PDF Version

April

3, 2017

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVIII No. 4

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Osborne):

Order, please!

Admit

strangers.

welcome to the public gallery today Mr. Doug Dunsmore who is the subject of a

Member's statement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

MR. SPEAKER:

For Members' statements

today, we have the Members for the Districts of Fortune Bay Cape La Hune,

Mount Pearl North, Bonavista, Placentia West Bellevue and St. John's East

Quidi Vidi.

The hon.

the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you. Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House to pay tribute to the Hermitage-Sandyville Volunteer Fire

Department for celebrating its 40th anniversary this past December. I have

always had great respect and admiration for firefighters' efforts as volunteers,

the countless hours, the high-risk situations and the constant search for

funding support.

It is an

honour to share their accomplishment and pride in celebrating this 40th

milestone, and I commend and thank them for the decades of professionalism and

commitment to ensure the safety of residents. It is remarkable that we have so

many long-standing volunteer firefighters in this rural area, where it can be

extremely challenging to recruit volunteer firefighters. We surely have great

people, dedicated to service and fortified with proper training. As dangerous as

it can be at times, I am sure it must also be a very fulfilling and rewarding

role to take on.

I ask

that all hon. Members join me in congratulating and thanking the

Hermitage-Sandyville Volunteer Fire Department for 40 years of outstanding

dedication. On behalf of the District of Fortune Bay Cape La Hune and the many

local citizens who benefit from your courage and support, I truly say thank you.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House today to congratulate and recognize Gemma Hickey who was

named the Human Rights Champion in Newfoundland and Labrador for 2016. On

December 8, 2016, the Human Rights Commission granted Gemma this recognition as

they have made a meaningful, lifelong contribution to human rights here in the

province.

Gemma is

an extraordinary activist and community leader. Gemma's passion and commitment

to helping others is inspiring. Gemma is the founder of Pathways, an emerging

organization that offers support to survivors of clergy abuse. Last year, the

Hope Walk attracted a great deal of support and attention. But Gemma is best

known for co-leading the movement that legalized same-sex marriage in Canada.

Gemma is a force for social change, and will continue to do great things in

life, mostly for others.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all Members of this House to join me in congratulating Gemma

Hickey on so many accomplishments to date and wish Gemma the best in the future,

as I'm sure there's a lot more good work to come.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Bonavista.

MR. KING:

Mr. Speaker, yesterday was

Autism Awareness Day, a day where many wear blue to open a dialogue about

autism. However, to people such as Treshana Gosse of Harcourt every day is

Autism Awareness Day.

Five

years ago, Treshana gave birth to Georgia, a bright young girl on the autism

spectrum. The irony of Georgia's birth is that Treshana started working with the

NL Autism Society 6 years ago. As assistant manager for the Eastern Region, she

is a tireless champion, providing programming on the Burin and Bonavista

Peninsulas, reaching west to Glovertown and east to Norman's Cove.

Since

March 2016, Treshana has become the face of autism training for first responders

in the province. This issue was raised by a firefighter in Come by Chance who

had an autistic nephew. Fire Chief Duane Antle who is also president of the NL

Association of Fire Services reached out to Treshana, who developed a training

program which is continuously delivered in all regions of our province.

I had an

opportunity to visit the society's office in Clarenville recently and all I can

say is wow. Treshana, you and your Program Coordinator Lisa Lane, truly make a

difference to those you serve.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia West Bellevue.

MR. BROWNE:

Mr. Speaker, she has done it

again! Rising above the odds, overcoming any challenge that lay before her and

shattering world records, Kaetlyn Osmond made Newfoundland and Labrador, and

indeed all of Canada, proud as she skated to a silver medal performance at the

World Figure Skating Championships in Helsinki.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BROWNE:

Her parents, Jeff and Jackie, were in the arena to watch and were quoted after

the win saying they were ecstatic and rightfully so!

Mr.

Speaker, we know Kaetlyn's story so well. Having grown up in Marystown to move

as a young girl to pursue her skating dreams in Montreal and then Edmonton,

where she lives today, she would return from the Sochi Olympics with a silver

win only to shortly after suffer a devastating injury. She had to learn to skate

all over again. Dedication, discipline and deep-rooted family support have all

led to her roaring comeback.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all hon. Members to join me in saying congratulations Kaetlyn for

the superb performance, and thank you Kaetlyn for being the wonderful ambassador

that you have become. You were silver on the podium but first in our hearts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I take

particular delight today in rising to acknowledge a constituent who has changed

the face of choral music since accepting a position at MUN's School of Music in

Besides

his immeasurable contribution to generations of students, who in turn became

teachers, Dr. Douglas Dunsmore reshaped the Newfoundland choral scene, already

rich when he arrived. Doug's tireless energy helped bring that richness to

national attention; those he inspired brought our choirs to the world.

Doug was

founding artistic co-director of the spectacularly successful Festival 500, and

was involved in so many projects, Mr. Speaker, I could talk for hours.

Particularly dear to me is the Philharmonic Choir of the Newfoundland Symphony

Orchestra, which Doug founded with NSO conductor Peter Gardner. We who have the

privilege of performing major oratorio repertoire can attest to the joy of doing

so having been directed by someone with Doug Dunsmore's knowledge and

enthusiasm.

Doug

retired as choir director after the annual December performance of The Messiah,

another of his legacies to our choral music scene. We're sad to see him go, but

grateful for having worked with him.

I ask

the House to join me in thanking Dr. Doug Dunsmore for his dedicated work,

particularly for the NSO Philharmonic Choir.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs and Environment.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, I rise to

recognize drinking water system operators in this province. Last week, I joined

over 300 participants for the annual Clean and Safe Drinking Water Workshop in

Gander everyone from operators, municipal representatives and trade show

exhibitors, to national experts in the field.

At the

workshop, I was pleased to present the Volunteer Operator of the Year Award to

Mr. Calvin Warford of Pleasantview for over 35 years of countless volunteer

hours.

The

Operator of the Year Award was co-awarded to two individuals from Ramea: Mr.

Brian Marsden and Mr. John Skinner for their response to the storm effects on

Ramea's drinking water in December.

I also

awarded certificates of appreciation to the other 19 nominated individuals for

their hard work and dedication.

Water

and waste water are a priority for our government, and our department provided

$140 million in water and waste water projects last year in conjunction with the

federal government. Approximately $209 million will be spent this year, and $580

million over the next three years on municipal projects, including water and

waste water systems.

closing, I would like to thank the many system operators that attended the

workshop, as they are at the first line for the delivery of water services. I

also thank the Water Resources Management Division for organizing this event. It

is very important that operators receive the proper training and support, and

this workshop is just one of the many initiatives we offer to meet this goal and

to ensure drinking water safety and municipal infrastructure sustainability.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I want

to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. We also recognize

the importance of clean, safe drinking water and applaud the drinking water

system operators throughout the province.

I want

to congratulate Mr. Calvin Warford on receiving Volunteer Operator of the Year.

I commend him for his impressive 35 years of volunteer service. I also want to

congratulate Mr. Brian Marsden and Mr. John Skinner on sharing the Operator of

the Year Award.

Mr.

Speaker, it's important to recognize these operators for their hard work and

dedication, whether it's through awards, nominations or certificates of

appreciation. Clean drinking water is important to all municipalities in this

province, and it's important that we see we have so many dedicated individuals

who are ensuring safe drinking water for our residents.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I too

thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I'm sure the system

operators who are participating in these annual workshops are appreciative of

the training provided, excellent training but support means more than annual

training sessions and capital funding. Municipalities need more resources for

ongoing training and technical support if we are ever going to eliminate the

many boil orders in this province.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Advanced Education, Skills and Labour.

MR. BYRNE:

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to rise

to recognize the long-awaited, first ever meeting of the Council on Higher

Education. This council was created in 2005 through legislation. The council's

purpose is to increase collaboration between Memorial University of Newfoundland

and the College of the North Atlantic.

Members

of the Council on Higher Education include representatives from the Department

of Advanced Education, Skills and Labour, which I Chair, the presidents and

board chairs of both post-secondary institutions, and, most importantly, student

leadership.

The

inaugural meeting included an overview, Mr. Speaker, of commitments in

The Way Forward , and members discussed

opportunities for current and future collaborative efforts. They identified

areas of interest for future partnership to benefit all regions of Newfoundland

and Labrador.

Mr.

Speaker, by working in partnership through the Council on Higher Education, we

will identify opportunities for improved engagement, sharing of resources and

increased collaboration in areas such as research.

Our

government, Mr. Speaker, believes that post-secondary education is key to

Newfoundland and Labrador's success in a challenging, changing economy.

Collaboration through the Council on Higher Education will help provide strong

value for our investments.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the hon. Member for an advance copy of his statement. I too would like to

recognize the members of the Council on Higher Education, and I wish them well

in their mandate. The Council on Higher Education has been a focus of importance

for many years with a continuing goal to line the functions of the institutions

for the overall betterment of our student population.

In 2006,

the act that established the Council on Higher Education was established. I'm

pleased to see the council will be continuing to build on integrated approach

which will result in greater opportunities and a brighter future for our youth,

especially now when it is needed the most.

I look

forward to hearing more about the council and what they will bring forth, and I

wish them the best in their task ahead.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I too

thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. Indeed, the formation

of this council is very good news. It's so important that students are

represented on this council because it's for the purpose of helping the students

that the council exists. I urge government to work with the council and provide

support for more paid internships, a real concern of our post-secondary

students, and that these happen within our post-secondary programs to help young

people to be more job ready when they graduate.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Oral Questions

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, over the weekend, the Member for Labrador West has been saying that the

government is moving forward with the repeat of a study on the fixed link this

fiscal year the government has budgeted $750,000 for the study in the 2016

budget.

I ask

the Premier, the minister responsible for Labrador, to tell us what, if any, of

the money has been spent so far.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well,

one of the opportunities that we have, in working with our federal government,

is that often what we've seen in the past is that they've been able to step up

and leverage some federal money and, therefore, less resources would be required

for the province, Mr. Speaker.

So what

we are doing now is working with the federal government. They have made an

indication that they are willing to participate. Once those contracts are

finalized, we'll get on with this study. It's very important to the people in

Labrador and, indeed, very important to the people all across Newfoundland and

Labrador that we get this study completed. Because it really forms the decisions

that we need to make in the future based on evidence, where we need to be with

this and costing and so on. And what we would then need for ferry services and,

indeed, how long.

Mr.

Speaker, any opportunity that we have to leverage federal money to support a

provincial initiative, we're going to do that every single time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, my

question was how much has been spent so far this year; $750,000 for a fixed link

study in last year's budget. Government also slashed $860,000 from

Labrador-Grenfell health services in the same budget, and some people in

Labrador feel that was quite the trade-off for the people of Labrador-Grenfell

region.

So I ask

the Premier: If he thinks that's a fair trade-off, $750,000 for the fixed link

and $860,000 coming off health care for the people in Labrador, is that a good

trade-off and how will the federal government support the project that he's

talking about? How much money is being spent on this?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Indeed

this was not a trade-off. People in Labrador for many, many years have been

asking for a decision on where they would be with the fixed link. There's a lot

of support for the fixed link, just not for Labrador, as I said, many people

look at this as a necessity for all our province. Putting a fixed link in place

will actually change the way goods and services are delivered to the province,

generate economic activity, Mr. Speaker.

It's

quite clear that Members opposite because I've heard the Members from the

Opposition, from the PC Opposition in the past who have said this was a waste of

money. What they're saying, Mr. Speaker, it was a waste of money to determine if

indeed a fixed link was possible. Therefore, their opinion is that there should

be just a ferry there providing that service into perpetuity.

It's not

the position that we take. We need to determine once and for all if indeed a

fixed link can be done to support Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, a

study done in 2004 on a fixed link, when published, determined that it could

cost more than $2 billion in today's dollars.

So I ask

the Premier: If you're doing a study and depending on the results of the study,

if you go ahead with this, you're looking at a $2 billion bill where's the

government proposing to get the money to pay for a $2 billion fixed link?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, I

guess it seems like the former premier of the province, and now the Leader of

the Opposition, it seems to me, he seems to have the answer on what indeed the

study would be. I guess the question could have been answered back in 2004. Why

did they actually even start the study themselves if the answer was just to do

it so you can put it on a shelf and not to anything with it, Mr. Speaker?

What we

want to do, there will be a number of options once we get the results back from

the fixed link. We will not give up on people in Newfoundland and Labrador and

we will definitely not be giving up on Labradorians. It's one of the reasons we

made the biggest, single investment in the Trans-Labrador Highway the single,

biggest investment in the Trans-Labrador Highway and we did that in

partnership with the federal government somebody they could never work with.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I remind

the Premier of the great work that was done on the Trans-Labrador Highway in

recent years, over the last decade.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

As a matter of fact, the

highway was opened under our watch, not under their watch.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, we believe in

investments in Labrador; there are no two ways about it. The study has already

been done. They're re-doing a 2004 study.

I ask

the Premier

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

They're

touchy over there today.

So, Mr.

Speaker, I ask the Premier: Will government also calculate the implications on

tourism and trade and the potential implications on the link that currently

connects the Maritimes to Port aux Basques the hub of Burgeo La Poile?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will

tell you right now in the

preamble to the question, are we touchy over here; we

are concerned over here. We are concerned because what we've inherited from the

previous administration is someone that completely gave up, gave up on places

like the Northern Peninsula, gave up on districts like Burgeo La Poile.

They were addicted to oil. If oil didn't answer the question, they did not go

looking for it. We are concerned about rural areas in our province.

Mr. Speaker, a fixed link study needs to be done to

determine what is required, number one, in terms of ferry services for Labrador,

for the Labrador area. We will continue to make significant infrastructure

investments, not only in Labrador but in the Northern

Peninsula. We're concerned about rural Newfoundland. They gave up on it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's

unfortunate the Premier doesn't like to answer the question, so I'll ask him the

question again because he got caught up in his own rhetoric over there.

Will the

government calculate the implications on tourism and trade and the potential

implications on the link that connects the Maritimes to Port aux Basques, which

is the hub of Burgeo La Poile I know they're sensitive over that. The

question is simple: Will you calculate those implications on a very important

part of the province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

certainly happy to stand here and speak as it relates to Marine Atlantic because

it's something that the other side desperately was lacking in when they were on

this side. In fact, I can say here in this House that when the Member opposite,

the Leader of the PC Party, was over here he had zero meetings with Marine

Atlantic during his tenure. He had zero meetings with the federal government as

it related to Marine Atlantic. So we certainly don't need to worry about what

their concerns were about Marine Atlantic because, I can guarantee you, they had

none.

What I

can say is this side is cognizant of the challenges in Labrador, it's cognizant

of the challenges we face from rural Newfoundland and Labrador and it's not

something that's meant to be mutually exclusive. We're going to take steps over

here to make sure that we benefit everybody in this province, no matter where

they live.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

I remind all hon. Members I'm

hearing a lot of voices, other than the individual that I've recognized to

speak. I ask hon. Members to respect the rules of the House and to respect the

individual that has been identified to speak.

The hon.

the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to

the Member opposite not so, not the case; what he's saying is not correct.

Mr.

Speaker, he didn't answer the question either. Will they calculate the

implications on his district, his own district he just had a chance to answer

it and he never committed to it. Will they calculate the implications on tourism

or on trade? They won't answer the question, Mr. Speaker.

The

joint councils of Labrador in their discussions talked about the ferry service,

they talked about roads, they talked about jobs and I'll tell you what wasn't

the priority for them: the fixed link for Labrador.

So I'll

ask the Premier, the minister responsible for Labrador: Why doesn't government

address the real issues in Labrador and get to the heart of the matters? Instead

of rhetoric, why doesn't he give answers to the people?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Mr. Speaker, talk about

rhetoric. Let's talk about common sense. If the former premier and the Leader of

the PC Party ever visited that district, he would know that it is a big concern

all around Labrador to get a fixed link study done. Get in touch with people in

Labrador, I say to the Members opposite, Mr. Speaker get in touch with them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER BALL:

Listen, Mr. Speaker, when I

look at the impact on tourism and economic development in our province, we see

any potential fixed link to have a tremendous impact in a positive sense. They

can talk about the negative impacts all they want, because all we've seen based

on the previous administration is red anyway. It's been just a sea of red, Mr.

Speaker, posting deficits when they've had the highest revenue in the history of

our province. We are concerned. We see this opportunity as a positive impact on

tourism in our province, Mr. Speaker, and yes, we will consider all impacts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A great

performance by the Premier this afternoon, but he didn't answer the question,

Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, the CFIB business barometer indicates that 30 per cent of survey

respondents are going to cut jobs in the next three months.

So I ask

the Premier: What actions are you taking to address this critical impact on our

economy?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

CFIB,

we've seen the business barometer, Mr. Speaker. If you notice in the barometer

you would see all province's that are dependent really on oil given the fact

that this previous administration made this province dependent on oil when they

refused to diversify the economy, refused to invest in areas of economic

generation and creating jobs, Mr. Speaker.

What we

are doing to create jobs was outlined last week in

The Way Forward: A Vision for Sustainability and Growth in our

province, talking about some 14,000 person years of employment, Mr. Speaker,

just the investments and infrastructure alone nearly 5,000.

Mr.

Speaker, these are the kinds of investments that industry leaders are looking

for. We've met with the heavy civil; we've met with the agriculture federation.

Mr. Speaker, all of them like the initiatives within

The Way Forward . It is

creating jobs. It's investment in infrastructure that is badly needed in this

province, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

From a

high to a low.

Mr.

Speaker, the CFIB actually points that taxes and fees as the reason why the

economy is the way it is.

Will

government reduce business taxes in this budget? Can we expect another lazy

budget like people of the province saw last year, or a real plan to get the

economy back on track?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well,

the people of this province have suffered through 12 years of lazy government.

Mr. Speaker, 12 years of lazy government when there was nothing done to bring

investment in parts of this province. Like I said, Mr. Speaker, addicted to oil.

They had infrastructure plans on the back of an envelope, nothing concrete, Mr.

Speaker. They made decisions based on political evidence. That's what it was

done for, Mr. Speaker. It was a popularity contest. They didn't care about

running deficits.

Mr.

Speaker, we are concerned about the future of our province. That is the reason

why we put in place a vision for sustainability and growth in this province. We

will continue to make key strategic investments in our province. Yes, Mr.

Speaker, it will create jobs and it will diversify this economy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I remind the Premier, that plan has the Conference Board of Canada

says Newfoundland and Labrador is the only province in the country that's going

to have a negative GDP growth next year. So that plan is not really working.

Mr.

Speaker, the Nalcor AGM announced that oil production in 2016 was four times

that which it was in 2015.

I ask

the Minister of Finance: How is this going to impact our fiscal situation in the

upcoming budget?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's

certainly a pleasure to get a chance to stand and answer a question from the

Member opposite. I would refer him back to the information we released as part

of the fall fiscal update when we provided people of the province with

visibility into some of the positive things that have happened with regard to

oil royalties and oil production. Certainly those things which we've benefited

from in the past year will certainly help where we will be when we announce the

budget on April 6.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, Nalcor announced $55 for their 2017 forecasting.

I ask

the minister: Is your government endorsing this number as well?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, the forecast

that government had in place for oil price is available on the government

website. The Member opposite can certainly look at that. We took a great

initiative last year to be very transparent around where we are with oil

royalties and oil production. There is clearly, publicly disclosed information

there as to government's position on the '16-'17.

When the

budget is released on April 6, later this week, we'll be able to provide people

of the province the forecast numbers we're looking at for the next six years as

we work hard to bring the province back to surplus, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I'm asking on behalf of the people of the province. The Crown

Corporation, Nalcor, who obviously controls our natural resources, has indicated

that they're projecting a $55 barrel of oil for 2017.

I'm just

asking the Minister of Finance: You and your budget, is that what you're

projecting? Is it consistent with Nalcor or is it not? A simple question.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, Nalcor it is

my understanding, the last I had checked provides their forecast based on a

process that they've identified inside Nalcor. For the province, we have

undertaken a number of initiatives including, I believe, upwards of 11 different

forecasters that we use to build our price, which we will forecast.

started last year with a revenue risk adjustment to make sure that we were being

careful around the revenue that we were projecting, and we've also taken

additional initiatives this year to make sure the oil price that we reflect in

our budget is based on the most transparent information and the most

knowledgeable information that we have, and we'll release that detail on

Thursday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, on November 30, I asked the Minister of Natural Resources for an update

on the extended loan guarantee and at that time an update wasn't available.

I ask

the minister today: Can she give us an update on the completion of the extended

loan guarantee?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well,

back in October we were very pleased as the prime minister announced a $2.9

billion enhancement to the federal loan guarantee. It meant significant

advantages to our province in terms of borrowing and certainly strengthened

Nalcor, and we were certainly pleased to have the support. Since that, there has

been a considerable amount of work done. If you noticed, the announcement was

made by the PMO at the time. It's not something that we came out with.

Mr.

Speaker, we're anticipating that we can actually even bring further value once

we finally get through all the documentation that's required. Mr. Speaker, like

we said so many times in the past, we are not about renting rooms and sitting

down and making fancy announcements when we don't have the feds at the table,

that will include the federal government. We're not going to go there. When it's

done it's done, but I tell you what, Mr. Speaker, Nalcor and the people of this

province will be better off, will be much better off with the finalization of

those agreements.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

answer again.

November 30 as well, at that time I asked the Minister of Natural Resources if

stipulations in the loan guarantee would prevent the sale of Muskrat Falls'

assets. At that time she indicated that provision had not been reviewed yet.

So I ask

her again today:

Section 40-11 Change of Control, will assets of Muskrat Falls

be allowed to be sold under the new agreement?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well,

once again, I'm very happy to respond to this question because right now, as I

said so many times in the past, the lineup of potential purchasers for Muskrat

Falls is few and far between. But I will say, if there's Mr. Speaker, what we

are doing right now is trying to manage, and we've seen some considerable work

that's been done by the new board, by the new CEO, and we've seen this just last

week at the AGM.

Mr.

Speaker, Nalcor is in a much better spot this year. We've put a considerable

amount of work into getting that project back on track, getting it back on

schedule as best we can be. We've worked very closely with the indigenous

leaders. Mr. Speaker, there have been certainly a number of issues that we've

had to deal with working with the Minister of Natural Resources and so on,

working with Nalcor.

Mr.

Speaker, the project is in a much better place today than it was when we took it

over, but there's no lineup of people looking for purchasing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

eastern seaboard the Premier is saying no one wants electricity. In his own

documentation that was released by Nalcor, the new CEO basically said in 2021 to

2040 there'll be $3.4 billion generated in excess revenue.

I ask

the Premier: Is this correct? Does he agree with it or not?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

course we look for all opportunities for the sale of recall power, Mr. Speaker.

When it comes to Muskrat Falls power, it's very expensive, as we know that. So

the sale of recall power to potentially any jurisdiction will be negotiated.

I can

assure the Members opposite, there is no one in the northeastern seaboard

looking to pay what it would mean for the cost to generate Muskrat power, get it

to those jurisdictions, Mr. Speaker. There is no one lining up to pay that

amount of money.

We will

take every advantage to sell recall power wherever possible; put that back into

rate mitigation so we can get affordable, competitive rates for ratepayers in

Newfoundland and Labrador. Right now, they are left to burden and shoulder the

complete costs of the Muskrat Falls Project.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

After

eliminating 24-hour snow clearing, the minister committed to this House that

equipment would be available, when needed, after hours. However, during Friday

night's snowstorm, equipment was pulled off at 8 p.m.

Can the

minister explain why this was the case?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

MR. HAWKINS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is

certainly a pleasure for me today and I thank the hon. Member opposite for

giving me the opportunity to thank the hundreds of men and women that are

working our highways in adverse weather conditions to provide safety for the

people that are on the roads.

Mr.

Speaker, contrary to the Member opposite for Mount Pearl North and others who

put tweets out on Friday night informing the people incorrectly that we were

taking plows off at 8 o'clock, we were not. That's the kind of irresponsibility

that we're getting from the other side. Totally irresponsible, because we did

not take our plows off on Friday night and we provided that service for the

people.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

believe there are a lot of Members opposite taking acting classes lately, but

they're doing a great job.

AN HON. MEMBER:

What?

MR. PETTEN:

You heard me.

Mr.

Speaker, regardless of what the minister just got up with his antics, the

department's own dispatch line said the plows are coming off at 8 p.m. It wasn't

over Twitter; it was done from their dispatch line. And that would be my

question: What is it: Who got the correct facts?

Your own

department are saying 9:30 but your own dispatch line in their Tweets I should

say. Their dispatch line is saying 8. So you got incorrect facts. Maybe you want

to explain that, Mr. Minister.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

MR. HAWKINS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of

all, what I would like to clear up, this is not a laughing matter; this is very

serious. If the Members opposite had just an idea of the amount of snow that

we've had since last Thursday, including the Avalon Peninsula, including Central

maybe we should go out to Central Newfoundland and have a look and just see.

We are

probably in the vicinity of about 100 centimetres of snow since Friday. Our

crews are working around the clock to provide safety. If, in fact, the Member

opposite called and got an incorrect number maybe he called the wrong number;

I have no idea.

I can

assure you that we deployed all of our resources over the weekend. All of our

resources were deployed to make sure our highways were safe for the people that

were driving. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, I drove back yesterday

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I don't

mind the minister; I do know how to use the phone and make a call. But I never

made the call; others did.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. PETTEN:

So everyone else is not

telling the truth, is that what you're saying?

While

doctors, nurses and law enforcement and other Central workers are still required

to travel to and from work, government cuts have led to plows being taken off

the roads at 8 p.m. during a snow event, leaving many to risk their own lives.

Does the government still consider snow clearing to be an essential service?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

MR. HAWKINS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I was

saying the last I was trying to finish off a statement. We had a tremendous

amount of snow and blizzard conditions over the weekend. Yesterday I drove from

Central Newfoundland, less than 24 hours after having blizzard conditions, over

50 centimetres of snow, drove on a highway that was completely bare completely

bare.

Mr.

Speaker, these are our men and women who are out providing these services. The

Member opposite is well aware of the protocol that's in place for emergency

situations. He knows quite well all of that because he was actually working in

the department as an EA. So he should know all of that.

We will

continue to make sure that we deploy our resources to have safety as number one

for our residents in this province, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis, for a quick question.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Last

Thursday, DFO announced a massive 63 per cent cut in shrimp quotas. This is

devastating news to the inshore shrimp industry. FFAW is calling for DFO

MR. SPEAKER:

I'd ask the Member to get to

his question.

MR. K. PARSONS:

FFAW is calling for DFO to

reconsider these cuts. Minister, what's your position?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources, for a quick response.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the hon. Member for the question. The position of this government, Mr. Speaker,

and I guess it's the position of this House because our position stems from the

All-Party Committee that we were Members of last year, and we stand by the

recommendations of the All-Party Committee.

We look

forward to working with DFO in the coming weeks to minimize the impacts to our

inshore plant workers and harvesters.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

minister took the words right out of my mouth: the All-Party Committee. So I ask

the Premier and the minister: Are they willing to set up the committee again so

we can continue having the united front that we had in fighting LIFO?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

two-part question, I'll answer the first part and then I guess the minister will

get up and answer the second part. As we just said, Mr. Speaker, it was

difficult news that we received last week when it comes to the shrimp quotas and

today, again, with the release of crab quotas.

These

are very difficult times for harvesters and plant workers and people that have

made significant investments into the fishing industry in our province. So we'll

be working very closely with all involved. We'll be working very closely with

DFO on all this. I know the minister has been in contact; our office we've had

some chats this morning about this. So, Mr. Speaker, if it takes an all-party

committee to get this right, we will do and consider all the options that we

have available to us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

inshore shrimp sector has supported thousands of onshore processing jobs, as we

know, while there was virtually no onshore processing generated by the landings

from the offshore shrimp sector.

So I ask

the Minister of Fisheries and Lands: Has he given any consideration to requiring

offshore shrimp licence holders landing their catch in the province to process a

portion of their landings in shrimp plants in the province?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the hon. Member for the question. Yes, Mr. Speaker, that is something that we've

had discussions with our offshore companies about. One of the benefits of the

CETA agreement is that the 20 per cent tariff on consumer-packed shrimp will not

be there any more after CETA is signed.

So it's

going to give our offshore companies an opportunity or an advantage that some of

the industrial shrimp that's cooked and peeled now in other countries to avoid

tariff can now be looked at being cooked and peeled here in the province and

finished to a consumer pack. That's certainly a discussion that we're having

with our offshore companies.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So I ask

the minister, in trying to maintain a united front from this House of Assembly

on behalf of the people of the province, if the minister will join us in

demanding Ottawa that they make it a condition of licence for offshore licence

holders to direct a portion of their landings for processing onshore?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the hon. Member for the question. We have reached out to the companies, and our

first approach is to work with the companies to entice them or to get their

equipment to cook and peel industrial shrimp on land. There are some more

challenges about it because there are jurisdictional issues, Mr. Speaker. Some

of the shrimp today is landed in other jurisdictions outside of this province.

So we would have to be very balanced in how we looked at that approach.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

In the

all-party committee we could discuss that approach and how to move forward with

it.

Is the

minister prepared to call for Shrimp Fishing Area 6 to be deemed inshore only?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think

my answer to the first question from the Member for Cape St. Francis was, yes.

That was a recommendation that came out of the all-party committee, I believe,

two years ago. That was the position of us when we sat on that side of the

House, and that's our position today.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

minister and the Premier have referred to talks and ongoing conversations.

I ask

the minister: Does he have any meetings planned with his federal counterpart to

discuss this urgent matter?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

answer to that is, yes. I've reached out to the minister's office. I've been

speaking with the minister's office numerous times since last Thursday. We

continue to do so, and I hope to speak with the minister in the very near

future.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

A very direct question, then,

for the minister, Mr. Speaker: Will the minister ask the federal minister to do

nothing less than to reconsider his drastic decision?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, when we did our presentation as a province or as a department a few

weeks to the advisory committee, we asked to have a recommendation or our

request was similar to that of the FFAW, that the cuts that would have to be

made this year be balanced over a two-year period. We've reiterated that to the

federal minister's office, that we felt these cuts should've been taken more of

an average or a balanced approach.

Mr.

Speaker, we can assure the harvesters and processors and plant workers in this

province that we will be there to support them in any way we can.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period

has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling

of Documents.

Tabling of

Documents

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

accordance with the Transparency and

Accountability Act , it is my pleasure to table the 2017-2019 strategic plans

for Nalcor Energy and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant

section 5(2)(

b) of the Supply Act, 2016 ,

I am tabling one Order in Council relating to usage of the contingency fund for

the 2016-2017 fiscal year as it relates to commissions of inquiry.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further tabling of documents?

Notices

of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville Port au Port.

MR. FINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Member for Labrador West, the following private Member's

resolution:

WHEREAS

most gas stations and fast food restaurant drive-throughs across the province

have no recycling bins available for travelling motorists; and

WHEREAS

Newfoundland and Labrador has the lowest recycling rate in Canada;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House recognizes the importance of

increasing recycling in the province and urges government to consider

legislation requiring recycling containers be present at fast food restaurant

drive-throughs and gas stations.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant

to Standing Order 63(3), the private Member's resolution just read by the Member

for Stephenville Port au Port shall be the private Member's resolution to be

debated this Wednesday.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

Answers

to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

today to present the following petition. To the hon. House of Assembly of the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of

the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

emergency responders are at great risk of post-traumatic stress disorder, known

as PTSD; and

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House

of Assembly to urge government to enact workers' compensation legislation

containing a presumptive clause with respect to PTSD for people employed in

various front line emergency response professions, including firefighters,

emergency medical service professionals, and police officers not already covered

under federal legislation.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, it's not the first time I've spoken on this very serious matter, and we

haven't heard any response from government on it yet, or any indication of

giving it some serious consideration. What we do know is post-traumatic stress

disorder is common amongst first responders in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Newfoundland and Labrador, we have a combination of first responders and types.

We have first responders who are career paid employees, and we have first

responders who are volunteer-based. And, Mr. Speaker, I would go as far as to

say all are professionals in the work that they do, have a variety of training,

depending on the roles and responsibilities. I can also say that

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. P. DAVIS:

for all of us to say that

emergency responders take their jobs very seriously and face difficult and

challenging times when never wanting to or never looking to do so but having to

do so because of the circumstances that exist from time to time, emergencies, a

disaster, chaotic situations and the like that occur in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Mr.

Speaker, currently, under current workers' compensation legislation, a person

filing a claim for post-traumatic stress disorder has to identify the event that

caused the post-traumatic stress disorder. We know that more so than ever

before, that in many times it's impossible for a first responder to identify an

event that caused PTSD.

It is

better known as time goes on and through practice and through greater

understanding of occupational stress injuries, and particularly post-traumatic

stress disorder, that quite often it's an accumulation of stressors and exposure

to events over a long period of time. Sometimes it could be decades before a

post-traumatic stress disorder is diagnosed and understood in an individual

first responder, and that person really begins to come to terms with the impacts

of post-traumatic stress disorder; therefore, the workers' compensation needs to

be reviewed.

Government needs to ensure that actions and steps are being taken so that first

responders understand the stressors, the stress that happens when placed in

chaotic and stressful situations, understand how they feel and how their bodies

will react, and also other ways to prevent illness at a later time.

Understanding is one of those, but when a person becomes ill with post-traumatic

stress disorder it is incumbent upon legislation to be in line, to help and

assist those first responders, not to be an obstacle as it is today. This is

about changing legislation for workers' compensation.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Before I

recognize the Member for St. John's Centre, I understand the importance of

conducting business while sitting in the House, I ask Members to keep the volume

down so that the Speaker can hear the individual presenting the petition.

The hon.

the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the

hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

government has removed the provincial point-of-sale tax rebate on books, which

will raise the tax on books from 5 per cent to 15 per cent; and

WHEREAS

an increase in the tax on books will reduce book sales to the detriment of local

book stores, publishers and authors, and the amount collected by government must

be weighed against the loss in economic activity caused by higher book prices;

and

WHEREAS

Newfoundland and Labrador has one of the lowest literacy rates in Canada, and

the other provinces do not tax books because they recognize the need to

encourage reading and literacy; and

WHEREAS

this province has many nationally and internationally known storytellers, but we

will be the only people in Canada who will have to pay our provincial government

a tax to read the books of our own writers;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House

of Assembly to urge government not to impose a provincial sales tax on books.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, I've stood in this House a number of times now and read this petition

coming from all over the province and I believe that people in the province have

seen it has a personal affront, that there's been a provincial tax imposed on

books again, the province with the highest illiteracy rate; consequently, the

lowest literacy rate in the country.

Often

we've heard in this House government defending this, saying it's not going to

affect the sales of books. But our own publishers are telling us our own local

publishers, those who publish the work of our authors, those who take the risk

on new authors as well, who publish their work because they deem it so important

to publish not only the work of established authors, but to publish the work of

a new authors, are saying that they've told government time again that it will

affect the sales of books, and they're right.

We're

hearing from our local booksellers who aren't multi-national organizations, but

local, small businesses who again are passionate about the issue of literacy in

this province who are taking the great risks to retail books written by our

local authors. Not that those are the risks, but the risks in terms of how

difficult it is to survive as a small business in this current economy. They

have clearly told us how this imposed tax is a detriment. They said really what

it's doing; it's robbing Peter to pay Ball. In fact, Mr. Speaker, this is not a

progressive tax; it's a regressive tax in this current economy. This is a

matter, and we've seen a number of those, where we're robbing Peter, the people,

to pay Ball.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I remind

all hon. Members that it is unparliamentary to refer to another Member of the

Legislature by name. You refer to them by district or title.

The hon.

the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the

hon. House of Assembly of and the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

Marine Atlantic ferry rates continue to rise, becoming increasingly more cost

prohibitive; and

WHEREAS

increased rates impact the cost of goods being shipped into our province, as

well as those products being exported out by local business; and

WHEREAS

tourism is negatively impacted by the ever-increasing, cost-prohibitive means of

ground transport into the Island portion of our province;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House

of Assembly to urge government to open a line of communications to the federal

government to begin and advocate on behalf of the residents and businesses of

this province, not stopping until the results are realized.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, this issue has been brought forward to this House on numerous occasions

via petitions from me and some others Members of our Official Opposition. It's a

very important issue facing us. As we know, it's our link to the mainland under

the terms of union, Marine Atlantic.

It's

something that's been subsidized by the federal government as per their

obligation. These increasing rates are becoming more of the norm in the last

number of years. There was a time when those rates were increasing and some

Members opposite were the most vocal opponents to those rate increases. But we

find now, with this new, renewed relationship with Ottawa, it's harder to find

some criticisms of these rate increases.

With

this newfound relationship, I think it would be incumbent upon them to use that

great relationship to talk about this issue. Instead of they just accepting it

and saying thank you very much, and okay the rates are increasing, we will deal

with it.

It was

deafening. When the rates were increased in previous years, they were very, very

vocal, and rightfully so as we are now. There is disconnect now. Because of

the party stripes, it's not cool to be criticizing your federal counterparts at

a time like this over increases that affect each and every one of us. Whether

it's your grocery shelves, whether it's an automotive store, whether it's a

tourist coming, it affects pretty well right across the province. The cost of

transportation to get to the Island, if you're not flying in, coming through

North Sydney during the winter and Argentia in the summer, these rates and

results effect consumers. They're very important, and it's meaningful to people.

It's one of those hidden costs. You see it slowly creep up, but it is additional

costs of crossing the North Atlantic, North Sydney.

As a

government, every issue bears importance. If it has a negative impact on our

economy and our citizens, it is incumbent upon the government of today,

regardless who is in Ottawa, to stand up for our rights and be vocal and to

lobby to get those rates more in line with people's affordability.

Those

rates lately, if anyone has noticed, the increase in those rates is getting to

the point where it is becoming very cost prohibitive. I encourage government

opposite to use their newfound relationship to do something about these rates.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I know

it's outside the Standing Orders; I've tried this a couple of times. The Members

opposite stand and present petitions and would like to know government's

position. I'm prepared at this time to speak to this if they'll provide me with

leave to speak about this. If they are interested in knowing government's

position, I'm prepared to stand here in this House and speak to the people of

the province and the Member opposite about what government is doing, but I

require their leave and I wonder if I have it.

MR. SPEAKER:

Does the hon. Member have

leave?

MR. A. PARSONS:

Well, it looks like no leave.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the

hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

the government has not implemented curriculum to teach the basic monetary skills

needed by our youth; and

WHEREAS

the government of our province has the responsibility to act in the best

interests of our youth; and

WHEREAS

the youth of our province deserve the greatest level of respect and

consideration;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House

of Assembly to urge government to introduce financial education into provincial

curriculum to prepare youth for the monetary and financial challenges of life

upon entering the workforce.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, we know, there's no doubt, there are challenges in our education system

from every level, but our education system has as one of its key objectives, is

preparing our students, upon graduation and as they transition through different

levels of our secondary school system, to move into post-secondary or move into

a career within the realms of their particular specialty or something that they

feel is going to be their contribution to our society, to prepare them for that.

Too

often we hear about one of the largest numbers that's increasing is bankruptcy

amongst young people. When they come out in their first job, it's probably the

first time that they've had disposable income from their perspectives, they move

into a financial situation where there are enticements to be able to buy

vehicles or homes or certain things or specialized things because interest rates

are low or there are no down payments. That's all part of the business

philosophy, getting people to buy certain products.

Young

people not understanding, when they come out, exactly what impact that may have

on them financially is a detriment to our whole society; it burdens them with

debt. It prevents them from, in some cases, being able to transition to other

careers. In some cases, going back to a post-secondary education institution to

upgrade or take a different line of a career path that they'd like to do.

sometimes has a major effect on relationships because of the burden. It prevents

them from being able to do certain things from an investment point of view

because they're not familiar with it.

So what

we're saying is, and there have been discussions, this is not new. My days as a

civil servant going back, and we used to have, the Crown agency was then the

Youth Advisory Council. Part of the discussions around there, and that goes back

to the early '80s, young people had said they need to be prepared for

understanding the financial restrictions, the financial challenges but also some

of the financial privileges that young people will have in their livelihood.

Part of

the issue here becomes we don't emphasize enough of that, and we're not saying

take away from some of the other key things in our curriculum. There are a

number of courses that are offered within our school system from civics and some

of the other things that could build into it, a key component around financial

responsibility, financial understanding. The world has changed. Now we do

electronic transfers. We're doing purchasing online. People knowing about what

interest rates mean, knowing what credit cards are and some of the things that

(inaudible).

Mr.

Speaker, I'll have an opportunity to speak to that again, but we think this is

another thing that could enhance our education system and help our students be

better prepared as they move forward as productive citizens.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Orders of the Day, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I call Order 2, third reading of Bill 2.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Minister of Natural Resources, that Bill 2,

An Act to Amend the

House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act be now read a

third time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

Bill 2 be now read a third time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Sorry.

All

those in favour?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK (Barnes):

A bill,

An Act To Amend The House Of Assembly Accountability, Integrity And

Administration Act. (Bill 2)

MR. SPEAKER:

This bill has been now read a

third time. It is ordered that Bill 2 do pass and its title be as on the Order

Paper.

motion, a bill,

An Act To Amend The House Of Assembly Accountability, Integrity

And Administration Act, read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as

on the Order Paper. (Bill 2)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I would call Order 4, second reading of Bill 4.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Minister of Natural Resources, that Bill 4,

An Act To Amend The

Intergovernmental Affairs Act, be now read the second time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

Bill 4 be now read a second time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill,

An Act To Amend The Intergovernmental Affairs Act.

(Bill 4)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

happy to stand here today and speak to Bill 4, which is

An Act to Amend the

Intergovernmental Affairs Act. And as I am want to do when I speak about bills,

sometimes I speak about their substance, their purpose and the size of it. In

many ways, it's a very small actual piece of legislation in terms of its size.

It only has about a handful of new sections that we're dealing with here, but in

terms of what it's doing, this is a substantive move being done by our

government as it relates to the Intergovernmental Affairs and the department,

and now we have the secretariat. So I'm going to go through the Explanatory Note

and go through the sections, and then I'll talk a bit about the purpose behind

it.

Basically, this is a bill that would amend the current act,

Intergovernmental Affairs , to ensure consistency with the structure

of government departments, branches, offices and secretariats. It's basically

to address a move that was recently made by our government as it came to the

realigning of current departments and divisions and part of the flatter, leaner

management that we are doing with our Way Forward .

When you

look at the act itself, there are a few sections that are basically repealed

with substitutions. So what we have here is

section 3 is repealed and now the

following is substituted: There shall be a secretariat within Executive Council

responsible for intergovernmental affairs.

Section

4 of the act is repealed, and now it says: The minister shall direct the

administration of the secretariat.

(2) In exercising the powers and discharging

the duties conferred or imposed on him or her by this Act, the minister shall

act under a style of cause that includes reference to intergovernmental

affairs.

Finally,

the remaining sections are subsections 5(1) and 5(2), which deals with the LGIC

being able to appoint deputy ministers and assistant deputy ministers necessary

for the proper conduct of the business of the secretariat.

When it

comes to the bill itself, Mr. Speaker, it's very small in size. So again, just

talking about some of the structure behind this, the background and reasoning.

The

Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs Secretariat was established in February

as part of the previously mentioned realignment of government. Specifically,

this new secretariat that is created combines the functions of the former

Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat, the Aboriginal Affairs branch of the

Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs office, and the trade policy function of the

former Department of Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural Development. So you

see a little change here that I think is quite interesting and quite necessary

as we move forward.

What you

see here is a unification of our government's efforts to build intergovernmental

relations nationally and globally with our efforts to advance our relationships

with indigenous governments and organizations. It's something that this

government has taken very seriously, and the fact that our Premier handles this

responsibility personally shows just how important this is to him. Again, he

works in conjunction with our Cabinet, with our caucus.

We have

a number of Members specifically as it relates to Labrador Affairs. So we're

very lucky to have strong Labrador representation in this House. If I may

provide some foreshadowing, I know some of them will have an opportunity to

stand up later during this debate or during the next debate when we talk about

Address in Reply to talk about Labrador. I'm certain that is something that

Members of the other side will hope to listen to. So perhaps they can establish

some connection with Labrador, because according to Question Period today

they're certainly lacking in some of that.

As I

move forward, we talk about the fact that we have a secretariat established now

that has the capacity to consider interactions with other governments. One of

the things we're seeing a lot again, the Member that sits behind me who deals

with trade policies certainly sees this a lot we had the capability to deal

with trade policy as we deal with other governments. It's a huge part of the

day-to-day work that goes on every day within government and within various

departments. When we look at the fact that all provinces and the feds right now

are pursuing an internal free trade deal which will reduce trade barriers within

Canada, this is something that obviously fits right into that current

development, something that we're trying to do.

Also, we

deal with the natural resource development opportunities which we know have

always existed in Labrador and there's more potential there now than ever. This

will speak to this and will move to this, making it easier as we move forward.

The fact is we still have our offshore petroleum exploration going on, in

Labrador mining, and I know there are other Members that will stand and speak to

this today and they'll talk a bit more in detail about this.

I think

a very important thing to note here as we move forward is the fact that the

responsibility for this secretariat will remain with the Premier. The Premier

has taken personal responsibility for this matter. This is someone even back

when we were in Opposition and certainly when we've been in government, he has

spent a tremendous amount of time in Labrador going up and meeting and been all

over in every nook and cranny of Labrador. He has taken the time to visit. The

fact that he has taken this on, in conjunction with our Labrador Members, shows

just how important he views it. This relationship, we need to continue it. I

think this move here is a positive step as we move forward as it relates to the

establishment of the secretariat.

Mr.

Speaker, on that note, I will take my seat and look forward to the debate on

this bill from the Members opposite, as well as my colleagues on this side, and

look forward to having an opportunity to speak in closing and during the

committee phase of this piece of legislation.

Thank

you so much.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is

certainly a pleasure today to rise to speak to Bill 4,

An Act to Amend the

Intergovernmental Affairs Act. We'll specifically look at it's being repealed,

the current Intergovernmental Affairs Act

and the new secretariat within the Executive Council responsible for

Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs.

So the

intent, my understanding of the legislation, with the new Intergovernmental and

Indigenous Affairs Secretariat will combine previous functions, some of the

Executive Council, as well as some of line departments, some of the functions,

in bringing those together. Specifically, Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat,

Aboriginal Affairs branch of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs office, trade

policy function of the former department of Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural

Development.

As the

minister indicated in some of his comments in terms of intergovernmental affairs

and relations, many of these aspects obviously are directly tied in terms of

various governments, various structures, provincially and federally as well, the

interaction of various levels of governments.

The

other interesting one is the trade policy function taken out of a line

department. There are many interactions in regard to the trade function, which

I'm somewhat familiar with in my role formerly as Minister of Innovation

Business and Rural Development where the trade function was involved in that

department.

There's

a lot of work done in active files, whether it's internal trade, execution of

trade between provincial jurisdictions in regard to bilateral discussions that

we've seen with CETA the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement in terms of

discussions back and forth, especially in areas of provincial jurisdiction and

discussions with the federal government; as well as the Trans-Pacific

Partnership with their discussions still underway in regard to Canada and

pursuing that with trade partners.

So there

is a lot of interaction from the provincial level from the line department; as

well, NAFTA in some of the discussion we're hearing out of the United States in

regard to that Free Trade Agreement and what some of the priorities are of the

current, new administration in the United States in looking at that North

America Free Trade Agreement and what other changes can be made.

It's

very important that this function to trade and other components are tied and

connected to operations of line departments and what's happening, because

there's interconnection in that regard. In internal trade, one of the things

that is often discussed is the transfer of electrical power and energy, and the

challenge we've always had in this province with Labrador and going west with

that east-west transmission grid. That can be done under various avenues. Under

the Constitution, we have a right to not be discriminated against in the

transfer of that power east to west. At a federal level, all stripes of

government have not given Newfoundland that direction or allowed Newfoundland or

forced any provincial jurisdiction to allow us to use that.

Agreements on internal trade I know the Premier mentioned before when we

talked about Muskrat Falls and east to west transfer of power. He talked about

the fact that there were discussions going on with Quebec. I think he referenced

internal trade. So that's a means in regard to the trade component of this piece

of legislation, how it's now put under intergovernmental affairs, the new piece

of legislation. We need to ensure that the ability and the focus in this piece

of legislation allows it to interconnect with other line departments and

functions of any particular government, any particular time, to ensure the best

efforts for Newfoundland and Labrador and public policy is developed.

There

are three amendments being made to the act. The first round is to change the

name the Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat to include the functions of the

former departments some I've spoke of to consolidate the secretariat as part

of the functions of Executive Council.

The

second round of amendments is to allow changes to the title of the minister

responsible for the new Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs Secretariat so

that the minister shall act under as style of cause that includes reference to

intergovernmental affairs.

The

third is related to the change in title of the Secretary to Cabinet for

Intergovernmental Affairs I understand that was not used since 1998 to

deputy minister or assistant deputy minister of Intergovernmental and Indigenous

Affairs Secretariat.

Now,

some of the briefing and some of the notes that were made available in regard to

the intention and what the desire is for this piece of legislation to support

and what the intent of Bill 4 is, from a government perspective and as I said

earlier, the department changes here are part of and I think the minister

referenced it earlier. The changes, per se, departmental changes, are not new.

They were part of some government restructuring that was announced on February

22 of this year. So I would suggest this is catching up in regard to that

restructuring that was announced at that time to amend the legislation to fit

what the intent of the current administration is in regard to redefining these

particular roles and putting them into Executive Council and combining them.

The

former Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs office has been reconfigured, I

understand, to, from government's perspective, achieve better goals. The

Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs Secretariat is established by merging

Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat with the former Aboriginal Affairs

functions of that office.

So all

of this is tied back to the February announcement in 2017 and some of that

restructuring; and this follows up on that with regard to redefining what that

will look like in bringing it into Executive Council.

With

this and with any piece of legislation, when we go to Committee there'll be some

questions asked with regard to how these new functions work, and are we

confident that this is going to allow the important aspects of this legislation

and the operations of government from a policy perspective, from a fiscal

prudence perspective, from being top of areas of interest in intergovernmental

affairs, certainly from a provincial level, from all levels of government right

to Ottawa that were on top of things that are in the best interests of

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

As we go

through Committee, we'll certainly look for some answers in regard to in

separating out Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs, is there staffing issues here

and how do we meet the requirements in that regard. Obviously there's a

principle-based relationship with Aboriginal people; to be concerned to make

sure that the new structure meets the mandate of the office to make sure that we

have those relationships we need and we can build collectively with Aboriginal

peoples in policy development, execution of items of importance of all levels of

government, whether it's a natural resource development, whether it's providing

of services and programming, whether it has the ability to meet particular needs

at times in particular communities in society. If there are issues that arise,

do we have mechanisms through this legislation to meet those, and to make sure

we can meet the needs of all people, all our people of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Also,

looking at the detailed analysis of how these impact indigenous relations and

Labrador issues in general, it is very important that we have that ability and

protocols and ability through this and nothing is lost through the integration

and directing this to Executive Council, outside of a normal line department of

government. That's very important that we have discussions, go through debate of

how that will operate and how it will function to make sure things are maximized

in the running of government.

Again,

things like has the structure been discussed with the Combined Councils of

Labrador as well, in terms of the council and what other groups were consulted

as well. That's very important. Obviously from a council perspective, very

significant player in regard to representing Labrador and what the issues and

concerns and that collectively we work together, in all functions of government,

all line departments of government, Executive Council and any government of the

day through again policy, service delivery and all of those things that we work

towards collectively. We need a mechanism to make sure that they can be

addressed, first off they are heard and they can be addressed collectively

through the structure of government. So we need to make sure is that what's

being proposed here allows this to happen, and certainly there is no

interruption in what we've achieved in the past and how we can clear the runway

for the future to make this happen.

We'd

have to look at based on the announcement in February 2017 in regard to the

restructuring, I think there was nearly a dozen people employed in the

Aboriginal Affairs division. So what will the staffing division look like in

this new model, the new structure, and we ensure that we have those people,

human resources, technical folks and all those we need to make sure that we

fulfil the functions of what we need to do.

Earlier

I mentioned too, it's certainly very important that we look at the whole trade

opportunities. Is this restructuring a lesson in any way, the importance of

trade opportunities, because it is so important to Newfoundland and Labrador?

When we think about our natural resources, it is very much commodity driven.

Forestry

has struggled over the past number of years. Traditionally, it has been a huge

industry for us. The fishing industry, there continues to be huge opportunities

in regard to this structure today and some of the things we've seen with the

Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement.

mentioned TPC, NAFTA, all of those, we need to ensure that this piece of

legislation by taking the trade component and the opportunities out of a

particular line department, bringing it into Executive Council, will that still

have the focus, the expertise to drive the opportunities that are out there in

our changing environment, our changing industries and in world trade?

Again,

we're huge in regard to commodities and natural resources. Ever since our first

days, over 500 years ago when people settled here in Newfoundland and Labrador,

trades were a huge component of it. It's important that we are ensured by this

piece of legislation that it remains a priority and we can deal with it.

As well,

we talked about internal trade and how important that is interprovincially. We

have the mechanisms in place to break down barriers between various provincial

jurisdictions so we have the free flow of goods and services within Canada. It's

good to export outside our national borders but, as well, it's very important

that we break down any barriers in regard to internal trade between provinces

and territories.

The

other question, why has government moved the trade policy functions of the

former department, that's what we talked about, to Executive Council? Trade is

tied to economic development and tied to the ability to drive the economy and

drive new opportunities. As we go through this, it is very important that we

make sure this division or the transfer of any of this has no way downgraded our

ability to direct trade policy to work bilateral discussions with our federal

counterparts in terms of driving activities that are important to us and the

long-term, socio-economic effects of the reorganization.

We want

to see that as we go through debate on this and make sure all opportunities are

seized through this. If you're making this change in restructuring, I assume

it's been done to further facilitate the opportunities that are out there but I

guess through discussions and through debate on this and in committee we'll see

if that is the case.

Again,

I'm looking forward to debate on the bill as we go through, Bill 4, to amend the

Intergovernmental Affairs Act in

regard to a new secretariat within Executive Council responsible for

intergovernmental and indigenous affairs. Normally, as we look at things like

budgets and those sorts of things when we go through the Estimates process here

in the House, that's all usually encompassed within Executive Council. So we'll

be interested to see how that would work as we move forward from a budget

perspective, what's budgeted, what's estimated and how we go through those

estimates here in the House.

So all

of those are factors and issues that I think Members on this side would like to

learn about and understand in regard to this particular piece of legislation. As

we go through this afternoon, we'll have debate in second reading and then when

we get to committee there may be specific questions that I'm sure the minister

and those on the other side can answer as we move forward with debate on Bill 4.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia West Bellevue.

MR. BROWNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the Member for Ferryland for his enlightened comments and for the Government

House Leader for his opening remarks as well.

It's a

pleasure to rise today in this hon. House to participate in the debate on

introducing

An Act to Amend the Intergovernmental Affairs Act.

The

Intergovernmental Affairs Act gave the

former Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat the authority and ability to build

relationships with other governments and international entities to advance the

province's interests. It also gave the secretariat the authority and ability to

advocate for Newfoundland and Labrador bilateral, multilateral, regional and

international intergovernmental meetings and conferences to promote government's

position on matters of importance to this province.

Mr.

Speaker, the current legislation has not been amended since the 1990s and

requires updating. The introduction of a new Intergovernmental and Indigenous

Affairs Secretariat was established in February as part of a realignment of

government. As the Member for Ferryland acknowledged, this really is much to do

with catching up with the changes that were made in terms of the legislation

that needed to be amended as a result of that.

The new

secretariat, the Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs Secretariat will

combine the functions of the former Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat, the

Aboriginal Affairs branch at the Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs office and the

trade policy function of the former Department of Business, Tourism, Culture and

Rural Development. The creation of this new secretariat unifies our government's

efforts to build intergovernmental relations nationally and globally with our

efforts to advance our relationships with indigenous governments and

organizations.

Mr.

Speaker, the Premier has made this a priority, obviously taking on those two

functions after assuming government in December 2015, responsible for Labrador

and Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Affairs. He's made a priority in

terms of government to government relationships, whether that be at our federal

to provincial levels, interprovincial levels, and certainly with our indigenous

governments and organizations.

Today,

we see the natural synergies coming together to form this new secretariat which

was done in February, and now it's being reflected in the amended legislation.

The change also achieved a much needed synergy. We now have a secretariat that

has the capacity to consider our interaction with other governments and trade

policy at the same time.

Mr.

Speaker, legislative changes are necessary to ensure the new Intergovernmental

and Indigenous Affairs Secretariat is able to successfully fulfil its mandate.

So, Mr. Speaker, as has been referenced and I'll delve into some of the

specifics here now. Specifically, we're proposing three amendments in Bill 4.

First, we propose changing

section 3 of the act so that it will now read: There

shall be a secretariat within Executive council responsible for

intergovernmental affairs.

Secondly, we are proposing changing

section 4 of the act so that clause 1 will

now read: The minister shall direct the administration of the secretariat.

Clause 2 will now read: In exercising the powers and discharging the duties

conferred or imposed on him or her by this Act, the minister shall act under a

style of cause that includes reference to intergovernmental affairs. Mr.

Speaker, this really takes away the restrictive language that was in the act

before and gives some flexibility under the act now with this proposed amendment

section 4 of the act.

Thirdly,

we are proposing changing

section 5 of the act so that clause 1 will now read:

The Lieutenant-Governor in Council may appoint, to hold office during pleasure,

those deputy ministers and assistant deputy ministers that the

Lieutenant-Governor in Council considers necessary for the proper conduct of the

business of the secretariat. Clause 2 will now read: The deputy minister shall

be the deputy head of the secretariat.

So, Mr.

Speaker, this really is in line with all other senior executive appointments

that would have been made within government by the Lieutenant Governor in

Council which, for those watching at home, is a fancy way of saying Cabinet.

Those decisions would be made at the Cabinet level. This really is to clarify

the language in the act to ensure that it is clear that the deputy minister in

that position referred to as deputy minister is also made the deputy head of the

secretariat.

Mr.

Speaker, in

summary of these changes and I just went through them we have

three changes we're proposing. Changes to

section 3 of the act; we're proposing

changes to

section 4 of the act, Madam Speaker; and we're proposing changes to

section 5 of the act.

summary of these proposed amendments, it will change references to a specific

Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat because the act was restrictive in its

language in designing it so that the Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat,

there could be no other changes or references included within that name. Now we

can change it to more general references, to intergovernmental affairs, being a

part of the secretariat's duties, which reflect the new secretariat's current

name and broader mandate of Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs

Secretariat.

Again,

it goes back to the Premier's commitment to ensure that we place very strongly a

high value on our government-to-government relationships, as I said before,

whether that be at our federal-to-provincial level. Of course it goes without

saying the tremendous relationship that we've had with the federal government

and we will continue to do that. I would certainly suggest that's in large part

due to the Premier taking this on himself and ensuring that those relationships

are managed in the best possible way.

There

are also other synergies coming into the secretariat through the Indigenous

Affairs branch which the Premier sees as a very high priority to ensure that

government-to-government relationship, the nation-to-nation building there, and

trade policy branch as well, Madam Speaker, which is important. Those are very

natural synergies, as the Member for Ferryland indicated, that do exist there.

The

proposed amendments, Madam Speaker, will also update the title of the minister

responsible for intergovernmental affairs to reflect the secretariat's broader

mandate and we will be removing the outdated and unused title of Secretary to

Cabinet for Intergovernmental Affairs in favour of using deputy minister.

Madam

Speaker, in

section 5 of the act right now which we're proposing to change to

read: The Lieutenant-Governor in Council may appoint, to hold office during

pleasure, those deputy ministers and assistant deputy ministers that the

Lieutenant-Governor in Council considers necessary . That said deputy minister

under clause 2 would be the deputy head of the secretariat.

Currently in the legislation, the deputy minister of the secretariat is referred

to as Secretary to Cabinet for Intergovernmental Affairs, and that's a title

that has never been updated in the legislation but has not been used in practice

either since the 1990s. The individual style as such, the Secretary to Cabinet

for Intergovernmental Affairs has since the 1990s consistently been referred to

as the deputy minister through successive administrations, and this is really

going back into the legislation now and ensuring that what we're doing in

practice is reflected in law.

Madam

Speaker, the federal government and provincial and territorial governments

across our country are putting greater priority on having meaningful engagement

with indigenous governments and organizations, and this is a priority for us as

well. We see that in the establishment of a new annual leader's roundtable with

indigenous governments and organizations, which is a commitment within

The Way Forward vision. Through this

roundtable, we want to shape an agenda together and create positive change,

because we recognize strong, good relationships with indigenous people are part

of building for our future.

I'm very

proud, Madam Speaker, to have four colleagues from Labrador sitting in the

government caucus

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BROWNE:

who do a tremendous job, a

tremendous job, Madam Speaker, I would suggest representing the people of

Labrador and all groups and governments within it. We have the Member for

Torngat Mountains, we have the Member for Labrador West, we have the Member for

Lake Melville and, of course, the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair. I'm

looking forward to hearing from the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair

speak later today about some of the issues that impact her district and

certainly the economic viability of Newfoundland and Labrador that came up

during Question Period earlier today, and I'm sure she'll enlighten Members of

the Opposition on what those potential benefits might be, and that's always

important to do, Madam Speaker.

We also

see through the changes being made, the establishment of this new

Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs Secretariat which also advances our

vision because it is meant to achieve better outcomes, and that is really part

of The Way Forward . We're committed to

ensuring the changes we make are for the better and that they're

well-thought-out and put together, and that is certainly reflected in the

changes that were made with the Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs

Secretariat.

Creating

this new entity will place our interactions with indigenous governments and

organizations within government's intergovernmental affairs function, which

properly recognizes the authority and responsibility that indigenous governments

and organizations have in representing their respective people.

Madam

Speaker, this is good legislation. These are simple amendments. As to the Member

for Ferryland said earlier, he acknowledged that much of these synergies now

contained within the Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs Secretariat are

tied to each other naturally anyway. Those natural synergies exist.

He also

mentioned, as a former minister responsible for trade, that the trade policy

functions that were contained within the former Department of Business, Tourism,

Culture and Rural Development, now referenced as Tourism, Culture, Industry and

Innovation, that those trade policy functions now would be shifted over into the

Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs Secretariat, and that also was a

natural synergy, he suggested, and I agree with that.

He also,

finally, suggested that the legislation that we are bringing forth today is

routine in somewhat of a nature, to clean up what should have been cleaned up

some time ago, some of the language in the act, as it concerns the title of the

deputy minister, and certainly to remove some of the restrictiveness in the

language surrounding the title of the minister, surrounding the title of the

department, the secretariat. It's important that we enable that flexibility and

bring those natural synergies together. I think the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador want government to look at itself to see what are the natural ways that

we can move things in with each other, where it makes sense.

I will

certainly say, Madam Speaker, I believe it to be good legislation. Although

these are what appear to be simple amendments, they're important ones, and this

is all being done to support this new entity that will do good work on behalf of

the province that result in successful engagements with the federal government.

We've

seen now a slew of announcements coming from the federal government. Minister

Judy Foote, you would almost think she is an MHA, she is in Newfoundland so

often delivering money to the province and it's a wonderful thing. I really have

to commend the Premier on taking this role on himself. I think there has been a

lot of action that has derived from that, and really strong relationships that

he has built with the federal government, with the prime minister, with our

federal Cabinet ministers, and certainly our own provincial Cabinet have built

those relationships with their counterparts in Ottawa as well.

But it

doesn't only include the federal government, Madam Speaker. It will also include

interprovincial negotiations, other provincial governments. The Member for

Ferryland also referenced the Agreement on Internal Trade, and that is very

important as well.

We also

see a number of dealings with foreign governments as it comes to the trade

policy function, and perhaps even I would argue most importantly, our

relationship with indigenous governments and organizations, and that's extremely

important as we look toward building effective and strong relationships with

indigenous governments and organizations.

So I

certainly look forward to what comes out of the debate today, Madam Speaker. I

think, as I've said now, these are somewhat routine matters to be put before the

House of Assembly in terms of cleaning up this legislation, as I've said, to

remove the restrictiveness of the language as it concerns the name of the

secretariat when it comes to the removing the restrictiveness surrounding the

language concerning the style and title of the minister. But also, removing the

formal title of the deputy minister and reflecting in law what is done in

practice now since the 1990s.

Before I

take my seat, Madam Speaker, I also want to take a moment, certainly, on behalf

of everyone, including the Premier, to say a thank you to the staff at the

Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs Secretariat. They work very hard.

They're not large in numbers, but they work very hard. They have a number of

balls in the air at any given time, and these are very professional, consummate

professionals who take their jobs very seriously, who are superb in guiding

government in its relationships with the federal government, the interprovincial

relationships that we have, our relationships with foreign governments, and

indeed, with indigenous governments and organizations.

It's

extremely important that we all recognize the strong work that the staff and

public servants within this secretariat do. I can tell you in my role as

parliamentary assistant to the Premier I have interaction with them, and I never

stop being amazed by their work, their aptitude, and certainly their skill and

knowledge in terms of what they bring to the table for government. So I want to

say thank you to them for their continued work on behalf of Newfoundland and

Labrador, and I thank Members thus far who have contributed to the debate, and I

look forward to hearing the others.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MADAM SPEAKER (Dempster):

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I am

very happy to stand and to speak to Bill 4,

An Act to Amend the

Intergovernmental Affairs Act. I also would like to thank all those from

intergovernmental affairs who provided the briefing to my colleagues here on

this particular act.

I have

some concerns, Madam Speaker, particularly about this bill and the concerns that

I have specifically revolve around two issues; one, the consolidation and

concentration of power within the Premier's office, and we see this as a growing

trend; and secondly, I have been in touch, our office has been in touch with a

number of indigenous governments and groups who have not had any discussion

whatsoever with government about this particular bill.

What I

find so interesting is that the House Leader, the Member for Burgeo La Poile,

in his introduction of this particular bill, he said that this is a little bit

about the flatter, leaner government. I'd like to say flatter, meaner

government. Also he says that the responsibility for this secretariat but it's

a secretariat with a small s, not a big s, and that will have some bearing and

we'll talk a little bit about that, Madam Speaker will remain with the

Premier. He said specifically the Premier has taken the time to visit the

indigenous communities, particularly in Labrador, and it shows that he is

committed.

I'd like

to say, Madam Speaker, that it's quite the opposite. This does establish a way

of working with indigenous communities and nations here in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador. The indigenous communities that I've been able to

contact so far have not been notified about this act at all, have not been

consulted, have not had any conversations whatsoever with this government who

says that this is about creating a better way of governance and a better of way

of relationships with indigenous communities.

believe that is extremely problematic. So it indicates that in fact this is not

about better relationships, and we are waiting to be able to hear from more

indigenous communities and indigenous governments in order to see really what

they feel about these particular moves.

Although

it is a small bill as said by the Government House Leader, the Member for Burgeo

La Poile, it is substantive, not in the number of words that we are dealing

with today, but in terms of the changes that it does promise.

The bill

makes amendments to the Intergovernmental

Affairs Act to restructure the role of intergovernmental affairs in

government. The reason for the bill is that intergovernmental affairs connects

with other provinces, the federal government and governments in international

entities to advance the province's interests. It also advocates for Newfoundland

and Labrador at bilateral, multi-lateral, regional and international

intergovernmental meetings and conferences to promote government's positions on

matters of importance to this province.

So it

was on February 22 that government announced it was restructuring the old

secretariat, combining the former Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat with the

Aboriginal Affairs branch of the former there are a lot of formers happening

here, Madam Speaker Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs office and the trade

policy aspects of the former Department of Business, Tourism, Culture, and Rural

Development into the new Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs Secretariat

and the office of Labrador Affairs to better achieve its goals.

Now the

concerns again, Madam Speaker, is that this is a further consolidation and

concentration of power in the Premier's office. I would like to point out no

matter the economic situation of this province, no matter the government's

approach to a flatter, meaner governance, to consolidate power at this time is

the antithesis of what should be happening.

Again,

I'm amazed, absolutely amazed that indigenous communities, indigenous

governments have not had a discussion; have not been approached by government;

have not even been informed by government that this is happening. This is about

the relationship and as the Member for Placentia West Bellevue said: This

will advance our relationships with indigenous governments and it will bring a

stronger relationship with indigenous governments.

The

indigenous governments have not been consulted; have not had a conversation

about this. They did not even know that this was on the table. That is not how

you improve relationships. As a matter of fact, it's the antithesis of how you

improve relationships.

The

Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs Secretariat has been established by

merging the Intergovernmental Affairs Secretariat with the former Aboriginal

Affairs functions of the office. The move unifies the provincial government's

efforts to build intergovernmental relations, with efforts to advance

relationships with indigenous governments and organizations again, without any

conversation, consultation, dialogue with indigenous governments.

separate office of Labrador Affairs has been created to help address unique

issues and advance social and economic development in the region. The

responsibilities associated with both of these offices remain with the Premier,

which in and of itself is problematic. Again, this is a further concentration

and consolidation of power in an office that has already been consolidating and

concentrating its power.

Diminishing our democracy, diminishing our way of doing governance, I don't

think that's what the people of the province want. We have a House with 40

representatives elected to govern and to further consolidate power into

Executive Council and to the Premier is not the way we should be going.

So it

appears and I believe it not only appears, that in fact it is to both

centralize more power under the auspices of the Executive Council and the

Premier's office, which is a troubling trend, as well as appearing to bury the

issue of Aboriginal Affairs, which for much of the last 20 years has been a

department in its own right. So when we see the amendments to this bill, where

we see a secretariat that is outside of Executive Council but still accountable

to Executive Council, to moving it right in Executive Council, we see the move

from the capital S to a small s. That is indicative, absolutely indicative of

what's happening with this bill.

When we

look at, Madam Speaker, this amendment reflects a growing trend in western style

democracies. In Canada, we're talking about the consolidation of power and the

concentration of power into Executive Council and away from departmental

responsibilities. In Canada, we first saw this move under Pierre Trudeau Sr.,

Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. Prime Ministers Chretien and Harper were famous

for trying to control every aspect of the federal government from their offices.

We're seeing that more and more.

This

phenomenon is called the 'presidentialization' of parliament, and the trends

towards centralizing executive power in one office, the Americanization of

Canadian politics, which is not the way parliamentary democracy is supposed to

work, and we are seeing this. We're seeing how it hasn't worked. In fact, Madam

Speaker, this is a regressive step. This is not a progressive step. If it's

based purely on economics it's a regressive step. I believe it's not based

solely on economics but that movement to centralization of power.

This

province has had a long history of power being centralized in the hands of the

executive, especially the Premier. Premier Joseph Smallwood was well known for

attempting to run government as his own personal fiefdom. Ministers under his

government had little or no true power, and this became worse as his

administration aged.

Premier

Danny Williams exerted a great deal of control from his office. So it's not just

the other side of the House, Madam Speaker. It's also the current Official

Opposition, when they were in power also started the trend of centralization and

consolidation of power.

Now,

The Telegram columnist Russell

Wangersky wrote: Williams was so involved in the daily working of his government

that a feeling grew over the years, if you really wanted an issue dealt with by

the government as a whole you had to garner Williams' personal interests first.

Williams

was criticized as being a one-man show, a controlling leader with his hands on

everything. Now, the Premier was traditionally considered first among equals and

her or his Cabinet being those elected officials who the aid of their caucus ran

government. Now what we see is that we have specific roles once again removed

from that and into the hands of the Premier.

Again, I

would like to stress, although government is saying, both the Government House

Leader and the Member for Placentia West Bellevue, that this is about

improving relationships, improving relations and better governance with

Aboriginal government, indigenous government in Newfoundland and Labrador and

indigenous groups, they have not been consulted on this as far as we know. We

have been speaking with some; they know nothing of this bill. That's not how you

develop better relations.

again, looking at this trend of consolidation of power, this trend has

disappeared as election campaigns and policy announcements tend to focus on the

leader's performance. This bill here today continues this disturbing trend. We

see more centralization of power in Executive Council with the virtual

disappearance of Aboriginal Affairs into a new conglomerate of functions now

referred to as the Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs secretariat, with a

small s. Just one of the host of functions lumped into Executive Council.

I ask

the Premier, why do this when it diminishes the importance of Aboriginal

Affairs, Indigenous Affairs at a time when it could not be more important? It

diminishes the role of his backbenchers as well, who also have an important role

to play in governing. This bill does not offer anything new that is good. Is it

seen by government simply as streamlining because of their flatter, leaner

approach, or is it based on a deliberate, an absolute deliberate consolidation

of power? And if so, I believe that in fact this does not enhance relationships

with indigenous governments and indigenous groups within Newfoundland and

Labrador.

I would

hope that the right thing for this government to do is to halt this legislation

at this point and to have the consultation and discussions with Aboriginal

governments and Aboriginal groups before this bill goes any further. That's what

would improve relations with Aboriginal indigenous groups and governments.

Again, at a time when it is so needed because of what we see in areas of land

claims, in areas of large-scale developments, and how it affects indigenous

governments and groups in this province.

Thank

you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS:

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

It's

certainly a pleasure to rise to speak to Bill 4,

An Act to Amend the

Intergovernmental Affairs Act.

As the

House Leader in his comments earlier, Madam Speaker, talked about the

Intergovernmental and Indigenous Affairs Secretariat being established in

February, and once there's a change in structure within departments, it takes

some amendments to the legislation. I think this is just more a matter of

housekeeping, but I do have a few comments.

listened to the Member for St. John's Centre talking about how this is not a

good thing, but I am indigenous, Madam Speaker. I am an Inuk from Nunatsiavut.

I'm a beneficiary to the Nunatsiavut government, and I talk about things that

are relative to government legislation and I spent a fair bit of time travelling

around in my district by snowmobile, talking to different people. When I asked

about the amendments to this legislation, to me, when you put intergovernmental

in with indigenous, I think it goes hand in hand.

I'd just

like to talk a little bit about it, Madam Speaker. When the negotiations were

ongoing for self-government with the Nunatsiavut Government, the former Labrador

Inuit Association, there were three levels of negotiation, two levels of

government and an Aboriginal entity that went on to become self-government,

which is another level of government. There were three levels of government.

This

legislation, when you look at intergovernmental affairs, talks about the

talks about relations with other provinces within our country, Government of

Quebec, Government of Alberta, Government of Prince Edward Island, Government of

Nova Scotia. It talks about the Government of Nunatsiavut.

Not only

that, Madam Speaker, within Labrador now we have three different Aboriginal

entities that are working towards a common goal, at three different levels of

negotiation. The first one is the Nunatsiavut Government which has negotiated a

Land Claims Agreement, and that Land Claims Agreement was negotiated with the

provincial government and the federal government. Now, if that's not a

definition of intergovernmental affairs, then we don't have one.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. EDMUNDS:

We also have the Innu Nation

that is negotiating the New Dawn Agreement. They have an agreement-in-principle,

so now they're negotiating with two levels of government, which is

intergovernmental affairs, towards a final agreement. We also have the

NunatuKavut on the South Coast that is still negotiating, getting to a framework

agreement.

So all

these negotiations involve three levels of government, Madam Speaker, and I'd

like to go back and look at the bill itself,

An Act to Amend the

Intergovernmental Affairs Act. I think it's a big plus to include indigenous

affairs within the intergovernmental affairs department because it gives us a

hand-in-hand framework agreement. It sets the tone for intergovernmental

affairs.

We can

be very vague and we can say that intergovernmental affairs mean Newfoundland

and Labrador and Ottawa; or in terms of agreements with the Atlantic provinces,

we could be negotiating with the Government of Nova Scotia and, in fact, in

some degree, we are. We have to look a little bit further than that. We now have

another government within our province and that is the Nunatsiavut Government. I

think intergovernmental relations come forward to embrace that.

Not only

that, I think to include indigenous with intergovernmental will help the

framework agreement for New Dawn and down the road, it could very well play a

big role in negotiations with the NunatuKavut community, Madam Speaker.

So I

think this is a good piece of legislation. As the hon. House Leader said, it's a

certain part housekeeping but it do extend our ability to work with the

indigenous people of our province, which includes me, as well as dealing with

other government agencies. We're all linked hand in hand.

With

that, Madam Speaker, I will take my place and I urge all hon. Members to come

forward in their support of this because it gives us, as government to

government, a way forward with the indigenous people in our province.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I am

happy to stand now and close debate on this particular bill. I welcome and

appreciate the comments from my colleagues along the way, as well as the

commentary from my colleagues on this side of the House. I look forward to being

able to stand up during the Committee phase and answer any questions that may

arise.

Thank

you.

MADAM SPEAKER:

Is the House ready for the

question?

The

motion is that Bill 4,

An Act To Amend

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

MADAM SPEAKER:

Oh, my apologies.

The

Speaker recognizes the hon. Member for St. John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you very much, Madam

Speaker (inaudible).

MADAM SPEAKER:

Sorry, we're just moving

through the next reading before we go into Committee.

The

motion that Bill 4,

An Act To Amend The Intergovernmental Affairs Act be now

read a second time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MADAM SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Intergovernmental Affairs Act. (Bill 4).

MADAM SPEAKER:

This bill has now been a

second time.

When

shall this bill be referred to Committee of the Whole?

MR. A. PARSONS:

Now.

motion, a bill,

An Act To Amend The Intergovernmental Affairs Act, read a

second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, by

leave. (Bill 4)

MADAM SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Yes, Madam Speaker, I move,

seconded by the Minister of Education, that the House resolve itself into a

Committee of the Whole to consider Bill 4.

MADAM SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into Committee of the

Whole to consider the said bill.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MADAM SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, the Speaker

left the Chair.

Committee of the

Whole

CHAIR (Warr):

Order, please!

We are

now considering Bill 4,

An Act To Amend The Intergovernmental Affairs Act.

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Intergovernmental Affairs Act. (Bill 4)

CLERK:

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Shall clause 1 carry?

The

Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Chair.

I would

ask the minister if, in fact, the Innu Nation was consulted on the consolidation

of this secretariat.

CHAIR:

The Chair recognizes the hon.

the Government House Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would

say that it's common practice for governments certainly this current one and

governments previously to not consult on structural changes made, especially

ones that are made on an administrative basis. What I can say, after talking to

the Premier and staff, is that many of the indigenous groups that the Premier's

office deals with are very happy to deal directly with the Premier's office

since he assumed responsibility for indigenous affairs, and that's the

commentary that we seem to be getting.

Thank

you.

CHAIR:

The Chair recognizes the hon.

the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Chair.

I, too,

acknowledge the importance of being able to address government to government,

nation to nation, and that that is a step forward for the indigenous government

and groups in Newfoundland and Labrador, but perhaps not so much in this manner.

So I

would ask: Was there any discussion or conversations at all with Nunatsiavut

Government over this particular move?

CHAIR:

The Chair recognizes the hon.

the Government House Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Hopefully, this answer will

answer the rest of the questions because I believe the Member opposite will go

down through the groups. There was no consultation because this was an

administrative change. It's administrative in nature. There's certainly no

change to engagement, absolutely.

So I can

put out the