May 17, 2004 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 31

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

This afternoon we would like to welcome some thirty Grade 6 students from St.

Bonaventure's College in the District of St. John's East, with their

teachers: Linda Little, Mr. Bouillie, and chaperones: Ms Colleen Simms, Mr.

Breen, Mr. Thompson, Mr. Fagan, Ms Murphy and Dr. Treslan.

Welcome to our House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Before we begin Statements by Members the Speaker would like

to rule on a point of order raised by the Opposition House Leader on Thursday,

May 13.

The Opposition House Leader raised a point of order with regard to a comment

made by the Minister of Environment and Conservation in Question Period.

Specifically, the Opposition House Leader questioned the use of the word hypocritical'.

The Chair took the matter under advisement at that time. After consultation with

the Table Officers and a review of Hansard, the Speaker is now ready to make a

ruling.

Hansard shows that the minister said, "I find that question very

hypocritical." The Chair has reviewed the House of Commons debates where

the words hypocrite' and hypocritical' have been ruled unparliamentary.

In all instances, the reference was made to an individual member rather than a

reflection on the issue or question. Thus, while the Chair does not condone or

encourage the use of such words, the Chair rules that in this instance the

reference was made to a question rather than to the member himself. Thus there

is no point of order.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have statements by the following members:

The Member for Port de Grave, the Member for Gander, the Member for Grand Bank,

the Member for Burin-Placentia West, and the Member for Bonavista South.

The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MS JONES: A point of privilege, Mr. Speaker.

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

for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

The hon. the member.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to stand in this House today to raise a point of privilege. Last week

I responded to information in a document from Executive Council that I had

received on May 7, 2004.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Opposition requested information under the Freedom

of Information Act on April 1, and we received it a month later. We assumed we

received this information after government had very carefully considered the

details of the information, what they were releasing to the Opposition, to

ensure that the information they were giving us was accurate and correct.

Mr. Speaker, last week I raised an issue coming out of that document which

pertained to the Department of Government Services and it had to do with driver

training examinations. After I raised the issue, and after my colleague, the

Member for Labrador West had raised the issue, the minister admitted to me that

she was not aware of this decision being taken in her department. She later

agreed to reinstate driver examiners for my district, saying that the document

had contained false information, I think was the answer that her colleague - not

false information but a working document, her acting minister actually said on

Thursday.

Well, Mr. Speaker, this week there was an issue with regard to the Department

of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. Again, the information was given to me,

through Freedom of Information, in a document prepared by the Executive Council

of government. The document clearly stated that the Labrador Transportation

Fund, which is a fund that is used to support the travel of students through the

High School Athletic Federation from Labrador to the Island, that this fund

would be reduced by $10,000 this year over last year.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation says that the

information was false, that my statement that I had made was false. Mr. Speaker,

I feel that my privileges are violated because I was quoting information that

was given to me under the Freedom of Information Act, by the Executive Council

of government. It was titled: Budget and Statistics, March 30, 2004. One would

assume this was all the information that was coming out of the Budget that was

passed down by the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board during that time.

Mr. Speaker, if these decisions were not taken by government, they should not

have been included in this document. I am really perturbed by the fact that

false information is part of a request under Freedom of Information, because

when you ask for a request under Freedom of Information you expect it to be

truthful, to be accurate and to have been scrutinized very carefully by

government before it was released. Obviously, that was not the case, or it seems

it was not the case. I feel that either government or Executive Council have

certainly breached the Freedom of Information Act.

Mr. Speaker, what disturbed me, I think even more, was that I was quoting

from a document given to me by government, and I had the Minister of Tourism,

Culture and Recreation in the public saying that I was giving false information

to the public, that I was giving inaccurate information to the public, when all

I was doing was quoting from his own document.

Mr. Speaker, I have a serious problem with that. This morning, I had a call

from the Deputy Minister of Tourism, who called to apologize to me because the

department had given false information to Executive Council, who in turn gave

false information to the Opposition.

Mr. Speaker, when the deputy minister can call you up and apologize, and tell

you that he is calling to eat crow, and sorrily regrets that this happened, and

the minister does not have the decency to make a phone call to explain to me

that his department had given out false information, but he is prepared to go

out in the public and accuse me of rendering false information and inaccurate

information, Mr. Speaker, that is wrong. I certainly feel that my privileges as

an Opposition member, as an MHA in this House, have been breached and publicly

discredited, I might say to you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I can only hope that it was not the intention of government to

discredit my character in the way that they have, by two ministers in two

separate departments, based on information that was given to me by them after

careful scrutinization' by them.

Mr. Speaker, I expect a ruling from yourself on this matter. It has happened

two weeks in a row and I do expect a ruling, because I think there is a breach

under the Freedom of Information Act by government or by Executive Council; and

I also, Mr. Speaker, am asking for an apology from the Minister of Tourism,

Culture and Recreation, who issued that press release knowing full well that was

not the case, even when his deputy minister called me to explain that it was not

the case, and to apologize for giving false information from the Department of

Tourism to Executive Council, and in turn to myself.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the point of privilege, this issue was raised last week, on Thursday, by

the Leader of the Opposition, who raised it again in the context of the same

information that was released by government, but for the specific issue of the

driver examiner. As you recall, the Government House Leader, at that time,

undertook to do some background checks and get back to us.

We realize that he had to be absent today, but again I would strongly advise

the Chair that this is one and the same in terms of issues. It concerns the same

package of information that the government has released. This is indeed a very

serious issue that members over on this side, following the law, following the

Freedom of Information Act, request information, rely upon that information

which was given to them by the Clerk of the Executive Council, only to have

Ministers of the Crown stand and say that it is either not final documents or,

as in the case of the Minister of Tourism, outright accuse the Member for

Cartwright of having misled and lied to the public, when they themselves know

they prepared the information, or their bureaucratic staff did, they released

the information to the Opposition, and it is a breach of our privileges if we

cannot stand and rely upon information that the government releases to us under

a legal procedure such as the Freedom of Information.

We encourage the Chair to consider both of these circumstances together. It

is indeed a very serious issue and is definitely, without question, a breach of

the members' privileges if we cannot rely upon the information being provided

to us.

Thank you.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just let me say a couple of things, Mr. Speaker. First of all, the Opposition

House Leader is correct. I think the Government House Leader gave an undertaking

to the Opposition, which was, I believe, concurred on by the Opposition on

Thursday, that he was seeking more detail here. Unfortunately, he had to be

absent today but he undertook to provide that detail to the House tomorrow -

which, of course, will happen.

The second thing I want to say, Mr. Speaker, is the reference by the hon.

Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and

Recreation. I think most people know, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Tourism,

Culture and Recreation has a fairly serious medical problem. He is not here

today, for the same reason, and was not in a position to call the hon. member to

make any apologies to her, as I am sure he would do, because it is in his

character to do, but the members know that he had to seek medical attention

outside the Province for some number of days, I believe, only a few weeks ago.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, if an inquiry was made, the information could be

provided.

He also, Mr. Speaker, has to travel outside the Province again today for the

completion of those medical procedures. I want that to be on the public record,

in the context of why the deputy minister - and it was in that context that the

deputy minister phoned the hon. member today, Mr. Speaker, and apologized. The

deputy minister fully admitted that the department had, in fact, provided

inaccurate information to Executive Council, and took the responsibility for

providing that inaccurate information, and apologized to the hon. member for any

inconvenience or hurt feelings or whatever transpired as a result of this. We

all do that. It is unfortunate, but I think it is like the - I do not know if it

was the Leader of the Opposition or the Opposition House Leader said last week:

Look, if a mistake has been made, admit that the mistake is made, apologize for

it and get on with it. That is exactly what the deputy minister did.

In terms of a point of privilege, Your Honour, I would have to submit to you

that I do not think this is a point of privilege. It might be a point that there

is a disagreement between members on information, whether it is accurate

information, how the information got disseminated and things of that nature, but

in terms of the privileges of any member of this Legislature being violated, I

do not think that is the case and I would submit to Your Honour that there is

not a prima facie case of privilege.

MR. SPEAKER: As hon members have mentioned, an issue similar to this was

raised on Thursday afternoon, May 13, and the Chair will consider both matters

at the same time. However, there was also an agreement between the two House

Leaders that we would wait until after there had been a further submission made

by the Government House Leader, which will occur, I understand, tomorrow. This

matter can then be adjudicated and the Chair will then be in a position to make

a ruling. In fairness to the Government House Leader, I do believe that it would

be worth a courtesy and an expectation that we would wait until he returns to

the House tomorrow before we would have any further consideration of this

matter.

The hon. the Member for Port de Grave on Statements by Members.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I rise today to recognize the Church Lads Brigade or more commonly known as

the CLB of Bay Roberts on their ninetieth anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, the CLB is a tremendous organization which helps children and

teenagers build strong community involvement. It assists many in getting

involved with the cadet movement and giving all children an opportunity to

participate, no matter what their economic background may be. Some of the CLB's

alumni include Hockey Night in Canada's Bob Cole, former NHL player Doug

Grant, and former Premier and Father of Confederation Joseph R. Smallwood.

Mr. Speaker, this past weekend I had the opportunity to participate in the

CLB's ceremonies with the Bay Roberts Branch. On Thursday evening, I attended

their banquet which honoured the hard work and dedication of all involved with

the CLB in that area. The Bay Roberts and the St. John's battalions teamed

together for events on Saturday and Sunday with a parade and a church service

held to commemorate their ninetieth anniversary.

I ask all members of this hon. House to join me in extending congratulations

to the Bay Roberts

chapter of the CLB on their ninetieth anniversary and thanks

to all volunteers involved with the successful operation of this very much

community-minded organization.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to stand before

the House, to bring to your attention the accomplishments of a young filmmaker

from the District of Gander.

A couple of weeks ago, Mr. Brad Peyton was one of the nominees in the

documentary and short film category for the Genie Awards.

This is not the first time that Mr. Peyton's film has gained attention.

Earlier this year, his film gained international praise at the Nodance Film

Festival in Park City, Utah. It was at this festival that he won the Grand Jury

Award for short film.

Mr. Speaker, I am highlighting Mr. Peyton's accomplishments today as a

reminder to all of us of the talent that abounds not only in my District of

Gander but also in Newfoundland and Labrador. The nominating committee of The

Academy of Canadian Cinema and Television recognized that talent when they

nominated Mr. Peyton's film for the 2004 Genie Award.

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

congratulating Mr. Brad Peyton of Gander for his dedicated hard work that led to

the honour of being nominated for this award.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Colonel Tom Tarrant of

St. Lawrence who has attained one of the highest ranks in the Canadian Armed

Forces.

Colonel Tarrant has served as Colonel for the past ten years with various

postings throughout Canada and abroad. Colonel Tarrant was on the Burin

Peninsula this month acting as chief reviewing officer for the annual

inspections for the St. Lawrence 269 Endeavor and the Lawn 237 Truxtun Corps. A

duty he also performed five years ago.

Colonel Tarrant joined the Armed Forces in August 1971. He graduated from

Memorial University in 1976 and was commissioned into the Royal Canadian

Regiment to start his first regimental tour of duty with the 2 nd

Battalion in Gagetown, New Brunswick. He has filled three tours of duty in

Germany.

Colonel Tarrant was promoted to Captain in 1979, Major in 1988, and most

recently to Colonel. He has since served as Commanding Officer at Headquarters

CFB Petawawa, Ontario and Commander of the 1 st Battalion, the Royal

Canadian Regiment at Petawawa among other staffings. In 2000, Colonel Tarrant

was moved to the Directorate of Army Training as a

section head and the Deputy

Director and during this time, completed a tour of duty with the British led

International Military Assistance and Training Team in Sierra Leone, West

Africa. Colonel Tarrant is presently Director of Reserves in the Chief of

Reserves and Cadets Division at National Defense Headquarters in Ottawa.

Colonel Tarrant is the son of Harry and Elizabeth Tarrant of St. Lawrence.

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

Colonel Tarrant on attaining one of the highest ranks in the Canadian Armed

Forces and expressing our thanks for his years of service.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring praise to Mrs. Amy Butler

of Baine Harbour.

Mr. Speaker, if you want an example of an individual with spirit and

determination, Amy is a perfect choice. On Saturday, May 29, Amy will take

part

in the one kilometer Hip, Hip Hooray Fundraiser Walk around Quidi Vidi Lake.

This will be Amy's twelfth year participating in the walk during which time

she has raised a total of $21,074. The funds raised in this event go towards

orthopaedic surgery and research, an area that appears to be seeing more

advances and increasing demands.

Amy herself has been the recipient of both hip and knee replacements and

continues to live independently in her own home. Regrettably, during the past

month Amy's husband passed away. The two were inseparable, and despite having

hip and knee replacements it was a common site in Baine Harbour to see them both

aboard their speedboat, either going to or returning from their beloved

resettled community of Port Elizabeth. The resettlement program of the late1960s

saw Amy, Bill and their children relocate to Baine Harbour, however, Amy and

Bill really never did leave their home on Port Elizabeth. They maintained a

cabin there and spent many weeks and months on the island that was, and

continued to be, their home.

Mr. Speaker, during her seventy-three years, Amy has faced many adversities,

yet she has risen above them and has continued to be a spirited individual. Many

people from across the District of Burin-Placentia West will also know Amy

through her work and commitment to the Hospital Auxiliary, a cause to which she

had dedicated much time and effort.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in wishing Amy Butler

every success in the Hip, Hip Hooray Walk on May 29, and I wish her every

success in the future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Sarah Fennell,

a native of Plate Cove West in the District of Bonavista South, on being

selected recently at Memorial University's "Amazing Student of the

Week."

Given that there are over 16,000 students attending the university, Mr.

Speaker, this is quite an achievement.

Sarah is a second year Chemistry major and an honour student. She is very

active both within the university community and in her own community of Plate

Cove West.

While at school, Sarah is quite involved with Student Affairs and the Student

Volunteer Bureau, and when she returns home on weekends she volunteers with her

church; and, somewhere in her busy schedule, Mr. Speaker, she finds the time to

participate in volleyball at the provincial level and to volunteer with patients

at the Health Sciences Centre.

Mr. Speaker, Sarah is hoping to be accepted into Memorial University's

Pharmacy Program. If her impressive record of academic, athletic and volunteer

achievements is any indication, I am certain that Sarah will certainly excel in

any field that she enters.

I ask all members to join with me in congratulating Sarah Fennell and wishing

her every success in her future endeavors.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

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

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

I rise today to commend the efforts of St. John's Clean and Beautiful and

its annual cleanup campaign, Take Pride, Take Action ! The campaign

officially got underway this past weekend and runs until June 15.

The Take Pride, Take Action campaign encourages neighbourhoods,

community groups, organizations, schools, businesses, as well as individuals to

participate. Cleanups have included school grounds, parks, playgrounds, rivers,

trailways, streets, and forested areas.

Mr. Speaker, the problem of littering, careless waste handling and illegal

dumping is more evident after the winter months when the snow is gone. I

encourage everyone in the St. John's area to do their

part in cleaning up the

city. I was pleased to be able to participate recently in a cleanup day in Shea

Heights, organized by St. John's Clean and Beautiful and the Shea Heights

Community Centre. Over 100 bags of garbage were collected in just a few hours.

St. John's Clean and Beautiful's annual cleanup campaign has been a huge

success over the years. Since 1993 there have been more than 800 registered

cleanups with over 51,000 volunteers picking up over 600 tonnes of litter and

debris, making St. John's a cleaner and more beautiful city. I commend

everyone involved with St. John's Clean and Beautiful, especially all of the

volunteers, for their dedication to the environment. Indeed, St. John's Clean

and Beautiful shares government's commitment to ensuring a cleaner and

healthier environment.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to take this opportunity to acknowledge all of the towns

and groups around the Province who are holding spring cleanup campaigns this

year. There are many communities in our Province, Mr. Speaker, who take action

to clean up the environment. I encourage everyone to keep up the good work and

to continue to take pride in their community. Hats off to our environmental

leaders and groups like St. John's Clean and Beautiful. When we each do our

part, we show commitment to a healthier, greener environment and help create

better communities in which to live.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the hon. minister for a copy of his statement. Again, I would

like to indicate that every day we see ministers getting up in the House and

bringing good news items which were part of the Liberal government, the former

Liberal government. Again, this is another initiative that started in 1993 under

the leadership of the Liberal government. We all realize that in Newfoundland

and Labrador over the last number of years people are more and more conscious

about our environment. We look at all the volunteer groups that are out around

Newfoundland and Labrador in terms of the Adopt a Highway Program, the Lions

Clubs, the Knights of Columbus, all the various organizations that participate

in cleaning up Newfoundland and Labrador. One only would notice ten or fifteen

years ago, when you drove across the Province, all you would see would be drink

containers, bottles and things, on the side of the road. I must say, it is a

pleasure now to drive across Newfoundland and Labrador and see that the sides of

our highways are completely clean and free of all containers and garbage.

I want to compliment the department and the people within the department who

have taken this great initiative, working towards cleaning up the environment in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I was listening to the minister talk about all of the cleanups that have

taken place: 800 registered cleanups and 51,000 volunteers, since 1993, you

would think the place would be clean by now. Yet, we see reports in the paper

the other day of car wrecks scattered around the environs of St. John's, and I

am sure they exist elsewhere in the Province, Mr. Speaker. Obviously, we

certainly congratulate anybody making the effort to clean up, but the problem is

that we still have people littering and, despite the remarks of the Member for

Bellevue, if you stop long enough at the side of the highway to go anywhere you

will find lots of things still there. We really do have - still - an attitude

problem -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: We still have an attitude problem which I think we do have to

work on, all members of this House, and young people especially. A new

generation, hopefully, will take better care of the environment than our

generation has.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers.

The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this morning, it was my pleasure to welcome 480 of the brightest

young scientific minds from across Canada at the opening ceremonies of the

Canada Wide Science Fair hosted by Memorial University.

Sponsored by the Youth Science Foundation of Canada, the Canada Wide Science

Fair is a prestigious national competition. Each of the young women and men in

attendance have earned their place by winning regional science fairs across the

country. Over 500,000 students have competed in past months at local fairs

throughout Canada, and only one in 1,000 have made it to this week's fair.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that our Province has twenty-four students with a

total of nineteen projects registered for this event: five from the Western

region, six from Central, and eight representing the Eastern region.

As Minister of Education with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador,

and a former teacher, I am always pleased to be involved in the exciting things

that are happening in our education systems nationwide. Science and technology,

Mr. Speaker, are integral parts of our society, and therefore, integral parts of

our education system.

Developing scientific literacy and stimulating student interest are two key

attributes of our new science curricula which have strengthened competitions

such as this. Science fairs encourage students to learn through hands-on

experiences that build valuable scientific skills. These skills last a lifetime

and are often transferable to many other domains.

Mr. Speaker, students of today expect and demand more from their education.

They are inquisitive, innovative and determined. We see their desire to

understand why or how; we see, particularly through events like the Canada Wide

Science Fair, their hopes to make this world better, safer and healthier.

With that said, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador was pleased to

contribute approximately $45,000 in direct funding and in-kind support to this

event.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join me in applauding everyone

involved with the organizing of this event: the teachers, students and

chaperones. We also thank the judges who are offering freely of their time and

expertise, and the many volunteers who believe in the importance of this event.

It is important to single out the event co-chairs, Mr. John Barron and Ms Renee

Boyce for their dedication.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate all students who participated in science

fairs throughout Newfoundland and Labrador this year, and wish the best of luck

to students participating in this week's event.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for the advanced copy. I would like to

also commend him for the $45,000 contribution to this fair. It is certainly a

worthwhile event. I would also like to congratulate the twenty-four students who

are representing our Province. I know that they have worked very hard to get

there, but also all of us on this side, and I am sure everyone in the House,

would also like to wish our students the best of luck. I am certain they will do

well at this fair.

Mr. Speaker, the minister stated, in his statement, that students today

expect and demand more from their education. I believe they deserve this, but

with the cuts to teaching positions and school boards, I think that in the end

they will receive less from this government. With fewer teachers and fewer

programs, all that many students in this Province, especially in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador, can expect in the near future is more Distance

Education courses, something that the minister realizes himself is no substitute

for having a teacher in the classroom with you.

While I commend him for his contribution to this particular project, I cannot

say the same for what he and his government are doing to the education system in

our Province this year and in the next four years.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would just like to say that science fairs, and in particular this one that

is being hosted here at Memorial University, are very good for young people. It

encourages them to aspire to be involved with technology and not be afraid to

get involved in something that is high technology, that requires a bit of

imagination and a bit of scientific attitude. It does actually get them closer

to the idea that they, too, can participate, as young scientists, in changing

our modern world, in creating new products, in finding new discoveries. The

level, I am told - I have not been there, but I know that some of the students

involved in this have some very advanced and highly intricate designs and

experiments that would surprise many, coming from such young people.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: I do want to encourage all of the young people involved in

this. I hope that our young people will do well in this competition, as they do

in most competitions nationally and internationally.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment, and Minister

Responsible for the Status of Women.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to advise my colleagues of the recent

opening of Hope Haven, a new shelter and resource facility for women and

children escaping family abuse and violence in Labrador West.

I would also like to give special recognition to the partnerships that went

into the creation of this new facility. In particular, the centre received a

additional $112,000 from the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation in

collaboration with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. There are also

many individuals at the community and corporate level who deserve a thank you

for their support of this project.

This new shelter allows the Province to better respond to family violence and

improve services for women in Labrador. Government was pleased to support a

study in 2002, titled: Moving Towards Safety: Responding to Family Violence

in Aboriginal and Northern Communities of Labrador , which identified a

number of needs for women in Labrador, including better access to shelter,

policing and health services.

The need for improvements to the shelter in Labrador West was also recognized

in this study. Hope Haven, through its rehabilitation, now has an increased

capacity to better meet the needs of women and their children in this region as

well as from other parts of Labrador.

Violence prevention is an important goal of the Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador and by working in partnership with regional and community groups,

we are undertaking a number of initiatives to advance this work.

This year, for example, the Violence Prevention Initiative will fund six

regional co-ordinating committees, a public awareness campaign and training on

violence awareness and prevention.

Hope Haven provides a shining example of what can be accomplished when

government and the community work together. Congratulations to all who made this

important project a reality.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to join with the minister and others in this House in congratulating

the people of Labrador West on Hope Haven. Mr. Speaker, I want to specifically

offer congratulations to people like Jackie Winters, Frances Fry, Janice

Barrens-Gallant, Patsy Ralph, Dianne Gear, Edwina Brenton, and I am sure there

are many others. These are women I met with, when I was Minister for the Status

of Women, and worked with on this particular initiative. Mr. Speaker, I was very

proud to be part of a government that contributed more than $100,000 to this

project in partnership with our federal partners, our MP for Labrador, under the

ACOA programs and so on.

Mr. Speaker, I had an opportunity to visit the old centre and I know the

extreme need that existed in that area, and the need to certainly have better

facilities. Hope Haven opened in December and it has been very well utilized

since that time. I think they had their official opening last week.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the Minister for the Status of Women that her

real response to women in this Province should be through her own leadership in

terms of the issues that she takes on, in response to women all across the

Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MS JONES: Just a few minutes to clue up, Mr. Speaker, because there is a

campaign by women all across this Province right now called the Feminist Fits.

It is kind of a tongue twister, but it is a very serious, very active campaign

by women in our Province who are dealing with the issue of increased funding for

women centres and shelters, and is dealing with the policies that government is

making like the closure of the HRE offices.

Mr. Speaker, they are a very active group. They have been actively pursuing

and lobbying the minister, and I ask her today - maybe she should show some

leadership and respond to all these e-mails and these women across our Province

who are contacting her office.

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to say, Mr. Speaker, that while I am glad that this new facility

is now open, I guess all members would agree that we all look forward to the day

when these shelters are not needed in our society. However, today we do not live

in that reality and shelters such as Hope Haven are needed.

Mr. Speaker, we have had a lot of meetings bringing this to its conclusion.

There was a lot of work for a long number of years - the lobby goes on - to have

such a centre open in Labrador West. I guess I would be remiss if I did not

thank the Iron Ore Company of Canada for their help and assistance throughout

the years by providing space to the crisis shelter in order to have a place

where women and children, mainly, could go in times of need.

I would also like to thank a few of the local people, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. COLLINS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

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

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. COLLINS: - with the risk of omitting some, I would also like to thank

Jackie Winters, Susan Bona-Landry, Frances Fry, Edwina Brenton, who is the

chairperson of the board at the present time, and of course, our MP Lawrence O'Brien,

who, along with myself, had many meetings over the years with the women's

groups in Labrador West to try and get this shelter. I think it is something

that the community - as I said, we wish we did not have the need for but the

reality is that we do and it is good to see that they have their own place and

able to meet the needs of the community.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask you, on the point of privilege

that I raised a few minutes ago, if I may?

MR. SPEAKER: Are you making a new point of privilege?

MS JONES: More a point of order, I guess.

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order would be appropriate if you wish to at this

time.

A point of order by the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, in my point of privilege the Minister of

Transportation and Works responded by saying that the Minister of Tourism,

Culture and Recreation did not respond to me - other than the press release he

sent out on Friday condemning the information that I put out in the public -

because of illness or sickness.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that I have all the sympathy in the world for

any member in this Legislature or any person in this Province who is ill,

especially has an illness that affects their ability to be able to carry forward

with their job or the duties of their job. But, Mr. Speaker, I have just learned

that the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation is in the CBC radio studio

in St. John's doing a cross-talk program. I think the minister has misled this

House today by standing in his place and telling me that the Minister of

Tourism, Culture and Recreation could not respond to the information, to me,

because of illness. Now, if the minister was ill he would not be in the studio

if he had an illness that prohibited him from carrying out his responsibilities

as a minister. Mr. Speaker, it does not take away from the fact that the point

of privilege I raised earlier is a legitimate point of privilege and it is one

that has infringed upon my rights as a member, as a parliamentarian, in this

House of Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, the information I quoted in the public - again, I will say - was

information that was obtained through the Executive Council of government from

the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, information that the deputy

minister had the courtesy to call me this morning and tell me it was given to me

and was false. But, Mr. Speaker, the minister sent out a press release. He did

not send out a press release saying that the information came from his

department and was false. In fact, he sent out a press release saying the

information that I put in the public domain was inaccurate and was false. Now,

Mr. Speaker, both ministers have misled this House and misled the people of the

Province, and I ask for an apology from both of them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I ask the hon. member to cool down. Nobody has

misled anybody about anything. The fact of the matter is that the Minister of

Tourism, Culture and Recreation has a medical problem that takes him to Ottawa

for medical treatment. He has already been up there previously, some time within

the last month. He has an eye problem, if anybody looks at him can see. He is

wearing a patch those days and he has to go back to Ottawa in an effort to have

that corrected.

The information that I had passed along to me before I came to the House, Mr.

Speaker, was that the hon. minister had, in fact, travelled from his district to

St. John's today, just around lunchtime. I understand that he is doing this

CBC in-studio thing at about now and then he is heading to the airport to go to

Ottawa. Now that is the information. There is nothing false about it, that I

know. There is nobody deliberately misleading anything.

The hon. member is all hot to trot about something, but, Mr. Speaker, nobody

is misleading this House or giving false information to the House. Therefore, I

say, Your Honour, that there is no point of order.

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

MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

I do not mean to belabour this, Mr. Speaker, but to the point of order.

AN HON. MEMBER: Sit down.

MR. GRIMES: I will sit down when I am finished and the Speaker indicates

that I should, thank you very much.

I understand that our friends over there are getting a little sensitive

because they do not like the fact that, again, they provided misinformation to

this House. It was done by a minister of the Crown. Mr. Speaker, everybody who

sat here -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I do believe I heard the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair say deliberately',

and very audible from where I am. I will ask the member if she would rise and

apologize or withdraw the comment, that any minister deliberately misled the

House.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the minister, himself, has indicated to me that he

knew the difference when he said that he knew he was at CBC studios. If that is

not deliberately misleading this House -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It has always been ruled unparliamentary, regardless of the circumstances,

that a member should never, ever accuse another hon. member of deliberately

misleading the House, under any circumstances. It has always been ruled

unparliamentary. I am asking the member if she would stand in her place and

withdraw the comment.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I cannot withdraw the comment. Based on what I

heard the minister say in the House today, he has admitted that he knew the

difference.

MR. SPEAKER: Again, I appeal to the member, because we have parliamentary

rules and the rules of Parliament are such that the Chair does not have any

choices in this matter. The member has admitted that she said the words. The

Chair heard the words and therefore there is no need to check the records.

Again, I am asking the member, out of respect for Parliament itself. It has

always been ruled in this House, in Ottawa and all other parliamentary systems

in our democracy, that it is always unparliamentary to accuse another hon.

member of deliberately misleading the House. Again, I appeal to the member, one

last time, if she would rise in her place and withdraw the comment.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to yourself and to

Parliament, I honestly cannot withdraw those comments after hearing the

minister, himself, admit he knew the difference today in the House.

MR. SPEAKER: Again, I ask the member - I am reluctant to do this. You

know the next stage is that I will have to name you, name the hon. member

pursuant to the authority that is vested in me under the rules of this House in

Standing Order 22. I am asking the member one last time if she would, out of

respect for Parliament, withdraw the comment.

MS JONES: My deepest apologies to you, Mr. Speaker, and to my colleagues

in this Assembly but I cannot withdraw the comments that I have made. I feel

they are true and I feel that the minister, himself, in his own comments have

divulged such information to me that leads me to believe he knew the difference

when he made his original statement and has, indeed, misled this House and he

should be the one apologizing, not myself.

MR. SPEAKER: Yvonne Jones, I must name you for disregarding the authority

of the Chair and ask if you will withdraw from the House for the balance of the

sitting day.

Continuing the point of order, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I believe all members would recognize the seriousness of the issue with

respect to a member taking that action, all of which could have been avoided,

Mr. Speaker, if the Acting Government House Leader today - and this is the point

of order, because I believe when you review the tapes with respect to this point

of order, everyone who is here heard the explanation given at the beginning of

the day and the point of privilege when the Acting House Leader did not talk

anything about being in a district, travelling to St. John's, going to the

studio and then going to Ottawa, talked about a medical condition that was

serious enough so that the minister, because of the medical condition, could not

phone the member and apologize. That was the explanation given. We should

understand, as well, that the minister wasn't going to be present today

because of the nature of the medical condition which required treatment outside

the Province.

Subsequent to that, we find out that the Acting Government House Leader knew

all along that in fact the minister was in the city, not in the precincts of the

Legislature, but performing another function on behalf of government, on a radio

talk show where, at this very minute, he is still answering questions from the

public, even though the Legislature is open. That is deemed to be important,

that is deemed to be a priority. The Acting Government House Leader knew that.

He just confirmed that he knew that, that he was on a radio talk show. He just

said that with his own lips, Mr. Speaker, in this own words. Still, for all, he

tried to explain that you couldn't expect the minister to give the apology to

the member, that was given on behalf of the minister by the deputy, but the same

minister could take the time to draft a press release saying that it was the MHA

for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair who was putting out false information.

Mr. Speaker, it is a serious point of order, and I believe, in fact, that the

Acting Government House Leader should stand up and acknowledge that he did, in

fact, just provide misleading and infactual information to a member of the

Legislature, right in the Legislature.

Mr. Speaker, I know you are going to reserve on the Point of Privilege, and I

had an opportunity to speak to that before, but now we have the third instance

of a minister in the Legislature. We have the document itself which is being

dealt with, Mr. Speaker, this particular document which was provided to us,

Budget details and statistics for all provincial electoral districts, March 30,

2004. We have that document in which there have been incidents raised about

driver exams and now, in this particular case, about a travel subsidy for

Labrador, all of which is printed in here, by the way, and provided.

Now, you have the Minister of Environment and Conservation giving one

explanation to the House saying, oh, never mind the fact that it is in here. The

first explanation is, it is a work in progress, it is only a draft document, you

should ignore what is in this book.

On another matter, which is the travel subsidy for residents of Labrador, and

particularly students trying to participate in intra-provincial competitions,

which they have always done, the information written in here says it is

decreased by $10,000. It is there in black and white. The minister who,

supposedly, is too ill to call the member and clarify it, has the Deputy

Minister clarify it by phone, privately, and apologize for giving wrong

information, while the same minister is putting out a public document to the

whole world condemning the member for putting out false information, the Member

for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

I believe, in this instance, we have the government members who either don't

know, the ministers and others, what was provided to us. They are coming up with

a different excuse every day as to how to deal with it. In fact, what we have

asked in the point of privilege, which is what the Government House Leader will

deal with tomorrow, is whether or not the ministers will just get up and admit

that either false information was provided, which is what the deputy did but the

minister would not do - that would be a good acknowledgment, so that we can do

our work as members - or today we would have the Acting House Leader apologize

for spending a couple of minutes at the beginning of the session explaining why

the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation could not make a phone call to a

member, and why the deputy had to make the phone call instead, only to find out

that all the information provided was improper, non-factual information, and a

misrepresentation of the circumstance.

I believe are still owed, the rest of us are still owed, an apology by the

Acting House Leader to this point of order. I know that you will deal with the

bigger point of privilege later in the week, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much.

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

Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think it is an important point of order because this one document which was

released on May 7, to the Opposition, has caused, now we are up to four,

ministers to make statements that cause great difficulty for members on this

side of the House to do their work. I think it was Shakespeare who had a saying:

Oh, what a tangled web we weave.

Well, we have a very tangled web here now, Mr. Speaker. I will not say the

rest of that statement because I might get thrown out of the House, but there is

a very famous saying associated with that, and we have a very tangled web over

here.

The Member for Labrador West relied on that document and got answers from the

Minister of Government Services that turned out to be difficult for her and for

us to understand what was going on. The acting minister, on Thursday, gave

statements saying that it was a working document. We have the Minister of

Tourism, who is not here today, so I cannot expect him to answer today. Now, we

have the Acting Government House Leader, problems arising from the same

document.

It is time we had this document cleared up, Mr. Speaker. I know that the

Government House Leader has said that tomorrow he will have some answer for us,

because he is not here today, but surely somebody on the opposite side can

explain to the people of this Province, and of this House, what this document

was. Is it an official government document? Can we rely on it, or can we not?

Are we going to have this confusion go on for another week, with ministers

getting themselves in trouble saying things, trying to defend a document that

may or may not be accurate?

We have a very serious problem here and I think we can start off by having

the member who is here today, who made a statement today which certainly led me

- and I have to say that; I will not say deliberate, and I do not personally

think it was, but certainly the words he chose to use to explain the

circumstance led me - to a particular set of beliefs based on his statement. If

that is not misleading, I do not know how anyone defines misleading.

I am not suggesting that it was deliberate, but perhaps the air can start to

be cleared if the member opposite would apologize to the House for giving the

impression, or allowing people to get the impression, that something was true

that was not.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The only comment I would add is that I sat here as well and listened to what

the Acting Government House Leader had to say today. I would also suggest, I do

not think he - not deliberately. He made the statement, he deliberately made the

statement, but not that he deliberately intended to mislead us.

The point is, I think his statement has been misleading. I think the Acting

Government House Leader - there is no other way to take what he said here today,

other than the fact that the Minister of Tourism Culture and Recreation could

not do it because he was ill. If there were other facts that were not given at

the time, that is fine, but there is nothing wrong - there has been a misleading

of the people. I think it is only proper and the honourable thing to do, for the

Acting Government House Leader to say: Fine, if I left out some information, if

I left the wrong impression, I want to correct it. That is all, and we move on,

but we find ourselves in a situation - this is not a case of not being big

enough to stand up and say it. I know the hon. member is honourable and he would

do what is right, but we end up here today with the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse

au Clair, who has been evicted from the Chamber over something that was not her

fault, that the minister did not give the full picture.

I suggest, in the sake of sanity here, and propriety here in this House, that

the Acting Government House Leader can save all of us a lot of trouble, and all

of us a lot of dignity, by saying: Look, I did not give the full facts. I am

sorry if I misled anybody. Let's move on.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank members for their submissions. Unfortunately, the Member for

Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair is not here because she used the words,

deliberately misleading, which are not parliamentary and Your Honour had no

other choice but to deal with it.

Mr. Speaker, I have been here for a long time on both sides of the House and

I have never given deliberately misleading information to the Legislature. If

anybody took that that way, I certainly apologize. The information I gave to the

Legislature, Mr. Speaker, when I originally stood today, was the information

that I had. I was advised earlier in the day that the minister, for medical

reasons, would be travelling out of the Province to receive that medical

attention today. After I had said that in the House, I think I was advised that,

in fact, he had arrived in the city from his district somewhere around

lunchtime, was doing the CBC Radio phone-in show and then heading on to Ottawa.

That information came subsequently to what I said earlier.

There was no intent to mislead, there is no intent to misinform, there is no

intent to be anything but honourable, and I would hope that if the impression

do apologize, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Speaker acknowledges the comments of the hon. the Acting

Government House Leader in issuing an apology for any comments that he has made.

I do believe the intent of the point of order is that would be the purpose that

has now been achieved. Therefore, we will proceed on to the rest of the day's

agenda.

I do believe I had not called for, I think it was the fourth time, further

statements by ministers. Further statements by ministers? Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on Thursday afternoon past in this Legislature, the Member for

Burgeo & LaPoile, on behalf of the Official Opposition, introduced a motion

calling for the creation of an all-party committee to draft the policy document

that would be presented to all federal candidates and party leaders in the

upcoming federal election. The purpose of the document would be to outline areas

of concern and importance to this Province and request federal candidates to

support our issues before they are elected to represent us in Ottawa.

Mr. Speaker, the question today to the Premier is, whether or not he and the

government will join with our Party and the New Democratic Party to ensure that

the issues of importance to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are clearly stated

during the upcoming federal election by moving on this motion that was

introduced last Thursday?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the Leader of the Opposition is aware, last week, on behalf of the

Province, I was in Europe on matters of importance to 5 Wing Goose Bay, on

foreign overfishing - of course, it is a huge issue for the people of the

Province - and, as well, on issues of trade with regard to business attraction

for the Province and investment in the Province. It was a very worthwhile trip.

It was a jam-packed six days, I can tell you, five countries in six days, but,

in fact, I think we have accomplished a lot and achieved a lot for the Province

during that trip.

My point being, Mr. Speaker, with regard to the question, I was not in the

House last Thursday and I apologize for not having seen the motion at this

particular point in time. I just came back over the weekend, but I will

certainly have a look at it and respond in due course.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe we will ask the question again tomorrow, after the Premier has had a

chance to look at the kinds of things that have been happening in this Province

while he has been away.

Mr. Speaker, there are many issues of importance facing Newfoundland and

Labrador, many of which are directly related to the federal government. There is

an upcoming federal election that will provide a good opportunity to receive

written comments from our federal candidates, and over the last seven months

very few of our federal-provincial issues have been addressed and very little

has developed into actual benefits for Newfoundland and Labrador. This new

government committed, in their Blue Book, to get a better deal from Ottawa on

equalization, just to name one issue. Equalization. In fact, to date we probably

have a worse deal on equalization than we had before. The question for the

Premier is: Could you please provide an update to the people of the Province on

your efforts since seven months ago to get a better deal on equalization in

particular?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of Opposition implies that, because I was outside of

the Province, I was not interested in things that were happening in the

Province. Of course, nothing is further from the truth. In order to try and

improve the economy and the desperate financial situation that he and his

government have left us, we have to try to attract business to this Province. I

am very proud, in fact, that we took the time to do that and made some wonderful

business network connections through the various embassies in Rome, in Paris, in

Brussels and in Berlin, and I intend to do absolutely more of that. No apologies

for that; I am very proud to have done that.

With regard to the federal-provincial relations, by the admission of the

Leader of the Opposition last year when he was Premier, in fact, he indicated

that provincial-federal relations were at an all-time low. I am very proud to

say that they are starting to move now to an all-time high. We have nurtured

that, and fostered it. We have worked co-operatively. I actually spoke with the

Prime Minister recently, a little over a week ago, on the whole issue of foreign

overfishing. At that particular point in time, I indicated to him that I wanted

to address the issue concerning the Atlantic Accord. I am delighted to say that

he tried to contact me when I was in Rome, and the connection was lost, and I

made a call during the weekend, so we are working very hard on

federal-provincial relations because we feel that is very, very important to the

Province. Of course, just as the economy -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Premier now to complete his answer very quickly.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Just as the economy has bottomed out and hit an

all-time low with the past government, so have federal-provincial relations, but

we intend to move them both back to normality. In fact, it is just a matter of

time.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, maybe just for the record, the short answer on equalization is

that they have done nothing about equalization, because he never mentioned it

and he had an opportunity to answer.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday on a local television program, and today on an Open

Line program, our minister in the federal Cabinet conducted interviews in which

he commented publicly on federal-provincial issues, including the Atlantic

Accord, and during these interviews our federal minister stated that the

Province is currently getting a fair share from our offshore resources.

Mr. Speaker, the question for the Premier is this: Could you please update

us, as to what representation you have made to the federal government on getting

the maximum benefits from our offshore resources, and why the federal

government, through its minister in this Province, is now saying that we are

getting a fair deal today? And, does he agree with the federal minister who

claims we are getting lots and lots and lots of money from the offshore

resources?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there is one thing for certain that I agree with the federal

minister, and that is when he indicated the hon. gentleman opposite and his

government had left us a financial nightmare. There is a lot of truth in that,

and I certainly agree with him totally on that.

With regard to his statements on Open Line, I did not hear his statements on

Open Line. I did not hear his other public statements. I joined him today when

he presented a cheque to the Province for disaster relief for Badger and for

Corner Brook, which we are very grateful to receive and thanked him very much

for that.

As well, as the hon. gentleman knows, we have presented a detailed submission

to the federal government, and have done so some considerable time ago. As well,

what I have done on behalf of the government and on behalf of the Cabinet, is

that I canvassed all the other Premiers across the country, something which the

hon. gentleman, of course, failed to do last year when he was looking for

fisheries support and amendments to the Constitution. He never bothered to ask

the other Premiers whether they would be interested at the time. Actually, when

it comes to fisheries issues, he is never interested enough to ask any

questions, quite frankly. That is his record with regard to the FPI issue.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Premier now to complete his answer.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, if I might add, we certainly canvassed all

the Premiers and have the support of eleven out of twelve, and the soft support

of the twelfth Premier. As well, we also have taken the initiative to write the

leaders of the federal parties, the New Conservative Party as well as the New

Democratic Party, and have, in a response from -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Yes, we did have a slight accident when we wrote -

We received a good response, actually. The response was that they were in

favour and support our position on the Atlantic Accord, so we are very, very

well positioned, there is no doubt about it, with regard to the Atlantic Accord.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is becoming more and more obvious, I think, the more the Premier speaks,

that he has either neglected this issue with respect to the Atlantic Accord, or

his message is not being heard in Ottawa at all, if our own federal minister is

doing interviews in the Province saying that we are doing great, thank you very

much, and saying that we should not expect equalization changes, because you

cannot have your cake and eat it too, then the message is wasted on other

is going to be decided.

The question again, I will ask, Mr. Speaker, maybe he will address it this

time: What is it exactly that the Premier can report to the people of the

Province that he has done that might actually be getting our argument heard with

the federal government in Ottawa - not with somebody in New Brunswick, not with

somebody in British Columbia, but with the Prime Minister of Canada in Ottawa,

and the federal minister for Newfoundland and Labrador, who is still down here

today saying we are getting our fair share under the Atlantic Accord? What is he

doing to influence the people who need to be influenced?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Before I tell the hon. gentleman opposite what I have done, I will tell him

what I have not done. I have not aggravated and annoyed and insulted the current

Prime Minister, the former Prime Minister, possible leadership candidates, as he

did, the federal minister and federal MPs of his own Party, as he did while he

was in office. I have not done that, if we can set the record straight on that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: What we have done: When the new Prime Minister came

into power, within one week he invited me to join with him for a meeting, and I

people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Of those five issues, the Atlantic Accord

was one, as well as foreign overfishing, Five-Wing Goose, the Churchill and

other important issues to the people of the Province.

Since then, I have spoken to him on the phone on several occasions. I have

also met him at First Ministers' Conferences where we have had an opportunity

to address this. I have developed a good relationship with your good friend,

John Efford, the Minister of Natural Resources, and we continue to discuss that.

I have a commitment, as I just told you, from the Prime Minister to call me back

and we will be discussing the Atlantic Accord in that.

I have spoken, as well, to the Minister of Natural Resources, with regard to

his -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER WILLIAMS: And you shouldn't put words in the mouth of the

Minister of Natural Resources.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Premier now to complete his answer.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: He is merely providing information to the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador and explaining the situation, explaining that we do

get royalties, however they are clawed back and there is an offset. It is the

gap in that offset that we are after.

Perhaps if you just took the time to clearly explain rather than try to put

words in the mouth of the federal Minister of Natural Resources, who certainly

doesn't need it and nor do I.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh !

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

Before we proceed, the last number of exchanges have taken approximately a

minute and fifteen seconds both ways. I ask members if they could keep their

questions shorter and also their responses a little bit shorter as well.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the minister answered as he did, because he continues

to tout the so-called wonderful new relationship with Ottawa. Well, I can tell

you, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are waiting to see some results,

especially with a federal election just around the corner.

Mr. Speaker, it doesn't sound like good results when the federal minister -

he can defend him if he wants, he can defend the federal minister who says: You

cannot expect changes in equalization, because you can't have your cake and

eat it too. If he agrees with that, stand up and tell the people of the

Province. If he agrees with a federal minister who says, everything is okay with

the Atlantic Accord, stand up and tell the people of the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member now to get to his question.

MR. GRIMES: I won't be saying that, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the question is this: What about the 8.5 per cent share in

Hibernia? What is the latest update? There is an election about to be announced.

What is the latest update? Never mind the wonderful dinners and the phone calls

and the great relationship, what about some action on something for the benefit

of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I indicated previously, we have a response from the New Democratic Party,

we have a response from the Conservative Party, and the only party from which we

don't have a response, of course, is your party, the Liberal Party of Canada.

We are awaiting that response.

I would assume the hon. gentleman opposite would have a good working

relationship with the Liberal Party, and would be working on our behalf, working

jointly together, to make sure we get the answers that are necessary, instead of

working against us, working against your own people, working against the people

of the Province, in order to try to prevent this from happening. The hon.

gentleman doesn't want us to succeed. He doesn't want any good news for the

people of the Province. That is his problem. It is just negative, negative,

negative.

We are positive, we are going to think positive, and we are going to deliver

for the people of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The record, Mr. Speaker, shows no progress whatsoever on equalization, no

progress whatsoever on the Atlantic Accord, and no progress whatsoever on the

8.5 per cent, but lots of lovely chats.

Mr. Speaker, one last question. Another separate question. Last week we do

understand and recognize that the Premier was on a different mission and was not

in the Legislature, and I do not know whether he is aware or not because he was

not aware of the motion made, but the Estimates Committee for the Department of

Business - which is the pride and joy of the Premier, personally, and he, the

minister of it - proceeded without the minister, the Premier who is also the

minister, being available to answer questions.

I ask the Premier directly today: Would you agree, by consent - because we

would gladly do it - to resume the Estimates Committee for the Department of

Business so you can tell us about the wonderful things that your new department

is going to create and do for the benefit of people in Newfoundland and

Labrador? Would he commit to that today so that we can explore some of the good

things, because so far we have heard nothing but bad news and no results from

this government?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I understand in my absence last week, when I was working on

behalf of the people of the Province, that an issue was made of the fact that I

could not be at the Estimates for the Department of Business. Well,

unfortunately I felt - and I am sure the absent member for Labrador and the

other present member for Labrador would agree, that issues of importance for

Labrador, like 5 Wing Goose Bay, are very, very important to the people of the

Province and, indeed, the people of the Labrador. So that is why we went on that

mission. We went to meet with the Italian Air Force and the German Air Force and

the Dutch Air Force, and the embassies in all these cities. The other thing,

from a business attraction perspective, the single, most important thing I did

from the business side was to meet with these ambassadors to discuss business

opportunities, to discuss networking, to bring European investment to this

Province so that we can grow the economy, so that we can create jobs, so that we

can economically diversify. That is why I went.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: As well, Mr. Speaker, something which obviously is not

of interest to the hon. gentleman opposite, is the whole issue of foreign

overfishing. I went over there to advocate our case on behalf of -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Premier now to complete his answer.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I went over there to advocate our case on behalf of the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador because of the overfishing that is going on our banks

and our communities are closing. Our people are leaving the Province. That is

why I went to Europe, and that is why I was not here!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The question was quite simple and straightforward. Now that you are back in

the Province would you like to have three hours at an Estimates Committee

meeting to expound further on what you just talked about in answer to that

question? Would you like to have an opportunity to come before the Estimates

Committee as the Minister Responsible for Business and spend three hours

explaining exactly what you plan to do for Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, at that particular Estimates Committee meeting I was very

capably represented by the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development

and because both departments are working together, working in tandem, she was

very capable of making that representation. I understand -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: - I do not know if my information is correct, if it is

not I will certainly clarify it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Read Hansard.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has recognized the hon. the Premier and I ask the Premier now if he

could complete his answer.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In conclusion, I might add, it is also my understanding that the hon. members

opposite, who were part of that committee, showed up and then left because they

really did not care about the business that was taking place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, a very simple, straightforward question. The answer can be yes or no.

The Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, in her own Estimates,

said: Any questions about the new Business Department should be addressed to the

minister responsible, who is the Premier, because he knows what is going on, I

don't. Mr. Speaker, that is her own words. It is in Hansard.

We are saying, you are now back in the Province, Premier, yes or no, would

you like an opportunity to come to an Estimates Committee meeting at your

convenience tonight, tomorrow morning, tomorrow night, next week, the week

after? At your convenience, would you like an opportunity to come and do the

Estimates for the Department of Business that you are supposedly so proud of?

Would you like to do that?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding - and I can be corrected if I am wrong -

that that particular Estimates Committee meeting is over, that it has been

passed and that it is done.

Now, what I do suggest to the hon. gentleman opposite is, you have Question

Period, so if you want to stand up tomorrow for thirty minutes and ask me

questions on the Department of Business feel free to do so because I will answer

each and every one them!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday gas prices hit the roof, the highest we have ever

seen in our Province. There is no question that government and the oil companies

are going to benefit from increased profits. Taxes amount to about 40 per cent

of the total cost per litre of fuel. That means that almost half of every fill

up is going to the government. Given the extra burden these sky-high prices have

on consumers, the minister must consider implementing a cap on the taxes paid to

government. There will be no loss to government since the cap will only take

effect when prices get to a level that government receives extra profits.

Will the Minister of Finance, today, implement such a cap on gasoline taxes

to protect our consumers?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is that kind of math, almost 50 per cent, that got us a billion dollar

deficit. I would like to state that currently now, at the moment I speak, 23.5

per cent of the gasoline is provincial tax. Last year's average was 26.9 per

cent. The member should know that in 1991 we moved from an ad valorem to a per

litre tax and that is 16.5 cents and as -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Having a tax - and I support having tax per litre as opposed to ad valorem

tax, which means that as the price of gasoline goes up discretionary income

people may not be able to use as much so the consumption per litre goes down and

we lose money on gasoline tax, number one, because consumption may go down. So

we are losing when it is per litre. Number two, government -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to complete his answer.

MR. SULLIVAN: If you want to hear the answer I will give it, if not I

will sit down.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: If they do not want to hear it, that is no problem.

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

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, it is clear that his answer is no to the

consumers of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, the federal government are just as guilty -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I am asking members on all sides of the House if they would co-operate. The

Member for Grand Falls-Buchans has the floor and she should be heard in relative

silence while she is posing her question.

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the federal government are just as guilty of gouging consumers

with gas taxes as the Minister of Finance is. A dollar a litre the federal

treasury is profiting from us every time we fill up our vehicles. What

representation has the Minister of Finance or your Cabinet colleagues made to

the federal government concerning the high price of gas?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If the federal government is charging a higher rate and they feel it is a

problem, it is a matter that needs to be addressed with the federal government.

I will not doubt that, Mr. Speaker.

The member should know that the problem with gas prices is international in

scope. It is beyond the scope of any provincial government to fix that problem.

In fact, if the federal government wants to do something and deal with it, they

have that option under their gasoline structure. But here in our Province, Mr.

Speaker, we have a per litre tax and we stand to lose gasoline tax as a result

of this measure. Furthermore, we also burn gasoline in government vehicles that

is going up in price. So that is an extra cost to us. We are going to lose a

double whammy, Mr. Speaker, not only in reduced consumption, but also in higher

costs for government vehicles that are necessary to use.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is clear there are a couple of things at play here today. Number one, you

do not intend to give any break to the consumers of this Province. I do not know

what happened to the federal-provincial relationship. It is down the sink hole,

as you just said, because you never even asked them about it.

Mr. Speaker, gas prices are the highest ever and the Petroleum Products

Pricing Commission Office is still up in the air. The only thing we know is that

the Premier and the Minister of Government Services have confirmed that there

will be an office in Grand Falls-Windsor.

I want to ask the Minister of Government Services today: Minister, is it true

that the function of the Commission is going to be taken over by the Public

Utilities Board? Would you answer that, please?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, I have spoken with the pricing commissioner just

this morning and then I will be making an announcement tomorrow with regard to

the Pricing Commission.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Finance. It talks about gambling in the

Province, particularly video gambling machines that are destroying families, not

only in this Province, Mr. Speaker, but across the country. In Nova Scotia,

between 2001-2002, ten suicides were linked to gambling. In conversation with

Dr. Simon Avis, the Chief Medical Examiner for our Province, I was informed that

last year we had three suicides. Of the three suicides we had gambling may have

played a role. One, we all know for sure did.

We have all heard the tragic stories that are linked to gambling. I want to

ask the minister if government intends to do as other provinces are preparing to

do, and that is reduce the number of machines that are available, limit the

times they can be used and cause interruptions to occur at frequent times, et

cetera?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker

We realize that there are serious concerns with people using them. In fact,

when I was in Opposition, I raised the issue that people did not have an

opportunity for access, and then they put a number on the machines where you

could call to get help. This year, and I have been saying for some time, we need

to increase our consciousness of this problem because it does destroy people's

lives. We added it into the Budget this year. Traditionally, there has been

$300,000 in the Budget to deal with addictions; $150,000 of it traditionally put

in by government and $150,000 by the beverage industry. This year, we increased

the government's commitment by another $100,000 to try to deal with some of

the concerns, because it is a concern. It is an area that the people in the

Department of Health are very conscious about. It is an area in which we

certainly hope people would resort to responsible gambling. There are people who

have addictions, and we have to be able to provide services to people who need

help and make sure it is there when they need it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: (Inaudible) years ago it was $52.4 million. Today it is $110

million. The Minister of Finance today stood in his place in this House a little

while ago, when he was in Opposition, and talked about the moral obligation that

government has to people who become addicted to gambling. You also stated that,

if elected, your government would allocate 5 per cent of gambling revenues to

treat addiction. Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the minister: Where is the $5

million that is lacking to help people with their problems today?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I did not indicate that we would, if we were elected, put 5 per cent. I did a

news release some time ago saying - and I spoke on it publicly on numerous

occasions - that we should start and work up toward that percent. I did numerous

interviews on it. I did one on the parliamentary channel, actually, federally,

on the same thing in one of the pubs down off Duckworth Street, Mr. Speaker, and

I indicated that we should start increasing our contribution until it gets to a

certain percent.

First of all, I think his question should reflect what I accurately did say.

I am a believer that we should increase it. The previous government, for a

number of years, did not put one extra cent in and we increased it significantly

this year. Certainly, the problem is there. The Department of Health, in

conjunction, working with them, we might, hopefully, be able to allocate more

money in the future toward that problem.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to ask the minister this: If his government is prepared to do as

Alberta has done, prepared to allow communities who wish to have the right to

hold a referendum to ban video lottery machines in their communities during next

year's municipal election, and if they agree, will they do so in time for this

referendum to take place on the ballot during next year's municipal elections

in the Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, if I may, I want to respond to the hon.

gentleman's question because it is a matter that is of grave concern to me,

quite frankly, something that personally has bothered me for a long, long time.

I am glad you have raised it. It is a good set of questions.

We have to find a way to address this problem. I know there was actually, in

fact, a referendum in New Brunswick and I was very surprised at the outcome

because they actually voted to leave them in place. We do have a fiscal problem

here, and there is no justification for the hardship that is happening to

families. I know families, personally, who have lost their homes.

MR. REID: How well did you know them?

PREMIER WILLIAMS: If the Member for Twillingate & Fogo would just

allow me, this is a very serious matter. There is no need to be playing games

here.

It is something that we are going to have a look at. It was a small step to

add a few dollars towards the addiction side, towards the treatment side. It is

something we are going to look at, during our term in office, and we are going

to try and do something about it. I cannot make any rash commitments to you

right now; neither can the minister or our Cabinet. It is a matter of very, very

grave concern that is causing a lot of hardship on a lot of families in this

Province. I do not like it, and we have to try to find a way to deal with it.

Thank you for your question.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for Question Period has expired.

MR. HARRIS: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order has been raised by the Member for Signal

Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to raise a point of order concerning a statement by the Minister

of Finance and President of Treasury Board just a few moments ago in Question

Period, and offer him an opportunity to correct himself; because it is my view -

and it is not only my view, Mr. Speaker, the facts speak for themselves - that

he has misled the House in his statement about what he said when he was in

Opposition.

I have in front of me a news release dated October 15, 1999, which comes off

the PC Party Web site on May 13. The headline is: The Province should allocate

five per cent of provincial lottery profits towards gambling addictions.

The first paragraph says, "Opposition Health critic Loyola Sullivan is

calling on the province to allocate a minimum five per cent of total lottery

profits to help those people victimized by gambling addictions."

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to table it, or ask a Page to show it to the hon.

member, because this is absolutely unequivocal, not qualified in any way, a

clear statement by the minister when he was Opposition Health critic, saying,

not that we would work our way up towards it but that we would dedicate a

minimum of 5 per cent to this particular cause.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Yes, he did say it. He did say various things in addition to

that, but the last sentence is a quote, "Five per cent of total lottery

revenues for rehabilitation services isn't asking very much, considering the

dilemma many families are confronted with through gambling."

I would offer him an opportunity to correct himself, Mr. Speaker, but I do

say that he certainly misled the House and misled the people of the Province in

saying what he did in answer to the question from the Member for Labrador West.

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

Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I did, on numerous occasions, speak. I did indicate that they should allocate

5 per cent. I did an interview with Roger Bill for C-PAC and I did numerous

interviews at the time and I indicated that it is money you cannot throw in

immediately. You have to start and build it up. There were numerous interviews

that were done publicly at the time, that could vouch for that.

Yes, I did indicate it was a goal and I did say up to 5 per cent, but it

could not be done immediately. I also made that statement numerous times in

public. If that is the specifics of this that he interpreted, I certainly accept

this as a release, I say to the hon. member, but if he would follow up on other

things emanating from that he would find that I said that it could not be done

overnight, it would have to work up to a certain level.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order. We have a disagreement between two hon. members

over the presentation of facts and that, in itself, does not constitute a valid

point of order. So, there is no point of order on this particular matter.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees? Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to move the following private member's

resolution:

WHEREAS the challenge of constructing and maintaining transportation

infrastructure in Newfoundland and Labrador is enormous, given our difficult

terrain and our relatively small population dispersed over a large area; and

WHEREAS much of this Province's existing transportation infrastructure has

deteriorated in recent years as a consequence of insufficient funding; and

WHEREAS the Constitution of Canada establishes the principle of equalization

which directs governments in Canada to reduce the disparity of opportunities

associated with the relatively poor fiscal capacity of a province; and

with this and other provinces whereby it has funded or cost-shared valuable

infrastructure work; and

WHEREAS in 1988, fifteen-years ago, Newfoundland and Labrador entered into

the transportation initiative known as the Roads for Rail Agreement, and this

agreement has now expired, leaving the Province with significantly diminished

funding in the face of an undiminished need; and

WHEREAS proper transportation infrastructure is required to attract and

complement investments that will create jobs and opportunities in our

communities.

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House call upon the Government of

Canada to enter into a comprehensive transportation infrastructure agreement

with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to our Standing Orders, I am taking this opportunity

now to inform all hon. members that this coming Wednesday is the government

Private Members' Day and the resolution that was just read into the record by

my colleague from Bonavista South will be the resolution that will be up for

debate.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion? Answers to questions for which

notice has been given? Petitions? Orders of the Day.

Oh, I am sorry. I apologize to the hon. Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

Petitions

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

petition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I stand today to present a petition to this hon. House regarding

the schooling situation in Carbonear, from the parents and students out there,

and how upset they are over the actions of the present government. I want to

read to the House, the petition:

WHEREAS parents and students in Carbonear do not want to have their school

close and unnecessarily bus students to Harbour Grace; and

WHEREAS existing school boards now cease to exist; and

WHEREAS a decision to close St. Mary's primary school in St. John's has

been reversed; and

WHEREAS a new school in Carbonear is necessary; and

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the

House of Assembly to reverse the decision of the Avalon West School Board to

close St. Joseph's school, reverse the decision to bus students to Harbour

Grace and commit funds to construct a new school in Carbonear.

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday past there was a giant motorcade in Carbonear,

ending up with a rally at the parking lot of the school in Carbonear, St. Joseph's

school. The school was surrounded by parents, students and teachers from St.

Joseph's and from the surrounding area, protesting the lack of action by this

government in not having the new school board, that they just recently

appointed, set up in a way that they can meet with these parents and hear their

cases. The parents and myself, and all the residents in the area, feel that the

decision of the former school board - the one that is now disband - should be

held or reversed until the new school board has an opportunity to take action

and do something regarding the school situation in the area.

Mr. Speaker, St. Joseph's school is an exemplary school. The principal of

the school was principal of the year last year on a national level. The students

and parents have come together there and the programs that are offered are

exemplary. We look at the situation now where that school will close in

September and the students will be bused to Harbour Grace. The school in Harbour

Grace, St. Francis, is not ready. There has been no funding committed. There has

been no tender calls for the necessary renovations to the school to accommodate

the larger influx of students. The remainder of students from St. Joseph's

will be transferred to Davis Elementary. Davis Elementary, itself, is not ready.

There has been all kinds of talk about building a piece on. There is nowhere to

build a piece onto that school in Carbonear, Davis Elementary. The only sensible

thing to do would be to build a new school. Construct a new school in the area.

A little while ago the Minister of Finance told me I was wasting my time, but

I want to say that I am not wasting my time because the minister himself got a

school approved in this year's Budget for his own district, which was not even

on the list of recommended schools by that school board.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. SWEENEY: By leave, just to conclude?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. SWEENEY: On behalf of the residents of Carbonear and the students of

Carbonear, our situation is no different. We should be looked at under the

vigilance of the new school board that is coming in place.

Mr. Speaker, this petition and others will follow because there are more

names coming on a daily basis. I will be back to state my case again.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate this opportunity and I am very pleased to see that the Minister

of Government Services is in her seat because it directly concerns her

department and the closure of the weigh scales at Port aux Basques.

I returned to my district on the weekend and I was presented with this

petition. I am amazed with the swiftness of its preparation and its signing

because it was done when I got back home on Friday, notwithstanding that the

announcement was only made last week. I understand this is one of many to come.

I am sure the minister is aware of the outcry that has taken place in this

Province in the last four to five days concerning her government's decision to

close the weigh scales, particularly the one at Port aux Basques.

I understand now the Minister of Justice might also have a problem because -

in terms of personnel and human lives, which are affected by the actual transfer

- the four personnel in Port aux Basques are going to bump into the Pynns Brook

station, which causes the Minister of Justice some problems in his district too.

The basic, biggest problem here is that this was done without any consideration

whatsoever for the safety of the people of this Province or the 400,000 people a

year who visit this Province. We are saving $400,000 a year by laying off ten

people. They average about $40,000 a piece in terms of wages, four of them in

Port aux Basques. So about $160,000 in the Port aux Basques operation. Very

little, if anything, to infrastructure. Yet, the safety factors of 80,000-plus

vehicles coming off the ferry now without inspection - I have to clarify,

because there is some confusion as well, that the people at these stations just

do not weigh trucks. They are inspectors. They are qualified journeymen

mechanics who say whether the straps are on right.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. PARSONS: Yes. Does the truck have the right load? Is it a wide load?

Is it a narrow load? If it is wide, do they have an escort? Do they have a

permit to get into the Province? If they are overweight, how do we insist that

they get their load taken off and broken down? What are their tires like? Are

their axles working? Are their shocks working? That is what happens at this

weigh station there. We are now allowing this government - this minister is

going to allow 80,000-plus tractor-trailers to come into this Province and go

270,000 kilometres without any such inspection.

The other piece I would like to point out to the minister, there is some

commentary about the scales being broken since last July. Well, actually they

were. The scales themselves - the weigh mechanism was broken as a result of an

electrical outage caused by a thunderstorm and lightening.

The minister's department, the director himself was notified, not once -

because I checked with the four personnel who worked with the weigh scales. I

said: Why didn't you let me know? They said: Well, it is not our job to let

you know, Mr. Parsons. You are the MHA, what does it have to do with you? We

went to the people who should be fixing these things. We went to our bosses and

we told them repeatedly to fix it. They fixed it alright. The decision of the

minister and the director, the easiest way to fix the problem was close it down.

That is exactly what they have done. A $7,000 problem - that could cost 7,000

lives if that station do not stay open - was not fixed because somebody said we

did not have the money in the Budget to fix it. Where do we put value on people's

lives in this Province anymore? I did not think we did. This petition expresses

the frustration, not only of myself here today in explaining it, but all the

people in that area of the Province who use it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The member has leave.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the opportunity and I will, indeed. This is a very sensitive,

important issue and I will be back again because this is not an issue that

deserves to stay as it is. The minister needs to look beyond the few dollars she

is saving, think about the lives that it will protect and make sure that this

decision is reversed. It is totally unacceptable; without logic, without

rationale. If you want to save $160,000 and you insist on saving it from the

wage category, get rid of or lay off - as you are doing - to junior people. You

do not have to close the facility and compromise everyone's safety. If you are

only interested in saving the bucks, do it by the usual layoff procedures under

the Collective Bargaining process. Do not close the station. You have tried to

accomplish one thing here, save a few measly dollars from a salary package, and

what have you done? You have compromised everybody's safety and security in

this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, Order 9, second reading,

An Act To Amend The

Survival Of Actions Act. (Bill 11).

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 11,

An Act To Amend The

Survival Of Actions Act, be now read a second time.

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

Actions Act." (Bill 11)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased this afternoon to introduce

this bill,

An Act To Amend The Survival Of Actions Act. This amendment relates

to changing the law respecting limitation periods for taking legal action that

survive the death of a person.

Now, Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of members, it is important to realize that

when someone has a cause of action, when someone has had a wrong done to them or

when their contract has been breached, then they have the right to sue and they

have the right to take an action. They must do it within a period of time that

is known as a limitation period. If you do not commence the action within that

limitation period, the action is lost. This particular piece of legislation

deals with changing the limitation period that exists under the Survival Of

Actions Act.

I should say, first of all, Mr. Speaker, that a number of years ago the

Newfoundland and Labrador Law Reform Commission conducted a study into the

various limitation periods and tried to come up with a rational system in

dealing with the many limitation periods that existed. The Law Reform Commission

recommended, at the time, that all limitation periods be divided into three: two

years, six years, ten years. Of course, for certain causes of action there would

not be a limitation period. For example, Mr. Speaker, if you have a cause of

action against someone for trespass to your property, there is a two year

limitation period. If you have an action to recover a debt, the limitation

period in that period of time would be six years. Actions to recover land, for

example, would be ten-year limitation periods. Certain pieces of legislation,

Mr. Speaker, have not been brought into that system, and the limitation period

under the Survival of Actions Act is one of them. This bill will amend the

Survival of Actions Act by eliminating the special limitation periods tied to

the date of probate or administration of an estate or the date of death of a

person.

This act will, instead, provide that the usual limitation periods that are

set out in the Limitations Act, which was legislation passed after the

Newfoundland and Labrador Law Reform Commission made its report, will apply.

Mr. Speaker, when the Law Reform Commission, in 1986, considered whether the

period that is set out in the Survival of Actions Act should be reviewed, it was

determined that it was not appropriate to change the period set out in the act

at that time without further consultation with members of the bar.

Mr. Speaker, under the existing provisions of the act, under

Section 5 - and

I will read it for the benefit of all hon. members.

Section 5 of the Survival of

Actions Act states, "An action shall not be brought under this Act unless

proceedings are started within 6 months after letters of probate or

administration of the estate of the deceased have been granted and proceedings

shall not be started in an action under this Act after the expiration of 1 year

after the date of death of the deceased."

Mr. Speaker, this wording, dealing with the six-month period and the one-year

period, has resulted in missed limitation periods due to the short time frame

for actions to be taken after death and the difficulty in determining whether a

litigant or a potential litigant has died, and whether a person's estate has,

in fact, been probated or administered. This has negatively impacted on some

lawyers and some clients and some potential litigants in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, the Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador and various members

of the legal community have expressed concerns about this issue and have

requested this amendment. This amendment to the Survival of Actions Act will

remove the six-month and one-year limitation periods in favour of the various

periods that are set out in the Limitations act. As I said, that is two years,

six years and ten years.

Mr. Speaker, this amendment is consistent with the Survival of Actions act in

Nova Scotia, British Columbia and Alberta. As well, the legislation in New

Brunswick and Saskatchewan has a similar effect.

This change to the Survival of Actions Act in Newfoundland and Labrador is

overdue. Mr. Speaker, I believe this change will be a positive one and will be

widely supported within the legal community and, in fact, as I mentioned, the

Law Society has requested this amendment.

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this amendment to the act, Mr.

Speaker. I ask for the support of all hon. members in the passing of this

amendment, and I look forward to the participation of all hon. members on both

sides of the House in this debate.

Thank you.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the opportunity to have a few comments in second reading on this

bill,

An Act To Amend The Survival Of Actions Act.

The minister is quite right, it is basically a corrective action being taken

at this time, because when the major overhaul was done to the Limitations Act

some years ago, the cross-reference and how it would impact upon the Survival of

Actions Act was missed, quite frankly. A gentleman by the name of, a

practitioner here in town, Mr. Steve Marshall, actually, I met with him about a

couple of years ago and brought it to our attention and to the attention of the

Law Society because the Survival of Actions Act was very obvious to Mr. Marshall

because in his line of work, in which he does a lot of personal injury claims,

he was quite often dealing with fatalities and initiating lawsuits on behalf of

people's estates who had been killed in traffic accidents. He became aware of

this conflict very quickly, between what the Survival of Actions Act permitted

and what the Limitations Act permitted. He came back, the legislative draftsmen

in the Department of Justice and myself reviewed it with Mr. Marshall at the

time, we went back to the Law Society, and all parties concur that this was

merely on oversight and it was a conflict that could not be allowed to continue

to exist between the Limitations Act and the Survival of Actions Act, because it

is never anyone's intention, of course, to take anyone's rights away, if you

have rights. The purpose, of course, is to try and let people know and avail of

those rights. It was an unintentional, shall we say, consequence of an amendment

of Limitations Act that impacted upon the Survival of Actions Act.

The purpose of this bill, now, is to remove that conflict so that we do have

consistency and the Limitations of Actions Act will, in fact, rule on a

go-forward basis. That is the principle. An anomaly, I guess, we have. So, the

purpose of this legislation is corrective in nature and that is why we,

certainly, on this side of the House, will be fully supportive of this

amendment. We all appreciate, in fact, it started on our watch, and we are very

pleased to see that the current government is continuing with this piece of

legislation.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now

read a second time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Survival Of Actions Act. (Bill 11)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a second time. When shall the

said bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House? Now? Tomorrow?

AN HON. MEMBER: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Survival Of Actions Act,"

read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House on

tomorrow. (Bill 11)

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, Order 10, second reading of a bill,

An Act To

Amend The Corporations Act. (Bill 4)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 10,

An Act To Amend The

Corporations Act, be now read a second time.

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

Act." (Bill 4)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today, to rise in the House to

introduce Bill 4,

An Act To Amend The Corporations Act.

The Corporations Act requires clarification and changes to improve the

operational efficiency of the Registry of Companies. We are also harmonizing our

Canadian residency requirement for directors of provincial corporations with

other jurisdictions.

This bill was originally introduced in the House in the spring of 2003, by

the former Administration. It makes several changes to the Corporations Act.

Specifically, it clarifies the application of the act to federally incorporated

companies and Crown corporations. It allows for the filing of electronic

documents and a change in the timing for filing annual returns. It permits

not-for-profit corporations to file notice for a change of directors annually

and it reduces the Canadian residency requirement for provincial corporations

from a majority to 25 per cent.

First, I want to speak to the amendment that will ensure the intent of the

legislation is clear. The intent of the Corporations Act is to treat federally

incorporated companies that do business in the Province the same as provincially

incorporated companies. Both are required to register under and are subject to

the act. Lawyers have raised questions about what they believe to be legislative

uncertainty over whether the act actually applies to federal companies.

The previous Administration realized this difference of

interpretation

existed and this amendment, a good amendment, I might add, was brought forward.

The amendment will clarify that federal corporations are subject to the same

requirements as provincial ones. For example, a company incorporated in the

Province of Ontario, that does business here, be it an insurance company or a

retailer, must register under, and is subject to, our provincial act. We want it

understood that the same applies to federally-incorporated companies, such as

national chains.

Mr. Speaker, the legislation also needs to be clarified as it pertains to

Crown corporations. Under the current wording, some provisions appear to apply

to Crown corporations, while other provisions exempt these corporations. This

amendment will clarify that the Crown corporations are not subject to the act.

The reason for this, Mr. Speaker, is that much of the Corporations Act is set up

to protect minority shareholders. Crown corporations do not have minority

shareholders to protect. The act will apply to Crown corporations that do not

have their own legislation. Otherwise, Crown corporations would only be subject

to the act if it was specifically written into the legislation that created it.

The amendment relating to the timing of annual returns is necessary to

improve the operational efficiency of the Registry of Companies. The amendment

will allow for corporations to file their annual return in the month of the

anniversary of the corporation. The act currently requires that annual returns

be filed by April 1 of each year. The single filing date creates a huge backlog

of annual returns around that date and a significant workload for the registry.

The new computer system for the Registry of Companies allows for the annual

filing on the first day of the month of the corporation's anniversary. This

spaces out the workload over twelve months.

Efficiency is also the reason for amending the legislation to allow for

documents to be submitted to the registry electronically. The act currently

requires that a hard copy be provided. This amendment is necessary to

accommodate the implementation of electronic registration. Providing

opportunities for more e-commerce is a commitment of this government. Allowing

for electronic registration is consistent with this commitment.

The amendment to allow not-for-profit corporations to file changes to their

board annually will reduce the administrative burden on these corporations. Many

not-for-profit corporations are volunteer and have significant turnover, as

other matters encroach on a director's ability to serve. The act currently

requires that these corporations notify the registry within fifteen days of a

director changing. This amendment will make it easier on these not-for-profit

corporations, while at the same time making better use of staff time within the

registry.

A change is necessary to the Canadian residency requirement for a board of

directors of the provincial corporation. The amendment reduces the requirement

in this Province from a majority to 25 per cent. This is in line with the

federal government and other provincial jurisdictions. This harmonization is

crucial in ensuring our ability to be competitive in attracting companies to our

Province. The current requirement that the majority of directors be Canadian

citizens is a hindrance to foreign investment.

Mr. Speaker, these six amendments are important for: the efficient operation

of the Registry of Companies; to clarify the application of the act; and to

ensure that the Province remains competitive in attracting businesses.

I look forward to the support of members opposite in the passage of this

bill. It is a good bill, as members of the previous Administration know. I am

pleased today to bring this bill forward to debate on behalf of the members of

the House.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Oh, Jack, I am sorry.

MR. SPEAKER: I think an arrangement has been made whereby the hon. the

Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi will speak first.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, there have been some discussions with the Opposition House Leader.

The legislation currently before the House to amend the Corporations Act

provides some significant changes to the way the Corporations Act and Registry

operate, and, in general, we are supportive of them.

I see clause 1 and clause 2 dealing with the notion of how government

corporations may operate is in keeping with some issues that were raised last

year when we were talking about the incorporation of the health information

corporation, the Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for Health Information, which

legislation is also before this House. The notion was very important for those

of us who were in Opposition at the time. Particularly, the Minister of

Transportation and Works and Aboriginal Affairs and myself raised this matter

with government last year when the Centre for Health Information was being

incorporated under the Corporations Act and the notion was that this would be a

separate corporation with its own board of directors.

We were very concerned that the Centre for Health Information, in fact, be a

government agency so that information that was being given, and very personal

information, by the Cancer Treatment Centre, by the health corporations, the

various ones across the Province, by MCP and by others, was going to be, in

fact, in the hands of a government agency, not just the corporation that was

established. One of the concerns was that the Corporations Act was not really

designed to handle that, so this legislation kind of clarifies that to some

extent, Obviously, the separate incorporation by statute of the Centre for

Health Information is also an important piece of that but it is incorporated

pursuant to the Corporations Act that we have here before us.

Clause 1 of the bill allows the fact that corporations set up under the

Corporations Act can be, in fact, government agencies set up for a government

purpose and can determine, by the Registrar, whether the act applies to the body

corporate. The new

section says, "This Act, except where it is otherwise

expressly provided, applies to every body corporate, whether incorporated under

this Act, the former Act or

an Act of Newfoundland or of the province." -

and that - "

(4) Notwithstanding subsection (1), this Act does not apply to

a body corporate incorporated under a statue other than this Act or the former

Act that the registrar determines was created for a government or municipal

purpose, unless the incorporating statue expressly provides for the application

of all or part of this Act."

That allows what has been done under the Centre for Health Information act to

use the Corporations Act where it is important and significant but also to

recognize that certain corporations are, in fact, government agencies. So, we do

support that change to the legislation here.

It is also, I think, positive that we can now have the annual reports and

filings being done on a round-the-year basis. It is a convenient way to manage

the workload at the Registry of Companies. I know the minister mentioned this.

We have seen it done in other areas. The Registrar of Motor Vehicles now does

that. You know, everybody does not line up March 31 to get their new driver's

licence or their vehicle permit renewed, which happened years ago. I remember

myself, Mr. Speaker, going to the Registrar. It was on the west end of town, and

there would be lineups going on for two days trying to get your driver's

licence renewed because everybody had to get their driver's licence renewe