May 29, 2007 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 20

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon the Chair has notice of the following members

who wish to present members' statements: the hon. the Member for the District

of Ferryland; the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Falls-Buchans; the

hon. the Member for the District of Trinity-Bay de Verde; the hon. the Member

for the District of Bay of Islands; the hon. the Member for the District of

Terra Nova; and, the hon. the Member for the District of Carbonear-Harbour

Grace.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for the District of Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize and congratulate Adam Kavanagh,

from the community of Calvert. Adam is a Level III student from Baltimore School

in Ferryland.

On May 10, Mr. Speaker, I had the honour of attending the graduating

ceremonies and speaking to the twenty-six Level III students of the Baltimore

Class of 2007. As part of the night's ceremonies, I was very pleased to

witness Adam receiving special recognition for his academic achievement and

community involvement.

Adam was recognized for being named a Loran Scholar. The Loran Award is open

to graduating high school students in Canada and renewable for up to four years.

It includes an annual tuition waiver and stipend of $8,000, access to funding

and internships through its summer program and mentorship opportunities. The

award is valued at approximately $75,000.

This honour is awarded to students who demonstrate academic achievement, are

involved in extracurricular activities, and show leadership skills and

potential.

Adam has continued to demonstrate his leadership skills in reviving his

school's Students Against Drunk Driving Chapter, he is a member of the local

4-H club for approximately four years and, as well, is operating his own

audiovisual company. Adam's plans for the future include pursuing a

post-secondary education at Memorial University.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating Adam

Kavanagh from my district for his outstanding achievement, and wishing him well

in his post-secondary studies.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to acknowledge the accomplishments of

Carley Linehan from Grand Falls-Windsor. This talented student, along with a

team of other young scientists representing Central Newfoundland and teacher

chaperone Mary Kelly from Exploits Valley High School, attended the Canada Wide

Science Fair held in Truro, Nova Scotia, May 12 to May 20.

The team, which consisted of Carley and four other students, two from St.

Brendan's Island and two from Lawn, had a very successful week at the Canada

Wide Science Fair. With four projects entered by this team, two came away with

awards, including Carley Linehan who won a bronze medal in the category of

Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals - Intermediate Division.

Mr. Speaker, Carley's project, Taxes a Pain, Taxus a Gain!, about a common

shrub in Newfoundland known as ground hemlock which has the potential for

anti-cancer drugs, was selected to represent the region at the Canada Wide

Science Fair following her first place finish at the Central Newfoundland

Regional Science Fair held in Grand Falls-Windsor earlier this spring.

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

extending congratulations to Carley Linehan and the other team members on their

involvement, participation and success at the Canada Wide Science Fair.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to extend congratulations to Valerie Jackson and Audrey

Jackson of Whiteway, Trinity Bay. Valerie and Audrey were recognized for having

knitted goods for NONIA for fifty years and were each presented with a gold

watch.

As you are probably aware, Mr. Speaker, NONIA is a non-profit organization,

founded in 1902 to finance the work of British nurses to provide health care to

our outports. Money was made from the sale of hand knitted goods by women of

these isolated communities. In 1934 the government took over the health care

portion of NONIA's operation; however, the business side was maintained and

continues today in much the same tradition as when founded.

At the age of twelve, Valerie was inspired, as many other outport knitters

were, by NONIA's offer to reimburse them for their knitted products; however,

it was her love of the craft that kept her involved to this day.

Mr. Speaker, Valerie and Audrey have been knitting for NONIA for almost sixty

years, carrying on a family tradition started by their mothers some years ago.

Mr. Speaker, Valerie and Audrey are fine examples of the wonderful skilled

crafts people we have, and are so fortunate to have, in our Province. I ask that

all hon. members join with me in congratulating them on their personal

achievement.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to extend

congratulations to a business woman from my district who was recognized for her

accomplishments by the business community.

Karen Matthews, owner-operator of Nortique Fashions Enterprises Inc. of

Summerside, was recently named Entrepreneur of the Year for the Western Region

by the Newfoundland and Labrador Organization of Women Entrepreneurs.

Karen opened her business in 1989, specializing in Newfoundland-made coats

and other fashions. Her unique coat designs, the customized tailoring and

quality of her products, has made her collections nationally known and are

carried by Specialty Boutiques across Canada.

Mr. Speaker, through her hard work and perseverance, Karen has expanded her

business over the years beyond her own expectations. With her dedicated staff,

she has established herself as an excellent example of what small businesses

have to offer in this Province.

In addition to her recent recognition, Karen has received many other awards

including past recipient of the Business Development Bank of Canada's Award of

Business Excellence and the Manufacturing Industrial Award.

Karen's commitment and dedication also extends into her community with her

many years of involvement with the school council, the Summerside 4-H Club, the

Corner Brook Chamber of Commerce, and Director with the Community Business

Development Corporation, to name a few.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all Members in this House to join me in extending

congratulations to Karen on this recognition and the contribution she has made

to her community.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Terra Nova.

MR. ORAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on May 18, I attended the St. Gabriel's High School Graduation

in St. Brendan's. There were four graduates in this year's class: Nicole

Byrne, Kristine O'Rielly, Samantha Walsh, and Jeremy White. While the number

of graduates was small, the ceremony was as big and as charming as any you would

see anywhere in this Province.

In St. Brendan's, the graduation is an event that brings out many from the

community. The support and encouragement I witnessed was amazing. The school

spirit and the pride they exhibit is overwhelming and clearly speaks to the

character of the people. As in smaller communities around the Province, the

school is at the centre of the community, the entity that joins people. St.

Brenda's is certainly no exception.

A week prior to the graduation, CBC did a story on the graduates. The

interviewer asked the kids a number of questions surrounding the topic of

graduation and future plans. While all the children spoke of different plans for

the future, one statement pervaded, they all said they wished they could remain

in St. Brendan's upon completion of their high school. Mr. Speaker, the love

and the connection that the residents have to this Island and their home is

absolutely remarkable.

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

congratulating the St. Gabriel's graduating class of 2007.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend congratulations to the

Carbonear Volunteer Fire Department on their incredible 166 years of service;

and on the installation of their new executive and Fire Chief, Mr. Ron Garland.

The volunteer firefighters, who make up the Carbonear Volunteer Fire

Department, have launched their 166 th year providing fire services to

the Conception Bay North town under a new chief, as well as a new banner.

Mr. Speaker, Ron Garland succeeds former Fire Chief Tom Crawford, a

fifteen-year veteran of the fire department. Fire Chief Garland has worked his

way up through the ranks, playing a prominent role in the department's

development during his twenty years with the department.

Throughout the 166 years of the department's service to the town, family

traditions have played a major role. Chief Garland's father, the late Ron

Garland Sr. and his brother, the late mayor Claude Garland, were both former

firefighters who served on the executive and were valued members of the

department.

Mr. Speaker, other members of the new executive are: First Assistant Chief

Kevin Butt; Second Assistant Chief Den Marshall; Captains Fred Baldwin and Steve

Burden; Lieutenants Geoff Squibb and Steve Barrett; Treasurer Ed Kavanagh and

Secretary Keith Thomas.

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

congratulating the Carbonear Volunteer Fire Department on their 166 years of

service and on the installation of their new Fire Chief and executive.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would like to note and welcome in the public

galleries Mayor Boyd Noel, the Mayor of St. Anthony.

Welcome to our House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: I am pleased to rise today to inform my hon. colleagues and

to again recognize that two managers from the Water Resources Management

Division have been selected by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, to

lead a two-year Science for Peace project.

Mr. Haseen Khan and Dr. Amir Ali Khan, who recently participated in the

European Space Agency TIGER Project in Egypt, have been appointed the NATO

country project director and co-director, to implement an environmental security

and water resources management system using real time water quality warning and

communications on the River Nile in Egypt.

The Egyptian project director is Dr. Shaden Abdel-Gawad, a graduate from

Memorial University of Newfoundland, and president of the National Water

Research Center of the Egyptian Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation.

Mr. Speaker, real time quality monitoring is state of the art technology used

to provide an early warning of adverse water quality incidents and is an

integral part of proactive water resources management in this Province. My

department was the first in the country to implement a real time water quality

monitoring and reporting network.

Our expertise was recognized nationally when the federal government

implemented a national network based on our network, and now we have been

selected by NATO to implement an index network in Egypt. Our selection to lead

this NATO project is international recognition of the strong technical expertise

in my department and is another illustration of this government's success in

using innovative technologies.

Mr. Speaker, this project will give Egypt the ability to proactively identify

and respond to both security and water quality management issues. It has several

implications for trans-boundary water resources management in Africa and will

potentially enable Egypt to approach the World Bank for funding of a national

network.

Over the next two years, delegations of young water scientists from Egypt

will visit my department to undertake training on various aspects of water

resources monitoring and reporting. Mr. Haseen Khan and Dr. Amir Ali Khan will

travel to Egypt to provide training and to set-up the water quality warning

system.

This is a water resources capacity building project that will use our

experience and expertise to develop a capacity in Egypt to monitor their

strategic water bodies on a real time basis against any natural or anthropogenic

threats. It will enable them to take immediate mitigative measures, and to

report the suitability of water for various uses such as drinking, irrigation,

livestock, aquatic life and recreational use.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say this is the first time in the history of the

Nile River system that a real time water monitoring network and reporting system

will be set up to ensure the integrity of the Nile River system under the

leadership of NATO.

I am confident this project will further add to the international recognition

that our Province and department has earned water resources management.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the hon. minister for an advance copy of his statement.

I, too, would like to congratulate the two individuals involved in this major

project. It does say a lot about their abilities and their expertise. I know it

is great that we are able to help out other countries within the world, but I

wonder today within our own Province, Minister, about our own water quality. I

understand we have a couple of hundred of our own communities on a boil order

right now as I speak. When we were in government we provided communities with

100 per cent funding for up to $100,000 to improve the water quality. Mr.

Minister, today when you are giving out this good news, I guess tomorrow you

will announce that your government will bring back this program to rural

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for his advance copy.

I am happy to, once again, congratulate Mr. Khan and Dr. Khan on their

expertise. We are fortunate to have such expertise in our Province, but I, too,

have to join with my colleague from the Official Opposition and point out that

we do have approximately 200 municipalities in the Province and according to the

figures of the minister's department, the same number as this time last year,

so we do not seem to be improving. It may not all be the same communities -

there have been forty-eight new communities since March of last year that now

have boil advisories, and it seems to me that if we have the expertise to share

with other countries, we should be able to use that expertise here. What I would

like to see is that we get the municipalities to the point where we do not have

to have -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's allotted time has expired.

MS MICHAEL: By leave, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

I hope that we can get our municipalities to the point where we do not have

to have the boil advisories, that what we are monitoring is showing us that our

water is so good this is not happening.

We have municipalities out there waiting for help from the provincial

government. Quite a number of the communities listed from the department are

having maintenance done to the water distribution system. I imagine that is a

major issue, but we also still have communities on these lists that have E. coli

in their water. So, we have a lot of work to do to make sure that we bring down

the number from the almost consistent 200 that it seems to have been for the

last few years.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, most people would agree that it was the American

marketing and secondary processing division that subsidized the FPI's

groundfish divisions in this Province during the moratorium. In fact, people

thought that it was so important, including the Premier, that he, himself, even

thought that it was worth buying last year at the infamous summit that he held

on fisheries. Today, we see that division being sold off to a competitor of the

Newfoundland fishing industry, being sold to High Liner. In return, High Liner

will keep one plant open in this Province.

Can the Premier tell us the value of that asset, the American marketing and

secondary processing division and how much High Liner is going to pay for it?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition, in his

preamble,

says that the marketing arm and the secondary processing division of FPI were

its most valuable assets. Well, that really depends on who you talk to.

We offered, as a government, to finance the purchase of those operations for

the Newfoundland industry. While there was certainly interest in making that

happen from the perspective of the union, there was absolutely no interest in

making it happen from the processors, from the people who are in the business of

producing and selling fish. I guess that tells you something, Mr. Speaker, on

how the industry itself felt about the necessity of having that piece of the

business.

Yes, there is only one operation in Newfoundland currently that operates in

the secondary processing area under FPI, and that will continue under the High

Liner deal if it goes through.

Mr. Speaker, in terms of the amount of money that will be eventually paid for

those assets, High Liner is a publicly traded company; there are confidentiality

agreements between FPI, High Liner, that are governed by stock exchange rules

and so on. I am not in a position to say what that amount is today, but it will

become public knowledge if and when definitive and final agreements are reached.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The asset that High Liner is buying consists of the marketing division, which

is located in Danvers, Massachusetts, a secondary processing facility that is

located in Danvers, Massachusetts, and a secondary plant in Burin. Of those

three assets, everybody knows that it is the marketing division that is the most

valued.

Can the minister confirm that, after purchasing this asset worth $40 million,

$50 million, $60 million, $100 million, if that is purchased by High Liner for

that amount, then High Liner can close the Burin plant, if it so desires,

transfer the equipment in that plant to their plant, which is very similar to

it, in Danvers, Massachusetts, and all that company will have to pay is a

penalty of $2.5 million.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I did not hear the interview, myself, this

morning on CBC with the President and Chief Executive Office of High Liner, Mr.

Demone, but I understand that, when that question was put to him, he laughed and

he laughed and he laughed; because, I mean, what company in their right mind,

what investor, who in their right mind...? I am not an investor - maybe the

Premier is the best one to answer the question - but what investor in their

right mind would pay tens of millions of dollars for an asset and then pay $5

million to close it down? I mean, it is so ludicrous that is blows the mind. It

is so ludicrous that it just blows me away that anybody could think in those

terms.

Mr. Speaker, High Liner has committed, and is prepared to commit, and has

committed, to a long-term operation in Burin. That is what we are interested in.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: That is what High Liner is interested in. That is what the

people of Burin are interested in, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I notice that he quotes Henry Demone. Henry Demone is the same individual who

sold the Burgeo fish plant with its quotas to Bill Barry, and Bill Barry

transferred those quotas to Canso, Nova Scotia, a couple of days after that

deal.

What the minister is missing is the fact that the Burin plant is

insignificant when compared to the marketing division and the plant in Danvers,

Massachusetts; so, just to sell it off or close it and transfer the assets

would, in fact, make money for High Liner.

Now, Mr. Speaker, to get to my question. For the past two years we have heard

ministers opposite say there is no money in groundfish because of competition

for labour in China and because of the value of the high Canadian dollar. In

fact, Mr. Speaker, it was these very reasons that FPI closed the plants in

Harbour Breton and Fortune and left the plant to remain idle in Marystown while

they left the groundfish in the water.

I ask the minister: Can the minister or the Premier tell me what has happened

to the competition in China and to the value of the Canadian dollar which is now

going to allow OCI to employ 500 people in Marystown for the next five years,

processing the same fish that FPI left in the water last year? Can the minister

tell me what has happened in the world to change those circumstances, and can

you also tell us what penalties are in place if OCI does not employ 500 people -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair requests both sides of the House to keep their questions and their

answers within one minute. In the last exchange, both sides have abused that

general rule we follow.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition, day after day,

gets up and talks about people going on a rant. Well, I do not know what you

would call that, but it seems to me that he spent most of the lead up to the

question on some kind of a rant.

I will tell you, Mr. Speaker, what we are not going to do. I have no control

over what happened between any deal between High Liner, Henry Demone and Bill

Barry, but I will tell you that this Province made sure, in terms of negotiating

restrictions around the quota that FPI currently controls, that is not going to

happen on our watch, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: It is not going to happen, not on your life!

Let me say to those - that it only took a couple of hours to work it out in

Ottawa - it took weeks and weeks and months and months of hard negotiations by

this Province to make it happen, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: What is the difference in terms of the groundfish operation

today, vis- B -vis

FPI?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister to complete his answer quickly.

MR. RIDEOUT: I will tell you the difference, Mr. Speaker: A Newfoundland

company with its own money and its bankers money, without a cent of investment

from government, is investing to make this happen. I have confidence in that,

Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let's talk about what happened under your watch. Stephenville closed, 300

people laid off; Harbour Breton closed, another 300 people laid off; Fortune

closed. That all happened under your watch, I say, Minister. Every bit of it

happened under your watch.

Mr. Speaker, last month, George Armoyan sold off his shares in FPI and walked

away with approximately $6 million in profits. It now appears that Sanford

Seafoods of New Zealand is about to sell this shares in FPI and walk off with

$25 million in profit. It also appears that John Risley and the Icelandic Group

are going to walk off with similar profits. The people who work for FPI, and

have worked for FPI as much as forty years in this Province, are getting $3

million out of this deal from FPI, and guess what that is going to do, Mr.

Speaker? That is going to bring their wages up this year to forty cents less

than they made an hour last year.

I ask the Premier - I ask the Premier, this time - does this sound like we

are maximizing the benefit to the people of this Province, or is this just

another resource giveaway?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, let's talk about Stephenville. Let's take an

article last

weekend from a Stephenville paper which basically says: Our sales are still on

the rise and we have experienced a steady rise ever since the closure of the

mill. Really, I cannot foresee any signs of business slacking in the community.

I cannot really tell you where it is coming from, but we have been flat out. We

had the best year we have ever had for sales in 2006. Mayor Tom O'Brien says

businesses tell him, business is strong and they have a positive outlook for the

future.

Now it does not get any better than that, but let's talk about the fishery.

Let's talk about the fishery and what you have been saying over the years and

where you have been. The Leader of the Opposition gave us John Risley. You gave

us the problem, you gave us that group -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: - and that board.

Let's hear what he was saying back in May of 2001 when he was Minister of

Fisheries. Let's talk about that. Here is what he said about shareholder value

then: Mr. Speaker, for a government to get involved would have seriously

undermined the rights of shareholders and potentially devastated the share value

of the company. You were concerned about them in those days when John Risley

took over the company and you left us with that mess.

Here is what else you said.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Premier -

PREMIER WILLIAMS: All interested parties recognize that there was no role

for government to play in the selection of the board of directors -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Premier to complete his question quickly.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: I can go on, Mr. Speaker, with quotes that the hon.

gentleman opposite gave that talk about being against nationalization, and now

he is for nationalization, being for shareholder value in those days, and now he

is against shareholder value; back and forth, flip and flop, this side of the

mouth, that side of the mouth. State a course, boy, and be consistent in your

answers!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier talks about Stephenville and how great things are there. I ask

the Premier: Are there more people employed in Stephenville today than there

were before you were Premier? The answer to that is obvious, there are not.

Mr. Speaker, employees of FPI, like all other employees of any business or

any plant in this Province, are protected by the Labour Standards Act. Under

this Act, employees are entitled to a certain number of weeks' pay if their

business or their plant closes.

I ask the minister, or the Premier: Can they tell me, either one of them, how

many weeks' pay the workers at Marystown, for example, are entitled to if that

facility is closed?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the facility at Marystown is about to reopen.

Nobody has announced a closure. I saw the president of OCI on the news last

night saying he was about to open it. I saw the president of the union, Mr.

Moulton, saying that they were delighted. I heard the Mayor of Marystown last

night saying they are rolling out the red carpet for them. The plant in

Marystown is not closing. Mr. Speaker, it is reopening under the careful

negotiations and good will and hard work of this government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, neither the minister nor the Premier has answered

one question here today. If the minister was so certain that the plant in

Marystown was going to remain open, he would not have a penalty provision in

there, I say to the minister. Now, Minister, in case you do not understand it -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: In case they do not understand, Mr. Speaker, if the plant

closes in Marystown, under the Labour Standards Act the people in that plant are

entitled to sixteen weeks of pay.

Now, Mr. Speaker: Can the minister confirm that these payments will be made

in addition to the penalties which he outlined yesterday in that deal?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, when there was a gentleman over here as

Government House Leader, when the Opposition would ask him an if' question,

we used to call him the government bull. He was a former Member for Bonavista

North, I believe, and he used to get up and say: if, if, if. Well, Mr. Speaker,

how can I respond to those ifs?

Mr. Speaker, the plant in Marystown is going to reopen. Mr. Speaker, the

plant in Marystown is going to reopen. The mayor is in favour of it, the union

is in favour of it, the community is in favour of it, and the company wants to

get on with the job. What is wrong with Mr. If, I say, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, the minister can get up and he can rant and he can

tear, he can laugh at this all he likes but this deal is important to the people

who work for FPI in this Province. Now, Mr. Speaker -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Now, Mr. Speaker, it is our understanding that if OCI closes

its plant in Marystown it will owe the employees at Marystown sixteen weeks'

pay, for a total - if you do the math, I say to the minister - of over $4

million; that OCI will owe the workers in Marystown if they close that plant

according to the deal that you presented yesterday.

Now, that $4 million that OCI will owe the workers in Marystown, will that be

on top of the penalty of the $2 million to $5 million you outlined yesterday or

will it just be the money that OCI is entitled to pay to the workers if they

close that plant? There is no penalty if that is the case, I say to the

minister.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, thank God for light bulbs. I suppose there was

a light bulb that went on in the hon. gentleman's head when he finally

realized that this deal was important to the employees of FPI in Marystown.

Thank God for light bulbs!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, it is important, Mr. Speaker, and that is why the

union is in favour of it. That is why the President of the FFAW is supporting

this agreement. That is why the president of the Local, Mr. Moulton, is

supporting this agreement.

Of course, this Opposition Leader, Mr. Speaker, tries to get a bit cute. You

know, the Labour Standards Act provides certain protection for workers in lieu

of notice. If there is notice, that is where they get their protection. If there

is severance pay, that is where they get their protection. We have negotiated

penalties on top of anything that the law provides, Mr. Speaker. That is what

this government is all about.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: What the minister is saying is that the penalty is there and

the workers of the current FPI will also receive their severance, the sixteen

weeks that they are entitled to. Is that what you are saying, and will you show

us that in a deal before you ink it and before the legislation is changed in the

House of Assembly?

My final question is to the Premier, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier is on record as saying that he wants an ownership or equity

position in our offshore oil and gas industry. He is on record as saying that he

wants an ownership position in our hydro industry in Churchill Falls and

Labrador. We already bought an equity position in our IT industry when he gave

$15 million to his buddies for fibre optic.

Mr. Speaker, we had the closest thing that we could come to in an equity

position or an ownership position in our fishing industry under the FPI Act

because we control that company. Now this government is about to scrap that -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member to put his question.

MR. REID: - and take no ownership whatsoever in our fishing industry.

Can the Premier tell me: What is it about the fishing industry that you do

not want any part of, or is it just that you do not like the smell of fish?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can remember him at the summit sat down at the end of the table. He came in

and sat down for a while and he did not have a pen, did not have a piece of

paper, he did not take a note. Then he went outside for half-an-hour or an hour

and dropped back in again, and then he went out again. He never bothered to take

a note because he did not like it. He did not like what was going on, the fact

that we were addressing the Province and the fishery.

This government and this Cabinet, and this Minister of Fisheries and previous

Ministers of Fisheries, have tackled the issues. Now, when you talk about

ownership, what is 49 per cent of a quota company? That is not ownership! We got

it for nothing. We paid not a nickel for it. We have 49 per cent of the quota

company right out of the gate. That is exactly what we have.

We also, some time ago, after we had gone through the summit, sat down with

the stakeholders in the Province, the people who are interested in the fishery,

unlike yourself, who did not make a mess of it when they were Ministers of

Fisheries, like yourself. They sat around that table and we offered to put up

the money to buy the marketing arm that you are talking about, the marketing arm

that we are now supposed to have given away. We put up the money. We said we

would put up the money but we could not get the industry, as the minister has

already said, to participate in it. We could do no more than that -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Premier to complete his answer quickly.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: We attempted to buy the marketing arm and buy that

equity in the company and participate with them in a partnership. We ended up

with 49 per cent of the quota company. We extended the quotas to nine years and

we have the landing and the processing in this Province. That is what I know

about fish!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, last week we heard of a call centre contract that

was awarded to a Quebec company. Well, that was not the first contract to be

awarded to Quebec companies in recent months. Another was a $57 million contact

to build a long-term care facility in Corner Brook, the Premier's own

district. When discussing the reasoning for awarding this contact to a Quebec

company, the minister stated that the agreement on internal trade had to be

followed that allowed companies from other provinces to bid on this contract.

Ironically, as stated in the correspondence, government found loopholes to void

this agreement when awarding the fibre optic deal. The minister has also stated

publicly that two ferries will be built in the Province, regardless of this

agreement.

I ask the minister: If you can guarantee that two ferries will be built in

this Province and can provide provisions to exclude this infamous fibre optic

deal from being subject to this agreement, why couldn't a $57 million contract

in Corner Brook also be excluded?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Labrador Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me just say to the hon. member, the contract that was let in Corner Brook

was let to a Quebec firm to save the taxpayers of this Province some $3 million.

I can also say to the member across that subcontractors from this Province are

engaged in that particular project.

I can also say to the Member for the Bay of Islands, Mr. Speaker, that the

two ferries will be built in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: They will be built in Newfoundland and Labrador, but I can

tell the hon. member one thing, that we are not going to buy rust buckets like

the hon. crowd did on the other side, I can say to the hon. member.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I say that gives a lot of comfort to the people

in Corner Brook, in the Premier's own district, who have to send applications

up to Quebec. That gives a lot of comfort to the people.

Mr. Speaker, local contractors have been contacting our office complaining

that they are not receiving any of the subcontracts for the construction of this

long-term care facility and all of the work is going to Quebec companies.

I ask the minister: Can you confirm why contracts to supply steel are going

to Quebec companies when there are local suppliers who can do this work?

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

Labrador Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me just say to the hon. member opposite, that his information is

incorrect. It is incorrect and it is incorrect. Right now, the site grading and

site finishing work is being done by Marine Contractors out of Corner Brook. The

rebar fabrication is done by Harris Steel out of St. John's. The concrete

supply is done by Atlantic Concrete in Corner Brook. Okay? The architectural

work, I say -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HICKEY: - is done by contractors in St. John's. So I do not know

where the hon. member is getting his information.

Let me say this, Mr. Speaker, this project is going ahead and it is for the

benefit of the Province and the benefit of Corner Brook, I say to the hon.

member.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just for the record, Marine Contractors got the bid on their own. It has

nothing to do with the major contract of this company.

Also, we asked: Why is the steel going to Quebec? The minister could not

answer it because the steel is being supplied by Quebec companies.

Mr. Speaker, all of the mechanical subcontracts for this facility are also

being awarded to Quebec companies. I ask the minister: Can you confirm why the

mechanical subcontracts are being awarded to Quebec companies when there are

local suppliers who can do this work?

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

Labrador Affairs.

MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, this hon. member does not understand how this

process works.

Let me say this, Mr. Speaker, Air Labrador just got a contract in Quebec - a

multi-million dollar in Quebec. So what are we supposed to say to Air Labrador,

you are not going to do any more work in Quebec?

Mr. Speaker, we are watching this project. We have talked to the French

company. We have also told them that we want as much business in this Province.

Let me say this, we have interprovincial trade agreements and we are following

those, Mr. Speaker, but we have companies in Newfoundland and Labrador that are

working all over this country, all over this globe, and I can say they also have

been looking at these projects.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, it is confirmed now, the steel and mechanical is

going Quebec.

Just for the minister's own information - because, obviously, the minister

or the Premier do not know - the general engineering contract in this Province

right now is being done in Quebec. If the people from his department have to go

over the design they have to call Quebec, an engineering firm in Quebec, to go

over the design changes for this contract.

I ask the minister: Will you supply this House all subcontractors that are

being done on this facility in Corner Brook as we speak?

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

Labrador Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: I have no trouble, and certainly on tomorrow I will supply

the contractors that are working on it - local contractors.

Let me say this, Mr. Speaker, the architectural design of this is done by

Sheppard Case out of St. John's, the mechanical and electrical is done by

Newton Engineering out of St. John's, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this member does not have a clue, like he normally does not have

a clue, what he is talking about.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

With the time allocation, we have time for one brief supplementary.

The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, a Newfoundland and Labrador based company has

filed a lawsuit against a Quebec company who was awarded this $57 million

contract. This local company claims an agreement on subcontracting work was

breached and, instead, awarded to a Quebec company.

I ask the minister: Are you aware there is a legal challenge, and has the

government investigated the allegations of local companies regarding

subcontracting work?

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

Labrador Affairs, time for a quick response.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, if we were to listen to the hon. Member from the

Bay of Islands, most of the companies would leave the Province. That is their

history.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. HICKEY: Let me say this -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HICKEY: Joe Kruger, now you want him to go?

Let me say something else, Mr. Speaker. Let me say this, when he talks about

the supply of steel: The supply of steel throughout this Province and Labrador

normally comes from Quebec and other provinces, Mr. Speaker. That has been

historic. That is nothing new.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: My question, Mr. Speaker, is for the -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Colleagues, the Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is to the Minister of Health and Community Services, concerning

the current situation in the radiology department at the Burin hospital.

Radiologists we have spoken to say that the ten-day time frame to reread the

6,000 CT scans and X-rays is impossible. Today, the Newfoundland and Labrador

Medical Association has put out a news release that says more time is needed to

complete the radiology review. It cannot be done in ten days. The four to five

weeks that Eastern Health originally said it would take was realistic, according

to the NLMA. Radiologists had developed a plan to do the work in four to five

weeks with the necessary quality assurances in place for the security of the

patients. What the doctors lacked -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: - is the support staff to help them collate the necessary

information.

There has been a staff shortage of transcription services for over a year. I

am wondering why the minister is continuing to promise the impossible, by saying

this work can be done in ten days.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, I just want to correct a couple of things.

I read the release as well. I did not read anywhere in the release that the

Medical Association has indicated that the four to five weeks initially

commented on was reasonable and needed to be done in that period of time. I did

not read that anywhere in their release.

The other thing, I just wanted to inform the House, after a closer

re-evaluation, the number of exams in question, rather than being the estimated

6,000, are now revised. That figure has been revised, so we are looking at a

figure somewhere between 5,100 and 5,200.

As of this morning, as I understand it, Eastern Health are proceeding along

the lines of the timelines that we mapped out. Very clearly, as of the end of

Sunday they had some 360-odd already completed. They have engaged the services

of some twenty-two radiologists who are assisting with the process. Some of them

are working full-time, I say, Mr. Speaker, and some of them are working

part-time on the project, and they are proceeding.

One of the things I want to remind the hon. member, and the members of this

House and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, the point that the Medical

Association have raised here is, they want to make sure -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to complete his answer quickly.

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to make sure that everybody understands clearly that we share the view

of the Medical Association when they talk about wanting to ensure that this is

done in a quality fashion and that the results achieved through this process are

of a quality nature and are very accurate -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

In order to facility a supplementary question, the Chair will revert to

asking the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi to put forward her supplementary

question.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

You know, I am getting a bit tired of the Minister of Health continuing to

correct my questions. When I ask my questions, the information is correct.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: I would like to read from the NLMA press release.

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. member to put her question quickly. We are

under some severe time constraints.

MS MICHAEL: My question, Mr. Speaker, is: Is the minister saying that the

NLMA is incorrect when it says, "However..." - and I am quoting -

"...three days into the review..." - and this came out today -

"...it is clear that our radiologists cannot complete this review in the

prescribed time frame with quality control in mind."

What does the minister have to say to the NLMA?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services, time

for a brief response.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Not to belabour the point, but I will say I will correct the

member opposite or anyone else in this House who stands in this House and makes

an incorrect statement, I say, Mr. Speaker.

Just to the point of reference -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the hon. the minister.

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

From my discussion with Eastern Health this morning, I understand, as I said

earlier, they have engaged some twenty-two radiologists in this process, and

they are endeavouring to identify some other resources to assist them with the

process.

We want to make sure that these exams, these 5,100 or 5,200 exams, are done

with quality in mind, they are done in a timely fashion, and they are done so

that the end result here would be the individual patients and the individual

physicians would have accurate results from these radiology exams, I say, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allocated for Question Period has expired.

MS MICHAEL: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

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

Vidi, on a point of order.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

When I asked my question, I pointed out that what I was saying was both from

conversations that we had with radiologists as well as the press release from

the NLMA, and I can supply the minister, if he requires, that information from

both sources. So, I really ask for an apology.

Mr. Speaker, this is the second time. One day last week, or the week before,

the minister stood to correct my question, how I asked my question. That is what

I am referring to.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Speaking to the point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I am at a loss here. It is not a point of

order, obviously. If it is anything, at best, on the surface, there is a

disagreement between two hon. members. That is allowed. That happens in the

House all the time and there is certainly no point of order, Your Honour.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair rules there is no point of order. If there is a disagreement

between two hon. members, that does not constitute qualifications for a point of

order.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

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

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased today to table the Mineral Act Statutory Report.

MR. SPEAKER: Further tabling of documents?

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will ask leave to introduce

a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999. (Bill 29)

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?

The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will ask leave to

introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Historic Resources Act. (Bill 30)

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will move, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that this

House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. nor at 10:00 p.m. tomorrow, May 31.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for Which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition from people in my District of Cartwright-L'Anse

au Clair. Mr. Speaker, this petition is asking for government to provide for

cellphone coverage in that particular area of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, we know that Aliant provides most of the telecommunication

services in that particular area, whether it be telephone services or Internet

access for many of these communities, but the lack of cell coverage in that

region is no doubt required and needs to be addressed.

Mr. Speaker, we have tried to deal with Aliant over the last number of years

to have cellphone access in that region of the Province. In fact, going back a

few years ago, we did make a business case to Aliant to have cellphone service

in the Labrador Straits area. They did partner with us through our local group,

called SmartLabrador, to have some cell coverage put into that particular region

but, Mr. Speaker, it only covers a very small area and most of the communities,

even in the Labrador Straits area, still do not have access to cellphone

coverage.

Once you go north of L'Anse-au-Loup you have literally no coverage from

that right on up through to Cartwright. As you know, that is a highway that

stretches over several hundreds of kilometres. Much of that highway, Mr.

Speaker, is in the interior of Labrador, it is over gravel roads, and in

winters, of course, it is not an easy highway to be able to navigate at all

times. We have had many incidents where people have encountered snowstorms, have

had problems with their vehicles on those stretches of highway, and not been

able to have access to be able contact people.

Mr. Speaker, I know how difficult this is. I have experienced it first-hand

myself, being stuck out on sections of that road overnight and not being to able

to get home or get to a community. I can tell you that if you had some access

through cellphone service at least you would be able to make a phone call to

someone to get that kind of help.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, even in the winter months the Department of

Highways equipment is not on the road until 5:00 a.m. So, in lots of cases, if

you are in the middle of a

section of highway, you could be several hours before

someone actually gets to you.

Mr. Speaker, I want to support this petition on behalf of the residents in my

district to have cellphone coverage. We did also make a business case to Aliant

to have cellular service in the coastal area from Red Bay going up north to

Cartwright; however, they have not seen it as being a viable business case from

their perspective in terms of investing at this point, and I guess what

residents are doing now is petitioning the government, through the department of

industry, to undertake some review of this in that area and probably engage in

some discussions with Aliant to see if there is a way that some partnership

between government and Aliant or another communications company is possible to

make an investment to provide cellphone coverage to people in that area of the

Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to move Motion 8, that this House not adjourn today, May 29, at

5:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that this

House not adjourn today, Tuesday, May 29, at 5:30 p.m.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion carried.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to move Motion 9, that this House not adjourn today, May 29, at

10:00 o'clock.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that this

House not adjourn today, Tuesday, May 29, at 10:00 p.m.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion carried.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, first reading, Motion 3, that the Minister of

Natural Resources have leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Establish

An Energy Corporation For The Province. (Bill 28)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To

Establish An Energy Corporation For The Province. (Bill 28)

Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Natural

Resources shall have leave to introduce Bill 28?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Natural Resources to introduce a bill,

"An Act To Establish An Energy Corporation For The Province," carried.

(Bill 28)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 28 be now read a first

time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that Bill 28 be now read

a first time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Establish An Energy Corporation For The

Province. (Bill 28)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 28,

An Act To Establish An Energy Corporation For The

Province, has now been read a first time.

When shall this bill be read a second time?

MR. RIDEOUT: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 28 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Motion 4, Mr Speaker, that the Minister of Natural Resources

have leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act Respecting The Newfoundland And

Labrador Hydro-Electric Corporation. (Bill 27)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act

Respecting The Newfoundland And Labrador Hydro-Electric Corporation. (Bill 27)

Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the minister shall have leave

to introduce Bill 27?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Natural Resources to introduce a bill,

"An Act Respecting The Newfoundland And Labrador Hydro-Electric

Corporation," carried. (Bill 27)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 27 be now read a first

time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that Bill 27 be now read

a first time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act Respecting The Newfoundland And Labrador

Hydro-Electric Corporation. (Bill 27)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 27,

An Act Respecting The Newfoundland And Labrador

Hydro-Electric Corporation, has now been read a first time.

When shall Bill 27 be read a second time?

MR. RIDEOUT: On tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 27 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, Motion 5. I move that the Minister of Justice

have leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Commissioners For

Oaths Act. (Bill 26)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the Minister of Justice shall

have leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Commissioners For

Oaths Act. (Bill 26)

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that the hon. the

minister shall have leave to introduce said bill?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice to introduce a bill, "An Act To

Amend The Commissioners For Oaths Act," carried. (Bill 26)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 26 be now read a first

time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that Bill 26 be now read

a first time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Commissioners For Oaths Act. (Bill 26)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 26,

An Act To Amend The Commissioners For Oaths Act,

has now been read a first time.

When shall this bill be read a second time?

MR. RIDEOUT: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 26 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I move Motion 6, that the Minister of

Environment and Conservation have leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act

Respecting The Sustainable Development Of Natural Resources In The Province.

(Bill 25)

MR. SPEAKER: Is it moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of

Environment and Conservation shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, An

Act Respecting The Sustainable Development Of Natural Resources In The Province.

(Bill 25)

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that the hon. the

minister shall have leave to introduce Bill 25?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation to introduce a

bill, "An Act Respecting The Sustainable Development Of Natural Resources

In The Province," carried. (Bill 25)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the bill be now read a first

time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt a motion that the bill be read a

first time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act Respecting The Sustainable Development Of Natural

Resources In The Province. (Bill 25)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 25,

An Act Respecting The Sustainable Development Of

Natural Resources In The Province has now been read a first time.

When shall Bill 25 be read a second time?

MR. RIDEOUT: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 25 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would now like to call order 9, second reading of

An Act To Amend The

Taxation Of Utilities And Cable Television Companies Act. (Bill 22)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 22,

An Act To Amend The

Taxation Of Utilities And Cable Television Companies Act, be now read a second

time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Taxation Of

Utilities And Cable Television Companies Act." (Bill 25)

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will just say a few words on Bill 22,

An Act To Amend The Taxation Of

Utilities And Cable Television Companies Act.

This amendment to the act, basically, will change the definition of

industrial customers to Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. In the act now, there

is a list of companies that are a part of the

schedule to the act and any time

that the list changes, it will have to come to the House of Assembly to be

amended. So what we are doing here, we are basically coming up with a definition

of an industrial customer.

It is clearly in the amendment, Mr. Speaker, and I will just read it into the

record, "industrial customer means a person purchasing power from the

Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro Electric Corporation, a corporation continued

under the Hydro Corporation Act and its successors and assigns, other than a

utility as defined in subparagraphs (h)(i), (ii.1), (iii) and (iv), supplied

from the bulk transmission grid at voltages 66 KV or greater on the primary side

of transformation equipment directly supplying the person."

Mr. Speaker, as I said before, some of the companies that would have been

listed, which are industrial customers of Newfoundland Hydro, are: Abitibi-Price,

Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, Deer Lake Power Company, Iron Ore Company of

Canada, and others. So, in the future, they would not be specifically named but

there would be a definition for the company to allow them to supply power to

these companies without certain taxation that is now in the act.

Mr. Speaker, the amendment will allow government to update the definition of

industrial customer in the act. The legislation provides for the taxation of

utility and cable television companies. This has nothing to do with increasing

taxes at all, whatsoever, nothing there at all, Mr. Speaker. This is strictly

with respect to the definition of the industrial customer and just removing the

list and having a definition which will be always up-to-date for Newfoundland

Hydro.

Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro will now be able to identify their industrial

customers through the application of the definition being added in the act. Each

future change in the list of industrial customers will not require a return to

the Legislature. That, in fact, Mr. Speaker, will allow that the legislation,

the

schedule and the list will always be up-to-date. There will be no further

requirements to come to the Legislature to adjust the legislation. The amendment

will treat all revenues from industrial customers in a consistent manner, so

everyone will be treated the same. This change affects the original intent of

the legislation.

Mr. Speaker, there is no more to it than that. It is really housekeeping. I

had some brief discussion with my critic on the other side of the House of

Assembly. I think he clearly understands what we are trying to do here. There is

really not much more to say other than to say that there are no changes in

taxation, just the definition of industrial customer.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In the absence of the critic today, I am delighted to stand and respond to

Bill 22,

An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable Television

Companies Act.

When I first saw that act today I thought to myself: Well, the list was

always defined for Newfoundland Hydro, who their industrial customers were. As

the minister stated today, this is actually doing away with that list. The term

industrial customer, I guess, can be used for any customer supplying power to

Newfoundland Hydro.

Of course, the first list is outdated for sure because it indicates that

Abitibi Price, located in Grand Falls and Stephenville - as we know, the excess

power that goes into the grid from the Grand Falls power project is not needed

in Stephenville anymore. That particular power is sold back to Newfoundland and

Labrador Hydro.

I was also concerned that if we do not have a list like we normally had in

the past knowing who the customers are for Newfoundland Hydro, I wonder: How

will it be known when other customers want to generate power projects throughout

the Province? I know there will be the usual environmental assessment acts

required, approvals and so on, but when we always had a list here on hand we

always knew what the customer base was. I am wondering now, in the future, how

will the general population know, other than looking in the newspaper and seeing

a request for an environmental assessment? The first thing that comes to mind

is: Is there a thought in mind that Newfoundland Hydro now is making a decision

to develop small power projects around the Island? That is the first thing that

came in my mind when I saw that.

Of course, in the absence of an energy plan for this Province, the general

population really does not know which direction government is heading in. We all

know that was one of the planks in the Tory Blue Book in 2003, that this

government would develop and announce an energy plan. To date, that has not been

announced and, of course, it is causing a lot of concern, particularly for the

residents on the Coast of Labrador who are still using oil-fired generation and

paying an enormous amount for their hydro bills.

I know we have four months before the next election and we should soon see a

glossy energy plan in our mailboxes, I am sure. When you look at the list of

defined customers that we had before - communities around our Province use the

opportunity to tax utility companies as part of their revenue for their tax

base. Even aside from this today, when you think about the fibre optic cable

that is going across our Province, there are many customers today who will not

even be able to take advantage of being able to pay on-line because they simply

do not have the technology in their own homes to avail of a discount by using

on-line services.

As the minister has stated, government is looking to be more streamlined and

they want to have a one blanket definition of an industrial customer that will

cover any current industrial customer and also cover any industrial customer in

the future.

I would still ask the minister: Are there any plans for small hydro power

generation projects? Because this is the first thing that comes to mind when I

see that. If that is not the intent of this legislation, I would certainly be in

agreement with what the minister has brought forward here today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further debate?

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, stand in support of this amendment to the Taxation Of Utilities And

Cable Television Companies Act, but I also have a suggestion to make. While I

agree with the definition of industrial customer being in the act - I think that

is very wise, actually - I still think it would be good, as did my colleague who

just spoke before me, it still would be good for the public to always know who

the companies are, so I do not see why putting the definition in should mean

that we do not still maintain a

schedule that could be updated every year. I do

not think that is a major problem. I do not think that is a major piece of work,

but I think the information should be public.

I would assume that somebody could go to the annual report of Newfoundland

Hydro and find out who the companies were in the previous year, but it would

seem simple to me to both have the industrial customer definition in there as

well as having a

schedule with the companies who are customers.

I am presenting that to the minister as something for him to think about. I

just do not see one excluding the other.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further debate?

If the hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs speaks now he will close debate

at second reading.

The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

MR. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, just a few words to the points that were brought up by the hon.

members opposite.

The Member for Grand Falls-Buchans mentioned that it was listed in the past,

and the same point that the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi is mentioning,

could there still be a list associated with this legislation?

If we have a

schedule associated with this legislation, it would be defeating

the purpose of this legislation. The Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi made a

good point in that any companies that would be customers of Newfoundland Hydro

would be in the report each year of which customers they would be. If we went

ahead with a

schedule into the future, Mr. Speaker, then we would have to come

back each time to change the list, which is defeating the purpose of this

amendment. So, other than that, I would not see any other major concern.

The Member for Grand Falls-Buchans mentioned environmental assessments, and

some smaller projects that would be forthcoming in the future on the smaller

rivers. Again, she was asking the wrong individual on that. That question could

be directed to the Minister of Natural Resources, but there is none that I am

aware of at this point in time.

Other than that, I would say to the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, a good

point with respect to the

schedule but again I think it would be addressed with

respect to the yearly report from Newfoundland Hydro.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I move second reading.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 22,

An Act To

Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable Television Companies Act, be now read

a second time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable

Television Companies Act. (Bill 22)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 22,

An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable

Television Companies Act, has now been read a second time.

When shall this bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?

MR. RIDEOUT: Presently, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Presently.

On motion, a bill "An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable

Television Companies Act," read a second time, ordered referred to a

Committee of the Whole House presently, by leave. (Bill 22)

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the

Whole to consider certain bills.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that the House resolve itself into a Committee

of the Whole to consider certain bills.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr.

Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Committee of the Whole on consideration of Bill 19,

An Act To Amend The Royal

Newfoundland Constabulary Act, 1992.

I have advised both Opposition parties, Mr. Chairman, that we have an

amendment to this bill in Committee. The minister will explain it, but it is a

technical amendment to tie together the provisions of the bill with the public's

right to file complaints under the public complaints regime. When we get to the

appropriate point in the bill, then the minister will move the amendment.

CHAIR: The Committee is of the understanding that it is clause 7 that is

to be amended?

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, Mr. Chairman.

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Act,

1992." (Bill 19)

CLERK: Clauses 1 to 6 inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall clauses 1 to 6 inclusive be carried?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Clauses 1 to 6 inclusive are carried.

On motion, clauses 1 through 6 carried.

CLERK: Clause 7.

CHAIR: Clause 7.

The hon. the Minister of Justice.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to propose an amendment here to

section

Section 36

essentially provides that a complainant or a police officer who is the subject

of a complaint may appeal an order of a decision of the commissioner to the

Trial Division of the Supreme Court.

In Bill 19, Mr. Chair, we propose that the commissioner be empowered to make

two additional decisions under

section 22 and

section 28 with respect to the

commissioner's ability to recheck a complaint that may be found as frivolous

or vexatious. This amendment in Committee confirms that right of appeal exists

within these decisions as well.

"1. Clause 7 of the Bill is amended by renumbering it as subsection 7(2)

and by adding immediately before subclause (2) the following:

"7.(1) Subsection 36(1) of the Act is repealed and the following

substituted:

"36.

(1) The complainant or the police officer who is the subject of the

complaint may appeal an order or decision of the commissioner under the

paragraph 22.1(a), subsection 22(9), 28(1), 28(1.1) or of the adjudicator under

section 33 by way of application to the Trial Division."

CHAIR: It is moved by the hon. Minister of Justice that clause 7 of Bill

19 be amended.

The Chair rules that the amendment is in order.

Is it the pleasure of the Committee to adopt the said amendment?

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I just want to rise in response to the amendment that the minister put

forward on Bill 19, to say that my colleague, the Member for Burgeo &

LaPoile, has spoken and is certainly aware of the amendment. I think the

amendment you are bringing forward certainly clarifies some of the questions

that he had earlier, when the bill was tabled in the House, and to indicate to

the minister, Mr. Chairman, that we have no problem with this amendment and

certainly support the bill.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

I, too, spoke with the minister and was really glad to see the amendment. I

think it speaks directly to a question which I raised when we were in second

reading with regard to the appeal and I could not - I did go through everything

afterwards and did not think that the issue of an appeal after the commissioner's

ruling was clear. So, this really makes it clear and I am very glad.

Thank you very much.

CHAIR: Is it the pleasure of the Committee to adopt the said amendment to

clause 7?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, amendment carried.

CHAIR: Is it the pleasure of the Committee to adopt clause 7 as amended?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye,

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, clause 7, as amended, carried.

CLERK: Clauses 8 and 9.

CHAIR: Shall clauses 8 and 9 of Bill 19 carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, clauses 8 and 9 carried.

CLERK:

Be it enacted by the Lieutenant Governor and House of Assembly in

Legislative Session convened, as follows.

CHAIR: Shall the enacting clause carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

The enacting clause is carried.

On motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK:

An Act To Amend The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Act, 1992.

CHAIR: Shall the title carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

The title is carried.

On motion, title carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report Bill 19,

An Act To Amend The Royal Newfoundland

Constabulary Act, 1992, carried with amendment?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Bill 19 is carried.

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the bill with amendment,

carried.

CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Committee on Bill 22,

An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable

Television Companies Act. (Bill 22)

CHAIR: Bill 22,

An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable

Television Companies Act.

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable Television

Companies Act." (Bill 22)

CLERK: Clause 1.

CHAIR: Clause 1. Shall clause 1 carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Clause 1 is carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK: Clauses 2 to 4 inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall clauses 2 to 4 inclusive carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Clauses 2 to 4 is carried.

On motion, clauses 2 through 4 inclusive carried.

CLERK:

Be it enacted by the Lieutenant Governor and House of Assembly in

Legislative Session convened, as follows.

CHAIR: Shall the enacting clause carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

The enacting clause is carried.

On motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK:

An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable Television

Companies Act.

CHAIR: Shall the title carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

The title is carried.

On motion, title carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report Bill 22,

An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities

And Cable Television Companies Act, carried without amendment?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Bill 22 is carried.

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the bill without amendment,

carried.

CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

CHAIR: The motion is that the Committee rise, report progress and ask

leave to sit again.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit

again, Mr. Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): The hon. the Member for Bonavista South and Deputy

Speaker.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have considered

the matters to them referred and have directed me to report Bill 19 carried with

an amendment and Bill 22 carried without amendments and ask leave to sit again.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chairperson of the Committee of the Whole reports the

Committee have considered the matters to them referred and is directing him to

report that Bill 19 has been carried with an amendment and Bill 22 has been

carried without an amendment.

When shall this report be received?

MR. RIDEOUT: Now, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

On motion, report received and adopted.

MR. SPEAKER: When shall these bills be read a third time?

MR. RIDEOUT: Bill 19 now, Mr. Speaker, and Bill 22 by leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 19 now and Bill 22 by leave.

I note, for the record, leave has been granted.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to move third reading of Bill 19,

An Act To Amend The Royal

Newfoundland Constabulary Act, 1992. (Bill 19)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 19,

An Act To Amend The

Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Act, 1992, be now read a third time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt a motion that Bill 19 be now read a

third time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Act,

1992. (Bill 19)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 19,

An Act To Amend The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary

Act, 1992 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.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary

Act, 1992," read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the

Order Paper. (Bill 19)

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

MR. RIDEOUT: (Inaudible) procedural point before - I do not want to have

to come back and do something with this again. This bill was amended and my

recollection - I have not had a chance to look at it - seems to tell me that we

have to do first reading of amendments, second reading of amendments, third

reading of amendments. There is something in my bleak past that tells me we have

to do something else here rather than just give it third reading. Maybe the

Table can advise us.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair acknowledges that there has been an omission of a

process. In order to assure that the parliamentary processes have been followed,

we will revert to the reports. The Chair acknowledges that there has been a

deficiency in the process, so the Chair will revert.

The Chairperson of the Committee of the Whole reports that the Committee have

considered the matters to them referred and have directed him to report Bill 19

passed, with amendment.

When shall this report be received?

MR. RIDEOUT: Now, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

On motion, report received and adopted.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said amendment now be read

a first time.

It is the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: "Clause 7 of the Bill is amended by renumbering it as

subclause 7(2) and by adding immediately before subclause (2) the following:

"7.(1) Subsection 36(1) of the Act is repealed and the following

substituted:

"36.

(1) The complainant or the police officer who is the subject of the

complaint may appeal an order or decision of the commissioner under paragraph

22.1(a), subsection 22(9), 28(1), 28(1.1) or of the adjudicator under

section 33

by way of application of the Trial Division."

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said amendment by now read

a second time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

CLERK: Second reading of the amendment.

MR. SPEAKER: When shall Bill 19, as amended, be read a third time?

MR. RIDEOUT: Now, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

On motion, amendment read a first and second time. Bill ordered read a third

time presently, by leave.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Third reading of a bill,

An Act To Amend The Royal

Newfoundland Constabulary Act, 1992. (Bill 19)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 19,

An Act To Amend The

Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Act, 1992, be now read a third time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that Bill 19 be now read

a third time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Act,

1992. (Bill 19)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 19 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.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary

Act, 1992," read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the

Order Paper. (Bill 19)

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Now that we have had appropriate flight of that bill, and I hope that His

Honour will not refuse to sign it, I would like to call third reading of Bill

22,

An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable Television Companies

Act.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 22 be now read a third

time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that Bill 22,

An Act To

Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable Television Companies Act, be now read

a third time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable

Television Companies Act. (Bill 22)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 22,

An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable

Television Companies Act, has not been read a third time, and it is ordered that

the bill do pass and its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And Cable

Television Companies Act," read a third time, ordered passed and its title

be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 22)

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like now to call Motion 1, which is the adjourned Budget debate.

I believe I was the last speaker, actually, and I believe I was actually

speaking at the good will of the House so I did not adjourn the debate; I

adjourned the House. So, I guess the debate swings to the other side for whoever

is ready to speak next.

MR. SPEAKER: Speaking to the Budget amendment, the hon. the Member for

Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to address a number of items, I guess, as they relate to the Budget.

In starting off my few minutes that I will have to speak here this afternoon, I

did want to make acknowledgement to the Minister of Environment that I had

presented a petition yesterday in the House of Assembly, on behalf of residents

in my district, that was looking for changes in the hunting season for ptarmigan

in that particular area. Maybe once the minister has an opportunity - I know

that he has received a copy of that petition as well, along with a letter from

those residents - maybe he will have an opportunity to look at that and be able

to respond.

Mr. Speaker, I guess today, in speaking on a number of issues as they relate

to the Budget, I am going to focus on some of the things in my district. That

is, Mr. Speaker, because in recent days I guess there have been a number of very

important issues that have taken precedent in terms of the job that I do in

responding to the needs of the people of my constituency.

Mr. Speaker, one of those items has certainly been the fact that there has

been no extension to the EI program for fisherpeople in this Province to date.

Mr. Speaker, every day I get phone calls from people in my district and discuss

with people in my district the challenges that they are faced with because of

the fact that they cannot take to the water and fish appropriately.

I think some of the individuals, Mr. Speaker, go back to having loss of

income since early April. I do not have to tell anyone in this House of Assembly

what that means for families in our Province who have been the last five or six

weeks without any income. Mr. Speaker, I can honestly tell you with the greatest

sincerity today that many of these people would have been on the water fishing

on May 1 when that fishery opened if they were able to, but because of the

extenuating ice conditions that they have been faced with this year they have

not been able to go fishing, or to be able to get their enterprises activated.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, they have no income coming in, and combine that with the

fact that this year, for probably the first year in almost three years, we have

had a failure, I suppose, in terms of revenue in the sealing fishery as well.

Because of heavy ice conditions - by Coast Guard's own admission, Mr.

Speaker, some of the heaviest ice conditions they have seen off the Coast of

Newfoundland and Labrador in the past fifteen years - because of that people

were not able to access the seal hunt in the way that they wanted to as well. As

a result, Mr. Speaker, even though they invested money in getting ready for a

seal harvest, they put money into their boats and into their enterprises to be

able to get involved in that particular part of the harvest, they were not able

to simply because of the ice conditions that were out there, that certainly

prevented them. As you know by media reports and probably from people in your

own districts, some of these vessels were stuck in ice for up to three weeks

and, at the end of the day, had to go back to port with no catch, Mr. Speaker,

because they were not able to access the seal herds, and yet had incurred major

expenses and many of them damages to their boat.

Mr. Speaker, they have not had a good spring in terms of the fishery in my

district. We do have one plant open today in St. Lewis, where we have been able

to have a couple of vessels that have landed some crab there, but it has been

very difficult for them, too. They have had to navigate through heavy ice to get

to the outside waters. They have had to set their gear, haul their gear back,

and stay with the gear in order to fish the crab. Then they had to take their

gear out of the water and bring it back into port when they came.

Mr. Speaker, that is a very difficult way to try and embark on any kind of a

fishery, so it has been a very bad year for a lot of people in the fishing

industry in my district. I can only continue to call Mr. Hearn's office on a

regular basis, as I have been doing, leaving messages there, trying to get

information, writing letters and faxing them to the Minister of Human Resources,

Canada. Hopefully, Mr. Speaker, at some point we will see some resolution here.

After all, when you have over $50 billion - I think the Minister of Human

Resources and Employment told me one day there was over $50 billion in the EI

surplus fund in Ottawa. There is absolutely no excuse for this, none whatsoever.

If there is anyone left in Ottawa in the government who has any understanding

of Newfoundland and Labrador and the geography and the conditions in which we

have to operate a fishery in this Province, then I would encourage them to act

and to act immediately. This is completely unacceptable. When you have people

calling your office because they cannot get out on the water and they have no

income - and I think in the case of one of my colleagues, just a few days ago,

had a call from a constituent who just had to turn their truck back into the

dealership because they could not afford to make the payment. Mr. Speaker, this

is the real impact that this is having on people's lives, and it is absolutely

unnecessary.

Mr. Speaker, that particular issue, within itself, has been one of the

primary issues that we have been dealing with in recent weeks throughout the

district, but there are many other issues as well. I want to talk about some of

them today. One, in particular, is as it relates to the Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing Program. I have a lot of constituents in my district who apply

through Newfoundland and Labrador Housing to be able to get upgrades and work

done on their houses. What they have been finding is, not only are they met with

a tremendously long wait list of up to two years and over two years in many

cases to try and get some of this work done on their homes, but also their

grants are being reduced based on their income. It seems like more and more

these people are applying and getting less and less money after waiting a couple

of years to get their application into the system.

In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, there seems to be some changes in the

program. Either it is a new change, or it is a change that was always there and

never implemented. I am not sure, but a lot of these people who are getting

their housing programs approved are being told that you cannot get money to do

work on the interior of your home, even though there might be cases where the

ceiling in the house may have fallen - the tile may have fallen out because of

previous damage that has been done. They have been told that because you do not

need your shingles replaced right now or because you do not need your roof

replaced right now, we cannot do that job.

I see the minister shaking his head over there, but I have just been through

the department with this very file and been turned down on various levels.

Simply because the family went out themselves a year ago, because they could not

wait any longer to replace the shingles and the roofing on their house - because

they went out and did that work themselves, and now it is not included in a

housing grant, then Newfoundland and Labrador Housing will not look at replacing

the ceiling on the interior of the house.

So, maybe the minister - I could give him the information and he can check

this one out for me, in particular, because I was not aware that this was a new

policy. In fact, I have never ran into it before, because in most cases what

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing would do is they would go in and do the

inspection on the houses in my district and they would indicate the priorities,

as they should. If there was electrical work that needed to be done, or plumbing

work that needed to be done, or furnaces that needed to be replaced, or windows

or siding or doors, all the - what I call the very important and necessary

components, obviously they would take first priority. Then if there was

available monies under the grant program or if people were prepared to borrow a

certain amount of money, then they would be eligible to get other work done as

well, such as floor coverings replaced, interior doors replaced, ceilings redone

and things of this nature.

Mr. Speaker, I have found out - actually, I have dealt with two particular

cases just in the last week, where I have had problems in terms of trying to get

monies for those individuals to do that piece of work. So, I will certainly give

the minister the information and maybe he might be able to undertake to get a

different result than I was able to do through the regional office in Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to talk about benefits under social assistance,

because in this Budget while there were a number of initiatives that dealt with

poverty or poverty related issues in terms of increasing things like the minimum

wage, giving some tax breaks to people who were in a lower income or middle

income bracket, but one of the things I did not see was an increase to those

individuals who are on social assistance. I want to raise that today because you

have to realize that the government today has a surplus Budget of $261 million,

I think it is, and we have not seen any, what I would call, substantial

increases for recipients of social assistance in the last number of years. I

mean, you have to look at the reality. The reality is this, that many of them

are incurring extra costs simply because the cost of living in our Province has

increased. Realizing that the price of home heating fuel and gasoline has

increased on a regular basis, and because of that, in areas where groceries are

trucked in, food and supplies are trucked in or flown in, those prices have gone

up as well.

I remember, Mr. Speaker, back a few years ago I did a preliminary study in my

district, doing a comparison of recipients on social assistance in Labrador

compared to those in other parts of the Province. It was very soon discovered

that while the rates at the time were the same, the cost of living for many of

the people between L'Anse au Clair and Nain who were on social assistance was

50 per cent higher than the rest of the Province. At that time I was an

Opposition member, but at the time when I presented this to the government, they

were keen to have a look at it. They did increase the rates for people in

Labrador at that time. That was when we started with people on assistance in

Labrador at a different rate than other people in the Province in order to

reflect the increase in the cost of living.

Mr. Speaker, what I am asking today is, why this Budget did not provide for

additional increases for people who are on social assistance, because they need

to have their benefit rates increased as well. When it comes to providing for

their families, all the costs that they incur - the same as anyone else in

society - are increasing as well. We also know that many of the people out there

who are family people on social assistance, those with children, are on

assistance either because they are under skilled or because they are in

employment deprived areas, or they have some form of disability or illness that

does not allow them to work on a full-time basis. Many of these people who have

children and are supporting families on social assistance are not doing so by

choice but simply because of the product of an environment in which they live,

or because of some personal issues that does not allow them to engage in

employment at this particular time.

Mr. Speaker, I think that the Budget should have reflected something on a

more concrete level for these individuals. I do realize that government still

carries on with the home heating fuel rebate that was put in place when we were

in government and the drug subsidy programs have changed, but not necessarily

for these individuals. They still have the same drug coverages that they would

have always had. While some of the cost is going up, their cost and the money

that is coming into them is not increasing.

In fact, it was only recently I had a phone call from a family that was on

social assistance with children. They were telling me that they could not get a

clothing allowance for their child this year. Basically what that means is that

- in Labrador, of course, many of the people live in temperatures that are minus

thirty on a regular basis throughout the winter, and even as cold as minus forty

and minus fifty, and they could not get a winter clothing allowance for their

children to buy them things like Ski-doo boots, snowsuits, and mitts and hats

and things that they would need for winter. Mr. Speaker, government employees

who work in Labrador do receive clothing allowances, and I think that needs to

be looked at. It is something that was brought to my attention.

Maybe the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment can clarify for

me if there is a program that provides clothing allowances to children in

Labrador, but I have been told by people who are users of the program and the

system that there is not a clothing allowance provided for those children and,

in fact, there is a clothing allowance provided for government employees.

If you work for the department of forestry, or our provincial fisheries or

wildlife, or industry and trade, or any of those provincial government jobs

which take you out into the field, and you have to work in the outdoors and so

on, then you are given a clothing allowance by the government. It is provided

for you, so you can do your work, and so it should be. So it should be. I

totally agree with it, but I also agree that if there are children, families who

are on social assistance, who are not getting clothing allowances, then they

should. That is something that I would like to raise with the minister so that

he can have a look at that particular issue and see if he can find a way to

provide those allowances for children.

Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of other issues I wanted to talk about. One

of them is with regard to the road to Williams Harbour. Back in 2003 there was a

commitment from the government at the time to build this road into Williams

Harbour. Just to give you a bit of history now, it was in 1997 that road

construction started between Red Bay and Cartwright and there were a number of

communities connected year over year as part of that particular road network,

first connecting the areas between Red Bay and Lodge Bay and Mary's Harbour,

and then between Mary's Harbour and Port Hope Simpson, and Port Hope Simpson

and Charlottetown, Charlottetown to Cartwright, and then, after that, there were

sections added. Government at the time decided they would build a road into

Pinsent Arm, and they did build that road. Before that, they decided to build a

road into St. Lewis, and they built that road, and the next road that was

scheduled to be built was the road into Williams Harbour.

Mr. Speaker, no one was any more disappointed than I was at the time when

government announced that they would not build this road. I think it was a wrong

decision on behalf of the government. I think, if they wanted to admit it, they

would realize it themselves, today, that it was a wrong decision to cancel that

piece of road.

Last week, I saw the minister for Lake Melville send out a press release

saying he was concerned about transportation going into Williams Harbour and

Norman Bay, and he was going to spend $1,500 a week to put a longliner on to

bring groceries into these communities.

Well, Mr. Speaker, the reality was this: At the time there was so much ice in

Norman Bay, you could not get a longliner in there. Grateful for the $1,500, but

where were you going to put the boat? The boat, in two weeks, made one trip into

that community - because, unless people have not heard, their place is blocked

with ice. That has been the whole problem up there all year, why people cannot

fish, why the plants aren't open, why we want EI extensions, because the

communities are blocked in with ice. So the minister's answer to the

transportation problem was to put a boat there. How that longliner was going to

navigate through that ice was beyond me.

Mr. Speaker, the real result to do, at that time, and still is today, is to

put a helicopter service in there to handle the needs of the people on an

emergency basis. Right now, we have people in that community who have missed

doctor appointments, who have not been able to get to hospital, cannot get a

regular mail service, cannot get out to get groceries. As you know, there is no

general store in the community. We have had no helicopter services for that

community, and I think that is wrong.

If there was a real concern on behalf of the minister for Labrador with

regard to this community, and Williams Harbour accessing the outside

communities, he would have built the road into Williams Harbour. I was never so

disgusted in all my life to read a press release that says we will spend $1,500

to put a longliner into Williams Harbour and Norman Bay to bring out freight,

and then a $10 million announcement by the same minister to put a bypass road

going into Torbay, where we already have a road that is paved. I know; I have

driven it. I lived out there for five years, the first five years I was elected,

and I drove back and forth because I had an apartment out there.

That was the part that was galling to me, how you could look at the people in

this community of Williams Harbour and say: We cannot build you a road. It is

too bad, we are concerned, but we cannot build you a road because it is not

economically viable to do that.

Well, Mr. Speaker, if you had to wait until it was economically viable in

this Province you would not have built too many roads, I say, and you would not

be repaving a lot of them today either.

Mr. Speaker, it is disappointing for me and it is disappointing for people in

my district when you have a Labrador person sitting in the Department of

Transportation and Works who knows this area intimately, travelled in and out of

this community many time when he worked with Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro,

and yet does not see fit to provide for $5 million to build a road to this

community so that we do not have incidents like we had last year where two

people went through the ice on a snowmobile because it was unsafe to get into

the community. Where we do not have incidents like we have this year where they

have been blocked in for weeks and not been able to access medical services or

any other kind of service. That is unacceptable, and if there was real concern

they would be coughing up the $5 million to build that road and they would not

be out there putting bypass roads in Torbay, and upgrading pavement in this

place and that place and somewhere else, when this should be the top priority in

my opinion, Mr. Speaker, of the government.

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to go on with that for too long because I already

know the double standard that exists with that minister and with that

government, and it is disappointing, because when you can go out and announce

roadwork for Labrador -

MR. SPEAKER (Collins): Order, please!

The hon. member's time for speaking has expired.

MS JONES: I will take just a few second to clue up, if you don't mind.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: To clue up.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When you go out and you talk about upgrading roads in Labrador, and putting

hardtop on them, and that hardtop has to be chip seal, something that the member

was totally against when he was the Mayor of Lake Melville - totally against,

out on the street every day calling it cheap seal, totally against it, said it

would never happen as long as he was the mayor there - well, now he is the

minister and he is still out there putting chip seal in Goose Bay, in Labrador,

on roads, but is prepared to put asphalt on roads in Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, that has been our life story in Labrador, and I guess it is not

going to change even with one of our own at the helm in the department. It does

not seem like that is going to change.

Mr. Speaker, it is all right to talk the talk, but when you have to walk the

walk it is a whole different story, and I certainly have not seen a whole lot of

walking coming out of that department when it comes to putting a road into

Williams Harbour.

I will conclude my comments now, Mr. Speaker. I know we just have twenty

minutes in Budget debate, and I certainly turn it over to another member of the

House. I am sure there are many speakers here today.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess we have to be very clear on what we are doing here today. This is a

non-confidence motion in a government, a non-confidence motion in the best

Budget that this Province has seen.

MR. BARRETT: Says who?

MR. DENINE: Says the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, I say to the

hon. Member for Bellevue.

The hon. Member for Bellevue says, who? Well, he has not talked to the people

I have spoken to because let me tell you, there was a lot of encouragement,

praise and congratulations on bringing in a great budget.

I do not understand it, Mr. Speaker, I get up to speak and all of a sudden I

am interrupted. Amazing!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DENINE: He will not say who because maybe it is only one or two.

Anyhow, Mr. Speaker, before I go on, get into it, I want to talk about the

recent announcement the Minister of Education made yesterday, and that is

significant; a significant announcement in debt reduction for our post-secondary

students, $14.4 million.

Mr. Speaker, just before I go into it, I want to make mention that the

Premier was at the Canadian Federation of Students meeting in Ottawa last week.

From reports that we received and what we got in feedback, is that he was

welcomed with open arms. He was welcomed with open arms because of the

initiative that we are taking to reduce the debt of post-secondary students.

That is what he was welcomed with, and I can attest to that because I happened

to be in Vancouver back in February or March. My son was boarding with a person

who was on the Canadian Student Federation Executive. Prior to our Budget, he

had praise for our government and our Premier for the actions that were taking

to reduce the debt load of post-secondary students in our Province. He said you

are the leading Province in debt reduction for our students. When we look at

debt reduction to our students, our post-secondary students, what does it do?

Well, it gives them more power when they get out. It reduces their debt so that

they can put that money to work for themselves, to further themselves in either

education or in buying a house, buying a car, or whatever it may be.

Mr. Speaker, last week our Premier again, as I said, was welcomed with open

arms. Now, what did we do? What did we do as a government? What did this

government do? Mr. Speaker, we have frozen tuition for four years. That cost

tens of millions of dollars in order for us to do that. Ten of millions of

dollars. What else did we do? This year we brought in up-front, needs-based

grants. Over 7,000 students will be able to avail of that service. I had a call

this morning - no, I will not go into that part of it. Also, what does it do -

because I want to bring that up as I go on through. Also, what I had to do -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. DENINE: That is okay, I get a little bit ahead of myself. I just want

to bring it all into perspective, Mr. Speaker, because I do not want anyone to

lose tract of this great announcement. This has to be done.

Mr. Speaker, what we did is we took the debt reduction and we put it into

up-front grants. What did that do? We did not put out another form, another

application, another anything else to fill out. What we did was on the student

loan application, when the student in post-secondary cultural studies - what

will that do? They fill it out and then if they qualify - there is $140 on a

weekly basis that they would need for living. The first $70 of that would be a

loan, anything after that would be an up-front grant that will not have to be

repaid back. Now, that is significant.

I had a question this morning - this is what I wanted to get to. I had a

question this morning on: How does a student apply for that? A parent in my

constituency asked me that. I said, all they have to do is fill out that form

and that will be your application for the grant. Depending on what you qualify

for, as far as loans and grants, then that will be determined by your needs. She

was delighted with that. Also, what she was delighted with was because we

increased the threshold of the contribution for parents. That is significant. A

family making $60,000, nothing, absolutely nothing that they would have to put

in towards their child's education. When you go up to $85,000 it increased, I

think, something like $650.

Mr. Speaker, that is significant, because what it does is provide the parents

who are not making a lot of money, that they do not have to contribute a

significant amount of those earnings towards their child's education. It makes

post-secondary education open to our students in the Province of Newfoundland

and Labrador. When we look at it, what do we need to do when we are building up

the economic base in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador? One of the first

criteria which we look at is a good educated society. This is what this

government is doing, making sure that post-secondary is accessible to all the

students who wish to avail of that; whether it be university, CONA or private

colleges, whichever they see fit. Whichever their niche is, we want them to

pursue that to help grow this Province so we can grow this Province with them.

Mr. Speaker, I want to go back to one thing that the hon. Member for L'Anse

au Clair mentioned. She mentioned that there was no increase in social

assistance in the Budget. Last year the former Minister of HRLE announced a 5

per cent increase in social assistance; 5 per cent. Also, it is indexed over the

next couple of years. So, to say we did not put anything in it, is not right.

There was money put into it and those social assistance recipients will receive

more money. Now, is it enough? I would say no, but we have to take one step at a

time and we need to get there one step at a time. We just cannot take this

mighty leap and all of a sudden be there. We are taking strategic steps to make

sure that there is more money in the pockets of Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to go on about this non-confidence motion because I

am not sure if this is - this is just what the Opposition had to do. This is

what they had to do, I guess, to justify their existence, to be honest with you,

because that is what an Opposition will do. They are the ones who have to put us

- and that is their job, and rightly so. Each and every one of them over there

can find things that are not included in this Budget. Now they have to dig hard

and deep to find them, but they will find them, because that is their job to be

negative. Now I heard -

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MR. DENINE: The hon. Member for L'Anse au Clair said constructive, and

I am not sure if that is synonymous with what I was talking about.

Mr. Speaker, when I listened to all the hon. members across the House who

contributed to the debate in this House on the Budget, there were not very many

positive things. Although, I was a bit optimistic, prior to the non-confidence

motion I was convinced that this would probably be the first Budget that we

passed unanimously in this House, in the history of Newfoundland and Labrador. I

am a little bit wary about that now because a few of them over there have been

shaking their heads and they are saying, no, no, no, it will not go unanimous.

But, I thought for one minute that it would.

Now, Mr. Speaker, when we know there are things that are not going to be in

the Budget, there are small things that are there that, over time, they will

come. Over time, it will come. It will come in the form of the Budget Speech of

next year.

Here are some of the things that are in the Budget that I cannot see anyone

not supporting it. I am going to go down through them. They cannot support

personal income tax rates decreased from 10.57 per cent to 8.7 per cent. Right?

The income tax, cannot support that. I am not sure.

Low income tax reduction will be adjusted from $12,000 to $13,000 with

individuals and $19,000 to $21,000 for families. No income tax, cannot support

that.

Seniors' benefit for married seniors increases as a result of the

adjustments to the income tax threshold range, a total value measure of $4.2

million for seniors. Can they support that?

Twenty-five million dollars to attract new businesses to the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador in strategic investments, business ventures, et

cetera, infrastructure for the purpose of attracting business to our Province.

Cannot support that.

More than $160 million invested in roads, including $66.5 million for

Provincial Roads Improvement Program, $17 million for construction of Phase III

of the Trans-Labrador Highway. Cannot support that.

Fifteen million dollars for replacement vessels for our ferry transportation

in the Province. Cannot support that.

Fifty point four million dollars as the Province's contribution under

various municipal capital works commitments. Cannot support that.

Two million dollars allocated to help equalize the debt of towns seeking to

work co-operatively at the municipal level, to help them out with debt

reduction. Cannot support that.

Over $16 million to advance the aquaculture sector. Cannot support that.

Minimum wage increased by $1 in two increments: October 1 and April 1, 2008.

Cannot support that.

Investment of $140,000 to update the provincial Strategic Literacy Plan.

Cannot support that.

Further investment of $41 million in the K-12 system. Cannot support that.

An increase of $14.8 million for new school construction, maintenance,

repairs. What did we do with maintenance repairs, Mr. Speaker? What did we do?

When the previous Administration was there, they reduced the amount of money per

square foot that school boards would get for their maintenance programs. We

increased it to ninety-two cents. The previous Administration had it at

fifty-five cents. To quote the CEO of one of the districts: Now we are able to

do preventive maintenance, something that we have not done before. Now we are

able to do that. Cannot support that.

Five point two million dollars to retain 137 teaching positions. Not going to

support that because, if they support it, they will vote for this Budget. Also,

thirteen positions that will be here for urban growth, around the urban areas of

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Eleven million dollars for the math program. Cannot support that.

Twelve point eight million dollars for free core textbooks for students in

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Can they support that?

An additional $28.9 million for poverty reduction. The hon. Member for L'Anse

au Clair says, well, we are doing a little bit. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, we are

doing a heck of a lot for poverty reduction, and as a member of this government

I am very proud of what we have done.

Eight million dollars to increase the board and lodging supplement for adults

with disabilities who reside with their own families. I was at the Newfoundland

and Labrador Association of Community Living and they applauded this government

for this initiative.

One point eight million dollars to promote greater labour market

participation of persons with disabilities.

Five hundred and eighty-five thousand dollars to support women vulnerable to

poverty to in