May 6,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIV No.

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Before we begin our routine proceedings, the Chair would like

to welcome to the gallery today twenty-five students from the Grade IX social

studies class at St. James Junior High School, in the district of

Burgeo-LaPoile, accompanied by their teacher, Mr. Ed Bailey; chaperons, Aaron

Hewitt and Jerome Battiste, and bus driver, Mr. Allan Porter.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: As well, I would like to welcome to the

gallery twenty-four students from Grades VIII, IX and Levels I, II and III

classes at William Gillett Academy in Charlottetown, Labrador, in the District

of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, accompanied by teachers, Max Sheppard and George

Jefferies; along with chaperons, Ray Turnbull and Lisa Frechette.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

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

Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is not hard to smile today. It is very easy,

on behalf of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Seriously, Mr. Speaker, as Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture for the past three-and-a-half years, it has been my responsibility

to work with industry to put measures in place to ensure the groundfish stocks

that have been seriously depleted are rebuilt to a sustainable level.

As we all know, the Grand Banks used to be the richest

fishing grounds in the world. However, Mr. Speaker, because of human greed,

including the overfishing by Canadian and foreign trawlers, this valuable world

resource has been depleted almost to the point of extinction. At the same time,

rural Newfoundland and Labrador is also suffering the same fate.

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have been saying for years,

Mr. Speaker, that one of the main reasons for the slow recovery of our cod

stocks is our burgeoning harp seal population. Today, Mr. Speaker, the Fisheries

Resource Conservation Council released its 1999 report, which states it is

"convinced beyond any reasonable doubt" that the conservation of groundfish

stocks will continue to be jeopardized if something isn't done about the

overpopulated seal herds. One of the council's principle recommendations to the

federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans is that he must take immediate action

to reduce the seal herds by up to 50 per cent of their current population

levels. The FRCC, which is the federal Fisheries Minister's own scientific

advisory board, states that without a doubt seals are a key factor in reducing

the recruitment of cod to the fishery.

From day one we, in Newfoundland and Labrador, have taken a

lot of criticism from stating our view that the seal population, at its current

level of about 6 million animals, is significantly impeding the recovery of our

groundfish stocks. We knew it would be a difficult battle, but the battle was

not only about seals and groundfish, it was also about people - our people, the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador. It was about our survival.

I have been concerned for the past three years about the

principles of resource conservation, and this report released by the FRCC has

given us hope. This is indeed another major step forward for us upon this issue.

As my hon. colleagues know, the House of Assembly's All-Party

Committee on Sealing travelled to Ottawa to make a major presentation to the

federal government's Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. Our message is

getting through, and I only hope that our message and the message delivered

today by the FRCC gets through to the federal Minister of Fisheries. He must act

immediately to implement the recommendations announced today by his own advisory

group.

I want to emphasize that I look forward to working with the

federal government on immediate implementation of these recommendations to

control the exploding seal herds, and thus rebuild our groundfish stocks. This

action must be taken now if our groundfish stocks are to come back, and if rural

Newfoundland and Labrador is to survive.

The FRCC report also recommended an increase in the 3Ps cod

stock from 20,000 tonnes to 30,000 tones. This is indeed good news for the South

Coast fishery.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: However, it is important to point out that

the South Coast is one of only a few areas around the Province where there are

positive signs of recovery of our cod stocks, and the South Coast is also an

area where there are lower numbers of seals.

There is a message in this and it is the same message that I,

as Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, members of the All-Party Committee on

Sealing, and my fellow Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have been giving for

years. It is a message that seals are jeopardizing the recovery of our cod

stocks and will continue to do so if action is not taken now for a major

reduction in the seal herd. If immediate action is not taken, the 3Ps cod stocks

will also be threatened because there are reports that the number of seals in

this area is starting to grow.

In closing, the recommendations put forward by the FRCC are a

major victory for rural Newfoundland and Labrador. We have worked hard to get

something done about this critical issue and today, as Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture, I am proud to reiterate that we have won the battle - but the war

is not over yet. We will continue to fight for the survival of rural

Newfoundland and Labrador, and the Federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans has

no choice but to act immediately upon the council's recommendations.

Mr. Speaker, before I sit down I want to make recognition of

one individual who is in the gallery, an employee of the Department of Fisheries

and Aquaculture, Mr. Frank Pinhorn, who has been on this file for -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: The former Minister of Fisheries, Mr.

Rideout, knows full well that this file did not start just recently. It has been

ongoing a long time. Mr. Pinhorn has been on this file for the past twelve years

and I just want to make recognition of his valuable contribution, as well as the

all-Party committee which travelled to Ottawa.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister: What a difference a year makes. It was

only this time last year that I was driving home in the afternoon and I heard

the minister on the radio talking about how he was going to make every effort to

disband the FRCC, to fire Mr. Fred Woodman. He was a traitor, he should be set

adrift, he wasn't speaking for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Now,

when we finally hear something that the minister wants to hear, it is a

wonderful announcement.

I say to the minister, the first step in solving the problems

that we are facing today is the attitude of the minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: I say to the minister: This is good news,

to have the scientific arm of the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans

making a report and finally seeing and finally reporting back to Ottawa, back to

the federal minister, the damage that is being done by the harp seal herd. It is

about time that people realize this is about more than seals: This is about

people, this is about families, this is about communities, this is about the

survival of rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: I say to the minister that we should make

every effort possible to make sure that the federal minister listens to this arm

of his department, make sure that the federal minister reacts and reacts now. We

do not have the time to wait. We do not have the time to get a count in the year

2000 and have it practised in the year 2001. We need it now. The time is urgent,

it is now, and I would implore upon the minister to visit with his federal

counterpart and to impress upon him once again the need to have this acted upon

as immediately as possible.

Mr. Speaker, thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When the minister first got up, the applause from his

colleagues led me believe he was starting his leadership campaign.

Seriously though, it is a serious statement, and is one that

we all, as an all party committee, went to Ottawa for, to support the effort to

insist that the federal government have a proper management plan in place for

the seal herd based on scientific evidence.

Now the FRCC has come out with this recommendation based on

scientific reports. In fact, I heard this morning Mr. Rick Smith of the IFAW

agree that the seal herd has reached its natural capacity. This is the same

organization that was fighting for a reduction in the quotas because the herd

was in danger. He said they had reached their natural capacity and ought to be

allowed to naturally collapse as a population. That is what he said this

morning.

Mr. Speaker, we know that if the return of the cod stock is

threatened, that that is not sufficient and not good enough, and there must be

action taken by the federal government. I want to caution the minister to take

the same -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: To have the same restraint about this issue

as he exercised in Ottawa. I think it is an important national issue, and that

we cannot risk losing the support of the people of Canada and the Government of

Canada on this issue by creating a backlash.

I think it is important. I think there has to be a quick

we can continue to support the efforts of the minister in getting that done.

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

and Agrifoods.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not as popular as Minister Efford. That is all you can

do.

I would like to take this opportunity to inform the House of

Assembly of the contributions of the Conservation Corps in the Province. The

Conservation Corps Newfoundland and Labrador was incorporated as a non-profit

organization in 1992. It has an excellent and deserved reputation in the

Province for innovative and progressive youth training and employment

initiatives. It provides young people with meaningful work, and training

opportunities in environmental and cultural heritage conservation and habitat

enhancement. This organization envisions our young people leading a change in

environmental, economic and cultural development in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I would like to acknowledge the support of this organization

by our colleague the hon. Julie Bettney. The Conservation Corps is supported

through the Department of Human Resources and Employment with a funding of

$450,000 for the coming year. This contribution will see 130 young people

employed this year around the Province doing a number of initiatives including

wildlife habitat enhancement and opportunities related to the environment.

Since its inception, the Corps has fielded 171 Green Teams -

more than 750 individuals between sixteen and twenty-seven years old - and

carried out 201 projects in 182 communities throughout the Province. Roughly

equal numbers of female and male students have participated.

Last year's program saw a dramatic increase of 55 per cent in

Green Team project applications. Green Team projects emphasize community, youth,

and environmental or cultural enhancement. These projects are as diverse as fish

and wildlife habitat enhancement, trail development and

interpretation, stream

rehabilitation and erosion control, cultural conservation such as archaeological

digs, and environmental education.

The Corps' Environmental Leadership Program provides students

aged twenty-one to twenty-four with leadership and environmental training in the

developing world, which they apply on local projects. Six participants are

selected in the Province each year to travel to Costa Rica for seven weeks. This

year they will be doing that again, and returning to the Province in the end of

May to start the program here in the Province.

We congratulate, on behalf of the Province, the Conservation

Corps Newfoundland and Labrador, for their commitment and dedication to

environmental awareness and preservation of our habitat, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the

minister for forwarding to me a copy of his ministerial statement.

The provincial government made a commitment to the

Conservation Corps in action item 21 of the Strategic Economic Plan which was

released June 18, 1992. That action item committed the Province to establish

Newfoundland and Labrador Conservation Corps which will channel funds into

socially useful activities that will both contribute to environmental

enhancement and provide valuable work experience and training for all members.

The vision of the Conservation Corps is that young people

will lead change in environmental, economic and cultural development and ethics

in Newfoundland and Labrador. The goals of the Conservation Corps in

Newfoundland and Labrador are to work with communities and partners to enhance

and restore sustainable development of our natural and cultural resources, and

to help the young people develop leadership, teamwork and employment skills, to

develop and promote strong conservation ethics in Newfoundland and Labrador.

What better way to educate our youth as to what is important to our Province. I

think this could be even bigger in the years to come.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HEDDERSON: I totally agree with the minister's

statement and congratulate the Conservation Corps of Newfoundland and Labrador,

and I hope everyone realizes the commitment and dedication to environmental

awareness and preservation.

I also support this organization and I know the employment is

greatly appreciated by our youth in Newfoundland and Labrador today.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We support the Conservation Corp and we are pleased that

government continues to provide significant financial support to this

organization. The work that they do is important. The opportunity for young

people to participate directly in projects of environmental concern is important

and a good life experience, and the Environmental Leadership Program offers an

opportunity for young people to get experience hands-on in dealing with some of

the complex problems of our society. It is a very positive opportunity and a

very positive experience for everyone involved.

MR. SPEAKER: Before the Chair calls Oral Questions, I

want to draw all hon. members' attention to our own Standing Orders in

Beauchesne as it relates to oral questions.

I have noticed that in the last couple of days there have

been some rather lengthy questions and lengthy

preambles, and answers have been

likewise.

Honourable members know that answers to questions should be

brief, that

preambles should be short, and that answers should be likewise. I

want to remind hon. members of our own Standing Orders dealing with

supplementary questions and oral questions.

In the discretion of the Speaker, a reasonable number of

supplementary questions arising out of a minister's reply to an oral question

may be asked by any member. In putting any oral question, no argument or opinion

is to be offered nor any facts stated except so far as may be necessary to

explain the same; and, in answering any such question, the minister is not to

debate the matter to which it refers.

Oral questions must not be prefaced by the reading of

letters, telegrams, newspaper extracts, or

preambles of any kind. A minister

may, in his or her discretion, decline to answer any question; or, if, in the

opinion of the minister to whom the question is addressed, it requires a lengthy

answer, he or she may require it to be placed on the Order Paper. The Speaker's

rulings relating to oral questions are not debatable or subject to appeal.

I refer members to Beauchesne , page 120, 409.(2),

which states, "The question must be brief. A

preamble need not exceed one

carefully drawn sentence. A long

preamble on a long question takes an unfair

share of time and provokes the same sort of reply. A supplementary question

should need no

preamble."

So I ask hon. members to keep their questions brief; and the

ministers, in their replies, to keep them brief as well.

Oral Questions

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Yesterday, in Question Period, the Minister

of Health clearly left the impression that the Member for Ferryland, in asking a

question related to the health care system in the Province, was trying only to

convince people of the Province that there was a crisis and that basic care was

going to be affected. Today, all members of the House received from the

Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association a statement on their assessment of

the health care in this Province.

My question is for the acting Premier. In that

correspondence, to paraphrase: Today the system may be able to handle the most

urgent and emergent cases; however, basic care is suffering - from the

Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association.

The question to the acting Premier today is: In the face of

this statement from the medical profession and from medical professionals, how

is government going to move quickly and expeditiously to restore the system and

to put faith back into the system on behalf of the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I did see on my desk, just before I left the office, a letter

from the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association. I have not read it but I

will take an opportunity to do that.

As for members on this side of the House, and for us as

government, we respect the views of all of the stakeholders out in the health

care system. Certainly, we respect the views, solicit the views, and take note

of the views that are expressed by agencies, stakeholders, and organizations

such as the doctors, nurses and others in the Province.

I am sure the minister, when she gets back from her travels,

will take time to review what has been put forward by the NLMA and, to the

extent that it is appropriate, she will address any concerns that they have

raised.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, that would be a change: for

the minister to address any concerns that have been raised, particularly by the

Member for Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: It is clear, and it also goes on to say

that in a difficult negotiating environment the NLMA and government recently

completed an intense process resulting in a Memorandum of Understanding. It is

clear - we have raised questions in this House - that the MOU is not being

effective.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: The question is this - I would like to ask

the Speaker one question. Is it you, Sir, who is in charge of the Chair, or is

it the Government House Leader? Which is it? I would like to know.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: Because too often in this House this

member, as Government House Leader, tries to take this House on his back. Not

today, not tomorrow, not next week, not any time, I say to the Government House

Leader!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question; he is on a

supplementary.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, in light of this clear

statement that the Minister of Health has stood on, that the Memorandum of

Understanding is working, it is not. In light of this clear statement - the

problem with retention and recruitment - I will ask the acting Premier: Will you

reopen discussions on the Memorandum of Understanding to correct the problem

that is seeing our physicians leave and making life difficult not only for

people, but seeing the health care system collapse around our ears?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sure that when the Minister of Health returns from her

urgent business that has taken her out of town today, she will reflect on the

representation that has been made by the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical

Association and she will provide to them - and I guess more importantly to the

people of the Province - an appropriate response, as she has been doing on an

ongoing basis, on all issues of major concern in the health care system.

The fact that there still continues to exist areas where we

need to do some things in the health care system, that, I suppose, will never

change. There will always be a need for improvement, for additional resources to

the degree we can put them in. There will always be a need for paying strict

attention to our health care system because, after all, our health is our wealth

and we want to ensure that we all have it available to us at what time we need

it.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I am not surprised the

minister is on urgent business, because the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical

Association says: Lately it seems that putting out fires has become the norm for

managing health care, that many of the meetings that they have established with

the Department of Health have been cancelled because of emergency situations

that have occurred.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: I would like to ask the acting Premier, and

minister in this case: These are the Province's physicians. Their concerns are

echoed by the Province's nurses. Are these not the experts, Minister? Are these

not the professionals that we rely upon to deliver sound, publicly administered

health care to every person in the Province? Are you telling them they do not

know, they do not understand what they are talking about when they say, when it

comes to basic care, that the system itself is in crisis? When are you going to

stop pretending that there is no emerging crisis in health care and do what

needs to be done on behalf of the people in this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do not know from what vantage point the hon. Leader of the

Opposition is propositioning the possibility that anyone is suggesting that

doctors do not know what they are talking about. That has not been said by me in

the couple of questions that I am taking. It has never been said, to my

knowledge, by the Minister of Health. It has never been said by us as

government.

We believe that in their -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MATTHEWS: We believe that in their -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We believe that in their area of expertise the doctors have a

lot to say with respect to the health care system. They have always been heard

as a significant contributor to the dialogue with respect to issues in health

care, and they will continue to be a significant partner in terms of discussing

and working through issues that affect our health care system so that we can

arrive at the most positive circumstance in the delivery of health care in the

Province that is ultimately possible.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In the Clarenville area the administrators of the board said

it was all rumours. The proposition from which my question comes from comes from

statements made by your own colleague I say, Minister.

The letter goes on to say: We trust that we can urgently work

together to address problems facing the Province, if only government will come

to table. Minister, the question is this. When will this government and the

Minister of Health and the Cabinet stop relying on spin doctors and start

listening to medical doctors when it comes to what we have to do with the health

care system in this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: When will you begin, based upon the

information coming from the professional association, to sit down, reopen the

Memorandum of Understanding, and focus our attention on retention of the

physicians we have in this Province, as well as recruitment of others, that

eventually will offer a better health care system to each and every person in

Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have great respect for the doctors of this Province. We

have much less respect and time for spin doctors and witch doctors and all of

these sorts of concepts. I can tell you that, as a government, it is not a

question of when will be come to the table. We are always at the table. We have

always been at the table and we will continue to be at the table and listen to

and talk with and dialogue with and take advice from and work through issues

with the doctors, with the nurses, with the other people in the medical fields,

and in the health care system generally.

We will undertake today, as we have undertaken in the past

and as we have indeed delivered on in the past, to do the maximum we can in

terms of resource investment and in terms of making significant changes to the

health care system so that we have positive net benefits for all of the people

of the Province who need health care from time to time.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Ask Dr. Chris Randell in Bonavista if this government has

been at the table for last ten years! Ask Dr. Wayne Kean in Clarenville: Has

this government been at the table for the last ten years? Those are two of many

physicians that are leaving the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: The Medical Association president -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary. I ask him to get to

his question.

MR. E. BYRNE: The Medical Association president in his

letter, dated to physicians indicates the MOU does not address the serious

problems identified by them and government has not addressed them. It does not

address the decreasing supply of nurses.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question.

MR. E. BYRNE: It does not create an environment conducive

to recruitment and retaining of physicians.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: The question is this: Is the minister

hearing what the Medical Association is saying? Is the minister doing anything

to act upon what the Medical Association has already provided to the department?

Is there finally any glimmer of recognition in this government's eyes that the

loss of nurses, the loss of physicians and the unaddressed concerns of doctors,

is directly linked to the retention and recruitment problem they say they are

trying to fix?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This government has invested probably more in percentage

increases in the health care system year over year during the past

two-and-a-half years than probably any other province or any other government in

this Province in history. I say to the hon. member that the people of this

Province are grateful to themselves, because on February 9 they elected a

government which was prepared to reinvest in health care, not a party which was

running on a platform of taking $800 million out of the provincial budget and

reducing the ability of government to response to the health care needs of the

Province.

We said we would deliver extraordinary increases in resources

to the health care system. We have delivered that level of resource, and we will

continue to work on the issues as they emerge and address them as best we can.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour

Main-Whitbourne.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for

the Minister of Education. Minister -

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: The Speaker made a ruling a few minutes ago

about questions. I wonder if the hon. gentleman would like to stand and ask me

if I am still a real speaker of this House. The Speaker sits up there, not here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

I am going to ask the hon. members that if they want to

continue their conversation they do it outside the Chamber.

The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, again, my questions today are

for the Minister of Education.

Minister, prior to the announcements of the teacher

allocations for this year, and since, you have been made aware of the negative

impact these cuts will have on programming for the upcoming school year,

September 1999. At Whitbourne High last evening I attended a meeting, organized

by two parents and attended by a large number of the school councils from Avalon

West School Board, which saw at least twenty-seven speakers stand. Each of those

speakers sent a very strong message to you, the message being that when it comes

to programming, enough cuts are enough cuts. The cuts have to stop here.

Is the minister going to act to answer the pleas of these

parents and students? Is the minister going to act to guarantee the same level

of programming in the schools of Newfoundland and Labrador for September 1999 as

we currently have in this school year?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, if the hon. members continue the conversation, and

they do not do it outside the Chamber - the Chair will not tolerate continuous

interruptions by the hon. members.

The hon. the Minister of Education.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I am well aware of the meeting

that took place last night out in Whitbourne, and very aware of some of the

issues that were raised and some of the concerns that were expressed. I have to

say that what I'm hearing seems to result from a lot of misinformation, and I

can certainly understand and appreciate where the parents are coming from. If I

were being told some of the things that parents are being told I would be very

concerned as well.

That is precisely why we are meeting with all of the

education directors for every district in this Province, to try and determine

again exactly how the teachers have been allocated. Because if the teachers have

been allocated in such a way as to impact on whether or not a student who

graduates from high school is qualified, based on the required number of courses

having been taken, whether or not they can enter a post-secondary institution, I

would be very concerned if they are being told that that may not be the case.

Because we have a responsibility and a mandate through the

Department of Education to make sure that enough courses are offered at the high

school level, required courses, to ensure that when a student graduates they

can, in fact, go on to any post-secondary institution in this country, we offer

162 courses.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I am going to ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer.

MS FOOTE: Those are the prescribed courses, prescribed

curriculum, through the Department of Education. Students must be able to access

36 credits out of that prescribed curriculum in order to graduate, and we ensure

that they can.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Harbour

Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Again, the meeting which I attended last

night, the people who spoke last night, I consider to be very much informed.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: A teacher loss in the school where that

assembly was held last night - this high school is losing a teacher unit, which

means less computer courses; the Phys. Ed. 2100 is gone; social studies have

been dropped; at least ten high school credits are gone. Fatima in St. Bride's,

All Hallows in North River, Holy Redeemer Elementary, and on and on, these

people stood up and gave an account of what is going on in their schools now and

what is going to happen next year.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question.

MR. HEDDERSON: Is this enough evidence for the minister

to act now?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, again, I go back to where the

information is coming from. When I am told that I was made aware, prior to the

teachers being allocated, of the impact that it would have. I will tell you

that, yes, the president of the NLTA, Mr. Brendan Doyle, came in to see me and

asked for a moratorium on teachers in the system, knowing full well that we will

have 4,200 fewer teachers in the system.

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member has said, yes, I was made

aware that through the NLTA they felt there would be an impact; but I would have

to question that, when you consider the reduction in the number of students and

not an equivalent reduction in the number of teachers.

Again, I go back to the source of the information that we are

getting. That is precisely why we are meeting with the education directors. If

the directors are allocating teachers in such a way that it is going to have an

impact on the quality of programming, if it means that a high school student

will not be able to get the require courses for graduation -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer quickly.

MS FOOTE: - then that is the kind of thing I want to know

about.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, last evening, a student at

Whitbourne High stood up and said that the program cuts of next year will force

her to move from Whitbourne to St. John's.

Minister, do you realize that if you do not do something, if

this program loss continues, that a two-tiered system of education will develop

in this Province: one for rural Newfoundland, one for urban Newfoundland. Are

you going to let this happen?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, that certainly is not the case. In

fact, the list of courses, the 162 courses that are to be available - courses

that students can access throughout this Province so that they can complete high

school and go on to a post-secondary institution - is available throughout this

Province.

It may vary from school to school, from district to district,

but I can assure you, as I stand here today, that every school -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to finish her answer quickly, please.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, any student who requires courses

throughout this Province can access the required courses in order to graduate

and go on to a post-secondary institution. No student should have to be

concerned that as a result of 182 teachers coming out of the system that they

will not, at the end of the day, be able to graduate and be qualified to go on

to a post-secondary institution.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are to the acting Minister of Health and

Community Services. In this House on May 3, I raised a topic of a contingency

plan to send babies to the Isaac Walton Killam Hospital in Halifax because there

was a shortage of specialist nurses here to care for them in the neonatal ICU.

The minister said that the contingency plan that has been put

in place is one that is in place on a regular basis if the number of patients

admitted to the unit exceeds capacity. The contingency plan in place is one we

have had in place a number of times throughout the last number of years, that I

am aware of, and will continue to be in place if in fact the need arises for a

bed and a bed is not available.

I have spoken with people working in this area and I have

been informed there never was a contingency plan in place before in this

Province because there was no bed available or because there was a shortage of

nurses, and the history of these people goes back to the 1970s.

I spoke with a person who is a head nurse, and a person who

is a coordinator of the transport team, who confirms that in their twenty-year

history -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: - in neonatal care there was no protocol

for newborn transport in this Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: I ask the minister: Will he stand in his

place in this House today and confirm that statement - that it is correct, what

the Minister of Health said in this House on Monday?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In a general sense we are, on an ongoing basis, in a state of

contingency with respect to planning to move people who cannot be handled in our

own health care system to hospitals outside the Province. We do it for

extraordinary circumstances or for special treatments that we cannot give in

this Province, on an ongoing basis, through our air ambulance system.

With respect to the specific question - I guess he is talking

about a more narrowly defined contingency plan with respect to the Janeway, et

cetera - I will take the question under advisement and get for him a clearer

response, upon the return of the Minister of Health, respecting that specific

issue.

I have to say that it is not uncommon for us to move patients

out of the Province for health care services. We do it for Janeway patients, we

do it for patients in all of our high level tertiary care. We move them into St.

John's and then we move them out as the need arises.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I am aware that people are

sent out of this Province when the surgery and other procedures cannot be

performed here, but the minister said in this House on Monday it is in place

when a bed is not available here, and that is not correct.

I ask the minister: Will the minister provide to me the times

over the last years and the past year - as the minister referred to - when such

protocol for newborn transfer was in place? Furthermore, will you tell this

House if the minister, or the acting minister, was informed this week that the

I.W.K. Hospital in Halifax informed this Province that it cannot accommodate any

babies in the future?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member asks specific

questions with respect to the movement of patients and the availability of beds

both in Newfoundland and in Halifax. I will undertake to take the question under

advisement and provide him with the appropriate response.

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

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister made a statement in Hansard on Monday that is

not factual, I say to the minister. She knows, and everybody in the system

knows, it is not factual!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Last fall, the department was told that not

only is the problem in neonatal intensive care but that paediatric intensive

care is becoming serious. They are only staffed to an occupancy level of 30 per

cent to 40 per cent when there was an occupancy level of 56 per cent, resulting

in overtime of $114,092 up to October of this past year.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: I want to ask the minister: Is the minister

aware that it is only staffed to an occupancy level of a little over half of

what is required; extreme overtime costs; one nurse with 500 hours of banked

time; two nurses with over 300 hours of banked time cannot use them because

there is a shortage. I ask the minister, is this an efficient and a safe way to

run an intensive care unit for children in our Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member knows very well that the government manages

the health -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows quite

well that the management of the health care system in the Province is an effort

that is taken and carried out under the auspices of the various health care

boards that are in place.

As far as I know our boards are doing as much as they

possibly can to ensure that the staffing levels at all of our health care

facilities are consistent with the needs. That is why they have some flexibility

in terms of calling in people, such as nurses, when they need them on short

notice. That is why they have to have, for efficient operations, a dedicated

bank of casuals that are readily available to them.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer quickly.

MR. MATTHEWS: If there are from time to time specific

areas where understaffing is causing critical concern to the hon. member, then I

would suggest he bring them forward very specifically. Otherwise our health care

boards -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to conclude his answer.

MR. MATTHEWS: We have confidence, Mr. Speaker, that our

health care boards are doing a good job on balance in managing the system.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the acting Minister of Mines and Energy.

Another day, another gas price hike, it seems. Some while ago we had gas prices

increase by four cents a litre and this week a further three cents a litre. A

year and one-half ago the minister received the report of the consumer advocate

on gasoline prices, and since then the minister has been lobbied hard by the

consumer group for fair gasoline prices.

I ask the acting minister: Why not take the advice of the

consumer advocate and the consumer group? Why not do what our party recommended

on January 7 and put in place an independent, impartial consumer watchdog to

investigate what is going on behind the scenes and issue the facts about gas

pricing so consumers can use those facts as a tool to keep prices down where

they should be?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

and Recreation.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I will certainly pass the

suggestion on to the Minister of Energy who is in Houston leading a business

delegation there now.

In fairness, if you look at what is happening in the world

today, the OPEC countries and the world producing countries have restricted

production by 2 million barrels a day. That has driven the prices up. If you

have watched the price of crude oil as measured against the West Texas crude

benchmark, you will see that oil prices have risen from $11, I think, to some

$19.50 U.S. in the last little while.

If you look at gas prices generally there is a market watch

in place. We took the advice of that study. If you look at the St. John's

region, from March 2 to April 22 you saw basically a four cent per litre

increase. In the same time frame in Saint John, New Brunswick there was a 7 per

cent increase, and in Halifax there was a 7.5 per cent increase. We are

concerned about it. This is a free market party and a free enterprise party, the

Conservative Party. Surely they do not want us to restrict the market or put

handcuffs on the market.

If crude prices are going up -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister to conclude his answer quickly.

MR. FUREY: - and wholesale prices at the refinery are

going up, it is naturally a consequence then that retail prices would go up as

well.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St.

John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: In view of the time, Mr. Speaker, I will

go to the Minister of Finance on the same topic. Consumers are outraged to

discover that taxes compose 51 per cent of the price of gas, and about

three-fifths of this tax is provincial. You have the power, Minister, to lower

gas prices by lowering your taxes on gasoline. Have you given serious

consideration to that option, Mr. Minister? I ask you if have not, will you?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and

Justice.

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to point out a couple of things. First of all,

the ad valorem tax -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is going to give the hon. minister a few seconds to

answer the question.

MR. DICKS: I will make two comments, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, the notion of ad valorem tax, which is one

based on percentage as opposed to a fixed amount per gallon, was one that was

brought in by his predecessor's government and Mr. John Collins, the Minister of

Finance in 1986. So on the one hand he is proposing a departure from what his

party adopted as a principle.

The second thing is, government relies on these revenues to

do things such as the educational system, to provide teachers, and to provide

nurses. I find it inconsistent -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer quickly.

MR. DICKS: - that he would maintain that we lower taxes

while his leader is demanding that we spend more taxes on education and health.

(Inaudible) consistency.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.

Petitions

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my pleasure to present a petition today in the House of

Assembly on behalf of nurses who presented this petition to me. I will read the

prayer of the petition:

To the hon. House of Assembly in the Province of

Newfoundland, parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned nurses of

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador ask the House of Assembly to accept

the following prayer:

We, the nurses, of Newfoundland and Labrador have honestly

and openly conveyed our concerns about the failing health care system in this

Province. In good faith, and under the collective bargaining process of this

Province, we attempted to negotiate these issues with the Liberal government.

Premier Tobin and the Liberal government showed their lack of respect for

nurses' concerns and made a mockery of the Province's collective bargaining

process by legislating nurses back to work without binding arbitration.

If the Liberal government honestly wishes to pursue

constructive dialogue with the nurses of this Province in an attempt to help

solve the existing health care crisis, we wish to inform the House of Assembly

this can only be made possible if the Liberal government admits they made a

mistake in not acknowledging the depth and scope of the crisis facing health

care in Newfoundland and Labrador, and the hon. House of Assembly repeals Bill

3, and the Liberal government resumes bargaining in good faith with the nurses

of Newfoundland and Labrador by using the collective bargaining process that

existed before Bill 3.

Mr. Speaker, there is a crisis looming in health care in our

Province. The minister might not acknowledge there is a crisis looming, but the

general public admits there is a crisis looming. Before I came to this House

today I got off the telephone with a lady who was in tears, whose son is numb

all on one side of his body, who runs a business in this city, and has to try to

drag himself to work, and has to wait until August to get a MRI.

That is just one recent example. I get dozens of examples

every single day of the week. I get hundreds in the run of a month from cases

like that where people are very concerned. As the parent said, that person may

not be alive by August. A young man working today, productive, with a family to

feed and a mortgage to pay, is in that situation. I told the lady I would call

her back after the House is over. I had to make a very brief call to her when

she left the message before I came to the House.

That is symptomatic of what is going on in our health care

system today. In this Province we have five radiologists, possibly six, who are

leaving, and nursing shortages that are unprecedented. In fact, in the neonatal

intensive care I just spoke about today there is a shortage of nurses. They need

nurses for Friday right up to Sunday. There are shifts not plugged in and filled

because they still haven't - there are numerous positions. There are vacancies

for nurses working tomorrow in the intensive care in the Janeway, and they don't

have nurses yet, and nurses' shifts for Saturday and Sunday are still not

filled. There are people back on double time.

They are juggling workers one day to the next. They cannot do

staff scheduling because there is not enough. They are taking to juggling

people, saying: Will you come in tonight on double time and I will give you

tomorrow off? They are filling the next day by saying to the person the day

after: Come in and we will give you tomorrow off, and come in on double time.

They are not filled tomorrow or the next day. Today is one of the first days it

is a little bit slack, there is a little bit of breathing room, and there are

still people in on double time.

It was a crisis last weekend. We have seen it. They had to

shut down. When you have to shut down the coronary care unit in the Grace

Hospital because there are no critical care nurses, that is serious. When you

have to tell a person who is ready to go to surgery: We cannot do you today for

a bypass because we have no nurse to look after you when you come out of

surgery, that to me is serious.

I got an e-mail yesterday from the person who told me he was

on death row for six months. Six months, he said, to get an angiogram, six

months to get a bypass. I finally got an e-mail yesterday which said: Thank God,

I finally got done. This is a person who runs an tourism business in this

Province who did not think he would be able to run the business this year, who

just came out of bypass surgery this past week, and I got an e-mail to that

effect. I have touched base with him, getting back on the situation. How many

are on a waiting list? I gave him the coordinator's number to call to just pass

on their concerns, to find out exactly what is happening.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SULLIVAN: We have a critical situation here with

nurses in our Province and it is not getting addressed.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member

opposite for giving me the opportunity to respond to his petition today

concerning nurses in our health care system.

What I would like to say to the member opposite or members

opposite is the fact that I recall three years ago being elected to this House,

and the first thing I did was look at the budget for health care. You know

something, when we were elected February 22, 1996 we were placing roughly $900

million in health care. Today, May 1999, even based on reduced health transfers

to this Province, we are now placing almost $1.3 billion into health care in

this Province. What does that tell you, Mr. Speaker, and Members of this House

of Assembly? That tells us all that health care is priority number one in this

Province for this government.

In relation to Bill 3, Bill 3 was a difficult choice made by

this government, a necessary choice. We had to act on our responsibility to

restore the health care system of this Province. What I would like to say today

is I would like to congratulate the nurses of Branch 12, the Western Health Care

Corporation, who this time last week were heading into some anxious moments

looking at a wildcat strike. I am glad they have be able to resolve their

differences with the board in Corner Brook. That is a good beginning. There are

bridges to mend, bridges to build, but I have to tell you that this government

is committed to health care.

MR. SULLIVAN: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The President of Treasury Board indicated today that $1.3

billion is going into health care. That contradicts the statement by the

Minister of Finance. I would like to know where the other $150 million is going

in health care that she made from the Minister of Finance's Budget?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, if you look at the Estimates

book, it is $1.2 billion but we are heading -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS THISTLE: What I am saying to you, Mr. Speaker, is the

following. This government has committed new money to the health care system. We

have committed $40 million to eliminate regional health care boards' deficits,

$21 million for additional hospital equipment, $15 million in additional funding

for board budgets, $4.1 million to recruit salaried positions, $1.8 for new drug

therapy, and the lists go on and on.

What I am saying, Mr. Speaker, is every time you look at

raising salaries for our public sector there is a price tag attached. Every time

you look at spending money for any department there is a price tag attached. The

recent raise that we were able to give our nurses, 7 per cent, there was a $27

million annual budget attached to that commitment.

What I would like to say today, Mr. Speaker, is that I

congratulate nurses for taking that first step back. I think once the 325 new

positions have been processed and are in the system, all of us will find the

benefits of that move.

It is difficult when there is an issue like Bill 3 looming in

front of us, but I would have to say to members opposite and the public in

general that this was a unique situation, one that government had to act on, and

we did not take that decision lightly.

What we have to do now is look ahead and cooperate in a

fashion that restores the health care system for all people in this Province. I

believe we are moving in that direction, and I thank you for the opportunity to

speak today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am glad to rise today to support my colleague on this

particular petition. I am even more enthused to get up, after hearing the

President of Treasury Board. I am wondering if my colleague would get up again

on a point of order and save us another million dollars very quickly. The truth

is, the minister has to get her facts straight.

Mr. Speaker, I had the full intention of supporting this

petition today especially, of course, to give me an opportunity to commend the

nurses in my district on how they handled themselves throughout this whole

situation, and how professional they were about it.

When the minister talks, she talks about: Now we need

cooperation, now we have to pass out the olive branch and everybody has to work

together. Well, Minister, I say to you, maybe it is too late because you have

gone too far. You have cut to the bone. You have backed these nurses to the

wall. They did what they had to do but, at the same time, they kept their

respect for the job that they do as professionals. They never once put in

jeopardy their patients, the people they have to deal with every single day.

That is what I commend them for.

When we saw all the wrangling going on, all the politics

being played, all the theatrics being done and so on, the nurses kept respect

for their patients. That was what was so professional about them.

In my district every day they manned the lines but also at

the same time they made sure there was adequate service at the hospital in Baie

Verte. They did a very good job of that, and I know they did it throughout the

Province.

We commend them for that, but what we are talking about here

is a process. Yes, the government of the day now says we have to cooperate. Yes,

they say we have to have dialogue and yes, that is going to have to happen

sooner or later, but it is not going to happen quickly because these

professional people who have handled themselves as professionals have been

bitten by this government and by the way they handled this entire process, a

process that was poisoned before it began.

When you talk about collective bargaining, that is two groups

sitting together to work out an agreement. That is what collective bargaining is

all about - in good faith - but of course we have heard many situations with

this particular unit and the RNC where this government has sat down with them

face to face and in good faith touched their shoulders and said everything will

be fine, we will work it out.

We find out the truth was that when the deed was done and we

were ready for an agreement, really, the strong arm of the government came down

and said: There is no such thing. We will tell you what you are going to get.

It was the same with the RNC and it was the same with the

nurses, two professions in this Province who have handled themselves

professionally and have done yeomen service for this Province over the years.

I commend those two groups - although we are speaking on one

petition today - for handling themselves in light of the way the government of

the day has handled this whole process. I believe they did the right thing and,

I will say to the President of Treasury Board, it is far from over. It is not

over with the nurses, it is not over with the RNC. They will remember because

this is something that has cut to the bone. We will see what their next move

will be, but we certainly support them in their efforts.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St.

Mary's.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today to present a petition on behalf of eighty-odd

residents from the District of Bellevue.

I was out in Whitbourne last night to a meeting and this

petition was passed to me. They asked me if I would present it in the House. I

want to read the petition:

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland

in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador asks for the House of Assembly to accept

the following prayer:

We, the undersigned citizens of the Isthmus region, hereby

draw your attention to the existing unsafe conditions as they now exist on the

Trans-Canada Highway near the Whitbourne-Blaketown exits:

WHEREAS it is the duty of government, thought the enactment

and enforcement of the Highway Safety Act, to protect its citizens, not only

from commuters but also from unsafe highways; and

WHEREAS the safety of the travelling public must be the

number one priority of any government;

THEREFORE your petitioners ask that government take all

measures necessary to ensure that a divided highway continues past the

Whitbourne-Blaketown exits and that the twinned highway include the Argentia

Access overpass;

As in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

These eighty-one residents from Bellevue are very concerned

about the planned extension to the twinned highway past and including the area

in Whitbourne. I was appalled today to hear the Member for Bellevue make a

comment that there was a Tory rally held in Whitbourne last night concerning the

Whitbourne Highway.

That was not the case. We were out there to a very

well-organized and very well-attended rally, that had to do with the education

concerns that are raised here. To think that the Leader of the NDP Party was at

that meeting last night, the president of the NLTA was at that meeting,

students, teachers, parents from all over the Avalon West area, Fraser March

chaired the meeting, for the Member for Bellevue to make a comment that it was a

Tory rally, I beg to differ and question. That was not the case at all. It was a

rally that was held on behalf of the students and the parents of the Avalon West

area. There was a great message that came from that, and my colleague here, the

education critic, brought forward those concerns today and will continue to do

so over the next little while.

Getting back to the petition and the concern that has been

raised by these people from Bellevue, there are two concerns. They are concerned

that their own member has not stood up and represented their concerns in this

House on this particular issue - the Member for Bellevue - and they are very

concerned that their own member has not stood up and spoken out on this concern

that these eighty-one people have raised. I have more. I have a whole file full

of information and petitions that have been forwarded to me by people from that

area.

This is a very ongoing concern by these people. Safety is the

number one concern that these people have. They are very concerned that back in

1996 the government put forward Davis Engineering - at a cost of $40,000 - put

forward engineering studies that showed that a twinned highway was the safest

route to take.

These ideas and these three proposals were put forward to the

people at a public session in Whitbourne in 1997. The people of the area

supported the efforts of a twinned highway which included, I say, Mr. Speaker,

an overpass at the end of Argentia Access.

For some reason or other, in 1997, the minister of the day

decided that he was not going to take into consideration the concerns of the

people of that area, he was not going to take into consideration the concerns of

safety of that area, and brought back another plan, another engineering study,

that does not include the twinned highway and does not include an overpass at

the Argentia Access Road.

Mr. Speaker, there have been considerably accidents and

fatalities in that area, and the people of the area believe that a twinned

highway is the safest route. It has been known right across Canada that a

twinned highway saves lives. It does not save everybody's life, but indeed saves

many lives from the ultimate decision that happens when there is an accident.

I rise today and present this petition on behalf of these

people because the concerns have been raised to me, and not only me but indeed

several of my colleagues on this side of the House. I find it very strange if

these concerns have not been raised with people on the other side of the House

also.

I think that those people should stand up and represent the

people who have put them here in the House. These people are very concerned.

This is not a political game, as some people may think it is. This is a very

serious issue that these people have come forward with. All they ask is that

their voices be heard and their concerns be taken, and that the proper thing be

done as it relates to the twinning of the highway and the overpass at Argentia.

Mr. Speaker, thank you very much.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition to the House. The petition

reads:

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland

in legislative session convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of

Newfoundland:

WHEREAS Route 235 from Birchy Cove to Bonavista has not been

upgraded since it was paved approximately twenty-five years ago and;

WHEREAS this

section of Route 235 is in such a terrible

condition that vehicles are being damaged, including the school buses serving

schools in the area, and schoolchildren are finding their daily trips over the

road very difficult;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to upgrade and pave the five kilometres of Route 235

from Birchy Cove to Bonavista.

Mr. Speaker, this is another petition that arrived at my

office. In fact, it arrived yesterday, I say to the members opposite, and there

are approximately another 120 names on this petition. It came in again as

parents are speaking out and wanting to add their voice to the voice of the

children that attend Matthew Elementary School and Discovery Collegiate to try

and get the five kilometres of road leading from Birchy Cove to Bonavista

upgraded and paved.

In repeating myself, this particular roadway was built

approximately twenty-five, twenty-eight years ago and there has been nothing

done other than patching since the roadwork was done. You talk to engineers in

the area and they will tell you that even at the time the road was build the

money was extended farther than it should ever be in order to build roads, in

order to get, I guess, the most done for the few dollars that you had.

It was almost like the road was built by just making the

ditch and taking the fill out of the ditches and making a roadway. Completely

different from how we see a road built today, where you go and you build a road

up to a certain limit. You put in your culverts, you tend to your ditches, you

truck in rock, and you build it up to acceptable levels, and then you roll it

all in and pave it.

The base of this particular road is nothing but mud and sand

and, I suppose, that is the reason why the road has deteriorated as badly as it

has. Because you will find on this particular

section of roadway that the

asphalt patches have been patched over almost on an annual basis.

Two-and-a-half kilometres of this particular roadway is

probably the worst

section of road, going around the pond, and I suppose that is

where the mud is, and that is why it so bad. What the parents are saying, I say

to the minister, is: Even if the two-and-a-half kilometres could be done this

year, at least it would be a big improvement from what it is today.

They would like to see the whole road done, the whole five

kilometres upgraded and paved. That is what needs to be done. If it is started

this year it will have to be completed next year, because I can guarantee you

that it will not last any more than another year, and the money will have to be

spent on it at that particular time.

There is not another detour to go around this certain area.

It is not like you are living in an urban area where you have choices, that you

can avoid this two-and-a-half kilometres by going another way, because there is

no other route unless you drive back up through the communities and drive miles

out of your way and down to Bonavista on another route. That is certainly not

practical and it is certainly not something the residents in that area should

have to do.

Their request is simple. Their own roads, through their own

communities, are in terrible shape as well but they are willing to look at this

section of roadway first. It is not a situation where parents are saying: If the

equipment comes in to do this particular roadway, then we want the road through

this community done and another community done as well. That is not the way it

is. They speak with a united voice by saying: This is what we have identified as

work that needs to be this year, work that needs to be done now in order to

provide a safe passage from Birchy Cove, Newmans Cove, Upper, Middle and Lower

Amherst Cove into the town of Bonavista, into the school, into the hospital,

into the fisherman's centre, into the grocery stores. They have all travelled

this particular roadway.

We are not talking about a massive project here. We are not

talking about overpasses. We are not talking about building bridges. We are not

talking about building a big link between one community to another where a road

is not already completed. All we are talking about -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: - is upgrading an existing road so that

those people may drive with some degree of comfort and safety.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition on

behalf of the people of the Great Northern Peninsula, the St. Anthony area and

their hospital in particular.

The petition is not worded in its normal form that would come

before this House but both House Leaders from the other parties have agreed that

it is acceptable to them to be submitted.

This issue is about a dialysis machine for the hospital in

St. Anthony, and the petition reads:

WHEREAS there is no dialysis machine in the St. Anthony

Hospital; and

WHEREAS there are several families in St. Anthony and other

parts of the Northern Peninsula having to leave their homes and move to Corner

Brook or St. John's and rent apartments to have access to dialysis;

We the people of St. Anthony and surrounding area petition

the government to install a dialysis machine in the St. Anthony Hospital.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk a bit about the problems that are

caused when people have to move away from their homes where they have lived all

their lives to receive treatment in other areas they are not familiar with.

If it is a young person that requires the services of a

dialysis machine, it may mean one of the parents being present at all times with

that young person, and the time that they have is spent exclusively, away from

remaining family members. If it is an older person that requires the services of

a dialysis machine, it could mean a permanent move to a strange city, places

that they are not familiar with, just to receive treatment. Many times it means

that their spouse may move as well. This means leaving behind their families and

their friends, selling off their homes.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)?

MR. COLLINS: Is there a purpose to the question?

Mr. Speaker, it means that this is a complete change in their

lifestyle. It may mean selling off their homes, it may mean selling off all the

things that have been dear to them over the years, so they can move to an area

of the Province they need to live in to receive the services they require. This,

as I said, is a complete change in the lifestyle they have known.

At a stage in their lives, particularly with our seniors, it

is a time when they should be able to be surrounded by their families and

friends. Instead, they have to move away from all that is familiar to them and

in many times live out their last days in a place that is totally foreign to

them. The shock alone of having to do this is detrimental to their health and

their well being, not only for the patient but for other family members who may

be required to uproot and move as well just to be near them.

This says nothing about the cost that is associated with

moving to a site, to a hospital, that can provide the health care that a person

needs.

I believe that when this issue was raised before in this

House, I think I recall the Minister of Health and Community Services saying, in

a response, that it was something they were prepared to look at. I am just

wondering if she, or somebody from government, could inform us what progress, if

any, has been made to establishing or putting in place a dialysis machine in the

St. Anthony and area hospital.

Mr. Speaker, I understand there are many issues in our health

care system that need to be addressed, particularly in rural Newfoundland and

remote isolated areas. In my own district, Labrador West, we have to travel to

the Island portion of the Province to receive any type of serious medical

treatment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. COLLINS: In my own district, many residents requiring

any type of serious medical treatment have to relocate or come to St. John's to

receive that treatment, in most cases. One of the problems associated lately in

Labrador West relates to stretcher travel and how a person, when released from

hospital, has no way to get back home if they cannot travel via regular

airlines.

We have had four cases in the past two months, and I must say

that with the intervention -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to speak at this time in support of the petition

presented by the Member for Labrador West. The issue has been debated in the

House before by a petition being raised by the Opposition House Leader. It is an

issue that is very important to the petition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. HARRIS: I am surprised that members are not listening

to the concerns of the petitioners.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I know the petitioners would want to know that hon. members

were listening to their concerns in this House when their petition was being

presented, because it is an important issue. It is significant enough that

people have signed petitions. There are I do not know how many hundreds of names

on the petition presented here today. I know there were nearly 1,200 or 1,400 or

more on the petition that was presented a little earlier by the Opposition House

Leader.

It is a issue that a lot of people are concerned enough about

to take around these petitions, to raise this issue, because they know what

happens when they are in need of medical services they cannot get in their area

- which area is the Premier's district, after all. It is a surprise that they

would have petitions presented by this side of the House rather than have the

Premier deal with their need and eliminate the problem by ensuring that

significant steps were taken to provide dialysis service in the Great Northern

Peninsula.

We had a situation a few years ago where a dialysis unit that

was in the Grand Falls area was moved out of Grand Falls, and the service was

not provided there. There were quite a number of matters raised in this House

about that. There was a group who came to St. John's and protested, and brought

this issue before the public, and government took action.

I understand that there is a need in this area that

government should be addressing. We should not have to have people move halfway

across the Province, to move to Corner Brook or St. John's, and end up in a very

expensive and dislocating experience to achieve dialysis treatment. It is not

something that is so unique or so complex, or even that expensive, that it needs

to be only in one, two or three centres in the Province.

There is a hospital in St. Anthony. There is a long history

of medical services out of St. Anthony, serving the Northern Peninsula and parts

of Labrador for many, many years. What we want to see is there being a relative

equality of services across the Province, obviously consistent with good

management, but we do have here a concern that comes out of experience that in

recent months, in the last six or eight months, there have been a number of

individuals who have had to have dialysis services and have been required to

relocate to St. John's. That is something that we would like to see ended, and I

support wholeheartedly the petitioners and the petition the way it was presented

by my colleague from Labrador West.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Orders of the Day

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, Motion 1, the Budget Speech.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my pleasure just to resume the few words I had on

yesterday. I would like to continue along the same lines. As you may recall, I

was speaking about the health and social services estimates. I would like to

recap and reiterate a couple of points that I made briefly last week.

In this House and outside we hear all the time: When is this

government going to make health care its number one priority? When are we going

to make it our number one priority? Mr. Speaker, if they were good students and

if they read their lessons and they read the Budget book, they would see that

health care is the number one priority in the Budget!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MERCER: It is number one! Our budget for this year is

estimating $1.2 billion - almost as much money as the member over there earns,

but $1.2 billion - out of a total budget of little under $3 billion. Now to me,

in my mathematics, that is about one-third of every dollar. Of every dollar that

we spend in this Province, thirty-three cents, or a little bit more, is going to

health care.

Now, if members opposite would like to engage in a debate as

to whether or not that is being wisely and efficiently, that would be a good

debate and a good discussion; but let's get off this nonsense about what is the

number one issue. Everyone on this side - at least on this side - recognizes it

as the number one priority.

Mr. Speaker, just to refresh the members opposite - just to

refresh their memory, because I know it is sometimes failing - in this year's

Budget, for argument sake, here are a few of the items. It is in very simple

form, it is in point form. It is not spread over many pages in the Budget. It is

not going to take a lot of their time to read it and understand it, but let's

take a look at some of the things that are in this year's Budget.

For argument sake, in the

summary - I am sure members

opposite have copies of this, and if they do not I am sure we can provide a few

hundred copies if they want to have one - we are providing this year some $40

million to eliminate the deficits in the regional health care boards. Let us

dwell on that number for just a little bit, because our hon. friends opposite

have said a lot of interesting things about that particular $40 million.

Many of them have indicated that we are doing very little for

the health care system. As a matter of fact, one of the members opposite has

simply said that we are just giving it to a board that we control, we

manipulate, and they will spend the money as we tell them to do. That is their

concept of the how the health care boards work, but the $40 million which we

have given the boards to pay down their debt is debt that has been accumulated

over the last - I don't know - five, ten, fifteen years. It is a debt which has

been in place for some long, long time. To say that is of no value to the

current health care system is a bit naive.

Obviously, if the health care boards are carrying a total

debt of some $40 million, someone is paying the interest. Where do you think the

interest on that money is coming from? It is coming out of the normal operating

budget of the health care system. Obviously, if you pay down the $40 million,

that is money on the interest payments which do not have to be made and which is

monies which can go back into health care, primarily at the institutional level.

Mr. Speaker, members opposite have said a number of very

disparaging things about this paying down of the debt. One member opposite - I

just made some rough notes and I am sure Hansard could bear me out if I were to

get the detailed words - clearly left the impression that the paying down of the

debt had absolutely no advantage. It was a meaningless thing for us to have

done. It was a waste of money. It did not do anything to improve health care. As

I have just said, that is clearly nonsense because the health care boards are

responsible for the interest on those long-term debts - money which must come

out of their operating budgets, money which could be better spent in other

things, whether they be support staff on the floors, equipment, or whatever.

I could go on and talk about a number of other things that

have been said by the members opposite, but we can all read Hansard. It is in

there for anyone who takes the time and the effort to read and to hear what the

Opposition have to say about that particular expenditure.

In addition to the $40 million for the paying down of the

long-term debt which has been accumulated over many years within the health care

system we also, this year in the Budget, have provided some $21 million for

additional hospital equipment; $21 million. People might argue it should be more

- it should be $30 million or it should be $40 million - I am not prepared to

argue that, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MERCER: Point taken.

Twenty-one million for additional hospital equipment. In

addition to that, the Budget this year provides an additional $15 million for

the budgets in the boards themselves; an additional $15 million to be spent in

the operation of the various health care facilities throughout the Province.

We have also, this year, provided for some $4.1 million to

recruit additional salaried physicians. I am not sure what I am hearing from the

Opposition from time to time. I am not sure whether we are spending enough, too

much, or just about right. Today, I heard the members opposite saying we were

not spending enough. A couple of days ago, the member who is now going elsewhere

spoke about the fact that we were spending too much for our doctors. Today, the

tune seems to have changed and we are not spending enough.

In addition to that, we are spending some $1.8 million for

new drug therapies. I do not profess to be an expert in this field but I presume

that is a legitimate and a bona fide expenditure within the health care system.

We are spending approximately $1.3 million to implement the

new Child, Youth and Family Services Act, and we are spending some $900,000 - a

relatively minor expenditure compared to the total Budget - in issues dealing

with tobacco reduction.

There is no doubt - I do not think anyone could challenge the

fact - that health care is the number one priority, at least in the expenditure

of provincial dollars, for members on this side and for the government that I am

very proud to be a part of.

I get a little bit confused when we receive letters from the

Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association - I received my letter today, the

same as the Leader of the Opposition - saying: I am calling upon all Members of

the House of Assembly to make health care a top priority.

I do not know where this association is coming from. It is

very clear that health care is the number one priority in this particular

Province.

That is one of the statements made today, and the Leader of

the Opposition today did make a number of other statements, but he also failed

to make some others.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (Oldford): Order, please!

MR. MERCER: The author of this particular letter says:

Money allocated in the provincial Budget may have reduced the burden of regional

board deficits but it has done very little to meet current demand - again, I am

at a complete loss as to the logical involved in that particular statement -

done very little to meet current demand, let alone the increased cost due to an

aging population.

Then he asked the question to the people that he wrote this

letter to: Has the situation in your clinic or hospital improved since the last

provincial Budget?

Mr. Speaker, the Budget was only introduced a few days ago.

We are still in debate on the Estimates of the Budget. Then we have a gentleman

here asking the question: Has the health care situation improved in that

relatively short period of time?

If we could have made profound changes, I suggest we would

have been on the Sea of Galilee and we would have parted the Red Sea.

There are issues in the health care system. There are issues

that need to be addressed, and they are being addressed.

That was just by way of a

preamble, just to bring us back to

where I had left off in the last few days.

When I stood in my place a few days ago, I said I wanted to

bring a West Coast - meaning west of St. John's, west of Grand Falls, west of

White Bay - perspective to my speech here in this House today. I indicated that

when I was in the last election campaign and nursing was a major issue, the same

as it was everywhere else in the Province, none of us on the West Coast - or at

least I did not duck the issues. I believe that after that election campaign I

came away from my district and I had a good feel, a very good feel, of what the

issues on the West Coast were, especially in my District of Humber East, with

respect to nursing issues and health care concerns.

As I said the last day, there were three issues. They are the

same three issues we hear all over the Province: working conditions,

casualization and pay. The big difference is that when I went around

door-to-door talking to nurses, talking to health care providers, that was the

order in which they were given: working conditions, casualization and thirdly,

pay.

In the last few words that I had to say the other day I spoke

about the first issue, the issue of working conditions. I alluded to the fact

that yes, at Western Memorial Regional Hospital there are problem which have

been there for many years. If we wanted to, I could elaborate on my discussion

from the last day on how some of those problems occurred, but that would serve

no particular purpose.

The second big issue, as I said, on the West Coast, or at

least in the area of Humber East, is the whole issue of casualization, the whole

notion of bringing in casual nurses to fill in when they were needed, or

basically, to bring them in whenever the hospitals thought they needed someone

that particular day.

Yes, that is a major problem. I met many individuals, many

young nurses with young families, who told me of the fact that they might be

called in at 3:00 p.m., told to be at work at 4:00 p.m., and they are faced with

a young child, and what to do and where to go with the young child. Unless there

was an established babysitting service or a day care provider, that presented an

unusual demand upon that person's time. Yes, those were the types of issues that

came up time and time again.

Also, when we talk about the casualization issue we talk

about the issue of lack of benefits, no annual leave and other matters. That is

not a very attractive lifestyle for someone trying to break into a profession.

Yes, I do have a lot of sympathy for those who work part-time, those who work

casual, but in the recent days I have heard a lot more about casuals. I have

heard, for argument's sake, that they are only casual in name. Many of our

nurses are working forty hours a week, some even more if they would appear to

take the time to go back in.

Just before I leave that point, a very important point to

make with respect to casualization is that if you refuse to come in when you are

asked, you are in violation of some of the rules associated with EI, and that is

another big issue.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

By leave?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the members opposite giving me a few extra

minutes to basically clue up.

The whole issue of casualization needs to be addressed. It

needs to be addressed both at the hospital board level and at the Department of

Health level.

When I talked to nurses and health care providers on the West

Coast the issue of wages, yes, it did come up, and I made no bones about it.

Government was wed to 7 per cent. Unfortunately or fortunately, as the case may

be, that was the government policy. The challenge was to find ways to get

additional dollars into the pay envelopes of nurses without violating the 7 per

cent. At some appropriate time I hope to be able to rise in my place and speak

to some of things that I believe were in the offer that was made to the nurses.

However, when I came into St. John's, boy, was I in for a

shock. Because the issue in St. John's was not in the order in which I had

perceived them to be in my District of Humber East. They were not: one, working

conditions, two, casualization and three, wages. Wages had somehow jumped to

number one. It was the only issue that I heard in there for about two weeks.

Maybe I was not listening to the right people, maybe I was not listening hard

enough, but in the terms of the things which I read it was very hard not to get

the impression that wages was not a major issue.

This is a little ad from, I believe, maybe from The

Western Star , as opposed to the St. John's paper: Nurses in this Province

are the lowest paid in Canada. I am not surprised. Many of us who are

professionals and who led a workaday life before we came in here, many of us who

are engineers, we could have gotten much higher paid salaries in British

Columbia, Ontario, Alberta. That is not really the issue, that we are the lowest

paid in Canada. We are the lowest paid in many professions in Canada.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MERCER: No sir, it does not make it right. What it

does mean is that we are probably paying the amount that we can afford to pay.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to add that little West Coast

perspective because what I am hearing here on the East Coast is not what I heard

on the West Coast. Just to follow-up a little further on that, just recently on

the West Coast there was the threat of a work action by the nurses dealing with

issues that have been unresolved, clearly, from the previous strikes here in the

St. John's area.

It is very interesting that I believe that my perception of

what I heard on the West Coast was real, because when this strike was

threatened, there was a disruption in the hospital. There was a disruption to my

constituents who had been asked to go in and were scheduled for surgery. They

were told: No, we cannot do you today because of the threatened strike.

There were ramifications associated with the threatened

wildcat strike. I just want to draw your attention to the fact that when the

issue was brought to a conclusion, when the issue was finalized, what were the

issues that were resolved?

Reading from the only materials which I have available - that

is in the public media - we find, for argument's sake, that at the Western

Memorial Regional Hospital there were an additional twenty-four full-time

positions. Positions which my colleague the hon. the Minister of Health

announced in this House weeks before. This settlement was done within the

context of that.

Another one of the issues which I am personally aware of that

was settled was the whole issue of support staff. I understand right now that

issues dealing with support staff are being addressed and there will be

additional support staff put on the floors. Casualization of course was

addressed in the permanents because there was so many of these casuals

transferred into permanent staff.

These were the issues that nurses articulated on the West

Coast, these were the issues that were addressed. The issue of wages was

acknowledged, not to be an issue that could be dealt with on the West Coast and

had to be dealt with in a larger environment, presumably at the Department of

Health and Treasury Board level.

I just want to again indicate and clue up by saying that a

resolution was passed here some weeks ago. I will read the wording:

"THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the Honourable House call upon

the Government, employers represented by the Newfoundland & Labrador Health and

Community Services Association, and the nurses, represented by the Newfoundland

and Labrador Nurses' Union, to immediately take collective action to address

nursing human resources issues, including recruitment and retention."

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. MERCER: Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to note

that motion was passed, but unanimously the members opposite voted against that

particular resolution.

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave is withdrawn.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Leave has been withdrawn.

MR. MERCER: They voted against the resolution.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today I would like to speak a little bit on rural

Newfoundland and Labrador. I find there is a rising crisis in rural Newfoundland

and Labrador today. I think we have to recognize that something is going to have

to be done in the very near future or we are going to lose a lot more people in

our smaller communities.

I've watched a lot of people in the district packing up,

boarding up their houses, and leaving the communities. I think that is going to

put a lot of hardship on the remaining people in the communities in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador. I think that if these younger family people leave,

these are the people that spend the money in the communities, these are the

people that have young families that need services, and they spend their money

supporting their families in these smaller communities.

I think if we lose too many more of these young family

members that the hardship put on the remaining people in the communities is

going to be that great that these communities will suffer so much that I would

say you are going to see a lot of resignations of councils and committee

members, and people that are going to say: Enough is enough, I cannot handle it

any more. They are going to be leaving too. You are going to see small

businesses in these communities having to close up too, because the family wage

earners in the communities that spend the money are the younger family members

with young families. If you take that money out of any community then it has a

devastating affect on the rest.

You can also see in a lot of communities, even some of the

larger ones, the municipal infrastructures deteriorating to a point where

councillors are so frustrated that they do not know what to do. I spoke to a few

councils in the past few weeks and they said they are just at the end of their

rope. They do not know what to do to give the services that are required in

their communities.

I was in one community that had one street light, one street

light that they had to pay for. There were several others that members of the

community took on themselves to pay on a monthly basis. I think that it is

unacceptable in this day and age that communities would have to suffer that way

because the government is putting undue hardship on these small communities.

They knew that they cannot repay loans that they have through capital works.

One community alone - I talked to the mayor there - owes

$200,000. They are cut off now from any more funding for infrastructure or

capital works in that community. They are so frustrated that any day at all the

only two members remaining on that council may resign. I do not think the people

in that community deserve to be treated in a way that they cannot have services

equal to other communities in Newfoundland and Labrador today.

I visit more than just my district. I visited a lot of

communities in the past year in Newfoundland, and I see the same problem in all

the communities, and in all the districts even serviced by members on the

opposite side. I am sure they are quite aware of these needs in their districts.

I went into one community and there was still three

kilometres of gravel road. Children in that community have to walk on these

roads and play near these roads. The devastating effect that is having on the

health of these children, I think is unacceptable. I think we are going to have

to look at communities now that still have gravel roads. Something has to be

done or some health matters may arise in those communities.

Also, in some of the places there are paved roads. These

paved roads are in terrible condition. They have deteriorated to a point where

they are almost impassable. I think this government is going to have to look at

these road programs and try to address some of the problems and get it in areas,

not only in their own districts, but think about the concerns of all people in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

I am a person that believes in equal treatment for everybody.

I believe that no matter what district you are in - I do not discriminate

against people because of their politics, their religion, colour or anything

else.

MS THISTLE: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the President of Treasury

Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, when I was responding to the

petition by the Opposition House Leader I said that when I was elected in 1996

government had roughly $900 million in its Budget committed to health care. I

said that as of February 9, 1999, we are looking at close to $1.3 billion. What

I was looking at was the figure in the Estimates book today, plus our commitment

to the St. John's Health Care Corporation of $130 million, and also to the

immigrant investor fund to other facilities around the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My philosophy on that is that I think that we cannot compare

dollars to people's needs. We cannot look at dollars and sacrifice the

importance of people's needs in this Province. There are needs there, certain

things that have to be done and should be done. If we go looking at dollars and

cents then a lot of things are not going to get done.

I do not know where the money is going to come from. This

government has control of the money. They spend it in places where they want to

spend it. I would like to see it spent in some other places. I would like to see

more emphasis put on the key issues in Newfoundland and Labrador, which are

health care and education. It is up to this government to make sure that money

is allocated in the areas that it is mostly needed and prioritize, at least, the

concerns of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

They are the ones who are speaking out. They are the ones who

have to vote for us and they are the ones who are going to make you and I

accountable in the next election. If you are not accountable and if you do not

do what you should be doing, then I guess I will not be looking at you next time

because I think I will be elected, but probably a lot on the other side will not

be elected. So I think you had better look seriously at some of these issues,

spend your money wisely, and make sure these health care issues are taken care

of.

I will get back to municipal infrastructure that I was

talking about. I went into some communities - and this is not all in my district

- where councillors are saying: Look, what can we do? We have forty-year-old

fire trucks, we have thirty-year-old pay loaders and dump trucks that we can't

keep working. What can we do? We are frustrated to a point where we do not know

where to turn, we do not know where to go. We need roads that have to be paved

and the government is saying: Sure, we have a capital works program, you can

take advantage of that. Where are these communities going to get their share of

the money? The interest on their loans now is so high that they can barely pay

it. I talked to some of the mayors in different communities and they are at a

point where maybe within the next six to eight months a lot of these councils

will not be existing. There will have to members appointed.

I also went between the communities where I saw a lot of

things that need to be done and should be done, particularly to roads connecting

communities in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. I think the rural areas in

Newfoundland are in serious trouble. If we don't do something to replace the

jobs that are being lost in rural Newfoundland and Labrador then I am afraid

that in a very short few years the health of the seniors in these communities

and the people that are unable to work is going to be jeopardized. They are

going to be in a position where the government might have to spend more money to

give them the services in their communities because they are not going to leave

on their own. Most of these seniors, when they leave they will be leaving in an

ambulance or a hearse. I think in this day and age we cannot allow things to

happen in the rural areas of Newfoundland so that seniors or children would have

to suffer because of lack of services.

A lot of the jobs in rural Newfoundland today can stay, and a

lot of other jobs can replace them if we just use our heads and think about ways

of replacing these jobs, particularly in the forest sector. We had a lot of jobs

lost, over 600 in the last couple of years in my district alone, 1,200 in the

last ten years. We are going to have to get into retraining a lot of these

workers, particularly the ones young enough to retrain, and use these workers in

the use of silviculture, firefighting protection and other things in the

community that they are able to do.

Not only in the smaller communities, but in some of the

larger communities in the district the towns and the people are suffering

because of lack of services. I talked to some people that needed medical

services. They got aboard their car and drove for an hour-and-a-half to a

hospital, stayed overnight, and had to go home the next day because they could

not find a bed for them. I think this is unacceptable. I don't know how, but for

the people who have to commute long distances to get health care and any other

care something has to be done, to make sure these people are not sent back on

the road in snowstorms and bad conditions, jeopardizing their lives, and then

have to return again the next day, only to be told that they cannot be seen

again that day.

A lot of people that I talked to throughout the Province are

desperate when it comes to jobs. They were used to making good money, used to

working all year round. In rural Newfoundland and Labrador today these people

are barely surviving, struggling to hang on to what they have, and having a job

even to put food on their table and shoes on their children's feet. If no one

believes me, I could take them to different places and show them what I am

talking about. I am sure there is nobody in this House today who does not

believe me. I am sure there is every district, particularly the rural areas,

that is seeing the same thing and I am sure that they understand.

A lot of people are looking for these make-work programs. The

money is not great but it is enough to keep them alive and give them some hope

that maybe if they can hang on another little while something better would come

along. I am sure if we all work together that maybe something can be done.

Hopefully, this government has compassion enough to see that the needs are there

in the communities. I think that we are all human and we all have hearts and

that we can feel this as much as anybody else.

Even though it is not a glamorous job, tree cutting and

thinning at a low wage is better than nothing. Some of these people are

certainly hanging on to the hope of getting something this summer and fall. They

are depending on these programs. They cannot move. Some of them are getting too

old, they are up in their late fifties. Some of them have already moved, went to

the mainland and were told: Go back home, you are no good to us, you are at the

age now where we cannot do anything with you. We cannot retrain you, we can't do

anything. Go back home.

I talked to several people who came home who phoned me and

said: What can I do? What can you do for me? There is nothing I can do only just

tell them to hang on. Maybe something will be done in the near future that more

programs will be put in rural areas of Newfoundland to help them hang on.

Even though a lot of people I have talked to are so

desperate, there are still so many out there, particularly younger people

between the ages of twenty and thirty, who are coming up with ways of trying to

sustain their own living by trying to get involved in small businesses. A lot of

them have good ideas, but they turn to politicians to get help, to help them

develop and finance their businesses. I have had many call me in the last couple

of weeks. One called me particularly in Beaumont. She had a good business idea,

and her business would mostly depend on the transportation system to the island

of Long Island. A commitment was made during the election to have a study done

on that by some other politicians. Most people on Long Island are expecting

these politicians and government to keep their word and have that study done,

and look at the viability of a causeway for Long Island.

If a causeway is possible, and the prices are reasonable,

then we should look at doing that. There are probably close to 400 people on

Long Island who are not going to move. The ferry operation on Long Island will

be there for many years, and the cost of operating that ferry is going to be so

high that maybe a causeway is possible.

With such avenues to access areas of Newfoundland and

Labrador, particularly in rural areas, then maybe a lot of these people can stay

in their homes, stay in their communities. Not only that, I believe a lot of

these communities will grow because of it. The tourist trade in some of these

areas could be enhanced greatly if some of these concerns were taken care,

particularly with paved roads, causeways, and even in the enhancement of the

ferry service, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER (Smith): Order, please!

If I can just interrupt the hon. member for a few seconds to

announce the questions for the Late Show?

MR. HUNTER: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The questions are:

I am dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of

Health re my question on doctors resigning. That is from the hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

I am dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of

Education re my question on education reform. That is from the hon. the Member

for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

I am dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of

Education re my question on school busing in St. John's. That is from the hon.

the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I was talking about job replacement in rural Newfoundland. I

think the tourist industry can certainly create a lot of jobs in rural

Newfoundland. I know we all must be diligent in finding ways of creating these

jobs. Some of these small family business people who I have talked to just need

a little help. The biggest resource is the time that they put into it, and I

think because of their dedication most of them will be successful, but I think

it is on politicians to help any way they can. I realize there are avenues and

resources and things available to them.

I think not a lot of attention is being paid to rural

Newfoundland. I think too much attention is being paid to the larger urban areas

in Newfoundland and Labrador, and I think even the members on the opposite side

are not speaking out enough to address the problems in rural Newfoundland. If

all of us don't do that, then maybe there will not be enough population to

warrant the number of seats that we do have today in this House.

I also see a need in Central Newfoundland, particularly, for

more input in the agricultural fields. I feel the resource base in the Central

Newfoundland land base - some people in the field tell me the land base is not

there. I see a lot of land base that I know is there. I think there is a lot of

problems, particularly in Central, with the paper companies because they do not

want to give up one inch of land and one foot of timber.

Multi-users in Newfoundland have to have access to our land

base, our resource bases, particularly in the forestry sector. There are a lot

of good ideas in Newfoundland pertaining to people wanting to develop different

businesses and industries. If they do not get that chance, maybe in a few years

then even some of the larger areas in rural Newfoundland will be wiped out. We

have to be smart enough to realize that certain things can be done and certain

things cannot be done.

In particular, in my area there is a blueberry association

formed just lately that has some good ideas for the blueberry industry in

Central Newfoundland. They are running into all kinds of road blocks because of

government bureaucracy and big business interference into smaller business

trying to get started. These bigger businesses do not want to see small

businesses succeed, because they know that down the road these small businesses

will become bigger and need more of the resource. The best thing now that these

big businesses are saying: Let us keep them out now, keep them from creating

jobs.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: That is true. You should be listening, hon.

minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: I was listening. That is not fair.

(Inaudible) couldn't hear.

MR. HUNTER: You were? Do you want me to start from the

beginning? I said some of these big businesses are not being fair to the smaller

businesses. They are controlling the resources in the area, so a lot of these

small businesses that have potential to grow, these big businesses are trying to

keep them down. Okay?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: Thank you. I got a fair compliment from you

the other day, Mr. Minister, and I appreciate it. I think you are treating me

pretty fair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. HUNTER: Some people cannot believe it and some people

cannot understand it.

MR. FRENCH: What did he do? What did he do, Walter?

MR. HUNTER: I do not know if he was smoking something or

drinking something but I did get a compliment from him and I thank him very

much.

MR. FRENCH: Don't go praising him up too much, now.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS THISTLE: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the President of Treasury

Board.

MS THISTLE: The Member for Windsor-Springdale said that

the blueberry business in his district was held up by government bureaucracy. I

would like to clarify that statement. Government has been totally supportive of

that industry and, in fact, has interceded with the paper company to allow a

Crown land transfer.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: I take it the hon. minister then will make

sure the association will get the land base that they need. I guess she has been

working on that and I can go back to the blueberry association and tell them

yes, things will be done for them, and they will receive the 300 hectares of

land they are looking for. Can I do that, Madam Minister?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. HUNTER: Did you? I can go back and tell them then

that they are going to get the rest of what they need. Thank you very much, sir.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order.

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the President

of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: (Inaudible) I was making reference, Mr.

Speaker, to a statement that you just made and it references our support for the

association. We have done it in previous encounters with the association. It

does not address what you are talking about today.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I read the letters. I get letters faxed every second day from

the association and talk to them by phone. They still are frustrated because

they are not getting full support from the department. Other than that, you

would have to talk to the association members. I can get the fax, and I have

letters I can give you if you want them.

Also throughout the district are other people who have good

business ideas. I talked to -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: They have the best now.

Mr. Speaker, some young people I talked to, young family

members, have good ideas. I think we have to do what we can to make sure these

young people get a chance to put their dreams into reality.

I can go on, I have a list here, but I know my hon. colleague

wants to get up too.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: Okay. Thank you very much.

Mr. Speaker, I will go back to one area in particular. Four

hundred jobs could be in jeopardy if something is not done soon, and that is in

the town of Triton. We have a fish plant there that is a viable fish plant, a

pretty well revamped new fish plant. The town has been calling me -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: Four hundred jobs, he said, in jeopardy.

MR. HUNTER: Four hundred jobs in the FPI fish plant in

Triton if they do not get the new water line to the fish plant. I do not know if

a commitment was made but I would like to know if it was. If a commitment was

made I certainly would appreciate it. It is not for me, it is for the people of

Green Bay south, and particularly around the Triton area. Mr. Speaker, I would

like to get more information from the minister on that if he is willing to get

it for me.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HUNTER: Thank you. Okay. I just support the hon.

Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture on his efforts there.

Mr. Speaker, I have seen cases in the coastal areas of my

district where people have to cut four feet off their boat so they can go out

and fish, to be within the regulation. I have people in there that had to add so

many feet on their boat so they can fish. It just blows my mind to see why the

federal government - I guess it is under the federal fisheries policies -, that

people would have to do this kind of thing to make a living and jeopardize their

safety to go out there and have to cut four feet off their boat. I really do not

understand why they would have to do that. I am sure the hon. minister is aware

of it and I am sure he is working on that. If changes can be made on that, I

would support him 100 per cent on that.

Now I will speak on the environment issues throughout

Newfoundland and Labrador today. I see a crisis arising, particularly in my

district, with landfills. We have several communities whose landfills are

overfull. Something has to be done in the near future to address that problem.

There was a report done last year, and I believe there is a new report being

done this year. I hope that soon in Green Bay South and Springdale something

will be done with regards to landfill in that area. Because there is a lot of

danger there, particularly with people in the area who use the landfill sites

there. There is a lot of danger particularly to people living near the existing

landfill areas with the smoke, pollution and everything going into the

communities. I hope that this year the minister will look into that need and

make sure his department will look into it and make sure something could be done

this year. There are great concerns in all the communities in that part of the

district.

In my district alone, I have great concerns with our regional

garbage incinerator, the Grand Falls-Windsor incinerator. It is on one side of

the road and our water supply is on the other side of the road. When the wind

changes, comes in from the southeast and easterly winds, all this smoke settles

on the water in our water supply. I realize we do have a new water treatment

plant but I think there is still something wrong. In our community alone in the

past couple of years the cases of cancer are rising and rising. Every day you

hear talk of people getting cancer and dying from cancer. I talked to the town

on it. They said they were monitoring the water supply. I think the type of

monitoring that is done is not sufficient to find out what chemicals are being

introduced in our water supply because of the incineration.

Now we have a bigger problem in there. Because it has been

made a regional incineration site, then we are bringing garbage in from

communities as far away as Botwood - and I believe Northern Arm, I am not sure

if it is Northern Arm -, Bishop's Falls, Grand Falls-Windsor. Now they are

talking about bringing garbage from Badger.

The amount of pollution going into that water supply could be

quadrupled. I have not talked to my hon. colleague because she is in the same

area as a member, but I think probably I will talk to her. Probably between both

of us we could get the ball rolling on some more studies in that area. I think

it is imperative that we do something because too many children are being

affected. Too many young people are dying in Central Newfoundland. I do not know

the reason, I cannot say, but we do have an industry in there creating a lot of

air pollution. We do have this incinerator creating a lot of pollution. I think

that in the near future I will lobbying the Department of Environment and Labour

to have more studies, and independent studies, because an independent study

probably will be more effective then some government department study. This

incinerator should be dismantled. It is not efficient, and I think it is time we

do something about it. I will lobby from now on to have something done about

that.

With the school situation,