Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Statements by Ministers — 5 April 2022 (50th General Assembly, 1st Session, Vol. L No. 40)
2022-04-05
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
PDF Version
April 5, 2022
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS
Vol. L No. 40
The
House met at 1:30 p.m.
SPEAKER (Bennett):
Order, please!
Admit
strangers.
Statements by
Members
SPEAKER:
Today we will hear statements
by the hon. Members for the Districts of Conception Bay South, Burin - Grand
Bank, St. George's - Humber, Mount Pearl North and Grand Falls-Windsor -
Buchans.
The hon.
the Member for Conception Bay South.
B. PETTEN:
Thank you, Speaker.
Speaker,
it's with great pleasure that I rise in this hon. House to honour two very
special ladies who celebrated their 100th birthday on March 26.
Ms.
Mabel Dawe and Ms. Alice Clarke, better known as “The Janes Twins,” were raised
in Paradise. Mabel resides in Long Pond, Conception Bay South, and Alice still
resides in Paradise. These identical twins are strong, independent women who
both live in their own homes, where they are cared for by family. Both have very
sharp minds and are known for their great sense of humour.
What
makes their journey through life so inspiring is not only the memories the two
have created, but also the inseparable bond they've formed with one another.
Their favourite pastime is knitting; they chat with each other daily, have
frequent visits and get their hair done together.
Both are
truly amazed at how much the world has changed throughout their lifetime. They
have worked very hard for the things that they have and are very appreciative of
the little things that life offers. Their life experiences have modelled them
into the role models their families look up to. Their motto is, “If you can't
help someone, don't hurt them.”
Please
join me in wishing Mabel Dawe and Alice Clarke a very happy 100th birthday.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Burin
- Grand Bank.
P. PIKE:
Speaker, the Province of
Newfoundland and Labrador is so fortunate to have so many Lions Clubs, which are
located throughout our great province and in many communities.
Today I
would like to acknowledge the Garnish Lions Club in the District of Burin -
Grand Bank. The club has been serving our region for 47 years. The Lions Club
has been involved in a number of major initiatives, but the one that I will
focus on today will be the Lion Morgan Knitting Project. This involves
purchasing wool for seniors and other citizens, with the finished products being
donated to the homeless and health care.
The
Lions Club has donated items to The Gathering Place, the Grace Sparkes House, NL
Housing & Homelessness: Burin Peninsula Network, the Salvation Army, Ches Penney
Centre of Hope and to the Burin Peninsula health care system for newborns.
Most
recently, they have decided to make items for Ukrainian families. Last Sunday,
the Garnish Lions Club collected donations for the displaced Ukrainian families
coming to our province. It's great to see that all communities in the District
of Burin - Grand Bank are eager to help.
I ask
all Members to join me in expressing gratitude to all volunteers and for the
kindness displayed in this great province of ours.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
George's - Humber.
S. REID:
Speaker, it is a pleasure
today to rise to recognize the work of Humber Valley Trailers, a group of
volunteers from the Humber Valley Resort, who have been maintaining and
improving recreational facilities in their community for the last seven years.
The
group initially focused on organizing group outings. As those became more
popular, they expanded their activities to improving trails and facilities.
One of
the trails they have been instrumental in improving is a decommissioned forest
access road that runs along the north side of Deer Lake. This group has
organized dozens of brush-cutting trips and cleanups along that trail.
Another
recent initiative of the group has been the Humber Valley Kitchen, a structure
with a stove and tables, seating area, close to the resort to promote year-round
outdoor activities.
This
group continues to upgrade trails, including culvert installation, construction
of a wooden bridge and construction of a steel bridge along those trails. Their
work has resulted in a significant rise in the use of these trails by people of
all ages year-round.
I ask
all Members of this House to join me in recognizing the work of the Humber
Valley Trailers.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Mount
Pearl North.
L. STOYLES:
Speaker, Mount Pearl has
always been a great place to live and raise a family. Over my lifetime, I have
seen much growth and improvement. With that, also comes the need to care for one
another in our community.
The
local churches noticed a need and started helping families at Christmastime with
food hampers. It was soon apparent that the need extended long past the holiday
season.
Almost
25 years ago, food banks officially came to Mount Pearl. Today, we have three
major food banks: two operating under the banner of the Society of Saint Vincent
de Paul, one at Mary Queen of the World Church and the other at St. Peter's
Church. The third food bank is at the Salvation Army on Ashford Drive.
The
volunteers who operate these necessary food banks are very caring and giving
people. They normally operate five days a week for a few hours a day, but this
is only the tip of the iceberg. Hours are spent stocking shelves, picking up
food and sorting donations, answering emergency calls and recording the
necessary paperwork – it all takes time.
These
volunteers are to be commended for their dedication to their fellow neighbours.
Speaker,
I ask all Members to join me and thank all these wonderful volunteers.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Grand
Falls-Windsor - Buchans.
C. TIBBS:
Thank you, Speaker.
I am so
very proud to rise today and honour William Lorne Goudie who was born in
Springdale on September 13, 1966, along with seven brothers. He has earned four
degrees: a B.A., a B.Ed. and a M.Ed. from Memorial, along with an MTS from
Tyndale University and Seminary.
During
his teaching career in Grand Falls-Windsor and Bishops Falls, Lorne found time
to become a published author, as well as a travelling ministry musician.
Lorne's other career, he served with the 2nd Battalion of the Royal Newfoundland
Regiment. In October 2020, Captain Goudie moved to Petawawa, Ontario with his
wife Dawn, where he served as a commissioned logistics officer and 35th Field
Battery captain until he retired last month.
My good
friend and hero to so many, Captain William Lorne Goudie retired so he could
jump on a plane and head to Poland and is currently in Ukraine doing what he
does best: helping people. The heart Captain Goudie has allowed him to do God's
work throughout his lifetime, and I am so very proud to call him my friend.
Please
join me today as we let Captain Goudie know just how proud we are of him as he
is in the Ukraine. Burgers on me when you get home. Stay safe, brother.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
Statements by Ministers.
Statements by
Ministers
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Education.
T. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Speaker.
As we
are nearing the Easter break in schools and looking toward the end of another
year, it is time to once again recognize educators that have gone above and
beyond for students and school communities.
Today, I
am pleased to announce the opening of nominations for the second annual
Premier's Award for Teaching Innovation and the Minister of Education's Award
for Compassion in Teaching.
Last
year, we were pleased to introduce these awards that recognize teaching
excellence in areas that have, at times, been overlooked but which are
meaningful and impactful for our province's K-to-12 students.
The
Premier's Award for Teaching Innovation recognizes primary, elementary or
secondary teachers in all disciplines who have demonstrated innovation in
instruction and a commitment to preparing their students for future success.
The
Minister's Award for Compassion in Teaching recognizes inspirational and
compassionate teachers at the primary, elementary or secondary level who have
demonstrated a commitment to supporting the social, emotional and mental health
of their students, colleagues or school community as a whole.
Speaker,
last year we held the first annual award ceremony here at the Confederation
Building and it was a very special ceremony. Members from both sides of the
aisle joined the festivities and I think all who took
part can agree that it was
extremely gratifying to see the pride of the educators who were recognized,
their families and their colleagues.
encourage students, teachers, colleagues and administrators to nominate a
deserving teacher today. The deadline for submissions is May 20. Information
about the awards and the guidelines are available on the Department of
Education's website.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Conception Bay South.
B. PETTEN:
Thank you, Speaker.
I would
like to thank the hon. minister for an advance copy of his statement. Speaker, I
join the minister in noting the opening nominations for Premier's Awards for
Teaching Innovation and the Minister of Education's Award for Compassion in
Teaching.
Given
the unprecedented challenges of the past two years, teachers are to be commended
for their innovation and compassion in the classroom. So many of our teachers,
administrators and staff have risen to the challenge of COVID-19 by providing
exceptional leadership and ensuring children receive a quality education. We've
also heard so many stories of teachers going the extra mile to ensure students
get a helping hand on their journey through the school system.
Sadly, I
continue to hear from teachers with concerns related to overcrowding in the
classroom, lack of supports and respect from this government, and this was even
before COVID-19. I do hope the long, long-promised review of the teacher
allocation formula that is finally under way will provide some structural change
to address some of these issues.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Third Party.
J. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
I, too,
thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. Teachers continue to go
above and beyond as we emerge from the challenges faced at the height of the
pandemic. We encourage the department to go further than symbolic awards; reduce
class size and ensure teachers have the resources they sorely need to prepare
our future generations, our children, for the world we are building for them.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
Further statements by
ministers?
The hon.
the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.
A. PARSONS:
Speaker, I am pleased today
to notify Members of the House of Assembly that the provincial government is
lifting the current moratorium on wind development, creating an opportunity for
industrial customers to generate wind energy –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
A. PARSONS:
– for their own consumption
and wind generation for export.
Speaker,
a moratorium on wind development has been in place since 2007 and was a barrier
to investment and development.
Newfoundland and Labrador has some of the best wind resources in North America.
These can be used to power wind turbines and generate electricity for industrial
customers; export through transmission lines; for the production and export of
hydrogen or ammonia; and to supply energy to Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.
Speaker,
my department has been engaged with a number of companies interested in
exploring industrial development. By lifting the existing moratorium to enable
onshore wind development, we are allowing companies to proceed through an
approval process for wind development. Details on this process will be released
in the coming weeks.
Our
government launched the province's Renewable Energy Plan in December 2021. One
of the short-term commitments in the plan was to review the moratorium on the
Island Interconnected Electricity System. This is an initial step in a
multi-stage process to enable wind generation in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Speaker,
this is a significant move and is supporting our transition to a greener
economy. This supports government's focus on working with the private sector to
find new export markets for the province's underdeveloped renewables.
Newfoundland and Labrador possesses valuable and abundant developed and
undeveloped renewable energy resources, as well as experience and expertise in
the province's technology and energy sectors. Our renewable energy industry is
growing and today's news will continue to grow on the experience and economic
potential of the sector.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Ferryland.
L. O'DRISCOLL:
Thank you.
I thank
the minister for the advance copy of his statement. Speaker, our province is
rich in abundant resources. I'm a firm believer that all of our resources,
including wind energy, should be developed to the benefit of our province, our
residents and our industries.
While I
believe this announcement by the minister is a good first step, it is a first
step. There are still unanswered questions. The minister must outline what the
appropriate process for a company who wishes to set up a wind development and
the relationships between the province and the industry. For example, will a
royalty on energy generated be collected by the province?
I also
believe that our publicly funded college, CNA, should offer training so that
this becomes an industry, which can employ Newfoundlanders and Labradorians for
many years to come.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Labrador West.
J. BROWN:
Thank you, Speaker.
I thank
the minister for the advance copy of his statement. This is wonderful news and
shows that we can capitalize on opportunities for a just transition, when the
political will exists. However, we must ensure that any development is
sustainable, that energy resources remain public assets and that their primary
benefit, and all benefits, remain for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
Are there any further
statements by ministers?
Oral
Questions.
Oral Questions
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
D. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Speaker.
The
health care system in this province is broken. Doctors, nurses and front-line
workers are desperately calling out for help. The Health Accord called for
investments into the system, yet the Greene report called for a 25 per cent cut
in funding.
I ask
the Premier: Which hand-picked expert will you follow in this year's budget?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER A. FUREY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
course, we know that the health care system is incredibly strained and
challenged, that's why we asked Sister Elizabeth Davis and Dr. Pat Parfrey, two
well-known experts, to evaluate it, including over a year co-operating with
stakeholders and seeking input. We're thoroughly investigating that analysis
right now to see the best path forward, Mr. Speaker.
We know
that there is going to be required an investment at some point in the health
care system; we understand that. We need to make sure that we are providing the
utmost care for the patients of this province, Mr. Speaker, and that's what this
government is all about.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
D. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Speaker.
I'm
happy to hear that the Premier acknowledges that we need to do an investment,
but we're in a crisis. That investment should happen this Thursday for the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador (inaudible) health care system.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
D. BRAZIL:
Speaker, the Premier promised
the people of Newfoundland and Labrador a chief economic recovery officer in the
last election campaign. It's been over a year and the position has yet to be
filled.
I ask
the Premier: Are you going to keep this promise and the many others that you've
made?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER A. FUREY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
That
vacancy has been advertised, as I understand it. I'll check and see where it is
right now and report back to the House, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
D. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It's
good that we're moving on some of the promises. There are a number of other ones
that the people of this province expect the Premier to deliver on.
Speaker,
during her presentation on the Greene report, Moya Greene said she would be
happy to serve the province further in any way she can.
I ask
the Premier: Are you holding this position open for Moya Greene?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER A. FUREY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
No.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
D. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It's
good we've got a distinct answer there. Good, we can move now to hopefully
getting somebody in play who can actually help move the economy in the right
direction.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
D. BRAZIL:
Speaker, a family physician
in Grand Falls-Windsor has taken to Twitter to illustrate how desperate the
situation is with local emergency rooms on constant diversion. Dr. Lynette
Powell, who is also a former president of the Medical Association, has painted a
grim picture of patients with chest pain and respiratory distress being turned
away from local hospitals.
Speaker,
this Liberal government has been in power for seven years. Will the Premier
finally agree that this situation is a crisis?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER A. FUREY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'm not
sure about finally, because I've always acknowledged that the health care system
has incredible strain and is incredibly challenged. I've worked in it; I think I
know probably perhaps better than anyone in this House the challenges that the
health care system is facing right now, aside from COVID-19.
It's
been chronically underfunded. We need to make sure that we are doing the best to
recognize that as we emerge from this pandemic, this time of disruption, that we
are re-imagining the health care system to provide the best care possible, to
drive the ultimate outcomes. We've been spending the most per person per year on
health care for year after year after year, yet we have the lowest life
expectancy, the highest burden of disease. We can't continue to invest in the
old paradigms; we need to create a new one, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
D. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have
to acknowledge that, to the Premier, the people of this province see the
difference between a challenging health care system and a health care system in
crisis. We're in crisis, and that's the effect it's having on people in the
province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
D. BRAZIL:
Similar stories to physician
shortages are all too common, in Fogo, St. Alban's, Twillingate, Springdale,
Baie Verte, Buchans, Harbour Breton, New-Wes-Valley, Bell Island and the list
goes on. In emergencies, patients are being transferred hours and hundreds of
kilometres away.
I ask
the Premier: After seven years, why has the government been unable to get its
act together to save rural health care?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER A. FUREY:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
That's
exactly why we put the Health Accord in place, Mr. Speaker, to recognize that we
need to deliver health care differently. The old paradigms of the past, the old
GP practices of the past, they are simply not going to cut it. We need to make
sure that we are investing in a new health care system, one that's been
re-imagined for the first time since the '60s, Mr. Speaker.
The
population has changed, the demographics have changed and technology has
changed. We need to make sure that we are harnessing that change to create a new
health care system for the people of the province that drives ultimate outcomes
as close as possible to home, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
D. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Speaker.
Dr.
Parfrey and Sister Elizabeth Davis have acknowledged that part of their work
will take 10 years. What they need is immediate investments here. So I would
hope that immediate investment comes this Thursday, with a commitment to the
people of this province that health care will be improved.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
D. BRAZIL:
Speaker, thousands of
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are one accident, one heart attack or one
stroke away from losing their lives because the Liberal government can't get its
act together. Dr. Powell has compared the current crisis to pre-Confederation
health care.
Speaker,
last week the Premier boasted about the 73rd anniversary of Confederation. Does
he share Dr. Powell's assessment of health care in rural Newfoundland and
Labrador?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER A. FUREY:
Frankly, Mr. Speaker,
pre-Confederation, it's a false analogy completely. You can look at the data
yourself. The life expectancy, the neonatal mortality rate, the maternal
mortality rate, that's an unusual comparison. I recognize that the health care
system is challenged, but frankly, to compare it to before Confederation is
wrong. It's statistically wrong and it's not accurate.
We are
moving, as this government, recognizing the Health Accord, working with people
like Lynette Powell and the NLMA to ensure that we are delivering the care that
is required in the communities. Inventive, innovative solutions like harnessing
technology, using collaborative care clinics, just to name two, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Conception Bay South.
B. PETTEN:
Thank you, Speaker.
I tell
you, the government has had seven years to get it right and we're still waiting.
Speaker,
I'm delighted the government has finally taken my suggestion to have the Auditor
General review Memorial University.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
B. PETTEN:
Funny it may be, but it's
true.
While
it's unfortunate that it took a year of asking, the minister also indicated all
changes to the Memorial University Act
are on hold until the review is complete.
So,
Speaker, will the changes to MUN's accountability and autonomy also be put on
hold?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Education.
T. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As the
Members know, we have been working on having the Auditor General go in to
Memorial University since last year. In fact, there were two pieces of
legislation changed in this Legislature, one specifically, the
Memorial University Act and
section
38.1, and the other more broad and looking at all government agencies, Mr.
Speaker.
But to
answer his question specifically, the
Memorial University Act amendments are looking at autonomy, looking at
accountability. We will await the independent review by the Auditor General to
add that to the work that is already being done on the
Memorial University Act and feed into it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Conception Bay South.
B. PETTEN:
Thank you, Speaker.
Speaker,
in the minister's news release yesterday he said an unbiased overview of how the
university allocates their investment is critical before changes to the act are
brought forward. If the minister can hold off on all amendments of the
Memorial University Act until the AG
report is complete, will he also hold off on increasing the tuition at MUN as
planned for this September until the AG has completed a review?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Education.
T. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Speaker.
I don't
know what purpose that would serve. Memorial University had given notice to
government – as they have the right to do; the Board of Regents has the ability
to change tuitions at the university. They had given government notice months
prior to last year's budget that they were increasing tuitions.
So with
or without removing the tuition freeze funding, which is meant to freeze
tuitions, tuitions were going up. We made the determination that we would take
that funding and direct it into student aid and student loan programs, Mr.
Speaker, which is where the money was needed.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Conception Bay South.
B. PETTEN:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It's
fallen on the backs of students. Everything else stays as it is, but everything
else falls on the backs of students and that's something the minister is
missing.
Speaker,
government has sat by while tuition is supposed to double; lavish renovations
were completed to the president's office and dubious spending on a personal
trainer. Yet, the students are struggling with the high cost of living, as are
the rest of us in this province, and will face a tuition increase later this
fall.
Again,
is everything else on hold? Why are the students the only ones being penalized?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Education.
T. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Speaker.
Again,
we don't make determinations or the decision on tuitions at Memorial University.
I do trust that the university has done their due diligence, Mr. Speaker, in
determining the tuition rates. I understand from the president that they are
still very competitive when compared to other Canadian universities. I also
understand that applications for the upcoming semester have remained stable.
So the
tuition freeze funding, Mr. Speaker, was to freeze tuitions. That wasn't
happening. Without taking that funding back, we wouldn't have the funding to put
into additional grants and loans for students, Mr. Speaker. Many of the students
who graduate are eligible for loan forgiveness in this province, unlike many
other provinces.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Conception Bay South.
B. PETTEN:
Thank you, Speaker.
This is
a case of passing the buck, Speaker. The minister is well aware. We've debated
this. It's not a new topic. We've debated back and forth in the House, outside
the House and in person.
Six
months ago, we passed legislation to let the AG come in and review MUN's books.
What are we waiting for now? Six months later, we announced yesterday – we don't
know when it's going to happen, when they're going to come in and do it. They
could have announced this six months ago, Mr. Speaker.
Now we
are looking at least a year or so before the AG gets her final report, so we're
not going to see a MUN act for 2023-24 – maybe after the next election. And
hopefully someone else with the right sense are in power to make the right
decision and not follow what's happening across the way.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Education.
T. OSBORNE:
Mr. Speaker, if we're waiting
for the other side of the House to make the decisions of this province, we'd
have another seven years cleaning up their mess.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Stephenville - Port au Port.
T. WAKEHAM:
Mr. Speaker, I'm not even
going to comment on that particular point, other than to say that right now,
yesterday, the government announced that they were going to do a review. They
were inviting the Auditor General to come in to review the books of MUN and talk
about transparency and accountability. At the very same time, the Minister of
Finance and President of the Treasury Board received the Rothschild report and
quickly told the people of the province she has no intention of releasing it to
the people to see it.
So I ask
the minister: Will you ask the Privacy Commissioner to take a review of the
report and cross out or redact anything that is, quote, “commercially
sensitive”?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Finance and President of the Treasury Board.
S. COADY:
Thank you very much, Speaker,
and thank you for the spirited question.
I will
say to the Member opposite that I'm sure he does not want to have a detrimental
effect to the people of this province. He would not want to put any type of
assets at risk. I will say to the Member opposite that I know why he is asking
for the report, but I will say to him that we have to protect the public
interest. It is important that we do so and we will continue to do so on this
side of the House.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Stephenville - Port au Port.
T. WAKEHAM:
Speaker, yesterday the
minister said she would do the responsible thing. The responsible thing would be
to ask the Privacy Commissioner to examine the report and to redact anything
that might be commercially sensitive.
I ask
the minister: Will you at least release the report and tell us exactly what
assets – a list of the assets – you plan on selling off?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Finance and President of Treasury Board.
S. COADY:
Speaker, I am sure that the
Member opposite understands the ATIPPA legislation; I have to believe that he
does. When he speaks about the Commissioner, the Commissioner's role is
oversight. The Commissioner's role is not to come in and redact. The Member
opposite must understand that. Either he is misunderstanding it or he is
misinforming.
I will
say to the Member opposite, the –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
SPEAKER:
Order, please!
S. COADY:
Sorry, Speaker, I am getting
interrupted.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
SPEAKER:
Order, please!
S. COADY:
If he doesn't understand the
legislation, I'd be happy to walk him through it. I will say that it is very
important that we protect the public interest. There are a lot of commercial
sensitivities. We wouldn't want to have it impact the commercialization of any
asset.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Stephenville - Port au Port.
T. WAKEHAM:
Speaker, the only one being
misunderstood or misunderstanding are the people of the Province of Newfoundland
and Labrador who this minister refuses to allow to see the report that they
spent $5 million to commission. It is about time that the people of the province
saw this report.
We also
notice that it is the same government, of course, that have hid the secrets of
the whole deal that was done with Canopy Growth. They still never released that,
yet they ask for trust.
A senior
in my district, yesterday, called me up and talked about why is it the
government can spend $5 million on a report but can't do anything about the
price of furnace oil.
I ask
the minister: Will you implement a home-heat rebate program?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Finance and President of Treasury Board.
S. COADY:
Speaker, I am sitting,
literally, I don't know, 12 feet from the Member opposite, he does not need to
shout. I can hear him completely. I have an earpiece in my ear as well just in
case there is chirping or comment.
I will
say to the Member opposite that the report will be reviewed; it will be
analyzed. What we're trying to achieve here is making sure that we're protecting
the people of the province. I am sure the Member opposite does not want to have
a detrimental impact on the people of the province.
With
regard to the home heat rebate, I will say again to the Member opposite and,
again, to the people of the province – and the people of the province understand
this, I can't understand why the Member opposite doesn't – the home heat rebate
has been rolled into the Income Supplement and the Seniors' Benefit and that
we've increased.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Stephenville - Port au Port.
T. WAKEHAM:
Thank you, Speaker.
I will
make sure that the minister clearly understands what I am saying, but let me
clearly say to the minister the program that she talks about that was introduced
in 2016, at that time, the price of fuel oil per litre was 61 cents. Today, it's
at $1.83; three times the amount when that program was introduced. So that's no
excuse for not implementing a home-heat rebate program. As a matter of fact,
we've gone so far as to ATIPP. In two years, we could not find any
recommendation or discussion by this government about even looking at a
home-heat rebate program.
So,
again, I ask the minister: Can you please implement a home heat rebate program
for the people of the province who really need it?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Finance and President of Treasury Board.
S. COADY:
Thank you, Speaker.
I'm sure
the Member opposite understands, because he just admitted to it, that the home
heat rebate was folded into the Income Supplement. We've just raised the Income
Supplement. We've raised the Seniors' Benefit. That is included, people are
getting their cheques; they'll get them four times a year. Speaker, there may be
other things in the budget coming in a short two days that may be helpful for
the people of the province on the cost of living.
We all
recognize that these cost of living concerns are very real, we understand that
and we understand that it's not just locally; it's nationally and
internationally. We are all concerned about the cost of living, it's not just
the Member opposite; it certainly is this government. I'm sure he'll see more in
the budget.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Placentia West - Bellevue.
J. DWYER:
Thank you, Speaker.
The
manager of a food bank said: “We've kind of got a new demographic really. We've
always had some working people, but we certainly didn't have this many working
people ….”
Why did
the minister fail to support these people who are now forced to look for
assistance from food banks?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Children, Seniors and Social Development.
J. ABBOTT:
Speaker, thank you for the
opportunity to respond.
Recently, we were talking to and have been working with Food First NL and we've
provided them some additional funds this year to support food banks and food
programs across the province, while we work through the very difficult time in
the community in terms of accessing food.
Also, as
the Minister of Finance just mentioned, we have a five-point plan, we've
increased the Income Support payments for individuals and families, we've
increased the Income Supplement and we've increased the Seniors' Benefit. So
we're putting out as much money as we can at this time until we wait for the
budget.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Placentia West - Bellevue.
J. DWYER:
Well, I can appreciate some
of the work that's being done. It's the people that are actually keeping our
economy going that are struggling now. They still have to buy their lunches and
put gas in their car to get to work. We're talking about a lot of people that
you increase stuff that, yes, it's important for them as well, but it is a fixed
income.
It's
getting more expensive to live here, simply. That's pushing more people to food
banks in my district and the whole province; people who once donated to food
banks, now have to look to them for food.
What
additional supports will the minister implement to lower the cost of food and
provide more supports to food-sharing organizations?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Children, Seniors and Social Development.
J. ABBOTT:
Again, thank you, Speaker,
for the opportunity to respond.
recognize, as a government, that the cost of living is increasing. We're doing
what we can, where we can and how we can to address that. We have the five-point
action plan, but more specifically to your question, we are working with Food
First NL. We have just put out additional funding to them to allow them to
receive applications from the community for those food banks and food programs
that need assistance to support the clients that they're working with right
across the province. We've started that process and we'll continue to support
them in the weeks and months ahead.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Placentia -West Bellevue.
J. DWYER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I think
everybody has seen the rally we had on the Burin Peninsula about health care.
According to the local health care committee on the Burin Peninsula, the Health
Accord team has informed them that they will strongly recommend that speciality
services such as surgery, obstetric care and intensive care units be removed
from the Burin Peninsula Health Care Centre.
I ask
the minister: Will these services be removed?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you very much, Speaker,
for the opportunity to reply to the Member's question.
The
Health Accord has delivered its
summary report to the department and we are
currently analyzing that. We are, however, still awaiting their second document,
which is an implementation report. All of these discussions are currently
conjecture. Once that report is received that, too, will be analyzed before the
department and government make any decisions about these kind of things.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Topsail - Paradise.
P. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
Speaker,
personal care home subsidies in the province haven't seen an increase since
2017. Since then, they've seen substantial increases in costs such as a 21 per
cent increase in utilities, a 22 per cent increase in groceries and supplies, a
30 per cent increase in labour costs and over a 100 per cent increase in
insurance premiums.
I ask
the minister: Will this budget include an increase to personal care home
subsidy?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
obviously can't speak to the budget, that's not my mandate, and it's not Budget
Day anyway.
In terms
of the personal care home sector, I have met with groups representing their
owners. We know that the review done by Deloitte some years ago contained
recommendations around subsidies, and time has passed those by.
We have
asked Deloitte to go back to their figures and revise them in light of some of
the cost-of-living changes. I would however like to point out that we've
provided considerable financial and in-kind support to the personal care homes
to cover their administration costs and all their PPE during COVID. So they're
not falling on deaf ears, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Topsail - Paradise.
P. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
Contrary
to what the minister says, the Minister of Finance spoke to the departments
actually (inaudible) into the budget. So he should know what's been asked for.
To go
back to the Deloitte report, having that redone, that's not going to change our
demographics. That report looked at seniors doubling. So that's not getting any
better.
Speaker,
without an increase in the subsidy, some personal care homes, especially outside
the Northeast Avalon, are in danger of closing, displacing seniors from their
homes. Nova Scotia and New Brunswick have taken progressive steps to increase
their subsidy rates.
I ask
the minister: What is the plan to ensure personal care homes continue to be
viable and provide high-quality care to the vulnerable seniors of this province?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you very much, Speaker.
For
clarity, I think the Member opposite may have his Deloittes confused; there are
at least three reports done by Deloitte governing the personal care home sector.
The one I reference was simply around the figure for subsidies. The others are
relevant but not germane to his question.
In terms
of small homes outside the Avalon, particularly, we are conscious that a per
capita bed subsidy has not worked for them in the past. It is crucial that
whatever we do with funding for personal care home beds, it takes into account
the importance of small homes in rural areas that provide a service and
employment, which cannot be managed the same way as the large 100-bed homes.
We're working with the operators to achieve that, Mr. Speaker.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Topsail - Paradise.
P. DINN:
It's – I don't know what to
call it, I was going to say amusing that the minister would say that the
increase and the reports of increase and the huge numbers of our seniors over
the coming years is not germane; not germane to this issue. Wow.
Speaker,
we hear regularly from our constituents around long delays to be assessed for
admission to personal care homes and reassessment for higher levels of care. We
only recently saw the instance of two seniors, one who has unfortunately passed
away. This means that seniors are left waiting for extended period of time to
access the care they require.
I ask
the minister: When will he take action to ensure timely access to personal care
homes and other care seniors may require?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Again, Mr. Speaker, for
clarity, the issue of the numbers of seniors requiring support, either in their
own homes, in personal care homes or in long-term care, has been very much front
of mind. We have our Home First philosophy to deal with the first group.
Personal care home sector itself has built an additional 1,800 beds, of which
1,500 are still empty because they have a vacancy rate and that is not due to
placement issues.
There
are, however, placement issues, particularly in Avalon. The other regional
health authorities less so. This has been occasioned by COVID; has been assisted
to some extent by the Good Neighbour Agreement with the unions; and we're
working with Placement Services in Eastern to streamline their process, Speaker.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Labrador West.
J. BROWN:
The teacher shortage issue in
Labrador West is well known. The minister must be well aware of the staffing
issue crisis at Menihek High School. A former teacher described the situation as
a house of cards. There are not enough replacement teachers and teachers have to
cover other classes since September. Now with four teachers set to be off for
the rest of the year, the house of cards is collapsing.
I ask
the minister: What short-term and long-term measures are being put in place to
ensure Menihek High School can continue the necessary teaching and maintain
staff for in-person classes?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Education.
T. OSBORNE:
Thank you, Speaker.
I thank
the Member for the question because it is a concern for the NLESD and the
department. It is the area of the province with the greatest pressure. It is due
to the ability to get teachers in that area based on pay and the amount of rent.
One of
the issues that we are undertaking in that area, Mr. Speaker, is a building that
is owned by the NLESD with apartments in the building itself. We're constructing
additional apartments and they should be in place, hopefully, Mr. Speaker, for
September so that we can use that to help attract additional teachers.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Torngat Mountains.
L. EVANS:
Thank you, Speaker.
We are
hearing across districts from Torngat Mountains to St. John's Centre that
critical supports patients need to achieve health outcomes are not effective or
not available to them. Supporters were here yesterday in the House of Assembly
advocating for a patient that is having difficulty getting proper medical
supports and is feeling abandoned.
I ask
the minister: Are patients supposed to accept this and just give up or will this
government review the patient outcome supports and ensure that cases like Simeon
Poker and many others across the province can succeed and not fall through the
cracks?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you very much for the
question, Speaker.
recognize that as the health care system with its specialization and
sub-specialization becomes increasingly difficult for individuals to navigate,
we have adopted across the RHAs a technique we used in cancer care, which was to
institute the role of care navigators. Each regional health authority has them.
They are straightforward to contact.
We are
working with our Indigenous partners to ensure that those people for whom there
may be cultural or language barriers to accessing care have those barriers
removed. Indeed, as recently as yesterday, Eastern Health, for example, were in
contact with Indigenous groups to provide support for families from Labrador who
I would
argue the supports exist, Mr. Speaker.
SPEAKER:
The minister's time is
expired.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Humber - Bay of Islands.
E. JOYCE:
There are 800 residents in
Western Newfoundland on wait-list one for cataract surgery and will have to wait
up to a year to 18 months, many in your own district, Premier. Many seniors who
cannot even see this broadcast today. Many seniors had their driver's licence
taken away from them and can't even read their medication instructions.
The Sir
Thomas Roddick Hospital hasn't performed any cataract surgeries since January
2021, 15 months ago, due to equipment and medical packs. There is a backlog of
surgeries at Western Memorial Regional Hospital with limited time available for
cataract surgeries. Three specialists can eliminate the wait-list in a timely
matter with more OR time available at the Apex building.
I ask
the Premier: Will you immediately convene a meeting with yourself, the Minister
of Health and Community Services and the three specialists on the West Coast to
resolve this issue?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you very much, Speaker.
For the
information of the House, the number of cataracts performed in Western Health
has increased by just over 20 per cent in the last five years. The number that
were done in Western Health facilities in the last year dropped by 99 per cent.
The reason that there have been no cataract surgeries performed in Western
Health is because when there was a defect with the microscope, the individual
concerned said he was not going back to Stephenville.
It has
been fixed on the direction of the department and we are awaiting the return of
the surgeon. There are some contractual issues, which we are looking into with
Western Health.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Humber - Bay of Islands.
E. JOYCE:
Mr. Speaker, you can say how
much you like are done, there are still 800 waiting to be done. I have a letter
from Western Health saying because of equipment failure and because of the
supply packs they could not perform the surgeries. So are they misleading the
people of Western Newfoundland, I say to the minister.
Eight
hundred people need this surgery and want their eyesight. They want their
dignity back and quality of life. If the surgeries were completed at public
facilities, MCP would be billed. Funding is not the issue now. It is where the
procedures are performed. The OR time at Western Memorial Regional Hospital is
limited. The backlog would only increase if it's not eliminated.
Premier,
residents I have spoken to don't care where they get this surgery done. They
want their eyesight. Premier, you said on many occasions the buck stops with
you. While your government are arguing where the surgery should be performed,
the eyesight of 800 residents is in your hands.
Would
you please resolve this very difficult situation and perform your job as the
Premier and meet with the specialists?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you very much, Speaker.
Part of
the arrangement with the Medical Association around cataracts was a provincial
approach to cataract waiting .
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
SPEAKER:
Order, please!
J. HAGGIE:
There is capacity in a
variety of facilities across the Island and I am delighted to hear –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
SPEAKER:
Order, please!
I heard
the question. I want to hear the response.
The hon.
the Minister of Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
There is capacity in a
variety of facilities across the Island. I am delighted to hear from the Member
opposite that his constituents are prepared to travel for the cataracts. We
bought extra cataract surgeries over and above. We bought 5,000. We did not
expect that the RHA list would be abandoned in favour of a more lucrative
approach.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
Question Period has expired.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Presenting Reports
by Standing and Select Committees
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Environment and Climate Change.
B. DAVIS:
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to
section 17 of the Harassment-Free Workplace Policy Applicable to Complaints
Against Members, I am pleased to present this report respecting the review of
the policy conducted by the Privileges and Elections Committee.
I thank
the Members of the Committee for their due diligence and hard work, and I
recommend this report to the House of Assembly.
Thank
you. Mr. Speaker.
SPEAKER:
Other presenting reports by
Standing and Select Committees?
Tabling
of Documents.
Notices
of Motion.
Notices of Motion
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Environment and Climate Change.
B. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I give notice that I will on tomorrow move the
following motion: That the House concur with the report of the Privileges and
Elections Committee tabled on April 5, 2022.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SPEAKER:
Further notices of motion?
Answers
to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Placentia West - Bellevue.
J. DWYER:
Thank you, Speaker.
These
are the reasons for the petition and the background to this petition, and it's
hopefully for the minister that's leaving to go get a glass water and not the
room.
AN HON. MEMBER:
You're not supposed to say
that.
J. DWYER:
No, I said he was going to
get a glass water.
SPEAKER:
Order!
J. DWYER:
I apologize. I withdraw.
AN HON. MEMBER:
(Inaudible.)
J. DWYER:
Oh, okay.
Roads in
our province are in various states of disrepair. Many rural communities are
concerned that the deplorable road conditions will keep visitors away from the
Come Home Year celebrations. We are inviting the world to come to our province
this summer, yet many rural roads are unfit to travel and many local vehicles
are damaged by huge potholes, unrepaired washouts and uneven shoulders. This is
a real deterrent to tourists and family members from out of province who wish to
join our celebrations this summer.
Therefore, we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: To urge the
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to increase the provincial roads program
budget to address the need for repairs to many rural roads throughout our
province.
This one
here is signed by people from Petite Forte and Rushoon. I presented one for
Chance Cove and I'm sure there are going to be more to come.
I'd say
the only ones that are upset with me presenting this petition are probably the
mechanics, because they're the ones that are going to be the busiest this
summer. I hope they don't make any plans for their own vacation this summer,
because I'm sure they're going to be backlogged with the state of the roads.
So I ask
the minister to have a look at it and fight on behalf of the people in rural
Newfoundland. I mean, I know what I was grandfathered into and a lot of it comes
to maintenance not being done for a while and stuff like that. So if that takes
buying some new equipment like brush-cutting attachments to do it ourselves
instead of contracting out, we might get a little bit more done because then we
can take that attachment and put it in different depots as needed.
There
are many ways that we can fix our roads, but we have to have a willingness to
want to do it.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Conception Bay South.
B. PETTEN:
Thank you, Speaker.
WHEREAS
Newfoundland has the highest incidence of cardiac disease in Canada and we need
to do what we can to improve the ability to save lives; and
WHEREAS
the implementation of a new registry can be completed for less than the cost of
a new vehicle; and
WHEREAS
after implementation, the annual cost will be five cents per resident;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House
of Assembly: To urge government to enact legislation requiring all AEDs in the
province to be registered with an online registry. This registry must be linked
to the 911 system to enable faster response time in the case of cardiac
emergencies.
Speaker,
this is not the first time I've presented this petition in the House. It's the
first time in this session probably in a while now, but this is something that
I've spoken about in the House on numerous occasions over the last number of
years. I believe we may be the only, or one of the only provinces in the country
without this registry.
The
simple fact of the matter is that it's been able to make sure the AEDs are
operational when needed, which is a big thing, batteries up to scratch and what
have you. In government facilities and whatever, they probably are looked after,
but not in every facility.
The key
point to it is – and I emphasize this because I have a family in my district who
suffers from ACR, the very deathly heart condition, actually, and they all
operate with pacemakers, who pushing this issue. But the biggest point to this
registry, and I hope government gives this serious consideration now that we're
dealing with 911 again, is if you have an emergency when you call 911, they will
know where the nearest AED is. You could be down on Water Street and you have a
medical emergency, they'll tell you this building here is the closest AED on the
street. That saves lives. AEDs are saving lives.
This is
a very serious issue. In fairness, every time I brought it up before government
were receptive to it, but it had to be depending on when 911 was in place – 911
didn't have the capabilities in the old system; the new system would.
I'm
looking at the minister when I say this, but this is one I strongly think you
should consider. It's not the first time I've talked about this; I'm sure your
officials may be aware. This needs to be brought in place. AEDs save lives,
simple fact of the matter, and they should be included in our 911 system that
they have an active registry, not only to keep the batteries up to scratch, but
know where one is, should an emergency happen.
Thank
you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Humber - Bay of Islands.
E. JOYCE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'm
going to rise on petition again today on the cataract surgeries in Western
Newfoundland. I'm going to read an email I got from Western Health. The Minister
of Health and Community Services –
SPEAKER:
Order, please!
The
Member has to read the petition.
E. JOYCE:
I already did.
SPEAKER:
No, you have to read it each
time you present it.
E. JOYCE:
I have it here somewhere.
You go
ahead, Mr. Speaker. I'll find it here.
SPEAKER:
Okay.
The
Member for Torngat Mountains.
L. EVANS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We, the
undersigned, are concerned citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador who urge our
leaders to return the marine shipping service between the Island portion of our
province and our Northern Labrador communities of Rigolet, Makkovik, Postville,
Hopedale, Natuashish and Nain.
This
marine freight service was removed in the spring of 2019, resulting in freight
having to be trucked now to the port of Happy Valley-Goose Bay and then shipped
to our northern communities. Since then, the additional shipping has directly
impacted prices of food, building materials, vehicles, including trucks and
off-road vehicles, household goods and many essential services to our
communities.
Our
Northern Labrador communities are totally isolated with no road access and
marine transportation services are limited to just five months per summer, on
average. With the cancellation of the direct marine freight service from the
Island portion of our province to our communities, residents are now witnessing
exorbitant price increases of basic needs impacting overall quality of life.
Mr.
Speaker, this petition is really important to the people in my district. In
actual fact, it's the reason why I ran. It's the reason why people actually
asked me to run. Because it was this actual Liberal government that took away
the freight service from the Island portion of the province to the North Coast
communities that drove up the price, not only of food – we see in the stores now
four frozen pork chops costing $28 – but also building materials. In actual
fact, the contractor services now have ballooned. A serviced lot, without the
house, costs $250,000. That's what they can charge us.
impacts household goods and materials; most people are forced to haul wood using
a snowmobile. Well, a snowmobile now from Goose Bay costs a minimum of $2,500
more than we would have paid if we could had gotten it from the Island. From the
Island, we would save $2,500 to $3,500 off the price and were thrown in bonus
materials that actually improved the quality of the machine. Now, we have to pay
these high costs.
It's
impacting families. With the price of food and materials now, families are
struggling, not just low-income families.
Mr.
Speaker, this service, in actual fact, is not just about marine freight service.
It's about the ability of our communities to have quality of life. The removal
of the freight boat was so unacceptable to people in my district that they asked
me to run. That's one of the things they asked me to do. I have hundreds of
pages of signatures and I tell you, every time this House is sitting, I'm
actually going to read this petition because it's not right, it needs to be
returned.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Humber - Bay of Islands.
E. JOYCE:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I read
the petition as follows:
WHEREAS
there are approximately 750 to 800 people, mainly seniors, who are on a
wait-list for cataract surgery in Western Newfoundland; and
WHEREAS
it will take almost 14 months for these seniors to have the procedure carried
out; and
WHEREAS
many of these seniors have had their driver's licence suspended, they can't read
the instructions on their medication, they can't read a book or watch TV due to
cataract problems affecting their eyesight, which is having an impact on the
quality of life in their later years; and
WHEREAS
a one-time allotment of funds will eliminate the wait-list for cataract surgery
in Western Newfoundland and Labrador and give these seniors, and others awaiting
surgery, a better quality of life which they deserve.
THEREFORE we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: We, the
undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador to provide the necessary funds required to carry out
these life-changing surgeries in a timely manner.
Mr.
Speaker, the Minister of Health and Community Services just got up and said they
can perform surgeries at the Sir Thomas Roddick Hospital. I'm going to read an
email, and if they give leave, I'll even table it in the House. Here's what
Western Health said. Now, the minister can take it up with Western Health,
that's up to him, but do not take it out on 800 seniors that need this surgery
and make statements like that, which is easily proven false.
I'll
read what they said: “There have been no cataract procedures performed at Sir
Thomas Roddick Hospital since January of 2021. Of note, there were equipment
challenges from January 15 - Sept 2022. One list was booked in November 2021;
however, it was cancelled due to Code Grey. There have been also challenges with
availability of custom supplies.” That's the letter from Western Health.
The
Minister of Health and Community Services can stand in his place with 800
seniors who can't see and say they can do it in Stephenville. That is just
false. For God sake, Government, theses are seniors. This is a personality
conflict with the minister and somebody else – 800 seniors.
Now, the
minister is giving the impression in this House of Assembly that now they can
travel anywhere across the province. Instead of getting it done in Corner Brook,
now they can come to St. John's.
I ask
the Premier of the province: How many of your residents are going to have to
travel to St. John's? The Member for Baie Verte - Green Bay: How many of your
seniors now are going to have to go to St. John's instead of Corner Brook?
That's what the minister is saying.
How many
from Corner Brook? How many from the Humber Valley area? Stand up. How many are
going to go to St. John's now because there is capacity in St. John's? You can
get it done in Corner Brook, but because of a personality conflict, none in
Stephenville; one or two days in Corner Brook, one of those is for
ophthalmology. He does the whole province, so he can't do cataracts for that day
when there's a listing that he can do what he like.
For God
sake, Government, this is fact. Information that is being put out in the general
public is false by the minister. Here's a letter, if I have permission to table
it, I'll table it right here.
SPEAKER:
Order, please!
The
Member's time has expired.
The hon.
the Member for Ferryland.
L. O'DRISCOLL:
Thank you, Speaker.
The
background to this petition is as follows:
The
Witless Bay Line is a significant piece of infrastructure.
WHEREAS
many commute to Bull Arm, Long Harbour and other areas for work as well as the
commercial and residential growth in our region has increased the volume of
traffic on the highway.
Therefore we petition the House of Assembly as follows: Upgrade to this
significant piece of infrastructure to enhance and improve the flow of traffic
to and from the Trans-Canada Highway.
We, the
undersigned, urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to get this done.
Speaker,
I spoke on this a number of times and it is a piece of infrastructure that
certainly needs to be upgraded. Each year there are thousands of tourists that
use the Witless Bay Line as access to the Irish Loop. Right now, starting this
week, you're going to have crab trucked across the Witless Bay Line as well. You
also have all kinds of people that travel it to go to Soldiers Pond, Long
Harbour, Bull Arm and wherever across the way.
Some of
the complaints that I get, certainly from campers, are they will drive the
Southern Shore Highway and go out the Trans-Canada rather than go across the
Witless Bay Line because it is so rough. A couple of our Members have driven
across, to cut across to get up to Bay Bulls and they drove it and they were
astonished at the state and disrepair of the road.
You
know, they did an upgrade last year, I think they did four kilometres.
Certainly, maintenance on this is a big issue and trying to get in and get some
of those holes filled. I understand this time of the year that you fill it up
and then it's gone again on the next snowfall, plowing it out and not being able
to hold the asphalt that they put in or the cold patch.
I hope
this year in the budget the minister looks good on it and be able to see some
pavement hit our district in the Witless Bay Line area and up in Irish Loop and
Trepassey area.
Thank
you so much.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Transportation and Infrastructure for a response.
E. LOVELESS:
Actually, I am going to
respond to a previous petition that was from the Member for Torngat Mountains
who was talking about the ferry service and painting a picture that the sky is
falling.
Well, I
would like to say to the Member that facts do matter. Last year, the passenger
numbers were up, the vehicle numbers were up, the cargo numbers were up and
overall it has been classified as a good service. So the sky is not falling and
facts do matter, I want to remind the Member for Torngat Mountains.
Now, to
the petition on roadwork. The road plan is coming out. The ask is enormous, but
I always have to live within my budget. But it is duly taken under
consideration, his concerns as he has brought them before this House before.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I call
from the Order Paper, Motion 6.
Speaker,
I move, seconded by the Minister of Health and Community Services, that under
Standing Order 11(1) this House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 5.
SPEAKER:
Is it the pleasure of the
House to adopt this motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
Motion
carried.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I call
from the Order Paper, Order 2, third reading of Bill 48.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I move,
seconded by the Minister of Justice and Public Safety, that Bill 48 be now read
a third time.
SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
the said bill be now read a third time.
Is it
the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
The
motion is carried.
CLERK (Barnes):
A bill,
An Act To Amend The
Financial Administration Act. (Bill 48)
SPEAKER:
This bill has now been read a
third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and its title be as on the
Order Paper.
motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Financial Administration Act,” read a third
time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 48)
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Speaker, I call from the
Order Paper, Motion 4, Bill 53.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Justice and Public Safety.
J. HOGAN:
Thank you, Speaker.
Speaker,
I move, seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader, for leave to introduce a
bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The Judicature Act, Bill 53, and I further move
that the said bill be now read a first time.
SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
the hon. Minister of Justice and Public Safety shall have leave to introduce a
bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The Judicature Act, Bill 54, and the said bill be
now read a first time.
Is it
the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
The
motion is carried.
Motion,
that the hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety to introduce a bill, “An
Act To Amend The Judicature Act,” carried. (Bill 53)
CLERK:
A bill,
An Act To Amend The
Judicature Act. (Bill 53)
SPEAKER:
This bill has now been read a
first time.
When
shall the bill be read a second time?
L. DEMPSTER:
Tomorrow.
SPEAKER:
Tomorrow.
motion, Bill 53 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I call
from the Order Paper, Order 9, Bill 41,
An Act Respecting A Province-Wide 911
Service For The Reporting of Emergencies.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Justice and Public Safety.
J. HOGAN:
Thank you, Speaker.
Thank
you for the opportunity to –
SPEAKER:
A mover and a seconder,
please.
J. HOGAN:
Sorry, I have to move again.
I knew I was missing something.
Thank
you, Speaker.
I move,
seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader, that Bill 41,
An Act Respecting
A Province-Wide 911 Service For The Reporting of Emergencies, be now read a
second time.
SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
Bill 41,
An Act Respecting A Province-Wide 911 Service For The Reporting of
Emergencies, be now read a second time.
Motion,
second reading of a bill, “An Act Respecting A Province-Wide 911 Service For The
Reporting of Emergencies.” (Bill 41)
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Justice and Public Safety.
J. HOGAN:
Thank you, Speaker.
Thank
you for the opportunity to speak to this new piece of legislation. Just so
everyone knows, we're updating and revising the
Emergency 911 Act , which will now be
entitled the Emergency 911 Act 2022 .
The new
act will assign responsibility of the 911 system in the province to the
Department of Justice and Public Safety. This government's decision to integrate
NL911 into the Department of Justice and Public Safety is in line with our
government's desire to streamline delivery of services, specifically with
reference to the public safety part of the department. There have been numerous
recent initiatives to broaden the scope of emergency services in this province.
The
Emergency Services branch includes the Provincial Emergency Operations Centre,
the future implementation of a province-wide radio system, Fire and Emergency
Services and the implementation of recommendations flowing from the Ground
Search and Rescue inquiry.
Residents of the province are well aware of the use of 911 in emergency
situations. This is why this service fits within the Emergency Services branch.
In recent years, there have been many developments that have highlighted the
need for a more strategic review of emergency management and response throughout
our province. The GSAR inquiry and subsequent recommendations is one example, as
well as the Nova Scotia mass casualty inquiry in relation to the shootings in
Portapique and various severe weather events that have cut off residents and
communities from emergency providers and their economic supply chains, including
the recent rainstorm on the Southwest Coast of the Island, Hurricane Larry and
Snowmageddon.
Emerging
issues such as cybersecurity, which we have now seen, not only around the world
but here at home; the federal government's use of the
Emergencies Act ; and, finally, the health emergency in COVID-19 that
impacted all aspects of society. Clearly, the landscape of emergency management
is changing and this government is positioning itself to make sure all facets
are aligned and complementary to one another.
We view
911 as a key communication tool within a larger emergency management framework.
It only makes sense to have it all under one roof, so officials within the
department, those who live and breathe emergency services every day, know
exactly what each facet of our emergency system is doing at all times. Officials
and experts will know how they can all work together. Having a single emergency
service operating in isolation is not prudent. In fact, it would lead to gaps or
a failure to communicate, and we all know in an emergency situation every second
matters.
Integrating NL911 into the department will provide for direct oversight of this
service and allow for identification and development of synergies within
government as we move forward with initiatives such as the implementation of the
Health Accord and regionalization of local government. Including this service as
part of core government is consistent with the approach of other jurisdictions.
Eight jurisdictions: Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Ontario,
Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and the Yukon have their 911 services as part of
their government department structures.
As a
government, we are taking steps to ensure that the integration of NL911 will not
change the 911 service for residents. The public will still be able to rely on
the service just as before. I do think it is important to explain how the
service works so the public will understand how the call-taking service will not
be impacted by the changes in governance.
The
basic process is an individual requiring emergency assistance dials 911. The 911
call is answered by one of the two Public Safety Answering Points referred to as
PSAPs based on the location of the caller. NL 911 Bureau contracts these PSAPs
with the City of St. John's and the City of Corner Brook. The two PSAP system
ensures that there is redundancy in the system and each provides backup to the
other in the event of a problem. When the call is answered at the PSAP, the call
taker determines the correct emergency service provider for response and then
forwards the call on.
The bill
we are introducing here today keeps this model in place. Furthermore, the bill
does not change the contractual arrangements that are currently in place with
the PSAPs. Staff currently working these PSAPs can rest assured that the
introduction of this bill will not impact their employment or job function.
As we
transition NL911 staff into core government, we are hopeful that they will see
the opportunity that this integration presents in terms of potentially expanded
scope of work, new projects or career development and other or new learning
opportunities.
The cost
for implementation of the Next Generation 911 system is unknown at this time. We
are estimating it to be in the range of several million dollars. The date for
introduction of the Next Generation 911 system is dependent on decisions of the
federal CRTC, which regulates the telecommunications industry in the country.
It is
important to note that this is not a decision of NL911 and it will therefore not
be a decision of the Department of Justice and Public Safety. Nothing is being
taken away from NL911 and we will follow the process and decisions of CRTC.
Next
Generation 911 is not available in any jurisdiction in Canada. So as other
provinces make changes, so, too, will this province. Government's intention is
to move forward with Next Generation 911 and so we will be working closely with
our partners to move this project forward when the time comes.
Funding
requirements for Next Generation 911 service will be addressed through the
annual budget process, again, when the time comes.
The move
to bring 911 service into core government is about looking for new opportunities
to find synergies and expanding and co-ordinating the emergency service in the
province. There is no downgrading of service in any way.
To the
board members who have worked so hard to develop the 911-telephone service
throughout this province, I thank you for your contribution. Many of you are
also representatives of the emergency partners that my department officials
interact with on a daily basis. So I expect that we will continue to enjoy
productive, collaborative relationships on the various aspects of emergency
management. We will continue to look for opportunities to engage with our
emergency partners as we move forward.
Finally,
I want to take a couple of minutes to address potential concerns I have heard.
First, the issue about the current fund that is allocated for Next Generation
911. As I have said, this government will follow the CRTC guidelines related to
Next Generation 911, which is not anticipated until at least 2025.
We have,
as a government, committed on numerous occasions to proceeding with Next
Generation 911 when the country, as a whole, is prepared to move forward with
it. Whether this commitment is made from the current board or from the
government, the commitment is there and nothing changes.
I want
to refer to the new legislation. It specifically says in
section 7 that the
minister shall be responsible and responsive to changing technologies. So there
is a statutory obligation to proceed with new technologies, which will include
Next Generation 911.
In fact,
the current fund is not specifically mandated for Next Generation 911, and the
old legislation only speaks to improving the service.
Whereas the new
legislation mandates government to keep up with new technology and, therefore,
the new legislation does speak directly to Next Generation 911.
The new
legislation also broadens the scope. Currently, under the old act, funds are
collected for an emergency 911 telephone service. However, now, funds will be
collected for an emergency 911 service. It is not a fund just for telephones. In
fact, the new definition specifically includes reference to the province-wide
radio system. This is not something that could happen under the old legislation.
Second,
the issue of consultation has been raised and specific reference has been made
to local knowledge. This is important and it is why the new legislation mandates
the minister, in
section 5, to work with municipalities and emergency service
providers. Furthermore, in
section 6, the municipalities are required to
participate. There is a legal obligation to consult.
Third,
the question has been asked essentially saying, why bother, and that the current
operations at 911 is sufficient. The new legislation is not just about 911; it
is part of a broader public safety initiative. The legislation refers to the
RNC, the RCMP, fire services, all within the Department of Justice and Public
Safety already. The new legislation refers to the province-wide radio system
currently within the Emergency Services Division of the department. These
entities will work together to ensure an overall streamline and efficient public
safety service.
Finally,
this is part of the overall streamlining of government. We anticipate savings.
The board is a tier-one board that is remunerated. Third party contracts the
corporation has can potentially be offered from within the department. Financial
and human resource issues such as payroll can be done by JPS officials.
And,
most importantly, infrastructure for 911 radios and other broadband initiatives
can be integrated to 911.This means taxpayer dollars and service-fee dollars do
not have to be spent on multiple infrastructure pieces when there is a way to do
it collectively and effectively. Mr. Speaker, 911 will not and should not be in
a silo.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Topsail - Paradise.
P. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
I just
want to touch on this act. Of course, as the minister mentioned, it's updating
and revising a new act. It talked about streamlining the delivery of
departments. It talked about emergency services.
Interestingly, yesterday the minister mentioned, when speaking to this bill and
speaking to 911, spoke about it not being about efficiencies but being about
safety. Not once in the
preamble did we hear safety – not once. The word wasn't
used. It talked fully about efficiencies.
This 911
is clearly about safety. It is clearly about individuals who need emergency
services and they pick up the phone and they make that call and they hope there
is somebody on the other end of the line that is going to have an ambulance or a
paramedic to their door, or firemen reporting to a fire. It is clearly about
safety.
You want
to have efficiencies around safety. Yeah, you can find efficiencies but at the
end of the day, it is all safety. Make no bones about it, it is all about
safety. Then it was mentioned about 911, a communication tool. It is a very,
very important communication tool.
The
minister said it makes sense. It is not prudent to have it where it is. Not
prudent to have entities outside of government; it is better to have it in
there. Every second matters, and every second does matter. But when you bring it
all into government, we know that the service or the program is not as nimble as
another entity outside who can look for better prices on things, get contracts
on things, and get a better service on things. When it comes within government,
you're talking about red tape and bureaucracy. There is no way around it. That's
what you see when you bring it in.
So I
have seen and heard nothing in the way of why this only makes sense. There has
to be data out there. There has to be issues that tell us why it makes sense.
When you talk to a current 911 board, for one thing, that is who I would go to
right away. If I'm talking about making changes to legislation and creating a
new act, talk about 911 service and bringing it into government because it is
prudent to do so, well, it's prudent to have a discussion with the board of
directors for 911.
And they
brought concerns to me. They brought concerns: No consultation – no
consultation. No response to the concerns from the board. No details provided on
the efficiencies planned, and I haven't seen them here today. No plan provided
for protecting the funding for the 911 service enhancements. And here we are,
now, the bill is here in the House and no promises for engagement to
stakeholders. This is all from the current board.
We talk
about the Next Generation 911. So NL911 have a fund reserve and it has been
created to cover the cost of enhancements and its future operation without
having to increase the telephone fee for service. I have heard nothing to speak
to how that will be addressed down the road. Will we see increased fees?
If 911
is folded into a government department, the reserve fund will no longer exist
and government may have to increase that fee, especially if they are
implementing a New Generation 911. The board goes on and tells me that no
increase in the service fee will be required if NL911 remains as an independent
agency, as the reserve fund will be adequate to cover the cost. The reserve fund
they have will be adequate. And the minister mentioned the CRTC. The CRTC has
mandated the communication subscribers to provide a Next Generation 911 enhanced
service for 911.
And
those enhanced services would include automatic location information, automatic
number information, text and video message ability and sharing data with the
Next Generation dispatching agencies. So all agencies would be involved. You
don't need them all in the one group. Our technology today – it doesn't matter
who you are dealing with or what entity – should be able to develop that
service.
NL911
already have planned to move into a Next Generation 911 system, and the
development of it is well under way with the reserve fund they have to cover the
cost. This board have made great progress in ensuring the safety of our
residents when someone calls 911.
When you
push that within government, the Newfoundland and Labrador 911 service fund
becomes general revenue and it's no longer dedicated to the 911 service. It's
general revenue. Then your NL911 process, every budget, you have to compete then
for funding with all the other departments when you have a group there that are
doing the work and have money in the bank, so to speak. If not seen as a
priority over other government needs, the NL911 may not be funded adequately to
continue to develop the Next Generation system.
Again,
you talk about putting it into the bureaucracy, you put it in there and it gets
mixed in with everything else, so there's an issue then with if it gets the
right priority that it should be getting. And again, this is so much a safety
issue.
The
NL911 service fund is currently not considered public money applied under the
Financial Administration Act . So NL911
may use the fund for the following purposes under the
Emergency 911 Act : It can be used for developing, establishing,
operating and improving the emergency 911 telephone service. It can be used for
the operations of the corporation and it could be used for paying the costs that
are associated with administering the fund.
The
minister thanked the board of directors. It's s a great board; they've done
great work. But I think they would love to be at least consulted with ahead of
this and some of their questions responded to. They haven't gotten that, and
these are dedicated people. When you look at this board, this board's comprised
of diverse backgrounds of stakeholders in emergency service. You have
Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador, the City of St. John's and Corner
Brook and regional representation from Labrador.
I don't
have to mention anything about Labrador; we know the different issues Labrador
are dealing with when it comes to health and safety and it comes to 911. When it
comes to getting individuals flown out of there for health services and
emergencies, we know that.
When it
gets folded into the government department, this wealth of experience from this
board of directors is lost. The mandate of this group was to establish,
implement and operate a province-wide emergency 911 service.
Because
there are so many questions on this, because there's been nothing concrete that
tells us why this needs to be done other than telling us it will create
efficiencies and so on and so on – safety hasn't been mentioned which is a key
piece here we need to talk about. The POMAX report that was done a little while
back was commissioned by government and recommended a separate agency – a
separate agency – as the most effective and efficient way to develop and
maintain 911 services in this province. The minister has spoken about all the
efficiencies and the effectiveness that this is going to create, but we haven't
seen it.
What I
would like to know is: What has been said, or what has happened to reverse this
recommendation? Again, I look at the bill, I look at the issues around it and
what's been presented and I think the key to this is safety. It's great to put
all your beans in the efficiency bucket, but it's still a safety issue. The
group that should know, or be the most informed on this, the board of directors
for NL911, should be the ones speaking to this; should be the ones consulted;
should be the ones who had answers to their questions. What I'm hearing is that
none of that has taken place.
So I
cannot and we cannot support a bill that is not supported by proper
documentation to show us that this is the right way to move.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER (Trimper):
Thank you.
The hon.
the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.
K. HOWELL:
Thank you, Speaker.
It is
indeed a privilege to have the opportunity to speak to this bill today and,
as always, to speak in the House of Assembly on behalf of the residents of St.
Barbe - L'Anse aux Meadows. Today, I'd like to take a minute to just talk about
NL911 and the critical service that it provides to the people of Newfoundland
and Labrador, ensuring their safety and their well-being.
This
bill, in an attempt to repeal and replace the current
Emergency 911 Act , will dissolve the NL 911 Bureau as an independent
corporation and integrate all of its functions into the Department of Justice
and Public Safety. And this transition of staff into a core department will
allow us to retain the knowledge and the experience that has been achieved and
acquired over their number of years of service.
certainly is not intended to compromise those processes and how those things
work but certainly to add an efficiency to the department. When you look at a
service that is being provided across such a broad spectrum, if you can bring
that additional expertise into the department, then that is going to be
beneficial to everybody on both sides of the equation.
We're
streamlining the lines of business associated with corporate services like HR,
payroll and finance. I think we could all attest to even some redundancies that
we find in our own management. So if we can do those types of things, then we're
being more prudent in the service that we're providing.
As we
move forward with initiatives and upgrades, as have been discussed, like the
province-wide public safety radio system, that will be an enhancement for
volunteer organizations and public entities all across the province. As we've
talked about today, Next Generation 911 is still very much a work-in-progress,
but this will ensure that we're part of that conversation and we move forward
with the rest of the country as the CRTC arrangements permit. So bringing the
province in line with other jurisdictions is a valuable piece of this equation.
Mr.
Speaker, this bill will not change the current model for a 911 service. As the
minister outlined, somebody dials 911, there will be a response from the PSAP
based on their location and then the call-takers will determine the most
appropriate responders and then dispatch accordingly. So that process will not
change. The fees will not change. Those will remain the same. We will still
continue to provide the supports that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have come
to expect and to deserve from the service of 911.
The
value of the service provided by these front-line emergency responders is truly
immeasurable, and many of these are volunteers. We are very appreciative of the
role that they play, particularly in our communities. The legislation references
the legal obligation to consult as well as the municipalities' co-operation, and
I don't think that's going to be a problem. Municipalities are notoriously
involved in fire and emergency services and providing these services in their
communities.
The role
of emergency responders is first and foremost on conversations around council
tables and the municipalities find these services to be a cornerstone of their
community. They work very closely with the Department of Justice and Public
Safety to ensure that these critical services are maintained and supported all
across the province.
Fire
trucks, fire departments, ambulances and ambulance bays, all of these things
have become critical structures or the heart and souls of our communities all
across the province. For sleepovers and potlucks or town meetings, these
buildings house these events and volunteers are usually supporting that effort.
That is in addition to the emergency roles that they play.
Speaker,
I have had the opportunity to be on the other end of that line. I have been the
appropriate responder that has been dispatched. When an ambulance is required,
it's certainly something that everybody wants to be efficient and effective.
As I
read through this bill, one of the things that jumped out to me was civic
addressing. If you will afford me a moment of reflection, I'd like to remember a
few calls that I have gotten from rural communities over the course of my time
in health care where the caller described their location.
On one
occasion, the lady said: Well, Maid, I don't know how to tell you how to get to
where I'm to. I'm out in the cabin lot; I'm in the red cabin with the triangle
windows. Another caller referenced: Can you please send an ambulance over to
Uncle Lonz's over in the bight. Or, Maid, I'm in the third house on the left
past the convenience store. It's a yellow house. There's a red Dodge Ram in the
parking lot and I'll flick the lights over the door as soon as I see them coming
around the cove.
Speaker,
these are challenges that can be addressed through civic addressing. Our
department is working on an approach for regional government that will oversee
the development and implementation of civic addressing. I am sure that we could
all agree on the benefits that would be associated with having a map or some
type of allocation to determine where you're actually requiring these services.
Numbers on a house, numbers on a box, numbers on a pole so that an ambulance
operator or a fire truck would have an accurate description of the location that
they are attempting to service.
These
implementations certainly wouldn't be intended to overwhelm citizens. It's not a
major undertaking to simply put a number on the side of your house or a piece of
property in your yard. So these are considerations that would be implemented as
part of a plan where we would see a regional model for governance.
The
benefits of this would certainly be realized as we talk about NL911 and
integrating those services into core government would allow us the correlation
between departments to have these conversations, to make sure that these things
make sense for our constituents, for our residents all across the province and
that we have something effective and efficient to move forward with.
That's
been one of the keystones and cornerstones of our conversations as we talk about
a lot of these rural areas that find these challenges to be front in their minds
and as part of their committees and their communities.
So it
certainly speaks to the work that is being done on behalf of NL911 and the
important role that they play all across our province. That's why I'm pleased to
support this bill.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Torngat Mountains.
L. EVANS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'm just
going to speak briefly on the new
Emergency 911 Act . When I attended the technical briefing, it was the usual
language: repeal, replace, dissolve and integrate. One of the most important
things that came up was the changes wouldn't affect the quality of service.
That's really important to me.
Before I
became MHA, I was an advanced medical responder. A lot of this service for 911
is about life-saving services so it's very important that this be done properly.
Just
looking at the language, 911 Bureau, the corporation, will be replaced with the
minister; all powers of the bureau will be transferred to the Crown. So I was
going along and I was thinking this is a straightforward transition, basically,
bringing it into government. But there are some concerns and I think they need
to be addressed.
When we
look at the new Emergency 911 Act , it
effectively dissolves NL911 and incorporates it into the Department of Justice
and Public Safety. So on the surface that's not concerning and it's not going to
impact the quality of the service, as the minister said. So, with me, I always
look at why, why are we doing this? More importantly, what are the benefits and
what are the drawbacks, i.e., the concerns?
The
stated goal for this change by government, the government said, is to find
efficiencies in the administration of the service: efficiencies in the service.
Streamline the integration of 911 services into search and rescue, that's all
good. That's really, really important.
But just
listening to what the Member across was talking about earlier about rural
Newfoundland and Labrador, in my district, if we have an emergency outside of
our communities, no one would think of calling 911. Because you'll get somebody
who doesn't understand anything about your environment or the resources there
available to help. We would actually call the local ground search and rescue. If
we had a medical emergency in our communities, we would actually call the
clinic. The number to the clinic. We wouldn't call 911. If we had an emergency
where it had something to do with the law, or violence, or anything to do with
that, we would call the RCMP. So I do understand what the Member across was
talking about.
What I'm
hoping to see in the future is that 911 actually grows into a service that the
whole province can avail of, whether you're out in rural Newfoundland and
Labrador or downtown St. John's, you would think to call 911. That's very, very
important.
So what
are some of the concerns that we heard? The concerns that I heard is basically
about this fund that was built up by actually collecting funds from the public
who use the service – this huge fund. The concerns are that has been built up
for the day-to-day operations of the service, but also for improvement of the
service that's going to come up, this new service that we're going to be looking
at.
What was
really concerning to me was these issues were being brought forward by the NL911
board. I've got to say, I try not to laugh, but, I mean, really, honestly. When
you enter government and you think government operates on a certain level and
then you start reading these things and you sort of wonder, well, it's not
really transparent here, right?
So the
revenue that's causing some of these concerns comes from the public. Residents
are currently charged 75 cents a month through the telecom provider for the
provision of this 911 service. The provider takes a – I'm just going to say how
much it takes – point zero seven?
P. LANE:
Seven cents.
L. EVANS:
Seven cents for
administrative costs. So this was all put into this fund that was actually for
day-to-day operations and also for planning and contingency.
But, you
know, I'm a pretty straight talker. Like, I'm not going to use eloquent, flowery
words or grandiose sayings or whatever to make this look overly important or
make me look overly dedicated to people who do have concerns. At the end of the
day, we need to talk about what's wrong with this picture?
Thirty
million dollars, is it?
AN HON. MEMBER:
Twenty.
L. EVANS:
Twenty million dollars.
AN. HON. MEMBER:
What's $10 million?
L. EVANS:
What's $10 million?
What's
going to happen to that money? It's going go into the general revenue. Then when
we're looking to expand the service and improve the service, we're going to have
to go back to the regular coffers. We're going to have to compete with everybody
else who's looking for money. But right now, that money has been put aside,
ready to be used, ready to develop and implement a service that we need. That's
actually been mandated by CRTC.
For me,
on the surface, I just had to say that at the very beginning if was going to
then start delving down into the eloquent, flowery words that actually take up a
lot of time. But, for me, what's important is the impact to the service. The new
act calls for all responsibilities, property, assets, agreements be transferred
from NL 911 Bureau to the Department of Justice, as my fellow MHA talked about
quite eloquently, I must say.
There is
supposed to be no immediate change in service – status quo, actually. When we
were on the technical briefing, they were saying the status quo will be
maintained. That's reassuring for somebody like me that don't deal with the
day-to-day operations or don't have insight into all these other issues.
I agree
that we need to find efficiencies. The province, we're not doing the best
financially. Also, we don't want to be burdening our users of the 911 service
with additional costs. So efficiency always sounds good on the surface, but one
of the pitfalls of this, if we're not really careful, is that if we go along
with this, there's the potential for, in actual fact, the 911 user to have to
pay increasing costs just to be able to access monies to do these upgrades that
are coming down the pipe, once they're approved.
We've
already paid the money. We've already contributed to the fund by the users;
that's public money. I have to say – I'm just having a little bit of fun now.
It's funny and not funny, as my niece always says. I don't know if I'm wrong,
but I'm sort of looking back when I was younger and one of the concerns was the
teachers' union. They had built up a lot of money. Remember the teachers'
pension.
AN HON. MEMBER:
(Inaudible.)
L. EVANS:
Sorry, we didn't talk about
this, so I might be poking somebody that I shouldn't be poking.
Back in
the day, the provincial government took the money invested by teachers for their
old age security and spent it on roads. Remember that crisis? Remember that?
That's true, isn't it? I didn't dream that. I was quite young at the time, but I
think that actually happened.
If we're
not careful, the money that the public contributed to upgrades for this new
service – the monies that we put away, paid by the public – could dissolve and
could be gone. Then, really, who ever is in government could turn around and say
no, the end-user has got to pay the cost for these upgrades. We already paid for
it.
AN HON. MEMBER:
(Inaudible) taxes.
L. EVANS:
Exactly.
that's one of the biggest problems. Finding efficiencies is important. But we
can't be downloading again the cost to the users for something that is a
life-saving service.
Just
looking at this now – anyway, it's not funny. What concerns me is when the NL911
board is almost, I guess, for lack of a better word, forced to actually go
public with their concerns. As my fellow MHA talked about, they did meet with
government. They did have concerns, they had questions on the operations and
they basically wanted to actually find out what the plan was – twice. And they
never received a response from government. So that is very, very concerning.
I've got
to say the biggest concern for me is what are we going to do with that fund? Is
there anything else we can do with it than basically put it into general
revenue, and end up having the public have to pay for it twice? Because it is
very concerning.
For me
being a novice – I haven't been an MHA for not even three years yet. But for me,
in all honesty, when this is actually being done, where you're bringing
something in to government and you've had a long-serving board of this service,
and they're forced to go public to raise these concerns and identify things that
could actually create problems for the general public, for them to be taxed
again by having to actually pay for this – to me, that's actually quite
disrespectful to the board and also to the public.
If we're
going to be a society where we can avail of a 911 service, where we can actually
just call those three numbers and have responders come out to us and help us, a
life-saving service, at the end of the day, we should be respectful of this
board that actually managed the service. We should be respectful of their
concerns about what's going to happen to this fund. Back in the day when we took
money from teachers' pensions to build roads and put their pensions in jeopardy,
didn't we learn anything from that?
Mr.
Speaker, I'm not going to continue to talk, but like I said that's a huge
concern and I will have some questions at the end.
Thank
you.
SPEAKER:
Thank you.
The hon.
the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development.
J. ABBOTT:
Thank you, Speaker.
It is
certainly my pleasure to participate in the debate here on Bill 41. This bill,
when passed, will allow the Department of Justice and Public Safety to
incorporate NL911 service fully into its operations, along with other
emergency-related services such as Fire and Emergency Services, which it has
responsibility for.
But,
fundamentally, the change proposed by the minister is part of government's
overall transformation agenda. In last year's Budget Speech, the Minister of
Finance stated: “We can and must take those steps toward a sustainable fiscal
future. Change can be challenging but it gives us the opportunity to discover
new ways of delivering services, become more efficient and be the best version
of ourselves.”
The plan
proposed by the Minister of Justice and Public Safety is to change the
management of our 911 services so that it fits more within the Minister of
Finance's aspirational goal for transforming government's operations.
Now,
Members here may recall that the transformation agenda includes such things as a
reorganization of Nalcor to bring it into the existing NL Hydro, which is
fundamentally completed. It also includes changing the corporate structure of
the Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for Health Information and bringing it
closer to the Department of Health and Community Services and the regional
health authorities – currently under way.
the Department of Education – actively under way, under the direction of the
Minister of Education, with enabling legislation already passed by this House.
There
are several other services under review to determine how best to structure them
to achieve the best service delivery at the best value to the taxpayer. Examples
include our ferry services and our health administrative services.
The
Premier alluded to the Health Accord NL in Question Period. In its report, it is
suggesting ways we can improve service delivery and health outcomes in tandem
with those changes. So we see that challenging the status quo can and will
achieve improvements in our public services.
Now, let
me speak to the specifics of the bill. Primarily, if passed, the bill would
facilitate the dissolution of the NL 911 Bureau as an independent,
not-for-profit corporation and integrate it and the functions of it in the
organization of the Department of Justice and Public Safety. The bill will
support the continuous delivery of the province-wide 911 service for the
reporting of emergencies, as already alluded to.
congratulate the Minister of Justice and Public Safety in tackling this
significant change in our emergency response system early in his mandate. It
demonstrates to me, and I think to those of us on this side of the House, the
critical importance he and his department attach to emergency services and
seeking out ways to improve their efficiency and their cost.
In this
case, with Bill 41, efficiencies will be achieved by combining administrative
functions: financial management, human resources and payroll are some examples,
as well as allowing the sharing of expertise in emergency planning and
operations across several functions under one department umbrella. I would
certainly want to emphasize and bring attention to that. The synergies that can
be achieved by having the experts under one departmental umbrella will greatly
exceed any downside where it stands alone.
This
approach that the minister is proposing in the bill is similar to eight other
jurisdictions across the country and, certainly, on the surface it makes
practical sense to do that. Despite the change, or in light of the change
contemplated by Bill 41, government remains committed to implementing next stage
upgrades to the 911 service when the time is ready. We are not ready yet.
Now, as
a former deputy minister of Municipal Affairs, I had responsibility for
emergency services and planning for a province-wide 911 service. We have come a
long ways since then. We have evolved and the minister's plan is to build on
this evolution. Weather and natural disasters over the past year alone speak to
the progress we have made in emergency management in this province with the 911
service, really, as a backbone to it.
So any
suggestion the government is trying to water down the 911 service through Bill
41 would be unfounded, for what government would seriously consider that:
downgrading an essential public service? Not this government for sure.
So under
Bill 41 what remains the same? Well, the bill does not change the current model
for 911 service. The fee for emergency 911 service remains unchanged and that
will be referenced in the regulations. Any and all prohibitions, offences and
penalties that are currently in the legislation remain the same and the
minister's regulatory making powers also remain the same.
However,
under the bill, there are substantive changes being proposed. First and
foremost, the minister now replaces any reference to the current NL 911 Bureau
board or corporation. So he will stand in its stead or their stead. The
definition of emergency 911 service in
section 2(
b) is broadened to include
reference to the province-wide radio communication network. The minister
referred to that in his opening comments on the debate.
Reference to the NL911 service fund is removed, as the fund will now be
consolidated into the government's consolidated revenue fund.
I think
something that is very important is the emergency response zones will now be
defined. That will help those in all parts of the province to know what their
zone is and how that is to be serviced for emergency response.
emergency service provider or municipality now has to give advance notice to the
Minister of Justice and Public Safety if making changes to their emergency
response zones or their operational procedures that may impact the operation of
the 911 service, as the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs referenced.
It now makes sure that the municipalities are fully recognized but also held
accountable for their participation in emergency management going forward when
it comes to 911 service.
Finally,
there is a provision for municipalities to provide civic addresses and for the
Cabinet, through regulation, to require and prescribe civic numbers on
properties to assist in emergency response to houses and properties throughout
the province. As we know, this will be a significant undertaking, but something
that needs to happen. As the government, we'll work with the municipalities to
make sure that is put in place over the foreseeable future.
I'm
supportive of the bill and the changes inherent in the provision of 911
emergency services across the province. I compliment the minister and his
officials for taking on this significant transformation project on behalf of
government and the people of this province.
There's
no doubt that through any change like this there are going to be different views
as to how this can and should be undertaken. I know the minister has met with
the members of the board and the board have communicated their concerns to him,
and he's responded in kind. I think those concerns have been adequately
addressed in the bill and it will be incumbent upon the minister and his
department to ensure that those concerns are fully addressed going forward, but
certainly don't act as any impediment on the changes being proposed.
But if
you look at it in a broader context, as the Minister of Finance started in the
budget speech last year, which I assume will carry into her next speech and
subsequent speeches, one of the things that government needs to do and is
embarking on, is to transform how we deliver services. It is incumbent upon all
departments and agencies to look at how we deliver services, where we can
achieve efficiencies, improve costs and certainly improve value. I think this is
an example where it meets the test.
Why do
we need a standalone bureau? We don't. It was put in place at another time, in
another place. We've evolved into understanding the 911 service much more
effectively, but, more importantly, I think, is the need to integrate that
service with other emergency response services under the jurisdiction of the
Minister of Justice and Public Safety. I think we'll see significant benefit of
that integration, literally, immediately, once that takes place.
Some of
the Members opposite raised concerns about the use of the current fund and when
it gets rolled into the consolidated revenue fund. There is no doubt that the
Minister of Justice – those funds will be obviously tabulated and understood
what their use is for and that will be addressed on the annual budget process.
We have other examples of that in government where there are specific funds that
have been earmarked for particular programs and services and they are protected
during the budget process. Certainly I sure that the Minister of Justice and
Public Safety, the current and any future one, will want to see that, in fact,
happens and that there won't be any double taxation as some have suggested.
The
reality is that when we look across the country, this is not new. There are
eight other jurisdictions, as I mentioned, that currently provide the 911
service within a government department. So obviously, we can learn from them and
how that works, and that is something we will be looking at for sure.
encourage Members on the opposite side of the House here to broaden your minds,
broaden your perspective on what the minister is trying to achieve here with
Bill 41 and to give it further consideration. We will be looking at other
operations like this and how we should be and could incorporate them within
government operations. I think we owe it to the taxpayer to make sure we can
achieve the maximum efficiencies, the maximum value at the least cost, and that
is an underlying principle here, without compromising the nature of the service
being delivered.
Mr.
Speaker, I support the bill and commend it to all Members of the House.
Thank
you.
SPEAKER:
Thank you, Minister.
The hon.
the Member for Harbour Main.
H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I am
very pleased to be able to speak about Bill 41, which is
An Act Respecting a
Province-Wide 911 Service for the Reporting of Emergencies. Speaker, I will be
clear right from the start; I cannot in good conscience support this
legislation. The people of the province should be concerned about this
legislation as well.
The
current existing board of 911 are unanimously opposed to this legislation,
Speaker. It is believed that this is not – I repeat “not” – in the best
interests of the operations of the 911 service in the province. And not only is
it not in the best interests of the 911 services, but also about the further
enhancements that are anticipated to occur to this system. I know I heard the
minister speak in his opening remarks that this makes sense. Well, I would beg
to differ. This does not make sense. Not only does it not make sense, I've not
heard any valid reason why the existing system should be changed. I've heard
claims that they want to find efficiencies; I've heard claims that there's a
risk to public safety.
Well,
let's look at the first point: finding efficiency. I need to remind government
that this current system that was put in place was as a result of a
government-funded consultant who recommended – this group recommended to
government that an independent, stand-alone, not-for-profit corporation was the
most effective and efficient method to implement and operate the 911 service in
Newfoundland and Labrador. So this was stated; it was recommended. This was
government's own entity, their own consultant, that recommended this was the
best way to go was to have that existing system that's in place.
Yet now,
what is government doing? They're drawing it back into core government. I don't
understand why they are now not listening to the advice that was given to them
by their own government-funded organization. But, at any rate, they claim that
they will find efficiencies. Well, I've heard no details about the exact
efficiencies that are going to be had. I believe back in June when I raised this
question in the House of the minister, the minister said, well, we'll find
efficiencies in things like payroll and finance. We need you to elaborate; we
need to see the evidence of this. There has been nothing forthcoming and that
has been the concern of the current existing board, Speaker, is that there are
no details about how they're finding these efficiencies.
Now,
that was the original justification for dissolving the current 911 Bureau and
repealing it and replacing it with the existing emergencies act, which they're
going to bring into government. That was the original justification. In the
House of Assembly yesterday, the minister, when I asked him in Question Period,
said that public safety is fulsome as it can be by coming through the
department. We need to address the public safety issue. So this could be a risk
to public safety. Well, I asked the minister: What is your evidence that there
is any risk to public safety from the current existing system that's in place?
They
have operated, from my understanding, within all the national guidelines. In
terms of safe response times, there has not been any issue to our knowledge. So,
please, we need to know if there is an issue of public safety, show us where it
is. By bringing 911 into government, how are you going to be able to improve
those so-called claimed issue of public safety?
So I
don't see any evidence. But again, I look forward to hearing from the minister.
Perhaps in Committee you can provide some examples of this issue of public
safety to us so that we understand. Also, another point that was made yesterday
and I have to ask about this. The minister said that there are eight other
jurisdictions in the country that are doing the same thing and why should we be
different.
Well, I
looked into this a little bit. Now, they are not actually doing it the same way,
what you're suggesting. For example, Nova Scotia has, actually, a separate
agency or entity set up to manage the reserve fund. So there are many
differences. You cannot just make a sweeping statement like that and say, well,
eight other jurisdictions in the country are doing this, without explaining to
us exactly how that is the case. Again, that's something else we need to
understand.
As well,
the minister, yesterday, stated it's going to be three years before the CRTC
will make the Next Generation 911 happen. But we can't wait for those three
years. I mean the current existing board are already working on this right now.
It is their view that you need to do the lead work. You can't wait for three
years and then try to, hopefully, have everything up in place when it comes to
these enhancements. So again, I've got concerns about that point that was raised
as well.
Speaker,
these are some of the concerns. The other final point was about the dedicated
funding solely for 911. Well, once this moves into government services, that $20
million – about $20 million – will become part of the general government
revenue. We all know what that means. That means it's going to be in competition
then in the budget. It's not necessarily going to be protected or a priority
like it is right now. It's a dedicated service fund. It is protected. It is
designated for further enhancements that will take place with respect to Next
Generation 911.
This is
of concern, I think, to not only myself as critic for Justice and Public Safety,
but to all Members of our caucus. We believe that this is something that when we
hear from the current board that they are unanimously opposed to it – these are
the people that have such expertise. They believe as well that there's
importance of independent oversight of NL911.
I've
heard from the minister in his remarks that we're streamlini