PDF Version (Day)

PDF Version

(Night)

November 2, 2020

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIX No. 61

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR.

SPEAKER (Reid):

Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR.

SPEAKER:

Today we will have Members' statements by the hon. Members for the Districts of

Terra Nova, Bonavista, Placentia - St. Mary's, Windsor Lake and Grand

Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

MR.

PARROTT:

Mr.

Speaker, I have the pleasure to speak about, once again, volunteers in the

District of Terra Nova and throughout our entire beautiful province. Volunteer

groups, like the Royal Canadian Legion, are the backbone of many communities. In

the last 90 years, over 300,000 members have contributed countless volunteer

hours and raised millions of dollars.

In my district I have three very active Royal Canadian

Legions: Clarenville, Branch 27; Port Blandford, Branch 48; and Eastport, Branch

41. Legionnaires support everyone: veterans, Special Olympic groups, cadets,

seniors, scholarships, people in need, community and school groups just to name

a few.

As a veteran myself, I feel it is critically important

for us to continue to recognize and honour the sacrifices that have been made by

our comrades on Remembrance Day. Young men and women lied of their ages to serve

in wars and fight for our province, country and freedom.

A very humbling picture I saw over the weekend sums it

up: “When you go home, tell them of us and say, 'For your tomorrow we gave our

today.'”

Please join me in recognizing the Royal Canadian

Legion, all veterans, all legionnaires and their dedication to their surrounding

areas.

Lest we forget.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Bonavista.

MR.

PARDY:

Following on the theme of volunteerism, Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure

to celebrate the volunteerism and dedication of Mr. Harold Duffett, Port Union,

within the municipality of Trinity Bay North.

Harold, at a very young age of 84 years, has been

involved in many organizations over the years. Beginning with his confirmation

at 11 years of age, he remained involved with St. Peter's Anglican Church ever

since. He was involved in the start-up of the Sea Cadet Corps in Catalina, the

school breakfast program, the Relay For Life, as well as the Christmas Seals

program.

In addition, Harold was a Member of the Red Cross,

Heart and Stroke, and CNIB Newfoundland and Labrador fundraising initiatives.

Today he volunteers on committees for the community playground, 50-plus seniors,

Tidy Towns and the Trinity Bay North fire department fundraising auctions.

He never misses a committee meeting and is often the

first to volunteer his time. The Trinity Bay North town manager, Mr. Darryl

Johnson states: Harold spends more time volunteering than anyone I know. The

ultimate volunteer.

I ask the Members of the 49th House of Assembly to join

me in thanking Mr. Harold Duffett for being such a committed volunteer who gives

so freely of his time for the benefit of others.

SOME

HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Placentia - St. Mary's.

MS.

GAMBIN-WALSH:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on October 26, Mrs. Theresa Jarvis

celebrated her 100th birthday. Mrs. Jarvis, one of three children, was born at

Pinch Gut to Joseph and Sara Smith. Her family resettled to Fair Haven and she

married John Jarvis. Together they had 10 children.

After her husband passed away in 1986, Mrs. Jarvis

lived independently in the family home until she was 98 years old. She presently

resides in a senior's apartment in Dildo, with the support of home care. Mrs.

Jarvis lives a fairly independent life. Mrs. Jarvis's memory is impeccable.

Until recently, she baked her own bread and made her own preserves. She also

loves to shop.

While Mrs. Theresa Jarvis has endured many hardships

throughout her 100 years, including the loss of three of her children, she

continues to live her life with faith and perseverance. Mrs. Jarvis has 23

grandchildren, 34 great grandchildren and 11 great-great grandchildren. Many of

her family members live outside the province but those who are here, along with

friends, helped her in celebrating this milestone.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all hon. Members in this House

of Assembly wish Ms. Theresa Jarvis a happy 100th birthday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Windsor Lake.

MR.

CROSBIE:

Mr. Speaker, I rise to say a word of affection for the Member for Cape St.

Francis, who announced his pending retirement.

The Member's reputation is built on dedicated district

work. No one in caucus has to ask, where is Kevin? Because the answer is always:

He's attending a funeral. And he knows the departed, as he knows the loved ones,

and they know him.

showed the Member, shovel in hand, fixing a pothole, practicing civic duty and

district politics in the most honourable of ways.

In his younger days, the Member had a reputation for

toughness in hockey. Who better to put in charge of Public Accounts Committee.

The Member has honourably served in this House under

six premiers. I regret he will not be with us to serve under a seventh.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

MR.

TIBBS:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Gerald Hurley was born in Inverness, Scotland, on April

6, 1942. After moving to Badger in 1947, Gerald met his wife of 53 years, Mary

McKenna.

Mr. Hurley wore many hats over his lifetime and touched

so many lives. His first job was a schoolteacher in Little Bay, where he

influenced the future of so many. Pivoting from his teaching profession, he went

on to become a welder and kept with that trade into his retirement.

Gerald Hurley was a firm believer in volunteerism and

loved to give back to his community. When he wasn't coaching either school or

senior hockey, he was serving as St. John Ambulance adult division leader. A

member of the Badger Recreation Committee, he also served on the Badger

Volunteer Fire Department. He didn't stop there, as this extraordinary man was

also an active member of the Knights of Columbus and a Eucharist minister.

Mr. Hurley served several terms as mayor in Badger,

including the 2003 flood that watched a community come together, like we are

known for here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Gerald Hurley passed this year but will always be

remembered for his service. Today we honour him, as we should, God bless you,

Gerald Hurley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Premier.

PREMIER FUREY:

Mr.

Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today with a heavy heart.

Last week's passing of the hon. Robert Wells, Q.C.,

comes with great sadness for his family, my own family and for many

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

Since first getting to know former Justice Wells and

his family as a child when I delivered their daily newspaper, I have been

inspired by his thoughtfulness and compassion.

Mr. Speaker, as a lawyer, MHA, Cabinet minister, judge

and commissioner of the Offshore Safety Helicopter Inquiry, Justice Wells served

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians for decades with great pride and distinction.

He set an example of what it means to serve the public and will be deeply missed

by all.

His work led to important changes in improving offshore

safety and his legacy will live on for years.

On behalf of Members of this Legislature and all of

Newfoundland and Labrador, I spoke with former Justice Wells's son Senator David

Wells on Friday to express condolences to Justice Wells's wife Lucy and his

entire family.

To honour and commemorate former Justice Wells, flags

have been lowered to half-mast at the Confederation Building since Friday.

They will remain lowered until sunset today and lowered

again on the day of his funeral.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

I thank the Premier for an advance copy of his statement.

On behalf of the Official Opposition, I join with the

Premier in expressing our condolences to the family and friends of the hon.

Robert Wells, Q.C., a man who I knew well both in politics and in law.

Mr. Wells served the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador through a long and storied career. From electoral politics to presiding

over the inquiry that made recommendations for offshore safety, Robert Wells was

a giant. Our province owes Mr. Wells our deepest gratitude.

He served in the House of Assembly from 1972 to 1979,

was president of the Newfoundland Law Society from 1977 to 1981 and was the only

Newfoundland and Labrador president of the Canadian Bar Association and a

Supreme Court justice.

I offer my condolences to Mr. Wells's family, his wife

Lucy, his son Senator David Wells and his large circle of family and friends.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS.

COFFIN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to thank the Premier for

receiving an advance copy of the statement. On behalf of the Third Party caucus,

I would like to take this moment to recognize the life of the hon. Robert Wells,

Q.C.

Throughout his illustrious career in public service his

dedication to the people of this province was unwavering. We take this

opportunity to send our condolences to the family. Justice Wells will be sorely

missed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Member for Justice and Public Safety.

MR.

CROCKER:

Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to inform this hon. House that the statutory review of the

Access to Information and Protection of

Privacy Act, 2015 , is under way and there is now an opportunity for public

input.

As a government, we are committed to openness and

transparency. We are fortunate to have someone with the stature and experience

of retired Chief Justice David B. Orsborn to conduct the review which will

examine the operation of the act and, as appropriate, make recommendations to

ensure the act is working as intended.

Mr. Orsborn is requesting written submissions no later

than November 27. Written submissions can be made by email, fax, hand delivered

or regular mail. Mr. Speaker, I want to encourage residents and stakeholders to

get involved in the review by making a written submission or applying to make a

presentation, either in person or virtually, at public hearings. All comments

and submissions received will be made available online and all hearings will be

public. Further details of the statutory review and more specific information

about how people can participate is available at nlatippareview.ca.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank former Chief Justice

Orsborn for taking on this important task and I look forward to the review and

his final report, expected to be delivered before the end of March 2021.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

MS.

CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his

statement.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to

acknowledge retired Chief Justice David Orsborn and to thank him for his

diligent work he is currently undertaking on the statutory review of the ATIPP

legislation.

I'm sure that all Members of this hon. House will agree

that this is an important piece of legislation, which must remain up to date,

responsive and one which ensures government and public information can remain

accessible by those who request it.

As a public call for input into this review is under

way, I encourage individuals to use ATIPP to reflect upon the types of

information they request and how the system could be more user-friendly. I am

hopeful that the statutory review will result in more proactive disclosure and

greater resident involvement in our democracy.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS.

COFFIN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I would also like to thank the hon. minister for

receiving an advance copy of his statement.

We, the Third Party caucus, are glad to hear that this

government is making a commitment to openness and transparency.

We would also like to thank Chief Justice Orsborn for

leading the review of the ATIPP act. He is an excellent choice for the job and

we look forward to his final report at the end of March.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Environment, Climate Change

and Municipalities.

MR.

BENNETT:

Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased today to speak about the $27.4 million from the Safe

Restart Agreement and the funding allocations that each municipality in

Newfoundland and Labrador will receive. The federal government portion is being

matched on a 50-50 cost-shared basis with provincial government expenditures

retroactive to April 1, 2020.

Mr. Speaker, the Safe Restart funding is distributed

based on 2016 census data and is guided by a per capita basis allocation to all

municipalities. No applications are required and payments will be processed once

Budget 2020 is fully adopted by the

House of Assembly. Allocations for each municipality can be found on the

Department of Environment, Climate Change and Municipalities website.

Agreement in July, with details released in September and it supports critical

needs to protect public health and safety, prepare for future waves of COVID-19

and further supports the safe reopening of the economies in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, our government supported Municipalities

Newfoundland and Labrador as the organization advocated for communities at the

onset of COVID-19. The province also wrote a letter of support to the Canadian

Federation of Municipalities in the national organization's effort to secure

funding for municipalities.

We thank the federal government for partnering with us

in support of municipalities. We know it has been a stressful time for municipal

leaders, and they have been eagerly awaiting word on how much they will receive

through this funding program. Our government appreciates the vital role that

municipal governments in our province have, and we want them to remain strong

and operational as we live with COVID-19.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

MR.

LESTER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his

statement. Mr. Speaker, the members of Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador

have been waiting for information about this funding for some time now. I know

they lobbied hard for additional support and we, the Official Opposition, are

pleased to see the program details finally announced.

Mr. Speaker, many municipalities across this province

have been negatively impacted by the pandemic and have budget shortfalls. While

this program will provide some much-needed financial relief, there is much work

to be done as municipalities try to move forward. In addition to the unplanned

expense caused by the pandemic, municipalities must also address important

issues such as drinking water, fire and emergency services and waste water

regulations.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to

recognize the valuable work of Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador and all

municipal leaders across the province. These individuals, many of whom are

volunteers, are tireless in their commitment and we certainly appreciate

everything they do to make our municipalities better and stronger for our

residents.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like to thank the minister for an advance copy of

his statement and I want to thank George Murphy for dropping it off.

I applaud the minister for securing this funding from

the federal government for our communities. We have seen several communities

suffer a dramatic loss in revenue from the closure of the recreation facilities

and increased costs to municipalities from implementing COVID measures. This

funding will go a long way towards helping our communities get back on their

feet, but I suggest government consider increasing the funding to provide to

municipalities going forward.

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 Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

Mr.

Speaker, election rumors have arisen in recent days.

With more than 15,000 people thrown out of work: Does

the Premier think an election before Christmas is in the best interest of the

people of the province?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Premier.

PREMIER FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Once again, we've answered questions on this but the

Member opposite seems to continue to want to go down this line of questioning.

I've said it's not my intention to call an election before, but it's not up to

me and me alone. We're in a minority government and this is democracy at work.

There are confidence motions before this House this

week, and this is not my decision to make alone. It's not my intention to call

an election before December certainly, but it appears that it's just the Members

opposite who are interested in talking about elections. They're the only ones

with their cars wrapped. They're the only ones getting materials ready. Maybe

the question is best reflected internally from the Member opposite.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

Premier, I spoke to a 32-year-old electrician with a young family who worked in

Argentia, and if he doesn't get work within the next six months he'll lose his

house.

What does the Premier have to say to this worker and

his family?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Premier.

PREMIER FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is people like that 32-year-old worker and the

families who – I think I speak for all Members of the House when I say that

we're all incredibly empathic towards the trying times that these families are

facing, the uncertainty ahead of them and their families moving into the

Christmas season and beyond. I want to express my sincere empathy and compassion

to them.

With that said, we are moving forward. We are

continuing discussions with operators, including having a healthy and good

discussion with the CEO of Cenovus on Friday. We're continuing to discuss with

the operators about how we can be prepared to continue to do work in 2021 and be

ready for when the rebound in this commodity happens and we can lead the world

as an industry with a valuable resource moving forward for the future of

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

Thanks, Mr. Speaker.

A jobless oil industry worker who lives in CBS says

that he's been watching the Northeast Avalon dying, with businesses and

restaurants closing, panhandlers increasing and the roads becoming quiet.

What does the Premier have to say to this jobless

worker?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Premier.

PREMIER FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Once again, I would express my empathy and concern for

the families during these uncertain times in a global positioning of

uncertainty. This isn't a crisis that's facing the Northeast Avalon or

Newfoundland and Labrador or Canada; this is a crisis that is affecting the

entire world, whether it's Saudi Arabia or Russia, the United States. Cities are

going through the same thing: Houston, Aberdeen. Everyone is feeling the pinch

of this global economic crisis with a downward pressure on the energy sector in

particular.

What I will say is that we're doing everything we can

and everything that's available to us in our tool box, including policy

instruments and whatever fiscal capacity that we have to ensure that our oil and

gas industry is well positioned for when this industry does return, and it will

return.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last week cast a cloud over labour relations in the

province. Unifor National announced legal action against the Royal Newfoundland

Constabulary, claiming a breach of Charter rights. The minister insists that

there is no role for him in this issue.

I ask the minister: Does he have full confidence in the

decisions made by the leadership at the RNC which resulted in this legal action?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the hon. Member for the question.

As we were in a situation we were in last week, again,

I was extremely disappointed, like everybody in this House, that the talks

didn't last longer than they did and they weren't successful, because it's very

important, first and foremost, for those people to get back to work.

Mr. Speaker, the Member asked me about confidence in

the police force. These are independent decisions made by the police force. I do

have confidence in the RNC and the RCMP and the work they do in our province.

I also am very pleased today to see that the Member

across the way, my critic, has accepted the invitation to sit down and have a

conversation with Chief Boland, I think, later this week. It's very important to

have that opportunity to sit down and see what decisions like these and how

they're made and what actual processes are followed to get to a place where you

make a decision to actually see the police deployed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

Mr.

Speaker, we're hearing heartbreaking stories from Dominion workers that are on

strike and struggling to make ends meet. These front-line workers sacrificed so

much for all of us during COVID-19 and they deserve to get back to work with

fair pay.

I ask the Premier: Has he reached out to Galen Weston

to encourage him to settle this matter?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Immigration, Skills and Labour.

MR.

BYRNE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

We were encouraged and were very much applauded for

reaching out to both the employer and their bargaining unit, the union Unifor,

to get them back to the table last week. It's very unfortunate that that meeting

did not result in a successful collective agreement, but still we remain

hopeful. I have reached out to both the CEO of Loblaws, again as early as this

morning, along with the national president of Unifor, to continue on a

discussion but, most importantly, to get the parties back to the table.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

Search Minerals, Mr. Speaker, is sending rare earth minerals from Labrador to

Saskatchewan for processing, creating no processing jobs in this province.

Why is the Premier allowing this to happen?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

MR.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm certainly glad to get a question on the mining

sector because it is certainly a bright spot in this province right now; one

that I've had discussions with multiple Members on and, in fact, we've been

reaching out even today on different issues.

The issue that the Member mentions is not one that's,

honestly, been brought to my attention, but what I can do – and I'll undertake

to report back to this House tomorrow with an update as to what is going on and

the reasoning behind it.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

Was the decision to send these minerals to Saskatchewan made when the Premier

was on the board?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Premier.

PREMIER FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I was never on the board of Search Minerals.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR.

BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This morning the minister announced that the isolation

requirements for rotational workers are not going to change.

Minister, these workers and their families are very

heavily impacted by this pandemic. Will this policy be reviewed again and, if

so, when?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR.

HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

The review by Quality of Care NL showed very clearly

that there was no need to make these restrictions on rotational workers any

tighter than they already are.

The situation in the rest of the country is what

determines a lot of our action. We had over a thousand cases on Saturday in

Ontario; a thousand cases on Saturday in Quebec. We've seen Alberta set records

for the number of active cases, Mr. Speaker.

Recognizing that rotational workers work in a somewhat

protected site is permissive in that it has allowed us these relaxations, but we

cannot let our guard down, Mr. Speaker, beyond a certain point. This is evidence

based. If the evidence changes, we will change.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR.

BRAZIL:

Many families in this province have children attending educational institutions

in other parts of Canada and in other countries who want to return home for

Christmas. Flight availability is decreasing while ticket prices are increasing

and these families and individuals need to make plans.

Can the minister offer any insight on what the

isolation requirements will be for those residents hoping to return home for

Christmas?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR.

HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

That is an active topic with our Public Health

department. Myself and Dr. Fitzgerald have undertaken to have something out

within the early part of this month.

Again, I must go back and say that the situation in

other parts of the country does not look very optimistic when you look at their

hospitalization, their infection rates and the curve in Ontario is like a cliff

face, Mr. Speaker. We have to look after the safety of the people in this

province, much as I would love to see my daughters too.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Bonavista.

MR.

PARDY:

Mr.

Speaker, a local child care operator in Witless Bay has spoken out about the

heavy-handed tactics of the minister's department. This home-based daycare has

been ordered to reduce their rates in order to avail of $25-a-day child care for

her families.

Why is the minister forcing operators to reduce

programming and even meals in order to survive?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Education.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The $25-a-day program provides an operating grant

that's been in place – the operating grant has been in place since about 2014.

Back then, when government introduced the operating grant to the child care

centres, many of them expressed the same concerns we're hearing today from the

family centres who we've now included in the operating grant under the $25-a-day

child care program. This may not be for all family-based child care centres, but

for any of the child care centres that are family-based that wish to come under

the operating grant program we welcome them.

We are open to feedback, Mr. Speaker, and we're

starting a consultation process to hear feedback and to view what child care

looks like into the future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Bonavista.

MR.

PARDY:

Mr.

Speaker, this child care operator was under the family-based operation, and in

an online forum this morning mentions that she may be losing up to $200 a week.

She has stated that she was sick to her stomach as she wonders what to do next.

How does the minister expect to create more quality and

affordable spaces if we are potentially pushing operators out of business?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Education.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's certainly not the intent to push anybody out of

business, Mr. Speaker. I know when the previous administration brought in the

Operating Grant Program, some child care centres had to give a little bit.

Government provided an operating grant to ensure that child care was affordable.

The current Premier promised $25-a-day child care. More

than 70 per cent of the centres are under the Operating Grant Program. Mr.

Speaker, we've had other centres express an interest in joining. We've also

invited the family-based centres. Again, we're hearing some of the same concerns

today the previous administration did in 2014 when they started the Operating

Grant Program for the centres.

Mr. Speaker, we are looking at this. We are not forcing

anybody to join. If a family-based centre doesn't want to join the Operating

Grant Program, we're certainly not forcing anybody to do so.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Bonavista.

MR.

PARDY:

Mr.

Speaker, the previous administration the minister was a part of since 2015.

Losing $200 a week is rather significant from a home care operator who was on

the program last year.

Mr. Speaker, concerns have been raised that the Casual

Caregiver Pilot Program will allow untrained and unqualified individuals to work

in child care centres. This is yet another band-aid solution to chronic staff

shortages with early childhood educators who feel undervalued.

When is the minister going to deal with the real

underlying issues affecting staff, including training and access to course work?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Education.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Mr.

Speaker, I hate to provide a math lesson to a former administrator in a school,

but in 2014 I wasn't a part of the former administration, I was a part of this

party.

Mr. Speaker, our government has provided, over the last

three years, bursaries and training money for early childhood educators. There

are certainly some stresses within the system. Those stresses are felt across

the country. We provide wage subsidies to early childhood educators, between

$12,900 and $16,900, to enhance their wages.

Does this answer all the questions? No. For example,

the $25-a-day daycare is a very, very solid first step, Mr. Speaker, as we

continue to consult with the industry and look –

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. Member's time has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR.

PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on Friday the minister spoke to the CEO of

Cenovus for the first time.

Did the Premier participate in this call and, if not,

why not?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

MR.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm happy to report that not only did we have a

conversation with Cenovus and their CEO on Friday, but the Premier led the call

with Cenovus on Friday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

A. PARSONS:

While it was an introductory call, the wording, I would say, that was used by

the CEO of Cenovus was very positive in nature, saying he has a connection with

this province and very excited to be here. While we know that we have a lot of

work to do, what I can say is that the call was positive in nature and we've

committed to continuing our ongoing discussions.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR.

PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When asked about potential job cuts, the minister said

it did not form part of the conversation.

Jobs are important to the people of this province,

Minister, and why did you forget to ask for a commitment about maintaining jobs?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

MR.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Certainly, what I can say is twofold here. Cenovus

being very new to this, it's like every other oil and gas company in this world.

They're reassessing what they are doing and where we are going in this

ever-changing landscape.

That being said, I also spoke to the VP of Husky on

Saturday. There were no job cuts discussed in that call. In fact, the largest

portion of that call was discussing the ongoing scope of work that they have put

forward to us and the opportunity for investment and job creation here in the

province.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR.

PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe job cuts should have been part of the

conversation, Minister; it's a big issue here in this province.

The Transocean Barents has left the province and is en

route to Norway, a jurisdiction that supports and encourages the offshore oil

industry. Bull Arm has become an aquatic storage facility with two other drill

rigs, and the Terra Nova will be there shortly.

Premier, what is your plan to resume exploration

drilling in this province?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

MR.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm certainly very happy to speak to this and, yes, the

Transocean is going. The contract signed some time ago has concluded, as was

expected a number of months ago, but I am proud to talk about the discoveries

that they made while they were here. We had two announced just last week.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

A. PARSONS:

They did do great work while they were here, and we're very happy about that.

Also, today in a phone call, actually between the Premier's Office and myself,

we spoke to CNOOC and we spoke about the exploration well that they will be

drilling, starting in 2021, and they talked about the exploration incentive that

we had.

In fact, the Premier and I spoke today to all the

members of CAPP, and one of the things that they were unanimous in was talking

about our exploration incentive and the fact that they know they can count on

this provincial government being behind them during this tough time.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR.

PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is no more exploration for another year, so that

answers that question, and the government, obviously, did nothing but cheer them

on.

Six weeks ago, government announced an exploration

initiative, yet details are still unavailable.

Premier, when will the details be announced?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology,

MR.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just to go back to the previous question; what I can

say is, yes, there will be drilling. Hopefully, in about six months is when

we're going to see that drilling happen, as committed to by CNOOC. That's what

they've committed.

The other thing, we have announced an exploration

incentive program, one that's about $40 million this year, which is coming from

the bid deposits. Again, there's unanimous support from all the operators. They

realize that we are in a very tough environment but they appreciate the support

that we've put there. This will help form part of the bid process which will,

hopefully, be happening this week.

They appreciate the fact that with very limited

options, financially, that the province can offer, this was a big one and will

help go towards to, hopefully, continued and increased drilling potential in the

future.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

MR.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last week, I asked some important questions regarding

an expiry date and renewal fees attached to journeypersons' certificates of

qualification and I did not receive an acceptable response.

The minister has now had time to follow up with his

staff.

Again, I ask the minister: Why were such policies

adopted?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Immigration, Skills and Labour.

MR.

BYRNE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I will admit I was somewhat confused by the question.

I've had an opportunity to process some of the question and the potential

answer.

It appeared to me that there was some debate as to why

the government had imposed an expiry date on journeymen's Red Seal certificates.

I could point out to the hon. Member that expiry dates have been in place on

journeymen's certificates since the 1990s. I was unaware how that policy could

have impacted and created job losses for individuals so again I'll repeat:

Expiry dates have been in place on certificates for many, many years.

If the hon. Member has any information of any

individual that has been impacted negatively by something that's been in place

for decades, I'd be happy to take that information.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

MR.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister does talk to the expiry date; however,

journeypersons have brought their complaints forward to his department on a

number of occasions; they have not received an adequate response. In fact, they

had to register a complaint to the Office of the Citizens' Representative. The

report actually quotes the department as saying: There has never been a

requirement for a journeyperson to renew their certificate of qualifications,

yet there is an expiry date and renewal fees attached.

What does the minister say to the hard-working men and

women who had to go through this?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Immigration, Skills and Labour.

MR.

BYRNE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. Member does now recollect and state the facts

which are there has been an expiry date that has been in place on these

certificates for many, many years; in fact, decades. There was a simple change

where there was a fee that was to be collected back some five years ago of $50

for a five-year period. There was a decision, and I think a good decision, not

to collect that fee anymore.

With regard to the complaints that the Member refers

to, we've reviewed our files, our records and we find no such instances. If he

would like to bring forward particular concerns from individuals, I'd be more

than happy to receive them because that would be new information to us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

MR.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guarantee you this complaint to the Office of the

Citizens' Rep didn't just appear; it resulted in complaints that were unanswered

by the department. This report also states, and I quote – this is coming from

the department – in the fall of 2018, it was concluded that the historical

practice of including an expiry date would cease as the individuals'

qualifications does not in fact expire. Yet, under this government, August of

2016, they not only looked to solve the issue, they actually attached a $50 fee

on top of it. The minister has already alluded to correcting it.

I ask the minister: Will the minister refund these fees

for a policy that should never have been put in place?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Immigration, Skills and Labour.

MR.

BYRNE:

Mr.

Speaker, again, we kind of come to the conundrum of the notion of harm or

whether or not some individuals have been negatively impacted. I'm more than

prepared and anxious to receive any information regarding that. If he would like

to bring that forward I'd be happy to receive it and will act on it.

With that said, expiry dates have been part of the

certificates for many, many decades. The certificates are now issued without an

expiry date after a decades-long policy and 11,000 certificates were issued some

months back, some years back without expiry dates attached to them. If there's

ever a certificate that's lost, we can replace that certificate without an

expiry date attached to it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

MR.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

His own department says it should never have occurred.

The department is after charging people $50 – 14,000 journeypersons for a fee

that should never have been charged.

Mr. Speaker, the PC Opposition advocated on an expanded

insulin pump coverage and government listened. The minister responsible has

touted investing in health, choose wellness over illness.

I ask the minister: Will he do the same and provide

full coverage for advanced continuous glucose monitoring devices for people

living with diabetes?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR.

HAGGIE:

Thank you very much indeed, Mr. Speaker, for the question.

I know that there are various business groups lobbying

for glucose monitoring. The issue is around the evidence to support their use,

Mr. Speaker. There are flash glucose monitors and there are continuous glucose

monitors. I await the decision of the medical profession to tell me which is

most relevant and which should be supported. At that point, we'll be in a

position to make a decision. As yet, I haven't had the answer.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise, time for a quick question and a quick

answer.

MR.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Given this is Diabetes Awareness Month, it's timely to

look at this. Flash monitors, of course, as we know, they take at periodic times

and the continuous one is ongoing.

If we are truly invested in health and choosing

wellness over illness, will government provide assistance to people who

desperately need this?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR.

HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

We made the expansion to the Insulin Pump Program on

the basis of recommendations from clinicians. I refer the Member to previous

comments about using evidence to inform our decisions. That evidence has not yet

been presented to me and I'm not aware that it actually exists in the form the

Member opposite would have me believe. Certainly, should the clinicians have

that, I would happy to have my staff look at it, Mr. Speaker. At the moment, we

have $3.3 million for a universal Insulin Pump Program.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We're hearing from family-operated child care centres

that the information released about the $25-a-day program will make it difficult

for them to be able to operate.

I just ask the Premier: What is he doing to ensure that

the province doesn't lose valuable child care spots?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Education.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we certainly want to work with our

partners in early learning and child care to ensure that we grow the number of

child care spaces in the province. We intend to do that. We have a consultation

process that is starting early in the new year.

Having said that, I've welcomed and continue to welcome

feedback from early learning and child care centres between now and then to get

their feedback and to look at options and suggestions and concerns that they

have.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Thank you.

Child care operators in Labrador West have reached out

to me multiple times and, in turn, I've reached out to the minister multiple

times, about concerns that their child care centres will have and the

possibility of closure if the program is not improved.

I ask the Premier: Has he spoken to child care

operators in Labrador to understand the vital roles that they play in the

community?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Education.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There are heightened concerns in some areas of

Labrador, in particular the Member's district, because of the competing jobs and

higher wages as a result of the resource sector. We understand that, Mr.

Speaker.

I know that the Peacock learning centre in Labrador,

government had invested about $900,000 over the past two years to get that

centre up and running. They are facing challenges with the recruitment of early

childhood educators. We've put in place a pilot project to allow centres to hire

temporary replacements in the event of an absent worker or in areas where it's

harder to recruit. We continue to look for options.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS.

COFFIN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When asked about a living wage last week, the minister

deflected and congratulated both sides of a labour dispute for getting back to

the table. He also deferred discussions about a living wage to the committee on

basic income.

To clarify, basic income is a form of a social safety

net to help individuals who are often not working or are partially employed;

whereas, a living wage will ensure that working individuals can afford to build

better lives for their families.

I ask again: Will the minister legislate a living wage?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Immigration, Skills and Labour.

MR.

BYRNE:

Mr.

Speaker, a living wage is a circumstance which would require a description and a

definition that I would ask the hon. Member opposite, the Leader of the Third

Party, to come forward with her perspectives, because I appreciate her

perspectives.

Obviously, a living wage would be very different for a

student than an adult, or an adult who has dependant children. So a living wage

has a very different context and definition, depending on the person involved.

It's difficult to legislate that. It's difficult for employers to make decisions

around hiring based on a requirement to be able to make the living wage of a

particular individual.

These are important questions, important issues, and I

look forward to discussion at the All-Party Committee because I think, maybe,

that could be a good venue for such a discussion.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

minister's time has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MR.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I understand that on Friday a memo went

out to schools promising that laptops and Chromebooks would soon be in the hands

of teachers and students. It's encouraging to see that my question on Thursday

elicited this much action.

With this in mind, I ask the Minister of Education:

Will he now table a list of schools which have received these devices, how many

teachers and students have these devices in hand, and a timetable of when the

remaining schools can expect to receive theirs?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Education.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Mr.

on the edge of his seat anticipating the next question from the Member.

Mr. Speaker, I will endeavour to get a

schedule of

schools and the timelines involved in getting these devices out. I know that the

devices have to be formatted. The laptops, my understanding is they've arrived.

They're in the process of being formatted. Some schools may already have them.

laptops into the hands of teachers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Notices of motion – sorry, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice of Bill 53,

An Act To Amend The Vital

Statistics Act, 2009.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

The hon. the Member for Burin - Grand Bank.

MS.

HALEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice of the following private

Member's motion, which will be seconded by the Member for Fortune Bay - Cape La

Hune:

WHEREAS Wednesday, November 11, 2020, is Remembrance

Day; and

WHEREAS Remembrance Day is a day to honour and remember

the people who have served, and continue to serve Canada during times of war,

conflict and peace; and

WHEREAS Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have an

illustrious history of service and have suffered great tragedies in the line of

duty; and

WHEREAS the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic will restrict

many annual commemorative ceremonies;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the House supports

veterans in Newfoundland and Labrador and recognizes the sacrifices made by all

members of the Canadian Forces; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the House urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to work with the Royal Canadian Legion and other

partners to rehabilitate the Newfoundland National Memorial in time for the

Memorial's centennial on July 1, 2024.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to Standing Order 63(3), the private Member's

resolution entered by the Member for Burin - Grand Bank shall be the one debated

this Wednesday.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

MR.

A. PARSONS:

Mr.

Speaker, pursuant to an undertaking that I made in Question Period, I undertook

to this House to provide information on Search Minerals, and I was a bit

surprised that I didn't realize that there was processing going out of province.

The reason I was surprised is because there isn't.

What I've had confirmed from Search is that, in fact,

there is a few samples of concentrate of this rare earth that is going to a

research facility in Saskatchewan to be processed to determine feasibility. In

fact, the goal is to – again, this was a project that was worked on by the

government as well as ACOA with the hopes – there is no separation facility in

North America right now. The goal is to determine feasibility so that this

company can continue on with their mining, which I would point out is in

Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair, in the hopes of discovering 200 jobs.

I would point out to anybody that was listening; there

is no commercial processing of these minerals going on. I felt the House should

be aware of that information.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further answers to questions for which notice has been given?

Petitions.

Petitions

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

MR.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

WHEREAS small businesses are the backbone of

Newfoundland and Labrador's increasingly diversified economy and their

contributions and the role they play in society is anything but small; and

WHEREAS they are creating jobs and opportunities,

strengthening and building communities and fortifying the provincial economy as

well as creating innovative solutions; and

WHEREAS there are supports available to small

businesses during the pandemic, there are small businesses that continue to

struggle;

THEREFORE we petition the hon. House of Assembly as

follows: We, the undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to develop a course of action to assist

small businesses that are unable to avail of the current supports or are in need

of other supports to ensure they survive the current pandemic and continue to

contribute to the success of our economy in the long term.

Mr. Speaker, I don't think anyone in this House will

deny the contribution small businesses have made to our economy and what they've

done during our pandemic.

There are approximately, somewhere in the ballpark of

15,000 to 17,000 small- and medium-sized enterprises in Newfoundland and

Labrador. They cover a range of services and products, and they are there when

we need them. Some of these became essential workers during the pandemic. Some

of the funding programs that are available, some have not been able to avail of

those.

Unfortunately, we've seen some of these businesses

close shop. We've seen others try to adjust and are operating at a lesser

volume, but they continue to survive. With Christmas season coming along, it's

going to be hard on many people who are concerned about employment and people

concerned about where they're going to buy their groceries or their essentials.

I would ask that all of us in this House of Assembly

make an effort to get out and support our small- and medium-sized enterprises.

These people need it for us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

P. DINN:

the past, you'd normally call them mom-and-pop shop; some of them are family

run. There is absolutely no reason why we cannot get out and support them as the

Christmas season approaches and with that support, buy local, buy Newfoundland

and Labrador. If we take that approach then we're going to come out of this on

the other end looking a lot better.

I thank you for your time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The background to this petition is as follows: An

extension was approved to Robert E. Howlett highway on March 25, 2014. An

environmental assessment, design and engineering of this project was completed

and continued residential and commercial growth has increased traffic flows to

the Southern Avalon.

Therefore, we petition the hon. House of Assembly as

follows: To reinstate the approved extension of Robert E. Howlett highway to

improve and ensure the safety of the travelling public to the Southern Avalon.

The reason I speak on this is, in 2014, this was

already done, approved and the government, in its wisdom, has decided to cancel

this project or move it back. It's detrimental to the safety of all the

residents in the Ferryland District. I look at some of the bypass roads or

extensions that were done, one in Torbay, one going to Carbonear and they're

vital for the safety of the people in the community.

If you can remember going down through Bay Roberts and

all those areas, you're not going through the centre of the communities in

regards to that. Some people are driving on the highways and it's a little safer

for the communities themselves. The speed limits in these communities, as you

drive through, the reduced speed is 50 kilometres.

With this extension, it brings people to our area, to

our tourism, to our marine bases that are there: one in Bay Bulls and another

proposed one in Fermeuse. It's vital that we get back to looking at this.

Not a part of this, but we also had the Team Gushue

Highway, which was stopped, and there was an extension done to that to join the

Robert E. Howlett, that has also been stopped. We don't hear anything on that

and we'd like to know where it is in our area because people travel that

highway. I would say there are a good many residents that use the Team Gushue to

get to Robert E. Howlett right now as it is. We'd like to see that reinstated,

if we could.

Thank you.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further petitions?

The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

MR.

PARROTT:

Mr. Speaker, the background of this petition is as follows:

WHEREAS residents of the area troubled with the unsafe

conditions of the road; and

WHEREAS residents of the area concerned with the lack

of maintenance repairs to the road; and

WHEREAS the road is owned and maintained by

Transportation and Infrastructure Department, Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador; and

WHEREAS the road is the only access to and from the

Town of Terra Nova; and

WHEREAS the road is travelled by schoolchildren that

travel to Glovertown school;

THEREFORE we, the residents of the geographical area

surrounding Terra Nova, petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: We, the

undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador that the roads be repaired and maintained to a

standard that is safe for travel by all residents of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, since May of 2019, I have been asking

questions about the road in Terra Nova and there have been a multitude of

excuses. First, I asked what the standards were for repair of road and I was

told it was a measurement taken from centre line. Well, I'll tell the Speaker

that the only thing remaining on the road going into Terra Nova is the centre

line.

I went out and I took multiple pictures, 30, 40

pictures, on several occasions and sent in. There are spots where they put some

asphalt in one pothole, skipped over one, went to the next. It was every second

or third pothole being done. There are also large sections of as much as eight

feet where there's probably one foot of asphalt replaced and the remaining seven

untouched.

This year, we went looking for a plan, after

consultations with the town, trying to find a solution. We figured a solution

would be to do small patches of full pieces of road. I personally went out

myself, took all the coordinates and sent in. The response I got from the

minister's department was they could tear up the existing – chip seal is what it

is – and treat it as a gravel road. We've heard all the excuses.

I went back to the department and I asked the

department about the chip seal, which was supposed to be a pilot project. I

asked them what the results of the pilot project were. No one could answer me.

There was supposed to be work done the year after the chip seal was applied. No

one answered me.

I know there could be an excuse coming that says it was

a previous administration or it was your government or something like that, but

the reality of this is it's not about who's in power; it's about what's

happening right now and the safety of children that travel to school on a daily

basis and the safety of the residents that live in Terra Nova.

The road is in unacceptable circumstances. If our

solution for people who live in rural Newfoundland is to tear up the existing

asphalt and replace it with gravel roads, we're heading down a pretty scary

path.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, we're looking for this road to

be maintained and fixed up.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I call Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Tourism, Culture, Arts and

Recreation, for leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act Respecting Tourist

Accommodations, Bill 52, and I further move that the said bill be now read a

first time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that the hon. minister shall have leave to introduce a

bill entitled,

An Act Respecting Tourist Accommodations, Bill 52, and that the

said bill now be read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture, Arts

and Recreation to introduce a bill, “An Act Respecting Tourist Accommodations,”

carried. (Bill 52)

ACTING TABLE OFFICER (Hammond):

A bill,

An Act Respecting Tourist Accommodations. (Bill

52)

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

bill has now been read a first time.

When shall the said bill be read a second time?

MR.

CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 52 read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader,

for leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Condominium Act,

2009, The Co-operatives Act And The Corporations Act, Bill 51, and I further

move that the bill be now read a first time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that the hon. minister shall have leave to introduce a

bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Condominium Act, 2009, The Co-operatives Act

And The Corporations Act, Bill 51, and that this bill now be read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Digital Government and

Service Newfoundland and Labrador to introduce a bill, “An Act To Amend The

Condominium Act, 2009, The Co-operatives Act And The Corporations Act,” carried.

(Bill 51)

ACTING TABLE OFFICER:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Condominium Act, 2009, The Co-operatives Act

And The Corporations Act. (Bill 51)

MR.

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a first time.

When shall the said bill be read a second time?

MR.

CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 51 read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Motion 11.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Deputy Government

House Leader, that under Standing Order 11(1) this House not adjourn at 5:30

p.m. on Monday, November 2, 2020.

MR.

SPEAKER:

has been moved and seconded that pursuant to Standing Order 11(1) that the House

not adjourn at 5 p.m. on Monday, November 2, 2020.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, number 5, second reading

of Bill 46.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that Bill 46, entitled

An Act to Amend the Credit Union

Act –

HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

MR.

SPEAKER:

Okay. Sorry, I didn't realize this is a continuation of a debate that we had

already started.

The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I would like to thank the Member to the

left of me there for Cape St. Francis who filled in last week when we introduced

the bill. He took over and did that part while I was off, and I certainly thank

him for that.

I'd also like to thank the department. When we did our

briefing, they were very informative on giving us all the details on this. It's

a pretty comprehensive bill. There are 86 proposed amendments to this, so it's a

lot of detail. We, on this side, certainly support the changes to the bill. I'll

read through some of the stuff we did at our briefing, and I'm sure he probably

touched on it the other day but I just want to touch on some of the parts of the

bill that we'll be looking at.

First of all, like I said, Bill 46 includes 86 proposed

amendments to the Credit Union Act. Some of the stuff is the disclosure of

potential conflict of interest by directors and officers; establishing by-laws

for engaging external third parties; separating the roles and duties of the

superintendent and the CEO; updating the responsibilities and structure of the

Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation – the acronym is CUDGC, it's pretty

hard to say all that out every time, so we'll use that if we can; facilitating

the establishment of a federal credit union; some record keeping;

definitions;

modernizing language; penalties and offences; enhanced membership; timelines;

increase regulation making authority, and other minor amendments in that as

well.

Some of the background on this; the current act has

been in effect since 2009. Associated regulations were amended as recently as

April of last year. According to the department officials, there are nine credit

unions in the province serving over – we had a letter from the credit union also

supporting that, and to update on the number it was serving. We had 62,000.

There are currently 63,800 members and they're also in support of that. They

sent out a letter supporting this bill as well and in favour of it. So we

certainly appreciate that.

Credit unions cover over 36 locations throughout

Newfoundland and Labrador and currently employ 317 people. They also offer a

wide range of financial services similar to banks, including chequing, savings

accounts, loans, mortgages and credit investment services.

Going on to some other information as well. Credit

unions are independently owned by members. The credit union – which, again, is

CUDGC – is a provincial Crown corporation and responsible for administering and

ensuring compliance with the Credit Union

Act and regulations.

The current act identifies a superintendent of credit

unions to also serve as the CEO of the credit union. That's some of the proposed

regulations they're changing. I'll just go down and touch on some of those.

We're not going to be able to do them all, obviously, but I'll go down and touch

on some of those.

When we were doing our briefing, the officials noted

that some of the key arrangements are: requiring directors and official officers

of a credit union and of the CUDGC to disclose potential conflict of interest.

This isn't spelled out in our current legislation. So the proposed amendments

will identify what constitutes a conflict, require disclosure and provide a

process for disclosure as well. I think it's important to get away from one CEO

– so to separate that. I think that's important.

Requiring credit unions to establish bylaws for

engaging external third parties to perform services on behalf of the credit

union. An example is an IT service provider. This is addressed in

section 47.1

and added to the act. Officials noted this addition would help minimize

potential risk to members from third party arrangements.

Also separating the roles of the duties of the

superintendent and the CEO, which I just touched on. Also we're going to be

updating the current structure of the board. This will align with the

international guidelines and the structure within other jurisdictions.

Also, we'll be updating – we'll all be updating, I

guess – duties, powers and responsibilities of the CUDGC and the superintendent.

Officials had said that this aligns with best practices, and other jurisdictions

will require to report significant issues to the superintendent.

Again, to highlight how many amendments are there:

There are 13 amendments related to record keeping; there are 10 amendments that

are related to new and revised

definitions in the act. An example would be

several

definitions are added related to federal continuance, which is a new

section added to the act, and another example of that is the definition of

material contact. It's also added to the act as well.

There are nine amendments that are related to

modernizing and updating the language.

Section 36 on trust funds is updated to

include electronic transactions. There are also instances where wording is

changed for clarity. Such as under

section 180, to clarify when notice is sent

by mail or electronic means.

There are seven amendments related to facilitating the

establishment of credit unions. A new

section is added to the act to address

this. Officials explained that this is a long way off, but it would permit

provincial credit unions to operate as a federal credit union upon approval from

provincial government and subject to federal regulations. Some pretty in-depth

regulations that are here.

There are also five amendments to increase offences and

penalties. Under

section 169 and 170, the upper limit of fines for individuals

is increased to $25,000, and the fines for corporations between $10,000 and

$50,000.

There are also five amendments that are aimed at

enhancing membership in credit unions, allowing members for more input into

dividend decisions.

There are also four amendments dealing with timelines

under the act. So the references, notification periods for meetings and allow

electronic meetings, which officials noted as a modern way to do business,

particularly in the current health emergency. During COVID, some of these banks

and credit unions or whatever the case may be, I guess they found it difficult

at the time to be able to have meetings in general and try to do them virtually

and some new regulations that are going to be added.

Also, there are four amendments that are dealing with

timelines under the act, so references, notification periods for meetings – no,

I already said that. Sorry.

There are also several other amendments including

expanded regulation-making authorities.

That's touching on some of the 86 amendments on that.

When we get into Committee, we have some questions there for sure that we will

ask and be able to get some answers to. Hopefully, when we get there, that there

are other people that have some questions, we will certainly try to get them

answered.

Thank you.

MADAM SPEAKER (P. Parsons):

The Member for Mount Scio.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

I just want to thank the Members for speaking about

this bill. It seems like there is general support, so I'm very thankful for

everyone for that.

I'd like to thank the MHA for Labrador West. His points

about digital banking and how consumers' interests are changing is very

relevant. So thank you very much.

I'd like to thank the MHA for Cape St. Francis for his

very relevant remarks last week about this bill as well; a lot about protecting

members. So thank you very much.

The MHA for Ferryland, thank you very much for your

feedback today as well.

I look forward to discussing this in Committee and

answering any questions that Members have.

Thank you very much.

MR.

SPEAKER (Reid):

The

hon. the Deputy Government House Leader.

MS.

DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Digital Government

and Service NL, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to

consider Bill 46,

An Act To Amend The Credit Union Act, 2009.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that I do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve

itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider the said bill.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

One second, before we do that, we did that procedure a

little bit wrong there. We didn't do the vote on second reading before going

into Committee. I'm going to revert to – the minister spoke and we didn't take

the vote on second reading. So just to make sure we have everything right.

Is the House ready for the question?

The motion is that Bill 46 be now read a second time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

ACTING TABLE OFFICER:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Credit Union Act, 2009. (Bill 46)

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

bill has now been read a second time.

When shall the said bill be referred to a Committee of

the Whole?

MR.

CROCKER:

Now.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Now.

On motion, a bill “An Act To Amend The Credit Union

Act, 2009,” read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole

presently, by leave. (Bill 46)

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that I do now leave the Chair and that the House resolve

itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider the said bill.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried,

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a

Committee of the Whole, the Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (P. Parsons):

Order, please!

We are now considering Bill 46,

An Act To Amend The

Credit Union Act, 2009.

A bill, “An Act To Amend The Credit Union Act, 2009.”

(Bill 46)

ACTING TABLE OFFICER:

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Shall clause 1 carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye,

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

ACTING TABLE OFFICER:

Clauses 2 through 86 inclusive.

CHAIR:

Clauses 2 through 86 inclusive.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I had them broken down in different clauses, I didn't

know if you were going to go through five or 10 at a time, but in clauses 5 and

6, sections 11 and 12 of the act references names and prohibited names. There

was a reference in the Explanatory Notes of the bill to removing the authority

for credit union's to use the title: Co-operative Credit Society.

Are there any instances –?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh,

oh!

CHAIR:

Order, please!

I'm having trouble hearing the speaker.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Are

there any instances of that being used now? I'm not sure if you could hear the

question or not.

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

I'm

just wondering if you could just clarify one more time the exact question.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

There's a reference in the Explanatory Notes of the bill to removing the

authority for credit unions to use the title: Co-operative Credit Society. Are

there any instances of that being used now?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

No,

there are not.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Section 35 references a member's right to withdraw deposits. With these

amendments, the authority for a credit union to require 90 days written notice

from a member to withdraw money is to be removed.

What replaces that now? Will notice be required?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Sorry, can the Member repeat the question.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Section 35 references a member's right to withdraw deposits. With these

amendments, the authority for a credit union to require 90 days written notice

from a member to withdraw money will be removed.

What replaces that now? Will notice be required?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Nothing has replaced it. The requirement is simply removed. There will not be

any notice required.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Under sections 37 and 38, the requirements in the act regarding payouts of money

upon death will be replaced with a requirement that credit unions establish

policies regarding deceased members.

Can you offer further details on this?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

think, obviously, if members have a loved one who's deceased, it's important

that each credit union, or a group of credit unions, have policies and

procedures in place to ensure that loved ones or family members or partners or

spouses or descendants or beneficiaries receive money that they're entitled to

legally that might be remaining in their account. I believe this change will

just ensure that each credit union – will make it lawful that each credit union

has to have those policies and procedures in place.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Section 117 references amalgamation of credit unions. The requirement that at

least 60 per cent of the creditors of an amalgamating credit union must consent

to amalgamation is being removed.

Why is that? Can you offer further details on that?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Sorry, what number was that?

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Section 117.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Sorry, can the Member repeat the question.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

The

requirement that at least 60 per cent of the creditors of an amalgamating credit

union must consent to amalgamation is being removed.

Why is that? Can you offer further details?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

When the changes for this Credit Union Act were put in

place, one of the things we're doing is aligning them with credit union

legislation in other provinces. That's one reason why we're making this change.

I'm just waiting for additional information at the

moment. Can we potentially come back to this so I can add more clarity in a

minute, please?

Thank you.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Yes, no problem. If you don't have the answer there,

then just let us know that and we will move on to the next one.

Section 131.1 is a new

section that's added to the act

referencing federal continuance. In our briefing, we were told that this will

allow credit unions in our province to apply for federal continuance and to

facilitate establishing a federal credit union. We were also told that this is a

long ways off but it was decided to put it in the act in order to avoid the

options available.

I am wondering why that is being put in there now

rather than being dealt with in the future amendments.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

As these acts don't get modified very often and we are

doing a very comprehensive review, we felt like it was important to add that in

case a credit union was, say, big enough to meet the federal criteria to become

a federal credit union. My understanding is none of our current credit unions

meet that criteria at the moment. I think we were just trying to be

comprehensive so that if, in the future, a credit union did meet the credit, we

wouldn't have to come back and change the legislation.

I did, Madam Chair, have a response for the previous

question, if that's okay. I just wanted to add also that in terms of putting

regulations in for a deceased member, in terms of the credit union putting

members in place, we did that change because it just kind of aligns with general

credit union principles. It was important that when someone has an heir, there

are policies and procedures in place to direct appropriately how that money

flows.

Thank you.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Sections 169 and 170 deal with offences. The fines have increased for

individuals, but not for corporations. Is there a reason for this and are the

offences and penalties in line with other jurisdictions?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We did review the fines for other provinces for

individuals and for corporations. They're in alignment, but also proportional to

the size of our credit unions, the size of our credit union holdings. Obviously,

a very large credit union in Ontario with many, many more members than we have

would have larger fines in that instance. Based on the size of our credit

unions, the amount of holdings, the amount of members, we did review across the

country and we felt that these were proportionate and appropriate for our credit

unions in the province.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The Chair recognizes the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Regulation making authority is expanded with these amendments. When will the

associated regulations be available?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

The

team will be drafting regulations, I believe that's already started, and that

goes through the process of getting Cabinet approval. I would anticipate within

the year. I think that's standard once a piece of legislation comes to the

House, there's a year before regulations are in place. So I would expect that

would be the case.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The Chair recognizes the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

How were the credit union members engaged in this review process, if they were?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

There was an extensive consultation process with credit

unions and credit union members. We also have the Credit Union Deposit Guarantee

Corporation, which is a Crown corporation, as well as a board and we have the

superintendent of credit unions as well within our department. We are confident

that we have listened to and incorporated credit union member feedback in the

proposed changes to the legislation.

CHAIR:

The

Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Do all of these proposed amendments stem from the review of the credit union

legislation completed by the Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm not familiar with exactly where each amendment has

come from, specifically, where it originated. It is a result of the thorough

review of each provincial legislation, our current legislation, a review by the

Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation, the board and a thorough stakeholder

engagement ensuring that we have a safe legislative environment.

The foremost thing, Madam Chair, is protecting the

interests of the members of credit unions in Newfoundland and Labrador. That's

our primary goal, having a dependable, trustworthy, reliable financial system

that residents of the province can have faith in and trust and protect the

members, protect their hard-earned money that may be held in these credit

unions.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The Chair recognizes the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Do these amendments include and address all recommendations made by the CUDGC?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Sorry, I didn't quite understand the question.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

these amendments include and address all recommendations made?

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My understanding is the Credit Union Deposit Guarantee

Corporation is in alignment with most of the recommendations here. I would say

that, as the provincial government, we have a unique perspective as the

regulator and we are trying to protect the interest of members. Not all

stakeholder groups are happy with all elements of the legislation, but this is

our kind of proposed that aligns with the other provinces and also protects

members and maintains a trustworthy, reliable financial system.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The Chair recognizes the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Officials indicated that credit union legislation in other jurisdictions was

also reviewed. Are these amendments in line with other jurisdictions? Is there

anything that is an outlier or different from best practices in other

jurisdictions?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

This review is a result of provincial and territorial

review of credit union legislative changes that we have done. My understanding

is that while we do have kind of a unique situation here with the Credit Union

Deposit Guarantee Corporation, as being a Crown corporation, there are some

nuances that make it different from the credit unions and how they are governed

in the other provinces. But, specifically, there are no legislative outliers

here that make this system substantially different than any other system.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The Chair recognizes the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Are

all stakeholders supportive of these amendments?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

am aware of a few changes that a few stakeholders would like us to make that

aren't reflected here, but we are confident that this reflects the best

legislative package we could put forward to protect the people and protect the

members. But my understanding is, generally, everyone is very supportive of this

bill and these proposed changes.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

CHAIR:

The

Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

When will these changes take effect? You might have said that but I'm not sure

if I caught that.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The regulations that accompany this bill would – I just

received information. We're hoping to have those in summer 2021 so that's when

this bill would take effect.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

What is your plan to communicate these changes to the stakeholders?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Once we have the regulations developed and they pass

through the appropriate Cabinet processes, they would be communicated through

the Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation to all the credit unions. We have

a communications plan in place to make sure that all credit unions are aware of

the changes. This act also has, as we know, changes that they'll have to make in

terms of how credit unions operate, how their boards operate and how they

communicate with their members.

I would also anticipate members seeing, perhaps next

fall, the result of these changes where information that they receive from their

credit unions is updated and is more appropriate and aligned with this

legislation.

I can't remember what the question was, sorry.

Thank you.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

No,

that was good. I had asked: What was your plan to communicate these changes to

the stakeholders?

All good, that's it for me on questions.

CHAIR:

Any

further speakers?

Shall clauses 2 to 86 carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, clauses 2 through 86 carried.

ACTING TABLE OFFICER:

Be it enacted by the Lieutenant-Governor and House of Assembly in

Legislative Session convened, as follows.

CHAIR:

Shall the enacting clause carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, enacting clause carried.

ACTING TABLE OFFICER:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Credit Union Act, 2009.

CHAIR:

Shall the title carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, title carried.

CHAIR:

Shall I report the bill without amendment carried?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the

bill without amendment, carried.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, I move that the Committee rise and report

Bill 46.

CHAIR:

it the pleasure of the House that the Committee rise and report Bill 46?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and

ask leave to sit again, the Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR.

SPEAKER (Reid):

The

hon. the Member for Harbour Grace - Port de Grave.

MS.

P. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Committee of the Whole have considered the matters

to them referred and have directed me to report Bill 46,

An Act To Amend The

Credit Union Act, 2009, without amendment.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

Chair of the Committee of the Whole reports that the Committee have considered

the matters to them referred and have directed her to report Bill 46 carried

without amendment.

When shall the report be received?

MR.

CROCKER:

Now.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Now.

When shall the said bill be read a third time?

MR.

CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

On motion, report received and adopted. Bill ordered

read a third time on tomorrow.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I call Order 7, second reading of Bill 50.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Transportation and

Infrastructure, that Bill 50,

An Act To Amend The Auditor General Act, be now

read a second time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that Bill 50,

An Act To Amend The Auditor General Act, be

now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, “An Act To Amend The

Auditor General Act.” (Bill 50)

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I'm pleased this afternoon to take some time to give

some information and a little bit of background around Bill 50 which deals with

an amendment to the Auditor General Act.

This bill will amend the act to replace the reference

to a sitting of the House of Assembly in subsection 7(2) with a reference to a

session of the House of Assembly.

Just some context: on March 11, 2020, the former

Auditor General resigned. In July 2020, the Deputy Auditor General was appointed

in an acting capacity. The Deputy Auditor General can perform the duties of the

Auditor General; however, it's important that we make this change here today to

the act, because the act currently states: “Where the office of the auditor

general becomes vacant and an acting auditor general is appointed under

paragraph 1(

b) or (c), the term of the acting auditor general shall not extend

beyond the end of the next sitting of the House of Assembly.”

Today we want to change sitting to session. There are a

number of reasons for this. It's due in lots of parts to the reference to how

long a sitting can actually be. Technically, a sitting can be as short as a day.

We've had many extraordinary sittings since COVID-19 here in this Chamber and

this would fall back in line. With the changes around the Auditor General being

selected by the Independent Appointments Commission, it does take more time.

Again, the proposal today is we change that.

The amendment outlined in Bill 50 would address this

timing issue by removing the word “sitting” and replacing it with “session.”

This would have the effect of changing the acting appointment from “… shall not

extend beyond the end of the next sitting of the House of Assembly” to “… shall

not extend beyond the end of the next session of the House of Assembly.” The

term “session” is the period of time between Speeches of the Throne and

prorogation.

Prior to 2016, the tender for enacting an Auditor

General was not an issue as the appointment could be filled at any point during

the vacancy. Using the new Independent Appointments Commission, their

recruitment process does take some more time.

Mr. Speaker, I'm not going to belabour the change any

further, but I'll certainly look forward to other Members, if they have some

input or want to make some comments about this change.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port.

MR.

WAKEHAM:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'll just have a few comments to make. Obviously, we

support this change.

As someone who started his career in public service

with the Department of the Auditor General, I can attribute to the important

work that the Auditor General department does.

In my time there, of course, we were way back. At that

time, we were actually doing municipal audits as well as Crown audits. I had the

pleasure of going around several areas of this province and I used to say we'd

put on our accounting hat and do the accounting work first to get the financial

statements in order and then we'd audit our own work. It's come a long ways, I'm

glad to say, from municipalities and government. The Auditor General is a very

important office, as we all recognize, and the work they do allows us to be able

to have informed decisions a lot of times in our House of Assembly here.

Again, the minister has alluded to the appointment of

the Auditor General as being for a 10-year term through the Independent

Appointments Commission and a recommendation of the House of Assembly. We've

seen where the previous Auditor General had stepped down prior to that period

being up and we find ourselves in a situation where we have an Acting Auditor

General. The idea is that the work continues, and even though the word acting is

in front of the Auditor General currently, that work does continue and the

Auditor General and the Auditor General's department continue to do valuable

work on behalf of the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Again, this change in wording will allow us to move, as

the minister referred to, from a sitting to a session and give more flexibility.

We support the change and I'll conclude my remarks.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further comments?

The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Here in the NDP caucus or the Third Party caucus, we do

support this change to move from sitting to session. We think it's important to

give the comprehensive review that gives them ample time to select an Auditor

General. We respect the work that is done in that division. We support that

motion.

Thank you.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Seeing no further speakers, I'm going to ask the hon. Government House Leader to

close the debate.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I'm not sure if that was a record or not, but this just

goes to show that this is pretty much a housekeeping piece of legislation. I

thank the Members opposite, the Member for Lab. West and the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port for their input.

I note one of the things that the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port noted was in this circumstance, the past Auditor

General left mid-term or part way through her term. This did leave a situation

where there was little time for planning. Again, that's why we find ourselves

here.

Mr. Speaker, I thank you and we'll move to Committee.

MR.

SPEAKER:

the House ready for the question?

The motion is that Bill 50 be now read a second time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK (Barnes):

bill,

An Act To Amend The Auditor General Act. (Bill 50)

MR.

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a second time.

When shall the said bill be referred to a Committee of

the Whole House?

MR.

CROCKER:

Now.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Now.

On motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Auditor General

Act,” 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.

CROCKER:

Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader, that this House

resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider Bill 50.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve

itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider the said bill.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a

Committee of the Whole, the Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (P. Parsons):

Order, please!

We are now considering Bill 50,

An Act To Amend The

Auditor General Act.

A bill, “An Act To Amend The Auditor General Act.”

(Bill 50)

CLERK:

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Shall clause 1 carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK:

it enacted by the Lieutenant-Governor and House of Assembly in Legislative

Session convened, as follows.

CHAIR:

Shall the enacting clause carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Member for St. John's East - Quidi Vidi.

MS.

COFFIN:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm curious to know: What will happen to this bill or

the Auditor General's position if an election is called before we get a chance

to appoint a new Auditor General?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

In that circumstance, the Acting Auditor General would

continue. The reality here, this is an officer of the House of Assembly; it's

not an officer of the government. I'm actually speaking today, I guess, on

behalf of the House of Assembly, but this is independent from government itself.

This is an office of the House of Assembly.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Member for St. John's East - Quidi Vidi.

MS.

COFFIN:

So we're not going to get one if there's an election called before one is

appointed? I'm sorry, I wasn't quite clear on what …

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much.

Normally, you would be sitting here in Committee and

you would be looking at getting words back from the department. In this case,

I'm getting some of the answers from the House itself, being a House position.

So the Acting Auditor General would continue in that situation.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Member for St. John's East - Quidi Vidi.

MS.

COFFIN:

Will this have any affect on the timing of the Auditor General's report for this

year?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

I think, as the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port actually said, the

function of the Auditor General continues on. The Auditor General is an officer

of the House, so his or her work would continue on regardless of an election.

Any time we have an election, every four years or

whatever it may be, the work of the Auditor General continues on. The Auditor

General is a 10-year appointment. I think that's one of the reasons why the

Auditor General is appointed in a 10-year term so that the Auditor General is

not tied to a specific Parliament or an Assembly.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Member for St. John's East - Quidi Vidi.

MS.

COFFIN:

I think that's all of my questions for now. I just wanted to have those on the

record for the House.

Thank you.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The Chair recognizes the Member for Conception Bay East

- Bell Island.

MR.

BRAZIL:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm not quite sure if the minister can answer this.

Knowing that it is an officer of the House, is there a

time frame that we're working towards to have the new AG appointed?

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

It's my understanding that the process through the IAC

is moving along and has actually progressed substantially along the way, so I

would expect to see that in the not too distant future.

CHAIR:

Any

further speakers?

Shall the enacting clause carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK:

Act To Amend The Auditor General Act.

CHAIR:

Shall the title carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, title carried.

CHAIR:

Shall I report the bill carried without amendment?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the

bill without amendment, carried.

CHAIR:

The

Chair recognizes the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, I move that the Committee rise and report

Bill 50.

CHAIR:

it the pleasure of the House to rise the Committee and report the bill?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and

ask leave to sit again, the Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR.

SPEAKER (Reid):

The hon. the Member for Harbour Grace - Port de Grave.

MS.

P. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Committee of the Whole have considered the matters

to them referred and have directed me to report Bill 50,

An Act To Amend The

Auditor General Act, without amendment.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

Chair of the Committee of the Whole reports that the Committee have considered

the matters to them referred and directs her to report Bill 50 without

amendment.

When shall the report be received?

MR.

CROCKER:

Now.

MR.

SPEAKER:

When will the said bill be read a third time?

MR.

CROCKER:

Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

On motion, report received and adopted. Bill ordered

read a third time on tomorrow.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Motion 2, Bill 48, a

resolution respecting the imposition of taxes on vapour products.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Finance.

MS.

COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Government House Leader, that

the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on Ways and Means to

consider certain resolutions and a bill respecting the imposition of taxes on

vapour products, Bill 48.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve

itself into a Committee of the Whole on Ways and Means.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a

Committee of the Whole, the Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (P. Parsons):

Order, please!

We are now debating the related resolution on Bill 48.

Resolution

Be it resolved

by the House of Assembly in Legislative Session convened, as follows:

“That is it is expedient to bring in a measure

respecting the imposition of taxes on vapor products.”

CHAIR:

Shall the resolution carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

The Chair recognizes the Minister of Finance.

MS.

COADY:

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I appreciate having the opportunity to

speak for a few moments on this particular resolution.

For the members of Newfoundland and Labrador who are

listening today, e-cigarettes are battery-operated devices that mimic the

smoking experience, using an inhalation and heating process that vaporizes

liquid within the device. The liquid solution varies in composition but it's

usually a glycol-based or propylene-based and can be combined with other

ingredients and flavours. Nicotine can also be present or not.

While early studies demonstrated some potential

benefits to e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation device, current research remains

inconclusive and the body of evidence is rapidly growing and shifting in terms

of concern for various health impacts.

In Budget 2020 ,

the government outlined concerns about some harm caused by vaping and

tobacco, particularly, Madam Chair, among youth. Smoking and vaping are a

significant public health concern with long-term impacts to our health care

system.

In Budget 2020 ,

we introduced a 20 per cent tax on vaping products, as well as increases that

we've already debated here in the House on tobacco. The budget also had about

$1.7 million to prevent and reduce tobacco and vaping use, which I think is

very, very important. We're only the third province in the country to implement

a tax. British Columbia, as well as Nova Scotia, have already put their taxes on

these products, Madam Chair.

I will also say that I've been in touch with

some members of industry who are supportive of an excise tax to ensure that we

deter people, especially young people, from consuming these products. I have

read an interesting study, Madam Chair, from the World Bank Group. There are

several studies they talk about, but they've estimated the price elasticity of

e-cigarettes and they talk about that it's been “revealed that higher prices for

e-cigarette disposable appear to be associated with reduced e-cigarette use

among adolescents ….” I think that's critical, that we continue to deter people

from utilizing these devices.

I also think it's very important, Madam Chair,

that we put the supports in place to help people, to dissuade them from using

either tobacco or vaping. I can tell you that according to Health Canada, vape

use is far more prevalent among younger Canadians, age 15 to 24. That's Health

Canada 2019 Canadian Tobacco and Nicotine Survey.

You're starting to see the use of vape amongst

the youngest of our society and we really do need to start deterring these

people. It would make, I'm sure, this government and, indeed, every Member of

this House of Assembly pleased if we were to collect no tax that we're putting

in place today, because what it would mean is that people weren't utilizing

these devices.

We really want to have a healthier population.

Some people say maybe we should just ban vaping and tobacco, but we've seen that

prohibition doesn't work. We've seen that time and time again. What we want to

do is really try and dissuade people from smoking and from vaping. As I said,

the World Health Organization says that increasing taxes on “tobacco products is

the single most consistently effective tool for reducing tobacco use,” with

greater impact on young people and low-income individuals.

What we want to do here today – and I think I

have the support of the House based on our debates of a week or so ago that we

had a private Member's resolution come forward and there was some great

discussion and debate in the House of Assembly to really reduce the prevalence

of vaping. I heard from all of our colleagues in the House of Assembly in

support of trying to help people curb their addiction to vaping and to tobacco.

I was really interested to learn that

e-cigarettes were first introduced only a short time ago in the Canadian market.

I think it was 2004, according to the Heart and Stroke Foundation. It's only

been in recent times that we're starting to see some of the health concerns.

I will say, Madam Chair, I think this is the

right thing for the House of Assembly and for government to do at this point in

time. I encourage people who need supports and assistance to reach out. We do

help to fund the Smokers' Helpline and we do fund other programs to help to

deter people from this addiction.

On that, Madam Chair, I'll listen to my colleagues and

their thoughts on this particular bill. I do believe I have the support and

encouragement of the House of Assembly in order to do this. I think it's very

important that we address the concerns around vaping.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay East - Bell

Island.

MR.

BRAZIL:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Again, it's an honour to speak in this House, as it

always is for every Member of the House of Assembly, particularly when we're

taking about the revenues for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and the

expenditures.

Now, myself and the Minister of Finance may very seldom

agree on a tax increase in any way, shape or form but I will start my discussion

with saying in this case, I personally, wholeheartedly agree with the fact this

is a necessary evil. If taxes are considered evil, this is a necessary evil.

I'm one, and I think some other Members of this House,

a number of years ago when we had all night sessions, spent a fair bit of time

debating a piece of legislation around vaping. At the time, as I still do

realize and accept, it's a necessity as a cessation program for certain people.

The process here always has been and continues to always be particularly people

in the health profession. I've talked to those leaders from the Heart and Stroke

Foundation and from the Lung Association and the perspective here is, how do we

find the best ways through education, through supports to encourage people to

wean themselves away from their dependency on any forms of tobacco as such?

In some cases, as the minister had outlined, sometimes

it has to be people do it for various reasons, but the biggest deterrent

sometimes is the financial cost. Sometimes you have to make decisions that may

not necessarily be relevant to the same way you would increase taxes for revenue

generating necessities but while at the same time it may generate some

additional revenues, that's secondary to the fact that maybe it will do what

it's hopefully meant to do, deter people from using that particular issue that

are causing more severe health issues. Outlining the fact that it becomes a

bigger financial burden on all taxpayers, not counting the most important thing,

the health of those individuals or the individuals around them.

At the time I felt, and I still feel, there's a need

for the vaping materials and the vaping products; but, at the time, I was hoping

that the pendulum was going dramatically down from the number of smokers to

those who were vaping to those who would eventually even wean themselves off

vaping as part of the cessation program. I felt that government had a role in

support that, as we did on a number of other cessation programs over the years

that were proven to help people get themselves away from dependency on tobacco

itself.

Unfortunately, what I did discover, while that worked

for some people, the alarming issues were – we all know, and we all grew up,

particularly if you went to high school in the '70s or even in the '80s and

probably beyond, you knew when you went around the corner there were 15 stood up

having a cigarette during recess or lunchtime or as soon as they got out before

they got on the bus. That itself was alarming. Those were days when we weren't

as educated about the impacts of tobacco, the health conditions, the situation,

the impact it would have long-term on people. We didn't see it as something

people needed as a stress reliever or a coping mechanism.

We've evolved since then and we realized that some need

it. For some, it's an addiction, we understand and accept that. So we need to

deal with an addiction with giving supports that doesn't add more to the

addiction in other ways or make them just as much dependant on a particular

necessity. In this case, it's the vaping from the tobacco parts or the vaping

products that are part and parcel of it. As a result, that doesn't really

achieve the effect that we had hoped to.

Only a few months ago, I was at a school just before

COVID, a high school, and when I came out I saw the cloud of smoke come around

the corner. I saw at least six or seven vaping. The alarming thing, it wasn't

what I would've thought now with Grade 12 that these were 17- or 18-year-olds.

These were 12- and 13- and 14-year-olds. That really was alarming to me for two

reasons. One, how they accessed it. I understand we're creative in this province

at any age to be able to get products that we probably shouldn't be having

access to. What was really alarming was, at the end of the day, I could see the

appeal. This was a trendy appeal thing. It was different than a cigarette. It

was different than the whole concept of doing what your parents are doing and

these types of things. It became a trendy thing.

Personally, I think we all have to take a bit of blame

for that because when we brought it in, we probably weren't aware a few years

ago of how we also had to add other support mechanisms from education to access

to minimize how younger people could be taken in, that this is a trendy thing.

It's the hip thing to do. It engages you with the socially acceptable groups. I

think we missed that. The more I read up on it and the more I looked at it, the

industry took us off a little bit. Industry found ways to entice a new market.

When I heard about flavour vaping and these types of

things, and the cool-looking vaping machines, I said do you know what? At the

end of the day, industry came in with the right intention. I'm hoping they did.

I know the medical profession, when they were talking about what role vaping

could play in cessation programs and getting people off their dependency, the

industry was going to be co-operative. Unfortunately, I'm not 100 per cent

convinced that the industry didn't see an opportunity to change their market

flow and still be very successful from a profit margin point of view, and by

expanding the number of clients and customers that they would have.

I go back in my days, back in the '80s as a civil

servant; I was responsible for most, if not all, of the research around youth

issues. That included everything from alcohol and drug dependency to tobacco

use, to sexually transmitted diseases to teen pregnancy: all the things that

were relevant to it. I was fairly aware of where the trends were going and had

seen a positive that trends were coming down.

I gave credit to government programs and health

professionals, but organizations like the Lung Association and Heart and Stroke

and their education programs, the education system itself and leaders within the

community, and thought we were going in the right direction. Again, thought that

this whole process around vaping might be something that would be better fit to

get those teenagers who took up smoking, give them an opportunity to get

themselves off that dependency and the adult population as such.

To my surprise and horror, I noticed that the trend has

gone upward when it comes to young people. That's alarming because there are

three major issues here. One, there's still discussion around that vaping may be

actually more dangerous from a health point of view; two, it becomes much more

expensive as part of it; and three, it becomes much more attractive to a younger

population around the attraction of how it was being sold.

Like I said, when I started hearing things and seeing

products that are bubble gum flavour, then I'm trying to think what audience or

what customer base are you really going after. That makes me alarmed; it makes

me a little angry that industries would go that route, but I understand they're

profit driven. Maybe their intentions in the beginning were honourable, but some

have gone a different direction, which is a little bit alarming and personally

insulting that at least they didn't stick to what the intent of it was and still

keep their market value going.

Adding a tax, there's a value of trying to say to those

– at least if we get 3 per cent who say here's my threshold. I remember my

mother always saying – who was a smoker – if cigarettes get to $1, I'm done. I

remember they went from 95 cents to $1 – and it might have been 1980 or '78 or

'79 – she stopped cold turkey. People need some motivations. Sometimes it's

about, physically, I'm going to do something else; sometimes they get a medical

scare; sometimes they see somebody else who's gone through traumatic events

because of their lifestyle and that changed it. Some it's financial. A lot of us

know what it means if something costs more.

While we talk about tax increases, which is never the

flavour in the House of Assembly and it's very seldom that we're going to agree

to anything. In this case, I personally see the value of sending the message out

there. This is not an attack on those who provide those products in their retail

outlets. This is not what this is about. This is not to stifle their business.

What it is, from my understanding, is to centre the business around those who

were initially, when these products came onboard and they were legislatively put

out there with safeguards, that indeed the industry would cater to those who

would need the vaping products as their mechanism for their dealing with their

tobacco needs either weaning themselves off, or this would be the approach that

they would take as their social reliever, for want of a better phrase.

To get to a point now when we're seeing dramatically

where it's going, and we know the whole evidence is not there yet because, don't

forget; this is new. As the minister said, we're talking only the last 15 years

or so. This is relatively new when you do research. People have been smoking, I

guess, since the dawn of time, but we've been doing research in the last 100

years or more and now realize that even changed dramatically; how more and

negative it is on our health.

As we go forward, I'm suspecting we're not going to

find that vaping has been overrated in the sense that it's not as dangerous or

have such a negative impact on people's health. I'm fearful that we're going to

find the opposite. I'm particularly fearful that if young people are, at this

point, finding it as a socially acceptable vice to be part of in society, then

that worries me because, again, once they start getting addicted, an addiction

is an addiction. Does it lead to other things? Possibly, it does, but the fact

is that they're still addicted to that. I don't know what the mechanism is to

wean them off something that we thought would be used as a mechanism to get

people off the tobacco use itself.

We've got some challenging times here. This is a small

step forward to at least sending the message that we're serious about what needs

to be done to keep people safe and healthy in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I hope the industry understands this is not an attack

on them from that perspective. It's about maybe there are other ways that we can

help them provide products to people who in turn are finding ways to either cope

with whatever their needs are or, at the same time, get them to move away from

their dependency on, particularly, tobacco.

Madam Chair, I, as the Health critic for the PC Party

and the Official Opposition, will be supporting this. It's not very often, if at

all, you're ever going to hear me say that again, I suspect in the House, that

we're supporting a tax increase. But in this case we see the value of it and we

hope it gets the end result that less people, particular those who are more

vulnerable, do not find themselves addicted to this forever and a day.

Madam Chair, I'll end on that and hope that, at the end

of the day, the desired effect comes out of this that we hope it does.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The Chair recognizes the Member for Lake