PDF Version (Day)

PDF Version (Night)

November 2, 2021

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. L No. 31

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

SPEAKER (Bennett):

Order, please!

Admit

strangers.

Statements by

Members

Today we

will hear statements by the hon. Members for the Districts of Burin - Grand

Bank, St. George's - Humber, Mount Pearl North, Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans,

Lake Melville and Carbonear - Trinity - Bay de Verde, with leave.

The hon.

the Member for Burin - Grand Bank.

P. PIKE:

Thank you, Speaker.

The 2021

Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador Conference and Trade Show will take

place this week in Corner Brook from November 3 to the 6. This is the first time

the MNL membership has gathered in person since 2019. Three hundred in-person

participants will attend the event with 32 councils accessing the event

virtually. Over 100 municipalities in total are represented.

The

theme of the conference this year is: It starts with us. This theme certainly

reflects the importance of municipalities in our province. This level of

government is closest to the people they represent in our communities.

The

conference agenda is full of exciting sessions and keynotes. Conference

discussion will feature topics on climate change, municipal event management and

a new provincial program, as Municipalities will launch its core municipal

training program with the College of the North Atlantic.

I would

like to join all Members in this House to congratulate our municipal leaders and

to wish them well at conference 2021.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

George's - Humber.

S. REID:

Thank you, Speaker.

Today I

would like to highlight the efforts of people to establish the My Dear Minnie

Museum in the Codroy Valley. Minnie White, the province's first lady of the

accordion, was born in St. Alban's, but moved to the Codroy Valley where she met

and married Richard White. They lived and raised their family in Tompkins. After

her family was raised, she returned to playing music and received many awards

before passing away in 2001.

After

much consideration, the family decided to turn her home into a museum on their

own. The museum is not just about Minnie White, but also reflects the heritage

and culture of the Codroy Valley and life in rural areas of the province.

The

museum opened in July of this year for the summer months and by appointment in

the off-season. Speaker, the museum is located one kilometre off the Trans

Canada Highway on Route 407, approximately 25 kilometres east of Port aux

Basques.

I ask

all hon. Members to join me in recognizing the efforts of the White family and

celebrating the life of Minnie White, our first lady of the accordion.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

L. STOYLES:

Thank you, Speaker.

I rise

today in this hon. House to recognize two wonderful volunteers in my district:

Con and Sandra Milmore, who have gone above and beyond to help in our community.

They are everywhere, serving food to the homeless and collecting food and

donations for the needy.

They

both volunteer with groups such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul food bank

at St. Peter's Parish and Mary Queen of the Wold Parish. They are both members

of the Knights of Columbus and Ladies Auxiliary. Con and Sandra give of their

time and talents freely to the community so that people in need will have a

better quality of life.

Con and

Sandra have both received numerous awards and acknowledgements for their

volunteerism but, true to the volunteer spirit, recognition is not why they do

what they do. They do it because they like helping people.

I ask

all Members to join me in offering congratulations to Con and Sandra Milmore for

their community involvement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Grand

Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

C. TIBBS:

Thank you, Speaker.

Ed Fewer

of Grand Falls-Windsor has been a legion member for 22 years, the president for

the last five years and a constant member of executive.

attended the Royal Canadian Legion's youth Pilgrimage of Remembrance to

Beaumont-Hamel. It had such a profound impact on him that he kept going back to

try and understand the enormity of the loss of life. It's been a personal

pilgrimage every year since that time for Ed.

Mr.

Fewer travels to France and Belgium each year to visit the First World War

battlefields and the Second World War battlefields. He places a Newfoundland and

Labrador flag on all the Newfoundland and Labrador Regiment graves and Canadian

flags for the Canadian fallen each and every year.

Mr.

Fewer's great-uncle, Lawrence Joseph Fewer, was killed on July 1, 1916. He died

on the battlefield of Beaumont-Hamel. Mr. Fewer just returned once again from

France and will be travelling back to France this week to observe Remembrance

ceremonies overseas.

Please

join me as we thank Ed Fewer for his dedication to our fallen loved ones, in

addition to all those who have served and serve today.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Lake

Melville.

P. TRIMPER:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

House of Assembly provides an opportunity to recognize excellence in sports,

whether at a community, provincial or even national level. Today, I'm honoured

to introduce you to an athlete of international calibre from the District of

Lake Melville: Mr. T. J. Gear.

T. J. is

from Happy Valley-Goose Bay, where he and his wife, Maria, own and operate

Gear's Gains, a professional fitness centre that has attracted great attention.

T. J. uses his own knowledge of training and fitness to create a following that

competes in various local and regional powerlifting competitions. Collectively,

hundreds of local residents are attaining their own fitness and training goals.

Last weekend, a team of eight members of Gear's Gains travelled to the Eastern

Canadian regionals in Cape Breton where each medalled and two set provincial

records.

T. J.

leads by example. In August, he placed second at the Pan-American Powerlifting

Championships in Florida. After this impressive performance, he was invited to

be part of Canada's national team. I am pleased to advise that T. J. recently

placed sixth at the classic world powerlifting championships in Sweden.

I would

like all Members of this Legislature to congratulate T. J. Gear for his

community leadership and accomplishments on the international stage.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Carbonear - Trinity - Bay de Verde, with leave.

AN HON. MEMBER:

Leave.

SPEAKER:

Leave is granted.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

It is a

pleasure to rise in this hon. House today to wish a happy 100th birthday to Mr.

John Pinhorn.

Mr.

Pinhorn was born in 1921 and is the youngest of seven children. He is one of the

only few surviving veterans of World War II. Mr. Pinhorn served with the 166

Royal Artillery Regiment in Britain, North Africa and Italy, and fought in the

Battle of Monte Cassino.

After

the War, Mr. Pinhorn returned home to Winterton, Newfoundland, where he married

his wife, Elizabeth Downey. They had two sons, Alex and Donald. Mr. Pinhorn made

his living largely as a fisherman, but was also a skilled carpenter who built

many homes in the area and contributed his skills to the construction of the

local school more than four decades ago. Mr. Pinhorn currently resides in the

Private Josiah Squibb Memorial Pavilion in Carbonear.

As we

approach Remembrance Day, it is important to honour those who served and

continue to serve, like Mr. Pinhorn, and thank them for their service.

I ask

all hon. Members to join me in wishing Mr. John Pinhorn a very happy 100th

birthday.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister

Responsible for Indigenous Affairs and Reconciliation, and Labrador Affairs.

L. DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I would

like to tell you about a visual artist whose work is delivering a powerful

message.

Bronson

Jacque is Inuit and a proud son of Labrador who hails from Postville on the

North Coast. He has been giving expression through his art for more than 10

years, but his most recent creation may just be his most powerful.

The

Nunatsiavut artist was commissioned by the Aboriginal Women's Association of

Prince Edward Island to paint a commemorative group portrait. The mural depicts

10 family members and friends of missing and murdered Indigenous women and

girls. Each subject in the portrait is holding an object that connects them to a

missing loved one.

The

mural is more than artwork. It tells a human story that reminds us that family

members who have suffered personal loss never truly escape the mourning. Before

taking paintbrush in hand, Bronson studied photos of the women he was painting

and he listened to their heartfelt stories over a period, Speaker, of several

months. He calls it the most important project he has worked on to date.

Speaker,

the mural has had a profound effect on many people who have admired the

painting. Those who have viewed the portrait have reflected on the love, the

fight for justice, the culture and the strength. Each of the lives lost had

value and meaning. We must resolve ourselves to make this cause for change.

Please

join me in congratulating Bronson Jacque of Postville for helping us increase

our understanding of the resilience of Indigenous women and the power of

healing.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker, and I

thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement.

Speaker,

I join with the minister in congratulating visual artist, Bronson Jacque, of

Labrador, a local artist delivering powerful works of art.

Bronson's latest commission is particularly impactful: A commemorative portrait

depicting family members and friends of missing and murdered Indigenous women

and girls. Each portrait subject has an object that represents a missing loved

one to emphasize they are not just statistics; they are mothers, daughters,

aunts, cousins, friends and family.

Bronson's exhibition is scheduled to be featured at the Confederation Centre of

Arts in PEI until the new year. I encourage everyone that has the opportunity to

see this heartfelt work and to remember the missing and murdered Indigenous

women and girls that it is meant to commemorate.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker, and I

thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement.

I would

like to congratulate Bronson on the achievement and to thank him for helping

share the story of those women and their families. Hearing stories from the

Indigenous communities about their culture and their struggle is key towards the

path of reconciliation.

We can

do better as a province to address the bias towards colonialism in our society.

Just outside this Chamber hangs a mural filled with colonialist symbols; outside

this building we proudly display a statute of Corte-Real, a propagandist gift

from Europe.

We must

challenge our colonial mindset and the ideas where we can. Art is one of the

most powerful ways we can do that.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

Oral

Questions.

Oral Questions

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

cyberattack affecting the health care system of the province is deeply

concerning to everyone in Newfoundland and Labrador. The health care workers of

our province are under enormous stress, and we in the Official Opposition wish

to thank them for their efforts to help keep health care moving.

I ask

the government: Have you asked the prime minister or other federal counterparts

for assistance for our health care system, given the enormous impact this is

having on this province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Speaker, for the

question. I thank the Member opposite.

We've

assembled the required expertise in operational, technical communications as

needed. As the Minister of Health and Community Services said yesterday, we've

also alerted the authorities in this matter, Mr. Speaker.

I will

say we certainly have great empathy and understand the pressure that this is

putting on families, on patients and on the health care system. We certainly

appreciate, as I said yesterday, the hard work of not only the Department of

Health, but the regional health authorities.

I will

say our main objective right now is to restore services. That's what we're

working toward. We will get through this, Speaker, but it is certainly taxing on

everyone involved.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Speaker, cancer treatments

have ground to a halt as a result of the cyberattack. Non-emergency appointments

have been cancelled in the thousands. We sympathize with the health care workers

who now have to operate a paper-based system.

Can the

government give any assurances regarding when non-emergency procedures and

appointments will resume in our health care system?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker.

I think

it is important to recognize the difficulties it's generated for patients and

families, and also to thank the staff for their perseverance once again under

yet another stressor.

Each

clinic appointment will be scrutinized by the care provider who requests it or

who has it, and will be prioritized in terms of when they are contacted. If you

have an appointment, you will be contacted about getting that rescheduled.

For the

non-urgent and the elective or planned appointments, those will likely take a

lower priority than those that are urgent because it will be done on clinical

need. For those people whose condition changes, I would refer them back to their

primary care provider for reassessment, Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

As we

saw with COVID, even urgent interventions are being pushed down the road. People

need to know that they can still access health care immediately to deal with

those urgent situations.

This

situation has been known since Saturday, four days ago. The people of the

province need to know when non-emergency care will resume in our province. The

minister referenced some health authorities being less affected than others at

this moment.

I ask

the government: Is there any capacity to send patients from one health authority

to another in order to maintain some level of service?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

The

provincial nature of some of our programs means that they are significantly

impacted. We have certainly worked very hard to try and identify those

individuals and, as I've said, to focus on contacting those who require urgent

treatment.

Emergency departments are open, emergency health care is available and

ambulances can be called if needed. We are working hard to mitigate the effects

of this failure, working towards remediation and rebuilding.

It would

be premature at the moment for me to give a timeline, as that would be purely

speculative. But we are discussing this on a regular basis with our managed

service provider in the Centre for Health Information, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

people of this province need to know that everything is being done to ensure

that this is a minimal interruption. As we know now, it's becoming another part

of the crisis we face in health care.

Experts

from around the country have given their analysis of the situation. One who

spoke on CBC last evening stated: If the primary records and backup records are

both compromised in this attack, it would be the worst-case scenario.

I ask

the government: Do you agree? Is this the worst-case scenario our health care

system is facing?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker.

As soon

as we became aware of this possible attack, we engaged the appropriate

authorities. We have brought in significant outside expertise. There is an

investigation ongoing. In terms of that, I think because of that it would be

inappropriate for me to comment further.

We are,

however, working, literally, round the clock to remediate the problems of access

to health care. If you are acutely unwell emergency care, ambulance services and

primary care are available. Everything we can do to minimize delays and advance

treatment, we are currently doing.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We're

hearing, all Members of this side of the House, of the hundreds of individuals

who have gone to emergency and, unfortunately, the overburden on the staff there

has gotten to a point where people walk out with serious injuries because it's

not capable of being able to handle the situation at this point. We need better

interventions.

The RCMP

have launched an investigation into the cyberattack yesterday. The minister

could not confirm whether a cyberattack had taken place.

I ask

the minister: Can you confirm today the nature of the attack that we are dealing

with and is it a ransomware attack?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

I will

say again that we have assembled all the expertise that we require during this

unfortunate situation, all the security experts, all the operational, technical

and communications, as I've indicated. Our main objective here is to really

ensure that we restore services as quickly as possible.

I can

appreciate how difficult this is for patients. I can appreciate how difficult it

is on our health care system, but our primary goal right now is working to

restore services. All the expertise that is required has been assembled and

we're working through this situation.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

Can the

Minister of Finance confirm whether a ransom has been demanded of government in

this situation?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you very much.

As I

said and I'll repeat myself, we have assembled all the expertise that is

required from an operational, from a technical, from a communications

perspective. We are working through this issue.

Again, I

will say that the primary goal here is to restore services as quickly as

possible and that's what we're focused on. We understand the impact on our

health care system, we understand the impact on patients, Speaker, and we are

primarily focused on doing just that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

people of this province need and want to know exactly what's happening. Why

we're hiding behind not sharing information makes no sense here. Everybody wants

to know what's happening and be part of the solution here. We need to be open

and transparent with the people of this province. People are fearful and we want

to diminish that fear by telling people exactly what's happening out here so

they can get back to having access to health care.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL:

Will the government declare a

provincial state of emergency?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

I will

say again that we have assembled the expertise that we require. We have

assembled the teams of people that need to assist during this particular

situation on the operational side of things and on the technical side of things.

We've alerted the authorities. Now our focus is really to restore services.

So I'll

say to the Member opposite yet again, please ensure that when we're talking

about this situation that our focus is on the patients, is on restoring service,

is on making sure that we are focused on the right things, at the right moment

and we listen to our expertise.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

couldn't agree more with the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board. That's why we're saying a state of emergency would ensure that all of us

in this House focus, and all of our energies are focused, on getting our health

care system back up and running for the people of this province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL:

Speaker, during the COVID-19

outbreak in February, the Premier took to the airwaves for daily updates and

repeatedly stated the people of the province need to know there is a Premier

here to work in crisis. Today, cancer care has been stopped in its tracks;

diagnostic work for chronic illnesses has slowed to a standstill. The health

care system in Newfoundland and Labrador is ground to a halt.

I ask

the Premier: Will you cut your conference short and come back to deal with the

crisis we have in Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you very much, Speaker,

and I thank the Member opposite for the question.

The

Premier has been fully engaged, fully informed. He has a very strong and

competent team here in St. John's. He is engaged in this very issue, as are the

experts that are required to assist us to move through this particular challenge

that we're having.

Speaker,

I'll say it again. We're all focused on ensuring that we restore services as

quickly as possible. I think you've heard, operationally, from the Minister of

Health and Community Services, and that's what we're doing.

We have

faced these type of situations most recently with Snowmageddon and with COVID-19

and the health care authorities are working through the problems.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Yesterday, we spoke with members of the public who were turned away at the

cancer care clinic here in St. John's. We know because of a return to a

paper-based system things are moving slowly. We know that; we realize that. But

cancer does not wait.

I ask

the minister: What is being done to ensure a continuity of treatment and

diagnostic work for those in need?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker.

It's a

very important question for those people who are trying to navigate their cancer

journey.

From our

point of view, each appointment that has been deferred will be examined by the

relevant clinician and a decision made as to how urgently to bring these folks

back once our system starts to commence more normal operations.

Because

of the challenge of our systems being so integrated with electronic

communication and prescribing through a provincial program based out of Eastern

Health, we are working with the health authorities to find ways round those

communication blocks.

If you

have an appointment, you will be contacted about a different time and date to

attend.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Family

doctors and primary care providers are one of the keys to a functioning health

care system. Right now, the Medical Association estimates that close to 100,000

people are without a family physician. Oftentimes, the family physician is the

point of contact for a patient accessing the health care system.

I ask

the minister: How will people without a family doctor or primary care provider

be contacted through this situation to ensure they don't fall through the

cracks?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

If they

have an appointment, there will be a contact point available to staff at the

facility. Private offices are not affected by this directly. This is an issue

relating to regional health authority infrastructure and IT serviced and

provided by Bell among others and the Centre for Health Information.

From our

point of view, we are aware of the challenges of patients without primary care

providers and that's why a couple of weeks ago we announced, as an

interim-bridging measure, a package of about $30 million to improve the

situation in the short- and medium-term. We are in discussions with the NLMA on

primary care and recruitment, Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

We've

already heard today in a couple of responses how they understand the impact on

staff and they recognize the contribution of staff.

In a CBC

story last week, the president of the Nurses' Union said the Janeway emergency

room is in a dire situation with staff being forced to work 24-hour shifts,

mandated overtime and 36, 16-hour shifts since August. To quote the president of

the Nurses' Union: “When our members are tired, when they're mentally exhausted,

that equates to risks for patients and risks for our members.”

Now, the

fallout from this cyberattack has fallen on their laps. I ask the minister: What

are you going to do to help our overworked nurses through this crisis?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

Again,

another equally important question. The staff of our regional health authorities

and nurses and others have stepped up and continue to persevere through what is

a unique-in-our-experience situation.

In terms

of our relationship with the Registered Nurses' Union, they are cordial and

effective, and we have multiple channels with Ms. Coffey and her team, working

on things such as workplace burnout, in terms of working on scheduling and these

kinds of things. Obviously, these will be a little difficult to continue with

under our current situation, but the channels are open and the doors are open,

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Speaker, there's a human toll

to this crisis on top of everything else. Paper is being physically run around

hospitals. Data entry means more delays for patients, which in turn adds stress

and anxiety to our health care workers.

I ask

the minister: What supports are being offered to our health care workers dealing

with increased stress and anxiety now and in the aftermath of this situation?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker.

Indeed,

I think it would be fair to say that with the efficiencies, automation and

digitization of the health care system that we've seen over my lifetime and the

last 20 years, we've really been pushed back about 30 or 40 years with this

incident.

In terms

of support for emotional and physiological well-being of staff, we actually have

a very robust system through Employee and Family Assistance through the regional

health authorities, we have DoorWays for those people who feel they need more

and we also have a very good suite of online apps that will help with things

like mindfulness, relaxation and stress reduction, Speaker.

Again,

happy to talk to the RNU to see if there are any other areas they would like us

to explore.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Speaker, yesterday I asked

the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL if any external security

audits have been conducted for government and IT infrastructure since she became

minister; however, an answer was not provided to this very important question.

Instead the minister highlighted a recent Member's statement about cybersecurity

month.

I ask

the minister: When was the external audit conducted?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In terms

of the security of the core government IT, we have a range of providers and

tactics that we put in place to make sure that our systems and the data of the

people of the province is as secure as it can be. Cybersecurity is an ongoing

threat; everyone must remain diligent.

At the

moment, in terms of the issue with Bell, NLCHI and the provincial government

systems, there's nothing out of the ordinary for us to report.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Again, the question was: When was the last external audit conducted?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

In terms

of the government IT and our cybersecurity, we have a range tools and providers

in place to help protect our systems and the data of the people of the province,

which we take very seriously. There is a range of things that we're doing; it's

an ongoing effort. Everyone needs to remain vigilant, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Again, I ask the minister:

When was the audit conducted?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In terms

of the core government IT's cybersecurity, we have a robust program in place. We

have vendors; we have tools. It's a constantly changing landscape, Mr. Speaker,

and our teams try our best to keep up. Cybersecurity is an ongoing threat; we

get thousands of intrusion attempts a month that are automated intrusion

attempts and cybersecurity is everyone's responsibility, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

I guess from the response there hasn't been one done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Speaker, in June 2020, a

warning was sent to the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security regarding increased

risk of data breaches and attacks by hackers against health care systems across

the country.

I ask

the minister: What has your department done to increase security as a result of

this warning?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So we

have a range of tools and providers in place to help ensure our systems are

secure against cybersecurity attacks. It would be irresponsible of me, Mr.

Speaker, to divulge certain things to this House and to the general public in

terms of our cybersecurity efforts.

We are

protecting the data and systems of the people of the province and we have a

range of tools in place to do that. We take that responsibility very seriously,

Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Well, I guess the answer to

the first one was, is it yes or no or was it done, and we didn't get an answer.

And we didn't get an answer on this one. So I don't know when we're going to get

answers and the people of the province need to know when this is going to be

done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Speaker, a disturbing detail in this cyberattack is the breach of the backup

data for the health care system. The backup data should be stored separately,

totally disconnected from the primary database.

I ask

the minister: Is the primary and backup health care data stored separately in

this province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

addition to our robust cybersecurity plans, we also have extensive backup

programs for all of our systems. They're different, obviously, for cloud systems

versus on-prem systems. We have backup teams and specialists.

Again,

in terms of the cybersecurity and the risk to our backups and our core systems,

we have a range of providers and systems in place to help us mitigate those

risks that are very real, Mr. Speaker. We get thousands of intrusion attempts a

month and we are doing our best to protect the systems and data of the people of

the province.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

In 2015, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador published an independent

security report review relating to two incidents that occurred in previous

years. The report outlined recommendations to the government in NL based on

these incidents.

I ask

the minister: Were these recommendations implemented?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

In terms

of our cybersecurity and our backups and everything to do with our IT systems,

in particular cybersecurity, given the most recent threat, we take that

responsibility very seriously. We have a range of vendors and programs in place

to help us manage that.

Everyone

has to be vigilant, Mr. Speaker. I recommend everyone not click on links or open

attachments from outside sources. Double-check that the sender of an email is

the one that you think it is. I would ask also, Mr. Speaker, not to put your

password in websites that are not your main government IT websites and to be

extra vigilant in your day-to-day activities.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thanks, Speaker.

During

COVID, we led the country in everything that we done. Why can't we lead the

country in cyberattacks? Why can't we protect our province from that? Why can't

we lead it?

Speaker,

our own Verafin is an international leader in cybersecurity, specializing in

protecting banks from these kinds of attacks.

I ask

the minister: Has the government reached out to Verafin for their expertise in

this situation?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board has indicated, we have

engaged all of the appropriate national experts to help us with this current

issue, in terms of NLCHI and the Bell situation. In terms of our cybersecurity,

we have a robust suite of products and services and staff on hand to protect the

information and systems of the people of the province, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Speaker, yesterday the

Minister of Finance said “we've invested a ton of money, Mr. Speaker, in

cybersecurity and we're going to continue to do so.”

Can the

minister provide details of how much has been spent for cybersecurity in the

past five years?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So in

terms of our cybersecurity investment, there is a range of things that we invest

in. Every program and service that we deliver, we have to look at from a

cybersecurity lens. It is not just one thing, we have many things and everything

is a cybersecurity measure. Everything from awareness and education, training of

our public service employees but also, yes, specific targeted cybersecurity

systems.

I'm not

comfortable giving additional information at this time, Mr. Speaker, but

cybersecurity of the data and systems of the people of the province is extremely

important to this government.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Speaker, I asked how much

money has been spent in the last five years and if you could provide details on

how the money was spent. I don't think that's too much to ask.

Speaker,

how much has been spent on protecting the IT infrastructure from cybersecurity

threats in the health system?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In terms

of core government's cybersecurity spending, everything, every system, every

initiative that we do, in terms of resident facing and internally facing, in

terms of our IT landscape, Mr. Speaker, we look at from a cybersecurity lens. We

do privacy assessments, and all that includes a cybersecurity lens, which is

extremely important.

All of

our systems are potentially vulnerable. We have to be vigilant in all areas, in

all aspects. These intrusion attempts are very sophisticated. We get thousands a

month. Everyone has to be diligent at all levels of government.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Mr. Speaker, the answers

given by the minister to the last seven or eight questions does not provide any

confidence to anyone in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador that she has

control of what's going on right now in our province and that is scary.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

T. WAKEHAM:

I ask the minister: Are there

any concerns over the payroll of health care workers arising from the

cyberattack?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Speaker, I think the question

was quite offensive to the minister in that she has provided the information to

the Members opposite. I think everyone can appreciate that we have to be careful

in what is being said because we are in a situation where we have engaged

expertise in the operational, technical, the communications area around this

particular challenge that we're now having.

We're

very focused, as I've said, –

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible) paycheque?

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

S. COADY:

I beg your pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER:

It's a yes-or-no answer.

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

S. COADY:

Do you want me to answer the

question is the question? I'm answering what they've asked.

We are

focused on this side of the House on restoring services, not on politics.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker,

some residents of Labrador –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Member for Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Some

residents of Labrador have been turned away and sent back to Labrador due to the

cyberattack on our health information system.

I ask

the minister: Will he lift the penalties on MTAP for multiple submissions in one

year for these Labradorians that must rebook?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker.

I'm

aware that Eastern Health, in particular, have looked at those people who have

travelled from Labrador for tests, and also, actually, from Saint-Pierre et

Miquelon, with whom we have a health care relationship, and made arrangements to

accommodate them wherever possible.

Certainly, those people who could not be accommodated because the tests could

not go ahead safely, if there are concerns about their expenses, given the

unique nature of this situation, I would be happy to look at that from a

sympathetic point of view.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

This

holdup of our health care system, on top of other factors that are ongoing in

our health care system, I ask the minister: Will he call upon other provinces to

help fulfill our impending health care backlog?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

issue of backlogs and delays I think is as yet unquantified. We don't have a

clear timeline for the rebuild and restoration of services. That is likely,

quite frankly, to be phased in and it would not surprise the experts if there

were still some difficulties with that process.

Once the

magnitude of the situation can be assessed in a realistic way, it will be up to

the regional health authorities to come forward with some recommendations as to

how we can help them help those people who were delayed, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Will the

minister ask our neighbour Quebec if he can divert Labradorians of urgent and

semi-urgent situations to Quebec like we have done in the past?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker.

I am

open to any practical suggestion. The issue of those operational things I would

leave well and truly to the regional health authorities because they have that

expertise, that experience, and I would be happy to discuss any recommendations

that they might bring forward.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Lake

Melville.

P. TRIMPER:

Thank you, Speaker.

Last

week, I tabled a private Member's resolution calling on government to develop a

transition plan to complete our active offshore oil fields and reach a climate

crisis agreement with Ottawa that would recognize the value for society to leave

other commercially viable prospects such as the Bay du Nord field undeveloped as

the world moves away moves from hydrocarbons.

I'm

asking whether government will take a serious look at this option and direction.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Certainly happy to answer this question, which I do think is timely given what's

going on in the world and given where our Premier is right now and all the

leaders of the world debating climate change and the transition that's going on

in the energy sector.

What I

can say is while we look at, very seriously, the reduction of emissions, I do

think it is responsible that we look at the resource that we have, that is

still, indeed, in effect that we've been continually working on the lowering of

emissions as it relates to our oil and gas sector.

I'll

point out that it was just a couple of years ago in this House that there was a

unanimous vote on getting to net zero in this province by 2050. We continue to

take actions to get us there, including using our oil and gas, but, at this

time, we continue to work with them for all the production and for the value

that they are bringing to this province.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Lake

Melville.

P. TRIMPER:

I, for one, am very pleased

to see that the Premier is with other leaders around the world tackling the

climate crisis at COP26. With the average temperature projected to rise six

degrees in just 29 years in Happy Valley-Goose Bay and 7.3 degrees in Nain where

it will become warmer than here in St. John's, for example, will our province

sign on to the Beyond Oil & Gas Alliance being proposed by Denmark in Scotland?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'll

come back to the declaration that the prime minister made yesterday, which I

would point out where there were three, I guess, prongs to it: One being

supporting the global phase out of coal; number two, helping to develop the

country's transition to clean fuel alternatives; and, thirdly, to reduce

pollution in the oil and gas sector.

Certainly, I've had a conversation with my federal counterpart yesterday prior

to his departure to Scotland. So we will continue to work on lowering emissions

in this province and lowering emissions in the sector. I would point out that

all the operators themselves are starting to take net-zero transition plans

themselves. I think we can have a transition that makes the best of our oil

resources as we have it and also looks at the fact that we have renewables that

will be coming on stream and helping our neighbours in this country.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Time for a quick question; no

preamble.

P. TRIMPER:

Very quick:

Does this government agree that the climate crisis is the single greatest

threat for future generations in our province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again,

it's hard for me to speak on behalf of the Premier and speak on behalf of

government. But what I would say is that when I read all the evidence and see

everything that's going on, it's hard to discount the fact that climate change

may be the greatest existential crisis we have faced in some time.

One stat

I read this morning from a gentleman who's called the living Darwin is that when

you see we've had more animals becoming extinct than there have been in the last

10-million years, it's hard to ignore that kind of talk. So I would say that,

yes, we take this extremely seriously.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period

has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling

of Documents.

Tabling of

Documents

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Speaker, pursuant to

section

26(5)(

a) of the Financial Administration

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

for fiscal years '22-'23 and '23-'24.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I give

notice that on tomorrow I will move the following, that notwithstanding Standing

Order 9, that this House shall not adjourn at 5 p.m. on Wednesday, November 3,

2021, but shall continue to sit to conduct business of government and if it does

not adjourn earlier, the Speaker shall adjourn the House at midnight.

SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

Answers

to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Answers to

Questions for which Notice has been Given

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

answer to a question raised by the Member for Conception Bay South yesterday, I

have some additional information. There was one unregulated family child care

home in CBS where there was an investigation that took place on October 6, 2021.

They had a large number of children, over and above what they should have had in

the operation, and they were directed to reduce it to four, as they were

unregulated, in order to continue to operate without being regulated under

legislation.

Follow-up was completed with all parents who had children registered with the

provider and we are confident that the provider has reduced the number to four

children. Speaker, we are not shutting down unregulated child care services but

when the department is made aware that an unregulated child care service

provider is operating with too many children, staff of the department

investigate.

If too

many children are confirmed to be registered with the service, the provider has

two options: either reduce the number of children or proceed to becoming

regulated via the family child care agency or through the regional office. Staff

continue to monitor the home for a period of time to ensure that the numbers

have been reduced.

Mr.

Speaker, our legislation is clear and we must maintain our legal

responsibilities.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Petitions.

Petitions

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

WHEREAS

there are many hopeful mothers and couples in this province dealing with

infertility issues and require medical assistance to conceive; and

WHEREAS

the cost associated with out-of-province fertility treatments, specifically in

vitro fertilization, is extremely cost prohibitive; and

WHEREAS

there are doctors in the province trained in in vitro fertilization and have the

desire to set up an in vitro fertilization clinic in the province; and

WHEREAS

the province is dealing with an aging population and serious population growth

challenges;

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

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

Newfoundland and Labrador to establish a fertility clinic within the province

providing full fertility services, including in vitro fertilization, for hopeful

mothers and families and, in the interim, provide financial assistance to access

out-of-province fertility treatment and services.

Speaker,

we presented this petition on numerous occasions. I'll just take a different

route this way in explaining it. This is an extremely time-sensitive issue for

many young women and couples in the province. As I said, doctors in this

province have submitted a proposal in 2018 to establish an IVF clinic in the

province – 2018.

The

Premier committed to establishing IVF services in the province nine months ago,

but has not reached out to these doctors. The Minister Responsible for Women and

Gender Equality has committed to a review, but has not reached out to these

doctors. The Minister of Health and Community Services three months ago promised

a travel package within weeks, but we're still waiting. This is from a minister

who – by his own words – underpromises.

This is

a critical need for our population, for the young women and families who want to

start a family and stay in this province. We don't need any more commitments, we

need action and we need it now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister

Responsible for Women and Gender Equality for a response.

P. PARSONS:

Thank you, Speaker.

Again,

we've heard about this issue now of course for the last two weeks in the House

of Assembly, and the information remains the same. However, I will say though,

Speaker, that I'm certainly not going to play politics with this issue. It is a

very sensitive issue for women, for couples and for families who are looking to

start and expand families.

The hon.

Member referenced the doctors. I have received correspondence to my department,

and I have indeed been in touch with a third party, actually, the Provincial

Advisory Council on the Status of Women. I have full intention to meet with

anyone who wants to call the department. I can say the same perhaps for my

colleague, the Minister of Health and Community Services.

The last

update that the Office of Women and Gender Equality received from the Department

of Health and Community Services is that currently there is a program being

developed. The details are being confirmed to help get funding into the hands of

the recipients who are eligible to get this treatment. The Member is right that

the Premier has committed to a review of these services. We will certainly do

everything within our reality, our fiscal framework, to help people who

certainly want to start and expand their families.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY:

Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker,

the residents of the Exploits District have a great concern from the result of

the 24-hour emergency service cut to the Dr. Hugh Twomey Health Care Centre in

Botwood. All residents feels that the 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. service does not

adequately and efficiently address the emergency requirements of the district

affecting both patients and residents to receive adequate care when needed.

We, the

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

Newfoundland and Labrador to restore the 24-hour emergency service at the Dr.

Hugh Twomey Health Care Centre immediately.

Speaker,

this is still an ongoing issue in the district. Again, it was promised in 2019;

still no opening of the 24-hour emergency service, as promised by the Premier in

2019. The minister has said he would look at it after the opening of the

long-term care unit. That's been done.

Mr.

Speaker, they keep making promises. Even in the 2021 election, again it was

announced that the 24-hour emergency service would open. They want their

promises. They want what was told to them. Not service by needs, they need the

24-hour emergency service.

So if

the minister had no intentions of opening the 24-hour emergency service, why did

he make those promises? Why were the election ploys and promises being made? If

it was just to win seats in the Exploits District, why do you play with peoples

lives this way? We want the 24-hour emergency service restored in Botwood.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Humber - Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE:

Thank you, Speaker.

present a petition again today on the opening of the Service NL building in

Corner Brook – Motor Registration.

These

four people that signed this are from Meadows. They travel probably about 40

minutes to get there. They find it very difficult to drive there and stand up

and hopefully that someone may cancel so that they can get in. There are a

number of petitions that I have presented from the people of Humber - Bay of

Islands, Corner Brook, Massey Drive area to have this service open.

We still

have not gotten any logical reasons why they closed the offices across the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We've seen people out in the rain –

seniors out in the rain, wind, lining up just hoping to get in. I had one person

who had to start arranging their doctor's appointments around Wednesday morning

to try to get their driver's licence and get a picture – just to get a picture.

If they never got it, they had to go do another test; 81 years old and had to go

get another test.

I will

keep presenting the petitions as long as the people of Humber - Bay of Islands,

Corner Brook, Massey Drive area continue to sign them. Again, we're supposed to

provide services to the people and not cause the stress and strain of wondering

if they can get their licence, if they can get their picture.

I asked

the minister on several occasions to explain logical reasons why they're being

closed. We always hear many concerns from the government that we have to change

things because of COVID and the answer you get from the minister is that it

worked well during COVID so we'll keep it going. It didn't work well during

COVID, a lot of people were stressed out and it is still not working well.

As we

see, it is not just now in Corner Brook. I know the Member for Mount Pearl -

Southlands presented petitions; he is getting a lot of calls. I know out in

Harbour Grace where people are lined up in the rain. If we call that service,

Speaker, I think we all got to look at ourselves in the mirror. If we're putting

seniors out in the rain in Harbour Grace and think that's suitable? I think we

have to start looking at ourselves and I think the government has to look at

themselves and say what are we doing with Service NL's Motor Registration?

I urge

the government again today to reconsider that decision. Let's put it back so we

can all applaud the government, put back services and stop putting people

through the stress and strain if they're going to get their driver's licence, if

they're going to get their picture taken in time so they can drive their

vehicles.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker,

I take this opportunity, pursuant to Standing Order 36, to move the adjournment

of the House for the purpose of discussing a matter of urgent public importance,

that being a current information technology disruption in our health care system

and the effect it's having on all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Before we adjourn, we'll give

an opportunity for quick comments.

The hon.

the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Speaker.

appreciate the Member opposite bringing forward this concern, but I will say to

the Speaker that I think this has happened in other jurisdictions. This is not

an unusual circumstance in the country or around the world that we have engaged

the correct expertise, as I indicated in the House of Assembly, operationally,

security experts, technological experts, communications experts. We are working

on ameliorating and restoring the services that we have.

Speaker,

we've alerted the authorities. This is certainly nothing political. I think it

is around the whole issue of getting ourselves back, making sure that we have

the services and restoring the services and moving forward.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I want

to comment briefly on this and just to reiterate what was said several times

during Question Period this afternoon, is that the RCMP has been contacted and

engaged in relation to the IT –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

J. HOGAN:

As I was saying, the RCMP has

been contacted by the Department of Health and Community Services in relation to

the IT systems outages that is affecting a number of health services in this

province.

We all

recognize on this side of the House the concerns and frustrations that members

of the public dealing with the health care system are feeling right now and we

do understand how important the health care system is to everyone in this

province.

But I do

want to stress that the RCMP has initiated a criminal investigation and they are

drawing upon specialized units within the RCMP that has expertise that none of

the Members in this House have in relation to cyberthreats.

We can't

provide any further information and we will not provide any further information

in relation to an ongoing RCMP investigation. That is very important to stress

in this House here today.

We also

do not want to create an unnecessary panic in this House. That is not what

leaders do. The Minister for Digital Government and Service NL answered multiple

questions today that were put forward to her and the purpose of this emergency

debate, in my opinion, will be to direct more questions towards a ministerial

department. That is now what emergency debates are for. That's not the purpose

of an emergency debate.

There

are also multiple privacy issues that are raised with regard to people's health

records that I don't want to, nor do any Members on this side of the House want

to address in this House here this afternoon in emergency debate.

Again,

the issues have been brought forward to the RCMP. I would suggest that the House

let the experts in this situation, criminal investigations and international

cyberthreats, deal with that because they are the experts. They are ongoing

investigations that I don't want to as Attorney General and Minister of Justice

and Public Safety want to debate here in public on the House of Assembly floor.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Speaker.

It seems

the debate has started. According to what I was told, we would present the

motion, you would advise me whether it's in order or not, then we would start a

debate. It seems like debate started a bit early.

I think

in fairness to the general public, whoever is watching this House, there is

something that needs to be clear. What the Minister of Justice just stated that

time was totally false for what we want. Not false in – he's bang on, on his

issue. That's not our issue. Our issue – and comments and chuckles across the

way do not help that people are in emergency rooms over in the Health Science

Centre waiting for 24 hours and their life on edge not knowing what to do. I

don't appreciate this being humorous because it's not.

We may

not be experts in the law enforcement but we're experts in dealing with people

and that's why we're elected. That's what we're here for. That's why we're in

this House, to represent the people who elected us.

They are

concerned about the health care and that's what we want this debate about. It's

about what's happening in our health systems, Mr. Speaker, the plan, how we deal

with this serious crisis. Nothing to do with the police investigation. Don't

muddy the waters. That's not what this is about.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

B. PETTEN:

This is an emergency debate

to get to the issue about how we deal with the people in Newfoundland and

Labrador that are in the emergency rooms worried and contacting us on a daily

basis. That's what we're here to debate, not the RCMP investigation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I think

if you reflect on the remarks of the Member opposite, the Member for CBS, what

he just finished in his concluding remarks. He said these are things on a daily

basis and we understand that there are issues around health care. He did say in

his remarks, Hansard will reflect, Mr.

Speaker, that these are issues of a daily basis. We agree that these are issues

of a daily basis.

I can

commit to the Members opposite that after we move through the present security

risk, the security situation we are in, this government, this side of the House

is more than open to a debate on The Way

Forward on health care.

We're

having that debate, Mr. Speaker, when you think about it. This has been

recognized through the health forum, through Dr. Parfrey and Sister Davis.

Again,

Mr. Speaker, I would ask you to reflect on the closing remarks of the Member for

CBS when he says this is on a daily basis.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

This House does stand

adjourned until we have an opportunity to review the adjournment for the urgent

matter.

Recess

SPEAKER:

Are the House Leaders ready?

Order,

please!

Before I

make my ruling, I would recognize that the Member for Conception Bay South has

provided me with a copy of the motion as per Standing Order 36, which I will

provide to the Clerk to be tabled.

In this

matter, I will be guided by a ruling by Speaker Hodder in the House on April 22,

2004, wherein he based his analysis on the urgency of debate by Members of the

House, rather than the urgency of the matter. This is confirmed in various

parliamentary texts, including

Parliamentary practice in British Columbia , fourth edition, page 86, where

it says: Urgency has consistently been interpreted as urgency of debate, not

urgency of the subject matter.

While I

recognize that this is an ongoing issue which is affecting many people in our

province, Members have other parliamentary opportunities to ask questions of

government regarding this matter. The matter of urgency of debate in this House

today, which would supersede all House proceedings, has not been established;

therefore, it's my ruling that this matter do not proceed under Standing Order

The hon.

the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Orders of the day, Mr. Speaker.

SPEAKER:

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I call

from the Order Paper, Motion 1.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Deputy Government House Leader that under Standing Order 11(1 ) this House not

adjourn at 5:30 p.m., Tuesday, November 2, 2021.

SPEAKER:

It is the pleasure of the

House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

The hon.

the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

I call

from the Order Paper, second reading of Bill 36.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader that Bill 36

An Act Respecting

The Office Of The Auditor General And The Auditing Of The Public Accounts Of The

Province be now read a second time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the Bill 36,

An Act Respecting The Office Of The Auditor General And The

Auditing Of The Public Accounts Of The Province be now read a second time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill, “An Act Respecting The Office Of The Auditor General

And The Auditing Of The Public Accounts Of The Province.” (Bill 36)

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

It's

important that the Auditor General's office in this province have the means and

tools necessary to carry out the important work on behalf of the people of the

province. I am pleased today to have the opportunity to speak to and propose

Bill 36, the amendments to the Auditor

General Act, 2021.

With the

exception of some minor amendments, Speaker, the

Auditor General Act has not been updated since 1991. Thirty years

have passed and changes are needed to modernize the legislation and ensure that

the Auditor General has the necessary access to information to enable oversight,

accountability and governance in the public sector through auditing.

The bill

drafted aims to strengthen the Office of the Auditor General as it continues to

conduct performance audits, provide independent oversight and ensure the public

dollars and other resources are being used in the most effective way possible.

Speaker,

the proposed bill will modernize the act, align the province's legislation with

other jurisdictions in Canada, increase access to information and enhance the

scope of the Auditor General. These changes are being put forward after

considerable conversations and meetings with the Office of the Auditor General

who was supportive of the legislation being introduced here in for second

reading.

Currently the Auditor General is responsible for audits, financial statements

and accounts of the province and has the authority to make any examinations that

are necessary to complete that work.

practise, he or she also conducts performance audits which go beyond the scope

of financial affairs. Performance audits review the wider issues of an

organization or program and whether it's achieving the objective goals and

economic efficiency. They are sometimes often referred to as value-for-money

audits because they can advise whether there is value received for the money

that's being spent. Language in the act is updated to reflect this practice.

Speaker,

the Auditor General can also undertake a special assignment request by the

Lieutenant-Governor in Council, the House of Assembly or the Public Accounts

Committee. This can be a matter related to financial affairs, to public property

or to a person or organization who has received financial aid.

This

power remains in the new act. Notably, the Auditor General will also now be able

to audit, as necessary, persons and organizations that have received government

funding. The ability to audit persons including corporations and organizations

in receipt of government funding will be on a go-forward basis from the

commencement of this

section of this legislation. This will not apply

retroactively.

I must

note that the intention of these changes is not to single out individuals in

receipt of funding. It applies to funding that is material, meaning an amount

that would matter to the public.

Speaker,

the scope of the Auditor General will also be expanded by making it the auditor

of all Crown corporations and agencies. Essentially, the Auditor General will

have a right of first refusal to audit Crown agencies and corporations.

The

current practice sees certain Crown agencies and Crown corporations contract

agents to conduct audits on their behalf. With this proposed legislation, the

Auditor General will be able to audit by default and will be the body

responsible for contracting external auditors to conduct audits on their behalf.

Delayed

commencement is included in the draft bill to ensure the Office of the Auditor

General and government have sufficient time to review resources and implement

the changes needed.

Speaker,

any time we can enhance transparency and accountability to the public, we should

do so. In a recent report from the C. D. Howe Institute on financial

transparency in Canada, Newfoundland and Labrador received a C plus, placing us

in the middle of the pack. But, Mr. Speaker, we want to be leaders. To that end,

access to information is enhanced in the new proposed act. The Auditor General

will be able to access Cabinet records when it's necessary as a part of an

audit.

Information regarding financial decisions of Cabinet and Cabinet records

including explanations, analysis, policy options related to public expenditures

can be exempted. This will exclude the deliberations of Cabinet, which is an

important provision to ensure that ministers can continue to have frank and open

debates on important matters before Cabinet.

Speaker,

the proposed amendments in the Auditor

General Act, 2021 also has some teeth when it comes to offences that have

been included and defined under the act. The penalty for obstructing is up to

$1,000 or up to three months in prison.

Finally,

Speaker, there are a number of general updates also being proposed. This

includes noting that the deputy Auditor General would be a position now in

legislation, clarifying that audit working papers are not subject to ATIPPA, and

that the Auditor General cannot serve in a public office for one year

post-position.

Speaker,

I close by referencing the Memorial

University Act , as I know Members opposite have been calling for the Auditor

General to have greater access and insight into Memorial University and its

operations. The Auditor General can currently, as per the

Memorial University Act , audit the

Board of Regents of the university. This is not changing, but as the proposed

Auditor General Act, 2021 applies to

all departments, Crown agencies and Crown-controlled corporations, the Auditor

General will be responsible now for appointing an agent to act on behalf of the

Auditor General.

In the

same way the Auditor General has the authority to conduct performance audits,

section 38(1) of the Memorial University

Act is repealed so that the Auditor General can determine if significant

investments are being managed with due regard to the economy, efficiency and

effectiveness. It is a measure of accountability that is needed for a sustained

investment.

Speaker,

as I mentioned earlier, this legislation was drafted with the input of the

current and previous Auditor Generals. We are supportive of the work of the

office and I believe this legislation gives them the tools required to ensure

public funds are being used as effectively and efficiently as possible.

I look

forward to the debate this afternoon from my hon. colleagues to the changes in

the Auditor General Act, 2021 .

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Thank you, Speaker.

We, too,

will be supportive of Bill 36, the Auditor

General Act, 2021 . I think it's something that's definitely needed.

The

minister alluded to the C. D. Howe report which was called

Good, Bad and Incomplete: Grading the Fiscal Transparency of Canada's

Senior Governments, 2021 . As the minister identified, Newfoundland and

Labrador was given a C-plus grade.

Officials have indicated that when they were identifying some of the legislative

changes, which needed to occur for some time, I think this report was actually

their precipitance to finalizing the legislative change and actually bringing

them into the House.

Again,

the Auditor General Act in itself, I

don't think has undergoing any significant updating since probably 1991. It's

long overdue. These amendments, these changes in the legislation will modernize

the AG legislation so that it will be in line, as the minister said, with the

practices of other jurisdictions and certainly increase the transparency and

accountability of public funds and public spending.

In going

through each of the explanatory notes and looking at what the will bill do, they

amend the definition of audits so that it's not limited to financial audits. I

mean, the Auditor General does currently perform performance audits even though

the existing legislation is not clear on whether or not they have the authority

to do so. Obviously, this bill and the new act will now provide explicit clarity

and authority to the Auditor General to perform those performance audits.

Something that all of us in this House would agree with.

Section

18 of the bill actually gives a definition of a performance audit and it notes

that it goes deeper than financial controls. It's looking at internal systems

and controls; compliance with policy, legislation or appropriations; performance

monitoring and reporting; and the governance, economy, efficiency and

effectiveness of any activity, program, process or function. Something that was

needed for a long time in the accountability for public spending. Again,

something that we totally agree with.

The

Auditor General Act says it confirms

the Lieutenant-Governor in Council's authority to appoint a deputy Auditor

General. Again, current legislation doesn't specify the position or the role of

the deputy Auditor General. This proposed legislation includes

section 11, which

notes there will be a deputy Auditor General that will be appointed by the

Lieutenant-Governor in Council on the recommendation of the Auditor General.

It talks

about it confirms the Auditor General's authority to conduct an audit of the

performance of a department, an agency of the Crown and a Crown-controlled

corporation. Clearly, that is something that everyone in this House has been

asking for and talking about for a while now.

The

minister alluded to the university, but it will change, this legislation – the

Auditor General will become the auditor of record for all government

departments, agencies, boards and commissions. The AG will have the

decision-making power to determine whether they want to carry out the audit

themselves or if they will contract it out, as the minister said, to another

auditor. It leaves that decision in the hands of the Auditor General. So,

clearly, they will be the ones to decide on whether or not to use an outside

agency or not.

Having

the Auditor General review all of the ABCs means that the Auditor General can

now follow the money from the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador clearly to

the ABCs. Again, something that all of us in this House would certainly agree

with.

We've

also talked about the performance audits that I just mentioned and the other

ones.

The

private corporations and not-for-profits receiving Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador funding: The Auditor General will now have the ability to audit any

public money which has been given to a private business, charities, community

groups, et cetera, to ensure that the public funds has been spent in accordance

with the intentions for which the money was given.

Again,

as the minister alluded to, a very key piece of this: The Auditor General will

be given access, and greater access, to government records, including Cabinet

records. That is something, again, I think that the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador would want to see to ensure that we have full openness and

accountability and a process entitled.

Again,

the minister alluded to the enforcements and the penalties. Speaker, as I said,

we are in favour of this and look forward to it passing. I'll have more to say

when we get to questions.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I do

applaud government on doing what they said they would do, especially when it

comes to the Auditor General because, as we know, when we ask questions – and

there's an hon. colleague behind me I'm sure who is itching to speak about this

as well – we have to make sure that accountability and what we do is transparent

as much as possible, especially when it comes to public funds and the public

purse.

We hear

it all the time, we can go back to Nalcor, we can go back to dozens of different

entities and stuff over time that people asked; they wanted these audits done,

they wanted stuff looked at. Now that we have actually even added performance in

there, as well, it gives at least a sense that, you know, we can keep track of

what we do for the public, how we do it and make sure that the public is getting

what they pay for. That's the most important thing, is that they get the

services and stuff that they paid for.

We have

our challenges and stuff like that, but we also have to make sure that we can

look into it; the Auditor General has the ability to look into it and that the

accountability is there when it comes to this.

applaud government there, especially on this. I know we talked about the C. D.

Howe ratings and that we were a C plus in there, but when you do a

jurisdictional scan, we're now going to fall in line with all the A-plus

provinces. This is where we should be going. This is where we should be heading.

We also

need to remember that we have to keep going back and checking to make sure that

we do give the Auditor General the resources and the ability to keep track of

everything that's going on within the government when it comes to the public

purse, but also when it comes to delivery of services. And to make sure that we

are giving the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador the best possible services,

spending the money on the best possible ways, that they can rely and trust that

they are getting what they've paid for and there are no two ways about it.

With

that, I do say we do support this bill. We do support the work of the Auditor

General going forward, especially with her new expanded role.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE:

Thank you, Speaker.

This is

certainly a very welcomed piece of legislation that we're debating on the floor

of the House of Assembly today, from my perspective.

I just

want to first of all acknowledge the government in bringing this forward. As

I've said in this House many times, when government does something that I think

is a good thing, I'm the first to acknowledge and congratulate them for doing

so. I think we've had some good legislation thus far as it relates to the code

of conduct for municipalities, as an example, as well as the

Disabilities Act , another great piece of legislation. I think the

all-terrain vehicles legislation that was recently passed with a few minor

tweaks that the minister is going to look at – a couple she's already made and a

couple of others she's going to look at – it's all good stuff.

I think

it's important that we have these debates. Sometimes we're going to agree and

sometimes we're going to disagree on certain things, like the

Lotteries Act , for example, that I

still have grave concerns about. I'll get to that when we get to third reading.

But as it relates to this piece of legislation, I think it's good for the

province.

Now,

some of the things here – it talks about strengthening the Office of the Auditor

General, it talks about agencies, boards and commissions and so on. So we're not

confused, the Auditor General already had the ability to go into agencies,

boards and commissions. It's making the Auditor General the auditor by default,

if you will. That all ABCs have to go to for financial audits, which right now

some of them don't have to and now they will. That's for the financial piece.

The

biggest issue, for me at least, is not just the financial audit – because any

auditor can come in and do a financial audit – it's really the performance

audits, the value-for-money, adherence to government policy, adherence to checks

and balances and so on. That's really where the true value comes to having an

Auditor General going in and looking at these matters. At least for me, that's

where it's at. Unfortunately, over the years we haven't necessarily – the

Auditor General's office has done great work in a number of areas, but of course

it comes down to having the appropriate resources in place at the Auditor

General's office to do that work.

I don't

know if I'd call it a concern, but one of the points I would make with all of

this is that if we are going to be enhancing the role of the Auditor General, if

we are going to be widening the scope to some degree – I know we are widening

the scope in terms of Memorial University. It's my understanding that as it

currently sits, without the passing of this legislation the Auditor General can

approach Memorial University, I believe, and it's up to MUN whether or not they

want to let the Auditor General in.

If the

Auditor General is let in to MUN, for example, the Auditor General can say,

well, I want to look at A, B and C. MUN has the ability at the moment to say,

well, you can look at A and B, but we don't want you to look at C. The Auditor

General has no right to demand to look at C, so to speak.

That's a

big problem when you look at the money that's been pumped into Memorial

University over the years, taxpayers' money. Albeit, it's a first-class

institution – not knocking that, not knocking any of those things – but it is

operating with total autonomy. There have been issues at Memorial University,

there has been questionable spending practices brought to light in just recent

weeks at Memorial.

You look

at the infrastructure deficit that they have at Memorial and you have to ask the

question was the appropriate funding going into maintenance and so on? Was there

money spent in certain areas where it was perhaps needed to be directed in other

areas? I'm not saying that things weren't done properly or above board, but the

point is that from the public's point of view there's no true public scrutiny at

Memorial University. This will allow that to happen and that is something I will

definitely support 1,000 per cent, Speaker.

Again,

the more responsibility that we give the Auditor General, the Auditor General's

office – and if we believe in the concept of the Auditor General's work, of this

idea of constantly reviewing programs and policies and ensuring that they're

meeting their goals, to ensure that they're being administered the way they're

supposed to administer, to ensure that we're getting the best value for money

spent in all agencies, boards and commissions. If we really believe that to be

true – and I'm sure we all do – then I think equally we have to recognize that

if we're going to be adding to the load given to the Auditor General, then there

has to be appropriate resources provided to that office to do that particular

work.

If not,

all we're going to do is we're going to say that agencies, boards, commissions

and departments, which may receive an audit from the AG's office once every – I

don't know – 20 years, we might have to wait for 40 years by the time they get

around to it, because there'll be so much to do with the same amount of

resources. This only works and has the desired effect, to my mind at least –

maybe I'm missing something. That's quite possible. But it only works if the

AG's office has the appropriate resources to do the work that needs to be done.

I'll

just point to an example of that, Speaker. I'm not going to read it all word for

word here but on August 18, 2016, I wrote then Auditor General, Terry Paddon,

and I asked for a review of Nalcor – August 2016. I won't read the whole letter

but I did suggest some items that needed to be looked into: A review of Nalcor's

board and management structure; benefits, remunerations, bonuses expenses of

board members, executive and management employees; a review of the actions taken

by the former board of directors and CEO following the Liberty report and, in

particular, justification as to why bonuses were paid in Nalcor following

DarkNL.

I asked

them to look at Nalcor's procurement policy and the application of same; a

review of all contracts which have been let as it relates to the Muskrat Falls

Project; review of conflict of interest allegations that were made by the former

chair of the board of directors of Nalcor before they all resigned en masse;

verification that no conflicts have existed by any individuals while serving on

the board, either the individual who was accused of being in a conflict at the

time or others who may be in a conflict of interest; and of course I said any

other matters that you, as the Auditor General, feel necessary to restore the

people's faith in the operations of Nalcor.

That was

on August 18, 2016. I followed up with another letter on September 20, 2016, to

Mr. Paddon. After a meeting that we had, he came to my office and we had a

meeting. I wrote him again following that meeting and in this particular letter

I'm asking him to add to that agenda to look at the idea of conflict of interest

and how the new CEO of Nalcor who replaced Mr. Martin, how it is that he could

be permitted to have up to 5 per cent shares in Fortis while holding the office

of CEO of Nalcor, how that could not be considered a conflict of interest.

Particularly given the fact that the former CEO, in his contract, it explicitly

said he could not have any shares but, for some reason, the new CEO could have

up to 5 per cent shares, how was that not a conflict of interest. I asked to

have that looked into.

November of 2016 the Auditor General came out and did a news conference over on

Pippy Place. I was there and sat at the table when he was doing it. He said he

was going to go into Nalcor. I wrote him in November confirming that and

thanking him for doing so, and I further asked him that we need to look into the

Public Procurement Act and how that

relates to Nalcor. Because apparently the

Public Procurement Act when it comes to Nalcor in terms of the day-to-day

operations, they have to follow the Public

Procurement Act but when it came to Muskrat Falls or any project that

they're undertaking, they can just throw the Public Tender Act out the window

and award contracts and so on to whoever they feel like without following the

Public Tender Act and with all the information shielded by the

Energy Corporation Act so they hide

everything they're doing. So I contacted him about that.

I have

another one here on March 3, 2017, where I wrote Mr. Paddon again. This

particular letter related to the allegations that were made which later became

subject of the Muskrat Fall inquiry. Issues about cost estimates being lowballed

and risk reports being hidden and so on. I explained the urgency that he needs

to look at that as well.

That's

in March 2017, so it started in August 18, 2016 and now we're into 2017. Of

course, Mr. Paddon moved on and then we had a new Auditor General, Ms. Mullaley.

I met with her, went over all the letters, the same thing again with her: Oh,

yes we're working on it. We're going to go in blah blah blah. Then –

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I've

been very lenient on relevance. So just try and stick to the bill.

P. LANE:

Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SPEAKER:

Thank you.

P. LANE:

The point I'm trying to make,

to be relevant here, Mr. Speaker, is that it comes down to we can change this

legislation, which is a good thing – and I am not knocking the legislation. I'm

not knocking this government; I'm supporting them. I absolutely am. But the

point I'm making is from 2016 I started. I've gone through 3½ Auditors General

because we had an interim Auditor General before the new one – I forget the

lady. She was the assistant Auditor General. She replaced Ms. Mullaley until Ms.

Hanrahan came into place; I can't think of her name. She was sort of like an

interim.

So three

regulars and an interim. I've had conversations, meetings, letters, whatever

with all of them. Here we are it is 2021, soon going to be 2022 and we still

haven't seen the report – still haven't seen the report. So from 2016 to 2022 is

six years later – six years later.

My point

is that if we're going to enhance the function of the Auditor General's office,

which I 100 per cent support, then we need to make sure the resources are there

so that we can get to these very pressing matters. I can say to you, certainly

during that time period and leading up to the LeBlanc inquiry and everything

else, that was probably a big thing on the radar of a lot of Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians – still is, what's going on at Nalcor.

Now, I

will acknowledge the minister of energy or whatever it's called – he knows what

I mean. He's come in and brought in some changes to look at the salaries and all

that kind of bonuses, and I commend him for that. We have seen the oil and gas

moved out. Nalcor will be going under some sort of a transition, whatever it's

going to look like.

I'm not

saying that they're not listening and not making some changes – and that's a

good thing, too. I will support every change they make, if they make sense, in

that regard. But I'm using this as a prime example of where it's fine on paper

to make changes but if the resources are not in place so that those things are

going to work effectively, then the changes on paper are not worth the paper

they're written on. That's my only point.

That's

not suggesting that the government is not going to resource the office and make

sure it's done. I'm not even suggesting that, so I don't want it to be taken as

a negative because it's really not. I'm just making the point that we got to

make sure that we do that.

So,

overall, as long as the office has the resources, making these changes is a good

thing. Like I said, MUN, that's a good one. I think, as I raised yesterday with

the Minister of Education, when we look at the Francophone school district and

some of the allegations that were made there, perhaps that's somewhere where the

AG needs to have a look. I'm sure there are lots of places where the AG could

have a look underneath the hood. We've seen issues raised in many departments

and so on.

The big

one for me, really, is – well certainly Nalcor – but agencies, boards and

commissions in particular having more of a presence of the Auditor General

involved in those operations, I think, are critical. Because they've really been

sort of doing what they want for years and years and years with little scrutiny,

to my mind.

That's

why I also support that the government did talk about this in the budget and I

hope that this is actually going to happen. They said it will, and I have every

confidence it will, that we're going to have more access to the ABCs through the

budget process or maybe a separate process so that elected Members of this House

of Assembly can start holding those agencies, boards and commissions to account.

Because for far too long – far too long – a lot of these entities have operated

with total autonomy.

That

doesn't mean the people on the boards are bad people or they're doing things

wrong; I'm not saying that at all. But the bottom line is they weren't elected

by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. The 40 people in this House of

Assembly, we were. We were the ones who were put in place to make sure that the

government is functioning the way it should and to make sure that their tax

dollars are being spent the way they're supposed to be spent. That's our

responsibility that we were duly elected to make sure happens.

between these changes to the Auditor

General Act and, hopefully, the changes that I will be supporting government

on 100 per cent when it comes to us, as legislators, having more access to the

books of what's going on in the ABCs and so on, I think these are all positive

steps forward, particularly when you look at the financial situation that we're

in in this province.

I think

I read a news release that government put out yesterday or the day before that

talked about the fact that even despite the good fortunes we've had of late in

terms of the rising oil prices, which have helped government coffers; not so

good for motorists, I would say, Speaker, but certainly for government coffers.

Despite that, we're still staring down the barrel of a $1.5-billion deficit

again this year. I think that's what I read. That should be concerning for us

all.

So we

have to find ways – and I'm sure Members have heard this on all sides of the

House from your constituents – before we start looking at jacking up taxes and

everything else, people are saying you have to find ways to cut expenses, to

find efficiencies and so on. That's what the people expect. People can only pay

so much in taxes. We have to find ways to be more efficient.

Utilizing the Office of the Auditor General, making sure that the Auditor

General's office is a resource so that they – he or she, whoever's doing it on

behalf of that office – can do their work, do it effectively, get as many audits

done as possible so that we can find where money is not being spent effectively

and efficiently and we can make changes, hopefully, to the better, that's what

the people want.

This is

a step in the right direction. It's a step in the right direction. So, once

again, despite the fact that sometimes Members get mad at me, on both sides of

the House, actually, from time to time, and that's fair game. Despite that, the

bottom line is I said from day one that if the government does something good,

I'll be the first one to acknowledge it and if there are things that I don't

agree with or I think need to be taken a different direction, I'll make sure I'm

heard on that too; no one will shut me down in either case.

But in

this particular case, once again, that's at least four or five pieces of great

legislation in the last couple of weeks that I can think of – this is one of

them. It's good and I acknowledge it.

With

that said, Mr. Speaker, I will be supporting the bill.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I marvel

sometimes at the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands, he can speak for a few

minutes and he can put 20 minutes together, sometimes longer. I don't know. He

seems to make sense; he makes sense to himself.

I looked

at the clock and we were at about five minutes left and I said: B'y, he's after

carrying on without getting called out for relevance. Shortly after you called

him. I respect where he's come from. He's been here a long time and I know the

AG issue has always been a very important one with Nalcor and he has indeed

spoken many times about it. I give credit where credit is due.

Speaker,

this bill, Bill 36, I don't think it's a contentious bill. Obviously, it's not.

I think we're all kind of saying we're agreeing, but that doesn't preclude us

from having some commentary and some viewpoints on this legislation.

We see

the AG – and it's a broad term sometimes. It's almost like – I wouldn't like to

use the word – it's not a tool. It's a very important office, but it's what we

all feel is the foundation of what we all do. I served on Public Accounts for

several years and the AG is a very – Public Accounts is a very powerful

Committee, obviously, but the AG, who obviously is a part of that Committee and

reports directly to that Committee, you don't realize the emphasis and

importance that this office has on the overall spending of public money.

I've

seen that first-hand. We keep saying sometimes, and you'll hear the public say

they're calling for the AG to come in. Long before I came to this Legislature,

when I read on the news or I watched the House of Assembly or whatever, there

was a letter written to the AG to come in and investigate something. That was

really, really serious.

I know

we're in the middle of this now and you're in your bubble, we're in here, but

when I was on the outside that was a very serious matter when you called the AG

in to investigate something. It just shows the level of respect the general

public and, I guess, we all should have for that office. I mean, it's about the

office and its powers.

Now,

we're giving it new powers and I think that's wonderful to be able to expand. I

know I've called and we've called, as a caucus, our party as the Opposition, has

called the AG to go in and look at the books at MUN. I think more and more each

day that becomes more and more evident. I think I've been on record; I would

like to see it done sooner than later to be honest with you. If this was part of

redoing the MUN Act, getting the AG in there, I think I would rather do it

months ago, but it's never too late. We're moving in that direction and I'm

hopeful this session will see the MUN Act come up for debate.

But I

think it's very important to never lose sight of the importance of the AG's

office and what that office actually means. It's not about the individuals. It's

the Office of the AG. It's always been very powerful. I think it's needed.

We look

at performance audits, you know, you're going through the bill, the ABCs, but

there was a time when every time you looked at the AG, it was about dollars and

cents. But when you get a better understanding, really, of what audits really

need to be about, sometimes it don't include dollars and cents. It all tracks

back to dollars and cents, everything we do in life, but it's the operations.

You're getting into the departments: Are the processes followed right?

We just

recently, with the ferry contracts, with Public Accounts – actually, I sat on

the Public Accounts Committee when we asked for the AG to look at those, how the

process worked.

At the

end of the day, people were caught up in the cost of the ferries, but we asked

the question to go in – because there were all kinds of questions being bandied

about, about how the contracts were done and how these were – procurement,

really.

The AG

went in and did a deep dive into the process. Obviously, there was a dollar

figure attached to the public purse, but the processes, you know, how tendering

was done, how staff operated, how inspections were done. It gets down to the

really bare bones.

Auditor General's work sometimes is not always sat in an office; it's not always

sat in an office in front of a computer with a cellphone and the phone in a

boardroom. Sometimes it's boots on the ground. You have to go out and see, meet

with people. It's quite different. It's not a regular accounting job. It's much

more involved. I've got an accounting background but it's not an auditing

background. It's two different things.

Sometimes you lose sight of really what's involved. Sometimes it's not that

glamorous, but it's such a fundamental function of our institutions and without

it – I mean, it is the foundation we're built on.

When

you're elected to the House of Assembly you become very acquainted with the

Green report. But how that report was derived, and I'm sure most Members in the

House recall – most weren't here, I think a couple might have been here. I know

one was definitely here, two probably were here, but most weren't. It was based

on the AG actually being able to come in and review the operations of the day,

of the House of Assembly. They were never allowed to come in before.

A prime

example of giving them that ability, giving them power to come in and do so,

because a lot of our legislation, a lot of departments throughout government –

the AG can ask to go in anywhere but some have the right – as MUN does right now

– to say yea or nay.

That's a

flaw in our legislation, obviously, and the powers and that's going to change,

obviously, after all of this is done and the MUN Act is reviewed.

The AG

came in and it shook the foundation of the House of Assembly. It shook the

foundation of our Legislature, which is a very powerful thing. I remember very

well and it was all as a result of transparency. It was let's open the books and

let's get in and see.

So the

work they did, it wasn't a good time. It wasn't a happy time for a lot of people

in this Legislature, as history will show. The end result was no one questioned

the work of the AG. It was a very painful time for a lot of people, but it was

necessary.

The same

thing applies anytime the AG goes in anywhere. You don't know, you're opening

the books and opening the doors. If everything is done above board and you're

following the rules, you have nothing to worry about. Ninety – I suppose I can't

per cent it but I would say, the vast majority, that's the case, or it's

innocent mistakes or things we could do better. I think that is somewhat where

you get into some kind of performance audits. As governments, we could always be

better. As individuals, you can always be better but, as governments, we can

always be better.

I liken

it to sometimes you sit back and have honest moments of reflection and you look

back and you could have done something better or you could have done something

different. No doubt a lot of ministers in government, when they're sitting in

their offices, they think about that. I remember, pre-2015, I spent a lot of

time around ministers and it was nice to know they always reflected. You rehash

things and you sit back and say maybe that wasn't the right decision. Maybe this

was done wrong. But you do it for the right reasons.

All an

AG will do, if an AG happened to come in – they do performance audits on

departments just as a regular yearly business type thing. It is part of their

existence. Coming back and telling you what could be done better – it is not a

witch hunt, I guess, is what I'm trying to say. What could be done better and

what could be improved upon, that's a very valuable function, too.

The AG

has investigative authorities and abilities and whatever; they can go in –

that's what it seems like, but it is not a witch hunt. Once again, it is a very

important function. I do know a lot of people out there probably look at it that

way. The word comes down the AG is coming in to look at something.

I think,

for the most part, that if you're doing things in the right manner, which most

are, it is a matter of let's see what we can do better. So when you see a review

of Public Accounts or they will go back a few years after the report and do a

follow-up on how many recommendations were implemented, that is very powerful,

too. We come into the House of Assembly and a lot of times we ask those

questions about was this implemented or that implemented or what have you. But

it is given more credence; it is about the powers of the AG and what the AG has

the ability to do.

That

brings all governments into account. We live in that world within the core

government. So to increase powers and abilities for the AG to come in and do

this in ABCs, it's like the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands said – and I

agree; it is a really good thing. When we get into some of the – the deputy AG,

there was clarity given to that. I mean, some of this stuff is pretty routine.

But I think that it's very important for us to look at what, I suppose,

processes in government – I guess we shouldn't be waiting for the AG to come in

and oversee and tell us what we done wrong. I think we all should be striving to

do better.

commentary when I started saying we can all do better and government departments

can do better and make us more functional – I know that's an ideal world, but

maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea for all through government – I mean, we're

spending public money. It's the public purse. That's no light matter. As I said,

my time on Public Accounts, when you sit on Public Accounts – we'll go in and

have public hearings with different entities within government and the AG

partakes in that and advises you and whatnot but, at the end of the day, again,

you're sitting with Public Account members who have a very important role to do;

you're analyzing the public money, the public purse. There's no slight matter.

So when

go back to MUN, for instance, a lot of money has been spent. I'm not going down

that road for the sake of relevance but there's a lot of money been spent a MUN

that I think anyone in this House and most people in this province want to step

back and say hang on, have a deeper thought into this spending. Is this needed?

Is this necessary? You hear it all. Why are you doing this if you're doing that?

Why are you doing this if you're not doing that? Now we're going to get that.

We're going to get that right throughout.

Again, I

commend government for bringing it forward. I think that the AG's office needed

this. I look forward to, I guess – when I say look forward, but hopefully the AG

gets in and if things are not up to scratch, bring them up to scratch and keep

departments and agencies performing because at the end of the day it is public

money and it's a very important matter.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, Speaker.

It's an

honour to speak again in the House of Assembly and to speak on this piece of

legislation, Bill 36, the Auditor General

Act, 2021 . There are a number of things that I'd like to point out, Speaker,

on this important legislation but, first of all, I think it's important that we

look at the role of the Office of the Auditor General in Newfoundland and

Labrador. I think that's important, just by way of background, to emphasize the

important role that the Office of the Auditor General has in our government.

It is an

independent, legislative auditor of government, its departments, all agencies of

the Crown and Memorial University of Newfoundland. I think that's important to

understand the relevance of the Auditor General and the important functions that

it plays within our government.

The

Auditor General Act , which is the

subject of this legislation, implicit in that act is the requirement for the

Auditor General to provide the House of Assembly with important, timely,

relevant information that is necessary to, in essence, enhance the public sector

accountability and performance.

So I

think when I look at this legislation, Speaker, it seems to me that the main

purpose of it, if we were to generalize, is about transparency. For that reason,

I feel that this is something I think is warranted, this legislation is

warranted and I am certainly in agreement with it in its overall intent.

One of

the things that I've noted is that the C. D. Howe Institute – and it's been

mentioned – released a report back in September of this year. It looked at the

transparency piece, the fiscal transparency of the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador. In that report, it's important to note that we didn't receive a very

good grade.

That, I

think, is important to note because it certainly acknowledges that there was

time for change, that legislative changes were necessary with respect to this

act. When we look at the C. D. Howe, for example, we know that is a reputable

organization; it's a non-profit organization which focuses on research. When

they completed this report, it obviously showed that it was time for us to look

at this legislation and the gaps that were there.

We also

know that the Auditor General Act has

not been modified or hasn't really undergone any significant changes for many

years. It's quite out of date when we look at 1991, as I understand the last

significant changes that took place. That clearly does show that there was time

for us to look at this legislation.

It's not

only about the piece of transparency; it's about modernization. We need to

understand that when we have modernization of legislation and then we have, as

well, transparency, we're going to have accountability; we're going to have

increased accountability. With respect to the Auditor General's role and the

Office of the Auditor General, who is responsible for public funds and public

spending, this is very important to take place: more transparency, more

accountability.

When I

look at this legislation I do see as well that there's an attempt to ensure that

there are housekeeping measures that are put in place. That's always good,

because we see that the current legislation that's in place, the language was in

need of modernization. We know that language is very important when we're

speaking of legislation and that we have to improve language. That it's more

I think

the current legislation, for example, used phrases like “immediately” when

referencing timelines in which the AG must provide reports and so forth to the

House of Assembly. Well, immediately is somewhat vague. I think the new

legislation will now use the phrase “at the earliest opportunity,” just to

provide clarity to the language.

course, when we see housekeeping measures like that come into play, I'm sure

that we'll all agree that that's a good improvement in any legislation.

One of

the things that I notice with this legislation, Speaker, is the expansion of the

scope of the Auditor General with respect to the powers and the authority. There

are a couple of sections within the proposed legislation that we need to really

look at and make sure. Because, of course, when we expand powers, we also have

to be very mindful of the implications of that enhancing of powers to a body

within government.

currently the agencies, boards and commissions, they're able to appoint their

own auditor under the current legislation. But this is going to change and the

Auditor General will now become the auditor of records for all government

departments, agencies, boards and commissions.

When we

see this new change is it a good thing? Is this a worthwhile change? Well, I

would suggest that it probably in all likelihood is. The reason is because it

will provide – in my estimation – more oversight. It's an oversight measure that

will be more comprehensive and will give the Auditor General the ability to

ensure that there are no gaps or cracks.

For

example, having the Auditor General review agencies, boards and commissions

means now that the Auditor General can follow the money from the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to the agencies, boards and commissions. That I would

suggest is a good thing. It's a follow-through, it's a way to ensure that

there's a comprehensive oversight from one process to another. I would suggest

that expansion of powers is, in my view, not a bad thing.

When we

look at another feature of this legislation, Speaker, with respect to expanding

powers, private corporations and not-for-profits who are receiving government

funding. What's going to happen with this now is that the Auditor General will

now have the ability to audit any public money, which has been given to private

businesses, charities, community groups, et cetera, to ensure that the public

funds have been spent in accordance with the intentions.

I would

submit that's a pretty wide-sweeping power that will be granted to the Auditor

General. Yes, I would think that that's important for transparency, but I do

wonder about that and I think that's something we need to look at, expanding

these powers. I would ask: Do other provinces have this legislative authority?

Is there consistency? Is there precedent for this across the country?

I also

worry a little bit about that when we have non-profits who receive government

funding; we know that many non-profits are very small agencies and organizations

who may not have the capacity and have that ability to do sophisticated

accounting. How is that going to impact your small non-profits who play such an

important role in our communities? We certainly don't want to be hindering them.

I wonder what will be in place to provide that kind of support for our

non-profits in our society.

Those

are some of the issues that I thought were important. We need to be mindful of

the expansion of powers and that we have proper oversight to ensure that there's

not going to be any kind of excessive use of powers. I mean, we need to make

sure that there is also a watchdog involved there as well.

But I'm

all for transparency. I think that's so important in our government offices and

bodies, so as to ensure accountability because they go hand in hand. If we don't

have transparency, we're not going to have accountability and that's certainly a

problem for us.

legislators, I would think that this is an important piece of legislation, but

we do have to be mindful of some of the concerns that exist with expanding

powers. I would think that this is a welcome piece of legislation that I would

be in favour of.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra

Nova.

L. PARROTT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Always

glad to have an opportunity to speak to a bill in this House.

When I

look at this bill, I think about something that the Member from CBS said. He

spoke about how we can do better and be better. The reality of it is that's what

the audit process is all about, no matter where you work in life or what you do.

If you're in the industry and you're working on aircraft or marine vessels or if

it's financial, the whole situation with an audit is it's to evaluate how you

got to the point you are, either from a financial or a performance standpoint.

So this

bill is really good timing, obviously. I mean, even today in the House we had a

conversation about external audits. Although we didn't get an answer, perhaps if

there were audits done we wouldn't be where we are today.

When I

think about the powers of the Auditor General and their ability to have a look

through government's business, it's really good to see that they're able now to

expand into the ABCs and have more jurisdiction. The reality of it is, is that

we need to be held accountable, I guess, and the Auditor General, when she does

her audits, she looks at everything with a microscope. That microscope not only

assures the public that we're doing what we're supposed to do but it enables us

to do a better job as legislators and our ability to perform. While we all think

we're making the right decisions, it's very educational for us to understand

where we made mistakes in the past so we don't recreate those same mistakes.

The fact

that this piece of legislation hasn't done any significant updating since 1991

speaks volumes also, I mean, it's 30 years later so it's time for this to

happen.

The

Auditor General's office, right now, is obviously very busy. When they begin an

audit, we know that the process sometimes takes years. So one major thing about

this bill that concerns me is whether or not they will have the resources, as

the Member from Mount Pearl - Southlands said, to expand what they do, whether

that's hiring an external agency or doing stuff in-house. I believe that it will

take significant resources and money in order for them to expand their

capability in a timely fashion where it serves us as legislators in a way that

this bill is designed to do that.

You look

no further than auditing of the ABCs, plus their regular role and any special

assignment task that they have to do. An Auditor General really has to make a

decision between which audits they do when they look at this. Perhaps there

needs to be some consideration as to the resources and their funding when we do

this.

If you

look at their past history and the audits they did, I think that the act could

go further and give them broader stroke and broader ability to make sure that

previous recommendations have been implemented. I'm not sure that they've always

gotten the level of support that they require with regard to recommendations and

recommendations not being implemented.

When

they go back and they do an audit of the recommendations as suggested, they

don't always get a clear answer. They get partial answers. We've started to do

the recommendations; we've started to initiate. Or some departments, it's

finalized, but if it's a broad stroke recommendation across several departments,

some departments implement in full and others don't implement at all. So it

really puts them in a tough situation with regard to not only their

recommendations, but how do they push through with them.

The

appointment of the deputy Auditor General obviously is a welcome thing, and I

would hope that it gives the AG more authority or more ability and a larger

comfort area for her task at hand – or his, whoever it may be at the time.

When we

talk about the Memorial University Act

– when the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands mentioned the

Memorial University Act and we

listened to how we can appoint an agent to act on behalf of the Auditor General,

that's a really big statement. Because now it allows them, if they don't have

time, to appoint someone on their behalf to work under the Auditor General in

order to do these audits.

Again,

the one thing that comes to my mind is while they have the ability to appoint,

whose budget does it come from? So does it come from Memorial University's or

any ABC, whichever ABC they're auditing? Who pays for this audit? Is it the

Auditor General's office, or is the ABC? So it's not clear in the bill, but it'd

be interesting to see how that comes out.

When you

look at audits and the purpose of an audit, like I said a few minutes ago, the

purpose of an audit is clearly so we understand all the processes. It doesn't

matter if the audit is a performance audit or a financial audit. It shows a

clear, decisive trail of how things started and how you ended up. And it gives

departments and legislators and everyone involved the ability to go back and

review the process that they were involved in and score themselves, really.

Although the AG is scoring individuals as they do these au