November 30, 2004 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 49

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

This afternoon we would like to welcome ten students who are participating in

the Human Resources Skills for Canada program at the MacMorran Centre in St.

John's, with their instructor, Ms Dana Aylward.

Welcome to our House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Before we begin routine proceedings, the Chair wishes to

make a ruling with regard to a point of privilege raised by the Member for Bay

of Islands on November 29.

The role of the Speaker is limited to deciding whether or not the

circumstances outlined by the member meet the accepted parliamentary

definitions

of privilege. In other words, the Speaker must examine the matter raised by the

member in the context of parliamentary precedents, the Standing Orders of our

House, and in consultation with the House personnel he must determine if a prima

facia case of breach of privilege exists.

Many Speakers have ruled, both in this House and others, that a dispute

between two hon. members as to the allegation of facts does not fulfill the

conditions of parliamentary privilege. Members may wish to refer to Beauchesne,

6 th Edition, page 13, or to Marleau and Montpetit,

chapter 3.

While the Member for Bay of Islands may feel offended by comments made by the

Premier during Question Period on November 29, the Chair cannot find evidence in

the verbatim transcripts to meet the accepted criteria associated with a breach

of privilege. This may mean, as other Speakers have said, that the House may

have to accept two completely opposing viewpoints of the same incident.

Accordingly, the Speaker rules that the member has not established a prima facia

case for a breach of privilege.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have members' statements as follows: the

Member for the District of Windsor-Springdale, the Member for the District of

Exploits and Leader of the Opposition, the Member for the District of Placentia

& St. Mary's, the Member for the District of Port de Grave, the Member for

the District of Burin-Placentia West, and the Member for the District of

Labrador West.

The hon. the Member for the District of Windsor-Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise in this House today to

extend congratulations to Mrs. Gladys Osmond from the District of

Windsor-Springdale. Gladys was the proud recipient of the prestigious Governor

General's Caring Canadian Award this past Saturday.

The award was presented by His Honour, Lieutenant-Governor Ed Roberts, in the

presence of a small group of Mrs. Osmond's family and friends in Springdale.

The retired Salvation Army Officer received the award for her tremendous

commitment to peacekeepers and missionaries all over the world. For over twenty

years, Gladys has been writing uplifting letters to soldiers and missionaries at

a feverish pace of nearly 500 per month. Often accompanying these letters are

items such as cookies, jams, books and other small items.

Enlisting the assistance of the residents of Valley Vista Seniors Home,

Gladys helped found the group affectionately referred to as the "Granny

Brigade" to aid her in efforts to bring well wishes to those serving

overseas. In recent years, with the wide use of e-mail, Mrs. Osmond has

increased her correspondence to over 900 letters a month.

Mrs. Osmond feels rewarded for her efforts every time she checks her mail.

She has received a great many written replies to her letters, and hopes to have

them published in a book some day. She plans to donate the proceeds of this book

to military family resource centres.

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Osmond's dedication to those serving abroad is a

testament to her deep concern for the well-being of others. She provides a

shining example of the contribution our volunteers make to society.

I ask all members of this hon. House to join with me today in recognizing the

extraordinary efforts of this remarkable lady.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honour many of the volunteers who continue to

help keep the Town of Bishop's Falls safe, in the District of Exploits.

Mr. Speaker, this year, the Bishop's Falls Volunteer Fire Department

recently gathered for their forty-second annual Firemen's Ball. It was an

opportunity for many of the town's citizens, including its municipal council,

to honour the volunteer firefighters for another successful year of keeping its

citizens safe from the threat of fire, and for being ready just in case the

unthinkable happens.

Mayor Oliver Rose, on behalf of the town, was pleased to be on hand and

present the fire department with a cheque to cover most of next year's

expenses. Mayor Rose described the cheque as: the best bang for the buck that

the council could ever get.

Mr. Speaker, medals for long-term service were given out at this ceremony as

well. Mr. Wilf Carey, Mr. Ed Harnum, and Mr. Ernest Balsom were the recipients

of pins for thirty years of volunteer service. Firefighter Ed Osbourne was

honoured with the distinction of Firefighter of the Year, and Gary King received

the Officer of the Year Award.

As well, the fire department's children were also recognized at this

ceremony, as the town presented scholarships to three of the firefighters'

children: one in Level I, one in Level II and one in Level III. Scholarships

were provided to Kayla Rowsell, Christopher Green, and Reginald King. I

congratulate each of these students for winning these particular scholarships.

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

of these dedicated volunteers who volunteer day and night to keep their

community safe.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On Saturday, November 27, 2004, I had the pleasure of attending the annual

dinner and dance of the Placentia Volunteer Fire Department. It was a night of

great celebration following another very successful year of firefighting, fire

prevention and training. The twenty-nine men and one woman who make up the

department provide an invaluable service to the community and have reason to be

proud of a job well done.

I had the opportunity to present pins and certificates for thirty years of

service to Fire Chief Wayne Power, and Deputy Fire Chief Terry O'Keefe. It was

evident to see that these two men provide great leadership to the department and

have the respect of all the members. It was also apparent that training and

improving their skills is a priority, when several members were presented with

certificates for courses they successfully completed to reach their goals.

Once again, the Ladies Auxiliary were on hand to present the chief with

another important piece of equipment. This year it was a digital camera. This

Auxiliary has proven over the years to be a very important asset to the fire

department.

There was also another very special presentation made on Saturday night to

firefighters Terry O'Keefe, Val Careen and Vince Power. It was very deserving,

but long overdue. The firefighters were awarded with the Medal of Bravery for

their heroic efforts for their actions on the early morning of August 7, 1987,

when a fire broke out at a residence in Jerseyside. Before the fire department

arrived on the scene, three of those firefighters, without breathing apparatus

or protective clothing, used an old wooden ladder to rescue three people who

were trapped in a burning house. When the request went in to government in 1987

to have the awards presented to these three individuals, it was discovered that

the annual deadline for nominations had passed.

The years passed by, and earlier this year the president to the fire

department, Jim O'Keefe, took it upon himself to follow up on the original

request through the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Fire Chiefs and

Firefighters. Because of president Jim's persistence and determination, Terry,

Val and Vince finally received the recognition they deserved for this brave act

some seventeen years ago.

I ask all members of this House to join with me in congratulating the

Placentia Volunteer Fire Department on another successful year, and thank them

for their dedication and commitment to the residents of their community.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to congratulate an incredibly talented young man from the

District of Port de Grave, who has recently shown off his tremendous stage

presence to the entire country.

Mr. Speaker, the people of Upper Island Cove have known for years that Jason

Greeley had what it takes to be a star, and this past summer Jason had the

opportunity to show off his skills to the entire country with his passion in the

incredibly popular television show, Canadian Idol.

Night after night, Canadians from Petty Harbour to Victoria, B.C., had the

opportunity to turn on their TVs and watch this tremendous show. Legions of

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and indeed Canadians from coast to coast,

dialed in every night that Jason preformed, to show their support for this

talented young performer. Mr. Speaker, Jason was so successful that he made it

to the final four of this Canada-wide competition, not an easy task.

I had the opportunity on Jason's return home to join with him and over 500

people in a special performance in his hometown of Upper Island Cove. This

summer, all will have the opportunity to watch Jason and the other three

finalists of Canadian Idol at the Klondyke Day Festival in Bay Roberts - and the

tickets are on sale now. Mr. Speaker, we are sure that Jason's performance

will be incredible, and we can't wait to see him perform.

I ask all members to join me in extending a sincere congratulations to

Newfoundland and Labrador's Idol, Mr. Jason Greeley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise in this

House and bring praises to two young women in the District of Burin-Placentia

West: Ms Desiree Leonard of Petite Forte and Ms Erin Glavine of Marystown.

Desiree and Erin were recently named to Memorial University's Deans list for

the 2003-2004 academic school year.

Ms Leonard, who is completing her Bachelor of Arts degree, graduated from

Christ the King School in Rushoon. Her parents are Paula and Frank Leonard. Ms

Glavine is presently completing an Honours degree in Archeology and is a

graduate of Marystown Central High. Her parents are Kevin and Susanna Glavine.

I would ask all members to join me in passing along to both of these young

women our sincerest congratulations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is with great pleasure I rise today to congratulate the Mark Nichols Rink

on winning the 2004 Canadian Mixed Curling Championship by defeating

Saskatchewan 7-5 in the championship game. This is the first time a rink from

our Province has won the National Mixed Curling Tournament.

The Nichols rink consists of Mark, his sister Shelley, Brent Hamilton and

Jennifer Guzzwell.

Mr. Speaker, both Mark and Shelley were born and raised in Labrador City, and

I am sure I speak for the Carol Curling Club and all residents of Labrador West

when I say how proud we are of them and their achievements.

Mark, of course, was also a member of the Brad Gushue Rink who won both the

provincial, the Canadian Championship, and went on to win the World Junior Men's

Championship in 2001. By the way, Mr. Speaker, 50 per cent of that team was also

from Labrador West.

Shelley has also enjoyed success as a member of the Provincial Women's

Junior Team who, in 2002, won the right to represent the Province at the

Nationals, where they won a silver medal, and later on that year Shelley also

played with Team Canada in the World Junior Women's Tournament.

Mr. Speaker, both Shelley and Mark have aspirations of playing in the Olympic

Games, and with their dedication and success to date there is little doubt in my

mind that they will achieve their goal.

Both Mark and Shelley are continuing their studies here in St. John's.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members to join me in congratulating the Nichols Rink

and wishing all of them continued success in their future endeavours.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Before we move to Statements by Ministers, it has been

brought to my attention, by a note that I just received, that Mr. Todd Russell,

President of the Labrador Metis Nation, is also in the gallery today, and we

wish to welcome him to our Chamber as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as members of this House are aware, the government intends to

introduce legislation in this session to ratify the Labrador Inuit Land Claims

Agreement. Passage of this Bill would be one more step towards the

implementation of this Agreement. Concerns have been expressed by the President

of the Labrador M tis

Nation that this Agreement may have a negative impact on his membership. I wish

to take this opportunity to speak to these concerns.

This Land Claims Agreement exchanges the asserted but undefined aboriginal

rights that may be held by Labrador Inuit for defined treaty rights in the

Labrador Inuit settlement area. This Agreement was negotiated in good faith by

the Governments of Canada and Newfoundland and Labrador, and the Inuit of

Labrador as represented by the Labrador Inuit Association. It was ratified by 76

per cent of eligible Inuit voters.

Mr. Speaker, the criteria to qualify as a beneficiary under this agreement is

extremely broad, and includes many people of Inuit descent who live outside the

settlement area, including anyone with 25 per cent Inuit ancestry. Those living

outside the settlement area enjoy many of the benefits of those inside, from

hiring preference at Voisey's Bay to access to federal programs such as

Non-Insured Health Services and Post-Secondary Education Funding.

The Agreement provides the standard protections for other Aboriginal groups

that are contained in other comprehensive land claims agreements in Canada. It

states, "Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to affect, recognize

or provide any rights under

section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 for any

Aboriginal peoples of Canada other than Inuit." Furthermore, Mr. Speaker,

the agreement provides for a requirement that it be amended if a court of last

resort ever determines that it affects the

section 35 rights of any other

Aboriginal peoples of Canada.

Mr. Speaker, if the LMN is able to demonstrate the people it represents form

a different society of Inuit than that covered by the LIA Agreement, it may be

able to have its own claim accepted, should it meet the accepted test for

comprehensive claims in Canada. The acceptance or rejection of the LMN land

claim is a decision for the federal government to make. The LMN has been assured

by the federal government that it will assess this claim on this basis.

LMN leadership was briefed on the well-publicized Inuit ratification process,

and negotiators for the three parties to the Inuit Agreement met with the LMN to

respond to their questions about the implications of the agreement. Each party

has also provided written responses to the LMN's questions. All three parties

have attempted to assure the LMN that, should it demonstrate it represents a

different society of Inuit, its members will be unaffected by the LIA Agreement.

Mr. Speaker, where there are competing interests in our society that cannot

reach agreement on their own, they have the option of seeking the guidance of a

court. Members of the LMN have chosen this course of action, and that is their

right. Nevertheless, we maintain that the bill in and of itself cannot cause any

harm to anyone as the agreement cannot come into effect until after it passes

through the Parliament of Canada, as well as this Legislature.

I want to assure members of this House and members of the LMN that, should

the federal government accept the LMN land claim, and subject to our own

independent assessment to ensure it meets the established criteria, the Province

will join with the federal government in settling that claim. If the LMN land

claim is accepted, and overlaps with the Labrador Inuit Settlement Area, then

the LIA and the LMN could negotiate an overlap agreement as the LIA is doing

with the Innu Nation in Labrador and the Nunavik Inuit of Quebec.

Mr. Speaker, in addition, any person who meets the eligibility criteria may

become a beneficiary of the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement, irrespective

of whether they participated in the Inuit ratification vote. Rather than having

a negative effect on LMN members, this agreement, through its protection for

other groups, demonstrating

section 35 rights and broad eligibility criteria,

provides added choice for those seeking access to federal Aboriginal programs

and services.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advanced copy of his statement. Certainly, Mr.

Speaker, I can tell this House that it is going to be a great day when we ratify

the Labrador Inuit Association Land Claims Agreement. When we look at the past

record of the plight of the Aboriginal people, the Inuit on the North Coast of

Labrador, then I think we would all agree that it is going to be a great day

when they can start taking shape and self-government to work out a lot of the

problems that they need to play first hand.

Just as important, Mr. Speaker, I am very encouraged today in the minister's

Ministerial Statement to know that they have now opened the doors to the

Labrador Metis Nation. I am sure all four members from Labrador who sit in this

House today are encouraged to hear this and I look forward to, as an Aboriginal

person, the federal government accepting the Metis claim. Certainly, I would ask

the minister to call upon the federal government to act upon the Metis'

request in a fast and true manner.

Again, Mr. Speaker, as an Aboriginal person I would like to say to the

President of the Labrador Metis Nation, that today this is good news for him and

his people, that should the federal government accept their claim, the

government of the day will then negotiate a land claims deal with the Metis

Nation, the same as they did with the Labrador Innu Association. I am sure that

the Labrador Inuit Association will work out an overlap claim with the Metis

Nation the same as they have done with the Innu of Labrador and the Inuit of

Northern Quebec.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, am very pleased that the agreement has been reached with the Labrador

Inuit Land Claims Agreement, and that we will take further steps in this session

of the House to see that become a part of our constitutional law. But, I will

say, Mr. Speaker, on the issue the minister raised, that there is a good faith

concern raised by the Labrador Metis Nation with respect to their concerns about

the implications. We must remember that it was this government, prior to the

last election, at least the Premier, wrote a letter indicating that they would

in fact recognize the LMN and changed their minds within several weeks of

receiving office. So, they do have cause to be concerned.

The serious good faith concerns are supported by an analysis of the agreement

done by a University of Ottawa law professor who concluded that the LMN has good

reason to be concerned about the implications of a Labrador Inuit Land Claims

Agreement. I will say, Mr. Speaker, that that opinion is now being studied by

the Department of Justice as we speak. We have concerns expressed by this

professor saying that the clarification -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's allotted time has expired.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The member has leave.

MR. HARRIS: (Inaudible) an important issue.

He suggests that clarification, at the very least, is needed and crystal

clear assurance that there will be no implications for any claim or potential

claims of the LMN. I would hope that the minister will be able to be crystal

clear about this, that not only government would stipulate that the agreement

with the LIA does not affect any claim or potential claim of Aboriginal rights

put forth by the LMN, which I think the minister has done today, but, also, that

the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador will not use the Labrador Inuit Land

Claim Agreement or its provisions to defeat any claim or potential claim of the

Labrador Metis Nation.

I think, Mr. Speaker, that those kinds of assurances, on the record, either

at some point in this House or at the time that the legislation is brought

forward, would go a long way in providing some reassurance to a group who,

understandably - as a result of their experience around the time of this

government taking office - need to have crystal clear assurances with what is

happening with respect to the Labrador Inuit Land Claim Agreement, which I fully

support, Mr. Speaker. I think it is a terrific step forward for the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador and obviously for the Aboriginal people, particularly

the Inuit, that this going to happen, but I think we also have to be very clear

that the Labrador Metis Nation, who for many years sought recognition, are going

to be protected as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Further Statements by Ministers.

The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to inform my colleagues about the release of CareerSearch 2004.

This publication provides parents, students, policymakers and program

administrators with followup information on students who graduated from our

post-secondary institutions in the year 2002.

Mr. Speaker, this government is committed to a strong post-secondary

education system that will enable graduates to succeed in the labour market and

continue to contribute to the social and economic development of our Province.

CareerSearch provides current information, on the job prospects, salaries and

debt levels of recent graduates. Knowing these, the labour market outcome of

programs allows students to make informed choices regarding their career

planning goals and post-secondary study.

This report is based on the results of a telephone survey of graduates of

2002, approximately one year following their graduation. Nearly 7,600 students

graduated at that time and approximately 66 per cent responded to this survey.

Mr. Speaker, as Minister of Education, I strongly support initiatives that

ensure accountability for our post-secondary programs. CareerSearch helps ensure

that the institutions are accountable for the programs they offer.

CareerSearch shows that graduates in general are finding employment in the

labour market. Approximately 75 per cent of graduates from most programs found

their first full-time job prior to graduation and within three months of

graduating.

I am pleased to report that more of our post-secondary graduates are choosing

to remain in the Province after graduation. This is great news for our economy

and for our future. Out-migration of MUN undergraduates has dropped

significantly from 28 per cent of graduates of 2000 to 22 per cent of graduates

from 2002. Similarly, the out-migration of college graduates has fallen from 20

per cent to 14 per cent.

Graduates of programs, such as Memorial Master's programs, three-year

College of the North Atlantic programs and journeyperson trades indicate very

high labour market results in terms of full-time employment. The employment

rates for nursing school graduates and Marine Institute diploma graduates are

also quite good. Similarly, graduates from Memorial master's programs,

three-year college programs and journeyperson trades indicate high labour market

results in terms of wages. The wages reported by the nursing school graduates

and Marine diploma graduates are also significant.

Mr. Speaker, it is important that this information is available to all those

considering post-secondary studies. Copies of the report will be distributed to

all school district offices, high schools, HRLE and HRSDC offices in the

Province. In addition, an on-line searchable database version of CareerSearch

available through the Department of Education Web site.

Mr. Speaker, we know that the publication of CareerSearch is essential to

effective career planning, as well as improving the system's responsiveness to

the needs of students and the labour market. I encourage all stakeholders make

use of this valuable resource.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to say thank you to the Minister of Education for sending over

an advanced copy of his first ministerial statement, and I want to thank him

also for acknowledging the good work of the previous Liberal Administration.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you very much.

This report is about the graduates of -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MS THISTLE: Can I have some quietness here, Mr. Speaker? They do not want

to hear what I have to say.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Members know that the hon. member replying has limited time. I ask all

members to be co-operative.

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

One of the statements that the Minister of Education said: I strongly support

initiatives that ensure accountability for our post-secondary programs. Does

that mean you are going to increase tuition? Is that what you are talking about?

Then he said: I am pleased to report that more of our post-secondary graduates

are choosing to remain in the Province.

Well, the first thing that this government did after they got elected was

come to this Legislature and cancel the initiative that we put forward so people

who were deciding to work in our Province and pay on their student loans had an

income tax break. That was their first piece of business in this Legislature, to

cancel that initiative. Now, it says out-migration of MUN -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, Oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS THISTLE: Listen, they cannot take the truth.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, the Chair asks all hon. members for their co-operation.

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans, a few moments to conclude.

MS THISTLE: Thank you.

The next statement he makes: Out-migration of MUN undergraduates has dropped

significantly. Here the Minister of Finance got up during Budget time and was

predicting out-migration and he was doing that because they cut 6,000 jobs in

our public service. Now, if we are going to have people working in our Province,

that says -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

MS THISTLE: By leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member has asked for leave. Does the member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been denied.

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think we have to recognize that the trends indicated in the minister's

statement are, indeed, positive. We have seen an increase in student enrollment

in the public system, a 7 per cent increase in Memorial University, for example,

despite a decline in the K to 12 population. What it proved, Mr. Speaker, is

that we are on the right track in reducing overall student debt, down nearly 10

per cent in the public system. By the way, I include the journeyperson trades

program in the public system because they are not for profit. But we still have

higher than national average of debt loads, approximately $5,000 higher, so we

have to reduce debt, we have to lower tuition and we have to reject the

suggestion by the Board of Regents of Memorial, that we lift their freeze on

tuition at Memorial University so that we can continue to ensure that students

of this Province have access to quality low-cost higher education in the public

system.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers.

The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sure my friend from Labrador West will not mind if I add to his remarks

regarding his statement today.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate the Mark Nichols

rink of St. John's on becoming the Province's first Canadian mixed curling

champions at the 2005 Canadian Mixed Curling Championship in Prince Albert,

Saskatchewan on Sunday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, team members Mark Nichols, his sister Shelley

Nichols, Brent Hamilton and Jennifer Guzzwell arrived in St. John's last night

to many fans and supporters.

Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time that the twenty-five year old from

Labrador City - and I know the member is very proud of - Mark Nichols has been

part of a championship team. As a matter of fact, both Mark and Brent Hamilton

were member of the Brad Gushue men's rink which won the 2001 national and

world junior championships. In fact, all team members have achieved success on

the national scene. Jennifer Guzzwell and Shelley Nichols were also silver medal

winners at the 2002 Canadian Junior Curling Championships.

Mr. Speaker, this recent success demonstrates, yet again, the incredible

talent we have in our Province, particularly in the sport of curling. This is

the second national curling title for this Province this year. As hon. members

will recall, the Bas Buckle rink from Corner Brook won the Canadian Senior's

title last season and went on to win the world championships.

As we prepare to host the 2005 Scott Tournament of Hearts in St. John's

this year, in February, I am sure we will see some of this incredible talent

first-hand. I am also hopeful that the Newfoundland and Labrador contingent will

be successful in their quest to capture the Scott Championships.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join me in extending congratulations

to Mark Nichols, Shelley Nichols, Brent Hamilton and Jennifer Guzzwell on

winning the 2005 Canadian Mixed Curling Championships.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advanced copy and I thank the Member for Labrador

West for bringing to the House's attention of this remarkable feat again.

I had the privilege, back in 2001 when they won the National World Junior

Championships, to accompany Mark and the other four or five people to Labrador

City for the homecoming; when they came back from the world's I represented

the government. It was a great feat.

What amazed me more about the four or five young fellows back in 2001, and

the coaches, was the humility; how good they felt but yet they were just

ordinary people going back to university. You knew from the sense of their work

ethic that they were going to do well and continue to do well because winning

the world juniors was not good enough, they wanted to keep going. So, I

congratulate all four.

I noticed one of the commentators - I am not sure which sports channel it was

- he said it must be a close-knit group because you have a brother and sister on

the same team getting along. They made notice of that. This national victory, I

say to the minister - and I know the minister is always involved in sports and I

know he is a big advocate of sports - bodes well for the feeder system in

Newfoundland and Labrador to give the confidence to all Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians that we can compete on the national level. These four young

individuals have shown again that, yes, we can compete. All we need is the

opportunity, with all the assistance that we can, and we will compete on the

national level.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday, the Minister of Health and Community Services stood in this

Legislature and stated that the provincial government could not make any new

investments with the increased health care funding from Ottawa because it may

not be given to the Province this year.

We have contacted the federal government, who have confirmed that upwards of

$40 million of new health funding has already been approved and earmarked for

the Province in this fiscal year, before the end of March.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Finance: Now that it has been confirmed

that the government will definitely receive this new health care funding in this

fiscal year, will he, on behalf of the government, be investing all of this new

money for its intended purpose of improving health care services in Newfoundland

and Labrador, as the Premier committed, in writing, at the nationally televised

health summit?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First, I want to indicate that there is no authority to spend money until a

bill has been drafted and passed in the federal House of Commons. Then it will

be transferred. We have been informed that we cannot spend money we have not

received.

While there might be a verbal commitment to do it, there is no legislative

authority to do it. We are used to complying with the Financial Administration

Act on this side of the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind members that during interruptions like we are having now, the clock

still ticks. Therefore, I ask members for this co-operation. We have limited

time.

The Chair recognizes the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, at the rate of expenditure in health care, I

think it would be safe to say that any money committed here, in all probability,

will all be spent, and maybe more besides. In fact, this year the boards are

currently incurring about $28 million more in expenditure than were budgeted

this year. In other words, we have already spent - even in this year, even

without any allocation of money - significant amounts of money.

We are going to move to meet the objectives that the Minister of Health said,

in dealing with the priorities established by the Premier. We will live up to

those commitments and make sure they are fulfilled.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, again, maybe the Finance Minister might check with the Premier

who announced the VON funding in Corner Brook as a result of the new health care

Mr. Speaker, again, I might ask the Minister of Finance, perhaps he himself

and his officials could check in other provinces. The Province of Saskatchewan,

as he knows, has already started to spend this new money - and I am sure they

are not breaking any laws in Saskatchewan - and have amended their budget. They

have amended their budget in the Legislature to reflect this new source of

income.

Mr. Speaker, again I ask the Minister of Finance: If other provinces in

Canada are already making investments with this new health care funding, why is

this minister and this government trying so hard to deny the fact that this

money will definitely be received in this fiscal year and is available to be

spent in this fiscal year starting two months ago?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Leader of the Opposition is getting a little carried away with the

process. The day before the minister in Saskatchewan went to the House to have a

fiscal update and a mini-budget, he called me and I spoke with him. That was

over two weeks ago. He informed me that he is dealing this year with a $900

million surplus.

I might tell the Leader of the Opposition that a significant amount of that

has come from oil revenue, but $583 million has come because of the new

equalization, the double floor that was given to Saskatchewan this year and was

agreed to back in September. They have a $900 million surplus, and they felt

that with such a significant surplus of public money it is only fair to come to

the House in Saskatchewan and deal with the specifics of this new-found wealth

they have.

I am not going to speak for the legislative process in another province. I

was elected here as a member of this Legislature, and I am Finance Minister in

this Province, not in any other province in this country.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sure he can rest assured he would not get elected anywhere else in the

country. He need not worry about it. He probably will not get elected any other

time here either.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Leader of the Opposition now to get to his question.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is important to note, that in Saskatchewan there is a

specific plan - Mr. Speaker, I know the members of the Opposition do not want to

hear this. There is a specific plan -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, the Speaker is asking members for their co-operation and I ask the

Leader of the Opposition now to get directly to his question.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I know the members opposite do not want to hear this, but there is a

definitive plan in Saskatchewan for $66 million of new health care funding, just

like there is in the range of $40 million right here.

Mr. Speaker, the last question is this; the federal government has confirmed

that not only is the health care funding available but there is an extra $121

million that the Finance Minister has this year from health care funding and

equalization changes, and that will become $237 million next year again. When

can we expect an honest, fiscal update and a revised or amended budget to find

out what this government's plan is for the extra $121 million that he already

has in his hip pocket?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Leader of the Opposition should know, he served as Premier of this

Province, that in this fiscal year the increased equalization that was put at

$10 billion this year - why we would receive an equalization. There is an

equivalent clawback. The Atlantic Accord was giving us that protection anyway

and a new pot of money this year in equalization on this year's entitlement

does not give us any money in that regard, because the Atlantic Accord

protection gave us that. If you want me to explain, there are certain

protections in the Atlantic Accord whereby -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, he does not want to hear an explanation. I

will state the fact and I will not give him an explanation why it is so, but I

will state, in case he does not follow it, and I will indicate that there is -

based on the extra equalization in the pot this year, we had that protection

under the Atlantic Accord. We will not get any benefit, but we will get a

benefit of $34.4 million, not counting any adjustments on population - $34.4

million for health care - and when we do get that money, Mr. Speaker, we will do

exactly as the minister and the Premier of this Province were committed to do,

we will improve the health care of people here in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: The people in the community of Lawn on the Burin Peninsula are

in shock today with the news that a recent analysis of their water, by Jacques

Whitford, show that there is E-coli in their drinking water. The town learned

the news after getting an analysis done on November 18, because the community

has been on a boil order for seventeen months and there were concerns about

children using the water to brush their teeth. The analysis was immediately made

available to the Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs and up to today,

eleven days later, no one from the department has been in touch with the town.

I ask the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, are you aware of this

report and how do you plan to deal with this most serious situation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious issue. Just one quick correction, there

has been someone in contact with the Town of Lawn; the Deputy Minister and

people within the department. Mr. Speaker, as we speak there are approximately

280 boil up water advisories in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador

impacting some 197 communities. These boil water advisories are required when

water supplies are not being treated and/or if their water treatment facility is

not operating properly. As we speak, Mr. Speaker, I have had basically a meeting

with the town council in Lawn back in January to discuss this issue and other

issues. We have asked them to put a financial plan in order. To correct the

problem -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Let me finish now, you have to hear the facts - $328,000 to

correct the problem there in Lawn. We have offered to pay upwards to 70 per cent

of that to correct the problem in Lawn with respect to the water supply.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now if he could complete the answer, quickly.

MR. J. BYRNE: As we speak, we have someone en route to the Town of Lawn

to meet with the town council to address, in the immediate future, to try to

come to some quick solution, Mr. Speaker, with the intent of coming with a

long-term plan to correct a long-term problem.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: I thank the minister for that because I think he recognizes

that this is a serious situation. It is not about dollars and cents, this is

about life and death. This is E-coli in the drinking water and we all remember

what happened in Ontario. So, I thank him for that.

Before being forced to pay approximately $700 for this analysis, the town

contacted the Department of Government Services and lands and requested the

government to do the analysis only to be told that the government does not carry

out testing on water that is not chlorinated. In other words, the government

ignored the towns concern and refused to do the necessary testing.

I ask the Minister of Government Services and lands if it is the policy of

the government not to test water systems that are not chlorinated, even if asked

to do so by a municipality that has been on a boil order for an extended period

of time?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

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

I am dealing with the issue, Mr. Speaker. That is why I feel I should answer

the question.

Once a boil water advisory is put in place in any given town within the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, the Department of Government Services and

lands does not do water testing on that until such time that the town does

something to upgrade the system, to improve the system or to correct the

problem. That is the policy that they had on that side of the House and we have

continued on with that.

In the meantime, as I said, I met with the town back in January on this issue

and others. We are prepared to put in 70 per cent of $328,000 to correct the

problem. The coliform count in the water in Lawn, at this point in time, is

normal for water that is not being treated, although it is not acceptable. There

should be zero tolerance, we acknowledge that, but there is a boil water

advisory on. The people know this and should be advised to continue on with the

boil water advisory within the Town of Lawn. In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, as

soon as we can get together with the Town of Lawn and come up with a solution,

with respect to the financial problems in the Town of Lawn, we will correct the

problem, but the boil water advisory is still on.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if the minister understands that we

are talking about E-coli here and it is not something that you do not take

seriously. Eleven days ago - you have the report, November 18. It is now eleven

days later and you are telling me you have sent someone down there today and you

trying to deal with it as quickly as possible. But what happened eleven days

ago?

The point is that if you look at the report prepared by Jacques Whitford, it

says here: No sample should contain E-coli. Also, it says: Corrective actions

need to be taken immediately. That is eleven days ago on November 18, minister,

that your department knew and failed to take action immediately, and it is E-coli

we are talking about here. Now, the reason there is no chlorine in the water in

Lawn is because the existing system is broken and beyond repair. The town, which

has one of the highest mil rates of any community in the Province, has been in

touch with your department.

I am asking the minister if he would commit today to finance a system for

Lawn that would make it possible for them to put chlorine in their drinking

water, at least as a first step towards ratifying this serious problem in one of

our rural communities?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Maybe the member has not been listening, but I have already told the hon.

member in this House, minutes ago, that we have someone en route to Lawn now to

do a short-term solution to it. I have already spoken to her and told her that

the $328,000 - we are prepared to correct the problem long-term for the Town of

Lawn and put in 70 per cent. I should also mention that in 1999 the Town of Lawn

received $220,000 in debt retirement to put a plan in place -

MS FOOTE: You are talking about (inaudible) in the water.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: Well, what do you want me to do? Mr. Speaker, the town -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The question has been asked and the minister is attempting to make the

response. I ask the minister, though, if he would complete his answer rather

quickly.

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

Mr. Speaker, we are addressing the concerns of the Town of Lawn. Not only

that, but the member should also be aware that there are 280 Boil Water

Advisories in this Province. E.coli - the count that Jacques Whitford came up

with is normal for water that is not being treated. The boil water advisory is

on, we are going to do the long term. You are asking us to come up with money. I

have already told you we are going to give you $328,000 to correct the problem,

so, therefore, Mr. Speaker, it is being addressed as we speak.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in the coming days the Province will be in a position to sign a

very historic land claims agreement with the Labrador Inuit Nation. This

agreement has been a long time in the making and is a very positive step for the

Aboriginal people of our Province. While we fully support a land claim for the

LIA, we have been approached by members of the M tis

Nation who are concerned about the potential adverse impact this agreement could

have on future negotiations involving their group.

Today the Minister of Transportation, Works and Aboriginal Affairs stated in

his ministerial statement, and I quote, "If the LMN is able to demonstrate

the people it represents form a different society of Inuit than that covered by

the LIA Agreement, it may be able to have its claim accepted."

I now ask the Minister of Justice: Will the terms of the LIA Agreement have

any negative future impact on the M tis

Nation in determining if M tis

people of Labrador indeed have a legitimate claim?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for her question.

As I indicated in the ministerial statement in the House today, as I have

indicated in meetings going back over several months with members of the LMN, as

LIA have indicated on many occasions verbally and in writing, it is the opinion

that we have been presented with by Justice officials, that the Government of

Canada has received from their advisors, and the LIA has received from their

advisors, there is no negative impact on the people represented by the Labrador

M tis

Nation.

The safeguards in this legislation that we are going to deal with here next

week are the same safeguards that are in every other Aboriginal land claims

agreement that has been negotiated across the country. In addition to that, Mr.

Speaker, there is a provision in the agreement that, should a court decide that

some future Aboriginal group have been negatively impacted then the agreement

must be amended.

Mr. Speaker, I think that is pretty clear.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse

au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the government that negotiated LIA Land Claims, we always assumed that

there would be no negative impact on any present or future land claims for any

other Aboriginal groups in Labrador. I ask the minister if he can confirm that

the current government is also operating under that same assumption, and also

give assurances today to the Labrador Metis Nation that the LIA Land Claims

Agreement, under

section 35 of the Constitution Act of 1982, will not negatively

impact any other present or future land claim in the Labrador area?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, I can confirm that I understand from briefings when we became the

government, that was the understanding under which the previous Administration

operated and signed off on this agreement in good faith. It is certainly the

understanding that we have of the present situation, that the LIA Agreement will

not negatively impact any other potential Aboriginal land claim in Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Health and Community Services, and it

concerns the provincial dental health program.

I want to ask the minister: Given the fact that this program is of utmost

importance to children in our Province, and the rates that government pay to

have procedures carried out is well below the fee

schedule for dentists

practicing in the Province, and families are required to pay the difference, and

the program funding is $2.7 million below what it was in the 1970s and 1980s, I

say to the minister, more than 15 per cent of children in our Province are going

without adequate dental care simply because their parents cannot afford to pay

the difference in cost. When will the minister commit to making funding

available to ensure that children who most need a free dental health care

program will have access to such a program?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member raises, obviously, a very important issue. When we talk about

the continuum of health care, it includes, for example, physical health, mental

health, and I think with respect to the particular question also should include

dental health.

The member is right, that in 1992, for example, there was in excess of some

$7 million spent on this. It was subsequently reduced shortly thereafter to

approximately $5 million. The point, however, is well taken. It is an issue that

this government will take seriously. As we go through our review of programming

with respect to what is in the interest not only of all Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians, but in this particular case the young children of Newfoundland and

Labrador, the issue of dental health as part of the overall wellness strategy is

something that this government will take very seriously.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Governments in the past have argued that the money allocated to that program

right now is not being spent, and that there is a surplus. I want to ask the

minister if he agrees that the reason the money is not being spent right now is

because the portion that is there as a subsidy, if you want, under the program,

the reason that is probably not being spent is because parents are not in a

position to access that money because they are required to pay the bigger bulk

of the (inaudible)?

I want to ask if the minister agrees with that statement, and if he will

guarantee the people of the Province that not only will this problem be studied,

but will there, in fact, be definite action taken on the dental program in the

Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is no question, I say to the hon. member, there are some discrepancies

that exist within the plan, but I think the problems that exist today result

from the fact that there was significant funding some twelve or fourteen years

ago, and that has now been reduced. That has led to an imbalance, and has led to

a situation that both dentists and the public, obviously, have some difficulty

with.

To repeat, Mr. Speaker, we do take this situation seriously. It is a serious

part of our program review. Again, as we continue along with the wellness

strategy of this government, that takes into account the full continuum of

health care - physical, mental and dental - we will look at this seriously as we

prepare and decide what programs will move forward in the next several months.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Education.

Yesterday, the Minister of Education said he planned to look at quality of

programming, affordability and accessability of post-secondary education, and

that he planned to deliver - he said. Yet, his first public statement indicated

that campus closures at the College of the North Atlantic are a real

possibility.

Can he confirm that several campuses are on the chopping block, and that the

Department of Transportation and Works have already made preliminary plans for

2005 to begin mothballing campuses? I am asking the minister: Is that what you

plan to deliver, Mr. Minister?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I will just reiterate -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I will just reiterate the commitment that I

made yesterday to this House, that this government is certainly looking at

post-secondary education but in a positive light. We guarantee that what

decisions we make concerning the post-secondary education system will be done in

a very informed manner, and that we are moving forward in a very positive way.

Once again, I reiterate that we will be looking at quality, we will be looking

will deliver.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

All I can gather from that ramble is that he admits that campuses are

closing.

Mr. Speaker, the Tory gospel, the Blue Book -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member knows from past experience that she should not hold up displays at

any time in the House, and I ask her to refrain from that particular usage.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will try to abide with that. That is not really a prop; that is the gospel.

The Blue Book promise -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has ruled that what the member is holding is a display. I ask her

to accept that ruling and not to comment on it whatsoever, and I ask her to

complete her question immediately.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will abide by your ruling.

Anyway, this minister and this government promised to maintain the tuition

freeze at Memorial University and the College of the North Atlantic, and

students have heard from the University Senate that they are going to have

increases that could be anywhere from 60 per cent to 85 per cent. Yesterday, the

minister would not commit to his government's own Blue Book policy.

I will ask you again, Mr. Minister: Are you going to maintain the tuition

freeze, as you promised, regardless of the White Paper outcome, yes or no?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, when we go back to the commitment that this

government made during the election campaign, through our Blue Book, we made a

commitment, and a serious commitment, that we would institute a White Paper

process that would look at the post-secondary, public post-secondary education.

That process is ongoing right now. I am not jumping out ahead of that

process, and I ask that the stakeholders out there bear with us as well, as we

go through a process that is going to lead us down the road to a public

post-secondary education system that is second to none in this nation, and

leading us down a road for not next year but the next five and ten and beyond, I

say to the hon. member.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: That sounds like a Rambo II statement, a rerun.

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that this government has no commitment to

affordable post-secondary education. I ask the minister this question, this very

important question: Are you going to cut public college funding and force

students into expensive private colleges, like you did with the Business

Administration program in the Carbonear Campus? Will other students -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask members to my left for their co-operation.

The Chair recognizes the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Education

this very important question: Will he force other students to take

$12,000-a-year courses at private colleges to replace the publicly-funded

$1,200-a-year program? Is this what you call affordable education?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I say again, for at least the fourth time, to

the hon. member on the other side, there is a process that this government has

put in place. We have over 100 consultation papers that are in our possession

right now. There are over 100 written briefs, thirty consultations, that we have

checked, and we have gone out and we have also done the research that is

necessary for us to make informed decisions, not to listen to rumours and

innuendo from across the House here, because obviously they are just grabbing it

out of the air, I say to you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, that was three questions the minister did not answer. Maybe I

will have more luck. My questions are also for the Minister of Education.

Mr. Speaker, it has come to our attention that in School District # 3, that

is the Corner Brook area, that the board, in an attempt to save money for this

government, has adopted an airline business model for the busing of our school

children. This model involves having fewer seats than students on particular bus

routes, while hoping that on any particular day a percentage of the students

will not show up.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Are you prepared to jeopardize student

safety by overcrowding buses simply to save money?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: I certainly would have to say to that, unequivocally, no.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allocated for Oral Questions has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

If the Chair is not going to be recognized, the Chair will recess the House.

Thank you very much.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today I table the Public Accounts for the Province for the Fiscal Year Ending

March 31, 2004.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Further reports.

The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, the Public Accounts Committee of the Forty-Fourth

General Assembly had not finished their deliberations when the House dissolved

before the last General Election. The Committee therefore recommend that the

House refer the evidence adduced before their predecessor during the Fourth and

Fifth Session of the Forty-Fourth General Assembly be referred to the current

Committee.

MR. SPEAKER: Presenting further reports?

In accordance with the Auditor General's Act, I have the honour, on behalf

of the Auditor General, John L. Noseworthy, to table the Report on the Audit and

Financial Statements for the Province for the Year Ending 31 March 2004.

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

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

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

I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Internal Economy Commission Act. (Bill 56)

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motions?

The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave

to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Public Tender Act. (Bill 53)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motions?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise again to present a petition on behalf of the people in Labrador, in

particular the youth. Today, Mr. Speaker, I present a petition on behalf of the

people in Nain.

Again, Mr. Speaker, as I have done so many times in this House, I present a

petition calling on this government to build an auditorium in the Upper Lake

Melville area.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask members for their co-operation. The Member for Torngat Mountains is

presenting a petition on behalf of his constituents, and I ask members on both

sides of the House to give the hon. member the attention that his people and his

petitioners deserve.

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess many of the children in Labrador who are watching today probably have

a better understanding now as to why they are not being heard.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very important petition. The children in Labrador, and

everyone in Labrador, deserve an auditorium in the Upper Lake Melville area. Mr.

Speaker, it is crucial to the students in Labrador and to all the people who

live there. Students and people in every other part of this Province have the

opportunity of a facility that they can go to, to attend plays and festivals.

Mr. Speaker, it is totally wrong for the people in Labrador who travel to the

Upper Lake Melville area on a regular basis to perform their skills and to work

for their communities.

Mr. Speaker, the auditorium is crucial to the existence and the well-being

and the health of all people in Labrador. The youth in Labrador have been

denied. They have been denied the right to participate the way that other

students do, by having an auditorium to go to.

Mr. Speaker, I was proud to be a member of government and I was honoured to

be the Cabinet Minister who went before Cabinet and got my government to allot

$2.4 million to build the auditorium. I know that the government of the day

talks of coming under big financial restraint when they took over but, Mr.

Speaker, the importance of the auditorium for the people in Labrador, in

particular the children, that I would ask all members on the other side and

those who sit in Cabinet, the Minister of Tourism and Culture, the minister who

handles the file of Aboriginal Affairs, the minister who handles the part on

Labrador Affairs, the Department of Education, and most of all, the Premier.

Mr. Speaker, I know that the Member for Lake Melville is pushing this as

well, and I fully support him because this is not politics. This is about

providing a facility to the children in Labrador which they so rightfully

deserve. On behalf of the children in Labrador, I call upon this government to

do the honourable thing. Do this before December, before the old year runs out.

Give them some hope for the new year, knowing that there will be an auditorium

built in the Upper Lake Melville area, built just for them by this government.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of people in the new Labrador

health board area. This petition is asking the government to - in moving forward

with health care delivery in that region, it is also asking them to pay down an

accumulated debt that the boards have incurred over a period of the last few

years.

Mr. Speaker, that debt, as I understand it, is to the amount of about $14

million in that board area alone. I do not have to explain, I am sure, to many

people the dynamics and the geographic challenges to providing health care in

this region of the Province. When you look at all of the Labrador region, which

spans from L'Anse au Clair and the Quebec border to Labrador City in the west,

to Nain in the north. It encompasses a great deal of rural, isolated communities

in this particular region and also takes in a great portion of the Northern

Peninsula, as well. A number of rural areas, rural communities in that region to

comprise what would be considered, I am sure, geographically and from a

demographic perspective, one of the most challenging board areas in the Province

when it comes to the delivery of health care.

Now, Mr. Speaker, this board has an accumulated debt, and as we heard here in

the House of Assembly today, that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador

this year alone will receive an additional $121 million in transfers from the

federal government to top up its budget. Also, looking at the fact that they

will receive $237 million next year in their budget to top up their amounts in

federal transfers. All of these funds have nothing to do with the Atlantic

Accord, they are funds that are already approved and will be transferred to the

provincial government.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleading on behalf of the people who are being serviced by

the new Labrador Grenfell health board area, that government give some very

serious consideration to addressing the deficit that this board has. If

government does not address the deficit, then the board themselves will have no

other choice but to tackle it. In order for the board to bring down a deficit of

this amount they have very little options, because there is no avenue to raise

revenue, as you say - I certainly hope there isn't. So their only other

options would be to cut services and cut programs that are being provided in

this particular area.

Mr. Speaker, I live in this district, and I live in one of those communities

that are in the remote area of Labrador. I can honestly tell you that right now

we have a good primary care health system, but can we sustain any cuts to that

system in any region of Labrador? No, we cannot. We definitely cannot. We have

what is considered the bare minimum of service right now being provided to us

through small clinics along the coastline, through nurses being staffed in those

clinics. There are no frills attached to that delivery. Most people who are

accessing any other type of health (inaudible) is by air.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member her time has expired.

The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise again today to present a petition from a group of residents of

Labrador West in relation to the fares that they must pay to access health care

in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, while other residents of Labrador do not have to pay

the exorbitant high fees that people in my area have to pay. It is totally

unfair.

I say to the Minister of Health, when they received the new money from the

federal government, the $35 million that is allocated to this year's budget,

the minister, upon questioning yesterday by the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse

au Clair stated, or he evaded the question, when he was asked whether or not

that new money would be in addition to the funding that is already in place to

offset health care travel in Labrador. He sort of evaded that question. He did

not answer.

Today in Question Period the Minister of Finance stated that they did not

have this money spent yet, as other provinces are doing, because they do not

actually have it in their hands. Well, I say to the minister, even if you do not

have that money in your hands, does that prevent you from rolling out your plan

as to what you will use that money for once you do receive it? I think the

people of the Province should be able to expect that much from this government

rather than wait until - if what they say is correct, when they get the money

then there will be further delays on the spending of that money simply to

develop a plan.

I think the people of the Province should be able to expect the government to

tell them today what the plans are for that money. I certainly hope, and the

people of my district certainly hope, that some of that money will be used for

air transportation to avail of services in Happy Valley-Goose Bay that are not

available in Labrador West. Even further to that, to provide a higher subsidy

that exists now so that people in Labrador, when they have to travel to the main

health care centres, such as St. John's or Corner Brook, that they will able

to do so without running up their Visa card, without taking out a personal loan

and, in some cases, if they are not able to use either one of these two options,

do not keep their appointment at all simply because they cannot afford to. That,

Mr. Speaker, is not access to health care as we are guaranteed as one of the

principles of our medicare system. The bar to health care, being finances,

should not be allowed to take place in this Province. I would suggest, for many

people it is a bar. Added to the cost of airline travel, there is also the cost

of living in this area once you get here to receive your health care; things

like staying at the hostel for almost $50 a night, your meals and ground

transportation while you are here. These are huge costs that a lot of people

from closer areas to St. John's do not incur when having to travel back and

forth to one of our major health care centres.

It is important, Mr. Speaker, that this government understands that people in

Labrador, first and foremost, should be treated equally. Which means that people

of my district should not be treated as second-class citizens when it comes to a

health care benefit that others in Labrador enjoy. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, is

that all residents of Labrador -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the member's time has expired.

Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. COLLINS: Secondly, Mr. Speaker, it is important that all residents of

Labrador have a travel assistance plan in place so that when they have to leave

Labrador entirely, they do not have to pay the total cost out of their own

pockets, which, in many cases, as I said earlier, some people are just not able

to do.

I ask the government to immediately correct these problems and make the

Labrador region of the Province a part of the whole when it comes to access to

health care.

Thank you.

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

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

I assume we are at Orders of the Day.

MR. SPEAKER: You are calling Orders of the Day, Sir?

MR. E. BYRNE: Yes, Sir.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER: Under our rules, we are now in Orders of the Day.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

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

Motion 4, the hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation to ask

leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Motorized Snow Vehicles

And All-Terrain Vehicles Act. (Bill 45)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of

Tourism, Culture and Recreation shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Motorized Snow Vehicles And All-Terrain Vehicles Act. (Bill

45).

Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Tourism,

Culture and Recreation shall have leave to introduce said bill?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation to introduce

a bill, "An Act To Amend The Motorized Snow Vehicles And All-Terrain

Vehicles Act," carried. (Bill 45)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a

first time. Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a

first time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Motorized Snow Vehicles And

All-Terrain Vehicles Act. (Bill 45)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the

said bill be read a second time?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Today.

MR. SPEAKER: Later today.

On motion, Bill 45 read a first time, ordered read a second time presently,

by leave.

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

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

Motion 7, the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to

ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Pension Benefits

Act, 1997. (Bill 52)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board shall have leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Pension Benefits Act, 1997. (Bill 52)

Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Finance and

President of Treasury Board shall have leave to introduce said bill?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to

introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Pension Benefits Act, 1997,"

carried. (Bill 52)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a

first time. Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a

first time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Pension Benefits Act, 1997. (Bill 52)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the

said bill be read a second time?

MR. E. BYRNE: On tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.

On motion, Bill No. 52 read a first time, ordered read a second time on

tomorrow.

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

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

Order 9, second reading of a bill,

An Act To Amend The Jury Act, 1991. (Bill

50)

I believe the Minister of Justice and Attorney General is ready to begin

debate on that,

An Act To Amend The Jury Act, 1991. (Bill 50)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 50,

An Act To Amend The

Jury Act, 1991, be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Jury Act,

1991." (Bill 50)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour and the pleasure to rise in my place today to

introduce

An Act to Amend The Jury Act, 1991. This amendment will allow the High

Sheriff to use personal information, but only the names, the dates of birth and

addresses that are garnered from the Newfoundland and Labrador medicare records,

in preparing the Province's jury list.

Mr. Speaker, the right to a jury trial is one of the most ancient and

fundamental rights that we possess as citizens of this country. It is a right

that people have fought and died for. It is a cornerstone of our system of

justice, and today it has been enshrined in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms

section 11.(

f) of the Charter.

In common-law systems, trial by jury in criminal cases has traditionally

involved a process whereby the guilt of a person accused of a serious crime is

legally determined by a body of lay persons. These persons, usually twelve in

number, are summoned by the state and chosen at random from the widest

population - and I emphasize widest population - to perform this function for a

particular trial and not as a general continuing service.

They are to make the determination solely on the basis of evidence properly

admitted and the law as explained to them by the presiding judge in the trial,

and not on the basis of preconception, partiality, or their own opinion as to

what the law ought to be.

The jury is summoned and selected ad hoc by the state as a body randomly

picked by lay members of society. It is not a body of law-trained persons; nor

is it drawn from any one class or any one professional group within society. It

does not represent any group in society. It is not a body of the accused's

type of person. It is a small number of ordinary citizens picked out of a hat to

participate in the administration of justice in its own society, not on a

regular basis but in the context of one specific trial.

It is not to make its decisions on the basis of personal knowledge, prejudice

or out-of-court information, but must base its deliberations solely on the

evidence admitted at the trial. Hence, the jury is selected at the trial through

procedures that permit the identification and exclusion from its membership of

individuals who are not impartial, and once properly constituted it is protected

from external and improper influence until it has given its verdict as to the

guilt or the innocence of the accused.

In this jurisdiction, in Newfoundland and Labrador, as in others, the

responsibility for maintaining the Province's jury list from which prospective

jurors are summoned to court rests with officials of the court, and in the case

of this Province with the High Sheriff of Newfoundland, Mr. David Jones, the

High Sheriff of Newfoundland and Labrador. That authority is vested in him under

the provisions of the Jury Act of 1991.

Mr. Speaker, while the Sheriff is permitted under that act to use a number of

sources of information in order to compile the Province's jury list, including

the Province's list of electors, the source which is primarily used by the

Sheriff is a list that is supplied to the Sheriff electronically by the Motor

Registration Division of the Department of Government Services and lands,

containing a record of all those persons who have driver's licences. This list

has been used by the Sheriff's Office for this purpose since 1997.

Prior to that date, Mr. Speaker, a list of electors compiled by the Province's

Chief Electoral Officer and the results of enumerations conducted by the Sheriff's

Office were used as the source of jury lists in the Province. For cost-saving

reasons, the ability to use records of the Registry of Motor Vehicles by the

High Sheriff has ceased, although he has the power to do so to conduct

enumerations for the purpose of creating a jury list.

As for the permanent list of electors used by the Chief Electoral Officer, it

is no longer used by the High Sheriff in generating this Province' jury list.

The reason for this is that the permanent list of electors currently used by the

Province's Chief Electoral Officer is created in the main from federally

supplied information coming from consenting individual taxpayers. Because of the

terms of the agreement on the use of this information between the federal and

provincial Chief Electoral Officers, an amendment to the Election Act of 1991,

and the provisions of federal privacy law, the use of such federally obtained

electoral data for purposes other than those related to an electoral event is

not permitted. The Sheriff cannot legally gain access to this information for

the purpose of compiling a voters' list and, in fact, it would be illegal for

the provincial Chief Electoral Officer to supply this information to him.

Therefore, to save the Province the cost of funding an enumeration of

prospective jurors, and because of the above noted changes in provincial

electoral law, the Sheriff's Office in 1997 began using driver's licence

records supplied by the Registry of Motor Vehicles for the purpose of generating

the Province's jury list.

While this information has proven useful, because of the mobility patterns in

this Province and the fact that people holding drivers' licenses often move,

often change addresses, without advising the Registry of Motor Vehicles

promptly, this source of data is not as useful as might otherwise be the case in

compiling the list of prospective jurors.

Mr. Speaker, this has resulted in situations where the Sheriff's Office has

had to send out more summonses than would otherwise be the case to return the

number of prospective jurors to conduct a jury trial. I understand that normally

while one would have to summon fifty jurors to empanel a twelve-person jury,

because of the inaccuracies in the Motor Vehicle list, eighty jurors have to be

summoned in order to obtain a jury of twelve. This inconveniences the Sheriff's

Office, it inconveniences prospective jurors and the employers of those jurors,

who must, by law, pay such employees their normal wages when they are summoned

to jury duty. It also increases the cost of summoning jurors.

Mr. Speaker, the fact that the Province's jury list is at present primarily

assembled from one source alone, Motor Vehicle's records, exposes that list to

potential legal challenge by persons who might have a right to sit on a jury,

but because of the manner in which a jury list is assembled, from Motor Vehicle's

records alone, i.e. from most people having drivers' licenses alone, others

are excluded from being part of the same, and from accused persons, also, who

might believe it excludes a class of persons, in other words non drivers'

license holders who should be included. Passage of this particular piece of

legislation would help to avoid such a challenge.

Under the Jury Act of 1991, as it exists today, the Sheriff does have the

right to conduct an enumeration of prospective jurors. However, the High Sheriff

reports that this would cost somewhere between $250,000 and $300,000. Well, this

is a small price to pay for the cause of democracy.

Mr. Speaker, the amendment which I am proposing here today, and which the

High Sheriff of Newfoundland and Labrador has requested be passed, offers the

High Sheriff another way, in a cost-effective and responsible manner, to update

the jury list without incurring this cost.

This, then, brings me to a direct discussion, Mr. Speaker, of the present

bill which is before the Legislature, Bill 50,

An Act To Amend The Jury Act of

1991. The proposal of the High Sheriff of Newfoundland and Labrador, which is

contained in this Bill, to permit the High Sheriff in Newfoundland and Labrador

to have access to the names, the addresses and the dates of birth of residents

of the Province who are prospective medicare beneficiaries under the Medicare

Insurance Act of 1999, for the purposes of assisting the sheriff in developing a

provincial jury list is one that I, and the government, support. It is important

to note that the sheriff does not seek, neither does he want, neither is the

government prepared to give him or to any other persons information that relates

to the medical history of any individual resident of this Province. Rather, as I

have previously stated, all that he is seeking, as the bill clearly states, is

the names, addresses and ages of those persons who potentially qualify for

medicare - no health related information or data.

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing remarkable about this. There is no threat to

any person's privacy as a result of this amendment. Indeed, six other Canadian

jurisdictions, six provinces, namely: Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick,

Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and the Yukon Territory already permit the use

of health data for this purpose. I know that all other Atlantic provinces,

expect Newfoundland and Labrador, permit access to health information for this

jury purpose.

While there are present problems with the accuracy of the existing list of

medicare beneficiaries in the Province, this matter is being addressed. Soon, I

understand, the Department of Health and Community Services will likely launch a

re-registration blitz of medicare recipients in this Province. It is the data

that will be garnered from this re-registration blitz - namely, the names,

addresses and dates of birth alone of perspective beneficiaries - that the high

sheriff is seeking for the purpose of broadening and improving the present jury

list, and for further refining it from time to time. This data, once it is

received by the sheriff, will be integrated into the present jury list and used

to improve it. Further, it will not be used for any purpose other than the

generation of perspective jury lists that are supplied to the courts, to the

accused and their legal council, and crown prosecutors in criminal jury trials

and for use by persons who are parties in civil jury trials.

It is important to remember that I, as Minister of Justice and Attorney

General, as the chief legal adviser to the Crown in this Province, and the

sheriff, as a senior peace officer and chief enforcement officer in the courts

of this Province, are charged with the responsibility for upholding the rights

for all persons in this Province, including the right of all of this country's

citizens and this Province's residents, to a trial by a jury of their peers.

What is proposed in this bill respects, protects and furthers such rights.

Indeed, Mr. Speaker, the bill before the House today strengthens the ability

of the sheriff and the courts to ensure for the proper functioning of the

constitutionally protected right of every resident of this Province and country

to a trial by a jury of his or her peers. It does so in a way that will not

abridge any other right that any citizen or resident of this Province enjoys and

in a manner that is practical and cost-efficient.

Mr. Speaker, it is for these reasons that I am pleased to introduce this bill

in the House today. I ask for the support of my hon. colleagues on all sides of

the aisle in the passing of this needed legislation.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate an opportunity to make a few comments about this amendment to

The Jury Act. I appreciate the history lesson on why we have juries and how it

is the foundation, I guess, of our judicial system. The only comment I have ever

had a problem with is people say: You get a jury, you have an opportunity to be

tried by twelve of your peers. When I started practicing law back twenty-five

years ago, a fellow in Burgeo said to me: Where do your peers have to live,

Parsons? I said: What do you mean? He said: Well, I heard that you have a right,

under our system, to be tried by your peers, but if I commit an offence down

here in Burgeo, I have to be tried in this Province up in Corner Brook in

Supreme Court and they never, in Corner Brook, select anybody from Burgeo for

jury duty. So, he said, they are not my peers. What do people up in Corner Brook

know about me and the offence that I am charged with down here in Burgeo?

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. PARSONS: Yes, and that was my response, I say to the Government House

Leader. Depending on what you are charged with, you might want to be tried out

of the Province. You might not want to be tried even in Corner Brook.

It made the point that we have a system and the system is intended to work

the best that we can make it but it is never always proper. We have the Lamer

Inquiry in this Province, of course, today which is, no doubt, indicative of the

fact that it is not a perfect system. Everybody understands who is involved in

and outside the system, I think, that it is not perfect. We are subject to some

mistakes from time to time and the system is fallible but it is a good starting

point.

With regards to the specific information here, the only caution I have - and

we have no problem with this. We are, basically, trying to devise a way here

where the sheriff, who has to come up with a pool of people from whom he or she

can draw a jury list and from that list we will draw the jurors and alternatives

for a particular trial. Where do we get the names from? Not a problem. I notice

it does not say here, but some common sense stuff - for example, why isn't the

phone book useable? If all you are going to get by putting the medical records

information here, a person's name and a person's address and a person's

date of birth useable, I mean, I would think that Aliant, for example, puts out

a phone book that is pretty well up-to-date every year.

In the phone book it says, the Member for St. John's Centre, for example,

what his name is. It tells what street he lives on, and it is a pretty good

assumption that Aliant would not have given you a contract to have a phone

unless you were more than nineteen. So you know you are of age, generally. So,

why wouldn't we have a common sense approach as well and say, from the other

sources that the Lieutenant-Governor in Council may prescribe - I mean, to me it

makes sense. If we are trying to save money, which is what this is all about,

and is identifying a pool - and this is not rocket science. How many people live

in a certain area that might be eligible for jury duty and we want to make it as

large as we can - let's use some common sense stuff. Let's say the phone

book is useable, an up-to-date phone book. What is wrong with that, if that is

all we are going to give the sheriff anyway is a name and an address of where

somebody lives? They will show up for jury duty when they are summoned. They get

called and then they give their reasons as to whether - they are examined as to

whether they are fit to be a juror or not. Sometimes they do not want to be a

juror, and there are certain reasons you can be exempted and, in which case, you

tell the presiding judge: Sir, I cannot be here for this trial because it is six

months long or whatever. You give your reasons and the judge decides whether

your reason for not wanting to be on the jury is acceptable. It is not

earth-shattering rocket science stuff, so why not say here one of the prescribed

methods is a phone book? The phone book tells you everything you are going to

get for your medical insurance.

What is wrong with, for example, vital statistics? Where there is every birth

and everything in this Province and everybody who was ever born here, I presume,

gets registered in the department of vital statistics. Why wouldn't we use the

department of vital statistics information and say: Yes, we have these many

people, this is their names, this is their date of birth, and this is their

address, at least, at the time of birth. Tell them that. There is no problem

there.

I guess the only concern I have is the big brother concept of we are passing

people's names, we are passing people's addresses around, and we have to be

very careful about whose possession that information falls within. I think it is

fairly clear that we operate today, as we speak, under the Freedom of

Information Act, which is some years old. It is pretty dated actually, and we

have sitting on the shelf an Access To Information And Privacy Act, which will

put some of these protections and safeties in. Despite the minister's

commentary to me some months ago, back in the spring sitting of the House in

2004: Stay tuned, we are going to get to that. I am still tuned and I still have

not heard. I have been told as recently as a week or two ago: Stay tuned again,

by the Government House Leader. You are going to get that Access To Information

and Privacy Act coming at you in this accountability session of government. I am

still tuned. I still have not heard it. I still have not heard the proclamation

of it.

I say it with a caution from the big brother perspective, we had better be

very careful when we start letting anybody, Sheriff officers or whomever, start

peeking into your medical records here in this Province. If we were to pass this

here today in all of its stages, I would submit, if we were to go from where we

are today, second reading, talking about the general principles of this jury

duty list, go on to Committee, go on to third reading, pass this today and

proclaim it today, we would have done so without giving it the protections that

will be in the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act. I think that

deserves a little note of caution, that until we proclaim the one we should be

very careful about who we let get into the medical records of this Province.

We are saying right here that it shall only be the names, only be the

addresses and their dates of birth. What about the persons who might not want

that known? Where is the protection for them? For example, if I put my name in

the phone book, I have pretty well given an indication to everybody in this

Province that I do not mind be looked up in a phone book. If Mr. Byrne puts his

in a phone book there, that is pretty good information and confirmation that the

Government House Leader does not mind his personal name and his personal address

being stated in a public document and is there, in fact, to use.

MR. E. BYRNE: It is there today.

MR. PARSONS: It is there today.

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).

MR. PARSONS: Yes, but I did not tell Dr. Taylor, when I went to see him

and I gave him my name and date of birth and he transferred that to the MCP

files of the Province, that I wanted it to be divulged. I did not tell him that.

There is a difference here.

I am wondering, if we are looking for a way to get a list, we do not need to

complicate it and we do not need to give information to people unnecessarily.

That is the only caution that I would use. We have not proclaimed the privacy

provisions of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act. We have

not done that, and I submit we should not be releasing information until we do,

in fact, proclaim that. I think then the protections would be in place, but I

would not put the cart before horse.

I have no problem in passing this, I would suggest - we are certainly in

favour of it - but I think as a caution and a precaution we should not proclaim

it until we get from stay tuned to proclamation on the access to information.

Thank you very much.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would just like to say a few words about the amendment proposed to the Jury

Act. As the minister has said, and the Opposition House Leader has confirmed, we

are dealing with a system of justice that provides for a trial before a jury in

certain circumstances. Obviously not every circumstance but in the most serious

of offences for the criminal law and in certain circumstances for civil matters.

The jury system is one of the most important and significant safeguards that

we have, as citizens, in this country. It goes back an extremely long way, Mr.

Speaker, perhaps a thousand years in the civil law system, common-law system

that we have. It goes back to ancient times. The principle is that in respect to

criminal law in matters of importance, that a person has the right to be judged

not by somebody up on a high bench looking down upon them but by a jury of their

peers determining the facts of the case. That is a fundamental importance, and I

think it is worth talking about why that is.

It has been shown over the centuries, Mr. Speaker, to be a tool of the people

against oppressive government, for example. It has been seen that juries are

able to refuse, in some cases, to convict, because they believe that the state

has been oppressing citizens and those citizens who happen to be before the

courts.

It has been also an instrument of political opposition in some cases. I know

there are a lot of cases in Ireland, for example, where juries, coroner's

juries, during the time of the potato famine, would find a verdict against the

Government of England for the fact that people died of starvation in Ireland

during the potato famine, and the associated misery that went with that; a

result not of a force of nature, Mr. Speaker, but in fact a result of a

disastrous public and economic policy of England at the time.

We have seen, even in modern times, where certain laws which are of great

controversy have had extreme difficulty passing muster before a jury when a jury

was able to decide the facts. I am thinking of some of the Morgantaler cases

that were before the courts maybe in the last twenty years or so, where the

Crown found it very difficult to convict in certain circumstances despite the

fact that a judge may, in the same circumstances, have convicted for an offense

under the Criminal Code.

In the last analysis, Mr. Speaker, it is an individual, twelve ordinary

people. When I say ordinary people, I say the Minister of Justice could not

serve on a jury, Mr. Speaker, and the Government House Leader could not serve on

a jury. Certain people are not permitted to serve on a jury, and lawyers are one

of those categories of people who are not permitted to sit on a jury, because,

Mr. Speaker, they are considered to be officers of the court or they are

considered to have too much influence in terms of the law, perhaps, over others.

It is supposed to be people who are not, technically, legally trained sitting on

a jury. In other words, it is supposed to be a jury literally of the peers of

the person who is before the court. It is a very important right and I think

that has to be the first point that needs to be made about any legislation

dealing with how juries are constructed, how they are able to be picked, and

whether or not they fairly represent the peers of the person who is before the

court.

The question then becomes - the corollary of this right of trial by jury is

that citizens must serve. If you are citizen, you have an obligation to serve on

a jury, subject, of course, to the rules. There are exceptions. If someone is in

extreme circumstances or ill or may have reason to be excused, they can make

their application to the court if they are called before a jury. It is an

obligation of citizenship. With every right there seems to be some sort of

obligation, and in this case a citizen who is entitled to a trial by jury also

has an obligation to participate.

I guess it is for that reason, Mr. Speaker, that the desire exists that we

have a list of citizenry, to be able to ensure the right of a citizen to a jury

trial, the right of a citizen to a panel of jurors that is representative of the

community in which they live, which is as complete and accurate as possible.

In principle, Mr. Speaker, what the minister says, that the election lists

are not accurate - and anybody who have been in an election, and everybody in

this House has, knows that no matter when the electoral list is actually drawn

up there will always be people on polling day who come and say, I am not on this

list, or I moved or, or for some reason I was missed, or even worse: I have been

living in this same house for the last thirty years and my name is not on the

list and I am disgusted with the system. Some people, Mr. Speaker, even refuse

to vote. I have lost a few votes that way. You bring them down to the polling

station and they say, my name is not on the list, I am not even going to vote.

People get disgusted because their right to vote is not recorded and written

down and they object to that, and I can understand those feelings. They are

disgusted with the lack of accuracy of a system that is supposed to be designed

to ensure that they have a basic right to vote.

I know that the voters list is not accurate, Mr. Speaker. I know that. There

may be people who are not on the voters lists who happen to have a vehicle. I

share the concerns of the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile, the Opposition House

Leader, that we have to preserve people's secrecy and privacy, but if someone

applies for a drivers licence and they are on that system, they are a citizen of

the country, they are using their right to use the public roads and drive a

vehicle, they have announced their citizenry and surely that makes that

information available or eligible to be used to determine whether they should be

on a jury list, or summoned at least to appear.

I think the one that my colleague on this side of the House raised concerns

about was the MCP list. Subject to whatever the minister has to say here, I have

the same concerns. I am concerned, obviously, about medical information being

given away, but we do have an MCP system. You do not apply to a doctor for an

MCP card. You do not go to a doctor and say: I am sick, give me an MCP card, and

I am talking to you privately about this. You get your MCP card - I went and got

MCP cards for my children within a number of days after they were born. You go

into the MCP office, you fill out an application form and you get your card.

Your card has your name on it and your card has your number on it. The number

includes your date of birth. Anybody who can read the number knows what your

date of birth is. The issue here is that this information be made available to a

person - we are not talking about to some agency. We are talking about people

who are employed directly by the public service, by the Department of Justice,

who work in the court system, who are Officers of the Court, who have clear

obligations to uphold the rights of justice, having access to information to

prepare a list that is considered to be a jury list.

I have a lot less concern about that than I do about a matter raised the

other day in the pharmacy bill, where the legislation that we are talking about

amending now says that an employee or agent of the department, in the Department

of Health, can go in and demand all sorts of records from a pharmacist. It does

not say what they are supposed to do with them or what the purpose of them are.

That is a different story altogether. What we are talking about here is the

person who has an MCP card and whose address is known to the Medical Care

Commission, and that information can be used to create a list. It is not passing

around a list of MCP recipients and what their numbers and names are, but the

information of a person, the name and address and a date of birth, perhaps, is

available to the Sheriff's Office to compile a list from which subpoenas are

sent. I do not really have a problem with that. These sheriff's bailiffs and

sheriff's officers are officers of the court, as has been confirmed by the

Supreme Court of Canada.

The Premier made a statement yesterday in the House about a case that went to

the Supreme Court of Canada involving William Chafe, or Billy Chafe as he was

known to all of us. His funeral the Premier and I attended yesterday, and many

members of the judiciary of this Province. The chief justice was there, former

Premier Clyde Wells, a chief justice of the Trial Division, many, many judges

which will give you, I guess, an indication of the esteem in which Billy Chafe

was held in this community and in this Province for his many years of service as

a sheriff's officer, as a sheriff bailiff, as an officer of the court. It is

people like that who would have access to this information for the purpose only

of compiling a jury list, and perhaps the minister can confirm that. But, the

only purpose for which access to the names and addresses and dates of birth are

is to compile a jury list which list then is used, along with the voters

information, the driver's licence information to say: okay, this is a list of

people to whom we will send subpoenas to show up in court on a certain day and

potentially become a juror, depending on the selection process.

I think we have to recognize that in order for this system of justice to

work, in order for people to have the right to a trail by a jury there must be

an impartial jury available from as wide a group of citizenry as possible so

that it is as objective and as representative of the community as possible. If

we do not have very good lists from the electoral office - and I know that Mr.

Green works very hard to try to ensure that he has us a complete list as

possible. We passed legislation in this House to allow the Chief Electoral

Officer in this Province, Mr. Wayne Green, to work with the Chief Electoral

Office of Canada to ensure that they have as up to date list as possible. But,

frankly, this has been going on for a number of years and each election

discloses, whether it is a federal or provincial election, that the lists are

clearly not up to date or as up to date as we would like to see them. So, that

is something that I think needs to be supplemented and I agree that it needs to

be supplemented.

Subject to whatever assurances that can be given by the minister, I really do

not have a problem with the information being available to compile a list. I

believe the minister will confirm that, that this is information only goes to

officers of the court to prepare a list of citizenry to whom subpoenas would be

sent. While I share, in general, the concerns that the Opposition House Leader

has raised - and I, too, share the concerns that we have not properly passed

legislation in this House to protect the privacy of individuals. In this

particular case, we are dealing with officers of the court who are sworn to

uphold the law and uphold confidentiality in carrying out their duties. I do not

see the kind of difficulty there as I would see if you broadened it out about

medical information, generally, which I think members of this House have been

vigilant to protect.

I know the Minister of Transportation and Works and Aboriginal Affairs and I

last year - when he was here on this side of the House, where I am now - took

great pains and steps to try to improve the legislative and structural framework

for the Centre for Health Information to ensure that it was set up as an agency

of the Crown, as opposed to an arm's-length outside organization that was

going to have access to a tremendous amount of confidential information. That

was done to ensure that it was a Crown agency who had access to information,

that there were proper protocols in place, that proper ethical standards were

adopted to ensure that any information which they had and they used, they could

only use it for the purposes of research and that they were bound by very strict

conditions of ethical standards to ensure that the confidentiality of the public

was respected and protected. I would expect nothing less from an Officer of the

Crown who happens to be working for the Sheriff's Office or sheriff's

bailiff, carrying out this important public function of protecting the rights of

citizens to have access to a jury trial.

In saying that, Mr. Speaker, we support the legislation. We see its

importance. We understand that it would create lists, but these lists only go to

a certain place for a certain purpose. They have, obviously, no information

attached to them which would disclose anything other than, in the case of MCP,

that someone is eligible for medical service in the Province. In other words,

that you are a resident of the Province. If you are not a resident of the

Province, you do not get an MCP card. If you are a resident of the Province, you

do get one. It is very simple. So, the only information that would be available

to the Sheriff's Office is that Tom Jones, or Tommy Toe, is a resident of the

Province and he is of a certain age. In other words, he is eligible for jury

duty and perhaps he lives at such-and-such an address. That is useful

information that is needed to protect people's rights to jury trial, and I

have no difficulty supporting that.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: If the minister speaks now, he will close the debate.

The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

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

I want to thank the hon. Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi for the

contribution that he has just made to this debate, and the fact that the

comments that he has made, I think, address some of the concerns that the hon.

the Government House Leader expressed earlier in the debate. I want to thank the

hon. Member for Burgeo & LaPoile, the hon. the Government House Leader -

AN HON. MEMBER: The Opposition House Leader.

MR. T. MARSHALL: The Opposition House Leader, I am sorry - for taking

part in the debate. The Opposition House Leader is a well-respected Crown

prosecutor and lawyer for many years, and the hon. the Member for Quidi Vidi as

well.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) the same day.

MR. T. MARSHALL: They were admitted to the Bar the same day, and he,

equally, is as respected and distinguished as a lawyer. I am sure the hon.

Member for Quidi Vidi has never been a prosecutor, though.

The hon. the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile felt that we could use some more

common sense here. I am certainly always one who likes to see the use of common

sense. He did mention phone books, that phone books could be used, and he also

mentioned vital statistics.

It might be helpful to look at some notes I have here on Saskatchewan, what

they do there. In Saskatchewan, other data, other than the information obtained

from the health records, was rejected as being too exclusionary. Motor vehicle

records eliminate anyone who does not have a driver's licence, and this would

have a disproportionate impact on poor people and Aboriginal people. Henderson's

Directory, post directory, the telephone books that the hon. member mentioned,

municipal assessment records, eliminate people from serving on a jury. They

eliminate people who do not own property, who do not own telephones, or who move

often and this, of course, would have a disproportionate impact on poor people

and Aboriginal people.

The purpose of the list is that one's peers can be summoned for the jury,

and it is important that we do not exclude from that list any particular class

of people because they may not have a phone or they may not have a vehicle or

they may not own property.

The other concern raised by the hon. member was with respect to his concern

about big brother. Most of his concerns, I think, were addressed by the hon.

Member for Quidi Vidi, so I do not need to repeat those.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. T. MARSHALL: Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, I am sorry. I don't exactly

know all the St. John's names, yet but I am sure I will.

It is important to note that we are talking about the rights to privacy and

the rights to a trial by jury, and the reasons that we are talking about

obtaining the MCP records, for obtaining only the name and the address and the

date of birth. I have been assured by my officials that the computer system that

will be set up, will be set up so that it will only extract three fields from

the health record: the name, the address, and the date of birth.

This information is being permitting in six other jurisdictions, and it is

permitted here because of the nature of the right that is being protected. It is

a right, an absolute right, to a trial by jury. That right is enshrined in the

constitution of this country.

Unlike the right to a trial by jury, which is an absolute right, the right to

privacy is a relative right, and in the case of a legal conflict between an

absolute right that is enshrined in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and a

relative right, it is the absolute right that must win. However, where they can

live together in a manner such as this bill proposes, without offending either,

that is the course which should be followed, and I believe that is the course

which is being followed here.

I thank everyone for their contribution in this debate and I urge hon.

members to pass this legislation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 50,

An Act To

Amend The Jury Act, 1991, be now read a second time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Jury Act, 1991. (Bill 50)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a second time. When shall this

bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?

MR. E. BYRNE: Later today, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Later today.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Jury Act, 1991," read a

second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, by

leave. (Bill 50)

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

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

That is a piece of legislation that everyone supported, I believe. One of my

colleagues, I think, being a little bit facetious, indicated that was the Jury

Act and we should have only spoken for about twelve minutes.

Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I want to move to Order 10, second reading of

a bill,

An Act To Revise Various Acts Of The Province With Respect To Certain

Functions Of Justices Of The Peace. (Bill 49)

We are looking forward to the brief commentary, the Minister of Justice has

told me, with respect to this opening, and the ensuing debate, which I

understand all members support as well, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 49 be now read a second

time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Revise Various Acts Of The

Province With Respect To Certain Functions Of Justices Of The Peace." (Bill

49)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I am pleased that my previous remarks on the Jury Act were so well received

that I am called upon to get up to speak again.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to introduce Bill 49,

An Act To Revise

Various Acts Of The Province With Respect To Certain Functions Of Justices Of

The Peace.

With this amendment, if the House deems fit to pass this amendment,

Provincial Court Judges and Unified Family Court Judges will conduct all

judicial functions currently being performed by JPs, with the exception of those

relating to the processing of

summary offence tickets.

Mr. Speaker, as members are aware, Justices of the Peace in this Province

perform different functions. They perform judicial functions and they also

perform what are known as administrative functions. Federally, JPs conduct bail

hearings under the Criminal Code and they issue search warrants also under the

Criminal Code. Judicial functions are also carried out by JPs under provincial

legislation, and the list goes on and on. They can issue search warrants; they

can issue warrant to seize; they can issue subpoenas; they can preside over

trials of an offence.

It is interesting that under

section 26 of the Wildlife Act, two JPs can

preside over the trial. They can impose a penalty; they can cancel a licence;

they can enter a conviction, such as under

section 48 of the City of St. John's

Act; they can deal with applications for pe