PDF Version

April

11, 2017

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVIII No. 9

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Osborne):

Admit strangers.

Order,

please!

I'd like

to welcome to the Speaker's gallery today Zoey Davis and her mom Scottina Davis,

and Michelle Clemens, the Principal of O'Donel High School who are joining us

today for the reading of the Ministerial Statement.

Welcome.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

As well, to the Speaker's

gallery today, I would like to welcome Janice and Rendell Drover of Upper Island

Cove, and James and Valerie Mercer of Bishop's Cove who are present today for

the reading of a Member's statement.

Welcome.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

To our public gallery today,

we have Mr. John Baker and Mr. Fred Power, the subjects of a Member's statement,

and joining them are members of their families.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

As well in the public gallery

today, we have members of the Canadian Cancer Society. Matthew Piercey, CEO,

Sharon Smith, Board Chair and Margot Reid who are present for the reading of a

Ministerial Statement.

Welcome.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

MR. SPEAKER:

For Members' statements

today, we have the Members for the Districts of Placentia West Bellevue, Terra

Nova, Cape St. Francis, Mount Pearl North, Bonavista and Mount Pearl

Southlands.

understand the Member for Harbour Grace Port de Grave has leave as well for a

member's statement. Is that correct? And the Member for Harbour Grace Port de

Grave.

The hon.

the Member for Placentia West Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BROWNE:

Mr. Speaker, nearly 50 years

ago,

an act of tragedy was accompanied by

an act of triumph. On a Marystown

summer's day in June of 1967, then 9-year-old Fred Power lost control of his

bicycle while going down a steep hill and went head first into a large boom

truck.

Then

fifteen-year-old John Baker witnessed the incident, and jumped in to carry Fred

to his home, a distance of nearly 3,000 feet. Fred would end up being airlifted

to St. John's undergoing major reconstructive surgery, having his jaw wired shut

and spending over a year in hospital learning how to walk and talk all over

again.

Now,

some 50 years later, Fred has overcome his many struggles through determination,

hard work and the support of his wife and two children. Next month he will

graduate from the Heavy Equipment Operators Program. Ironically, the man who

administered Fred's driver examination in Marystown was none other than John

Baker, the same man who Fred credits with saving his life and having a lifelong

impact on him.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all hon. Members to join me in recognizing John's instant and

life-saving action, which resulted in a second chance for his fellow man.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Terra Nova.

MR. HOLLOWAY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House to recognize a true Newfoundland and Labrador champion. At

the age of 66 years, Bramwell Churchill has risen to the top of his game of golf

and he has represented this province with pride and spirit.

Originally from Portugal Cove, Mr. Churchill now calls Port Blandford home,

where he practises faithfully at the Terra Nova Golf Resort. Since 2002,

Bramwell has focused his interests and his success on the Long Drive Division.

For 14

years, he has been a member of Team Canada and Bram has travelled extensively

throughout Canada, United States, Jamaica, Mexico, Dominican Republic and the

Caribbean. Among his long list of accomplishments, Bram is a three-time Quebec

and Maritimes Senior Long Drive Champion; three-time Remax Senior Long Drive

Canadian Champion; six-time Senior Long Drive Canadian Champion; and a

three-time International World Senior Long Drive Champion.

He holds

the Canadian Senior Long Drive distance record of 377 yards and his personal

best is 400 yards, 6 inches. In August the

Downhome magazine named Bram Churchill as Canada's Best Long Driver and a

Golf Superstar.

Bravo to

Bramwell Churchill for his sportsmanship and his mastery on the world stage of

golf.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Cape St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I rise

today to honour the late Mr. Paddy Hickey of Outer Cove. Paddy, who passed away

in January, had a long and interesting life. At the early age of eight, he

worked with his father's fishing enterprise. As a teenager, he worked in a cod

liver oil plant. At the age of 17, he became a truck driver at Fort Pepperell.

Aside

from his five years working in the United States, Paddy spent his a lifetime in

Outer Cove. With his wife Agnes, he operated a small grocery store which served

as the favourite Sunday handout. Paddy spent 20 years of his career with

Government House where he personally assisted visiting dignitaries and royalty.

Paddy

believed that time was a precious asset, a person's word represented an

unbreakable bond and helping your neighbour was to be done without question.

Visiting the sick and attending funerals was one's moral responsibility.

Paddy

would have been 95 this past Saturday. He will be remembered by his family and

friends with love and respect and will be missed. Paddy's gentle nature and soft

smile will be forever present.

I ask

all hon. Members to join me in honouring the late Mr. Paddy Hickey.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House today to recognize the Rotary Club of Waterford Valley and

its work on the Waterford River. The Waterford River flows through Mount Pearl,

St. John's and Paradise. The river has been a priority for the Rotary Club of

Waterford Valley since it was founded in 1977.

Recently, the Rotary Club unveiled the club's completed mobile interpretive

exhibit booth, featuring a specially prepared video designed to heighten the

public's awareness of the river and the challenges it faces. The club is

planning to have the booth on display in community buildings, schools and other

public venues.

Spokesperson and long-time Rotarian Sandy Roche stated: We want to make sure

that the vitality of the river is maintained for future generations to enjoy.

Key to achieving that goal is the commitment of, and cooperation amongst, the

three municipal councils involved.

The

three municipalities are coming together to implement a comprehensive baseline

study of the river to determine what is affecting the river's long-term

viability. The study is now underway and should be completed this summer.

Honourable Members of this House, please join me in thanking the Rotary Club of

Waterford Valley for the tremendous work it's doing to protect the Waterford

River.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Bonavista.

MR. KING:

Mr. Speaker, when life hands

you lemons, some people choose to make lemonade. This statement couldn't be

truer for the residents of Champney's West who just celebrated their 25th

anniversary performances of their annual variety concert.

Started

in 1992, as a way to lift community spirits in the wake of the cod moratorium,

the Champney's West Recreation Committee and Friends have been performing for 25

years. Not just for their own community but for far and wide. This event which

features a number of skits and musical performances, welcomes all to

participate. Showing true community spirit in all they do, everyone from the

community pitches in whether they're nine or 90.

In 1992,

it cost a dollar for admission because nobody had any money. Today, it costs

$15, with the money invested back into the community.

On March

24 and 25, standing-room-only crowds packed the recreation hall. I was fortunate

enough to attend on the 24th and certainly wasn't disappointed. In fact, I was

recruited to hand out diplomas during the prom skit and cut loose to Footloose

as we exited the stage.

To all

those who have contributed to making this event successful year after year, I

say bravo.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

District of Mount Pearl Southlands.

MR. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, it is my

privilege to stand in this hon. House to recognize the tremendous success which

was the 35th Annual Frosty Festival in the City of Mount Pearl.

Once

Again, this year's festival included various activities for citizens of all ages

and interests, including: an opening extravaganza The Circle of Life by TaDa!

Events; an outdoor parade of lights; a sold-out concert at the Glacier,

featuring Newfoundland's own Shanneyganock, along with The Fables and Celtic

Connection; two community breakfasts; an Irish pub night; a lip sync contest; a

seniors' bingo; a jiggs' dinner and variety show; a dinner theatre with Spirit

of NL; and a Battle of the Brains trivia night, just to name a few.

Mr.

Speaker, I'm sure you can appreciate any festival of this magnitude would not be

possible were it not for the hard work and co-operation of a number of community

partners. I would therefore ask all Members of this hon. House to join me in

congratulating the City of Mount Pearl, the Frosty Festival Board of Directors,

the various community groups and organization, the corporate sponsors and all of

the community-minded volunteers who contributed to the great success story which

was Frosty Festival 2017.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Grace Port de Grave.

MS. P. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you to my colleagues for this leave. Today I would like to recognize two

first-time authors from the District of Harbour Grace Port de Grave: Mrs.

Janice Drove of Upper Island Cove and Mr. James Mercer of Bishops Cove.

Janice

wrote a book Miracles Happen ,

a story of a tragic event that happened in Harbour Grace in 2010. On August

13, her husband Rendell Drover, a well-known fisherman in the community, was

injured in an industrial accident that nearly claimed his life.

Janice

recalls in detail the weeks and months that followed. Throughout his recovery,

Rendell underwent a series of dangerous medical procedures and lived. There was

a recent community book launch in Upper Island Cove, and the Drover family

dedicated book proceeds to the Children's Wish.

James

Mercer's book also features a true life event, about his great-grandfather and

namesake, James Eliol Mercer, who was brutally murdered in 1883. He died under

mysterious circumstances. which occurred just before his 30th birthday while en

route to Harbour Grace.

The

story of his great-grandfather has withstood the test of time, and James is

pleased to share with the readers the factual and heart-breaking details of the

event, which has been told and retold for over a century in the community of

Upper Island Cove.

Colleagues, please join me in congratulations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, next week, Canadians will celebrate the 35th anniversary of the Charter

of Rights and Freedoms. Constitutionally enshrined in 1982 under the government

of Pierre Elliott Trudeau, the Charter guarantees rights to all Canadians, such

as democratic rights like the right to vote, legal rights like the right to

life, liberty and security of the person, equality rights to ensure equal

protection and benefit of the law without discrimination, among others.

Minister of Justice and Public Safety, and the Attorney General, I consider

myself an ambassador of the Charter. Part of my duty is to ensure that the

rights of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are protected, and that the

government of this province respects the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in all

that it does.

Mr.

Speaker, I am committed to ensuring that the system of justice here is fair and

accessible and that it respects and promotes the Charter. Where would this

country be on matters such as same-sex marriage, access to abortion services, or

more recently, medical assistance in dying without the Charter?

In our

first year of government, we have already endorsed Charter values. For example,

with the passing of the Access to Abortion Services Act, we ensured individuals

can attain respectful and private access to legal health services while

respecting the rights of others to protest or express dissent.

The

Charter continues to actively shape the design and

interpretation of our laws

and policies and it protects our fundamental freedoms. In this 35th anniversary

year, I believe it is especially important to engage people in this province on

the role the Charter plays in their lives. To that end, we'll be engaging with

Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We encourage you to participate.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for an advance copy of his statement today. We join with government

in celebrating the 35th anniversary of the

Charter of Rights and Freedoms , a document and a new way forward for Canada,

composed of fundamental freedoms, democratic rights, mobility rights, legal

rights, equality rights as well as language rights.

While

the Charter was enshrined 35 years

ago, it remains a living document that continues to grow and adjust to the needs

and expectations of Canadians. A recent example of this, Mr. Speaker, is the R.

v. Jordan case one that we've discussed here in the House many times. A

decision of the Supreme Court of Canada which rejected the traditional framework

used to determine whether an accused was tried within a reasonable time under

the Charter and have been replaced now

with fixed timelines. We know it's a decision that has impacted the justice

system here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The

Charter is an important part of our

national pride and our cultural fabric, and it is with good reason that we

celebrate it today.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister. Thirty-five years ago, women across Canada had to fight to have

gender enshrined in our Charter of Rights

and Freedoms after it had been left out. At home, we lobbied Primer Brian

Peckford. Then I was sent across the country on behalf of the women of

Newfoundland and Labrador to lobby Premier Blakeney in Saskatchewan, and then on

to Ottawa to lobby Prime Minister Trudeau to put women's rights back in the

Charter through clause 29.

reminder once again that our rights are never given to us but are hard won. Yes,

let's celebrate, but we must always remain vigilant.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

The hon.

the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in

this hon. House to congratulate Zoey Davis of Mount Pearl who is this year's

recipient of the Lester B. Pearson Scholarship for Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KIRBY:

Zoey is currently a level II

student at O'Donel High School in Mount Pearl. She was selected based on her

outstanding academic achievement, her involvement in extra-curricular activities

and her dedicated volunteerism within the community. Zoey has also won awards in

public speaking and drama.

Mr.

Speaker, the Lester B. Pearson Scholarship offers a life-changing opportunity

for exceptional young people and will provide incredible support in helping Zoey

fulfill her long-term goals. The scholarship is valued at $80,000 over two years

for pre-university study in the International Baccalaureate Program at Pearson

College, a United World College in Victoria, British Columbia. The provincial

government contributes $34,000 to the scholarship.

congratulate Zoey and hope her time at Pearson College enriches her life,

solidifies the foundations for her academic future and opens doors to new and

exciting opportunities.

Mr.

Speaker, I also congratulate three other students who, on the strength of their

applications and their performance in the selection process, have been offered

and have accepted United World College placements. I am pleased to announce that

Jack Kenny, a level II student at Exploits Valley High in Grand Falls-Windsor,

has been accepted at the United World College of the Atlantic in Wales, United

Kingdom. Manish Benuen, a level II student at Mealey Mountain Collegiate in

Happy Valley-Goose Bay, has been accepted at Pearson College, in Victoria,

British Columbia. As well, Andree Gaudet, a level II student at Gonzaga High

School in St. John's, has accepted an offer to attend the United World College

in Changshu, China.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all hon. Members to join me in congratulating Zoey, Jack and

Manish, as well as Andree, and wish them every success in their respective

studies.

Thank

you, 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 minister for an advanced copy of his statement. On behalf of myself and the

Official Opposition, I am proud to stand and congratulate Zoey Davis of Mount

Pearl for being this year's recipient of the Lester B. Pearson Scholarship for

Newfoundland and Labrador. Zoey's excellence in academic achievements and

dedication to her community are just some of the many qualities that make her a

deserving recipient of this scholarship.

We would

also like to congratulate Jack Kenny, Manish Benuen and Andree Gaudet. I offer

my sincere congratulations to each of them, as well as to their teachers and

families. These dedicated and accomplished young people have a bright future

ahead of them and they are certainly a great source of pride for the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

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 advanced copy of his statement. It is wonderful that

so many of our students such as Zoey, Jack and Manish achieve at such a high

level each year and are worthy of scholarships and placements such as these.

I urge

the Minister of Education to ensure that we continue to have adequate funding

for our educational system to enable it to continue to maximize the potential of

all of our students such as these wonderful people.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This

April marks the 60th anniversary of the Canadian Cancer Society's Daffodil

Month.

Wednesday, April 5, I had the pleasure of attending this year's launch of

Daffodil Month at Daffodil Place in St. John's. Since it opened in 2009,

Daffodil Place has been a home away from home for more than 4,500 people from

communities throughout our province.

For

decades, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have supported the Daffodil campaign

by making a donation, buying a daffodil pin or flowers and contributing to

research and support. Mr. Speaker, this anniversary not only illustrates a long

history of supporting those in our communities with cancer, but it also

illustrates the giving nature of the many dedicated volunteers in our

communities.

Last

week, I had the honour of meeting Margot Reid, the longest-serving volunteer

with the Canadian Cancer Society in the country, and was pleased to join in the

celebration of her volunteer efforts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. HAGGIE:

Ms. Reid has volunteered for

66 years, having brought the Daffodil campaign to Newfoundland and Labrador over

six decades ago. She has been selling flowers every spring since.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask the House to join me today in remembering those in our community

who benefit from the Daffodil campaign, and to offer our sincere gratitude to

volunteers, like Ms. Reid, who give so generously of their time for others.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for the advance copy of his statement today. I certainly want to

join with the minister in honouring and celebrating the contributions of Margot

Reid, and it's certainly a contribution that is well worth noting in this House.

We join

with government in recognizing this April as the 60th anniversary of the

Canadian Cancer Society's Daffodil Month. The daffodil has long been the symbol

of hope and strength to so many cancer patients and their families. Much like

Daffodil Place has become a landmark in our province, symbolizing care and

support for people dealing with a cancer diagnosis, it is a place of refuge when

someone is in need.

Our

administration was proud to support the Daffodil campaign, Daffodil Place and

the Canadian Cancer Society, and I'm very happy to see that support continue

with this current government. Thanks to all volunteers who make a positive and

lasting difference in the lives of so many. You are really to be commended.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I thank

the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I'm absolutely delighted to

stand and acknowledge the wonderful work by Margot Reid and the thousands of

others who have promoted the Daffodil campaign.

At the

same time, I remind the government that they have a duty to back up that

wonderful work by making sure that those who are living with cancer do not carry

a heavy financial burden because of the diagnosis and treatment caused by travel

costs and the cost of drugs.

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, Budget 2017 identified $283

million in savings. I ask the minister will you provide today, the House of

Assembly, on where these savings will come from.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want

to thank the Member opposite for the opportunity to stand up and answer this

question. Last week, Members opposite would have been provided a technical

briefing. In the technical briefing, there was information provided to them.

The

expenses related to this fiscal year, savings of $283 million, come from the

zero-based budgeting work, which yielded $65.9 million. The changes in

management structure inside core government and the regional health authorities

yielded $30.8 million. We also reported savings from extended government boards

and agencies in the tune of $41.9 million. We also had annualized savings from

last year, as well as some accounting benefit that built up that $283 million.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well,

the budget is a plan and there hasn't been a lot of transparency and details on

the $283 million savings in their plan. So I ask the minister: While you're not

providing details, will you provide more details and specific details to the

House or Members of the House and to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, for the Member

opposite, I'm surprised actually around the context of his question, considering

that the Opposition chose to remove the officials that were in their briefing

room that could have provided them some details on this question when they were

in technical briefings last week. I don't know why they made that decision but

certainly that was their choice to make.

Having

said that, the Estimates process, which this House will go through in the next

number of weeks, will provide opportunity in this House for a detailed

discussion on the line items that build up the budget. The information that the

Members opposite are looking for, I'm sure they'll get their answers in the

Estimates debate.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you very much.

Minister, I didn't participate in the technical briefing. Some of your staff sat

in the office with us and they offered to leave so we could have a discussion.

That was my recollection of what happened last week, Minister.

People

of the province care about the details of what was contained in your budget and

there's not a lot: $283 million in savings and there's not a lot of detail;

2016-17 fiscal year, there are public sector jobs that were cut in a number of

rounds and we have asked for updated details on job cuts. The minister has

promised to provide them. We have not received them yet. You provided one about

five or six weeks ago, but we haven't got an updated one.

So I ask

the minister: Will you provide a comprehensive list of up-to-date impacted

positions and their departments that you have cut in 2016-2017?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, if the Members

opposite have questions about the five areas and categories that I have referred

to and our officials referred to in technical briefings, and I have been

referring to publically, I will continue to answer those questions. I will

continue to say that in addition to the zero-based budgeting dollars that we

were able to save, we realized savings through the changes in management

structure. We have savings through extended government agencies of the tune of

$41.9 million.

We have

annualized savings from the program decisions that were made as part of budget

'16-'17 of an additional $68.1 million. We have net savings, including actuarial

calculations and accrual adjustments, of $77 million, Mr. Speaker. The Estimates

will provide the opportunity for further questions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well

actually, Minister, Question Period provides the opportunity for further

questions. The question I asked is: Will you provide an updated list of all

impacted positions from 2016-2017? It's a simple question, Minister. Will you

provide the details of that?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, I fully expect

that when we participate in the Estimates debate and the Estimates discussion

that the Members opposite will ask that exact question and information that we

have available, we will share with the Members opposite. But the suggestion,

albeit subtle or direct, that somehow there is something hidden in a budget that

is presented to this House for budget debate and for Estimates review, quite

frankly, is wrong, and I think is problematic for the Members opposite who

continue to have a habit of creating anxiety, where in fact there is none.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That

from the minister who promised transparency and openness I asked a very simple

question for an updated list, and it's very clear that she is refusing to

provide that to the people of the province and the Members of the House.

So,

Minister, I'll try this. Agencies, boards and commissions were identified and

according to the budget documents there are over $70 million in savings. Will

you be open and transparent in this case and provide some information on the

number of jobs that will be lost as a result of these reductions? Or do you know

what the impact is?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, I want to

correct the Member opposite. I did not refuse to answer the question. He

continues to make allegations like that and that has not been my practice in

this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MS. C. BENNETT:

When we have information that

we can share, we will share it. The Estimates debates, the Estimates discussion

provides all Opposition, just like it provided us in Opposition, the ability to

ask questions that will be answered in detail. They can ask those questions and

answers will be provided.

Mr.

Speaker, I also want to correct the Member opposite who said that savings from

agencies, boards and commissions were somewhere in the tune I think the number

he used was 70. I want to more precisely say that it's $41.9 million. As I've

said publicly, when we make operational decisions and our employees are

impacted, we will communicate with them first, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

minister likes to take her time to point out and make corrections. Well, I'll

make a correction: I didn't say you wouldn't answer the question. I said you

won't provide the information. Your openness and transparency is a failure

because you're refusing to provide the details. That's the problem.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

So, Minister, when can

agencies, boards and commissions, and those who work for agencies, boards and

commissions get some details and understanding of what's coming for them in

their significant reductions that they're going to face? When will you be

upfront and open with them?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, I'm sure that

the Members in this House can check

Hansard , as I will do, and I'm sure the Member opposite will do. He clearly

indicated that I refused to answer the question, as has been his practice in

this House for the last number of months, and I will not accept that accusation,

Mr. Speaker. He has the right and we will provide the details to the questions

in the Estimates.

The

question he asked just then about agencies, boards and commissions, the CEOs and

the boards that are in place will be reviewing efficiency, they'll be reviewing

the structures, they will be reviewing services they provide, how they deliver

things, and the operational decisions they make will be communicated to their

employees when there are small impacts at that time.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Grant

funding that supports sector diversification and innovation in Tourism, Culture,

Industry and Innovation has been cut from $1.3 million last year to just

$155,000 this year a cut of 88 per cent of the budget.

I ask

the minister: What are the impacts of this cut?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd be

delighted to answer the question in more detail to the Member in Estimates and

provide a detailed listing of what the grants and subsidies are appropriated

for.

We had a

carryover last year in the fiscal budget for broadband initiatives of $1.27

million, I believe that was, for the broadband initiatives that were clueing up

over last year. So that can account for a difference.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, it's clear what

the Liberal Party line is today: Wait for the Estimates Committees and then

we'll answer your questions about this mysterious budget.

Mr.

Speaker, I say to this hon. House, people don't want to wait until some

committee meeting three weeks down the road. They want answers today in the

House of Assembly from the minister who's responsible. That's what we're

demanding.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

He wouldn't answer that

question, so let me ask another.

Seven

hundred thousand dollars has been cut from regional economic development and

business development, which provides support for regional and community economic

development opportunities.

How will

support for rural parts of this province be impacted by this $700,000 funding

cut?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I find

it very ironic to get questioned from the Member opposite about rural

Newfoundland and Labrador and what their plan is for their economic development

initiatives. They were the ones who did not support the RED Boards and cut them

by a significant amount.

When it

actually comes to the cutback for the regional diversification fund that is in

the budget, it was a directive by their administration to cut the budget by

$100,000 every single year for a period of four years, and that is the directive

that they had put forward.

As well

as the initiatives that we put forward, we're being very strategic when it comes

to investments in the rural economy. Whether it be $13 million in tourism

advertising, that's 18,000 jobs in the economy; aquaculture investment, Mr.

Speaker. There are significant investments that are benefiting rural

Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

It's unfortunate that the

minister won't explain any of the cuts to Tourism, Culture, Industry and

Innovation millions of dollars of cuts, when we will be asking more questions.

I now

ask the Minister of Natural Resources: When can the people expect an oversight

report on Muskrat Falls from your government? The last one was released in

December 2015, almost a year and a half ago.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the hon. Member for his question. We've been very methodical and very diligent

on making sure the Muskrat Falls Project is on track. We have a new board of

directors, an expanded and a very stellar board of directors. We have a

world-class CEO. We've made changes to the federal loan guarantee and expanded

it. We've finalized a re-negotiation with Astaldi. All these things add to

methodical and diligent improvements in this project, and really was emphasized

in the last annual general meeting only held a couple of weeks ago.

Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, we also announced that we were adding independence to

the Oversight Committee. We have four incredibly talented volunteers from our

community who have come forward and will add their expertise to the Oversight

Committee and they will continue to advise government and the people this

project (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MS. COADY:

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, I applaud the

government for strengthening the board of Nalcor and for adding

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

additional expertise to the

Oversight Committee. These are good moves. These are responsible moves, and I

commend government for making them. But the minister today has not answered my

question.

Why has

it not been a priority to provide public updates on the oversight of Muskrat

Falls, as you had committed to do? It's been almost 18 months. I ask the

minister: Why haven't you ensured the open and transparent release of

information related to Muskrat Falls Project?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Mr. Speaker, we have been

truly open and transparent about the Muskrat Falls Project really transparent

about the Muskrat Falls project. We were left with an incredible mess in this

province and we have taken the time over the last 18 months or 16 months that

we've been in office to ensure that we have the incredibly important governance

and the incredibly as the Member opposite said, he applauds us on our efforts

of ensuring this.

The

Oversight Committee has been expanded. They are doing their work. They have been

doing their work methodically and diligently, Mr. Speaker. I'll continue to use

those words because that's what we've been doing. Oversight will continue for

this project. We will continue to make sure the information is public. Mr.

Speaker, I think the people of this province understand the amount of work we've

done to fix their problem.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, I'm glad to hear

the minister say that oversight is important, but why not release those

oversight reports? Public reporting is also important when it comes to oversight

of the project.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

In 2016-2017, the Royalties

and Benefits division spent $4.5 million on professional services, despite only

having $670,000 budgeted.

I ask

the minister: Can she account for this significant difference?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

You're

shifting from the incredibly important Oversight Committee to a very detailed

question on royalties and benefits. Mr. Speaker, the Royalties and Benefits

division of the Natural Resources Department is very active, very engaged with

ensuring the people of this province have the royalties and benefits given to

them by the people who exercise the rights in the offshore oil and gas.

We make

sure the contracts are reviewed. We make sure we do audits on the oil and gas

companies and we've invested some money in ensuring that we have the resources

that we need to ensure that these contracts are upheld. More details obviously

will be coming as we get into Estimates, but we will continue to make the

investments to ensure the offshore oil and gas industries provide the

(inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Member for Mount Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, that's the third

minister to stand in Question Period today and say stay tuned for an Estimates

Committee meeting down the road. That's not acceptable to the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

Almost

$4 million additional, over budget, was spent by the Royalties and Benefits

division in 2016-2017 on professional services. I'm going to give the minister

another opportunity to answer the question: Why the almost $4 million overrun on

professional services in the Royalties and Benefits division in 2016-2017?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Allow me to correct the

Member opposite. Clearly, he did not hear my answer, Mr. Speaker. I was clear in

saying we were ensuring in the Royalties and Benefits division of Natural

Resources that we held to account the oil and gas companies, making sure that

the contracts that they have signed on to, the royalties and benefits that are

being paid to this province we have to pay lawyers because we go to

arbitration. We have to review the contracts that are being done.

So we

made investments in the department to ensure that people of this province

realize the royalties and benefits that are required under the contracts with

the oil and gas industry. We'll continue to do that because we are diligent.

We're not like the other former PC administration that allowed ballooning

escalation, for example, in the Muskrat Falls Project.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In the

Budget Speech your government committed to a tuition freeze at Memorial

University and the College of the North Atlantic. Does the minister still stand

by that commitment?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Advanced Education, Skills and Labour.

MR. BYRNE:

Thank you for the excellent

question. What an excellent opportunity to highlight what we're doing as

investments not only in post-secondary education, but in maintaining a tuition

at the College of the North Atlantic and Memorial University of Newfoundland. In

fact, Mr. Speaker, in the Budget Speech we outlined that $56 million will be

invested specifically to maintain a tuition freeze for Newfoundland and Labrador

students both at MUN, and an additional almost $11 million for the College of

the North Atlantic.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, just put this in perspective for a little bit: $56 million for the

tuition freeze is more financial assistance, government assistance, taxpayer

assistance, than what the Government of Nova Scotia provides to Acadia

University or to StFX.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MUN

President Gary Kachanoski said that an $11.9 million cut to its operating grant

is more than double what was expected. Was there any analysis done of the impact

that the $11.9 million cut would have to MUN?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Advanced Education, Skills and Labour.

MR. BYRNE:

Excellent question, Mr.

Speaker, and an excellent opportunity to highlight the fact that analysis

provides us with a lot of information, a lot of data. We think of tuition as

being a cost of an education, a university education. In fact, it's really not

the cost; it's an input of revenue. But there are also other revenue items, for

example subsidies from taxpayers.

Canada in costs, on average, about $19,000 for an undergraduate education per

student, per year; in Newfoundland and Labrador, it costs about $31,000. So

there's a real, real difference here. We feel that through efficiencies at

Memorial University of Newfoundland, that the tuition freeze can be maintained

while a top, top-quality education is maintained in the process.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So I

take from that there was no analysis done.

Did you

consult with the university prior to making your announcement regarding the

tuition freeze and were they confident that they could stay within the budget

you were providing them to ensure the tuition freeze existed?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Advanced Education, Skills and Labour.

MR. BYRNE:

Mr. Speaker, what an

excellent question and what an excellent opportunity for me to highlight the

fact that yes, we did consult with the university in advance. We consulted with

the president and senior stakeholders, but as the president did indicate which

is always the case it is the Board of Regents which will decide the course of

business, the final decision making of the university. They'll be bringing that

information back to the board.

At $56

million to maintain a tuition freeze at Memorial University of Newfoundland, I

am very, very confident that the university's Board of Regents will have the

resources to maintain a tuition freeze for Newfoundland and Labrador students.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

When looking at the Estimates

documents they reveal that the division which is responsible for the delivery of

essential services to children, youth and their families has been cut by over $3

million from $132 million down to $129 million.

I ask

the minister: How will this cut impact services for our most vulnerable?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, this government

takes the protection of children and youth very seriously. We have seen too many

times in the past where children have been in harm's way because of inaction on

someone or another's part. We are doing the best job we can to make sure those

incidents never happen again in the history of Newfoundland and Labrador.

So it's

vital that we protect children and youth interests. As the Minister of Finance

has said numerous times now, when we have Estimates Committees and there will

be hours and hours and hours of time provided to ask detailed questions such as

the Member's the Member will get an answer to this question and any other that

she has through the Estimates process.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

A whole lot of openness and

transparency going on here.

We are

also shocked, Mr. Speaker, to see in

Budget 2017 to discover that the Disability Policy Office was cut by $50,000

in this budget.

What

programs and services will be reduced or cut as a result?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, the rights of

people with disabilities in Newfoundland and Labrador is extremely important to

all Members of the House of Assembly, regardless of what side of the House

Members sit on. We have made commitments to people with disabilities over the

course of the election campaign in 2015, and we intend to keep those

commitments.

encourage the Member to stay tuned to the legislative process for that. There

are many good things that are going to be announced for people with disabilities

as we continue to move along to a more inclusive Newfoundland and Labrador,

which is really fundamental to moving forward

The Way Forward , the vision for the

province.

As I

previously said in my last answer, the Member will have an opportunity to ask

detailed questions about where money is moved in the Estimates document when we

have those Committee meetings.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, the Minister of Finance has stated the Liberals will watch every dollar

and eliminate waste.

Does the

minister think spending tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayers' money on free

skiing when people are struggling to get by under the weight of your

government's excessive taxes ?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Tourism, Culture, Industry and Innovation.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I find

it very ironic that the Member opposite is asking this particular question.

Because when I talked to the former board chair, and other members of the board,

they stated they were held back, they were directed not to run Marble Mountain

like a business, to generate and maximize revenue as a Crown corporation. For

such a pristine provincial asset, 12 years of neglect and failed outcomes when

it comes and I said last week that Marble Mountain was not living up to its

full potential as a provincial asset, and it certainly can.

The

Auditor General's report of 2012 highlighted numerous problems, but they failed

to act and get the results they needed to. As well, they invested $4.6 million

of taxpayers' money because the insurance program wasn't up to date enough to

cover the cost. So they wasted taxpayers' money, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Member for Conception Bay South for a quick question, no

preamble.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I say to the Minister of AES, the champion of free ski giveaways at

Marble, why not

MR. SPEAKER:

I ask the Member to get to

his question.

MR. PETTEN:

introduce this type of

promotion at the beginning of ski season and not at the end?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Advanced Education Skills and Labor.

MR. BYRNE:

I think the question was why

didn't we introduce the promotion at the beginning of the season as opposed to

it at the end. Well, Mr. Speaker, we did respond to the fact that the hill

customers were very dissatisfied, very frustrated, that there was a decision to

close the hill while ski conditions appeared to be probably in the best

condition that they have ever, ever been in a very long time. Notwithstanding

all of that, we are promoting the hill. They never.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we

tried to get the Minister of Finance to tell the people of the province

important details about her budget that she did not include in the Budget

Speech. Today we will continue to try to get answers on the record in this House

for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador so they can get the whole story.

Schedule

III attached to last week's Budget Speech showed a drop of more than $400

million in salaries and employee benefits. I ask the Minister of Finance after

adjusting for one-time items and previously announced management layoffs, what

is the net reduction in funding for salaries and employee benefits?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, the number that

the Member opposite is referring to is a reflection of the consolidation of

salaries and benefits across government, as she referenced, and it is obvious

that she left officials in her technical briefing.

As she

rightly referenced, there are some one-time numbers that impact that 416, which

she referenced. In addition to that, there would be the numbers that were

reflective of the decisions that were made in last year's budget. There are no

reflections in that line item related to decisions that have yet to be made

around small operational changes that may result in the work were doing in

The Way Forward , Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Mr. Speaker, what I'm asking the minister is to tell this House how much money

is going to have to be spent and how many public employees will have to be laid

off in order to achieve the amount of savings that she's not even telling us.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, I met with, last

week, union leadership for our public sector unions, and I shared with them, in

advance of the budget, our position as a government that this budget would not

reflect massive layoffs, and that's exactly what the budget reflects.

The

number that the Member opposite is referring to is from and including a large

number that relates to actuarial calculations, as she is aware. There is nothing

in the budget that is about hiding massive layoffs. I would suggest that the

Member opposite may want to consider the fear mongering that she is perpetuating

and anxiety levels inside public sector employees.

We are

having a discussion with our unions and we will continue to have this discussion

at the table.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, the people of

the province want fair and open and transparent answers. The minister was unable

or reluctant to answer questions in the House yesterday on the forecasted

unemployment rate for this province.

I ask

the minister: Would she stand and tell the people of the province the projected

unemployment rate for 2021, and explain why that rate will grow so much over the

next five years?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

appreciate the question from the Member opposite. As many people in this

province understand, we have seen a significant shift in our economy. Our

economy is in transition, coming off of and moving through the conclusion of

several major megaprojects in a population that is the size of just over half a

million. That's a significant transition.

Our

government is focused on improving employment numbers. We have done that though

the $3 billion infrastructure plan, which will create the equivalent of 43,000

positions on an annual basis. We have done that through

The Way Forward targets which will contribute in excess of 9,000

positions or equivalents over the next number of years once we achieve those

targets. We are very much focused on employment in our province.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker,

Budget 2016 took a heavy toll on many Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians. Budget documents point to a 3.2 per cent reduction in average

household income for this coming year.

I ask

the minister: How does she expect the economy to recover when people are

suffering, their incomes are declining, and all but one of the taxation measures

from Budget 2016 remain in effect?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the Member opposite for asking the question today, again, that she referenced

yesterday. I want to correct her, though, because the assumption that she's

presenting to this House is actually inaccurate. If she looks at the household

disposable income that was forecasted last year, for fiscal '17, and the number

that's forecasted this year, it actually went from $16.5 million in income for

households up to $17.1 million, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period

has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling

of Documents.

Notices

of Motion.

Answers

to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Answers to

Questions for which Notice has been Given

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Service NL.

MR. TRIMPER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

response to a request by the Member for St. John's East Quidi Vidi in this

House on April 5, I rise today to table information on the benefits and

cost-sharing arrangement associated with BizPal. Based on a calculation by the

staff in Service NL, it estimates a savings for Newfoundland and Labrador

businesses of some $4,400,000 per year, Sir. So I table that document today.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further answers to questions

for which notice has been given?

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you very much, 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

bookstores, 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 the 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 rise, yet again, to present a petition that has been signed by people

all over the province about this very regressive tax on books that makes no

sense. I'd like to just come back again to some of the clauses in this

particular petition, because they really tell the story.

The tax

on books will go from 5 per cent, which is federal tax, to 15 per cent again,

the only province in the country, even though we have the highest illiteracy

rate, the growing highest unemployment rate in the country. So that's going from

5 per cent to 15 per cent.

It's

saying also that a tax on books will reduce book sales to the detriment of local

bookstores. We've had book sellers who've told us that. In fact, people are

ordering online because for some of the booksellers online, they aren't charging

the provincial sales tax. Although they are required to do so, they aren't doing

it.

So it's

an unfair advantage, and an unfair, extra burden on our local booksellers. We

all know everywhere in the province how hard it is for local booksellers, and

how important it is for local booksellers how important it is to have local

bookstores where people can browse, where people can take their kids to look

through books, where adults can look through books. We know how important that

is, but they're having a hard time.

Publishers are telling us that. Publishers are telling us they're not going to

be able to take the risk on new authors that they have been able to because of

the imposition of this tax creating a heavier burden for them. It flies in the

face of reason, Mr. Speaker. It absolutely flies in the face of reason.

Thank

you very much.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

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

there has been an identified lack of mental health services in our province's

K-12 school system; and

WHEREAS

this lack is having a significant impact on both students and teachers; and

WHEREAS

left unchecked, matters can and, in many cases, will develop into more serious

issues;

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

of Assembly to urge government to increase mental health services and programs

in our province's K-12 school system.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, we've often talked in this House of Assembly, particularly in recent

years with the All-Party Committee on Mental Health and Addictions, of the

seriousness of mental health issues. We often talk in this House of the

importance of our children and how they are the future.

In terms

of mental health, if left unchecked, children will carry mental health issues

throughout their entire lives. We feel it is of critical importance to ensure

that early intervention can and does take place. The school system, Mr. Speaker,

is the ideal place for this to happen.

In many

of the presentations that we were fortunate to receive during the all-party

consultations on mental health and addictions, this issue was raised over and

over and over again. While we recognize that there are challenges with respect

to fiscal restraints in this province, we also know that money is forthcoming

from the federal government for mental health and we have to make priorities. We

think increasing the budget for mental health services in K-12 will have

benefits for centuries to come, and we call upon government to seriously

consider it.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

honoured to rise in the House today and 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

infertility is not an inconvenience; it is a disease of the reproductive system

that impairs the body's ability to perform the basic function of reproduction;

and

WHEREAS

infertility affects men and women equally; and

WHEREAS

treating infertility is excessively expensive and cost prohibitive; and

WHEREAS

infertility impairs the ability of individuals and couples to conceive children

and begin to build a family;

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

of Assembly to urge government to implement a program that assists individuals

and couples, allowing them access to affordable in vitro fertilization services.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, there are some programs to support couples and individuals dealing with

fertility issues in our province. There are programs that exist through Eastern

Health, but for quite some time there have been families calling on government

to do more and to provide some services that are not offered here but are

offered elsewhere, often at great expense to families in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

I was

contacted recently by a constituent who wanted these concerns brought to the

House of Assembly and asked me to present a petition in that regard. So rather

than provide my own commentary today on that petition, I'd like to share some of

her words with this hon. House.

She's

writing about concerns we all have about getting IVF coverage in the province: I

feel like fertility is something that is taken for granted by most people and

taboo for those who actually go through it and, because of this, it is not

talked about. Everyone will go to the fertility clinic, get their test

procedures and try to forget about it. I think it's about time that people start

looking at the clinic as a relief and exciting experience, knowing that finally

there will be a solution.

The last

thing that should influence a person's emotions and decision making at the

clinic is finances. No one should have to remortgage, take out a loan or sell

the things we have worked so hard to get. Most people are worried about saving

money for maternity leave, when people with fertility issues have to owe so much

money from the beginning.

I feel

like I shouldn't complain about something unless I'm going to do something to

help solve the problem, so that's why I'm contacting you. I think it's about

time the government actually start something that the rest of the country can

look up to, instead of merely following along. Why wait until every other

province offers fertility treatment? I think that we should join Ontario and

Quebec and cover fertility treatments. I am willing to give out a petition if

you're willing to present my concerns.

Today,

I'm pleased to have the opportunity to do so. Mr. Speaker, I know I'm running

out of time. This is an important issue. It affects many families in my district

and districts across the province. I look forward to discussing it further in

the House of Assembly in the weeks ahead.

Thank

you.

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.

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 US Center for Disease Control now estimates that Autism Spectrum Disorder

(ASD) affects one in 68 children, which represents a 30 per cent increase from

the estimate two years ago; and

WHEREAS

early diagnosis of ASD is essential because there is a critical developmental

period when early intervention is vital for future success of children with ASD;

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

of Assembly to urge government to allow other specialists trained and certified

with ADOS to make the Autism Spectrum Disorder diagnosis.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, there are so many issues that people on the autism spectrum have to

face. A key one is that youth and adults with autism who have an IQ of 70 or

more are not eligible for services offered to people with intellectual

disabilities. So the only thing this recognizes is saying that if you have an IQ

of above 70, basically you're not on the spectrum. We know that's not true; many

people with autism who are IQ 70 or above need services such as job coaches,

life coaches, caregiver respite, just as much of those who have an IQ under 70.

What's needed, Mr. Speaker, is a functionality test, not an IQ test, that

measures social interaction and self-care abilities.

There's

been work done at the School of Social Work here at Memorial University and

their research has shown what the impact of this rule is. They found that this

barrier, only giving services to people with IQs under 70, has had serious

heart-breaking impacts. People with autism have suffered isolation and inability

to realize their potential. Families have shouldered enormous burdens of care.

Successive governments in this House have promised to eliminated the IQ 70

eligibility criterion for people with autism. It is in the current Health

Minister's mandate letter, but nothing has changed. It's time for action and an

update from government. To continue with this rule, or this criterion, is to

continue ignoring the needs of so many people in this province.

When one

is on the autism spectrum, Mr. Speaker, there are so many elements to what that

means. Very often you will have somebody who is extremely intelligent but who

has a real disability when it comes to social interaction; when it comes to

mixing with other people; when it comes to growth as an individual in every way,

not just intellectually, Mr. Speaker.

I really

urge this government to listen to the people who have signed this petition, to

listen to the people who are ADS and to listen to the people who care for them

and to change this criterion.

Thank

you very much, 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

government recently cut vital funding to many of the province's youth

organizations; and

WHEREAS

the cuts to grants to youth organizations will have a devastating impact on the

communities, as well the youth and families; and

WHEREAS

many of these organizations deeply rely on what was rightfully considered core

funding for their day-to-day operations;

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

of Assembly to urge government to reinstate funding to the province's youth

organizations immediately.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, I've had an opportunity to speak to this a number of times but, more

importantly, I had an opportunity to speak to a number of youth organizations

who have been affected by the dramatic cuts that were implemented last year but

announced six months later, at a time when most of these organizations had

already committed that part of the funding that they had taken forever and a day

as being core funding. So not only did they now have less money, they'd already

spent money, had to readjust their budgets to make up for lost revenue, and then

also absorb the full cost of the impact on the cuts. Some was up to 60 per cent

of the core funding.

Move

forward, five months later, we're into it again, where that same 60 per cent cut

is no longer part of their budget lines. So they're now really struggling in a

lot of cases to find ways to adjust and provide the services that are very

valuable to the people of this province, particularly the young people.

Inherent

in our society is that government has a responsibility to support, particularly

agencies that go out of their way to enhance education, social inclusion,

healthy well-being, physical health. All these are important components of what

we do in our society and what we're responsible for.

From a

business point of view, when we have an organization that can leverage four to

five times as much money for programs and services than we invest, then that's a

good business plan. If you add into that that government would be responsible

for providing those same services at a much higher cost, you now look at it and

you've got a dual benefit for having a partnership developed with organizations

such as Boys and Girls Clubs or Big Brothers Big Sisters, or Scouts and Guides

or all the youth organizations who do valued work out there for providing these

type of services.

We've

talked about things around mental health. What better organization to deal with

some of the mental health issues in our society than youth organizations who

have professionals who are trained around the focus of inclusion and ensuring

that young people get the best provided service possible? So this in itself is

an inherent ability for government to partner with organizations who, in a lot

of cases, have provincial bodies that oversee what they do and support it, have

national bodies and, in a number of cases, international organizations that

support that.

You have

a wealth of knowledge. You have people from various backgrounds, from education

backgrounds, from social work backgrounds to health backgrounds helping design

programs and services that we can avail of and use for the people of this

province.

So, Mr.

Speaker, I'll have an opportunity to speak to this again and show that the

investment that should be made is a benefit to all taxpayers in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call

Orders of the Day.

MR. SPEAKER:

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, from the Order

Paper, I would call Motion 1, the Budget Speech.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

appreciate the opportunity to rise again today, this time to speak to the

budget. The motion that we're actually debating today, that the House Leader

just referred to, it reads: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of

Treasury Board to move that this House approves in general the budgetary policy

of the government.

It won't

come as a big surprise to Members opposite that I do not support the general

budgetary policy of this current government. I know that upsets some. Although I

will point out before I get into my more serious remarks today that the

Government House Leader and I do agree on a couple of things. For instance,

we're both thrilled that the Montreal Canadiens have made the NHL playoffs again

this year. Believe it or not, I'm also pleased that the Toronto Maple Leafs has

made the playoffs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

I am pleased because my

father is a Leafs fan. We've watched a few games together this season. I think

it's good for hockey, good for Canada, and good for the sport to have the Leafs

back in the playoffs. So good luck to both teams and we'll see the Leafs on the

golf course after they face the Capitals probably, but we'll see.

I have

an opportunity today to speak to a number of issues and before I dive into the

budget, I'd like to talk a little bit about the Throne Speech. I haven't had an

opportunity yet to speak to the Throne Speech. I didn't feel there was an

urgency to speak to the Throne Speech because we'll have a chance to reply to it

throughout this calendar year. I didn't feel there was a lot new in the Throne

Speech. I didn't feel that there was actually a lot to talk about, and let me

explain a little more about why that is.

actually saw lots of rhetoric and buzz words in the Throne Speech; words like

complete, develop, outline, advance, focus, collaborate, leverage, but it was

extremely, extremely vague on details. There was a great deal about the past,

which this government loves to focus on. There was a great deal about the

actions that the previous administration had taken in energy development; that

the previous administration had taken in health care, in multi-year

infrastructure funding, in long-term care and in violence prevention.

Mr.

Speaker, what we didn't hear about in the Throne Speech a few weeks ago was

what's to come, what's the vision, what's the plan, what are the ideas and the

solutions that are going to move Newfoundland and Labrador forward. And that's

what the people in Newfoundland and Labrador are crying out for.

They've

had enough of the rhetoric and politics as usual, and certainly they've had

enough of this Liberal government's obsession with the past. We've now got a

government that's been in office for a year and a half. They're in the second

year of their mandate. They'll soon be halfway through their mandate and it's

time to lead; it's time to govern.

So let's

talk about the future, let's talk about the present and let's talk about what's

to come to move Newfoundland and Labrador forward. What we saw in the Throne

Speech was a speech that was very vague, full of intentions, short on details.

Some of the buzz words leave people to wonder if they are, in fact, covering

cuts that are to come. That was reflected in the Budget Speech as well, which

I'll get a chance to speak to this afternoon.

In fact,

the tone was quite clear from Question Period today. We saw at least four

Cabinet ministers stand and say wait until the Estimates debate. We don't need

to answer your questions now. We don't want to reveal details about what's

actually contained in the budget and what the impact will be. Wait until an

Estimates Committee meeting three or four weeks down the road.

Now, the

people of the province, for the most part, won't have an opportunity to see the

Estimates proceedings. They may choose to read

Hansard or listen online. Those opportunities are available.

However, they won't get the same kind of attention that happens when you ask

questions of ministers in Question Period. So that general theme today among

Cabinet ministers of wait until Estimates and you can ask your questions there

when the people of the province are not watching, for the most part, that's

really unfortunate and it causes people to wonder what's being hidden.

I think

the general reaction to the budget has very much been: Well, thank God it wasn't

worse than last year. Well, it may not have been much worse than last year, but

it certainly wasn't any better. I think as we go through the Estimates process

that will become more obvious. I hear the catcalling from Members opposite. The

fact remains that of the 300 new taxes and levies and fees that were introduced

in last year's budget, only one of the 300 was partially adjusted in this year's

budget.

It's

pretty well the same budget. They've improved their communications. They've

fired some people in the Premier's office and replaced them a couple of times, I

believe. Yet their general communication strategy seems to have improved. The

budget was certainly packaged better than last year's, but it wasn't actually a

budget that was very different from the year previous.

So back

to the Throne Speech, let's talk about what was not said and what was not

covered. There were a number of omissions that really jumped out at me. One was:

Where was the attention to Labrador, which appeared to be thrown in as an

afterthought? Where is the generic royalty regime, which

The Way Forward promised to deliver, which was actually

completed in 2015 by the previous administration? Where was the reference to

Mistaken Point, which just achieved UNESCO status? Something that we're very

proud of I know the Member for Ferryland, my colleague, the Opposition House

Leader, is quite passionate about and Members of my caucus and I think even

Members opposite would attest to that.

Where were the specifics in the Throne Speech related to

inclusion, which is a huge issue for teachers and for parents and for students

in our province? Where are the references to growing rural Newfoundland and

Labrador, which seems to be ignored in the Throne Speech and again in the

budget?

There are many references to aquaculture, but what about

the fish processing sector? There were references, which I was quite pleased to

see, related to the All-Party Committee report on mental health and addictions .

As I've said many times, and I'll say it here again this afternoon, I believe

that the current government and future governments will move forward on those

recommendations all 54 of them in the All-Party Committee report on mental

health and addictions. So a $5 million commitment in this year's budget is a

start, but there's a lot more work to do. In a $3 billion health care system, $5

million I know, for a fact, doesn't go very far.

Where

was the commitment to social policy? There were very vague references in the

Throne Speech. Overall, Madam Speaker, where is the foundation for hope and

confidence? People want a vision. They want a plan.

The Way Forward doesn't provide it. The document that has been

released this year by the Liberal administration doesn't provide the hope and

confidence that our people are looking for. There is a trust issue, given the

broken promises from the 2015 Liberal election platform. People want leadership.

They want a vision, they want a plan, they want hope and they want confidence.

We didn't see it in the Throne Speech a few weeks ago. We didn't see it in the

budget last week.

There

were phrases and oversights in the Throne Speech that really make us wonder if

there are more cuts coming: cuts to the College of the North Atlantic; cuts to

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing because we believe there is a major

restructuring coming, based on numerous reports that we have received. There may

be an end to the tuition freeze at Memorial University and College of the North

Atlantic. We raised the issue in Question Period today. The Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island asked questions today specifically about that

issue and recent comments made by the president of Memorial University.

We had a

speech that was full of buzz phrases that do leave people concerned. We will do

better with less, was one of the lines used. We heard it again in the budget

last week. That reminds us of a statement way back by the current Premier when

he indicated that nurses should be working harder. The simple concept of we will

do better with less is not a fiscal policy, and it's not a vision that is going

to propel Newfoundland and Labrador forward.

We also

saw statements like: We are not seeing sufficient return on investment. That

does cause concern. I don't necessarily disagree with the statement. We should

be maximizing the benefit of our resources in Newfoundland and Labrador. We are

asset-rich. If you look at the assets in Newfoundland and Labrador, we are a

very wealthy and prosperous place, and we need to realize the potential of those

assets. So to see sufficient return on investment makes sense, but when

government says it without backing it up, it causes people to wonder what's

coming.

Flatter,

Leaner Management Structure: On the surface, I'd say that's not a bad thing

either. A more efficient approach to the delivery and management of government

services is a good thing. But the devil is in the details in this instance,

Madam Speaker, because we're talking about people's lives. We're talking about

the lives of people who depend on government programs and services and utilize

government programs and services.

We're

also talking about the thousands of dedicated women and men in our province who

deliver those public services and what impact some of these changes has on them.

We need to do government differently. We need to be smarter about how we deliver

government programs and services, so a Flatter, Leaner Management Structure on

the surface sounds like a good thing. Making sure we get good return on our

investments is a good thing. But what does government really mean and where is

the plan to support those statements?

There

were some very political statements near the beginning of the Throne Speech,

which seemed a little inappropriate, actually. We all in this hon. House have

great respect for His Honour the Lieutenant Governor and to hear political words

being put in the mouth of His Honour, I found a little troublesome and not

necessarily the kind of tone and approach that you like to see in a Throne

Speech. Words about the current government inheriting problems and placing

political blame; words about facts being hidden from people. That's not

leadership.

People

are growing incredibly tired of the blame game. There's been no government in

the history of this province that has made every decision correctly. I would

argue that during I was around for two-thirds of our previous administration

and I saw lots of good things happen. I saw lots of decisions made and

investments made that improved our province's position overall and made it a

better place today than it was 15 years ago.

But

that's not to say that every decision was perfect. There are things that I would

absolutely do differently if I had supreme power and was in a position to do so,

and we need to learn from the past and make sure we have a solid plan for the

future. That's what's required. That's leadership. We've seen a real lack of

that from this government.

The

government may be trying to politicize every other office of government, and

we've seen tons of political appointments, even in the most senior office of the

civil service, as with the Clerk of the Executive Council. When I saw the

Liberal government politicizing the Throne Speech and politicizing the words

coming out of the mouth of the Lieutenant Governor, I felt it was a little bit

too far, Madam Speaker, and I feel the need to highlight that during my time

this afternoon.

There

were many references to collaborating with the federal government and

leveraging, but no references to the broken promises on the $400 million

fisheries investment fund, or Ottawa's failure to deliver fairness on

equalization, and the province's refusal to fight for it when other provinces

are getting amounts of funding that would completely change the challenges we

face.

Let me

elaborate on that, because I've talked a lot about equalization and I've had one

of our province's MPs publicly attack me and some of my statements on the issue.

I'm not suggesting for a moment that Newfoundland and Labrador should build a

plan for the future that's based on being dependent on Ottawa. Nothing could be

further from the truth. In fact, with all the resources we have, it is entirely

possible that we can get back on the path towards prosperity and self-reliance

and we can be sustainable. We have lots of assets that can make this province

sustainable for generations to come, and that's what our focus should be on.

But we

need some help along the way. We have a very resource-dependent economy, and

there has been lots of great work done over the years to diversify the economy

and to pursue other industries, ranging from the tech sector to ocean

technology, the knowledge-based economy. We've seen huge growth in tourism. Our

fishery remains a very viable sector in Newfoundland and Labrador and continues

to do a lot of great things, particularly in rural communities. There are lots

of good things happening that we should be excited about.

What we

have right now is a cash problem. We don't have an asset problem; we have lots

of wonderful assets that can lead to a very prosperous future for Newfoundland

and Labrador. We definitely have a cash problem; we have a spending problem.

Now, in

the final years of our administration, government spending was curbed and we

actually reduced the size of the public service, which obviously is unfortunate

for those that are impacted by that, but we have to be responsible and live

within our means, no doubt. So we had an attrition plan that we were

implementing, and it was working, that would have resulted in many young people

keeping their jobs within the public service, holding on to lots of that next

generation of talent which we so desperately need to continue revitalizing and

renewing the public service. I feel that would have been fairly effective in

helping manage some of the fiscal challenges that we face. Nonetheless, there's

more work needed to reduce government spending.

Now we

see a budget this year where the spending in this year's budget that we're

currently debating on the floor of this House, the spending level is actually

higher than the budget of 2015, two years ago. The spending limit is higher, so

we felt all this pain of 300 new taxes and fees and levies and threats to close

libraries and new taxes on books and gas and insurance, things that have

affected virtually every family in Newfoundland and Labrador I think most

people would understand the need for us to take our share of the burden in order

to move Newfoundland and Labrador forward and to position us for success, but

that's not what's been done here. Everybody is feeling the pain, while this

government increased spending.

Last

year, we saw an increase in taxation and an increase in spending, and this

year's spending levels are higher than they were in 2015. So the current

government, the government that's been responsible for the last year and a half,

has not tackled the tough issues. If it wasn't for $500 million of additional

oil revenue this year, we would have a real challenge. We see no vision, no plan

and, therefore, people have no confidence that things are going to get better.

That's

really disheartening. It's really disheartening when I talk to young people who

are now planning to move away because they don't feel there will be

opportunities for them here in the next number of years. We have entire families

that are uprooting and moving elsewhere. It may be many, many years before they

return, if they ever return at all. There was so much work done to bring people

back here, to give people a reason to be hopeful, to give people opportunities

to raise a family here, like I'm choosing to do, and build their futures here.

That's

what everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador wants. We are a people that place an

incredible value and importance on family; that's who we are. This budget and

the lack of appropriate fiscal and economic policy by this government threaten

that. It threatens our way of living; it threatens the quality of life for

families. I'm not just talking about low-income families. I'm talking about

middle-class families; I'm talking about all families in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

So when

I talk about issues like equalization and the fisheries investment fund and the

fact that we're not getting our fair share, we are asset-rich but we have an

immediate problem now due to some exceptional circumstances, Madam Speaker, was

the point that I wanted to make exceptional circumstances, relatively

short-term, that create a major challenge for the prosperity and the viability

of Newfoundland and Labrador.

doesn't have to be this way. This year, the Province of Nova Scotia will receive

$1.7 billion in transfer payments from Ottawa. This year, in 2017, the Province

of New Brunswick will receive transfer payments of $1.7 billion from Ottawa.

This year, in 2017, the Province of Quebec, while cutting taxes, reducing fees

and actually still running a deficit I believe I'm not certain on that fact,

Madam Speaker; I'm certain on the previous two facts. They will receive a

transfer payment of $11 billion from the federal government.

So I'm

not saying let's be dependent on that source of revenue forever, but I'm saying

let's recognize the exceptional circumstances that we find ourselves in. There's

not an economist in this province, in the country, that predicted that oil was

going to bottom out at $27 a barrel. It would be great to get to a point where

we're not so dependent on oil revenue, but the reality is that today we have a

great dependence on oil revenue. There have been great efforts made to diversify

the economy and that needs to continue. And we will get there. I believe we will

get there, and there's a way to get there.

But to

simply ignore reality and say, well, we just got to take what we're given, cap

in hand, and be happy to receive whatever we receive, while other provinces get

their fair share if we were getting comparable treatment to Nova Scotia or New

Brunswick let's leave Quebec aside for a moment. If we were getting comparable

treatment to Nova Scotia or New Brunswick when it comes to

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MADAM SPEAKER (Dempster):

Order, please!

MR. KENT:

transfer payments from

Ottawa, we essentially wouldn't have a deficit. We would not have a deficit. Our

short-term cash problem, our short-term spending problem, there is a solution,

and the burden doesn't have to simply rest with families in this province.

I'd like

to move the following non-confidence motion related to this government and it's

moved by the Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island that all words after

that be deleted in the motion before the House, and the following words be

substituted: THEREFORE this House condemns the government for maintaining all

but one of the 300 tax and fee increases they imposed on people in last year's

budget, while failing to be forthright and accountable in disclosing information

and while failing to nurture the conditions for economic growth across

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Madam

Speaker, we don't have confidence in this government; we don't have confidence

in this government's leadership or their fiscal policy. I must move this

non-confidence motion. It's seconded by the Member for Conception Bay East

Bell Island, and I ask for the House's consideration.

MADAM SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The

Member for Mount Pearl North has moved a non-confidence motion and this House

will take a brief recess to consider the motion.

Recess

MADAM SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Are the

Whips ready?

AN HON. MEMBER:

Yes.

MADAM SPEAKER:

The Speaker has reviewed the

motion and found it to be in order.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MADAM SPEAKER:

The Speaker recognizes the

hon. Member for Mount Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

appreciate the wise and considerate ruling and I'm glad to have an opportunity

now to continue my remarks.

For the

purposes of those who may be watching the proceedings, we just moved

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. KENT:

I can't hear, Madam Speaker.

MADAM SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KENT:

We just moved a

non-confidence motion to suggest that we do not have confidence in the fiscal

policy of the current government and their budget. So this is a matter of

confidence, and that's why we're taking the debate rather seriously, of course.

Just to

conclude where I left off, we have a government now that likes to defend and

apologize for the federal government instead of being an advocate for

Newfoundland and Labrador. The shots being called from somewhere other than the

Premier's office in this province is an approach that we find very, very

concerning.

In my

previous remarks this afternoon, I had an opportunity to talk about the Throne

Speech and the lack of clarity in the Throne Speech and the lack of a clearer

vision and plan to move Newfoundland and Labrador forward. I'd now like to shift

to focusing on this year's budget. A number of words jump to mind when I thought

about this year's budget and what impact it will have on people; what impact it

will have on seniors; what impact it will have on families; what impact it will

have on children and youth; what impact it will have on businesses; what impact

it will have on communities and on our overall economy.

The

Liberal approach that we see outlined in this year's budget, which is really an

extension of last year's budget, very much so, words that come to mind about the

approach include: weaken; the Liberal approach is to tax; the Liberal approach

is to discourage; the Liberal approach is to blame; the Liberal approach is to

panic; the Liberal approach is to cave; and the Liberal approach is to hide.

First of

all, the Liberal approach is to weaken. It will leave people worse off at the

end of this year than they are now. In fact, some of those 300 new taxes and

fees that came in last year's budget only came into effect in 2017. So it's only

in 2017, in this current year, that people and families will feel the full

impact of last year's decisions and this year's affirmation of those previous

bad decisions.

The

Liberal approach is to tax. It fails to connect high taxes with low growth. The

Liberal approach is to discourage. It fails to connect high uncertainty with

poor performance. The Liberal approach is to blame. It blames the PCs, while at

the same time relying on and pointing to PC achievements.

The

Liberal approach is to panic. The Budget Speech included an astonishing

admission about panic. The Liberal approach is to cave. It downloads our woes on

the people instead of fighting for people, instead of standing up for people,

instead of providing leadership and providing a plan and a vision to move

Newfoundland and Labrador forward.

The

Liberal approach is to hide. It hides the details instead of being transparent.

We saw that in Question Period today. From four different Cabinet ministers in

four different government departments, we heard the same response. We're not

going to answer your question but when we have an Estimates Committee, which is

part of the budget process, a few weeks down the road, ask your questions there

and then maybe you'll get a response.

This is

the people's House, Madam Speaker. On days the House is open, we get 25 minutes

to ask questions of government ministers.

AN HON. MEMBER:

On behalf of the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. KENT:

On behalf of the people of

the province, absolutely.

For

government ministers, one after another, in the same 25-minute Question Period

today say oh well, you just got to wait until and Estimates Committee, we're not

going to answer detailed questions about our budget now, that's crazy.

identified an 88 per cent reduction in grants that relate to sector

diversification and economic development. Other budget lines where other grants

and funding related to business development and economic development,

particularly in rural parts of our province, have been cut substantially and the

response of government is, well, ask the minister about it in Estimates and we

might give you some more detail.

That's

an offensive approach. The amount of arrogance that we saw displayed in that

kind of approach today is really disappointing. The condescending answers from

the Minister of Finance when challenged about the content of the budget, it's

not okay, and people in Newfoundland and Labrador expect better. As an

Opposition, whose job it is to hold government's feet to the fire, we expect

better as well.

So back

to my seven points, the words that jumped to mind the Liberal approach is to

weaken. So if you look at The Economy

document that came out with this year's budget it's on page 7 you can see

what kind of year the Liberals expect we will have, in their second year in

office. Real GDP is forecast to decrease by 3.8 per cent. While other provinces

have turned the corner and are growing, we will decline. That means fewer

opportunities. That means less investment. That means fewer jobs. That means

smaller incomes, and we've seen no plan to address any of that.

Capital

investment is expected to decline by 7.8 per cent. That's the investment that

drives growth. That's investment that drives spinoff opportunities. That's the

investment that drives jobs.

Employment is expected to be down 1.9 per cent from 2016. Employment rates on

this government's watch are plummeting. The unemployment rate is expected to

increase by 0.5 percentage points to average 13.9 per cent. That's on top of the

worst thing that happened in the past year.

Household income is expected to decline by 0.3 per cent due to lower employment

in the province. Retail sales are expected to decline by 0.2 per cent. That's

the sales that enable employers to hire. Because this government has almost

worked hard to eliminate hope and confidence, they have ground the economy to a

halt. Consumers have stopped spending because of the uncertainty that this

government has created around the economy, around their own job prospects and

around their families own futures.

Consumer

prices are expected to increase by 2.9 per cent. That's inflation. It makes it

costlier to live here in Newfoundland and Labrador. The province's population is

projected to decline by 0.5 percent. That's hardly surprising when opportunities

are falling. It's not population growth. We had a Population Growth Strategy. We

still have a lot of work to do; there is no doubt about it.

I, for

one, have been happy to hear the Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and

Labour talk about immigration as a priority. I believe it has to be a priority,

and it's consistent with the Population Growth Strategy we had in place, but

jobs are important too. Growing the economy is important too.

It is

fine to talk about we need people to come here, and we do the only way to make

Newfoundland and Labrador sustainable and for us to become self-reliant in the

future is to bring more people here and to have more people choose to live here

and stay here. But there has to be jobs. There's no reason for people to come if

they cannot make a living and sustain themselves here and contribute to the

economy. So that has to be the focus. This government is certainly not focused

on job creation when you look at these projections.

Housing

starts are forecasted to decrease by 3.4 per cent. That's an activity that

drives many spin-off industries and supports many jobs, and it's in decline as

well.

These

indicators show an economy that's worsening, not growing, and it's not a good

sign. It doesn't show a government making conditions better. It shows the

government presiding over a shrinking, a worsening, a declining of opportunities

and people's quality of life. At the same time, they're further diminishing hope

and confidence and not providing any kind of vision and plan to move

Newfoundland and Labrador forward. That's not what they promised. It's not what

they were expected to deliver, and I think that's why people are so disappointed

and so angry.

This is

their second budget, approaching two years in office. This is their watch. They

are not turning things around. They are making things worse.

The

second word that comes to mind is tax; the liberal approach is to tax. The lazy

way to make a revenue shortfall is to take money from consumers and employers,

and that's what the Liberals chose to do last year and that's exactly what the

Liberals are choosing to do again this year. This budget is not a better budget;

it's the same budget, the same 300 taxes and fees that were introduced last

year, with an adjustment to one of them.

The

Budget Speech this year states: Our government made hard choices and asked

taxpayers to dig deep into their pockets so we could close the gap between our

revenue and our costs. That wasn't a hard choice for the government; it was a

lazy choice and a misguided choice. Unfortunately, it's left consumers with

fewer choices because they have less income to spend.

Families, consumers, face difficult choices like which bills to pay first and

which important things to do without. Last year, the government raised more than

300 taxes and fees. This year, they are leaving all but one of them in place on

people's backs. The one they're reducing is being only gradually and partially

reduced before they re-impose it in some form in 2018 as a carbon tax.

We had a

robust Climate Change Action Plan and it makes sense to continue to pursue it.

We have to wrestle with the best way to approach tackling climate change and

dealing with the issue of carbon tax. When we look at the impact on people and

families, and this year's budget celebrates slightly reducing the gas tax when

next year we're going to face a carbon tax, it's a little disingenuous, Madam

Speaker.

So when

we hear government celebrate no new or increased taxes that kind of rings a bit

hollow when there's little left that isn't already being taxed at a higher rate

than when the Liberals came to office in 2015.

So let's

revisit the tax announcement that was in the 2016 Budget Speech, so just a year

ago and bear with me while I share some of what we heard last year, keeping in

mind the reason this is relevant is that all of this, with the exception of a

slight reduction to the gas tax, is still in this budget that we're now debating

and that was presented last week by the Finance Minister.

It reads

as follows: A series of new or increased tax measures and fee changes are being

implemented today. During our consultation process, input from Newfoundlanders

and Labradorians clearly pointed to increasing taxes and fees as a way to

address the unprecedented fiscal situation. Total revenue in 201617 will be

$647 million annualizing to $882 million.

Effective April 15, tobacco taxes will increase by one cent per cigarette and

by two cents per gram on fine-cut tobacco products, raising additional revenue

of $5.5 million.

Several

tax changes will take effect July 1, 2016.

increase revenues by $204 million annually, it is necessary to increase Personal

Income Tax rates for all income ranges. However, Newfoundland and Labrador rates

remain competitive in Atlantic Canada.

The HST

rate will increase 2 percentage points, generating, on an annual basis

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MADAM SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

It's

rather hard to hear today. I know they may not like what I have to say, but it

needs to be said.

So again

quoting from last year's Budget Speech: The HST rate will increase 2 percentage

points, generating, on an annual basis, $224 million.

The

Retail Sales Tax on Insurance Premiums is being re-introduced at a rate of 15

per cent and will generate annualized revenue of $111 million.

The

Insurance Companies tax will increase by 1 percentage point, increasing revenues

annually of $16.9 million.

Effective January 1, 2016, the Financial Corporations Capital Tax Rate and the

general corporate income tax rate, will increase 1 per cent and the

Manufacturing and Processing Profits Tax Credit will be eliminated, generating

additional annual revenues of $31.8 million.

Another

measure our government is implementing is fee changes on an annualized basis,

total fee changes are projected to raise an additional $19.3 million, this

includes the introduction of 50 new fees and the modification of a further 300.

Now, I

won't read the fee changes document from last year's budget because it's 13

pages long, but keep in mind the reason this is so important is that when people

talk about, well, this budget wasn't as bad as we thought, 100 per cent of this

is still in place. Some of it is only coming into effect fully this fiscal year,

with a slight reduction to gas tax later this year.

So it

continues: Temporary tax measures. Our plan will ensure Newfoundland and

Labrador will not face these fiscal challenges forever. That is why, through

Budget 2016, we are implementing some temporary tax measures.

Deficit Reduction Levy of up to $900 annually, depending on taxable income will

be implemented. Individuals with a taxable income of $20,000 or less will be

exempt. That levy will come into effect July 1, 2016. Revenue from the temporary

tax will be $74.8 million in 2016-17, annualizing to $126 million.

In 2018

we will begin the phase out of this temporary tax.

Effective June 2, 2016, gasoline tax will temporarily increase by 16.5 cents

per litre. That's more than the reduction that was just announced that's coming

later this year. This tax increase will be reviewed ahead of the Fall 2016

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (Warr):

Order, please!

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I hope

the mic is picking up some of the noise in the Chamber this afternoon. It's hard

to hear myself over here.

This

tax increase will be reviewed ahead of the Fall 2016 supplemental budget. I

note that never even came. This budget was so devastating that government even

shied away from presenting a supplemental budget, as previously committed last

fall.

The tax

rate on diesel products will also increase, by 5 cents per litre and the tax

rate on aviation fuel will go up 1.8 cents per litre. Taxes on Home Heating

fuels will not change. Total projected annual revenue from these measures is

$142.8 million.

provide all of that context because it matters. It matters to the people who are

affected by that level of taxation, and it's all still in place. With a minor

adjustment to the levy and a minor adjustment to gas tax that's coming in the

future, it's all still in place. So we have a budget that leaves people in

Newfoundland and Labrador under the crushing burden of taxes. That burden has

actually become worse this year, with some taxes just kicking in. Other tax

hikes could come at the municipal level, as towns struggle to meet the new

formula rules. And we are hearing from municipal leaders from around the

province who have some concerns about some of the changes that have been made.

Money

out of the pockets of consumers is money that they cannot spend to drive local

growth. Money out of the pockets of employers is money they cannot spend to hire

and to invest and to boost competitiveness. So why are retail sales down? Why

are housing starts down? Who has the money? Gas tax, sales tax, book tax, income

tax, the levy, insurance tax and I can go on and on, these things have really

driven up the cost of living for all families, regardless of your income level.

Gas and

insurance tax hikes have driven up the cost of freight and essentials like food.

It impacts people severely. Stores are closing up, from small towns to Water

Street, St. John's. High taxation is a policy that stymies growth at a time when

stimulus is needed. When a government cuts, you want the private sector picking

up the slack. The irony is that when you raise taxes too high, people have so

little left to spend, that tax revenues fail to meet expectations. Revenues fall

short. You can't bleed a turnip.

It's a

general difference of philosophy between Liberals and Tories. Liberals like to

tax and spend, as we saw last year and as we see this again year. Tories see tax

cuts as stimulus. As our revenues grow, we cut taxes, which we did. Liberals

faulted us for abandoning revenue and giving tax breaks we could not afford. We

believe overtaxing is fundamental wrong, and it's bad for the economy and it's

bad for families.

So my

advice to government is, take your hands out of the pockets of people and people

will spend the money they keep. They will drive local growth and generate the

kind of activity we need. That growth will help turn the economy and ultimately

revenues around.

The

Liberal approach is to discourage. Soon after the change in government in 2015,

the Premier and some of his ministers announced a series of initiatives to rein

in spending. People talk about our spending record. Government did grow on our

watch I've said so publicly and there were steps made in the latter years of

our mandate to get that back in line and to reduce the size of the public

service. But if you look at the spending increase that happened during the 12

years of PC government, and the previous 15 years of Liberal administration, the

actual increase in spending was far higher on Liberal watch than it was on PC

watch.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

And unlike the Liberal

government, we had a plan. We were reducing the size of the public service. We

did reduce government spending and we did have a plan to reduce the size of the

public service further through attrition. Not through haphazard layoffs, not

through random cuts so you can create space for your Liberal friends, that

wasn't our approach. That didn't happen on our watch, but that's what we've seen

over the last year and a half.

So back

in the fall of 2015, we were warned that it was going to be all doom and gloom,

despite all the election promises of sunshine and rainbows, and a stronger

tomorrow. Since that time, an axe has been hovering over the heads of the entire

public service, and over people who rely on programs and services.

Threats

of tax hikes and other restraint measures have been looming alongside the axe.

In the end, the government did slash many jobs and perhaps more are waiting to

be slashed. In Question Period today, we asked about $70 million of cuts to

agencies, boards and commissions, and the Finance Minister refused to tell us

what those cuts relate to. That's more jobs, that's more families affected, and

that is more impact on government programs and services.

Threats

of tax hikes and other restraint measures have been looming alongside the axe,

and in the end government did slash many jobs, as I said. If you cut 100 jobs,

that's 100 people who no longer have the income to spend. But if you hold the

threat over the heads of tens of thousands of employees, all of whom are

uncertain about what lies ahead for them, then it isn't just 100 people who stop

spending, it's tens of thousands; and therein lies the issue with the lack of a

plan and the secretive nature that we're seeing, wait for Estimates to ask your

questions about the budget, a budget that's going to be devastating for people

and for families in this province.

imagine the impact of tens of thousands of the province's employees restraining

spending because of uncertainty about their future. Then imagine what businesses

do when they feel that same chill descending on the economy. Do they hire? Do

they invest? Do they expend or do they put their plans on ice, hold back and

wait?

In a

climate that's been created by the Liberal government of perpetual uncertainty,

the economy ratchets back from growth to suspension and plans are in limbo. In

an economy if you aren't moving forward, you're moving backward and that's the

irony of the Liberal's latest series of documents,

The Way Forward . We're actually slipping backward. We're actually

slipping downward, losing ground that we spent a decade gaining.

We used

to lead the country in economic growth; now we lead the country in economic

decline. A climate of fear and uncertainty is a large part of the reason.

Confidence has been undermined. Fear and apprehension is contagious and it's

toxic for growth. Investors flee from a discouraged economy. They put their

money elsewhere.

Prophecies of doom, Mr. Speaker, become self-fulfilling. People who expect the

worst end up doing worse. There's been no hope or no optimism in our economy

since the fall of 2015. It's been entirely doom and gloom, with threats of more

bad things to come. The climate for growth needs optimism and confidence, which

is entirely lacking. It's been wiped out under the Liberal administration.

So the

next word that comes to mind about the Liberal approach is blame. Their approach

is to blame. It's a mark of immaturity when you spend all your time finding

others to blame for your own challenges and inadequacies and failures. The

Liberals have been in blame mode for so long that they don't know another way to

behave, as you're hearing from the noise opposite this afternoon. Every speech,

every document and even the Throne Speech of all places that the Lieutenant

Governor had to sit in your chair is full of blame.

The

Budget Speech continues and the line is as follows, on page 1: The magnitude of

the fiscal challenge that we inherited cannot be understated. The blame

attitude has become so pervasive that the Liberals have come to believe their

own rhetoric and they've gone nose blind to it, while others are just shaking

their heads. Blame your parents is what teenagers do, not responsible adults

and not all teenagers, I should say.

Even one

journalist who ought to know better got into the blame game on budget day. He

tweeted: NL PCs are like the foxes who ate the chickens and now complain there

are no eggs. It's funny, it's amusing, it got lots of likes and retweets

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

and you can see from the

childish behaviour opposite, but it's not accurate, Mr. Speaker. They don't want

to hear the truth. There were plenty of eggs in this year's budget that came

from the chickens that the Tories

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KENT:

cultivated. In fact, if it

weren't

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The

level of volume has escalated to an unacceptable level in the House of Assembly

and I'd ask all hon. Members to take notice and they'll get an opportunity to

speak. Right now, the hon. Member for Mount Pearl North has the floor.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That

might be funny, but it's not accurate. There were plenty of eggs in this year's

budget that came from the chickens that the Tories cultivated. In fact, if it

weren't for the goose of Nalcor laying the golden eggs of oil revenue, the

Liberals wouldn't have had anything positive last week to write about.

Tory

investments in the Energy Plan produced the gains the budget was celebrating.

The Premier says Tories were addicted to oil and oil is not a policy, as if oil

is something bad about our economy. But where would we have been in this year's

budget without an oil production and revenue windfall to save the Liberals from

the catastrophe their first budget nearly created? Oil may have just saved the

province from a credit rating downgrade, and I know there are certain political

hopefuls projecting a credit rating downgrade. We will see. Time will tell.

The

budget also finally admits that Muskrat Falls will not double electricity rates;

something that we have said from the very beginning, and now they are finally

admitting it. The CEO of Nalcor is now admitting it. At some point in the

future, people will realize that all the blame and boondoggle talk of the

Liberals about Muskrat Falls was misplaced, and it was actually a sound

investment in our long-term future. Sound environmentally, economically,

fiscally and socially.

In the

meantime, we will acknowledge that the Liberals have started making the slow

turn toward calling the project positive, with all the good things that have

been appearing of late about the project in the Nalcor and the budget documents;

$12 million dollars a week in activity that's boosting our economy, not

depressing it. At some point, we expect hear the Liberals taking credit for the

project, as they do with lots of initiatives that they weren't necessarily

involved in. We don't expect the Liberals to stop blaming us from running the

economy into the ground when, in fact, we did the opposite; when, in fact, all

the economic indicators that I listed previously prove that we did the opposite.

What

about spending the oil revenue windfall, wasting money, driving expenditure

growth beyond the level we could afford? What about health spending exceeding

the national average while delivering some of the worst outcomes in the country?

The facts tell the opposite story.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Before the Atlantic Accord,

we were lagging the country in all measures of social and economic performance.

We were the poor cousins of Confederation. But when we turned the corner, we

decided that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador should reap the benefits.

Why should we endure the worst child poverty rate in the country, the longest

health care wait times for health care, large class sizes for our students,

inadequate child protection and so forth? We made poverty reduction a priority

and achieved the country's lowest rate of child poverty within a decade. That

wasn't a waste of money, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

We achieved some of the best

health care outcomes in the country, meeting or exceeding national benchmarks in

a number of areas. Now, that's not to say we are doing a great job when it comes

to health outcomes. We have ton of work to do, and one of the things that the

Minister of Health and I wholeheartedly agree on is that we need to get better

outcomes, we need to provide better care for people and we need to get better

value for money in the health care system, no doubt.

As of

September of 2015, when our government was last in office, just to give you a

couple of examples: 87 per cent of knee replacements happened within the

national benchmark time; 92 per cent of hip fracture repairs; 94 per cent of hip

replacements; 96 per cent of cataract surgeries; 98 per cent of coronary bypass

surgeries; and 99 per cent of curative radiotherapy figures from the

minister's own departmental website.

If we

have relatively high health spending costs per capita, it may just be because we

have a relatively old population and the cost of providing health care to those

aged 15-64 in Canada is less than $3,000 per person, but the cost for those over

65 is more than $11,000 per person.

We're

not afraid to talk about our record. We created new spaces for long-term care.

We were also making great gains in student performance. We lead the country in

We made

phenomenal gains in child protection and public protection. These thing cost

money. They drove the hiring of social workers and police officers and teachers

and nurses and doctors, and I don't think any of those things are a waste of

money. Those things cost money, and the Liberals didn't oppose those investments

at the time. In fact, they called for us to do even more.

So we

resisted the call to grow beyond our means and we imposed attrition measures and

other choices to rein in spending growth. At the same time, we continued to

invest in infrastructure, growth industries, rural diversification, research and

development and business attraction. Those things cost money as well.

Some

investments are generators of growth that may produce h