April 28, 1999 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 13

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise

today to welcome back to Cabinet, to government, the hon. Beaton Tulk, Minister of

Development and Rural Renewal and Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, as the House will know,

on December 2, 1998, Minister Tulk resigned his Cabinet post because of allegations by Mr.

John Woodrow. On the same day, the RCMP began an investigation and the Commissioner of

Members' Interests also commence an investigation into this matter.

On March 18, 1999, the RCMP concluded their

investigation stating that there was no criminal wrongdoing. Yesterday, Mr. Robert

Jenkins, the Commissioner of Members' Interests completed his investigation and presented

me with his report which also found these allegations to be groundless.

Mr. Speaker, I have since spoken with Mr. Jenkins

directly who has assured me that he is confident there was no wrongdoing on the part of

Minister Tulk or any member of his staff. The matter is concluded, and with consent, if I

have consent, I will table the Commissioner's report before the House immediately upon

completing this statement.

Let me say that I am extremely pleased that Minister

Tulk is back in Cabinet. He and his family have been through an extremely difficult time

because of these investigations, because of these unsubstantiated allegations. As I have

said before, the process of a public investigation, while difficult, is sometimes a

necessary burden for members of this House to bear. I want to reflect that Mr. Tulk has

carried this burden with dignity and with grace over a five-month period of time.

In tabling the report, I would invite hon. members to of

course review it, and I would invite hon. members to be in touch if they require further

comment or clarification directly with the Commissioners of Members' Interests. He is

after all an officer of this House and reports to the House. As such I am pleased to table

this report today and to welcome an hon. colleague back to this Assembly and back to his

full duties as a member of the government and a Minister of the Crown.

Mr. Speaker, I table the report today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Let me join with the Premier in saying

to the Member for Bonavista North, the Minister of Development and Rural Renewal, welcome

back to the duties which he voluntarily himself left. We all remember that time in the

Legislature. It was a difficult time. When any member of the Legislature is brought up

under such scrutiny made by allegations, then it impacts, directly and indirectly, all of

us to some degree.

I recall during that time, and shortly after, being

asked publicly: Why didn't you go after Mr. Tulk in a more definitive way? My answer at

that time, and it was the answer that we maintained as an Opposition, was that what we

were after was a process that was transparent, that would look at these allegations in an

arm's-length independent way to make the conclusions in an arm's-length independent way. I

am pleased that was the position that not only myself and my caucus took but, but it was

one that I think reflected generally the approach that should be taken in any matters that

may arise like this in the future.

I want to say that while just receiving the report I

flipped directly to the findings of the Commissioner. If I may quote, just to take a

moment by leave, because I know it has not been a long statement, he says:

"Accordingly, in the absence of any evidence to the

contrary and upon the basis [of] the evidence as presented to me, it is my considered

opinion that in terms of the relevant conflict of interest provisions of

Part II of the

House of Assembly Act, neither Mr. Beaton Tulk, nor any member of his political staff nor

any other person in a position of responsible political authority in relation to this file

did or caused anything improper to be done in relation to the licencing of the

Newfoundland & Labrador Paralegal Training Institute. I find any accusation made

against Mr. Tulk or his staff members to be groundless and without any basis in fact or

law."

While I may have disagreed with the process the Premier

decided upon, I am satisfied, and my caucus is satisfied, certainly that this event is

behind a member of the House. While I would have chosen another process, in terms of a

judicial inquiry, I do find that with the report and the findings of the Commissioner of

Members' Interests the process has been served.

I say to the member you have my personal well wishes in

terms of you back in the Cabinet and carrying out your duties on behalf of the government.

I look forward to the debate that will ensue again with you in your capacity as Minister

of Development and Rural Renewal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal

Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to as well join with the Premier and the

Leader of the Official Opposition in welcoming a minister back from out in the cold, I

guess, and in recognizing that we have in the Commissioner of Members' Interests, and in

that process, an impartial officer of the House who is charged with the responsibility of

administering the legislation. I think this is probably the first time that legislation

has been tested in this way and that the Commissioner has being used to conduct such an

investigation.

I do also offer my sympathy, I guess is the proper word,

for the cloud which the Member for Bonavista North has had to endure through a number of

months, and also through a provincial election, as I mentioned the last time this issue

came up on March 18.

I, too, wish to acknowledge that the process has worked

and has provided us, provided the public, with this kind of assurance that it needs that

the member's position has not been in conflict and that the proper decorum and actions of

public officials has been followed.

I welcome him back to his position in the Cabinet, and

we will be partisan from here on in. I think it is worth noting that from the time the

investigation started it is not been raised as a partisan issue, either during the

election or since the thing came forward. I think that it is important to note. We have

all respected the process and we respect the conclusions that both the RCMP and the

Commissioner of Members' Interests have reached.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, if I could, let me first of

all do as I did I think when the RCMP report was brought in. If I could have leave.

Let me just say that, first of all, I want to thank the

people of Bonavista North who, through an election, as I said at that time, took the word

of one Beaton Tulk over the allegations that were on the public airwaves of this Province

that indicated that indeed there had been some wrongdoing on behalf of their member. I

want to thank them for their support in that election.

I also want to recognize that in this partisan

atmosphere that we live in it would have been very easy, I guess, for the Leader of the

Opposition and the Leader of the NDP to raise this issue to heights that they chose not

to, because I believe they recognized that what we were doing was the right and proper

thing for all of us, and that I had taken maybe the right course of action. I do want to

thank them for their nonpartisan attitude to this and I want to thank them for their

welcome back. I realize that will end probably in about two or three minutes when we

become partisan foes in this Legislature again.

I want to thank the caucus of the Liberal Party and

especially the Premier of this Province, for having the faith in me that I had not

committed any of the allegations that were made against me and keeping the Cabinet

position open for me. I think it is fairly safe to say, that is maybe a first in this

Province as well.

I want to, if I could, thank my family, especially my

wife, who is in the gallery -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TULK: - for the support over the past five

months. I look forward to getting on with this, getting past it, and getting into the next

five minutes.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, there is a very clever

headline in The Telegram today saying, "There's no beatin' Tulk". You can

see he stands here, six-foot-something, and is back and ready to participate.

I want to rise as well today - and this is the first

opportunity I have had a chance to do so - to pay tribute, on behalf of the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador, to the late Wallace Pike, who passed away on April 18, at the

age of 99. Mr. Pike was the last of Newfoundland and Labrador's World War I veterans

living in this Province.

Wallace Pike spent much of his time overseas as a

stretcher-bearer, risking his own life during the war to help the wounded. He represented

what would later become a Canadian tradition in times of conflict - that of humanitarian

aide and lifesaver. Mr. Pike fought to allow each of us to be free, to stand in this House

today and to openly discuss the issues of the day, and for that, to him and to his entire

generation, those who served in the First World War and indeed those who served in the

Second World War, the Korean conflict, and those who serve today as peacekeepers, we must

be thankful.

Mr. Speaker, the passing of Wallace Pike signals the end

of an era in Newfoundland and Labrador's history. Our first-hand knowledge of World War I

has been greatly diminished.

Mr. Pike leaves a large family to remember his life:

nine children, thirty grandchildren, fifty great-grandchildren, and six great-great

grandchildren. Mr. Pike was predeceased by his wife, Minnie, and one child.

We would like to extend our sympathy, and indeed our

appreciation, our celebration of this man's life and that of his generation, to Mr. Pike's

family in this time of mourning.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

Obviously, as Leader of the Opposition and on behalf of

our party and the caucus in the Opposition, we want to be associated with the remarks of

the Premier on behalf of government.

Obviously, Mr. Pike's life reflects a time in our

history and it speaks of the role that people in this Province played in overseas conflict

and what became known as the Great War. It also, I guess, makes us reflect upon what we,

in terms of our provincial character and at that time our national character, the

commitment that we made both physically and with the loss of many sons and daughters

during that time.

Mr. Pike's life is a testament, I think, to the grit of

the Newfoundland psyche, the Newfoundland character, and the grit and determination that

he brought to his post-war activities in life through his involvement with The Salvation

Army.

We, on this side of the House, wish to be associated

with those remarks in passing on our condolences to his remaining family in the spirit of

honouring today, in this House, a great Newfoundlander.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal

Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to join with the Premier and the Leader of

the Opposition in expressing our sympathy to the members of Mr. Pike's family and also,

through him, to recognize the contribution of all Newfoundlanders who fought the number of

wars in this century.

It is worth noting that Mr. Pike was probably born in

1900 and, as we approach the end of the century, it is important to recognize that

throughout this century this Province has had many people who have fought, and many who

lost their lives, preserving the ideals which we believe in to create the kind of society

that we want to have.

Mr. Pike was amongst those recognized by the Government

of France with the Legion of Honour very recently. I am sure we were all very proud of him

and all of our veterans, especially going back to the First World War, on that occasion,

and I think it is fitting that we recognize it here today.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment

and Labour.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today is a National Day of Mourning in Canada. It is a

day set aside to remember those workers who have paid the ultimate price on the job.

Today, April 28, Canadians everywhere are paying tribute to workers who have been injured,

became ill, or who have died as a result of industrial disease or workplace related

accidents.

An Annual Wreath Laying Ceremony was held at 12:00 noon

today in memory of the Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who have lost their lives on the

job. In keeping with this occasion, flags on Confederation Hill are being flown at half

mast today.

Mr. Speaker, injuries, illnesses and fatalities in the

workplace are a disturbing reality for people across Canada and in Newfoundland and

Labrador. We have all heard it said that accidents will happen; however, I have always

maintained a belief that accidents can be prevented. Today, it is important for each and

every one of us to reflect on that thought and consider what we can do to ensure our

workplaces are safe.

Mr. Speaker, government, employers and employees must

work together to reduce the number of workplace accidents but, more than that, we must

work together to create an accident and illness free workplace everywhere in this

Province. This may sound like an impossible goal, but I believe it is achievable if there

is a concerted and enthusiastic effort by all parties.

Mr. Speaker, today I ask all Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians to take time to remember those who have lost their lives, those who have been

injured or became ill, in workplace related accidents. Take time today to reflect on the

importance on safety in the workplace, and make it an integral part of your everyday

activities.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

South.

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

I join with the minister in his comments today. Illness

and fatalities in the workplace are disturbing - not to diminish the seriousness of some

of the larger tragedies that we see. If there was a bus accident where there were twenty

people injured, it would be national news. Yet there are more than that, on a daily basis

across the country, injured in the workplace and we never hear of it.

My grandmother always said: An once of prevention is

worth a pound of cure - and I agree. I agree with the minister in his comments that we

have to be more vigilant in ensuring workplace safety in this Province. We are now

embarking on a new industry, an oil industry, and it is really not that new. We saw

tragedies such as the Ocean Ranger many years ago. We are embarking on a new industry in

this Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. T. OSBORNE: We are embarking on a new industry

in this Province, the oil industry. We are getting into mining, such as Voisey's Bay, in a

major way. It is important that this Province help educate people in the workplace to

ensure that injuries and fatalities in the workplace are limited.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to rise and make a few comments on the very

important day for workers in this country. I would like to just talk a bit about how this

came about, and the personal tragedies that we have had in this Province over the years.

I can recall, in February of 1977, in the mining

industry in Labrador West, we had three fatalities in nine days. Following those three

fatalities, with nobody knowing who was going to be next, the Steelworkers Union went on a

two-week wildcat strike that saw thirteen people sent to jail and others fired.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. COLLINS: I would like to say that also in this

Province, the longest strike in Canadian history over the single issue of health and

safety was staged by the Steelworkers Union in Baie Verte in 1978.

I think it is important to remember as well that nobody

gave workers the right to safe workplaces. Workers paid the ultimate price for that. They

died for it and they fought for it by going on strike and taking other actions that were

necessary to get the recognition that occupational health and safety deserved.

We also saw a four-month strike in 1978 in Labrador

City, where health and safety was one of the key issues. As a matter of fact, I am proud

to say as a steelworker that the right to refuse, and the occupation health and safety

legislation in this Province, was taken almost word for word out of the collective

agreement that followed that strike at the Iron Ore Company.

While I was president of the Steelworkers Union in

Labrador City, I was faced with having to go to three different families and tell them

that their loved ones would not be coming home. We had three fatalities there during the

time that I was president of the local union.

Today it is about more than people being killed, because

there is something else happening in the workplace that is of equal importance and it is

not always obvious - the number of people who die each year from industrial disease. A lot

of times that takes a while to happen because there is a latency period associated with

the chemicals that we are exposed to, the dust that we are exposed to, and many times it

is fifteen or twenty years later, when a person has finished his work life, that they

actually get sick and eventually die from these diseases. I think that is where a lot of

our energies have to be focused in the future as well. Workers have to have a greater say

on the workplace floor on issues relating to occupational health and safety.

I agree with the minister; we can achieve a workplace

that will be free from accidents and disease, and I believe that this government has a

leading role to play in making that happen.

Thank you.

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

Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, as hon. members know,

government decided last year to assist the financially troubled S.C.B. Fisheries in Bay

d'Espoir. S.C.B. has been involved in finfish aquaculture since the mid-eighties, and the

focus prior to government's latest involvement was on research and development. However,

all participants recognized the need to focus all future efforts on commercialization of

the industry in Bay d'Espoir.

Recognizing that there was a fear that the operation

would have probably gone out of business, and a possible loss of 200 jobs in the area,

government decided to make available a $6.4 million working capital loan guarantee in 1998

to help S.C.B. Fisheries deal with some of the problems they were facing in this new and

challenging industry.

Government invested this money because Bay d'Espoir is a

leader in the aquaculture industry in our Province, and we have confidence in the growth

of this new sector. There are many challenges, Mr. Speaker, in the ongoing development of

the aquaculture industry, but we believe it has considerable potential and can offer

economic diversification opportunities.

One of the problems at S.C.B. resulted from the types of

strains of fish they were allowed to use that were not commercially competitive to the

strains of fish being used in other parts of the world. The inferior strains of fish that

they were using, as a result of DFO regulations, was one of the major reasons for the poor

financial performance of the aquaculture industry.

Meanwhile, hon. members, if you can recall, we have been

lobbying very hard and pressuring the federal government to allow us to bring in a better

strain of fish. We are happy to report, and inform the hon. members, that we have now been

given permission to import all female diploid steelhead trout, which are more commercially

viable. This recent decision by the federal government will now place S.C.B. Fisheries in

a more competitive position. Our efforts paid off, and this is good news for S.C.B.

Fisheries and other aquaculture operations in Bay d'Espoir.

Mr. Speaker, in 1998, when government assisted in the

management of the facility and provided financial assistance to commercialize S.C.B., I

made it very clear to everyone involved that it would be the last of taxpayers' money

going into the operation. Government believed that this final investment would help the

company better position itself for potential investment by the private sector. The S.C.B.

operation is a major force behind the development of finfish aquaculture in the Bay

d'Espoir area and we believe very strongly that it has a brighter future. Since our

involvement we have achieved the following favourable results:

Plan worked out with Shur-Gain - feed supplier to S.C.B.

- whereby it has received satisfactory conclusion to its $3.4 million outstanding feed

credit to S.C.B.; completion of an independent detailed operational review of the company;

site operating costs reduced to address the seasonality of the business; plant processing

facility organized and upgraded which resulted in increased productivity, improved

quality, and lower production costs; refocused the hatchery operation to deal with quality

and not quantity, and as a result we have larger, healthier fish going into grow-out cages

which will equate to less mortalities and improve the costs of the marine sites.

By lobbying D.F.O., we received approval to import

diploid all female steelhead eggs. By using these improved strains we will see improved

feed conversion ratios, which equates to lower costs to grow the fish.

In

summary, the aquaculture industry in Bay d'Espoir

will be placed in a competitive position with other producers. In short, they now have a

brighter future.

The time has come, Mr. Speaker, for government not to

have any further financial involvement in the S.C.B. operation, and this has been done

effective March 15, 1999. We have ended all of our financial and managerial involvement in

the operation; however, release of the Province's security will be subject to S.C.B.

Fisheries Limited first having in place a new general manager, a new investor, and

submission of a viable business plan for the continued operations that is acceptable to

government.

We believe, as a result of our investment, we have put

the company in a more favourable, stable position to move ahead and to continue to play a

major role in the future development of the aquaculture industry in Bay d'Espoir and in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

I reiterate that government is committed to the

aquaculture industry and will continue to provide research and development funding to

support this sector. We will continue to work with the industry in this area with the

objective of building a self-sustaining aquaculture industry in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista

South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, $20 million is an awful lot of

money. When the minister talks about the S.C.B. Fisheries being able to deal with some of

the problems, he is not even saying that $20 million solved the problems as they presently

exist. We are talking about taxpayers' dollars.

Back in December, I think, of 1998, the minister stood

in his place and talked about bringing forward $6.4 million. At that particular time his

voice was loud and clear; he was going to have his ADM down there and he was going to

resolve the management problems. I would like to ask the minister if there are any new

managers being put in place in this particular facility.

The people I have talked to - S.C.B Fisheries is less

attractive now than it was back in December. My understanding was that at that particular

time it was going through a stage, that there were two or three months when the fish would

not have to be fed. From what I understand, the present owners, since that time, have gone

forward and culled the fish that was there. The minister should know the meaning of that

word very well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: I understand that the present owners

have gone forward and culled the fish there and sold it and, because of that, the investor

that was interested in taking over S.C.B Fisheries is not nearly as interested now as it

was then.

I say to the minister that we are paying over $100,000 a

job. As important as the 200 jobs are at S.C.B Fisheries down in Bay d'Espoir, somewhere

down the road we have to look at the amount of taxpayers' dollars that have gone into this

operation. It is about time we put managers in place and people in place to run this as a

business and not to be continually coming back and getting handouts from the Minister of

Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal

Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In reading through this statement, it is pretty obvious

the minister is claiming credit for certain improvements at S.C.B Fisheries. I agree that

improvements have been made in the management and operations in the last number of months,

but if you look at his statement here you would conclude that the $6.4 million loan

guarantee has somehow been paid off or taken over by somebody else. I do not know if the

minister can clarify that, but that doesn't seem to me to be what really happened here.

When he says we have ended our financial and managerial involvement, and yet we have a

$6.4 million loan guarantee still in place, that sounds like a pretty substantial

liability of public money, to me.

We know that there are still considerable problems there

in the biology, in the escape of fish there, that is potentially causing serious problems

to other species and also to the salmon in the area. We also know there are other

problems, but in the whole area of fisheries aquaculture, this minister, this department,

has really failed to do something about the loss of our cod hatchery and our cod

technology that is now being developed in Nova Scotia.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: - in Nova Scotia and in Maine, with the

talent and the information that was developed here. We (inaudible) here.

MR. SULLIVAN: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, today being Private

Members' Day, and the clock being at 2:30 p.m., I would ask, with leave of the House, to

allow the Order Paper - Notices of Motion and that - to continue after Question Period,

prior to moving at 3:00 p.m. into the private member's resolution.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: We need to read a Notice of Motion

into the record. I will give the Government House Leader a copy of that.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, if I could, just let me say

to the hon. gentleman that I would have no problem with that even at 3:00 p.m. If he wants

to read his resolution -

MR. SULLIVAN: I was going to do it at 3:00 p.m. but

will ask for it on a point of order now, because at 3:00 p.m. -

MR. TULK: We do not need to go through the whole

orders of procedure.

MR. SULLIVAN: No, that is (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair understands then that at 3:00

p.m. we will call Notices of Motion and then move into Orders of the Day.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Yes, at 3:00 p.m.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

My question today is for the Premier. The last day the

House was open is marked on our calendars as the day government legislated a collective

agreement on the very nurses with whom this government and this Premier promised to sit

down face to face and negotiate with. In the four weeks since then the crisis in the

health care system has not gone away, evidenced by the statements of the executive

director or head of the St. John's Health Care Corporation, and in light of the comments

made by the executive director of the Western Health Care Corporation today.

Casual nurses are still leaving. The issues of

casualization have not been addressed adequately. Workload issues are still, today, the

same as they were four weeks ago, as they were six months ago, and that the legislative

imposition of an agreement, the heavy hand of this Legislature, has not solved those

problems.

Premier, when will you make good on the commitments that

you have made on behalf of the people of the Province and start doing something to address

the crisis in the health care system and the crises that are facing health care workers

generally, and specifically health care workers with respect to nurses in this Province?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: We have as of yesterday put out a

request for the three parties involved - the employers of the employees of the

Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses' Union, the Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses' Union

members and their executive and ourselves - to come together and try to find a solution to

the outstanding issues surrounding, particularly, nursing retention, recruitment and other

work-life issues. Mr. Speaker, we have not formally heard back from the nurses' union, but

I know we will be having discussions this evening with the employers around this very same

issue.

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

the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, what a pathetic response

by a Minister of Health to put out an invitation to sit down and deal with the issues.

Will the minister acknowledge the issue itself, and that

the issues surrounding recruitment and retention are clear, and what is required is not an

invitation to sit down and talk about it but what is required is immediate action that

addresses the fundamental problems surrounding caseloads, surrounding recruitment and

retention and surrounding workload? Won't the minister admit that what is required is not

an invitation to the nurses of this Province but that what is required is action that

addresses the fundamental concerns faced by nurses and the health care system in this

Province?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The first part of the action is to offer an invitation

for all of the parties to come together. There is absolutely no intention on our part not

to move forward in a way that is required. However, we first offered the invitation for

all of the parties to come together and sit down to try to resolve those issues.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: The minister certainly did not follow

that approach when she stood in her place as the Minister of Health and in a public

relations exercise try to court public opinion by announcing more nurses into the system

that grossly did not serve to deal with the fundamental issues that were debated at much

length in this House.

Let me ask the minister this. Nurses in the Western

Health Care Corporation yesterday talked about taking job action. It is obvious to all of

us what that means. It is fair to say that the Western Health Care Corporation is a

glaring example of health care mismanagement at a time at the Western Health Care

Corporation. The minister allowed the Corporation to go years without filing the proper

accounts. It went a year without a CEO. The Atkinson group sent in to clean up the mess

was delayed for months because they could not get their hands on the most basic

information about the expenditure of tens of millions of public dollars.

Government has had this report in their hands since the

fall of 1998. When does the government plan on releasing the Atkinson report so the public

can see the extent of damage? Or are you too ashamed, Minister, of what the report reveals

to let us all see it and let the light of day and the light of transparency shine on

exactly what is taking place within our health care institutions in this Province?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have moved forward with a number of initiatives,

particularly in the western area, over the last six to eight months. We know that, in

addition to the Atkinson report we have also done our own financial review of all the

boards across the Province, and we incorporated the results of the financial review for

Western with the Atkinson report. Many of those initiatives have already been acted upon:

for example, the senior management, the financial reporting system.

While I know the members opposite would like to

eliminate the boards and start again, we believe the boards have done a good job. We

believe that what is needed to be done is certainly a strengthening of the accountability

framework. This government has been working for a very long time, in fact over the last

nine months, putting in place an accountability framework which we will be discussing and

consulting with the boards over the coming months to deal with these issues.

Mr. Speaker, in fairness and in reality, a number of the

issues that have been identified by our own review as well as the Atkinson review have

been incorporated by the new executive team and by the overall region. We will continue to

move forward from there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, nobody, only Cabinet,

would know what is contained in the Atkinson report because they have only seen it

themselves. They will not make it public.

The minister stands in the House to leave the impression

that many of the recommendations contained in the Atkinson report have been implemented.

Madam Minister, the only way for the public to get a true understanding of if your

statement is correct and the trust in the approach that you have used, which is not

working publicly any more, is for you to release the report.

I will ask the question again. When will you on behalf

of government, or when will the Premier, one of you, stand up and table the Atkinson

report for all of us to see? That document does not belong to you. It belongs to the

public of this Province and they have a right to know what is contained within the covers.

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I just mentioned, we did a financial review of the

whole Province, not just in the western region. One of the components of the Atkinson

report, with our own financial review that we used in preparation for the Budget, was that

we had to assimilate both of the reports and look at what was brought forward. Because as

you know, there has been total financial line-by-line review done for the first time in

many of our boards, and it was based on that information that we moved forward with our

Budget announcement.

As to the release of that report, that would be brought

before Cabinet. It would be looked at now in the context of what was done and what still

needs to be done. That decision has not been made.

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

the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to leave

this issue. I will ask the minister again. Cabinet must have dealt with this issue. You

have had the report that was given to you in October 1998. It was presented to the

government.

Surely you are not telling the people of this Province

that you have had such a detailed report in your hands as Minister and you have not

brought what was contained in that report before Cabinet? Is that what the minister is

saying? If she is not, then she should stand in her place and tell us when she is going to

release that report for all of us to see what the recommendations are.

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What I have said is that we have factored in the

information we obtained from the Atkinson report. We put that in line with our own

financial review which we did of all of our boards right across the Province, and we used

that information.

We in no way have prevented the western region - in

fact, many of the recommendations that we are acting upon are very obvious and have been

dealt with very clearly with the Western Health Care Board, particulary around the

financial accountability, around the new management, and around identifying the services

that will be offered, particularly as it relates to the construction of new facilities in

that region, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, that is shameful. The

first time a financial review was conducted on the Western Health Care Corporation it was

done by the Auditor General. The first time that any agency, whether the Department of

Health or an agency of this House, it was the Public Accounts Committee, of which at the

time I was Chair. It held a review on the Western Health Care Board, and at that time

officials from the Department of Health indicated that it was the political decision not

to conduct financial reviews on the health care boards of the day to give them time to get

their management in place.

Minister, I ask you again: Why will you not release the

Atkinson report so we all can see what the recommendations contain? Is it so damning on

the management of your government with respect to health care? Is that why you will not

release the report so all the recommendations can be seen?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have not impeded any of the boards from moving

forward in doing what needed to be done as a result of financial review, either from our

own financial review or from that, in the western region specifically, on the Atkinson

report.

What we have said in our own deliberations, with the

Budget particularly, is that we have moved forward with the new management structure that

is out there, with the financial accountability, with the introduction of a new

computerized system to monitor the financial component of that particular board. So, Mr.

Speaker, we are not prohibiting the board from moving forward in any way on this

particular issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Minister, when will you stop playing

games and start doing your duty? How many more nurses will we lose? How many more patients

will have their medical treatments cancelled? How many more beds will close and hospital

facilities remain under-utilized because you and your Cabinet refuse to give health care

the number one priority it deserves? How dare you ask nurses, Minister, to cooperate in

finding a solution when all the tools are in your hand to find the solutions. When will

you act, and act now, to address the issues that the public has debated, and that we have

debated so thoroughly in this House?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I have never at any

point said that we would never act on what needed to be acted upon with respect to health

care. What I have done - and I have made it very clear over the last couple of days - is I

have offered an invitation to the nurses' union and to the employers to work with us on

this issue, because the employers run the health care system and the nurses, particularly,

are a very important component of that system.

So I am not saying that we will not act, but I will say

that we have offered the invitation, that there are a number of outstanding issues. There

are a number of outstanding issues that were left at the table. While this is not meant in

any way to be a round of negotiations, it is meant to provide an opportunity to move

forward in addressing some of the outstanding issues, particularly as they relate to

retention and recruitment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: How much debate must take place? How

much must occur? The Minister of Health, as the minister responsible for government's

policies with respect to health care, who used the legislative hammer to impose an

agreement prior to the House closing, is now offering an olive branch with nothing

attached to it. That is what it amounts to, an open invitation. The reality is, Minister -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

to his question.

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

Minister, when will you do what is correct? When will

you come to an understanding that realizes that what is in the best interest of nurses in

this Province is also in the best interest of health care in this Province?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I don't know if I am

misreading what the Leader opposite is saying. Are you saying that we should not talk?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am wondering if I am in any way hearing that the

Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we should not consult and should not meet if

those parties are interested in doing so. I never mentioned the word debate. I mentioned

the word meeting with them, consulting with them and moving forward. I never said at any

point we would not act. What I have said is that we have gone forward and invited two of

the three players involved to come and sit with us and deal with some of the outstanding

issues. Now, I never said debate and I never said negotiate. I have invited them. I have

not said that we would not act. However, the invitation is there. There are outstanding

issues and we will be moving forward to try to address those.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are to the Minister of Health and

Community Services. We have heard comments recently from the President of Treasury Board,

we heard them from the Minister herself, we heard them from the Premier, all calling for

cooperation from nurses. Nurses, Minister, cooperated prior to the strike, during the

strike, and after the strike.

Everybody is aware that the permanent solution to this

is to hire more permanent nurses. You do not need a health care forum to tell you. You had

one two years ago and you did not fix the problem. That was one of the first tasks you

had, to put out the fires during a federal election, when health care was the main issue.

Other provinces are smart enough to realize that we are

in dire need of more nurses. Mike Harris is hiring over 10,000. Roy Romanow had the

integrity and the courage to admit they had failed. The window of opportunity, Minister,

is quickly closing. What we want now is action on the issue, not more talk. Won't you

admit that if you do not start doing something now, that window of opportunity will

quickly close and there will be no nurses available to do the job then?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I do believe that by

offering, first of all, an opportunity to come to the table to start discussing these

issues... I have said it many times -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, if I may have an

opportunity to answer.

We have offered the invitation for all of the parties to

come to the table to begin to deal with this issue. The member opposite talked about

Ontario hiring 10,000 nurses. I ask the member opposite: How many thousands of nurses did

they take out of the system? How many thousands of nurses did Alberta take out of the

system? Whether people want to accept it or not, these are not my statistics.

The Canadian Institute of Health Information has stated

- it is a national body - Newfoundland has the third best ratio of registered nurses to

the general public.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, these are not my

numbers, these are not cooked numbers from government, these are national statistics. We

do recognize and we do admit that there is a national shortage of nurses as well as a

national shortage of other health professionals that we also need to try to deal with, but

we are willing to try to address outstanding issues around retention and recruitment. We

have offered an invitation. We hope we will hear positively in a formal way. If we don't,

we will move forward to do the best we can. We take our responsibility seriously and will

do what we have to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the

Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In the past decade we have seen 1,000 beds close in this

Province and nurses laid off. Nurses have been laid off and they have left this Province.

They have been without a job as you continuously close hospital beds, and it is occurring

at a more rapid pace than ever. Minister, under your Administration it is happening; it is

worse.

Nurses, just today, in the Coronary Care Unit at the

Health Sciences Centre, were informed they cannot take annual leave - nurses overworked,

underpaid, dealing with the stresses of a job, who were awaiting a badly needed vacation

with their family. Minister, there is a crisis going on, in case you do not know.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

to his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: Now tell us: What are you going to do

about it?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Every single jurisdiction across this country have

closed hospital beds because they are providing more ambulatory care. Contrary to what the

member opposite believes, we have changed the practices over the last decade. We have

changed from higher in-patient services to higher out-patient services. We have moved - as

one example - going from seven days as an in-patient for a hernia repair to doing it on an

out-patient basis. That is just one example, not to mention changing the number of days

required for obstetrics and other post-op care.

Mr. Speaker, we are not decreasing beds in this Province

as a result of some new strategy. It is a strategy that has been implemented right across

the country because of new techniques and surgeries. That is how the system is working.

We recognize there is a national shortage, and we also

recognize that we have to do something about it. That is why we are going to move forward.

As to what we will do, our first preference is to deal with the other two parties - or at

least deal with one of the two, hopefully with the nurses' union as well as our employers

- and move forward. Once we come to those decisions, we will announce them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the

Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

An announcement will come when it is too late; it is

going to happen.

Heart surgery has doubled in the last four years. The

waiting list has doubled. Surgery cancelled last week - there are no nurses to care for

the patient after the surgery. We have seen the entire Coronary Care Unit of five beds

shut down over a week ago at the Grace hospital. A call from the Health Sciences Centre,

with three coronary patients, and we could not take them. They called a day prior. A

person went through angioplasty - no bed to put them in, in the Grace - and they could not

take them back because there were no nurses to come in and go to work -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

to his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: Minister, health care is falling down

around our ears in this Province. I want to ask you: Do you consider what is happening

here appropriate care for our sick? If you do, what are you going to do about it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have not at any point said that we do not recognize

that there is a national nursing shortage. Being part of a nation, we recognize that is

inherent as well in our Province. We are very willing to try to deal with those issues as

best we can.

With respect to the surgeries as well, the member

opposite knows that we are experiencing shortages in a whole number of areas - nurses

particularly, and also with respect to cardiovascular surgery -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS J.M. AYLWARD: If I may have an opportunity to

answer, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In addition to the shortages that we are experiencing

with nurses we are also experiencing, particularly as it relates to cardiovascular

surgery, shortages in the cardiac profusionists.

Mr. Speaker, we do realize that we have a lot of areas

that we need to work with. We have had and continue to have shortages with our medical

practitioners and our specialists, and we are continuing to try to deal with those. We

also have shortages with OTs and PTs and speech therapists. We know that, and we continue

to try to deal with those.

That is why, in the longer term, we are putting forward

our health human resources planning committee to try to deal with it in the long term. In

the meantime, we are trying to deal with the other issues on a more urgent short-term

basis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour

Main-Whitbourne.

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

for the Minister of Education.

Since the mid-eighties, this Province's education system

has seen a serious decline first of all in students, which in turn has seen a serious

decline in the number of schools and in the number of teachers. Each spring, every spring,

it appears to be the same story: teacher cutbacks, which stand for program cutbacks.

Enough is enough. School administrators have had, for

too many years, to adjust to long-term cutbacks in programs - restructure programs. They

have been in a juggling act just about every spring. This spring has been no different.

I ask the minister: How can this government continue to

expect high quality education for our young people when you still are going to slash up to

182 teaching positions this year?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, the formula that has been

used for allocating teachers throughout this Province has been existent since the early

1980s. So it is not this Administration or the past Administration that in fact put in

place the formula. Having said that -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS FOOTE: Maybe the leader would like for me to

answer the question?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS FOOTE: Do you want an answer?

As the member acknowledged, we have had a severe decline

in our student enrolment. Obviously, if you have at one point 170,000 students in the

system and that goes down to today where we have 97,000, that will impact on the number of

teachers that are needed in the system. If not, there is something wrong with our system

if we keep teachers when there is no need to have them in the system.

Mr. Speaker, we recognize that maybe we need to have a

look at the formula. In fact, for the past two years we have not applied the formula. So

while the hon. member opposite talks about slashing 182 teachers from the system, if we

had applied the formula that exists - and formulas exist in every province in this country

- if we had applied the formula over 400 teachers would have been removed. We chose not to

do that, so if you look at the student population and you apply their formula we would

have had 400 fewer teachers in the system. We chose not to do that. We chose to reinvest

$11.5 million back into the system when we did not have to do that, but as a responsible

government, Mr. Speaker, that is what we chose to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, despite the minister's

contention this government has placed this education system in crisis. It is serious. I

keep repeating that this system is in crisis. Regardless of reducing or adding, we want to

look at what is happening to the programming.

I've received numerous calls from around this Province

from parents who at this present moment are more than angry at the slash of 182 teachers

because they realize that they are down to bare bones as a result of the cuts, as a result

of the decrease in the number of teachers in this system since the mid-1980s. Regardless

of the number of students, you have to have a -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

to his question.

MR. HEDDERSON: - level of programming, and this is

what is in serious peril. Again, I ask the minister: Is she going to address the crisis?

The allocation formula is outdated. She realizes it, we realize it. Is it going to be

addressed, or is it going to be just put off until next year and again have our children

suffer through program cuts?

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, it is amazing how the hon.

member opposite can refer to a crisis in the education system when the high school

graduation rates have increased 30 per cent over the last ten years and now stand at 82

per cent in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: One of the highest, Mr. Speaker, in the

country, by the way. There is no crisis in the education system. What we have out there

today maybe is a crisis in terms of the declining student enrolment, something we

certainly would like to see changed. As a government we certainly would like to be able to

put more teachers back into the system, and would if our numbers warrant it.

We are concerned. We want to ensure that we have a

top-notch quality education program in this system and throughout this Province. We are

working at that. We are working with all of the school boards throughout the system.

We have undertaken to meet with each of the education

directors throughout the system, each of the boards - there are ten of them - to try and

determine in fact, if there are some concerns out there, what the genesis of those

concerns are. If we have boards out there saying: Because of the cutback in the number of

teachers we are going to have to cut back on the programs that are being offered, that is

a concern for us as a government. Because we want to ensure we have the best quality

program.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: We are going out meeting with each of the

education directors at each of the school boards to find out what their concerns are, and

if they have concerns we want them to show us how they are originating, where they are

coming from and how we can best deal with them.

It is one thing for boards and others to stand and tell

us there is a problem; it is another for us to have a chance to consult with them and find

out the genesis of that problem, and that is exactly what we are going to do. We are going

to meet with them and find out what the cause of the problem is.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, again I am having

difficulty getting across to the minister that yes, there is a crisis out there. I think

you should go out and talk to more than just the boards. Let me just read from two

students from Lester Pearson Memorial High School.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

to his question.

MR. HEDDERSON: As a result of the cuts made over the

last five years the number of courses offered have dropped from seventy-four to fifty.

This is a small school, this is a rural school. What are you going to do, Minister, again

to address the problem of students who have to suffer -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.

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

MR. HEDDERSON: I am getting to it, yes, Mr. Speaker.

Again, the question is that we have schools in the Province even as I speak that are down

to bare bones programming and basic programming. The cuts that have been brought about as

a result of the Budget this year will bring that program to a level where these students

will not -

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

Leader.

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

We are pretty lenient on this side, but I have to say to

the hon. gentleman that it is 3:00 p.m., that it took him two minutes to ask a

supplementary. It is 3:01 p.m. and I think we are one minute past the deadline for Private

Members' Day.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has ended.

We are now going to go to Notices of Motion, I think, by

agreement.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask leave to introduce the following private member's

resolution:

WHEREAS the St. John's Health Care Corporation recently

announced the closing of acute care beds due to a nursing shortage; and

WHEREAS there is an overall predicted nursing shortage

nationally; and

WHEREAS the reliance on casual nurses in this Province

has been excessive; and

WHEREAS remuneration for nurses is the lowest in the

country; and

WHEREAS the overall workload for nurses has been

excessive; and

WHEREAS these are symptoms of the failure of the

Department of Health to properly ensure an adequate supply of nurses to fulfil its

responsibilities to provide a proper functioning acute care system;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House call upon

the government to take the steps of improving nursing remuneration, nursing working

conditions and staffing levels, to ensure the proper functioning of the health care

system.

Mr. Speaker, I also ask leave, in light of this

resolution, to withdraw Motion 4 in today's Order Paper, since I had a previous private

member's resolution on the Order Paper.

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

MR. TULK: We have no objection to the hon. gentleman

withdrawing the resolution and putting the new motion that he has on the Order Paper

because the first one is outdated. To keep the records of the House straight, I wonder if

he would put it in the form of a motion, to ask for leave to rescind the resolution and

read the previous resolution on the Order Paper so that it is straight in the record? So

that we can pass it and get it on the (inaudible).

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Before I sat down I asked for leave to withdraw Motion

4, which was that resolution.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes. Mr. Speaker, I ask leave to

withdraw Motion 4 on today's Order Paper.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: If it is on the Order Paper you do

not have to read it in, do you? It is there.

MR. SULLIVAN: It is a long one but I can read it.

Motion 4 on the Order Paper:

"WHEREAS the government has failed to reach a

tentative agreement with the nurses of the Province and, as a result, the nurses' strike,

which commenced on March 24, 1999, continues; and

"WHEREAS talks between government and nurses have

broken off; and

"WHEREAS the reduction in the nursing workforce

associated with the unresolved labour dispute has diminished operations at the Province's

health care institutions and deprived people of access to certain medical procedures; and

"WHEREAS the government, by its own admission,

cannot assure Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that their health care system will be able

to respond adequately to their health care needs if this labour dispute continues

unresolved;

"THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this Honourable

House call upon the government to submit the dispute to binding arbitration as provided

for in the Public Service Collective Bargaining Act."

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I don't know about the third

party in the House but we certainly have no objection. I would second the motion that the

hon. gentleman withdraw resolution four as he just read it in the Order Paper.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal

Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Yes, Your Honour, the third party in the

House has no objection either.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion before the House is that

Motion 4 be now rescinded.

All those in favour, `aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye!

MR. SPEAKER: Against.

Carried.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

For the Table I have some copies of that resolution.

I thank the House for cooperating in allowing the

resolution to come forward because -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is now introducing a resolution. Which

resolution are we speaking on now?

MR. SULLIVAN: Are we still on Notices of Motion now,

I want to ask, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: We called Notices of Motion but the

hon. member gave notice. As he is aware, a Notice of Motion must be twenty-four hours.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: So the hon. member has leave?

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I requested leave and I

think that is what the hon. Government House Leader -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Okay, the Chair did not understand

that.

The Chair understands that the House is giving leave to

the hon. member to debate this private member's resolution that he just introduced.

Private Members' Day

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is certainly my pleasure to have an opportunity today

to debate a resolution of major significance, I might add, here in our Province. It is a

very serious issue.

This very type of action we are talking about here can

prevent what we have seen happen to the Province's doctors, because a stitch in time saves

nine. If you move quickly to correct a problem, you will not be faced with a bigger one

down the road.

We have seen a similar thing happen with doctors, the

discrepancy was so great. The Memorandum of Understanding with doctors, with the

Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association, did not even, with 22 per cent or 23 per

cent in many areas, solve the doctor shortage, and we are still getting an exodus of

doctors out of this Province. We let it go too long, the situation was too severe, and we

are going to find the same situation with nurses.

We only need to be normal individuals. Just think about

it: Nova Scotia pays 29 per cent more; Prince Edward Island's contract, which expired

March 1, pays 17 per cent more. They are down here recruiting in this very Province. They

are down recruiting from our north, a new territory in the north, paying people in the

vicinity of $55,000 to $60,000 range, giving assistance. They are providing assistance and

accommodations, and providing a northern allowance on top of that salary, I might add.

I spoke just two days ago with a group of nurses who

were here in St. John's. They were at a social gathering, with a nurse who was leaving the

next morning to catch a flight down to the United States, and I spoke with some of them.

They said: We are getting together because our friend is leaving tomorrow morning.

We saw incidents on the news. They are telling examples

of the problem we have, and we have to fix it. We are going to have a problem.

One hundred and twenty-five new nurses in the system -

the minister stood here and announced in the House, right in the midst of a strike - is

not the solution to solving the nursing crisis here in this Province. The solution is

hiring more permanent nurses.

The nurses have worked so much - they have been called

in on overtime - it is causing an increase in sick leave in our system because they are

stressed out and they are overworked. It is causing problems. The casualization - they do

not know from day to day, from minute to minute, if they are going to get a call. You

cannot run a major health care system, acute care institutions in this Province, on

casualization. We allowed it to get out of hand.

I raised this issue about four years ago in this House.

I raised it four years ago on casualization, and talked about what the problem is going to

lead to. It is on the record of Hansard somewhere around four years ago; it could be five,

who knows? We addressed what could be - an impending crisis is coming here in the system.

We have a major concern, a major problem. If we do not

address it - the government, during the election campaign, seemed to be aware of it. They

were aware of it in the election campaign, very much so. I have some of the quotes here

from the Premier in their election campaign. He talked about all this new money we are

going to get, a big chunk of money from the federal government, this big $40 million. You

know what that turned out to be? - $4.4 million. That was the difference.

In Canada Health and Social Transfers, I say to the

Minister of Mines and Energy, based on the document that the Minister of Finance, his

colleague, tabled in this House, there is $4.4 million extra under the Canada Health and

Social Transfers. That is what we got. We did not get $40 million extra; we got $4.4

million extra. Either we got sold a bill of goods, whatever it is, that is what we got

under the Canada Health and Social Transfers.

That is what your document - you are a member of Cabinet

- a document which you provided to this House, and I assume this is accurate. If it is

not, you will have to stand and defend it in the estimates, in discussion on the Budget

here in this House. I am going from your figures of $4.4 million, one-tenth of what we

were told we were going to get.

He said he now understands and realizes. He now has the

money to improve the Province's health care system. That is what he said. He has the money

to improve it. He told us everywhere he has gone - I think he even thanked nurses in the

campaign, for raising the issues out there in the public and doing such a good job. That

is right. He said: The Minister of Health is a nurse, the deputy minister is a nurse,

every night he goes home to a nurse.

He tells the nurses they can trust him to handle their

concerns over cutbacks to health care. That was the story back on February 8. I do not

know why February 9 changed it. Since that, we are hearing it all over. The western part

of this Province now are indicating that they are going to (inaudible). They cannot take

it any more. The people here in this Province cannot take it any more.

I spoke to people the weekend before last - anybody who

has friends sick there - up at the Grace Hospital. There were five people in the Intensive

Care Unit - there are six beds, and five coronary care beds - there are eleven beds in

total, and they did not have enough nurses to care for those who were there. One needed

two nurses. He was so sick, he had need of two nurses. They tried to get a nurse to come

in. Eventually they got one to come in at twelve o'clock. Another patient came in - to

make it six - at 10:00 p.m. There was another nurse came in, and they had two deal with

one. On top of what they were doing, they did not have the right ratio of care that is

required for the health of the individual. They were monitoring two by telemetry,

monitoring two that were hooked up to monitors down on the floor of the hospital. They got

a call from the Health Science: We have three coronary care patients we want to put in

there. Five empty beds, we cannot take them.

There was a fresh angioplasty, someone had just had an

angioplasty done. We have nobody to go in there - five empty beds. We cannot shut down the

Coronary Care Unit. A Coronary Care Unit in the capital city of the Province had to shut

it down because we cannot get nurses. The minister knows full well that when you train

critical care nurses in casualization, when they took permanent jobs in other areas, they

jumped at this chance.

The same corporation now, and the same Minister of

Health overseeing her appointed boards, because that is what they are... She talked about

appointed boards. We said: Scrap the boards. Look at your own memos inside that said you

were going to do the same thing. In this election campaign and prior, you were going to do

the same thing. You were going to make the CEO's report to the Department of Health. Do

not deny it. I would like to hear the minister respond to that one - the very same thing.

When someone does that, to me, it sounds like a hypocrite. That is what it sounds like.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: It sounds like it; I did not say it

is.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Okay, it does. I withdraw it, if it

makes the Government House Leader happy. I withdraw it.

When you say something that the Opposition are going to

do that you were going to do the same thing, and you go out in the public and say it. We

know, I know, and you know very well, you are going to do the same thing. It is

ridiculous. It is the games you are playing. That is what it is; it is a game. It is a

spin game they are playing out in the public. That is all it is. It is not a genuine

concern to address the issue. There is one solution. You either stand up and admit you

have failed, like Roy Romanow - say we failed to address it - instead of hiding behind it,

and say there is one solution to it. The solution for it - Do we want to fix it? That is

number one. Are we committed to fixing the problem? If we are committed to fixing the

problem, there is a solution, Minister, and you do not need a health forum, you do not

need to get together with the nurses' union, you do not need to get together with anybody.

You have been told.

Two years ago you called a forum in at Littledale, got

an appointed minister, they replaced the minister. The more I think about this, the more I

realize what we need now is a change, a shuffle in there now in the Department of Health,

to put some credibility back so people in this Province can come in, sit down, discuss and

negotiate.

Yes, the minister is smiling. Maybe she feels her time

is coming - she is going to get that little shuffle out of there now and her colleague

gets shuffle back in there - because I am not sure whether she has lost the confidence of

the people to address the health care issues in this Province. I really, sincerely feel

you have lost the ability to function as Minister of Health, to address our concerns. I am

genuinely serious about that. That is no game, I can tell you.

I do not know how you can go about it. I think

(inaudible) a lame duck minister in this Province who has turned her back on concerns in

this Province, who has not done what is needed to be done.

I will get on to a few other things that are very

important. She talks about what we have done: We have shorter procedures, we have more day

surgery. Sure we have, but we have 1,000 less beds, we have hundreds less nurses, we have

layoffs, we have staff gone everywhere, beds closed, people not getting called in,

casualizations working more than full hours. All of these problems are symptomatic of a

system that is sick. Yes, there is sickness in our system, in our society, but there is a

sickness in the delivery of health care, there is a sickness in the administration of

health care, and we are not getting a very properly delivered system.

Maclean's magazine said that 40 per cent of dollars

are wasted - health care, over $70 billion in this country a year, 40 per cent of that -

almost $30 billion goes right down the toilet, flush it out the toilet.

I am seeing it everywhere, Minister. I am seeing it in

program-based delivery where you spend half of your day, or 30 per cent of your day, in

meetings and discussions and so on. It is ideal in a society with unlimited resources. The

program-based system works with unlimited resources, but we do not have unlimited

resources in this Province and we cannot waste our time when we could be giving front-line

service.

People going home in the evening cannot get their work

done because they are sitting around on discussions on issues to run a program that you

say conceptually works in theory. It has not worked in practice because the resources have

not been there to give the numbers to make the program work. That is wrong. Scratch it,

get rid of it. Scrap it, I would say, throw it out - inefficiencies. Why should we need a

bed utilization coordinator, all of these new positions? Because you have mismanaged the

system to put us in a position where you have to flip a coin now and see who is the worst.

I spoke to the family of a man who was in intensive

care. He was supposed to be monitored for two days. They came in and said: You are going

to have to go back to a floor; somebody else needs your bed worse. Two days later, that

man died in his wife's arms down on a hospital floor, when he should have been monitored

there. Yes, they are real cases, and I have dozens of them. I can tell you of horror

stories that I am hearing because they have been putting the medical people in such a

position that they have to decide who is the worst, which one is worse.

You are telling us that urgent emergency surgeries are

getting done. That is what the minister said. In other words, the heart surgery that was

cancelled last week because there was no nurse, that was not urgent or it was not an

emergency. That person who had waited for several months, that is not important. When we

have a list gone from 120 - when I first became health critic I checked 110 to 115 people,

I think, on the list. It is up in the mid-two hundreds now. It is getting worse, Minister

- empty beds.

First there was a problem - anaesthetist - you had to

cancel it, there was no space. We put in space. Then it was profusionists, and now it is

nurses.

Look, you are trying to tackle one little fire at a time

and go on to the next fire. You do not look at the whole picture. You have lost your

ability to be able to function in a setting and plan properly in health care. You have

lost it. The department has lost it. Your credibility is gone, I can tell you, in the

Department of Health in terms of delivering health care.

You have a report that you said four times was going to

be available, an Atkinson report, and you cannot even deliver it because the report is so

damning of the system here, and your responsibility of that board you appointed being

accountable to you. You have lost the link of accountability in your appointed boards.

Then, the audacity to say we are going to scrap them and

run them out of St. John's, the Premier said, when at the same time you were planning to

do the same thing yourself. Imagine, if that is not what - what is it? I am not allowed to

use the word hypocrite. I wish I could. I probably would but I cannot, and I respect that.

It is wrong, I say to the minister. We have major

problems and they are getting worse by the day. As each nurse - and, I can tell the

minister, it is not just in the nursing area. We are seeing it with other allied health

professions. We are seeing it with other professional people. We are seeing it with

doctors, too, because the measures that were put in did not address it.

You expect nurses looking for cooperation - now, what a

scam. Treasury Board first, then the Minister of Health, then the Premier: We are looking

for cooperation from nurses. What do you want cooperation from nurses for? You have that;

you had that all along. What did you do? Legislate then back to work. Then you got up in

the House and said: We will put 125 new nurses in now. Then you come back and say: We have

to go back and talk to them, how to solve it, and make your announcements whenever you

feel like it.

More political manipulation. The situation is becoming

sickening by the day, what is going on, a feeble attempt to give the public the impression

and trying to shift the burden of guilt. I think I saw it printed in nice little letters

in The Telegram , trying to shift the burden of guilt from themselves on to the

nurses.

I can tell you, it did not work. You failed dismally

because of it, and you had better wake up and realize that there are issues that have to

be dealt with in this Province. You cannot pay lip service in an election campaign.

February 6, 1999, three days before the election, the

Premier - I can see him now - I have been convinced, putting aside other issues, that the

staffing issue needs to be addressed and is one that I intend to intervene on personally.

That is what he said. Here is what he said: You can't

have stressed out people working double shifts, being called back on short notice, burnt

out, running and operating within the system. What does it do?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

You cannot have that going on in the system, I say to

the minister. I will get a chance to speak again.

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

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) the Leader of the NDP, just

now, and the Opposition House Leader, about putting a motion on the makeup of the

committees that have been referred to, the Estimates Committees. I would like to ask leave

to put that motion now very quickly, the naming of the Estimates Committees, that I gave

you just now, without taking away from anybody's time.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice and by leave move that the

following heads of expenditure be referred to the Government Services Committee: Finance;

Works Services and Transportation; Government Services and Lands; Municipal and Provincial

Affairs; the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation; the Public Service Commission.

Be it that the following heads of expenditure be

referred to the Social Services Committee: Human Resources and Employment; Education;

Health and Community Services; Environment and Labour; Justice.

That the following heads of expenditure be referred to

the Resource Committee: Fisheries and Aquaculture; Forest Resources and Agrifoods;

Tourism, Culture and Recreation; Industry, Trade and Technology; Mines and Energy;

Development and Rural Renewal.

I move that the referrals of the heads of expenditure to

the Estimates Committee become effective on May 3, 1999.

MR. SPEAKER: All those in favour of the motion?

Against?

Carried.

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move an amendment to the resolution that is seconded

by the Member for Bonavista North.

The resolution to be amended by: (

A) Striking out the

first recital clause, (

B) Striking out the third, fourth, fifth and sixth recital clauses,

and by substituting the following:

"Whereas it is recognized that an adequate supply

of nurses is necessary to provide a functioning Health Care System;" and

(

C) Striking out the Resolution Clause and by

substituting the following:

"THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the Honourable House

call upon the Government, employers represented by the Newfoundland & Labrador Health

& Community Services Association, and the Nurses represented by the Newfoundland &

Labrador Nurses Union to immediately take collective action to address Nursing Human

Resources issues, including recruitment and retention."

The resolution will now read:

WHEREAS there is an overall predicted nursing shortage

nationally; and

WHEREAS it is recognized that an adequate supply of

nurses is necessary to provide proper functioning health care system;

"THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the Honourable House

call upon the Government, employers represented by the Newfoundland and Labrador Health

& Community Services Association, and the Nurses represented by the Newfoundland &

Labrador Nurses Union to immediately take collective action to address nursing human

resources issues, including recruitment and retention."

MR. SULLIVAN: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I contend that it is not in order. It destroys our

resolution calling on this government. We are not calling on the nurses' union that are

not empowered to do it, or the Health Care Corporation is not in power. The power is with

government. It destroys the intent of the resolution and I ask, Mr. Speaker, that you rule

it out of order.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I have not seen the amendment yet.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me say to you that the

hon. gentleman is wrong. The intent of this resolution is obviously to address the health

care issues in the Province, and in particular -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Just a minute now, I listened to you.

- and in particular as they relate to nursing care in

this Province and our hospital situation in general.

The intent of the resolution is not destroyed. It might

be a different method of doing it. It is not as politicized, I say to the hon. gentleman,

as his resolution was. It is more, in a cooperative manner, trying to solve the problems

in the health care system; but the intent of the resolution is still there and I would ask

Your Honour to make a ruling that indeed it is in order.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

We will recess for a few minutes to consider the

amendments, and come back.

Recess

MR. SPEAKER (Oldford): Order, please!

The Chair took some time to consider the amendment.

Based on our Standing Order 36, and '567 on page 175 of Beauchesne relative to amendments,

the Chair rules the amendment to be in order.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have put forward this amendment to try to begin the

process of bringing the parties together to identify ways of addressing the outstanding

issues; as we see them, mostly focused around retention and recruitment. We know that

there is a national nursing shortage, and again this Province is experiencing its

component of nursing shortages, being a part of that national shortage. We also know that

with the announcement of creating 125 new positions, and with the conversion of casual to

permanent of 200 positions, we know that this is for us a very good beginning to try to

address some of those issues.

We know and we believe that it has been consistent in

the system that about an appropriate number of casuals would be 15 per cent in the system.

With the introduction of the new positions and the conversions we believe we will have

between 18 per cent and 20 per cent casualization in the Province. It is certainly well on

its way to trying to address the issues. Now, in some areas of our Province the

casualization is much higher than others and I think we have to work very hard to try to

address those issues.

We believe the 15 per cent level of casualization in the

Province will be necessary for a number of reasons. One, because for many employers they

need to have at least a 15 per cent flexibility, even though over the last number of years

it is has been quite a bit higher. There has been a constant movement forward across the

country to reduce the percentage of casualization. So with our current rate between 18 per

cent and 20 per cent we believe we are certainly in the decline towards a more appropriate

level at 15 per cent.

We also know that in some events while the majority of

nurses would prefer to have permanent status there will always be some nurses, perhaps

very few in nature, but there will always be some who do require casual status and want

casual status because of some of the flexibility it accords. While a permanent position

does give pro-ration of benefits, particularly if it is part-time with full benefits if

permanent full-time, some nurses would choose to work on a casual capacity. In the

previous agreement that was one of the reasons why paying casuals in lieu of benefits

became an issue, and that is why the current rate now is 20 per cent for casuals over and

above their salary in lieu of the benefits they do not get as a permanent employee of the

system.

In terms of our commitment to health care, I know in

this Province we will always have challenges for a whole number of reasons but I was

really glad to hear the House Leader say and admit that there is not an endless pot of

money in this Province. I think that is a first, because I think it is a really good

indication that he does recognize that there is not an endless pot of money in this

Province and, in fact, that we have to make some very difficult choices, although we have

chosen to spend well over one-third of our total Budget on health care. In this last

budget year we announced $40 million to retire the debt; in addition to the $10 million we

announced last year, another $15 million.

I think that is a very important indication based on our

ability of our commitment. Do we still need to do more? Yes, there is no doubt about it,

we do have a lot more that we need to do. I think our commitment of putting over one-third

of our budget into Health and Community Services is a very important point, as we say that

health care is our number one priority, particularly as it relates to our budgetary

requirements.

I also have to say something about the boards. The

member opposite did mention about our health care boards. I know he mentions them quite

frequently, and about how they are appointed and they are this and they are that. I know

how he does not support them. I will say in terms of his comments about me -

MR. SULLIVAN: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER (Smith): A point of order, the hon. the

Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Health and Community Services said I do

not support the health care boards. I've never indicated I do not support health care

boards. Let me be emphatic. I have never made that point. I have respect for people on and

running those health care boards, I might add.

What I take offence to are boards appointed by the

minister when the minister does not ensure accountability to them. That is my problem.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess it is a point of

interpretation. When you say

you want to eliminate the current structure, the board structure, it would lead one to

conclude that that party in particular does not support the board structure. That was

during their election campaign.

I think it is important to note, because we are talking

about consistency and speaking out of both sides of your mouth and making all those sorts

of insinuations. I have to say - and it is important to point out - we have been

consistent in our support for the boards. We are not like the members opposite who first

said elect them, then said eliminate them, and then said replace them all. There is a

little bit of inconsistency over there.

I think it is important to have it on the record because

that is a very key and important point and is very much integral to how the system works

in this particular Province. Because we do have an appointed board structure that we in

this government support very much. We will continue to work with them to try to continue

to enhance our health care system.

I would like to say, as well, that I think it is

important for the record that while these statistics I referred to are not our own

provincial statistics, they are national statistics from the Canadian Institute of Health

Information, a national body that looks at ratios and other sorts of statistics. They have

placed Newfoundland as the third best province in its ratio to the public, to the RNs. I

think that is an important point.

The other point I want to say is about our commitment to

health care. This Province is one of the only provinces in the country that maintains the

ratio of skill mix - particulary in our long-term care sector and in our acute care sector

- of licensed practical nurses and RNs only. We are one of the few provinces in this

country, if not the only province in the country, that does not use untrained, unlicensed

workers in long-term care and acute care sectors. Again, I think that speaks to our

commitment to the quality of health care.

More specifically to this particular amended resolution

is that we do recognize that there are nursing shortages, particularly in some areas over

others. Not in all areas, but certainly in a large number of areas we are experiencing

difficulties. We also need to recognize that with the current structure of the collective

agreement, when we fill positions and make them permanent or create new positions they

come out of the casual pool of nurses. Because positions have to be posted and filled

internally before we can go outside the collective agreement and post them outside.

It is only normal to expect the casual pool to decrease

while we are filling permanent positions. I know there are other factors involved. It is

not just the filling of permanent positions, it is the fact that we are being heavily

recruited and it is the time of the year. In addition to that, it is the annual leave

period of time of the year.

We do support moving forward, addressing issues

particularly around recruitment and retention. We also know, Mr. Speaker, that we will

move forward to address issues. We have invited the parties to work with us. We hope that

they will come forward and meet with us on this issue. We at no time said we would not

act. We have offered them an opportunity to come and meet with us and to go through some

of the initiatives we would like to put forward, in conjunction with some of the

initiatives I hope the health care boards will put forward, and we can all together come

to the best resolution to begin to address the issue of retention and recruitment, in

addition to the other initiatives that we have put forward for our health care and our

commitment to making it and retaining it as a quality health care system.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay

South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to take a couple of minutes to respond to

what the minister has said. I will start off, Minister, by saying it is too bad you are

gone. I will start off by saying that it is too bad, when we talk about retention and

keeping nurses, that on the night that we legislated them back to work -

AN HON. MEMBER: Not we, them.

MR. FRENCH: On that side, when they legislated them

back to work, that the minister did not stand in her place and show some backbone and

intestinal fortitude, and vote the way that she spoke at one particular point in time when

she was the President of the nurses' union. I can only say my, how the times have changed.

My, what a Cabinet position can do for you. My oh my! How you can forget where you came

from and forget the people you worked with for a number of years.

It is too bad. It is very sad when we see the former

President of the nurses' union of Newfoundland and Labrador taking the stance that she has

taken to watch this amendment as I watched a year ago when I introduced a private member's

resolution for the personal care homes in this Province. To date, what an insult to those

people. What an insult to the nurses of Newfoundland and Labrador. What an insult to the

RNC of Newfoundland and Labrador who supported these nurses when they were on strike. What

an insult to see the Minister of Finance, the highest law maker in this Province, sit in

his seat and jeer the nurses who sat in the gallery. What an insult to those people. I sat

here and saw it with my own two eyes.

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Minister of Mines and

Energy.

MR. GRIMES: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

I think all of us know the rules in this House. We are

not allowed to tell lies in the Legislature. I believe that the suggestions now in terms

of what the hon. member is saying happened in this House - I sat here through this whole

debate and saw no such action. It is totally false, unlike when the member opposite gave a

rude gesture with his finger in a debate earlier before Christmas. I believe he should

retract and withdraw the statement because it is an absolute, downright lie, what the man

is saying.

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

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon.

Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Mines and Energy rose here and imputed

motives and almost directly said that the member here was lying. That is out of order, I

would say. It is imputing motives and the Minister of Mines and Energy's statement is out

of order.

MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, the hon. the

Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: He did not impute motives, Mr. Speaker.

He said he was lying and that is unparliamentary. He has to withdraw it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to take his seat, please.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Are you speaking to the point of order?

MR. FRENCH: (Inaudible), Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay

South.

MR. FRENCH: First of all I think the Minister of

Mines and Energy should withdraw his remark. I do not know what he saw but I know what I

saw. He talks about a gesture that went on here. We can all say that, to take the heat off

his former buddy who sat up here. That was no problem at all. This is the spin doctoring

that we have heard from this minister. The nurses saw it. They had very uncomplimentary

words for that particular minister. I sat here and watched the chief lawmaker of this

Province and the Minister of Finance go like that to people sitting in the gallery when

they were ejected.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: That is the truth, Mr. Speaker, that is

not a lie. I have no intentions of withdrawing that. None!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would ask the hon. member to take his seat.

The Chair has heard enough on this issue, and the Chair

will take this matter under advisement and rule at a later date.

The Chair now recognizes the hon. Member for Conception

Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I

believe the Minister of Mines and Energy just referred to me as a liar, that I was lying

in this House, and I ask now that those remarks be withdrawn.

MR. GRIMES: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, the hon. the

Minister of Mines and Energy.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, with respect to the rules

of the House I withdraw the statement and I wish he would do the same.

MR. SPEAKER: I thank the minister.

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have no intention of withdrawing of what I said. It

happened. I will tell you one thing, I am as much a man as anybody on that side is. I am

as much a man as you are, partner.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: I am as much a man as you are. I am as

much a man as anybody over there, Mr. Speaker, believe you me.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FRENCH: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I would like to

continue. When I see these things happening and I listen to the Minister of Mines and

Energy - I think he was up about ten times. Every time we would put up a speaker I

believe, again to see one man from the other side jumping up time after time when nobody

else over there would get up. The person they wanted to get up I do not believe would get

up. I do not believe that particular individual would get up.

I understood it was going to be a free vote. I would

certainly like to question the freedom of the vote. When we see these things happening and

we hear what we just heard, and we see the motion that changes the intent of this motion;

when we watch what is going on in health care in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador, when we talk about people who have been prepped and ready to go for heart

surgery seven, eight and nine times; when we have a doctor in the hospital who put out a

report and asked how many people in the Province of Newfoundland or how many people in his

area of the Province died while waiting on open heart surgery; when that doctor paid for

the ad himself and got seven replies, and asked in a meeting that I was in if there was

any member there from the House of Assembly who would stand up and ask that question;

well, the question was asked. The question certainly was not answered.

When we look at now nurses who are being recalled or

called back on overtime, when we look at paying people triple-and-a-half time, then I

believe it is time that somebody really took a good look and a hard look at exactly what

we are doing and where we are going.

To move this amendment I think is a shame. To look to

call the nurses of this Province after they legislated them back to work, I think it is a

insult to their intelligence and it is morally wrong.

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you going to vote against it?

MR. FRENCH: Definitely, without question. Vote

against that amendment? Sure. I am going to vote against the amendment just as much as you

had intended to vote against the motion, I say to the minister.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: I think you are one face the nurses will

certainly remember after your conduct in the House while the particular piece of

legislation was going on. They will remember you.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: You do not need to hope that. They will

remember you, believe you me.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: Oh yes. I am sure, speaking from the old

sandbagger himself, it was really good what he did. As a matter of fact, the night that I

speak about when a heart surgeon in Corner Brook asked if there was a politician there who

would get up and ask the question, that member was there. I did not see him the next day

coming to his feet asking the question that Dr. Arthur Grebneff on the West Coast of this

Province wanted asked. You know -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: Dr. Arthur Grebneff. You do not know the

man, I assume.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: I see, very good. Again, Mr. Speaker,

the gentleman had his opportunity the night the legislation was passed. He certainly could

have risen in his place anytime throughout that day but it did not happen. I think that

this amendment is wrong and cannot and will not support it. I believe in the motion that

was put forward by my colleague, and that is the only thing I would certainly be willing

to support.

I thank you for your time, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to stand today to support my colleague the

Minister of Health in her amendment to the resolution. Today is a time for reflection.

This is the first time that this House has convened since the passing of Bill 3. I think I

will start off on reflecting the events of Bill 3.

Bringing forward Bill 3 was something that neither

myself nor this government took any pleasure in. It was legislation that was necessary,

necessary because we had heard from the Health and Community Services Association that

health care in this Province was undergoing a crisis. We knew how long it would take to

get it through the House of Assembly and we had to take the responsible position that we

did. As I said when I started off, neither myself nor this government took any joy in

bringing forward this legislation.

The benefits that occurred to nurses because of this

legislation are many. The contract agreement that was narrowly rejected last October

provided for a 7 per cent raise for nurses. When I was appointed to this position as

President of Treasury Board the first thing I did was look at our Province's finances.

When I did that I had the stark realization that it was almost ten years since any

government, previous to ours, had the ability to provide a raise for our public sector.

That says a lot. We had gone through a very harsh economic climate in this Province. We

had now reached a position where we were able to provide an increase for our public sector

workers.

I believe the 7 per cent increase we provided was fair.

Do I think we should have paid more? I would have to say that I myself, and all members of

this government, would have probably liked to pay more, but the reality is we were not

able to pay more. If you ask your friends and neighbours, no matter what district you are

from: Are you willing to pay more so nurses, as part of our public sector, can have more

in their pockets? Yes, everybody would love to pay more, but the truth is we are the

highest taxed province in all of Canada. None of us can afford to pay more taxes. Really,

what is the reality here when you cannot afford to pay more taxes? You only can do it one

other way, and that means cutting services. It also means cutting employees.

I am sure all of us seated in this House will remember

1996 when we as a government inherited a $300 million deficit. We were faced with the

problem of what to do. We had to bring in a massive downsizing program. If you speak to

any public sector employee within this Province they will tell you that before Christmas

each year was a troubling time because most of them did not know if they were going to

have their job after Christmas or not. That was considered to be getting ready for the

budget for March 31, the adjustment period.

You talk to any public sector employee here today and

they will tell you that for the first time in a long time they have a great measure of

comfort with this government because they have not gone through that pre-adjustment period

before Christmas in the past two years.

They now can go out and make plans. They can make plans

to buy homes, to buy cars, go travelling, do things with their family, improve their

houses, do whatever they need to do, because they have some stability in their lives to go

out and make these financial decisions.

I want to tell you the benefits that we have brought in

to nurses - the 7 per cent increase that will be paid over a thirty-nine month period,

retroactive to a year ago April 1. The in-charge pay premium for nurses who are either

team leaders or nurses in charge, that will increase twenty cents an hour, from sixty-five

to eighty-cents. Casual nurses will also receive an increase in their in lieu of benefit

pay. This will increase that amount only from 14 per cent to 20 per cent of their salary.

So that is significant, along with their 7 per cent.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS THISTLE: Yes.

Do you know that over the next three years the cost of

these compensation measures will be $27.9 million? We are talking about new nursing

positions, 125 brand new permanent nursing positions, but you cannot forget the 200

casuals because they are 200 new nursing positions.

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

MS THISTLE: Yes. When they are classified as

permanent, they are permanent and they are new. You can put any name you wish on them, but

they are new.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS THISTLE: Do you know something, Mr. Speaker? This

is the largest single increase in the number of permanent nursing positions in our

Province's history. That says a lot. On top of that, government is willing to work with

nurses to look at the twelve-hours shifts. That may be one of the ways to reduce stress.

Now, I am going to tell you that nurses are a very, very

important part of our health care sector. I could not help - all the while during this

controversy, I held onto a letter from a constituent of mine from Grand Falls-Windsor who

works in the health care sector. When I read this letter, it told me about all of the

other people in the health care sector that are resource people and accommodate and work

with nurses and make sure that the whole health care sector works. One single group in not

an island onto themselves; they all need each other.

This person went on to tell me how - she used an example

like: Ms Smith was experiencing chest pains and had her family doctor refer her for X-ray

and blood work. The first thing she did was go into a word processing equipment operator

to register all of that stuff. It was a snowy day when she arrived at the hospital, so

what happened then? The maintenance department sanded the sidewalks, and when she entered

the hospital a utility worker mopped the water from the melted snow off the floor. Then

she asked the receptionist at the front desk where she should register. Then another

person, the registration clerk, entered all the data that Ms Smith needed to have her

tests completed.

When she had her blood work done, the laboratory aid

collected Ms Smith's blood. That was delivered to the materials and management department

and it was paid for by the financial services department.

She needed a urine sample. Therefore, the washroom that

she went in was cleaned by a domestic worker. She needed to have something to eat before

she went home, so she went to the cafeteria. From that cafeteria she was able to order a

menu created by who? Dietitians. Prepared by who? Cooks. Who served that? Food service

workers.

After lunch, she went to the diagnostic imaging

department for an X-ray. Her papers were processed by a clerk. Then, she put on a gown

that was washed and folded by a laundry worker. She had her X-ray done by an X-ray

technologist. The films are processed in a machine that was serviced by a biomed

technician. The X-ray was read by a radiologist and typed by a typist.

Now, she was not finished. She went on to the

respiratory department for an ECG and a stress test. An ECG technician performed the test

and a technologist did the stress test.

Is the message getting across? What I am saying is that

no one profession in the health care system works alone. Not one group works alone. Every

group is an integral part of our health care system, and there are dozens of professions

that cross over these lines in the hospital system.

When we look at the fact that we are looking at a

possible nurses' shortage, you know something, that is not a local problem. It is not a

local problem to St. John's; nor is it a local problem to Grand Falls-Windsor or Harbour

Breton or Baie Verte. It is not a provincial problem. It is a national problem. I would

even think it is an international problem.

What we are saying is this is a difficult time for

nurses. There is no question. You do not go through an event leading up to legislation,

and since legislation, without feeling anger, resentment, bitterness, and all the emotions

that go with that event. We, as a government, understand that. What we are saying at this

time is maybe a cooling off period is necessary. In saying so, we are still offering an

opportunity for dialogue. Whatever happens to this whole entire issue, the fact of the

matter is that government has to work with nurses. The employer, the health care

association, they have to work with nurses. We all have to work together. It may not be

today, it may not be tomorrow, but none of us can separate ourselves for an extended

period of time.

We, as a government, had to take our responsibility

seriously and we did that. We, as a government, were asked to take the matter into control

and we did that. What is important on this today is the fact that legislation, Bill 3, is

behind us. It was totally unique. It was totally unique to this situation. The nurses'

disagreement that could not be settled, that was the situation.

Bill 3 in no way affects any future contracts that

nurses will enter into with government, and it does not affect any other contract that

will come forward to government in the collective bargaining range. It was entirely unique

to this nurses' situation and will have no bearing on future contracts. We did what we

felt was necessary and responsible at the time, based on our ability to pay nurses and

other public sector workers.

We had a situation where we needed to take control of

the looming crisis that was within our health care system. That is now behind us. It is

almost one month behind us, but what is ahead of us is the fact that we need to foster a

new relationship with nurses. As the President of Treasury Board, I am willing and ready

to talk to nurses again.

Nurses that are seated in the gallery today, you are

shaking your heads. All of us know, when there is a dispute of any sort it is only so long

that we can stay apart. We all need to come together whenever the time is right. I do not

know when the time will be right. Whenever the time is right, we need to come together and

work on the issues that are facing nurses which today are workload, retention, recruitment

and all the issues, other than money. It is unfortunate but we cannot dwell on what was

done almost thirty days ago. We have to move forward and rekindle a new relationship -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MS THISTLE: - to improve the health care system of

this Province. If you look at what this government pledged to health care -

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

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave!

MS THISTLE: No leave? Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave is denied.

The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have to rise. I did not intend to rise today, because

my colleagues were intending to bring forward a resolution which made such good common

sense that we thought there would be only a speaker from this side of the House and one

speaker from the government side of the House, and that we would have unanimous approval

for the resolution put forward for the Member for Ferryland, because it made such good

common sense.

What that resolution basically said was they would call

upon the government to do what was right, to be fair to nurses, and to go and take unto

itself the powers they have, by virtue of being the majority in the House, to take steps

to improve nurses' remuneration, to do what the public of this Province has said should be

done, and to improve working conditions and staffing levels to ensure the proper

functioning of the health care system.

I say to the government, what other responsibilities do

you have? When the government moved to alter the resolution, what they altered was what we

have asked them to do. We on this side said to the government: Would you take steps to

improve nursing remuneration? Obviously since the government has changed the resolution,

put forward their thing: No, we will not do that. We said: Take steps to improve nurses'

working conditions. Because they changed the resolution, they are simply saying: No, we do

not want to do that.

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. gentleman is

supposed to be speaking to an amendment. The resolution has been amended and he is

standing up obviously with the old resolution in his hands, speaking to the resolution as

opposed to the amendment. We are speaking to an amendment resolution and not the one

(inaudible). Perhaps the hon. gentlemen might like to be a bit relevant.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, that point of order is

about as relevant as most other things that come from the Government House Leader. The

point of order itself is totally irrelevant. What it does show, though, is the contempt

the government has for any resolution that is designed to improve health care and the

nursing situation in this Province. It shows the contempt the government has for nurses.

It shows that they do not want to address the real issues. The real issues were what was

contained in the member's resolution when he put it forward today in good faith.

As a matter of fact, when we were having a discussion in

our caucus we felt that this resolution made such good common sense that the government

would say: Here is a good positive resolution. We will vote for it because we want to

improve the nursing remuneration, we want to improve nurses' working conditions and we

want to improve the nurses staffing levels so that we can ensure that the health care

system functions properly.

We were surprised to come in and find that the

government, in their very first speaker, had the minister stand up and offer an amendment

to that resolution. We here call upon the government to solve government's created

problems.

It was not the boards of health in this Province that

created the problem that is causing the crisis in health care. It was not the nurses'

union that created the problems. The problem was created by the government when the

government decided they would not abide by the current law in this Province. The current

law says, under the Public Service Collective Bargaining Act, that you could have binding

arbitration to resolve those differences. The government said: No, we are going to be the

bully, we are going to browbeat, we are going to intimidate, we are going to frustrate the

system, we are going to put at risk the integrity of the entire health care system, but we

will do it.

Then the minister gets up today, the President of

Treasury Board, and she quotes a lengthy letter from one of her constituents. I would ask

her to stand in her place tomorrow and read a letter from another constituent of hers

which wasn't nearly as complimentary as the one she just quoted a few minutes ago. Perhaps

on tomorrow when I get a chance I will bring that letter down to the House and I will read

another letter that went to the minister from a Ms Noseworthy, who is a constituent of the

hon. the President of Treasury Board.

What we have here today is certainly a case of where we

have, again, confrontation versus cooperation. The nurses who have been slapped in the

face, they have been browbeat, they have been bullied, they have been stamped on,

everything that you can do to a profession this government has done to nurses. Now, after

they slapped them in the face, after they have gone and said: That is it, we are going to

do what we want with your collective agreement, we are going to destroy it, we are going

to say to you that if you do not agree with what we want we will change the law to make it

the law of the Province to impose a collective agreement, we will not give you the

provisions of the Public Service Collective Bargaining Act, but what we will do is create

Bill 3. Then, after we have an Easter break and all that kind of thing, now the Minister

of Health comes back and says: Would you please forget about all of that?

What the minister has to realize is that that is not the

way the world operates. The nurses of this Province are not about to enter into a cuddling

session with the Minister of Health, the President of Treasury Board, or any members of

the Liberal Party. They have good reason not to because they have been treated so

unfairly.

Then the minister stands in her place and says she is

going to convert 200 casual positions into full-time positions. Then she says they are new

positions. Not only that but then she quotes Budget dollars which will have the effect of

saying: That is all new money. We happen to know the issue in casualization is not in the

total hours worked, it is the fact of the unpredictability of the hours. In fact, the

total remuneration for the 200 full-time positions, in contrast to the money that was paid

before for the 200 casual positions, the total amount of money is not that much different,

but the minister claims that is all new money now. Certainly, the issue of double counting

here in terms of financial analysis is certainly a very real issue. Nobody is being fooled

by the minister's comments in that regard.

The Premier of this Province made commitments to nurses.

He told them he would look after them. They feel betrayed. They feel they have been trod

upon. They feel that what is happening here is certainly not fair to them.

I watched television a few days ago and it was on NTV, I

think it was. They showed a young nurse leaving Newfoundland. She was at the airport, and

as she was putting her luggage into the conveyor system she started to cry. She did not

want to leave Newfoundland and Labrador.

We have knowledge now of some of the leading health care

professionals that are leaving this Province because they know that the working

environment in this Province is not fair, is not conducive to good professionalism. We

know as well that this government has to face the reality. People are not going to stay.

Not only that, but they do not have to stay. If you are offered a full-time job in Nova

Scotia where you are going to get $10,000 more, then you are on the boat and you are on

your way. Mr. Speaker, if you are offered a full-time job in the Northern Terri