PDF Version

May 10, 2022

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. L No. 51

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

SPEAKER (Bennett):

Order, please!

Admit strangers.

First,

I'd like to welcome guests. In our Speaker's gallery today, I would like to

welcome the family of the late Bill Callahan, former minister and Member of the

House of Assembly. Mr. Callahan's family here today is his wife Daphne, children

Maureen and Ann Marie, and Brian is up in the press gallery. Also his brother

James and his wife Linda.

Welcome.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Also in the public gallery I

would like to welcome Gracie Penney. Gracie is the subject of a Member's

statement this afternoon, and she is joined by her mother Kara, her father Mark,

and her sister Heidi.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Also in the public gallery,

I'd like to recognize the mayor of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, His Worship George

Andrews.

Welcome.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

SPEAKER:

Today we will hear statements

by the hon. Members for the Districts of Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans, Lake

Melville, Stephenville - Port au Port, Mount Pearl North, Cape St. Francis and

St. John's West with leave.

The hon.

the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

C. TIBBS:

Thank you, Speaker.

I stand

to honour singer-songwriter Kellie Loder from the beautiful Town of Badger. From

playing their guitar in the corner of a St. John's coffee shop, to captivating

Canadians and leaving the judges in awe on the newest season of

Canada's Got Talent , where they are

now a semi-finalist. Kellie's 2010 album

Imperfections and Directions was nominated for a Juno, Canada's top music

award, which was a catalyst for their career.

In 2021,

Kellie was named the Ron Hynes Songwriter of the Year by Music NL, and won an

ECMA award for their song and music video

Molded Like a Monster . You also may have recognized their voice as part of

CBC's Tokyo Olympic Games closing ceremony coverage last summer. Adding to their

accolades, Kellie was recently nominated for the 2022 Songwriter of the Year and

Fan's Choice Entertainer of the Year ECMA awards.

addition to setting the music industry on fire, Kellie, who is transgender, has

been a strong force in the LGBTQ community, sharing their personal journey of

acceptance and bravery.

Please

join me as we let Kellie know how proud we are of all their accomplishments,

their amazing talent and their representation of our fine Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador all across the globe.

Good

luck, Kellie.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Lake

Melville.

P. TRIMPER:

Thank you, Speaker.

Jolene

Ashini from Sheshatshiu has just graduated from the University of Victoria with

a degree in Indigenous Legal Orders and Canadian Common Law. She is the first

Labrador Innu woman to receive a law degree.

Jolene's

father, Daniel Ashini, was a strong Innu leader who, together with her mother,

Sheila Blake, created the inspiration for this challenging career pursuit.

Jolene

said: I grew up around lawsuits. I grew up around protests. I grew up around the

recognition of the Innu, so it's always been instilled in my sister and I that

there's such a big importance to try and revitalize our culture.

addition to this impressive accomplishment, Jolene received a special award from

the Royal Society of Canada in honour of Justice Rosalie Abella – the first

Jewish woman appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada. The award recognizes law

students who share a commitment for building equality and equity across Canadian

society and beyond.

Jolene

explained that, from a very young age, we were taught about the injustices

across Canada and the colonization and assimilation of Indigenous communities.

I would

ask this Legislature to congratulate Jolene Ashini on her accomplishments as a

law student, and wish her well on a bright future as a lawyer.

Tshenashkumitin.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Thank you, Speaker.

Don

(Chief) Cormier of Noel's Pond has impressed the powerlifting world for decades

and, at the age of 67, he continues to compete with the best of them.

In the

1960s, Don was introduced to and competed in Olympic lifting before switching to

powerlifting in the early '70s. Within two short years, he attended his first

national competition. It was here that he was bitten by powerlifting bug.

Over the

years, Don has competed against some of the legends of the sport and has been

the recipient of numerous awards in powerlifting. Most recently, in 2019, he

placed first in provincials, second in Commonwealth's and fourth in Commonwealth

Powerlifting Union Nationals. In 2021, he placed first in provincials and second

in the Eastern Canadians.

Don's

dedication and commitment goes beyond his personal training; he continues to

give back to a sport he loves by coaching and mentoring upcoming lifters. One of

his proudest moments was competing alongside his grandson Noah in a recent

competition.

Presently, Don is attending the 2022 Canadian Powerlifting and Bench Press

Championships in St. John's from May 9 to 14 as coach of the team from Bay St.

George.

We wish

Don and his team all the best in this competition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

L. STOYLES:

Speaker, I rise in this House

to acknowledge the life of Ms. Liz Murphy.

Liz

passed away suddenly

on May 4 at her home in Mount Pearl. She was

known to everybody in the city, especially for her volunteer work with the Girl

Guides, which was her passion in life.

You could

find her serving tea at the Lieutenant-Governor's garden party, dishing up

breakfast for the Frosty Festival or cooking hotdogs for the Girl Guides during

City Days. She was always out in the community at every event.

She was also

a loyal and dedicated public servant, as she worked here at Confederation

Building at the Department of Finance for over 30 years. She retired just a few

months ago.

I ask my

colleagues to join me to tribute the life of Ms. Elizabeth – Liz, as we know her

– Murphy.

Thank you,

Speaker.

SOME

HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for Cape St. Francis.

WALL:

Speaker.

Today I recognize a young constituent, eight-year-old

Gracie Penney of Logy Bay-Middle Cove-Outer Cove. Like many children, Gracie's

parents enrolled her into gymnastics and dance classes, but that just wasn't the

right fit for Gracie.

At the age of four, Gracie was enrolled in tae kwon do

and she has not looked back. She trains three times per week and also assists

with her four-year-old sister's tae kwon do class.

After four years and through her training and

dedication to her sport, Gracie was presented her black belt in tae kwon do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

WALL:

Speaker, only two others in the province have achieved this status by the age of

eight years old – those being her trainer's two children.

Gracie is characterized as being patient, respectful

and enjoys the challenge of perfecting her chosen sport. Tae kwon do has also

helped Gracie to overcome the intimidation of training with older students. A

team player, strong representative and ambassador for her sport, Gracie proudly

wears her black belt tied around her waist, the ultimate in martial arts goals.

Speaker, I ask all hon. Members to join me in

congratulating Gracie Penney on her outstanding achievement and wish her all the

best.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for St. John's West, with leave?

HON. MEMBER:

Leave.

SPEAKER:

Leave is granted.

The hon. the Member for St. John's West.

S. COADY:

Speaker, the province has

lost a celebrated author, a renowned editor, a prominent community leader and a

respected former Cabinet minister.

Bill

Callahan served as MHA for Port au Port from 1966-1971 and served as minister of

Mines, Agriculture and Resources. He considered the establishment of Gros Morne

National Park and the Salmonier Nature Park among his most valued achievements.

An avid

journalist at The Western Star and

CJON, he served as publisher and managing editor of

The Daily News , and managing editor of

The Evening Telegram . In recognition of his tremendous contribution,

Mr. Callahan was appointed to the Canadian Radio-television and

Telecommunications Commission and received a Lifetime Achievement Award at the

Atlantic Journalism Awards.

He was

also a dedicated volunteer, a long-time member of the Knights of Columbus and

served as president of the Red Cross.

I ask

all Members of this House to join me in recognizing and celebrating the

incredible life of Bill Callahan and offer our sincerest condolences to his wife

of 65 years, Daphne; children, Sean, Mark, Brian, Maureen, Sheilagh and

AnnMarie; 13 grandchildren; and three great-grandchildren.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Speaker, I am pleased today

to highlight Mining Week and the extremely positive impact of the sector in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

2021 was

a banner year for this industry in our province. The value of mineral shipments

were the highest ever recorded, and mineral claim-staking activity reached its

highest point since the Voisey's Bay claims 25 years ago.

Our

province processed over 800 mineral exploration applications last year. Driven

by positive exploration results, along with strong gold prices, we saw

exploration expenditures nearly double from 2020, to just over $127 million.

The talk

of this industry has been the gold rush in Central Newfoundland. It was less

than two months ago when I announced that the Valentine Gold Project had been

approved to proceed. It will be the largest gold mine in Atlantic Canada and a

significant contributor to our economy here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Speaker,

we clearly have world-class deposits that contain geology with great mineral

potential. Critical minerals which are needed to grow and develop the green

economy, such as our low-carbon nickel, mined in Labrador – refined at Long

Harbour – is being used to develop lithium-ion batteries for the world's

ever-growing EV industry. Notable companies such as Northvolt, and just last

week, Tesla, have signed agreements with Vale.

Our

government works hard to develop meaningful mining opportunities, and officials

within the mining branch demonstrate daily our commitment to create an

environment that supports mining development. If I can just say, I have to

commend the staff in that department for the work they do every day behind the

scenes making sure that this industry moves forward – a big shout-out to them if

they're listening.

I'll be

speaking at the 33rd annual mining conference held by the Baie Verte Peninsula

Chamber of Commerce next month to share what this industry means for local

business and how it allow our province to invest in programs like

infrastructure, education and health care.

Speaker,

the future looks prosperous for this industry, with employment exceeding 8,000

person-years and mineral shipments reaching $6 billion in 2021. We look forward

to see what is coming for this key economic driver for this province.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra

Nova.

L. PARROTT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for the advance copy of his statement.

There's

no doubt that the mining sector in this province is a bright spot in our economy

and our communities. It is an economic engine, which we don't often acknowledge

the importance or the benefit of. Mining Week is a chance for us, as public

figures, to champion and bring attention to this industry. Whether it be

Marathon Gold, Vale or the increased mineral exploration in our province, this

industry has a lot to look forward.

With

this being said, I encourage the minister to review the mining and mineral act

to ensure that our legislative and regulatory regime are up to date and

supportive of all future projects and growth.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement.

His

comments prove that we can benefit greatly for the move forward towards a green

economy, and the economic diversification offers us a great opportunity going

forward in this province. Given that so much of the $6 billion in last year's

mineral shipments came from Labrador, we call upon the government to invest a

greater share of the wealth in services and infrastructure for the people who

have generated this great wealth from the Big Land.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Any further statements by

ministers?

Oral

Questions.

Oral Questions

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

Gas is

now $2.17 a litre in St. John's, $2.19 on the Burin Peninsula and $2.21 in

Springdale and on the Northern Peninsula. Seniors and families are struggling to

afford essentials from food to fuel to medication. Yesterday the Premier said

more measures may be coming. The Liberal Premier has let people suffer with the

rising costs of living for far too long.

Is today

the day the Premier announces these measures?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As we

know, we can't control the price of gas. It's externalities beyond our control,

the geopolitical forces at play. We saw the human face of that yesterday, Mr.

Speaker, as Ukrainians arrived to the warm comfort of Newfoundland and Labrador

families.

Mr.

Speaker, the ripple effect, unfortunately, goes beyond the human tragedy that

exists in Europe. The tyranny, the war that is being waged by Mr. Putin, not

just on Ukrainians but indeed on the world through the economic crisis that has

ensued. We can't control that, Mr. Speaker; those are externalities beyond our

control. We're always looking, as a government, towards the cost of living –

always. That is why we have taken a holistic approach and done $142 million to

address that in this budget.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

I ask the Premier to look at

the faces of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who are also suffering

(inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL:

While he can't control the

global thing, he can control what is happening in Newfoundland and Labrador. It

is not enough. It is just not enough in this province.

Quebec

gave $500 directly to the residents who make less than $100,000 a year to help

with the cost of living.

Will the

Liberals in our province do the same?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That

initiative cost the Quebec government billions of dollars, Mr. Speaker. We have

fiscal restraints within this province that we have to recognize; we can't

ignore. We're always willing to look at and evaluate options –

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Mr. Speaker, there you go. So

we are looking at fiscally responsible, prudent avenues forward but we have to

do so recognizing that the fiscal realities of this province. We are addressing

electricity rates through rate mitigation.

AN HON. MEMBER:

Right now.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Rate mitigation is right now.

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Rate mitigation is right now,

Mr. Speaker. That is something that we have done. We returned $2,400 to the

people of this province.

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I ask

the Member for Ferryland to keep his comments down.

The hon.

the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

That's all I had to say, Mr.

Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

I will

reiterate again: It is just not enough. He has a responsibility to address the

issues by finding solutions.

Prince

Edward Island is also sending direct payments to residents.

Why do

the Liberals in this province continue to ignore the pleas of its people?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you very much.

Before I

get into addressing that question, I do want to welcome the Ukrainians who

arrived yesterday with open arms and open hearts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

S. COADY:

I think we should recognize

them.

I do

want to let them know that the economy in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador is strengthening coming out of the pandemic. In fact, our employment is

stronger; it is 3.9 per cent improved year-to-date this year. Retail sales are

stronger at 8.4 per cent improved. We have home sales are stronger at 12 per

cent improvement. Even food services are stronger with 12.2 per cent

improvement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

S. COADY:

So I say to the Ukrainians

that are arriving, I say to the people of the province, our economy is

strengthened and buoyed and I hope that we have a very continuous strength in

the economy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

So the

economy is strengthening, but the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are

suffering, Mr. Speaker, that's not acceptable in this province.

April, Alberta eliminated its 13 per cent gas tax. Will the Liberals in our

province lower the cost of gasoline?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

I'm glad the Member opposite

is detailing what's happening across the country. We, too, in this province are

very aware of the very, very difficult times that people are experiencing, not

just in Newfoundland and Labrador but around the country. That is why we –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I say to

the Member for Ferryland, it's the last warning. Next time, you will not be

recognized anymore today.

The hon.

the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

That is why in this budget,

Mr. Speaker, we provided $142 million to address the cost of living, which is

the entire amount – actually it's more than the entire amount – we collect in

provincial gas tax.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

You've

heard on that side, we've heard it here; the media have heard it. It's just not

enough. You've got to change your approach to address the needs that people are

facing in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL:

Ontario has also pledged to

reduce the gas tax by 5.7 per cent per litre on July 1.

Will the

Liberals in our province lower the cost of gasoline?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Speaker, I've addressed this.

The 14.5 cents per litre that is levied by the provincial government has been

returned over the amount that we actually collect in that gas tax. In the other

taxes that are collected we also have made investments in health care – an

additional $400 million in the last couple of years – additional investments in

education, additional investments in safety.

Speaker,

these are very, very challenging times, it's not political. That's why we gave

$142 million back to the people of the province. We're continuing to see what

more we can do as we continue throughout this year.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

As my

colleague said, it's not enough. But not one cent has come off the price of a

litre of gasoline or home heating fuel at any pump in Newfoundland and Labrador.

They're the people who need it. They need it to get to work. They need it to

heat their homes and it's not happening right now.

Nova

Scotia implemented a Heating Assistance Rebate Program to help low-income

residents with the cost of living.

Will the

Liberals in our province do the same?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think

it deserves recognition that we are also giving people $2,400 a year, families,

to help control electricity rates, Mr. Speaker. That's $500 million they don't

want to talk about. That's $500 million every year, year after year. They talk

about giving cheques, we're giving direct impacts to the families of this

province.

On top

of that $142 million. How much money is enough, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

If you

want to waste your Question Period arguing back and forth, I'll let you go;

otherwise, I want order.

The hon.

the Leader of the Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

We are

living in the here and now and it's about people being able to heat their homes,

people being able to get to work, people being able to sustain their jobs

because it's affordable enough for them to go to work and earn a living in this

province, Mr. Speaker.

Federal

Intergovernmental Affairs minister says that – and I quote – this province has a

whole series of tools on its own if it wanted to do something about the price at

the pumps. Those are the minister's words. Our province had taken action.

Why is

this Liberal government refusing to offer people relief at the pumps?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

Premier is absolutely correct. Not only are we providing $2,400 in rate

mitigation, we are also providing, on average per child, $6,300 in child care

relief, that is only in the last 18 months. This government has been putting

money back in the people's pockets. That's why we provided the $142 million.

I will

say to the Member opposite, a cent or two at the pumps is not going to address

this global problem. It is not going to address this global problem. What we

want to do is put money in people's pockets. I know the Members opposite are

shouting and saying that they want more, they want different, but I will say to

the Members opposite, we are doing everything we can on this side of the House

and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, if

you are doing everything you can, you need to change your plan because it is not

working for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL:

A home heat rebate, reducing

the gas tax, deferring the carbon tax, helping find alternative fertilizers and

helping food banks, these are a lot of options that the Liberals have at their

fingertips.

Why

don't the Liberals have the political will to help the people of this province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Speaker, we have been helping the people of this province. I have just gone

through a number of things that we are doing on this side of the House. I can

tell you what the Members opposite are talking about when they talk about

getting rid of jobs within government and taking that money and giving it back

to the people. That doesn't help our economy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I ask

the Member for Ferryland not to rise anymore; you will not be recognized anymore

today.

The hon.

the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Speaker.

I have

lost my train of thought, but I will say on the carbon tax – deferring the

carbon tax would mean that the federal government will come into the province,

not only would they take the money out of the province for the carbon tax but

they would also levy an additional fee, additional carbon tax on home heat. Is

that what the Members opposite want?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Thank you, Speaker.

What the

Premier and the minister have failed to tell the people of the province is that

every time the price of fuel goes up, they bring in additional revenue. Their

bank accounts get larger, while the people of the province, their bank accounts

get smaller.

I ask

the Premier: After hearing what other provinces have done, after hearing about

all the hardships of all the people of the province who are suffering right now,

does the Premier feel that his cost-of-living plan does enough?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Again, I have to say that the

Member is misinformed or he is misinforming. And I'll say that again and again,

Mr. Speaker, because clearly he either doesn't understand or he doesn't want to

understand.

I will

say that we are doing everything that we can to address the cost of living in

this province. We can't – we don't have the levers on carbon tax, I just

explained why. We are getting a modicum more on the HST. The carbon tax is a tax

per litre and so is the tax per litre that we put on with the provincial gas

tax. On the HST we are, and I've said it repeatedly, we are considering what we

can do in the fall as we move through the summer and looking at the overall

economy.

I will

say to the Members opposite, Speaker, we are doing everything that we can and

will continue to do so.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Speaker, I can assure you I'm

not misinformed and I'm not misinforming.

I would

simply ask the minister: Will you confirm that every time the price of gas goes

up, every time the cost of a product goes up, that you get additional revenue in

HST. Yes or no?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

The Member understands how

HST works. It is a harmonized tax across the country. It is defined under the

federal Excise Act . We all know that

it's a federally controlled tax. Yes, as prices go up, we get a modicum more; we

will collect about $60 million in HST this year, Speaker, and we are considering

what more we can do.

But we

have provided $142 million. We have provided $2,400 for rate mitigation. We have

provided for every child, $6,300. Speaker, I'm sure if we added up everything

that the Members opposite ask for, it would be well over $500 million. Add that

to the $500 million we have to pay because of Muskrat Falls, we're well over a

$1-billion deficit.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville-Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Speaker, I think it's

important to understand that it's the people of Newfoundland and Labrador who

are suffering. It's the people in Newfoundland and Labrador who are telling us

it's just not enough.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

T. WAKEHAM:

Mr. Speaker, a single mom

with two children told me she's working for $14 an hour and she has to drive 58

kilometres per day to work. She is struggling. The money that was provided to

her, as part of the original plan, is long gone, and it wasn't enough.

What

does the minister say to that single mom?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

I would say to that single

mom, things are difficult. I respect that, I know it is difficult and we're

hopeful that with improvements globally that the price will come down. But with

two children, Speaker, she's also benefiting from the investments that we've

made in child care. She also should have received the Income Supplement that

we've increased, and that's quarterly. We increased that by 10 per cent. She

would have also now not had her home heat double. Electric rates double in this

province.

Speaker,

we are doing everything that we can. We have provided $142 million back. That

single mom that was just talked about, she would have gotten some fees back from

motor vehicle registration. She may have a home that she has insured. All those

things are money in her pocket.

SPEAKER:

The minister's time has

expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra

Nova.

L. PARROTT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'll

remind the minister that it was the single mom who said it wasn't enough, and

that she can't afford to it. So it isn't enough.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

L. PARROTT:

Motorists in this province on

the Liberal watch are forced to pay an additional five cents per litre of

gasoline because of the Come Bay Chance Refinery shutdown.

Can the

minister explain why he continues to allow motorists to be charged this extra

five cents, even though Come By Chance is now under new ownership?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Happy to

answer the question, even though I guess some of it falls under the Public

Utilities Board, as the Member knows.

I guess

the first thing I'd say, I'm very happy that we're actually standing here, or

sitting here answering questions about a refinery that continues to be open and

employing hundreds and hundreds of people in this area –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

A. PARSONS:

– as opposed to the questions

we were answering last year, which were what was the future of that industry and

the hundreds of people that were out of work. I'm very happy that we've at least

satisfied that.

The

reality is, though, that now that it's moved to a biodiesel renewable facility,

North Atlantic has been forced to import fuel into this province. They made

application to the Public Utilities Board some time ago talking about the extra

cost. The Public Utilities Board then made a decision that their costs were

valid and has put that there, but again, I think the other minister will have

something to say about that shortly.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra

Nova.

L. PARROTT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

While

it's great that hundreds and hundreds are working, the minister misses the fact

that thousands and thousands are choosing between gasoline and groceries –

thousands. It sounds like they are content with the temporary increase and that

it will stay here.

When

will the minister step in and ask the PUB to remove it?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I've

been around long enough to see the Public Utilities Board and how they operate,

and there's certainly nothing about contentment here. We have issues with the

Public Utilities Board. That's why we're bringing in legislative changes, so I

look forward to that debate. But what I can say is that the Member opposite

knows full well – now he knows this, but the reality is that you cannot direct

them to do this. The implications of that are well beyond something that we're

prepared to see.

In fact,

I think by the Member doing something that he thinks is right, he would probably

cause more harm to those citizens that he's talking about. We have the same

desires, but doing that is not as easy as the Member thinks.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra

Nova.

L. PARROTT:

The desire is to get people

to the grocery stores and give them an affordable way to live.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

L. PARROTT:

On 60 litres of gas, it's

five cents per litre and that's $3 for which, some families, could mean hundreds

of dollars each year.

Is the

minister refusing to provide this relief to the people who now need to choose

between gasoline and groceries?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Trade and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

premise of the question is ridiculous. That's the reality here. The premise of

the question is ridiculous – is the minister refusing. The reality is we're

living in a market right now that has seen more volatility than we have ever

seen before. The reality is that the Eastern Seaboard is basically running out

of diesel. Levels that we've never seen before – gas is gone extremely high in

every single province in this country and every single state in the United

States.

So the

reality is that we cope with the challenges and we try to do what we can, but as

a province the reality is that we have to try to live within our fiscal means,

something that is challenging given the fact that we are currently subsidizing

electricity, currently subsidizing so many other things. This is another

challenge that we must try to persevere through.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra

Nova.

L. PARROTT:

I remind the minister that

the refineries always ship goods in, but I'll also remind him that they've often

said they can do things with tax breaks versus money out of people's pockets.

So I'll

ask the minister: Why doesn't he give the refinery a five-cent tax break instead

of taking the five cents out of people's pockets?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Trade and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

So the Member wants us to

give North Atlantic a subsidy? Is that what the Member is saying he wants us to

do? He wants to give this company a break – you're talking about giving citizens

a break; now he wants to talk about giving them a break.

Now I'll

remind you, last year we sat here with $320 million from the feds, and I'll tell

you what, I said it then and I'll say it now: They had that spent the minute

that it came out. Spend it on West White Rose, spend it on Baie du Nord and

spend it on Come By Chance. The fact is that this crowd over there is going to

keep asking for something but they absolutely know that what they're promising

is not something that they would ever deliver in government, God help us.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Bonavista.

C. PARDY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

All the

situations that we express in the House over the past couple of weeks have been

genuine and authentic from people who are experiencing hardships.

Mr.

Speaker, a woman who reached out to us just this morning to express her

frustrations with the rising cost of gas in our province told us that her

husband makes $1,600 in two weeks and, during that time, he spends $700 on gas

to get back and forth to work.

How does

the Liberal government expect this family to afford to live here?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

We're

hearing similar stories of people who are finding it very, very difficult, not

just all around the province, Speaker, but indeed all across the country and

around the world. This is very, very challenging times, and we recognize that.

That is, again, why we are doing absolutely everything that we can do to provide

for this particular family, this particular couple, and that is why we have done

things like increased the Income Supplement. That's why we're doing all the

things that we're doing, to ensure that they have money in their pockets.

Can I

control the international markets and bring down the price of oil? I can't, but

I can certainly work with my colleagues here and do whatever we can to support

families.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Bonavista.

C. PARDY:

Speaker, the residents in the

District of Bonavista would question as to whether everything is being done that

they possibly can do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

C. PARDY:

I'm sure it is in the

government districts as well. The Liberal cost-of-living plan, the budget, isn't

enough. The people in the District of Bonavista repeatedly state that it just

isn't enough.

Does the

minister realize that people who want to avail of Oil to Electric Rebate Program

cannot afford the upfront costs to do so?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Speaker, $142 million is a

lot of money. I will say to the Members opposite and I'd say to anyone in this

province: We had to borrow that money to put it back in people's pockets. It is

going to cost our children and our grandchildren to pay for that. We have to

think about those things.

While it

may not be satisfying everybody in the province, it is what we can do. We are

looking at what more we can do as we move through this year. I would say to the

Member opposite, please, we are willing to work with that family, with the

families of this province. CSSD is providing bus passes. We're working with

others to provide supports. We are doing everything we can. I just wish the

Opposition would work with us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Bonavista.

C. PARDY:

There are no bus passes in

the District of Bonavista; there are none.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

C. PARDY:

Mr. Speaker, $1.2 billion being collected in personal income tax; $260 million

thereof in gas tax, carbon tax. The cost-of-living plan doesn't help with the

cost of food or fuel.

Why did

the Liberals feel it necessary to subsidize electric vehicles at this time but

not reduce the price of gasoline?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Environment and Climate Change.

B. DAVIS:

Thank you, Speaker.

I'm very

happy to speak to this question, it's very important that we transition to

electric vehicles. We're talking about many of the issues here today, and the

hon. colleague that used to sell vehicles would understand how important it is

to move in this direction as well.

One of

our things is we put a pilot project in place to allow electric vehicles or

individuals moving to that direction to receive a rebate of $2,500 as well as a

plug-in electric vehicle as well, that we could give a rebate of $1,500 for a

hybrid vehicle as well.

That's

what we think is going to be the answer and it's going to help in a bunch of

different ways to put money back in the pockets of individuals, but also to help

your resident that you talked about earlier, that costs $700 every two weeks.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I'd like

to get real here, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

P. DINN:

That's a lovely intro to a

real issue here.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Mr. Speaker, just this

morning an individual reached out to both us and the Minister of Health stating

that the MTAP program covers 20 cents per kilometre but the price of gas has now

reached $2.17 per litre. This individual states that he has two small children

and requires at least 10 visits to the Dr. H. Bliss Murphy Cancer Care Centre

for treatment. This individual writes in his email: Please share until we get

the minister's attention, because privately reaching out to government lately

has yielded us nothing.

I ask

the minister: What do you tell this individual who's forced to choose between

going to chemo treatments and taking care of his two small children?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

We have

a Medical Transportation Assistance Program, which is not means tested, and is

available to everybody. We have broaden the criteria. We have lowered the

deductible mileage. We have now allowed expense claims for staying with family.

We've provided per diems for escorts and we continue to work within our fiscal

realities to expand the benefits that we have. For people on Income Support, we

have a complete reimbursement program, again, criteria driven.

As we

get more money back and our balance of payments improves we will be able to do

more. We have a very competitive program compared with other jurisdictions.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Teachers

in schools where children of newcomer families attend are concerned about the

lack of translation services that would allow them to communicate with parents

of their students.

I ask

the Minister of Education: What is government doing to ensure that sufficient

translators are in our schools so that parents and teachers are able to speak to

each other?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Speaker, and I

thank the Member for his question.

As we

had seen with the Afghanistan refugees to the province, Mr. Speaker, the needs

for the placement of those students in our province's schools were identified by

the school district. We responded based on the needs that were identified and

provided the resources that were requested.

We'll

see what the needs are of the Ukrainian newcomers to the province as the

assessments are done and if there are needs identified we will meet those needs.

I will

remind the Member that in this year's budget we have over $3 million identified

for increased population in our schools.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I'm

hearing that schools are paying for translation services out of their own funds,

in some cases using money from their own fundraising events.

Will the

minister assure us that translators are fully funded by government and schools

will not have to rely on their own limited resources to pay for these

translation services?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If the

Member wishes to share with me these instances I would be happy to discuss those

with our school districts based on the schools that he identifies.

I know

that the Member identified yesterday that there was a primary grade with over 30

students. We spoke to the school district and the school district is not aware

of that situation so I would invite him to tell me which primary class that is

as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

I think the minister is

misquoting me. I said there are classes in the primary up to 29, almost 30.

Nothing over 30, yet.

Does the

Minister of Education agree that the teaching conditions of teachers are the

learning conditions of students?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Mr. Speaker.

We have,

through the Education Action Plan, provided over 380 new resources in our

schools. We recognize that the success of our students is paramount and we have

responded based on the Education Action Plan, Mr. Speaker.

Most of

the items that were identified as actionable in the Education Action Plan have

been fulfilled. We are now undergoing a teacher allocation review. We will see

what that review provides us, Mr. Speaker, but there is nobody who can dispute

that this government has responded to the needs of our schools, our educators in

a way that no other government has in the past.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Humber - Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, I've been

receiving calls from many seniors who need cataract surgery in Western

Newfoundland, including the Premier's district.

The

Minister of Health and Community Services said in a letter dated April 19, 2022,

and I quote: Ophthalmologists may also take advantage of unused time at the Sir

Thomas Roddick Hospital, which has been fully functional since late August 2021.

Mr.

Speaker, in an email from Western Health on March 28, 2022, and I quote: There

has been no cataract procedures performed at the Sir Thomas Roddick Hospital

since January 2021.

I ask

the minister, I implore upon the minister: With this discrepancy in the

information, will you please meet with the three professionals in Western

Newfoundland and Western Health so we can get the cataract surgeries done for

the seniors of this province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker

I was

reading the other day a report from CIHI, the Canadian Institute for Health

Improvement, that Western Region has 97 per cent of its cataracts for first eye

done within the national benchmark – the best in the province. If the issue is

the refusal of ophthalmologists to utilize operating time at Sir Thomas Roddick,

we'd be happy to look into that.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Humber-Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, it's sad that he

won't look at the wait-list. He knows the wait-list is what I'm referring to.

It's sad. Premier, you need to do something. It's sad.

Mr.

Speaker, in the same letter from the minister, he states: The cost to providing

cataract surgery at Western Memorial Hospital is to be $655.60 per surgery. That

cost does not include overhead or consumables, just the labour cost. The Grant

Thornton report, which, Minister, your office was a part of, states: A fully

burdened cost figure of operating costs, expenses and capital equipment costs is

approximately $1,105 per surgery. When you add the $100 for the lens, the

cataract cost is $1,205 per surgery.

Minister, it is obvious that you are not party to the correct information. Will

you convene a meeting to get the facts on the table and help the 800 seniors who

are wait-listed, which you are aware of, to get their eyes done so they have a

dignity and their way of life back again?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

One of

the elements of the proposal to provide cataract surgery outside of regional

health authority facilities was in actual fact the collation and organizing and

validating provincially of cataract wait-lists. I would be delighted if any

ophthalmologist wished to contribute their wait-list data, in terms of patients,

demographics, details and that kind of thing to a provincial wait-list and would

love to hear from them.

Thank

you very much, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period

is expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG:

Speaker, I rise in this hon.

House today to table the 2021 annual report for the Chicken Farmers of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Minister, actually that goes under Tabling of Documents, next one. You're a

little premature.

Any

presenting reports by standing and select committees?

Tabling

of Documents.

Tabling of

Documents

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG:

So we press replay, Mr.

Speaker, thank you.

I rise

in this hon. House today to table the 2021 annual report for the Chicken Farmers

of Newfoundland and Labrador, times two.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SPEAKER:

Any further tabling of

documents?

Notices

of Motion.

Notices of Motion

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

I give

notice of the following resolution:

THAT in

accordance with Standing Order 8(8), notwithstanding the Parliamentary Calendar

issued by the Clerk for 2022 or any Standing Order to the contrary, the

Parliamentary Calendar for the fall of 2022 sitting of the House of Assembly

shall be modified as follows:

AND THAT

this House will meet in accordance with the daily

schedule prescribed in the

Standing Orders , as follows:

From

October 3, 2022, to October 20, 2022, inclusive; and from October 31, 2022, to

November 10, 2022, inclusive;

AND THAT

the week of October 24, 2022, shall be a constituency week.

SPEAKER:

Any further notices of

motion?

Answers

to Questions for which Notice has been Given?

Petitions.

Petitions

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker,

the province's population has aged much more rapidly than any other province in

the country over the last 50 years.

The

number of persons 65 years of age and older has more than doubled in the past 30

years.

Many

aging couples have been assessed and deemed eligible for placement in a

long-term care facility and require different levels of care and are separated

into different facilities in order to get the care they require in a timely

manner.

Having

support and assistance as close to their home and community as possible should

be a key objective in developing and providing services to our seniors. As well,

individuals want a choice in living in a place that maximizes their

independence.

Couples

who have supported each other should not have to face being separated when they

enter long-term care. Keeping them together ensures a better quality of life.

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 enact legislation that allows couples to stay

together, even as they age, even at the highest level of care.

Speaker,

during COVID, the plight of our seniors was ever magnified. We all had many

calls when there was isolation and homes that were shut down and visitors

weren't allowed. We've heard stories of seniors, grandparents, parents who have

died or passed away over COVID, alone. COVID highlighted that, but there are

still seniors now dealing with that. Seniors need to be treated with dignity,

respect and have choice.

We're

not getting any younger, none of us, and we're becoming an older population.

They need to have the choice whether to live and age in their own home or take

other choices like long-term care. But they have to have that choice and they

have to be treated with dignity and respect. Nobody wants to die alone. Nobody

wants to die without their family next to them. It is really, really troubling

when you hear from families that call you in tears and they cannot get their

loved ones in the proper care, nor can they get in to be with them.

Again,

we are not getting any younger, but we really need to start dealing with how we

treat our seniors and their families. We are all going to be there, so the

sooner we start looking at legislation and other steps to ensure they have

dignity, respect and choice, well, the sooner the better.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

reasons for this petition and the background of this petition are as follows:

The

rising cost of fuel is having a dramatic effect on the truck drivers in our

province. Drivers are finding it increasingly difficult to pay their bills,

maintain their machines and pay for ever-increasing fuel costs. This means, for

many, that they must spend more time on the road with smaller margins of

survival and, for those with families, more time away from home.

Therefore, we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: To urge the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to consider a fuel rebate for truckers

so that they can continue to supply those essential services to many

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that depend on them each day.

This one

here is signed by people in Terrenceville. This is not something that's just

affecting one sector. It's the truck drivers that are coming forward and saying

that there's no other way for them to make any margin whatsoever. In the minute

it is going to be useless for them to even fuel up their truck to go on a trip.

Just

this morning I got another email. I explained here in the House before that

April 25 last year, the price of filling up a truck was $1,973. On January 25,

it was $3,986 –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

It's

hard to hear the Member speak.

The hon.

the Member for Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER:

Thank you, Speaker. I

appreciate that.

Like I

said, the other side, they're always asking us for ideas and stuff like that, if

they'd mind to listen for five minutes, I think they'd understand that we are

here to bring forward the plight of the people. It's not about us and it

shouldn't be about them, but apparently it is. Like I said, change is in the

air; it's just that there's no dollars in the air – that's the problem.

Mr.

Speaker, what I would like to say is that it's the truck drivers that kept our

economy going for so long when COVID first hit. We expected so much of them,

especially with no vaccinations and anything like that. But the thing is that

there's a trickle-down effect. If we start now, it's like the old saying goes:

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. But now we're faced with

something different, so to plant that tree today, it's going to be very

important.

But what

we need to do is we need to address the people of the province. It's not about

the people inside this Chamber; it's about us making sure that we look out for

the 520,000 people collectively and give them all a break. It's not about giving

a pittance. It's about taking something off the fuel surcharges so that

everybody gets a break.

This has

been unbelievable. This interruption clause from the PUB is supposed to be to

our benefit. It hasn't been utilized to our benefit at this point, so therefore

I would hope that this government would have a look at their budget and realize

that they need to help the people of the province today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Bonavista.

C. PARDY:

Thank you, Speaker.

When the

new bridge was constructed in Plate Cove West in 2012 to replace the bridge that

was damaged by Hurricane Igor, concrete and rebar remains from the previous

structure in the waterway adjacent. In addition to being an eyesore, it is one

factor preventing local boats from accessing the inner harbour reservoir to

secure shelter in adverse weather.

We, the

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

Newfoundland and Labrador to remove the construction debris remaining in the

waters around the Plate Cove West Bridge and in so doing allow the local boats

to access the inner harbour.

anybody travelled the District of Bonavista, which I'm sure most have. I know

the minister certainly has and enjoyed his experience. Many travel 230 on the

Trinity Bay side down the peninsula and travel coming back up on 235, which is

on the Bonavista Bay side. One of the more picturesque communities on the 235

side of the peninsula is Plate Cove West.

Plate

Cove West is a fishing community, still many boats fish out of Plate Cove West.

This bridge that was replaced when Hurricane Igor hit. Prior to Hurricane Igor,

the boats would travel underneath that bridge to an inner sanctuary harbour

which would give them great reprieve from adverse weather. Much the same as the

inner harbour in historic Bonavista.

Since

the construction and, of course, Igor, you will find that they're unable to get

underneath this bridge. But if you look from the waterway and from the bridge to

look down you'll still see concrete with rebar that is in the water that is

close to the bridge. I think that's rather uncommon for bridge construction that

you would see that. And whether that was covered up and erosion or the wave

action has really now exposed it, but it is an eyesore. It is something in

scenic, historic Bonavista District that we certainly do not wish for the

residents and, at minimum, the tourists to see.

So this

petition here is in good spirits. I think they realize that there is much work

to be called upon and to be done. But this is one in Plate Cove West that we

would like for the department to have a look at and see as to whether they can

remove that debris that's adjacent to the bridge.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

petition to increase support for Labrador West seniors.

The

reason for this is that the need for senior accessible housing and home care

services in Labrador West is steadily increasing. Lifelong residents of the

region are facing the possibility of needing to leave their home in order to

afford to live or receive adequate care. Additional housing options, including

assisted living care facilities like those found throughout the province for

seniors has become a requirement for Labrador West. That requirement is not

currently being met.

WHEREAS

the seniors of our province are entitled to peace and comfort in the homes

where they have spent a lifetime contributing to its prosperity and growth.

WHEREAS

the means for the increasing number of senior residents of Labrador West to

happily age in place are not currently available in the region.

WHEREUPON we the undersigned, your petitioners, call upon the House of Assembly

to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to allow seniors in Labrador

West to age in place by providing affordable housing options for seniors and

assisted-living care facilities for those requiring care.

Speaker,

certainly not issues that are facing Labrador West but certainly accentuated

there; some of the issues that I've faced in my own district. My neighbour, Dr.

Simms, he was in his 90s, late 90s, and he was still living on his own. More

importantly, he and his brother, who was also a nonagenarian at the time, would

go out fishing in South River quite a bit. That was our connection.

I always

had an admiration for the fact that if that's age, that's where I want to be.

But the fact is, and I do believe this, that we do our best to keep people in

their homes as long as they can and to put the supports in place. That's where

they're healthiest, that's where they're happiest and where they can maintain

their independence.

Japan is

probably the oldest country in the world right now; one out of four people are

over the age of 65. Newfoundland and Labrador are probably not much behind them.

They've put in strategies, even such a thing as long-term care insurance, but

we've got to start dealing with this as well. I would argue, Speaker, it's not

just Newfoundland and Labrador that's responsible, this has got to be part of an

overall strategy with the federal government as well.

We've

got to be able to deal with this, it's across Canada, but here in Newfoundland

and Labrador we have a rapidly aging problem and we really need the input of the

federal government in this as well. This cannot be on our own; it's a problem

that needs to be solved nationally.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Exploits.

P. FORSEY:

Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker,

the residents of 13 Mile Crossing on route 350 near Bishop's Falls are concerned

with speeding through the area. This is a bus route and due to high speeds in

the area residents feel it is a safety issue for students boarding and exiting

the bus.

We, the

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

reduce speed and increase safety for both students and residents of the area.

Speaker,

this is an area that leaves Bishop's Falls on route 350 towards Botwood. It's

controlled by the Department of Transportation. In that area there is signage

there for 40 kilometres, but what's happening is when you come in from Botwood,

northeast into Bishop's Falls, that area is 80-kilometre zone, so you come down

to a dip there and you are going direct from 80 right into a

40-kilometre zone. People have a tendency to keep their speeds up and don't

adhere, basically, to the signage that's there.

I know it is wrong. I really do. But people feel there

is more housing in that area in the last few years and people feel that with the

new bus stops, more children in that area that they would like to have a digital

sign there to at least acknowledge, to get people's attention to slow them down

so that something doesn't happen in that area.

So it's something that needs attention, to reduce the

area to help with the safety aspects in that area.

Thank you, Speaker.

SPEAKER:

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Motion 7.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

CROCKER:

Thank you, 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. today,

Tuesday, May 10, 2022.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Motion 8.

SPEAKER:

Oh,

sorry. I forgot to vote on the last one.

As per the first motion regarding the late sitting this

afternoon.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Motion carried.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Motion 8.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader,

that notwithstanding Standing Order 63, this House shall not proceed with

Private Members' Day on Wednesday, May 11, 2022, but shall instead meet at 2

p.m. on that day for Routine Proceedings and to conduct Government Business and

that, if not adjourned, the Speaker shall then adjourn the House at midnight.

SPEAKER:

All those in favour of the motion,

'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Motion carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, second reading of a bill,

An Act To Amend The Access To Information And Protection Of Privacy Act, 2015,

Bill 59.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that Bill 59,

An Act To Amend The Access To Information

And Protection Of Privacy Act, 2015, be now read a second time.

The hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety.

HOGAN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Government House Leader, that

Bill 59,

An Act To Amend The Access To Information And Protection Of Privacy

Act, 2015, be now read a second time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill, “An Act To Amend The Access To Information And

Protection Of Privacy Act, 2015.” (Bill 59)

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you, Speaker.

On April

29, 2022, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Innu Nation

formerly announced the launch of the Inquiry into the Treatment, Experiences and

Outcomes of Innu in the Child Protection System as a

Part II Inquiry under the

Public Inquiries Act, 2006.

Public

bodies are subject to the ATIPPA 2015 and must comply with access to information

requests. Public bodies listed in

Schedule B of ATIPPA 2015 are exempt from

access provisions.

Section 4 of ATIPPA 2015 outlines the process by which a body

maybe included in

Schedule B. Without listing under

Schedule B, ATIPPA 2015

would apply to information collected and used by the Innu inquiry.

It is

anticipated that processing access requests would negatively effect the work of

the Innu inquiry. It is also anticipated that the Innu inquiry would generate a

substantial amount of records.

Previously, both the Muskrat Falls inquiry and the Ground Search and Rescue

inquiry were listed in

Schedule B on the grounds that ATIPPA obligations would

unreasonably interfere with the inquiry's work and singular focus.

Listing

the Innu inquiry under

Schedule B would be consistent with past practices for

previous

Part II inquiries.

This

direction is also consistent with the recommendations of the 2020 statutory

review of ATIPPA 2015. The OIPC has been consulted and agrees with this

approach.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I'm

pleased to stand today to speak to Bill 59,

An Act to Amend the Access to

Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 2015.

Speaker,

as has been noted, this bill, in essence, what it will do, it will exempt the

inquiry respecting the Treatment, Experiences and Outcomes of Innu in the Child

Protection System from the ATIPPA legislation.

Really,

in essence, the general rule is all public bodies are subject to this act, to

the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act . So all public bodies are subject to it, which means it allows

researchers, it allows private citizens, businesses and others to file a request

for records or information. What this legislation will do is it will provide an

exemption. It will provide an exemption with respect to the inquiry respecting

the Treatment, Experiences and Outcomes of Innu in the Child Protection System.

So this inquiry will be exempt.

Why is

that important? Well, first of all, the rationale is that it's going to be

consistent. It will be consistent and in line with previous inquiries who have

also been exempt from the following ATIPPA legislation. So that is important to

note.

Another

rationale as well is that we know when there is an inquiry they collect a lot of

information. Much of it is personal, much of it is emotional; much of it is

sensitive. So much of the information would be redacted if the inquiry were

subjected to ATIPPA. So these documents, in essence, will now not be ATIPP-able,

as they are not of a public body. So removing this inquiry, as we've done with

other inquiries, from ATIPPA, it prevents the inquiry, in essence, essentially

from being bogged down in requests for information.

Now, I

know there's always that concern that when we restrict information and the

disclosure of information, but, in this particular case, I would submit and

argue that it is appropriate.

At the

end of the inquiry, Mr. Speaker, the commissioner will have the opportunity to

file a report and make a report public. So the commissioner is ultimately

entrusted to include in this report any information which he, in this case,

feels should be public. So, Mr. Speaker, by the very nature of a commission of

inquiry, information through exhibits and testimony is made public.

I think

it's also important to note that the commissioner will assess and will look at

and examine which exhibits can be made public and which will remain

confidential. That will be within the authority of the commissioner and his

acting ability. The commissioner is ultimately acting in the public interest,

Mr. Speaker, by virtue of his position. It is also true that the commissioner

will make such a determination always with the public interest in mind. What

does that mean? It means he will always consider what is in the best interest of

the public and the public's best interest.

Also,

it's important to note that the Ground Search and Rescue inquiry and the Muskrat

Falls inquiry were both exempt from access to information requests. So this is

no different. It's just consistent. It's legislation which is necessary to be in

line with previous legislation. Therefore, we, as the Opposition and me as the

shadow minister for Justice and Public Safety, take no issue with this

legislation.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

First of

all, I want to say the importance of this inquiry and its importance for the

Innu people, but also for everyone in Labrador, as this is a long time coming.

It's important that we are following consistency in allowing the inquiry to go

through the same way as the previous two inquiries, through the exemption

through ATIPPA.

But this

is a very solemn and important inquiry that needs to proceed with all the

resources and everything that is required, but also at the same time follow

consistency and to be able to be open and transparent for all the people

presenting and the people that are inquiring.

So I do

say that we do support this wholeheartedly. We support the inquiry

wholeheartedly and all of its outcomes and its needs, because it's a place of

solemnness and it's important that we do what we do.

With

that, I'll take my seat, but we are supporting this wholeheartedly.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm not

going to take long. I, too, for the record just want to say that I will be

supporting this bill. I guess the rationale has kind of been explained, but I

know I've stood up in this House on numerous occasions speaking to the issues

around ATIPPA and the Privacy Commissioner and the fact that Nalcor does – not

Nalcor, but NL Hydro, OilCo, should fall under ATIPPA.

And the

reason why I do so is because at least then you have an independent arbitrator

who can look at that information, in the case of ATIPPA, the Privacy

Commissioner, who is an independent Officer of the House, and determine what

information should be disclosed, what information shouldn't be disclosed, have

that ability for people to force government and force government entities to be

open and transparent with information and to share all information that should

be shared with the public and not to hide any information.

In this

case, we're asking for an exemption, which one might, on the face of it, think

flies in the face of that concept, that principle, but it really doesn't.

Because, in this case, while it may not be the Privacy Commissioner, there is a

commissioner who heads up these inquiries. I would submit that this

commissioner, basically as an independent individual, would follow a similar

process that the Privacy Commissioner would follow. Throughout the entire

inquiry, the commissioner that's heading up any given inquiry is going to

determine and he will hear, or she, arguments from all parties involved in the

inquiry as to what information is sensitive and should not be shared.

This

particular inquiry that we're talking about here is a very, very sensitive one,

as we all understand. There are some very personal stories, very personal

information there and so on involving children and other parties that ought not

to be shared.

So the

commissioner, in overseeing this whole process, any information – because it's a

public inquiry anyone from the public will be able to – I would assume like any

other inquiry – go there in person, watch it online, whatever, the media will be

there, and any information that the commissioner deems relevant and in the

public interest to have it disclosed, he or she will ensure that that happens.

Any information that he or she deems to be of a sensitive nature, that's not

necessary in painting the picture that the inquiry is seeking out and protecting

certain personal rights and privacy, then the commissioner will make sure that

information is not disclosed, similar to what the Privacy Commissioner would do

in a typical ATIPPA situation.

course, as the Member for Harbour Main said, at the end of the process, after

all the information has been heard by the general public, all the relevant

information, the commissioner is going to issue a report. That report is going

to contain within it all the background of what happened, why it happened and

there are going to be a series of recommendations, hopefully, to make sure that

these type of things never happen again. That will all be made public and open

to scrutiny by the general public, by the media and so on.

So I see

it as a very transparent process, but also bearing in mind that there is some

information – no different than information contained within government,

information contained within OilCo or anywhere else, we all recognize there is

some information that cannot be disclosed for certain reasons. But my problem

has always been, when I've talked about OilCo and Hydro and before that Nalcor,

the fact that we didn't have that independent arbitrator, that this entity could

just outright refuse the public information without any scrutiny by an outside

party, i.e., the Privacy Commissioner.

That

doesn't happen in this process. That doesn't happen in a process of an inquiry,

such as this and such as other inquiries we've had in the past. So we have that

protection built in by virtue of having that independent commissioner who will

see it through from the beginning to the end, a final report. He or she will

ensure that all information that ought to be released to the public will be

released to the public.

I'm

confident in that process and for that reason I will support this amendment

under Bill 59.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Lake

Melville.

P. TRIMPER:

Thank you, Speaker.

It's a

very important, while a very straightforward matter, having this particular

inquiry included under the

Schedule B of the ATIPPA legislation. I can tell you

from personal experience, and from so many of the constituents of Lake Melville

and across Labrador, how important getting this inquiry finally going, and with

the right structures and supports is so important.

This is

going to be a very challenging period of time for our province. There are going

to be situations that will be tough to hear, they're going to be tough to bring

forward. I think for the ability, too, as my colleague from Mount Pearl -

Southlands just very well said, it's important to be able to give people the

feeling of full disclosure and confidence that so many matters of highly

personal, highly difficult to just explain and talk about, matters will be able

to be brought before a very well selected group of commissioners.

I just

wanted to highlight those commissioners, because I know two of the three of them

very well. The hon. James Igloliorte, a retired Provincial Court judge, has just

completed, I think, I would have to say a very well-received inquiry into search

and rescue. The ability to take a lot of personal information, again from so

many people in Labrador, who were involved in events around the loss of Burton

Winters, but also very many other issues around search and rescue, and his

ability to bring that forward in the form of clear recommendations to

government; some of which have already been implemented and I compliment him on

that. I've stood on my feet before and spoken to it. So, Jim, I'm really glad

you're back on board as the chief commissioner.

Anastasia Qupee, she's going to be a co-commissioner working with the judge. For

those of you who don't know, Anastasia is the former grand chief of the Innu

Nation, former chief of Sheshatshiu. She now sits as the director of Social

Health for the community of Sheshatshiu. So she is very well versed and very

familiar – she is a passionate leader. I feel she is going to bring so much to

the table.

Also,

she served on the board of directors for Labrador-Grenfell Health. So you have a

great background that she will also bring to the table from the Innu perspective

and the Innu leadership perspective, but also as someone who lives in

Sheshatshiu and cares a lot about these youngest of generations that are coming

in society.

Then

finally, Dr. Mike Devine, who I don't know personally, I know about him. I know

he is a retired professor at the School of Social Work. I was just having a

little read of his background, certainly a long history of community involvement

and community activism.

thought I would conclude my remarks, Speaker, just to roll them into the record

because I think it is a very important quote from the current Grand Chief

Etienne Rich and I would just like to read this into the record.

“The

announcement of the Inquiry into the treatment of Innu children and youth in

care has been long awaited in our communities of Sheshatshiu and Natuashish. We

have known for many years that the child protection system has not been working

for Innu people and that it has not operated in the best interests of our

children. We hope that the Inquiry will help us better understand where the

system has failed Innu and how we can work together to make the right changes

for better outcomes for our children. We are confident in the people we have

selected as Commissioners and we are grateful to them for their interest in and

commitment to the Inquiry.” That was written and stated by the Grand Chief of

the Innu Nation, Mr. Etienne Rich.

With

that, Speaker, I will wholeheartedly endorse this bill here today. I look

forward to the inquiry getting off to very important work.

Thank

you very much.

Tshenashkumitin.

SPEAKER:

Seeing no other speakers, if

the Minister of Justice and Public Safety speaks now he will close debate.

The hon.

the Minister of Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I want

to thank the Members from Harbour Main, Labrador West, Mount Pearl - Southlands

and Lake Melville for speaking to this bill and certainly for their support on

this bill. Particularly the Members from Labrador who spoke about the issues

regarding the Innu and why this inquiry was called in the first place. I do

appreciate their comments.

It is

obviously more personal and more touching to people from Labrador so it means a

lot to have them speak here today. I do appreciate those comments from both of

them representing their districts in Labrador.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SPEAKER:

Is the House ready for the

question?

The

motion is that Bill 59 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.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Motion

carried.

CLERK (Barnes):

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Access To Information And Protection Of Privacy Act, 2015. (Bill 59)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

second time.

When

shall the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole?

S. CROCKER:

Now.

SPEAKER:

Now.

motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Access To Information And Protection Of

Privacy Act, 2015,” read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the

Whole presently, by leave. (Bill 59)

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Justice and Public Safety that this House resolve itself into a

Committee of the Whole to consider Bill 59.

SPEAKER:

It 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 Bill 59.

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

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Motion carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, the

Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Trimper):

Order, please!

We are now considering Bill 59,

An Act To Amend The Access To

Information And Protection Of Privacy Act, 2015.

A bill,

“An Act To Amend The Access To Information And Protection Of Privacy Act, 2015.”

(Bill 59)

CLERK:

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Clause 1.

Shall clause 1 carry?

The hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, Chair.

Has the minister spoken to the

Newfoundland and Labrador

provincial Information and Privacy Commissioner in regard to this act?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of Justice and

Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you for the question, Chair, and the OIPC has been consulted on this

amendment and does agree with this approach.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for Harbour

Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

Can you please advise whether he intends to publicly post or make available the

exhibits which he relies on throughout the inquiry?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of Justice and

Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

I assume that means whether the commissioner will provide that information to

the public, as opposed to the Privacy Commissioner. The three commissioners will

decide what records will be released publicly as the inquiry moves forward.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for Harbour

Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

Has the Privacy Commissioner given an opinion on this amendment, and if so, what

is it? C an you table

it?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

So I don't know if an opinion

has been given, other than he does agree with the approach.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

This inquiry is very

personal in nature and will rely on the testimony of family members. How will

their personal information be treated by the inquiry?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

That will be within the

purview of the three commissioners as this inquiry moves forward. Certainly this

inquiry, I would suggest, is a bit different than the last few that we've seen

in this province, because there are certainly emotion components of this that

didn't exist for other fact-finding inquiries and investigations.

So I do

believe and I do have the utmost faith that the three commissioners will respect

that process, and I've had a conversation with the three of them very recently

about that and certainly discussed with them that it's all within their purview

of how they want this inquiry to run and operate. I know they will respect the

feelings and emotions of individuals and families as they move forward with this

very important inquiry.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

Yes, and

we understand it's within their purview, but are you aware of if there are going

to be any supports that will be made available to volunteers or family members

throughout the inquiry?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Yes, there will be supports

provided to family members as they come forward to talk about these difficult

situations that they faced.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

What kind of supports

would that be?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

I don't have the details on

those supports right now and I would suggest that, as they go forward, it will

probably reveal what sort of supports these individuals need. If the

commissioners do need anything for it, certainly they can come to the Department

of Justice, but it would also all fall within the budget that the commission has

been given by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The hon.

the Member for Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

And that's all the

questions I have.

CHAIR:

No further questions, I

recognize the Member for Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Chair.

Just a

couple of questions there to the minister. The timing of this inquiry – could

the minister give an idea of when it will be started and roughly how much time

will be given to the inquiry to do its work?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

So work is ongoing on the

inquiry already. I know they're addressing issues right at the forefront, the

structure of it, staffing issues, how it's all going to look. Certainly document

gathering is under way as well. Timing, I do believe – I stand to be corrected –

they hope to have this done by next fall.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The hon.

the Member for Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Chair.

With the

structural makeup of the committee, how will that look going forward and

compared to similar inquiries?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Right off the start, it is a

bit different than the previous inquiries in that we have three commissioners as

opposed to one, which were GSAR and the Muskrat Falls. In terms of the

structure of the commission itself, that is something else that is within the

purview of the commission.

I did meet with them to discuss that a couple of weeks

ago and the discussion we did have was the commission does have to be

independent of government. And whatever structure they see necessary, however

many staff or employees or whatever they need going forward, they will set up

that structure independent of government.

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

BROWN:

Thanks again, Chair.

What space has been allocated to the inquiry and will

it be able to meet the needs, especially for individuals travelling and things

like that?

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety.

HOGAN:

So the budget is sufficient to meet all those needs. Obviously, travel is a

different issue for this inquiry as opposed to other ones. I anticipate they

will move through different communities and have different meetings and hearings

or however they want to conduct it.

As I said, it will be different in a lot of respects in

how it looks and how it feels, but again those are decisions that the

commissioners can make and the budget has been provided for them to be

independent of government and make those decisions as they see most appropriate.

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

BROWN:

Thank you, Chair.

Will there be sufficient

interpretation and translation

services made available to the committee?

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Minister of Justice and Public Safety.

HOGAN:

I am sure that if

interpretation services are needed, the commissioners will

have the necessary translators there to deal with that. Obviously, it wouldn't

serve much purpose if people can't give their evidence and can't be heard.

I do remember when I was at the Muskrat Falls inquiry

that was an issue with one of the Indigenous individuals who came to testify and

he didn't want to participate any further because he wasn't able to speak in his

first language. So there were adjustments made for that and even heightened the

sensitivities around this now, given the nature of this inquiry.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

No further questions? No further speakers to the bill?

Shall the motion carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK:

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

Session convened, as follows.

CHAIR:

S hall 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:

An Act To Amend The Access To

Information And Protection Of Privacy Act, 2015.

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 hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I move that the Committee rise and report Bill 59.

CHAIR:

It is moved that the Committee rise

and report Bill 59.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Thank you.

motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, the

Speaker returned to the Chair.

SPEAKER (Bennett):

Order, please!

The hon.

the Member for Lake Melville and Deputy Chair of Committees.

P. TRIMPER:

Speaker, the Committee of the

Whole have considered the matters to them referred and directed me to report

Bill 59 carried without amendment.

SPEAKER:

The Chair of the Committee of

the Whole reports that the Committee has considered the matters to them referred

and directed that Bill 59 be passed without amendment.

When

shall the bill be received?

S. CROCKER:

Now.

SPEAKER:

Now.

When

shall the bill be read a third time?

S. CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, report received and adopted. Bill ordered read a third time on tomorrow.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I call

from the Order Paper, Motion 3.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, 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 relating to the raising of loans by the province, Bill 47.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded I do

now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of the

Whole.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, the Speaker

left the Chair.

Committee of the

Whole

CHAIR (Trimper):

Order, please!

We are

now debating the related resolution and Bill 49,

An Act For Granting To Her

Majesty Certain Sums Of Money For Defraying Certain Expenses Of The Public

Service For The Financial Year Ending March 31, 2023 And For Other Purposes

Relating To The Public Service.

CLERK:

No, wrong bill. It is 47; I

gave you 49.

CHAIR:

Wow, the Clerk made a

mistake.

CLERK:

I made a mistake.

CHAIR:

The Clerk made a mistake.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

CHAIR:

Order, please!

apologies to Hansard. This doesn't happen very often.

We are

now debating the related resolution and Bill 47,

An Act To Authorize The Raising

Of Money By Way Of Loan By The Province.

Resolution

it resolved by the House of Assembly in Legislative Session convened, as

follows:

“That it

is expedient to bring in a measure to authorize the raising from time to time by

way of loan on the credit of the province a sum of money not exceeding

$2,700,000,000.”

CHAIR:

Shall the resolution carry?

The hon.

the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank

you for the opportunity today. As Members in this House realize under

Budget 2022 , when it was tabled in the

House of Assembly on April 7, 2022, it identified a borrowing requirement of

$2.7 billion for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2023.

Today we

are introducing the bill, the Loan Act,

2022 and it is under this authority of the

Loan Act, 2022 and

section 38 of the

Financial Administration Act that we will raise by way of loans not

exceeding $2.7 billion. So like all Canadian provinces, the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador borrows in the provincial bond market. We issue

publicly traded debentures through a syndicate of investment dealers. These

bonds then trade freely in the secondary market and are available for purchase

by any retail or institutional investor.

The

province may meet its borrowing requirements through the issuance of long-term

and short-term debt in the domestic and international capital markets. Borrowing

requirements of most provinces are satisfied primarily through domestic debt

issuance, and some provinces also address their borrowing requirements through

the international debt issuance.

Now, the

primary source of funding for Newfoundland and Labrador has typically been

domestic fixed-rate term debt with a standard maturities of five, 10 and 30

years. The province also relies on short-term borrowing – happens on Wednesdays

– through weekly issuance of 91-day Treasury bills and other cash-management

bills as required. And investors of the domestic fixed- and floating-rate

debentures typically include insurance companies, pension funds, corporate

investors and Canadian governments and agencies.

Now, the

province can also issue debt internationally, but it does not currently have an

active international debt issuance program. As you've heard recently, interest

rates are rising and that is a cause of concern for all of us. As I've said

many, many times in this House of Assembly, the cost of borrowing is

approximately a billion dollars, just under a billion dollars each year.

So it is

a significant amount of money, and there is a concern about these rising rates.

But we are rolling over, for example, debt that had a higher interest rate.

Sometimes we actually do a little better. I'll just use an example; we do have

one particular loan that's rolling over that was significantly higher. I think

it was around 8.65 per cent interest. So when we roll it over, hopefully we'll

get somewhere in the 3 per cent to 4 per cent range. I understand that, as of

budget day, rates varied from about 1.31 per cent – which is decent for a

five-year term – to just over 3 per cent for a 30-year term. Just to give the

people that are paying attention some ideas.

Of the

$2.7 billion that we will need to borrow this year, approximately $1.7 billion

are maturities. As I said, we're seeing some of that global instability being

seen now in rising interest rates. So that is obviously a concern.

The

province may borrow without further statutory authority under two acts.

Section

42 of the Financial Administration Act

provides a statutory authority to borrow in the capital markets for the purpose

of redeeming or retiring existing loans, making statutory sinking fund

contributions over the retirement of unfunded pension liabilities.

The

secondary act is under the Canada Pension Plan and it's borrowing from CPP that

are authorized under The Loan (Canada

Pension Plan Investment Fund) Act, 1966 . There have been no surplus CPP

funds available for loans to the province since 2002 so it is predominantly

under the Financial Administration Act .

So the

Loan Act will come into full force and effect until the $2.7 billion limit is

reached or is replaced by a subsequent Loan Act. So what happens once you give

authority, we have a Treasury team within the Department of Finance that will

start to place the money in the markets at opportune times to get the best rates

possible.

The last

Loan Act passed by the Legislature was the

Loan Act, 2021 , which provided long-term borrowing authorities of up to $1.5

billion. As of March 31, 2022, the province had borrow $1.35 billion in

long-term borrowing; $50 million of which was pre-borrowed against 2022-23 and

that was because we saw interest rates going up so we took the lower interest

rate amount.

The

Financial Administration Act

authorizes the new borrowings for the purpose of redeeming or retiring debt, as

I mentioned, making sinking fund contributions and for retiring unfunded pension

liabilities. The Loan Act, 2022 , is

required in order to provide specific long-term borrowing authority to meet the

2022-23 budgetary requirements.

As you

can appreciate and we talked a little bit during Question Period, we do

anticipate the $351-million deficit this year so you have to add that to our

borrowings. We have to add to our borrowings any maturities that are coming and

any other monies that are required to ensure effective operations. So the

borrowing activity is necessary in order to allow the province to meet its

day-to-day financial commitments.

So I

turn to the House and say this is a requirement for the House to review the Loan

Act. I can appreciate when you're borrowing this amount of money, trust me, you

want to get the best rates in the market. We have strengthened our team within

the Department of Finance and we have a very stellar team now – we always had a

good team, I am not saying that. But we have strengthened our team in the

Department of Finance to really make sure that we are maximizing our efforts of

ensuring our cost of borrowing is lowered.

I also

said, and I have said it in the House before, we do have a strategic kind of

overview plan to ensure that we are addressing the concerns of both the bond

markets and institutional investors to make sure that they understand that we do

have a strategic plan on improved and better financial management and on debt

management. As you can appreciate, when you have $17 billion in borrowings, you

want to make sure that we have a good eye to ensuring the lowest deficit as

possible in that and a plan to get to balanced budgets as well as a plan to

reduce our cost of borrowings.

things like the balanced budget legislation, the future fund, we have made some

changes in the House, for example, to sinking funds, recently made changes to

the Financial Administration Act to

allow different ability for the sinking funds. All of this is part of the bigger

view on ensuring that strong, financial and debt management.

I would

also say it was very helpful that we have addressed the concerns arising from

Muskrat Falls and addressing the financing of Muskrat Falls and improving the

province's ability to ensure we can rate mitigate. That was another big concern

of the institutional investors in the bond-rating agencies.

So I

always think of it as a triangle, really, focussing on improved financial

management and that is why it was so critical to hold the line on expenditures

in departments and making sure that we have a balanced budget. Our balanced

budget forecast is to get to balance, making sure that we have a future fund.

Also making sure that we are making the modernizations and improvements that are

required to government to free up more funds that we can invest rather than

borrow.

Then on

the debt management side things like I have indicated on improving the way we

invest our sinking funds so that we can pay down on our borrowings.

So a lot

is happening to ensure that we address the cost of borrowing and lower our cost

of debt. That is critically important, I think. As I said, we spend a billion

dollars a year. Imagine if we could free up some of that money to invest in

other things that we all want to invest in in this province. It would be

certainly advantageous to all.

So,

again, this Loan Act is $2.7 billion, most of it is debt maturities and the rest

is requirements for improved operations and day-to-day financial commitments of

the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.

With

that, Chair, I'll listen to the debate.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The hon.

the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Thank you, Chair.

I'll

take some time to speak to Bill 47 and the

Loan Act, 2022 , and the requirement to borrow up to $2.7 billion in

long-term borrowings.

Before I

do, I want to acknowledge as well the dedicated staff and the highly competent

staff that exists in the Department of Finance, particularly around this

particular issue. In our Estimates, we had an opportunity to hear from them, and

to listen to what they had to say to us about how they manage the long-term debt

of the province and look to take advantage of opportunities to reduce that

interest expense by finding ways to borrow at a much lower interest rate.

That is

exactly what this bill is doing. The government doesn't need $2.7 billion in its

budget this year in borrowings, but it does need to take out of circulation $1.7

billion in old debt and retire it, or roll it over. So what that essentially is

going to be able to do, as we heard from the minister, is we're actually going

to be able to take debt, in one particular case, as high as 8.65 per cent

interest and reduce it down to somewhere between 3 and 4 per cent. Except for

the high inflation rate, we probably might have even done better.

But

that's the sign of good management on behalf of the people, on behalf of the

Department of Finance, the officials that work there because that's exactly what

we want to see happen. Any time that we can look at old debt and find a way to

reduce the interest rate on it that, in itself, is a good thing. We all support

that and will continue to support it.

Some

people will question why government needs to borrow a billion dollars if its

projected deficit is only $351 million, and I think the minister has spoken to

that. It's a combination of the amount needed for the deficit, as well as for

the cash flow requirements of the government through the year. And that was very

well explained again in the Estimate process to us.

I will

agree that significant borrowing, it's still a borrowing; it's still a debt. We

continue to add to our debt, unfortunately, but if every time in doing these

things we can find a way to lower our interest costs, those are always good

measures to take.

We will

argue back and forth across this House about how we spend our money and what

priorities would we give to some over others. Obviously, we've been spending a

lot of time in this House talking about the impacts on the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador, about this particular time that we find ourselves in

of high inflation, high cost of living, high cost of just about everything that

you can purchase, whether it's food or gas or oil for your home heating fuel. So

there are a significant pressures on individuals in our province and significant

pressures to be able to find different ways of doing things to help the people

of Newfoundland and Labrador. That exactly is what a budget is supposed to do.

It's suppose to be about how we manage the people's finances and how we help

them in their time of need.

I would

suggest right now there is a lot of need in Newfoundland and Labrador. We

applaud the measures that were taken. We have spoke to them before. We don't

disagree with those – well, maybe we disagree with a couple of them in terms of

how effective they will be in terms of electric vehicles and home heat rebates,

if people can't afford to take advantage of them.

But on

the other side of that, there is an opportunity and there still exists an

opportunity for government to really step in and help out and help the people of

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We will continue to bring those

issues forward. We will continue to tell you their stories, because I think

that's exactly why we're here. Politics shouldn't be about politicians; it

should be about people – more particularly, the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Today,

during this Loan Act, obviously, it just gives us an opportunity to remind

ourselves of why we're here, why we're about to borrow an extra billion dollars

and why we're going to borrow an extra $2.7 billion. We can all surmise on how

we got to where we are, whose fault it is or whose fault it isn't, but at the

end of the day it's up to us that are seated in this Chamber now to make the

changes; to make things better for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador; to

provide help where we can, help on the ground, help with their fuel prices, help

with their food prices and find a way to do that. I think that's what we've all

been talking about. That's what we all want to see.

commend the government on moving – I think the minister had talked about the

international markets as well and traditionally our province has borrowed in the

domestic market only, but we are now again – it was explained in Estimates –

moving into the international market, which is again another good step, another

bright spot. It's good to hear, and I think that's the way of the future. I

commend it for doing that.

Again,

as we say, they use a lot of different measures when they borrow the 91-day

Treasury bills – they try and find different ways of managing our money to

provide us with the best possible outcome as a province. These are people

working behind the scenes. They're not sitting here in the House of Assembly;

they're working diligently behind the scenes to make this happen. Again, I want

to thank them for the work they do and continue to do, and I look forward to

more debt being rolled over from 8 per cent interest rates to 3 or 4 per cent

interest rates.

With,

Mr. Chair, I'll stop.

Thank

you.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Chair.

I think

my colleague has spoken to the benefits of this bill and the lower interest

rates in terms of rolling over some of the debt and borrowing. I'm going to try

and keep it real here, as I mentioned earlier. I think about the Mental Health

Week theme: This is empathy. Before you weigh in, tune in.

When I

first spoke to the budget a little while back, I was talking about the supports

and there was a lot of debate and questions on whether the five-point plan was

good enough or dealing with enough. And no one is complaining that those five

points weren't needed, but there was a lot of discussion on what more was

needed.

There

were numbers tossed around in terms of the number of individuals that would

benefit from those five points – I think it was over 100,000; it might've been

140,000. I stand to be corrected. But what's become evident over the last weeks,

months is the price of fuel going up is having a huge effect on our residents

and on our constituents and on the economy.

I talked

about some of these programs having a threshold where you do an income or a

means test on them. If you make just under this much, you can avail of this

program or that program. Then those who are just above that threshold don't have

the luck or don't fit the bill in terms of applying for those programs or

accessing those programs. A lot of those are hard-working Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians – in fact, not a lot of them; all of them are. I spoke to them as

being the working poor. In fact, it's not me putting that label of them. Some

have called me and said that.

what's been happening over the last weeks as the cost and the price of fuel goes

up, that threshold stays the same, but there are more and more people above that

threshold who are feeling the pinch in the cost of living. It's interesting,

every week we're all getting calls; we all get calls on making difficult

choices. Those who are rationing their medication, to make it go longer. Those

who are going outside to the mall to be warm during the day so they don't have

to have their heat on. Seniors who've seen their fuel bill go from $600 to fill

their tank up to over $1,000. Individuals who drive back and forth for

treatments at the Health Sciences, whether chemo or cancer treatments. The

amount of money they're paying to go back and forth.

I can't

make this up; these are real calls that we get. Individuals, our residents and

our constituents are all calling now. I've seen a huge increase since the price

went up last evening in the price of gas. It's really jumped now. So it's really

starting to affect those that had a little bit of a buffer. You have individuals

out there who have savings; they've delved into those. I've known individuals

who have delved into their retirement plans. I've heard from individuals with

pensions who got nowhere to go but make decisions.

mentioned today in Oral Questions about a young family, two young kids, husband

and wife who come into the cancer treatment centre here in town. Because of the

price of gas, they're making some difficult decisions. Coming in to get that

needed treatment for their health is taking away from the ability to look after

their children and provide their children with what they need.

The

minister, in response, listed off a bunch of programs and different things to

do, and I'm not questioning that. I'm not questioning the programs that are

available. Similar to mental health, there's many programs out there. But the

point being is individuals are coming to us and they're obviously falling

through the cracks, they're obviously not being able to utilize those programs,

or those programs are not doing enough to alleviate the stress they're going

through.

This is

where we need to start looking – I say we, collectively, this House, all 40

Members. This is where we really have to – and I don't mean just words and

rhetoric. We're not here getting up and making up stories. We're bringing forth

what's happening out there, what's happening in the public, what individuals are

going through, real stories. So, yes, I understand we're probably not going to

be able to help everyone. But there's some out there with some – and we've

mentioned some solutions that we need to explore to make it easier on some of

these individuals.

Because

we made some of these decisions at a point in time when revenue and taxes and

that were a little different, and how much we got was a little different. We've

progressed to another point in time now where income and revenue is different

again. In fact, it's probably gone up. So we need to look at that and say: Can

we use that money? Where can we use that money?

It's not

a question of if we can use that money; we certainly can use that money. But

looking at what's happening out there in the public and the real, real,

true-to-life situations that people are facing. People are facing huge

decisions. When you have people calling you, and those decisions of whether you

have shelter over your head, you have food, or you have heat and light, those

are serious questions that affect people. But when people are actually calling

now and they add their health into that scenario, they talk about treatments in

that scenario and trying to get back and forth to get those treatments, how that

affects their full budget, their household budget, that becomes a major issue.

That's a major issue for people

applaud moving to electric vehicles and trying to initiate that, but,

realistically, in this day in age, right now at this moment in time, we need to

help those who need the help. That number has increased, that threshold has gone

up. There are more and more people that are falling into that category that they

are making difficult decisions around their budgets and how they allocate their

funds that they get on a regular basis, because it's affecting everything. It's

affecting our food bill, our heat bill and our transportation bill. I suspect

it's affecting medication that gets shipped in here.

So, I

mean, we can discuss this bill, and it's not going to be an issue with approving

this bill. Most people look out there and look at the sum of money we're talking

about – it's good. It's prudent to do what they're doing. Any government would

do the same. In fact, you run it just like a household. If you had an

opportunity to take something out of higher interest rate account and get a

cheaper rate somewhere else, you're going to do that. That's just good financial

management.

But when

it comes to our individual households, they are in a hole and more are falling

into that hole, and more are clamouring to get out. As I said before, it's

probably an overused term, but you hear it a lot, it's so true, they're not

asking for a handout. They're just asking for a hand up. Help these people get

out of that hole and give them an opportunity to stay out of it. That's all

we're asking for here. I say we, but we are representing our constituents. We

are speaking for our constituents.

So when

they speak to us, when they phone us and they look for answers – and some of

them suggest answers – then we have to come and bring it here to the floor,

because we have an elected government with elected Members who are in portfolios

with a mandate, with a responsibility, and we want to hear from them on

solutions.

CHAIR:

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

Further speakers?

The hon.

the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE:

Thank you, Chair.

It's

great to have an opportunity to speak again today. Right now, as has been

referenced, we're speaking about the loan bill, $2.7 billion loan. It is good

that the minister did clarify the fact that even though we're getting a loan of

$2.7 billion, the deficit is actually around $350 million.

So we are just renewing loans, getting better interest

rates on money we owe and so on. As it has been said, that is a positive thing.

I, obviously, support that. I'm sure every Member of the House of Assembly

supports that. There will be nobody that would be opposed to that I'm sure.

But I think it is important, Mr. Chair, once again,

that we still be cognizant of the fact that even though we only have a deficit –

I say only – $300-and-some-odd million this year, which is substantially lower

than was predicted. And thankfully for the good fortune, I guess, of additional

revenues that came in the door and so on from the province's point of view. Not

so much on consumers, but from the province's point of view, additional revenue

from oil and gas and different things that we are in a position that our deficit

is much lower than what was originally anticipated.

But we have to be cognizant of the fact always in this

House of Assembly that we still have a provincial debt of over, I think, $15.2

billion – I think that's the number; $15.2 billion sounds right. Over $15

billion anyway. That is net debt and we also have a lot of unfunded liabilities

and so on. The actual debt is probably more like, I think I have heard $40

billion or something is a number I heard thrown around.

So we are in a huge hole, financially, as a province.

So we have to be cognizant about that at all times when we are standing in this

House of Assembly and we are asking for more money for this and more money for

that and so on. So I do understand the balance that government is trying to

create here – being cognizant of that. But I also understand how the average

person is feeling right now in trying to balance their budgets and that's the

other side.

So, again, government has taken some measures to keep –

the Premier keeps talking about the $142 million, which is basically the

provincial gas tax portion of the tax on gas, a little better than that

actually. And the people who benefit from that, I'm sure they are appreciative,

but again there's this group – and, once again, I am not going to harp on people

who are making big salaries or significant salaries, although everybody would

like a break, no doubt about it. We would all love a break.

As I

said last night, it turns my stomach every time I go to the pumps and you watch

the numbers just rolling up. It's absolutely insane where the prices have gone,

but at the end of the day I do have the financial flexibility to be able to

absorb that.

Again, I

want to keep going back to that group of people – a lot of the ones who I'm

hearing from and other Members are hearing from – seniors who are not in receipt

of the supplement, low-income working people who are not in receipt of any kind

of supplement. Those are the people that we continue to hear from; those are the

people that are really, really, really struggling. I know everyone in this House

knows that. The government knows that. I know they do.

I know

it would be great if we had a billion-dollar surplus this year, as opposed to a

deficit of $300 and some-odd million dollars. How great it would be if the

biggest problem we had is how do we spend the money? That's why sometimes when

we make comparisons between what we're doing and what Alberta is doing, you've

got to realize – I think we have to be realistic on what Quebec is doing – how

much money they've got coming in through the door compared to where we're to

financially.

As other

Members have said and I will say as well, Ottawa is getting off the hook. Part

of the solution should be Ottawa. Not blaming everything on Ottawa, but part of

the solution should be Ottawa. I think we need to be fighting harder to get our

fair share. When you look at Quebec as an example and you look at how well

they're doing, yet there are billions of dollars in transfer payments going to

Quebec and you look at where we're to, and what we're receiving, which is a mere

pittance.

Basically we receive the basics of what we're entitled to. Sometimes, like when

we see our – and I'm not trying to knock anything that our federal MPs have done

with the rate mitigation and so on. But still, when you see federal MPs as an

example, and they're here and they're doing an announcement on the West Coast,

an announcement on the East Coast and announcement in Labrador – money for this

program, that program, whatever – that's only what we're entitled to. That's

only some federal government program – if the feds come out with an

infrastructure program and we are entitled to our share, whatever that is, or if

they come out with some kind of a healthy living initiative and Newfoundland is

entitled to a certain percentage of that and they announce some projects, that's

all we're getting. There's nobody giving us anything over and above.

So when

we see these announcements saying, oh look, they're going to put some money in

Gros Morne, they're going to do this, they're going to do that, that's only our

share of a program. We don't deserve that. That's not a back-patting

opportunity. It's only pittance and a photo op. It's only a pittance compared to

what we need and compared to what, I would argue, we deserve. Because as we all

know, the equalization formula is not taking into account our circumstance in

this province.

The

health care transfers are not taking into account our geography and our

demographics. It's not taking it into account; it's on a per capita basis.

Obviously, if you're looking at a place like, say, Toronto or whatever and you

have millions of people and there's population density and so on and all those

dollars are coming in on a per capita basis, naturally they can do an awful lot

more with it than we can do based on the geography, the demographics, the health

of our population and the age of our population. We're just simply not getting

our rightful due. We're not. Former Premier Williams wasn't wrong.

Now,

should we have torn down the Canadian flag and start referring to the prime

minister as Steve and all that kind of stuff? I said in this House before, at

the time when it happened it felt good. I was calling him Steve too. I know a

lot of Newfoundlanders were, absolutely, but we paid a price.

Right

now, we have a situation where our provincial government and our federal

government are supposedly aligned, same political stripe; they say that there's

this great relationship. We've seen some things come to Newfoundland. Not

denying that we haven't seen anything, we've seen some things, but most of it

has only been federal programs that we're just getting our share.

Now, was

there some work done on rate mitigation that we're all glad it happened?

Absolutely. But even if you look at that really, considering the fact that they

signed off on both loan guarantees and they were clearly partners in all this,

when you look at the actual cash – the Hibernia shares are something we've been

after