believe this competition is as

unique and challenging as the Alaskan Iditarod dogsled race and that Labrador

will become a mecca for long-distance snowmobile racing.

I am also proud to say this government, Mr. Speaker, invested $57,000 to

support this event and the ever-growing winter tourism industry which

contributes greatly to our Province's economy.

I would like to ask all hon. members of the House to join me in

congratulating the volunteers, the White Wolf Snowmobile Club in Labrador City,

and especially all the entrants in this year's Second Annual Cain's Quest

Endurance Race.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased today to stand and join with the minister, and all of us on this

side of the House, in congratulating the competitors and the winners of Cain's

Quest.

Mr. Speaker, as most people will know, we in Labrador take our snowmobiling

very seriously, and 2,000 kilometres through Labrador's wilderness is no small

feat for anyone to sign on to. It certainly takes a great deal of courage and a

great deal of stamina to endure a race of this nature.

Mr. Speaker, when I was in Labrador West, when they were getting ready to

start this race, I did talk to some of the competitors who were there from New

Hampshire. That was their second year in this competition. They had told me that

this was probably one of the most rugged and challenging courses for

snowmobiling anywhere in the Eastern Seaboard.

I think that this race not only allows you to go out there and take on what

is a unique challenge, but it also gives you the actual bliss of being able to

enjoy the tranquility of Labrador's wilderness, and to be able to embark on an

experience that will leave you, I am sure, rekindled and rejuvenated, and in

doing so have a tremendous amount of comradery in that whole process.

What I really enjoyed about Cain's Quest was the fact that, as an

individual anywhere you wanted to watch or participate you could do so on-line

through their electronic tracking system. Of course, I enjoyed doing that

everyday while the race was going on.

I have to say, I was somewhat biased. There were two competitors from my

district, Miles O'Brien and Joe Hancock, and this was their second year

competing in this race. They made the trip from the Labrador Straits up through

and into Labrador City to get ready for the competition. They did very well, and

I am very proud of them.

I want to congratulate all the people who partook in this event, and also to

congratulate the organizers, people like Todd Kent who is, I think, the only

employee with the Department of Tourism now in Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

MS JONES: May I by leave, just to clue up, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MS JONES: Mr. Kent is certainly an individual who has been involved with

this initiative since the beginning. It shows the creativity and ingenuity of

the people in that area to be able to embark on a competition like this and be

able to attract people to compete.

I congratulate them all and I wish them well. I am sure that, as the minister

said, this will grow to become one of the most renowned races in snowmobiling

throughout the Eastern part of the country and the United States.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On November 22, the House of Assembly passed a resolution that calls on the

Auditor General to investigate all the details and circumstances of the fibre

optic deal. Since then, Cabinet material has been exempted and a new special

protocol has been established by the Department of Innovation, Justice and

Executive Council that includes the vetting of all documents before they are

approved for release to the Auditor General. The Auditor General himself raised

concerns in correspondence earlier this month when he stated, quote: I

reiterate, that as a result of the vetting process by the Department of

Industry, Trade and Rural Development, Executive Council and the Department of

Justice, I will never be in a position to conclude whether government has

provided me with all information relating to the fibre optic review.

I ask the Premier: If there is nothing to hide, why is government going

through such trouble to establish a new special protocol, one the Auditor

General has never witnessed before in the history of this Province that

restricts what information the Auditor General can have access to?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I can just quite simply say that we have

provided the Auditor General with every single scrap of information that he is

required under law; every single piece.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: I say to the Premier, when the resolution was passed by this

House back on November 22 there were no caveats and exceptions to the Auditor

General doing this review, such as the Auditor General's Act or Cabinet

secrecy. That was imposed by this government after, only after, the fact. If

they wanted to do it, they had lots of time to put it in the resolution and they

did not.

Mr. Speaker, we have heard the Premier state time and time again that the

Auditor General would not be allowed to look at Cabinet documentation because

the Auditor General Act prohibits him looking at the documents. However, nowhere

- nowhere! - does it state that Cabinet cannot voluntarily allow the Auditor

General to look at these documents. I am certain that Mr. Noseworthy would not

be disclosing this document to the public. It is only for him to have, for him

to review, so that he can do a thorough, comprehensive review.

I ask the Premier: Does this deal reek so bad of cover-up that you are afraid

of what the Auditor General might find in the Cabinet documentation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, since we first said that we would provide

the Auditor General with all the necessary information, we have done so. As I

said before, we have provided him with every single scrap of information. In

fact, we provided the Auditor General with 6,200 e-mails alone. I will give you

some idea of the volume of information that we have actually provided to him.

That is one box, Mr. Speaker. That is two boxes, Mr. Speaker. That is three

boxes, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: That's four boxes, Mr. Speaker. (Inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Members will know that the use of props is not permitted in the House and I

would ask if these props could be taken off the table.

MR. REID: Danny, we can't see you, boy. Stand up.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: The thing is, Mr. Speaker, they want this information,

and we are prepared to table all of it.

MR. SPEAKER: The Premier has every right to table the information.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: (Inaudible) if you want to go through it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I thank the hon. the Premier for his co-operation.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What a joke! What an absolute joke and disgrace to the people of this

Province, when the Premier is asked a legitimate question and he stands up here

and plays jokes and plays tricks. How despicable! How absolutely despicable!

I say to the Premier, you might need those boxes to hide behind when the

investigation is finally done. You might need them to hide behind.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General has also raised questions

regarding an affidavit signed by the Premier and released to the media earlier

today. This affidavit appears deliberately evasive and states that the Premier

was not part of the Cabinet decision of October 26, 2006. As it was pointed out

by the Auditor General in meetings last month, it does not state which other

meetings the Premier was involved with or if he was involved in any Cabinet

deliberations.

I ask the Premier, very straightforward - you are a lawyer, you can

understand this - very straightforward and clear: Will you state emphatically

and provide an affidavit that you were not involved in any other discussions on

the fibre deal with your Cabinet colleagues, bureaucrats, and the proponents

themselves?

MR. BUTLER: Now, where is the box with that information?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: First of all, let me say, Mr. Speaker, that these are

not props. This is the information, in those boxes, that was provided to the

Auditor General. We are now saying, to hon. members opposite, that they can have

a copy of all of that information. Just for the record, let me clarify that

these were not props.

Secondly, I am a lawyer, Sir, and I know when I am being deliberately

evasive. You don't, you cannot read my mind and you cannot accuse me, in this

House of Assembly, of being deliberately evasive in an affidavit.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, this was an affidavit that I, in good

conscience, provided voluntarily to the Auditor General. I have spoken to the

Auditor General since, on two occasions, as recently as last Thursday morning

before this hon. House opened, and I asked him: Is there any other information

that you require? Are we withholding any information that is outside the act? Is

there anything else you need? He said: Absolutely not! Those were his words to

me, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I tremble at the fear of being sued again. I used words I should not have. I

fear I might be sued again.

Mr. Speaker, it is our understanding from the Auditor General that the bulk

of the documentation provided by government on the fibre optic deal is indeed -

in fact, the only information provided by this government to the Auditor

General, to date, is somewhere between 6,000 and 7,000 pieces of e-mail. Now,

that is the first time I am ever aware of - I was a former member of government

at one time - any government having spent $15 million of taxpayers' money

untendered over e-mails. I think there is a bit more behind there than this

number of e-mails.

I ask the Premier: Where are the real documents of substance related to this

deal? Why are you only providing e-mails when the hardhitting, real substantive

facts of this deal are being hidden? Premier, what are you hiding and why?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the minister responsible for this

department is overseas representing the Province on behalf of the seal hunt, so

if I may, I would like to refer to a letter that he forwarded on March 22 to the

Auditor General. I am just going to read some selected excerpts. A copy of this

will be available. A copy of this will be available for the press as well.

"I understand you have raised concerns over the documentation my

department has provided you with regards to the Trans Gulf Fibre Optic

Proposal... I understand all appropriate documentation has been submitted to

your office, and technical briefings have been held for you and your staff, but

should you or your officials require additional information or encounter any

problems whatsoever during the course of your review, please feel free to

contact me...

Reports, Briefing Presentations... I am advised that all the reports,

briefing presentations, consulting contracts and legal opinions requested have

been provided to your officials." That is a lot more than e-mails.

"The non-Cabinet confidence Novell Groupwise emails of the lead official

on this file, Robert Parsons, and the former Deputy Minister... comprising some

6,200 emails and attachments were also provided."

Also, with respect to Cabinet confidences, we are not allowed to break the

law. You should know that. We cannot break the law and we are not breaking the

law. As well, Mr. Speaker, there is also a memo, a protocol that went out from

the Deputy Minister of Finance in August of last year indicating to deputy

ministers that there is a proper protocol to be followed here and they have to

make sure when they go through e-mails, that it does not violate Cabinet

confidences. That is normal. That is proper procedure.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is not a case of Cabinet would be breaking any laws. This is a case of

Cabinet hiding behind the law. That is what this is all about.

I spoke to the Auditor General as recently as this morning - got him out of

bed in Toronto, actually - just to be sure and certain as to where he stood on

this issue of providing information to him. He says: I have all I am allowed to

have.

You take the roadblocks that this government has put in front of him from the

Cabinet documentation issue, which is a total farce, and the issue of the

special vetting program that has been set up, and he is not getting any more

e-mails - and the media spin that this government put out, which Mr. Parsons,

that he alluded to, gave in public presentations to the media and everybody else

who wanted it. We are not getting the real facts.

Mr. Speaker, we recently heard in the media that Persona communications, one

of the proponents in the fibre deal, had spent in excess of $90 million to

acquire cable companies in British Columbia.

I ask the Premier: Why are the taxpayers of this Province subsidizing this

company, Persona and others, to the tune of $15 million when Persona has no

problem spending close to $100 million in other parts of the country?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, this is an Opposition that gets up time

and time again and talks about out-migration and lack of jobs in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador, and we are not doing anything to create employment,

and we are not doing anything at all; we are just throwing our hands up and

doing nothing for rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

We just spent $15 million on rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and here is an

excerpt from the Coaster . Here is what was said in the Coaster :

The fibre optic deal is seen as a good thing for the Province and for rural,

remote areas such as the Coast of Bays. It has been needed and long overdue for

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and it is a wonderful opportunity.

The economies of scale did not exist for a single service provider to upgrade

the types of IT service that we have in rural areas. The fibre optic cable,

particularly with it landing in the Connaigre Peninsula, is going to

significantly improve telecommunications infrastructure. It is going to open up

new opportunities for things such as call centres. It is going to impact our

existing businesses in terms of our ability to sell products on-line -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: - our ability to attract businesses because they will

just be able to have an IT system that is compatible with anything on the globe.

That is what we are trying to do, Mr. Speaker. We are trying to make rural

Newfoundland and Labrador world-class.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Premier as well.

I say to the Premier, the only jobs that he is creating in this Province are

for his close friends and business associates when he is giving them $15

million. What the Premier should check on is the fact that the Connaigre

Peninsula is already being serviced by a fibre optic cable or broadband

initiative that was provided by Aliant, so you should check out your facts

before you make those statements, I would say to the Premier.

Mr. Speaker, since this government came to power back in 2003, the Board of

Directors of Fishery Products International has run roughshod over its employees

and now is prepared to break that company up and sell it off piecemeal. This is

happening, I say, Mr. Speaker, with the consent of this government, and has

occurred with the consent of this government.

Last spring, at the infamous fisheries summit that we held down at the hotel

- hosted by the Premier, I might add - he stated that FPI's marketing division

in the United States was of such vital importance to the people of this Province

that we should consider buying it, I say, Mr. Speaker. We should consider buying

it a year ago. Now we hear that FPI is considering breaking off that marketing

division in the U.S. and selling it off to its competitor, a competitor of FPI,

Highliner out of Nova Scotia, and this apparently is going to be done with the

consent of this government.

I ask the Premier: Why your flip-flop in just one short year over FPI's

marketing division?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the only thing that I would categorize as

infamous related to the summit, the fisheries summit that the Leader of the

Opposition refers to in the

preamble to his dissertation, would be the spectacle

of the Leader of the Opposition cowering at a table up in the end of the room,

not even taking a note, Mr. Speaker. You did not even know he was there. He had

no interest in it, no participation in it, said nothing, and did nothing except

occupy a seat, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in terms of the marketing division of FPI, the Premier made it

clear on numerous occasions to anybody who wanted to listen, including the

industry, including the union, that this government was prepared to stand behind

a Newfoundland consortium of any sort - whether it be a co-operative, whether it

include the industry, the union and others - of the Newfoundland Government

standing financially behind the acquisition of that asset for the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Premier not only did it on one occasion, Mr. Speaker; he gave people time

to go back and consider, and come back and talk to us as a government again, and

he did it on a second occasion. Neither time, Mr. Speaker, on neither occasion,

did we have any take-up from the union, from the industry, or anybody else

associated with the industry in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In a recent interview with The Telegram newspaper, the Fisheries

Minister stated that no asset belonging to FPI, Fishery Products International,

would be sold unless it was in the best interest of FPI workers and the people

of this Province in general.

I ask the minister if he could tell us how the sale of the American division

of FPI - the same division, Mr. Speaker, that subsidized the groundfish division

all through the moratorium in this Province - how can you say that would be of

benefit to the 2,200 FPI employees in this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I just answered the question: that this

government made it abundantly clear through the Premier, not on one occasion but

on two occasions, two separate occasions that I can recall, when this government

indicated to the industry, to the union, that we were prepared to financially

assist any group or consortia of groups, or amalgamation of groups, that wanted

to acquire the marketing division of FPI. We tried that as a Newfoundland

initiative, as a Newfoundland-based way of controlling that piece of FPI, and we

had no takers.

Now, it so happens that High Liner, a company that the people of this

Province are intimately familiar with, whether it was at Arnold's Cove or La

Scie in the past, and a number of other communities in Newfoundland and

Labrador, it so happens that High Liner has expressed an interest in that and

other assets of FPI, including Burin on the Burin Peninsula. That piece of

negotiation is continuing. Where it will go, we will see.

In terms of the marketing division, Mr. Speaker, we have offered to

financially assist in acquiring that asset by the people of this Province, by

businesses and the people of this Province, with no luck so far.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker

The minister wrote, or his department was responsible for, the first FPI Act.

He is missing the point in that the only way that FPI can sell its marketing

division, even if the Province does not want to buy it, the only way that they

can sell it is with permission from your government. So you are willing to allow

them to go out and sell it off piecemeal.

I am asking the question: Why are you allowing them to do it in the

beginning? Because you can stop them from doing it even if you do not want to

pay for it, even if you do not want to buy it.

Mr. Speaker, my final question is again for the minister or the Premier. I

ask the minister if he can also tell us, when you are talking about the sale of

any asset will only be done if it is for the benefit of the people of the

Province, how the sale of FPI's two draggers recently - which was done with

the approval of Cabinet, I might add, and unbeknownst to the minister, the

Member for Burin-Placentia West, who sits around that Cabinet table - of what

benefit was that for the people who worked on those boats, and of what benefit

was that to the people who work in the plant in Marystown?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker on the

preamble, I suppose you would call it, to

the hon. member's question.

First of all, Mr. Speaker, it was this government, this Premier and this

government, that amended the FPI Act to ensure that no asset of FPI could be

sold without the consent of the government. That was not there, Mr. Speaker. We

did not inherit that from the Leader of the Opposition. We did not inherit that

from a Premier, who never had the time of day to ask those questions, and a

government who never had the time of day to ask those questions to FPI when they

were doing the thing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. RIDEOUT: They never had that time, Mr. Speaker, but we had the time

and we amended the Act to ensure that it did not happen.

In terms of the trawlers, Mr. Speaker, everybody knows, including the

Opposition - but he does not want to be blinded by the facts - but everybody

knows that FPI divested themselves of some trawlers and purchased certain other

trawlers, which they are now refurbishing and redoing to put back into the

industry, that are more efficient, fuel efficient and fishing efficient and

everything else. There has been no detriment done to the ability of FPI to

harvest their offshore resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. BALL: Mr. Speaker, in 1973 an agreement was negotiated between the

federal and provincial governments to develop Gros Morne area as a national

park. Since that time, snowmobiling has been a permitted activity that has been

enjoyed by thousands of residents and tourists in the Province. Unfortunately, a

park management plan has now been developed that would restrict snowmobiling to

less than 10 per cent of the park, even though Parks Canada has found no

evidence that snowmobiling is causing any damage to the area.

I ask the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation: Since the Province is

one of the signatories on this plan, is the provincial government supporting the

decision to place restrictions on recreational snowmobilers and tourism

operators in the area?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question.

In response to that question, I have to say that, first of all, we are

talking about federal jurisdiction and a national park. I might add, Mr.

Speaker, that this is the only national park in all of Canada that does allow

snowmobiling within its boundaries. In order to get to that point, they did a

consultation with all stakeholders and came up with a plan, implemented a plan,

and certainly we go forward from there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. BALL: I like the idea of being a little unique in Canada and I think

that would have given us one unique opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, not only does Parks Canada want to restrict the area for

snowmobiling, but they also want to cap the number of people who can use the

park. The Deer Lake area has just been designated the snowmobile hub for the

Province and Gros Morne National Park is one of the key destinations. The

minister, himself, released a winter tourism guide which encourages snowmobiling

as a key activity to promote winter tourism in the Province.

I ask the minister: If we are to encourage and protect tourism in this

Province, why would we permit the removal of snowmobile rights in this area,

especially where there is no evidence to support such a move?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, looking at the question, I reiterate that

this is a federal jurisdiction and a federal decision that was made. We did, as

a government, certainly involve ourselves in that decision to ensure that all of

the concerns of the stakeholders were raised; they were raised. We did look at

making sure that the decision that was made was in the best interest of the

people concerned.

I say to you, once again, that this is not a jurisdiction of which we are a

part, and that we did bring forth the concerns of the residents. The residents

concerns were put forward. Again, the decision was made on the part of the

federal government, not the provincial government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. BALL: The management plan suggests, if an individual lives in Gros

Morne National Park they will be permitted to snowmobile in 85 per cent of the

park. However, if an individual lives outside the park they are limited to only

10 per cent usage.

I ask the minister: Why the difference?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, these were decisions that were made as a

result of a consultation process brought about by the federal Parks Commission.

I say to you, Mr. Speaker, that this goes back to the formation of that park

back in the 1970s, where the rights of the individuals who were within the

boundaries of that park were protected and protected well. We want to make sure

again, as a government, that we lobby the federal government to look after the

concerns of the residents. This consultation did take place. Again, I say to

you, that the decisions that were made were made on behalf of the federal

government. Again, we represented the people, we represented them to the best of

our ability, but the decisions were made and that goes back over a number of

years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Natural Resources.

Last fall we questioned the Bull Arm Site Corporation's process of awarding

contracts without following through on proper procedures as set out by law. It

was discovered that the former Chair, Ms Joan Cleary, who was fired and

dishonourably discharged from her duty, had been awarding contracts without

going to tender. Since that time, we have submitted several Access to

Information Requests to the Bull Arm Site Corporation, which comes under the

minister's control, only to discover that board never held a single meeting

between November 15, 2005 - when Ms Cleary was initially appointed - up to

October 30, 2006, even though contracts were awarded, many of them, during this

twelve-month period.

I ask the minister: How can any corporation which comes under the provincial

government, and in this case a board upon which the Deputy Minister of Natural

Resources supposedly was sitting, spend hundreds of thousands of dollars of

taxpayers' money and award contracts without ever having a board meeting and

receiving proper approvals?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will review the information as put forward by my colleague, but I can only

speak from the time that I became Minister of the Department of Natural

Resources. Very soon after that a new board was put in place. They met for the

first time in the fall, in October. The winterization contract was one of the

very first things that they dealt with and sent the CEO to look for new

information.

We have looked at all of the contracts that were awarded since 2005. There

were anomalies found in three. We have corrected all of the information made

available and provided all of the information that has been requested by the

Opposition and by others under the ATIP request.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, in this 2004 Conflict of Interest statement, Premier Williams

listed that he was a director of a company called Spectrol Energy Services and

also declared that he had a loan guarantee, at least at that time, to the

company. Mr. Bill Fanning is the head of Spectrol Energy Services and was

appointed to the Bull Arm Site Corporation last year. Mr. Fanning is, in

essence, an employee of one of the Premier's private sector companies.

I ask the minister: Is Mr. Fanning still on the board? Who has replaced Ms

Cleary as the new chair of the board?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Fanning is still on the board and I have to tell you that we are

absolutely delighted to have him.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: He brings a wealth of knowledge and expertise that he is

willing to share with this government and with the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador to see the full use of that site to the benefit of the people of the

Province.

Moreover, Mr. Speaker, a blind trust is a blind trust, and the Premier was

obligated to put his companies in a blind trust so that he could do his job

here. If his companies are in a blind trust, what we are doing with the

employees, or how those people participate in the life of this Province, is not

an issue for the Premier or for the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, conflict of interest guidelines is based not upon

whether the conflict actually exists but even if it is perceived to exist. It is

like the old saying, justice must not only be done but it must be seen to be

done. That is the nature of our questions about Mr. Fanning being so close in

his employment relations with the Premier and you putting him on a board.

Mr. Speaker, we have also discovered in the minutes of the Bull Arm Site

Corporation meetings - those are the ones that were held, when they did have

meetings - that the Auditor General raised concerns regarding the issue of

severance pay to a former site manager. I believe Mr. Greene is the current site

manager, but the person whom he replaced, the site manager, after the

termination of his contract.

I ask the minister: Could you explain to the House the concerns that the

Auditor General raised about severance pay being made to that individual, and

also whether Ms Cleary was given a severance package once she was removed from

her position as a result of her inappropriate actions?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Severance was issued in accordance with the terms of the employment of the

individuals who work for the Bull Arm Corporation. I will certainly find the

details with regard to the former employee. I know that Ms Cleary was entitled

to severance, and I expect that she received severance.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allocated for Question Period has expired.

MR. RIDEOUT: A point of privilege, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: A point of privilege has been raised by the hon. the

Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to raise an issue that I believe is a point of privilege coming out of

an exchange by the Opposition House Leader during Question Period. As everybody

knows, we do not normally do this in Question Period because it would take away

from the time allocated for Question Period, so we generally do it after, if it

needs to be done.

The Opposition House Leader, in putting a question to the Premier, Mr.

Speaker, used the words, in describing an action by the Premier, as

"deliberately evasive".

Mr. Speaker, I know from experience that in this Legislature we are not

allowed to use the phrase "deliberately misleading". That is

unparliamentary and has been ruled so by Your Honour and any number of

predecessors over the years. It would seem to me, Mr. Speaker, that the phrase

"deliberately evasive" is no different than the phrase

"deliberately misleading", that it means exactly the same thing, and

that it accuses and imputes to an hon. member that a member is deliberately

misleading or not being forthcoming with the House in a response.

I would ask Your Honour, as is appropriate, to look at this matter and to

make a determination whether or not the phase "deliberately evasive"

is parliamentary, and I would suggest to Your Honour that it is not.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Your Honour, I look forward to your rendering a decision on

that. We are all aware that the word deliberately, if you impute any improper

motives to a person, would be unparliamentary, and I await your ruling as to

whether the words "deliberately evasive" are indeed inappropriate.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair will look at the matter. I do believe that when

the hon. the Government House Leader began his address he mentioned a point of

privilege. I do believe he meant to say a point of order. I wish to seek the

guidance of the hon. the member, because it would fall under a point of order

rather than a point of privilege.

MR. RIDEOUT: (Inaudible) a point of order.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair will take it as a point of order and will review

the tapes and come back with a decision at the next sitting.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A point of order.

Again, I waited until the end of Question Period because that is the accepted

process, not to disrupt Question Period.

We would be pleased to accept the props that the Premier referred to and

placed on the desk today. We certainly would appreciate having them, and I hope

there is more in there than the e-mails that he referred to. We look forward to

getting them immediately, if we could, so we can start our study of same.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

I do understand the Premier has already indicated that the items that are

under discussion by the hon. member, he has agreed already to have them tabled

in the House. We will facilitate that at the earliest possible opportunity.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Another point of order, or maybe clarification might be more

proper.

The Government House Leader made reference, I believe, during one of his

responses to the Leader of the Opposition about the sale of certain assets under

the FPI Act and claimed, I guess, responsibility for having provided the piece

of the FPI Act, when amended, about the selling off of assets.

I have asked the Deputy Clerk to check, because I am pretty certain that the

amendment to the FPI Act that talked about the sale of assets came from the

Opposition and not from the government.

I would like to get that point of information clarified so we do not have the

people of this Province thinking, for goodness gracious sake, that this

government actually did that when it was an effective Opposition.

MR. SPEAKER: Speaking to the point of order, the hon. the Government

House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, it is up to any member on either side of the

House to propose an amendment, but it is up to the government to determine

whether or not it is going to pass, and this government passed the amendment,

Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I thank the hon. members for their submissions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

This is not a point of order.

I do believe that clarification has been sought by the hon. the Opposition

House Leader and clarification has been presented by the hon. the Government

House Leader.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for Which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise again today to present a petition on behalf of the residents of the

North Shore of the Bay of Islands, concerning the condition of the highway.

Again, the people from the McIver's area had it faxed over from the Town

Council of Irishtown, Summerside, from people from Irishtown, Summerside, in

excess of 1,500 names on the petition. Again, I promise today not to get too

upset with the minister unless he laughs at my petition again, and the sincerity

of the people.

I know the minister said publicly that it is just me causing a few problems.

I will just let the minister know, because I am not sure if he is aware of it,

that the Great Humber Joint Council just passed a motion to write a letter to

the minister to support the town councils on the North Shore with the condition

of the highways. I just want to let the minister know that the whole Great

Humber Joint Council for the whole region is in support of the town councils on

the North Shore.

Mr. Speaker, these conditions are extremely serious. It is a matter of

safety. It is a matter of people now not even being able to get back and forth

to their work and employment under certain conditions, especially in the

wintertime when ruts are on the side of the road. When the snow is built up,

when they go off the side of the road they are not sure if the ruts are there.

The maintenance on the highway is extremely poor. The conditions - even some

culverts are extremely bad. I know personally, I know I challenged the minister

to release this before, the recommendations from the staff on the West Coast,

because I know the recommendations from the staff on the West Coast have a lot

of areas on the North Shore and the South Shore recommended to be done, funding

to be approved. I know again, that the minister will not release these

recommendations because they will show, once again, that the people of the Bay

of Islands are not being treated fairly. Their safety is being put in jeopardy.

Any minister in this government - I know the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs met with the Great Humber Joint Council just this past

weekend to discuss several issues, but yet I cannot get the minister out to meet

with any town council. There are three or four different requests. There is

another request gone in to the minister to meet with him. I know the minister is

avoiding meeting with the town councils, which is a shame. I know the Minister

of Environment and Conservation -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There are a number of conversations going on that are rather loud and the

Speaker is having difficulty hearing the hon. member. The member has about

another half of a minute left in his presentation.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I know the Minister of Environment and Conservation was out meeting -

MR. HICKEY: (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: Here goes the Minister of Transportation laughing again, Mr.

Speaker. I committed to myself that I would not be upset, but when you come to

the safety of individuals, this is not a laughing matter, I say to the minister.

Do your duty, go out and meet with the town councils and look at the concerns.

You may not be aware of it. I doubt it. You may not be aware of it, but don't

laugh at the people who are presenting petitions in the House of Assembly for

safety reasons, for God's sake. Take the responsibilities a bit seriously,

that there are people who are getting damages to their cars.

Mr. Speaker, this minister should at least have the courtesy of meeting with

the town councils and stop standing behind the microphone and laughing. This is

a very serious matter. If you do not have the ability to put politics aside to

go meet with these individuals, do not stand there laughing.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HICKEY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member's time has expired, but I also recognize

the hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works and Labrador Affairs on a

point of order.

MR. HICKEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just a point of order. Let me say to the hon. member, I have said in the past

and I have sent messages to the communities of the Bay of Islands, that I will

meet with their councils as time permits.

I have to say, as far as the member is concerned, if he had done his job when

their government was in power they would not have the road conditions, I say, on

the North Shore of the Bay of Islands that they have there today. If he had of

done his job -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

I assume that the hon. the member is not rising to speak to that point of

order.

MR. PARSONS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Okay, the Chair recognizes the hon. Opposition House Leader

on a petition.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much.

I would concur that that was absolutely not a point of order that the

Minister of Transportation and Works was talking about there.

I have an issue here that I would certainly like to get his attention to as

well, and this is a petition I am presenting on behalf of the people of LaPoile

and Grand Bruit. I went through this in this House eighteen times before

Christmas in regard to the porta-potties that ended up in Burgeo and Ramea. The

minister likes to weasel out of stuff sometimes, you know. I say: Can you give

us a few porta-potties at least until spring breaks and the ground thaws and you

can get something of substance done? He sends a letter back saying: Well, all

Parsons ever asked for was the porta-potties. You know, those kinds of games -

people do not appreciate that kind of stuff, Minister.

Anyway, I am going to give you a bouquet today because I understand that it

is in your budget this year to do something for the people of Burgeo and Ramea,

and I thank you for that on their behalf. Mr. Marston of Ramea, in particular,

thanks you for what you have done in Burgeo and Ramea, or we hope is going to

get done in this budget. That is good that you have reacted positively to what

is definitely a health and safety need.

The problem is, I have it further up the coast now. It was brought to my

attention that the residents of LaPoile and Grand Bruit need the same service.

In fact, they are a bit worse off, because when they wait for the boat in

Diamond Cove they do not have a motel or a hotel or even homes where they might

run to if they needed to. The ferry docks in a little place where the fish plant

used to be in Rose Blanche years ago and there are no homes within kilometres.

Anybody waiting for the boat to come to take them back to LaPoile and Grand

Bruit, they have to stand outdoors and we all know that is not appropriate.

Now, the cost I would think is not substantial. We are not asking for any

visitor information centre tied in with tourism and whatever. We are asking for

a very basic, practical solution to a health and safety issue, that people

should have a washroom available to them whenever they are waiting for the ferry

service. That is all we are asking now on behalf of the people of LaPoile and

Grand Bruit. They have the same needs. You have recognized the need further down

the coast in Burgeo and Ramea and we thank you for that, but we just say: Can we

borrow the porta-potties from Burgeo and Ramea while you are finding a bit of

money to do what needs to be done in Rose Blanche for the people of LaPoile and

Grand Bruit?

MR. HICKEY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order has been called by the hon. Minister of

Transportation and Works and the Minister Responsible for Labrador Affairs.

MR. HICKEY: Let me say this, Mr. Speaker; the member opposite asked for

porta-potties, and we, the Department of Transportation, provided porta-potties.

That was not, I can tell you, our permanent solution.

I can also say, Mr. Speaker, that during his time as the member representing

that particular district, during his time when they were in government, they did

nothing about those type of situations down on that particular coast.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind hon. members that points of order should deal with the order of the

proceedings of the House. We should not use points of order to engage in debate.

There is no point of order. I ask all hon. members to respect the rules, the

rules are there for a purpose and I ask them for their cooperation.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Opposition House Leader who has about one

minute left in his presentation.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thought I was being very kind to the minister today. I would remind him

that I can table and will table in this House, a copy of the documentation that

came to his department about the request for restroom and washroom facilities.

In fairness to him, he was not the minister when that letter was written. The

member for St. Anthony was the minister at that time. But I will table the

letter because he is deemed to understand, once he becomes the minister - and I

am assuming he goes back and reads the files. He would have come across that

letter from the Town of Burgeo which, by the way, was cc'd to me as their

member. Guess what? When the minister formerly wrote back to the council he did

not have the courtesy to cc the MHA; never cc'd the MHA and that is

unacceptable. This is the open and accountable government we are talking about.

All I ask the minister for - and not for me, I ask it on behalf of the people

I represent in LaPoile and in Grand Bruit in this case. Do your job, Minister,

put money in this year's budget that will provide proper, fit, necessary

facilities in Rose Blanche to accommodate the ferry users of that service. That

is all we ask. Do the decent -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Further petitions.

The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is considerable shouting from both sides of the House and it is

preventing the hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair from presenting

her petition. I ask members for their cooperation.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the member.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the intervention because this is an important petition on behalf

of the people of the Community of Williams Harbour. It is important that the

Minister of Works simmer down so he can hear what the plea of the people is in

this particular community.

Mr. Speaker, I presented two petitions on behalf of residents in this

community and also residents in the surrounding communities of Williams Harbour

in the last couple of days of the Legislature.

Mr. Speaker, these people are desperately asking government to reconsider the

decision to cancel the building of a highway into Williams Harbour. The

community is only about twenty-two kilometres from the Trans-Labrador Highway,

at the end of the highway at Pinsent Arm junction, and it requires a bridge to

be put across a small tickle to allow these people to access, not only the

mainland but also the highway. What we have had is a problem in the winter

whereby this small tickle of water does not freeze up and therefore they cannot

get out of the community by snowmobile and are, in essence, stranded and unable

to get to any of the services they require.

In this community you do not have a health care facility and you do not have

a lot of other facilities that many of us take for granted in the communities in

which we live. In order to access those important services today, they have to

go by snowmobile. In this case, they cannot because of the global warming issue,

or in summer they have to go by boat.

Mr. Speaker, I know the Minister of Transportation and Works is very familiar

with this community and with the situation that they are in. He has spent a

great deal of his life in Labrador. He knows the challenges of the residents of

Williams Harbour. I can only appeal to him, as the minister, to do something to

help this community.

I actually had an opportunity to meet briefly with the Minister of Finance

about this particular issue. He knows as well, it is an important issue for me

and for the residents of Williams Harbour and the residents of my district. In

fact, if you go back through budget consultations in the last three years that

this government opposite have carried out, almost every representation that

would have came from a zonal board or anyone affiliated with that part of the

district which represents Williams Harbour, would have put forward that as a key

priority for government to look at in terms of infrastructure spending.

Mr. Speaker, I want to, in the advance of a budget going down, once again ask

the Minister of Transportation and Works, the Premier, and the Minister of

Finance to reconsider a decision that they made back three years ago to cancel

twenty-two kilometres of road into Williams Harbour and ask them to reconsider

that decision, to look at building this piece of road to connect the residents

in that community to the rest of the communities on that part of the Southeast

Coast and to the highway so that they can get off the Island and be able to

access the services that they need in order to have any quality of life in this

Province in a small, rural outport community.

Mr. Speaker, I ask him to reconsider and do the right thing, and find the

money to build this highway into Williams Harbour.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition on behalf of

200 residents of the Isthmus area. They are calling on the House of Assembly and

calling on the Minister of Natural Resources to extend the cutting permits for

firework in the Isthmus area of my district. This year there was a lot of snow

in that particular area. We all know that Doe Hills and all that area around

there had a lot of snow which impeded people from going in the woods to cut

their firewood. We all know that in rural Newfoundland and Labrador wood is

essential in terms of the home-heating process. Unfortunately, in that

particular area - and the new member for Long Harbour will be interested in

that.

MR. DENINE: (Inaudible).

MR. BARRETT: The Member for Mount Pearl, be quiet, please.

They only have three months of the year to cut their wood. In other areas of

the Province -

MR. DENINE: (Inaudible).

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, can you tell the Member for Mount Pearl to be

quiet, please?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BARRETT: This is a serious issue for the people in the Long Harbour-Norman's

Cove-Long Cove-Bellevue area. This is a very, very serious issue and it is not

something to be joking and carrying on about. The Member for Mount Pearl should

be quiet.

Right now they get a permit and it is only good for three months. In other

areas of the Province -

MR. DENINE: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BARRETT: The Member for Mount Pearl, Mr. Speaker, there must be a way

you can shut him up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask members for their co-operation. The hon. the member is presenting a

petition on behalf of his constituents and he has a right to be heard in

relative silence.

The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: I guess we understand now where this government is coming

from when we hear the Member for Mount Pearl getting on the way he is here this

afternoon, how sensitive they are to rural Newfoundland. Here I am presenting an

issue from the people of my district that affects people in rural Newfoundland

and Labrador and he is over there shouting and bawling.

The reason I am here today is the residents, these people, have written the

minister requesting an extension to the wood cutting permits for this particular

area. I call on the minister to treat the people in this particular area no

differently than other people in the rest of the Province and extend the permits

so these people can go in the woods. Because at the end of March they expire and

April month is a good time to be able to get out there. If they are out there in

January and February cutting wood, do you know what happens? Half the wood is on

the stump because the snow is so deep and so high that they cannot cut down to

the base of tree. What we are doing here is actually saving the forest by being

able to extend the season for the extra month of April.

I am calling on the minister to, please, request that the 200 people who

signed this petition - there is a letter gone to the minister's office dated

March 15, to which there has been no response. I am asking the minister, to

please extend the wood cutting permits for this particular area to the end of

April.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, before moving to Orders of the Day, there is a

housekeeping matter that I need to attend to.

Standing Order 65 prescribes for the appointment of various committees, one

of which is the Standing Orders Committee. The Standing Orders Committee needs

to be updated because certain members who were part of the committee are no

longer part of the House.

Just for the record, I will read - there is no change to the Opposition

members' composition on the committee. I have already consulted with my

colleague across the way, but just for the record, the following members, from

this day forward, will constitute the Standing Orders Committee pursuant to

Standing Order 65.

Your Honour, of course, is Chair of the committee; myself as Government House

Leader is a member of the committee; the Opposition House Leader is a member and

remains a member of the committee; our colleague from Bonavista South is a

member of the committee; and the Deputy Opposition House Leader, the Member for

Port de Grave, is a member of the committee. A new addition, in addition to

myself, will be the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, the Leader of the New

Democratic Party, replacing the former leader, and two new members from our side

replacing members who have moved on. It will be the Member for Ferryland and the

Member for Port au Port.

MR. SPEAKER: I say thank you to the hon. Government House Leader for

apprizing the House of the changes. There are a number of issues that need to be

reviewed by the Standing Orders.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: On Orders of the Day, Mr. Speaker, I would next like to move

to Motion 2.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 2 is to move, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that the

House not adjourn at 5:30 o'clock today, Monday, March 26.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion carried.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Motion 3, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 3 is to move, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that the

House not adjourn today, Monday, at 10:00 p.m.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion carried.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, Motion 1.

I move that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to

consider certain resolutions for granting Interim Supply to Her Majesty.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that the House resolve itself into a Committee

of the Whole on Supply to consider certain resolutions for the granting of

Interim Supply to Her Majesty, Bill 71, and that I do now leave the Chair.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on

Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

The Committee is ready to continue debate on Bill 71,

An Act For Granting To

Her Majesty Certain Sums Of Money For Defraying Certain Expenses Of The Public

Service For The Financial Year Ending March 31, 2008 And For Other Purposes

Relating To The Public Service.

The Committee is ready to continue with debate of Bill 71, and the resolution

that accompanies that particular bill.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am pleased today to make a few comments with respect to Bill 71,

An Act For

Granting To Her Majesty Certain Sums Of Money For Defraying Certain Expenses Of

The Public Service For The Financial Year Ending March 31, 2008.

Mr. Chairman, this is a bill that is quite standard, and one that will give

the government authority to spend certain amounts of monies until the Budget for

the coming year is presented and debated.

Mr. Chairman, we hear from time to time the Opposition talking about

government not doing anything at all for rural Newfoundland and Labrador. I have

heard the Leader of the Opposition say, on a number of occasions when he has

been on Open Line, on the Open Line shows, to the people of the Province, asking

the question: Are you better off today than you were one year ago, two years

ago, and now three-and-a-half years ago? That is the question he has been

asking: Are you better off now than you were when this government took office in

2003?

Mr. Chairman, I think if they want to find the answer all they would have to

do is listen to the poll results that have been coming out every quarter for the

past three-and-a-half years. It has been fairly consistent, Mr. Chairman, the

fact that these polls show that this government is performing more

satisfactorily to the people of the Province than any other government in its

history. I think that is where the answer is, Mr. Chairman.

In the meantime, I would like to make a few comments with respect to a couple

of our government departments. The first department that I would like to speak

to, with respect to some of the things that we are doing, is the Department of

Health and Community Services. I guess with that department alone, Mr. Chairman,

the people on this side of the House can stand up for the full seventy-five

hours talking about the good things that we are doing in that department, but I

would like to make specific reference today to three or four items that affect

the District of Bonavista North; because, when we talk about expenditures for

the Department of Health and Community Services we are talking about

expenditures that affect every citizen in this Province, whether you live in St.

John's or whether you live in the smallest community of the Province.

Mr. Chairman, this year that is just ending now, our government spent an

additional $200 million on health and community services in the Province. I

would like to mention a couple of things, like I say, that affect the district

and the people of Bonavista North.

One thing in particular is the money that we spent on the new cancer clinic

in Grand Falls-Windsor. That, as you know, was ongoing for a number of years,

and delayed, but a year after we took office we started to make arrangements to

have that cancer clinic put in Grand Falls-Windsor, and it was done, Mr.

Chairman, this past year. Not only the clinic in Grand Falls-Windsor, but we

went even further when it comes to providing services to the people, the cancer

patients, in the Central Region of the Province. We went even further, a total

of $1.5 million all together, which took care of not only the cancer clinic in

Grand Falls-Windsor, Mr. Chairman, but we also made renovations to the James

Paton Memorial Hospital in Gander.

With those renovations, Mr. Chairman, I would have to say to the Leader of

the Opposition to go out and ask the cancer patient in New-Wes-Valley, or the

cancer patient on Fogo Island, who can now go to Gander, a couple of hours drive

- an hour-and-a-half or two hours drive - ask those people if they are better of

today than they were three or four years ago. I am sure of what the answer will

be, because any time you can drive and get that kind of service, just an

hour-and-a-half from your home, rather than drive four and five hours, I know

what those people are going to say.

On another point, Mr Chairman, monies that we spent this past year with

respect to dialysis in Gander, our government provided the funding to set up a

dialysis unit in the Gander hospital. Before, people in New-Wes-Valley, people

in Twillingate & Fogo, Musgrave Harbour, had to drive the extra hour to go

to Grand Falls for those services. Those are people, Mr Chairman, who had to

make that drive three times a week. I can tell you, that two hours that they are

saving is a major benefit to the health and well-being of those people who have

to avail of that service.

Another point, Mr. Chairman, with respect to the Department of Health and

Community Services is the new drug program that we just brought in, that just

came into effect a couple of months ago, where people on low income can now

avail of the opportunity to get contributions, financial contributions, toward

the cost of drugs, whether it is 20 per cent, 30 per cent, or 70 per cent or 80

per cent. Whatever it is, Mr. Chairman, it is a major benefit to people who need

these drugs.

Mr. Chairman, this Province alone, just about half of our budget is spent on

health care services. I do not care where you are, whichever province you live

in in this country, there are problems with respect to wait lists and waiting

for procedures and so on. I do not care. Even in Alberta, the richest province

in the country, you will find that these people have similar wait lists to what

we have here in this Province. Whatever you do or however much money you spend

on health care, you will always have these problems to deal with. There will

always be specific cases that you never have the funding to take care of in the

immediate time.

Mr. Chair, I would like to move on from that department to the Department of

Transportation and Works. This year, in this Budget coming up now, effective

April 1, our government is spending a total of $171 million on road upgrading

and paving transportation infrastructure in this Province. Out of that, Mr.

Chair, 97 per cent of that $171 million is going to be spent outside of the

Avalon Peninsula. There is another area where we are making a major contribution

to rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Of that $171 million, $60 million is being

spent on secondary highways, the trunk highways in the Province. Last year, as

well, we spent $60 million.

When we took office -

MR. JOYCE: On a point of order, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands on a point of order.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Chair, I have committed to myself that every time there is

information put forth in the House that I feel is inaccurate - the member just

said again, $60 million. I will just invite the member to look at the annual

report from the minister himself, the minister's own annual report that he has

there.

The highlight of the Budget was $33.7 million spent on roads, not $60 million

as being put out by the government. If you want the correct information, look at

the minister's own report, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista North.

MR. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As you say, there is certainly no point of order there. The hon. member

brought up the same issue a few days ago when someone else was speaking on this

side. He got the answer then, so why ask it again now and waste the time of some

other member who wants to speak on this topic?

Mr. Chairman, what I want to say is, back when we took office in 2003 that

government of the day then spent $23 million on roads upgrading and paving; $23

million, Mr. Chairman, in an election year. I will also go back further than

that. It has been referred to here on many occasions, they were as low as $6

million on roads upgrading and paving in this Province. Is there any wonder why

we have the state that we have today, the dilapidated condition of roads in this

Province?

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MR. HARDING: The hon. Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair is

speaking. She was Minister of Transportation when some of this money was needed

to go into roads upgrading and paving and did not see the need to do it.

Mr. Chairman, I would have to say that if this government, or any government,

is going to do anything with rural Newfoundland in terms of sustaining what we

have out there or development in those small communities -

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that his time for speaking has lapsed.

MR. HARDING: By leave?

CHAIR: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

CHAIR: The hon. member by leave.

MR. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The hon. Leader of the Opposition over there is saying something. I do not

know what it is, but I would say, Mr. Chairman, that he is just jealous of the

amount of money that we are putting into road work in this Province.

MR. REID: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, on a point of order.

MR. REID: I would like to tell the Member for Bonavista North what I was

saying. I was saying that you could have leave to clue up, I say to the member

opposite.

CHAIR: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista North.

MR. HARDING: Thank you very much.

That is normally what he does not say when I have been standing up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARDING: I am really surprised to get that comment, Mr. Chairman.

In cluing up, I have a lot more to say on this, Mr. Chairman. I just want to

make the point with respect to the Gander Bay Highway, a highway that the Leader

of the Opposition drives over maybe once or twice a year. I do not know. He will

be out there when the election is on probably four or five times. Anyway, what

gets me now, Mr. Chairman - over the past four years, between myself and my hon.

colleague from Gander, we have worked together in putting major expenditures

into the upgrading and resurfacing of the Gander Bay Highway. It is to the point

now, we are going to do another ten kilometres this year and after that there

will only be about ten left.

Mr. Chairman, over the fourteen or fifteen years that those people were in

government there was hardly one cent spent on upgrading and resurfacing that

highway, the Gander Bay Highway. Whenever I go into the Gander Mall or anywhere

now, there are people from Gander Bay, Carmanville, Main Point and Davidsville

coming to me and giving me credit for what we have done over the past three or

four years. One thing that sort of turns me off now, Mr. Chairman, is to know

that the hon. Leader of the Opposition is going to have that good road to drive

over on his way to Twillingate & Fogo.

Mr. Chairman, on that, I would like to clue up. I will have some time later

on to carry on with this debate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to have a few words with regard to this bill on Interim Supply, and I

think everyone understands what Interim Supply is. That is a bill in which the

government is granted sums of money in order to carry on with its expenditure

until such time they are able to bring in a Budget into the House of Assembly.

Anytime there is a bill like this in the Legislature, hon. members have the

opportunity to stand and debate any particular issues they want and to bring to

the House any particular issues they want.

Now, Mr. Chairman, as one of my previous colleagues, who has since moved on

to retirement, used to say: Words are important, and you should get your facts

straight when you are making statements in the House of Assembly. I want to

remind the Member for Bonavista North, that I was never the Minister of Works,

Services and Transportation. If I had been, I would have had every road in my

district paved before I ever got out of the department, I say to the member, if

the money was there.

Having said that -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS JONES: Oh, I am not going to make any bones about it.

Mr. Chairman, I was the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of

Transportation and Works for a short eight months or so, and I have to say that

during the time we were in government we did built, I think, over 400 kilometres

of road in my district alone, in which there were no roads. For none of those

things will I apologize.

Mr Chairman, there is still a tremendous need in the area that I represent

for roads to be build, to be paved, to be resurfaced and upgraded. When the

member opposite stands up and talks about all the money that came out of the

Provincial Treasury in the last two years to be invested on the Island of

Newfoundland in road work, I guess it makes me a little jealous, not the Member

for Twillingate & Fogo. Because in Labrador we have not seen that kind of

commitment from the government opposite when it comes to provincial revenues

going into roads in Labrador. We all know that. In fact, in the last three years

the government opposite has been talking about putting $50 million of provincial

revenue into resurfacing the highway between Goose Bay and Labrador City, but

that $50 million is over five years, of which the Province is prepared to

contribute only $10 million a year to that project, but at the same time they

are prepared to put $60 million, in excess of $70 million a year, on the Island

of Newfoundland.

It is a double standard when it comes to highway spending in the Province by

the members opposite, so I have no doubt that the member would get up and gloat

but at the same time realize that there are a lot of people in this Province who

are not getting a fair shake when it comes to road development and road

resurfacing.

Mr. Chairman, I wanted to talk a little bit today about a comment that was

made by the Minister of Business in his comments on Friday. He stood in the

House in debate on Interim Supply and he was referring to us, in the days that

we were in government, and said: They did not grow the economy; they did not

have any revenues.

Well, I want to speak to that for a few minutes, Mr. Chairman, because maybe

the hon. minister himself needs a little lesson in where the revenues come from

that filter into the provincial coffers in this Province. Although he sits at

the Cabinet table, maybe he needs a little refresher in where the revenues

actually are generated, in what sectors of the economy, and who created the

opportunity in those sectors of the economy.

Mr. Chairman, I am going to start with this. We hear a lot of talk these days

about the Atlantic Accord, about the wonderful deal that was secured with the

Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin in his days of government in Canada, with a

great deal for Newfoundland and Labrador that would see us not only grow and

maintain equalization but also grow our revenue through those royalties that we

would gain on the oil and gas sector.

Well, Mr. Chairman, the only reason that a deal like the Atlantic Accord is

ever possible is because you have an oil and gas sector to start with, because

you actually have an oil industry in this Province that has been developed, is

producing a tremendous amount of wealth, and because of that you have an opening

with the federal government to renegotiate on the royalties from resources like

that. That is where the Atlantic Accord comes into play.

Let's talk about where the developments in the oil industry came from in

this Province; because, as you know, today in Newfoundland and Labrador the

major contributors to the revenue that builds the roads the hon. member talked

about over there, that builds every other piece of infrastructure in

Newfoundland and Labrador, it comes from the oil industry, it comes from the

mining industry, which are probably the top two contributors of royalties to the

provincial coffers.

Let's talk about the oil industry. The Hibernia deal was the first oil

development project in Newfoundland and Labrador. While it might have been

initially discussed under the Peckford government, it was actually signed under

a Liberal Premier, Clyde Wells. That was when the Hibernia deal was signed off.

In fact, at the time that Hibernia was signed off, it was done so on

projections, I think, of barrels of oil that were somewhere around $12 a barrel,

in terms of looking at paying for itself and balancing out at that time. I stand

to be corrected on that figure, because I am trying to draw from my recollection

of what was happening with the various deals at the time.

Mr. Chairman, we know today that the price of oil is a lot greater than $12 a

barrel, so we know that not only is Hibernia paying for itself in generating a

revenue but it is generating a tremendous amount of royalty and profit to the

people of this Province.

What were the other oil deals that were done? Let's look at Terra Nova.

Terra Nova was an oil deal again done by a Liberal government, under a Liberal

Premier, I would like to remind the Minister of Business. It was done by Premier

Brian Tobin, when he was here, who negotiated the deal under Terra Nova, who saw

the contracting out of hundreds and thousands of jobs in this Province to the

private sector, that allowed companies to move in here, national-based companies

that would have ordinarily only been in places like Norway or Sweden or Calgary

or Texas, moving into Newfoundland and Labrador to set up shop to service the

second oil field in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Then what happened, Mr. Chairman? We had White Rose. Again, the third oil

development project in this Province done under a Liberal government, done under

a Liberal Premier who signed it off at the time. Premier Grimes was the Premier

at the time when White Rose was being done. What happened under White Rose?

Eighty per cent of some of the work under the White Rose development project was

done right here in Newfoundland and Labrador. Most of it was done in Marystown,

at the fabrication site in Marystown, where today I don't know if we have a

single soul left working there. At that time, under the Liberal government's

deal on White Rose, we saw up to 1,500 jobs working at the Marystown Shipyard.

Where are these 1,500 people today? You go down and ask the leader of the union

in Marystown, and he will tell you where they are, because they left forwarding

addresses and phone numbers with the union. They are all out in Western Canada,

because they had to go there to go to work.

Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Business will get up and talk about how Liberal

governments did not create and diversify the economy. Three oil fields developed

in this Province, today contributing the greatest amount of revenue to the

provincial government of any other revenue-generating resource in Newfoundland

and Labrador, I say to the Minister of Business. He needs to get with the

program and start learning where the royalties are coming from in Newfoundland

and Labrador.

What have we seen from the government opposite when it comes to oil

development deals? We have seen them not taking a negotiating approach at all.

In fact, Mr. Chairman, you have people today out there in the oil industry who

are actually saying that there could be net losses of jobs as early as this

year, up to 500 jobs. Guess what? They are pinning it on the backs of the

government, because they know that the government opposite has failed to

negotiate deals with oil companies that have continued to allow us to grow the

oil industry in Newfoundland and Labrador.

When you get people out there making statements like this, with no energy

plan in place, no gas royalty regime in place, no Hibernia South, no Hebron, and

now no exploration activity, where are we going to see this industry develop?

Mr. Chairman, these are the kinds of questions that people are asking, and

these are the kinds of comments that they are making, the people who are working

in the oil industry: As far as everyone is concerned globally, we are not open

for business. We are not open for business, and no one wants to deal with him -

referring to the Premier of the Province. All he does is fight, and the business

community here is sick of it.

Mr. Chairman, I am going to tell you something. The oil industry in this

Province has been the catalyst for deals like the Atlantic Accord, and if we do

not have a thriving oil industry what is the good of deals like the Atlantic

Accord, I have to say to hon. members? In order to ensure that there is

continuous growth in this sector, there has to be a hand of government that is

willing to negotiate, that is willing to do deals that are going to be

beneficial to the people of the Province.

We cannot continue to see platforms leaving out there. I think the Henry

Goodridge is going to leave this year. I am also hearing that the Eirik Raude

could be leaving. These are hundreds of jobs that are going to be lost on these

platforms, and what is replacing them? Is it the same thing that is replacing

the amount of work from White Rose that was occurring at the Marystown Shipyard?

Because we know what replaced that work at the Marystown Shipyard, and that was

absolutely nothing, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair that her time for

speaking has lapsed.

MS JONES: May I have leave to clue up, Mr. Chairman?

CHAIR: Does the hon. member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

CHAIR: The hon. member by leave.

MS JONES: Mr. Chairman, do you know what replaced that activity at

Marystown? Absolutely nothing! That was the reason you seen the exodus of

skilled workers leaving this Province from that area.

Well, what is going to happen when these two particular platforms come off

this summer and we see hundreds of more jobs gone and not being replaced in the

exploration industry in Newfoundland and Labrador, with no new deals on the

horizon, no new oil project to be started under the current Tory government that

likes to be the big deal maker in this Province? We are not seeing it. Where is

the new economic stimulation for Newfoundland and Labrador going to come from?

The Minister of Business could not tell us that. He has some files that he is

working on, he said. He does not know what is going to materialize. He has some

files that he is working on up there.

Mr. Chairman, I am going to say this to the hon. members, if they think that

pumping $15 million into a private cable company is stimulating the economy in

Newfoundland and Labrador, well boy, I got news for you fellows, because it

certainly is not. No, Mr. Chairman, it is not.

When I listen to people, like the Minister of Business, get up and talk about

how there was nothing done under a Liberal government to drive the economy, and

to sit there and know full well that today, without the oil industry in this

Province, all of which was done under Liberal governments, I say, and Liberal

Premiers, that there would not be an Atlantic Accord deal to even sit down and

negotiate. Sometimes, Mr. Chairman, members tend to forget very important and

significant developments like that, that have been the catalyst for development

in Newfoundland and Labrador, not only for the last decade but will be for the

next decade, even in the absence of the lack of activity and the no negotiation

and the no deals by the members opposite, I say to you, Mr. Chairman.

I am going to take my leave now because I know I have ten minutes that I can

get back up again while we are in Committee. I will reserve the rest of my

comments until then.

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Justice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, I wanted to respond a little bit. I was not intending to respond

to the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair because I did have things that I

wanted to talk about, but I do want respond to that to some degree. She did

start out by saying that the Atlantic Accord and the oil deals were done by

previous Liberal Premiers and Liberal Prime Ministers. Mr. Chair, that is

absolutely incorrect. I was involved in politics a long time before I was

elected and I remember going to the Hotel Newfoundland when former Premier

Peckford and Prime Minister Mulroney did the Atlantic Accord deal. That was done

by the former Premier Peckford and Prime Minister Mulroney.

Mr. Chair, let me tell you this, the full intent of the Atlantic Accord was

broken by former Liberal Premiers, which is what the Premier of this Province,

the current Premier, Premier Williams, fought to have reinstated. That is what

we did. That is what we did under the Atlantic Accord.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: That is what we did, Mr. Chair, because former Liberal

Premiers allowed that Accord to be broken and allowed our resources to be taken

without the full benefit to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: That is what happened by former Liberal Premiers, Mr.

Chair. Former Liberal Premiers had further giveaways, such as Voisey's Bay,

something that this Administration would not do. We are not going to sign a deal

just for the sake of signing a deal unless it gives full and fair benefits to

the people who own the resource, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: That is what we are all about, Mr. Chair.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. T. OSBORNE: She says we are not open for business. I will tell you

what we are not open for, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Order, please! Order, please!

MR. T. OSBORNE: I will tell you what we are not open for, Mr. Chair, we

are not open for giveaways.

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. T. OSBORNE: There will be no more giveaways under our watch, Mr.

Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The Chair has recognized the Minister of Justice. I ask members for their

co-operation and allow the Minister of Justice to use his speaking time to

deliver his speech here in the House of Assembly.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Chair, I will tell you what, all we need to do is

look back at former Liberal Administrations and deals, such as the Upper

Churchill deal and deals such as Voisey's Bay, to know what we want in this

Province.

MS JONES: Tell me, what's wrong with Voisey's Bay?

MR. T. OSBORNE: The Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair is asking us

to tell her what is wrong with Voisey's Bay. Over the next ten years, if we

were to take all of the royalties that we are going to get out of Voisey's Bay

we would have enough for a party for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador,

enough for a snack pack-and-a-half. That is about what we would get out of it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: We are not interested in giveaways, Mr. Chair. What we

are interested in is good deals for the people of this Province, and I think the

approval ratings for this government speak very loudly and very clearly to the

job that we are doing, because the people of this Province, knowing that

Newfoundland and Labrador is the wealthiest Province in all of Canada,

resource-wise, with the second smallest population in Canada, this Province

should be the wealthiest Province in Canada. Do you know what, Mr. Chair?

Because of bad deals, because of giveaways, because of the people of this

Province not getting the full and fair benefit for our resources, Newfoundland

and Labrador is fiscally the poorest Province in Canada, and that is not

acceptable. It is not acceptable, Mr. Chair, to this Administration.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: It is not acceptable to the Premier of this Province and

it is no longer acceptable to the people of the Province.

I remember last year as Minister of Health, just to give an example, we had

to do a re-registration on MCP. Why did we do that? Because there are 80,000

more MCP cards in circulation than there are people living in the Province. That

is a sad state of affairs, Mr. Chair, because there are people who have left the

Province in order to find work elsewhere. Do you know why they have left?

Because we have not taken full advantage of our resources to give full benefit

to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and that is changing under this

Administration, Mr. Chair. That is changing under this Administration. We are no

longer prepared to allow our resources to benefit everybody else and not us.

Mr. Chair, there was a review done in 1997, and I remember at the time

because I was the critic for the Department of Industry. I remember that review.

There was information released by the Department of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development in 1997 which compared Newfoundland and Labrador and Ontario and how

they were benefitting as a result of exports from this Province and how we were

benefitting as a result of imports from Ontario. Mr. Chair, let me tell you what

that review found. There were 4,000 jobs created in Newfoundland and Labrador as

a result of products that were imported from Ontario. Most of those 4,000 jobs

were low paying jobs, clerks and cashiers at places like Wal-Mart and Dominion

and the like, because we are importing manufactured finished goods from Ontario.

The reality is, there were 22,000 jobs created in Ontario as a result of

imports to Ontario from this Province, Newfoundland and Labrador. Because of our

exports directly to Ontario, most of those jobs were manufacturing jobs as a

result of raw resources from this Province going to that province. They were

relatively high paying jobs, 22,000 of them. That is what we are trying to

change. That is what we are trying to turnaround, Mr. Chair. That is what we do

not agree with. That is what this Administration does not agree with. That is

why we fought for the Atlantic Accord. That is why what the federal government

are doing right now is so unfortunate and so unfair to this Province. When you

find that we are now put in a position, under their - the promise that they made

to remove natural non-renewable resources from equalization, they made that

promise to this Province and to Nova Scotia and to every other province in

Canada, but they broke that promise.

What that means to this Province is similar to what Nova Scotia had to do

just last week when they weighed both sides of the debate and made the

determination that it was better for them to get out of the Atlantic Accord,

which this Province and Nova Scotia fought so hard for, they made the

determination that it was better for them to get out of the Atlantic Accord. We

are now faced with the same decision. Do we take the deal that Harper is giving,

or do we stay in the Atlantic Accord? We should not be faced with having to make

that decision. We should not be faced with having to make that decision.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Do you know why we should not be faced with having to

make that decision? Because of the promise that the Prime Minister has made.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

I ask members for their co-operation.

The hon. the Minister of Justice.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Chair, these are the words of Prime Minister Stephen

Harper when he said, "This is a commitment that was made by me in my

capacity as leader of the Canadian Alliance when I first arrived here and has it

origins in the intentions of the Atlantic Accord signed by former Prime Minister

Mulroney in the mid-1980s. These are longstanding commitments, our commitment to

100 % of non-renewable resource royalties. It was our commitment during the

election, before the election, and it remains our commitment today."

Well, what happened, Mr. Chair, to his commitment, when you have a Province

like Nova Scotia who has pulled out of the Atlantic Accord, and a Province like

Newfoundland and Labrador who have to seriously consider our options? It is a

broken promise.

Mr. Chair, he goes on to say, "The eight year time limit and the Ontario

clause effectively gutted the commitment made to the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador during the election campaign. Why should Newfoundland's possibility

of achieving levels of prosperity comparable to the rest of Canada be limited to

an artificial eight year period? Remember in particular that these are in any

case non-renewable resources that will run out." Non-renewable resources

that will run out. "Why is the government..." - of Canada - "...

so eager to ensure that Newfoundland and Labrador always remain below the

economic level of Ontario?"

Well, Mr. Chair, that is a good question, and it is a question that perhaps

Prime Minister Stephen Harper should answer today, because what has happened

here is that the election promise that he made after the Atlantic Accord deal

was signed, sealed and delivered, after we had the full benefits of the Atlantic

Accord deal, the full intended benefits that were signed under Prime Minister

Mulroney and Premier Brian Peckford, after that deal was recognized by Prime

Minister Paul Martin and our Premier, and we finally got what was intended under

the Atlantic Accord, he made the promise that non-renewable resources such as

nickel, that the former Premier, Roger Grimes, allowed to be shipped to Ontario

and Manitoba, iron ore which former Premier Tobin allowed to be shipped out,

when we see all of those non-renewable resources such as pulp and paper, such as

other resources, that are considered non-renewable in many circumstances, it was

determined that these non-renewable resources would be exempt from clawback

under equalization.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I remind the hon. Minister of Justice that his time for speaking has expired.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have another ten minutes later on today, and I will certainly be glad to

stand and speak again.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I stand today to speak to this particular bill and talk about Interim Supply.

As I listened to the Minister of Justice, he has very selective memory. The

irony in all of this, of course, is that he talks about whether or not they will

sign a deal, no giveaways. Well, the reality of it is that by the time they do

get around to signing a deal there is not going to be anyone left in this

Province to take advantage of it. We have people leaving daily. It is fine and

dandy to say no giveaways, but there has to be compromise, and anybody would

know that when you strike a business deal there has to be compromise. You do not

give anything away; you do what is in the best interests of the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Whenever they want to talk about bad deals, things that the Liberal

Administration signed, what do they talk about? The Upper Churchill, Voisey's

Bay, and that is it. Then they stop. It is all so general. They throw out these

statements and they do not back them up, because they know they cannot back them

up. The irony in this is that Voisey's Bay is going well, people are employed

in this Province, they are not having to leave and go to Alberta, but what does

the Minister of Justice say? Give it ten years. Like his boss said from time to

time, you could drive a Mack truck through it. Well, we are still waiting to see

where that Mack truck is, because I have yet to see where it can go through the

Voisey's Bay deal.

We have thousands of people employed in this Province as a result of the

Voisey's Bay deal. Most of the people who are employed in this Province, up

until they had to go away, were employed because of deals struck by the previous

Liberal government, deals that made it possible for people to be employed, to

support their families and to see this Province move ahead. In fact, we were

leading the country in growth. Then we were at the middle of the pack. Where are

we now? Where are we going to be in 2008? We are going to be at the bottom of

the list, the bottom of all of the provinces in the country.

So, tell me what this government has done to make a difference. We were

leading the pack and we were in the middle of the pack all because of

initiatives of the previous Liberal Administrations. Now, in 2008, we are going

to be at the bottom of the pack and this government has been in power for four

years, and what has it done? Absolutely nothing.

Wait now, there is this infamous Accord. How can we forget the infamous

Accord, the only thing that ever gets raised as a major accomplishment of this

Premier? Well, you know, if it was not for a Liberal government in Ottawa

looking to get re-elected, wanting the seats in Newfoundland and Labrador, you

would not have had the Accord. I mean, how foolish to think that a government in

Ottawa would do what it did if they weren't desperate for seats in

Newfoundland and Labrador, and desperate to win an election? For the Premier to

be standing and patting himself on the back is so silly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS FOOTE: As I listen to them talk about general statements about this

and about that, and why you have not done anything or cannot do anything on

giveaways, no specifics, as always, no specifics, because they know that where

we are in terms of people working in this Province is as a result of initiatives

of the previous Liberal government. They know that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS FOOTE: I can talk about that, Mr. Chair, because I have a community in

my district, in Fortune -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MS FOOTE: - a community in my district called Fortune, and it came up

today in the House of Assembly. This is a community that is -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: A point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader, on a point of order.

MR. PARSONS: A point of order, Mr. Chair.

I do not mean to disrupt and take away from the time that the hon. Member for

Grand Bank has, but we are getting a lot of sniping here coming from the other

side. I say to the members opposite, we are here, possibly until as late a ten o'clock

tonight. I invite each and every one of you to stand up in your appropriate

times and do whatever shouting and bawling and screaming you want to do, but

please, please, do the courteous thing, the respectful thing, and allow the

Member for Grand Bank to finish her speech.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader, to that point of order.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Chair, I am not about to give a lecture or anything. I

agree with the essence of what my colleague has said, but I mean this cuts both

ways. I mean, the Minister of Justice was just on his feet and indeed gave a

fine speech, but I hardly heard a word he said because of the yelling,

particularly from Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair and others on the

opposition side. You know, I agree and we should do, and it is the right thing

to do, but it cuts both ways.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: Simmer down, I agree, yes.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The Chair has been hearing and listening to the heckling and the

conversations across the House ever since the committee began. The Chair has

been reluctant to name the person by their district, the person that is doing

most of the calling, but let me assure you, from here on in this afternoon, when

people are interrupting other people talking, the Chair will not hesitate to say

the person's name and the district that they are from in order to let people

know who is causing the disturbances in the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: And I hope that interruption does not take away from my time,

Mr. Chair, because it is you that I rely upon to protect us when we stand up

here making some remarks about where we are today in this Province and who is

responsible for what from different perspectives.

I want to talk about Fortune, and you know that Fortune came up today. It

came up because of a letter that was written in my district that contained

total, total, false information, but I will not go there. I will talk about

Fortune though, because I had asked the Premier a very important question on

behalf of the town of Fortune and it was one that he totally ignored, just to

come back at me with a letter that was written by the Chairman of the Concerned

Citizens Committee. It was a serious question, and it was a serious question

because we have a town that is in desperate need of help, desperate need of

support from this government.

I say from this government, because if you look at what has happened in

Fortune, a town that had a fish plant that employed hundreds of people, and not

just from Fortune but from different communities in my own district, and I have

twenty communities in my district, the reality of it is that the fish plant

closed under this government's watch. They allowed FPI to ride roughshod over

not only the people of Fortune but in other parts of Newfoundland and Labrador,

wherever there was an active fishery going on.

Here we are now in Fortune with a plant that has been closed, they have not

been working. They have been waiting, they have been hopeful that something will

materialize. Discussions have been held with interested parties, but nothing has

materialized.

Here we are today in a community where they have an arena. Let's take that

for an example, an arena that the town usually puts in a sum of money to help

that arena so that it can operate. Guess what? They came to this government

looking for some financial assistance to keep that arena going at a time when

people are in desperate shape, when people want something to take their minds

off where they are today, the fact that they do not have enough money to make

ends meet and they cannot provide for their families. The town thought that they

would go to the government who would obviously understand the situation they

find themselves in, because government was a part of the process that resulted

in the fish plant closing. What they got back from this government was: Sorry,

we do not have appropriate resources available. They were looking for $60,000

and that would be the town's contribution to ensure that the arena continued

to operate. They were told that the government does not have appropriate

resources available. They were told that from the Minister of Tourism and they

were told that from the Minister of Municipal Affairs. If you look at where the

money is going, and I looked at the Interim Supply Bill here, I am sure that

this government could find $60,000 to help that town continue the operation of

its arena.

That is one part. The other

part is that we have hundreds of people having to

leave Fortune and other communities just to make ends meet. These are people who

are in their fifties and sixties. These are not just the young people. These are

grandparents. T