Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Oral Questions — 26 March 2002 (44th General Assembly, 4th Session, Vol. XLIV No. 5)
2002-03-26
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
March 26, 2002 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 5
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!
The Chair would like to welcomed today sixty Grade 5 students from St. Kevin's
Elementary School in the Goulds. These students are from the District of
Kilbride and Ferryland. They are accompanied by teachers, Ms Kelly and Mr.
Bruce, along with chaperones, Diane Gulliver, Kevin Power, Randy Connors, Ingrid
Connors, Charlotte Carey, Jeannette Putt, Ann Marie Miller and Jim Power.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to pass along congratulations to a local student at Ascension
Collegiate, Bay Roberts on having received a $300 scholarship.
Chantal Barrett of Bay Roberts was this year's winner of the Con-Tri
division, Retired Teachers Association scholarship. This scholarship is the
fifth such award presented by the association, and to qualify, a student must
reside in the boundaries area and write the Department of Education's
scholarship exam.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Chantal on this award and wish her well in her
future studies. Also, I would like to congratulate the Retired Teachers
Association in sponsoring this scholarship.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Provincial Girls 4A High School Basketball Championship was held at St.
Kevin's High School in the Goulds this past weekend. St. Kevin's Mavericks
won the championship for the second straight year.
The team had an outstanding year going undefeated. In fact, it did not lose a
game in two years sporting an 81-0 record over the past two years.
On behalf of the Kilbride MHA, Ed Byrne, and myself, and I am sure all
members of the House, we offer our congratulations to their coach, Clarence
Sutton and the entire team on an outstanding year.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.
MS M. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today, and I am very
pleased to send congratulations to two students in my district.
Matthew Healey of Marystown has made the University of New Brunswick's
Faculty of Forestry and Environmental Management's Dean's list, one of only
thirty-six students to receive this honour, which at the minimum requires a
grade-point average of 3.7. Matthew is currently in his fourth year of the
bachelor of science in forestry.
Also, Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate Stephanie Lundrigan of Burin for
her recent award of a $300 Burin Peninsula Arts Council Scholarship. Stephanie
is a graduate of Pearce Regional High in Burin and is currently enrolled in her
second term in the music program at Memorial University. Stephanie is a member
of the MUN Chamber Choir and is a member of a local band, Southern Reflections.
Stephanie excels in piano, violin, piano accordion, button accordion and the
tambourine.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate both these students for their achievements and I
wish them further success in their academic studies.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, today I rise to note the recent passing of a constituent, Mr.
Gregory P. Devereaux, of Avondale who passed away February 20, 2002 at the age
of ninety.
Gregory was a teacher. He began his career in 1931 and spent over forty years
in service to the students of this Province. He was certainly a very well
respected member of his community and his hard work and dedication have often
been acknowledged and did not go unnoticed.
Gregory, in 1953, was awarded the Bene Merenti Medal by Pope Pius XII in
recognition of his contribution to Catholic Schools. In 1976 he was inducted
into the Newfoundland and Labrador Softball Hall of Fame, and in 1998 the local
ballfield and playground in Avondale was dedicated in his name.
He was instrumental, as well, in erecting a monument to the CBC youth of
yesterday at the once popular Bridge of Avondale. He was a longtime member of
the Knights of Columbus, active as a member of the senior's group, strong
parish worker and certainly very well respected.
As an historian, he certainly has written many poems and stories. His
writings were to ensure that the local history is remembered and relived through
his word. He maintained a keen interest in all aspects of his community.
Although never married, he had been a devoted family man, especially active
in the lives of his nieces and nephews and their families. His gifts to his
family were considered, by him, to be his greatest achievements. His commitment
to his community, parish and school shall never be forgotten.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members of this House to join with me in offering
condolences to the Devereaux family on the passing of Gregory.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear- Harbour Grace.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, recently the Newfoundland and Labrador Youth of the Year Awards
were awarded to students across our Province.
This program is administered by Futures in Newfoundland and Labrador's
Youth ( FINALY), a dynamic youth driven organization, which empowers youth to be
active participants in the decision making process.
The winners were: Jillian Parsons of Corner Brook for the Expression Award;
Chris Dakins of Carbonear for the Innovation Award; Rita Broderick of St.
Brendan's for the Legacy Award; Zachary Goudie of Grand Falls-Windsor for the
Linkage Award; Danny Huxter of Springdale and Julia Benoit of Burgeo were
co-winners in the Vision category.
These six winners were selected from more than thirty nominations received
for the five awards. The awards are meant to recognize volunteer efforts in
social and economic development.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of the House to join with me in congratulating
these award winners.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.
MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have been forwarded some names of people from the District of Placentia
& St. Mary's: from Dunne Academy, Jeremy Kielly; from St. Catherine's
Academy, Michelle Healey, Corrinna MacDonald, Shane Butland and Julia Dunphy;
from Laval High in Placentia, Peter Benoite and Sandi Ennis; and from Fatima
All of these people have left their schools and travelled to Memorial
University, in most places, and made a mark in basketball in Newfoundland and
Labrador. These respective schools have sent these people forward and they have
been great role models, not only for their schools but, indeed, for the young
people, not only in the District of Placentia & St. Mary's, Mr. Speaker,
but for young people throughout the Province.
We look everywhere for heroes and in my own district we have all these people
who have been excellent heroes and excellent role models for the young people.
I just want to take the opportunity today to bring their names forward in the
House and say congratulations and thank you for a job well done by these young
people. When there is so much wrong in this world to see all these people doing
something right and leaving a lasting impression on the younger people who are
coming through our school system, I think is a positive thing and I want to say
congratulations to all these people today.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions today are for the Premier. Mr. Speaker, the Premier made a
commitment to build phase III of the Trans-Labrador Highway over a six-year
period. Given the fact that the Premier and the Minister of Finance have
indicated that the deficit for next year will be in the range of $400 million,
and of course that is by their own creative accounting methods, the cash method,
the deficit will probably be closer to $6 million, $7 million, $750 million next
year: Could the Premier tell us how he will come up with the additional $17
million to commence Phase III, as well as the $18 million that will be necessary
to run the ferry service, when he cannot even find enough money to open hospital
beds and recruit cancer specialists in this Province?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I take it from the line of questioning from the Leader of the Opposition,
that he does not have further questions; two days later he does not have any
further questions about this year's Budget. He would now like for us to
discuss next year's Budget, and the year after and the year after. We will
gladly do that, Mr. Speaker, next year and the year after and the year after,
when we are here presenting Budgets on behalf of the people of Newfoundland and
Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, in the meantime, I take it that the last
part of the question with reference to the serious issue with respect to the
oncologists, that has been in the public the last two days, that the Leader of
the Opposition would state, as has been done six times already now since last
Thursday, that we should spend more money for oncologists and cancer treatment
services in Newfoundland and Labrador; because the position of the Opposition,
Mr. Speaker, on Thursday past, was that we are spending money that we do not
have. He referenced the deficits, and seven times now, since then, counting this
one, their suggestion has been that if they were the government, they would
spend more money on roads, on health care services, on job creation in Humber
West, now on oncology services. Mr. Speaker, we will gladly deal with the issues
with respect to the Budget and we will gladly deal with the future years in
future Budgets, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the reason we are concerned and the reason that we forecast and
we look ahead is because we are concerned about this government's ability to
keep its promise to the people of Labrador. That is why we are so concerned.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, in the Liberal Red Book in 1999, this
government was elected on a commitment that the Labrador Transportation
Initiative Fund would be used exclusively for transportation in Labrador and
that it would not go into general revenue. Yesterday, the Premier said that, if
necessary, he will take money from other parts of this Province to replace the
money they have taken from the Labrador fund and use it to construct Phase III
of the Trans-Labrador Highway.
My question for the Premier is: If the entire provincial roads budget is in
the range of $20 million, does that mean that there will probably be $2 million
or $3 million left for all of the other roads in this Province?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The people of the Province know exactly what our commitment is. What they are
waiting for, I would suggest, is: What is the position and commitment, if any,
of the Official Opposition? Because, just like on all other issues, Mr. Speaker,
there is no commitment.
The real question is this: What would the Progressive Conservative Party do
if, by some fluke of nature, they happen to form the government in future, with
respect to a commitment to finish Phase III of the Trans-Labrador Highway?
Our commitment is so strong, as I stated yesterday, if it means exactly that,
that the provincial priority and that the provincial funding is going to be
spent in Labrador, because Labrador is a crucially important part of our
Province and it is their turn for us to spend our money in Labrador, that is our
commitment, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: What the people of the Province are looking for is, what
would they do about it? Because, as with all other issues, there are some
questions asked but there are no suggestion as to what would be done by the
group opposite if, as I said again, by some fluke of nature, they actually
happen to form a government in Newfoundland and Labrador.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer.
PREMIER GRIMES: I would like to hear an answer maybe at some point in
time, and I am sure the people of the Province would as well.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
So, Premier, you have broken your commitment to the people of Labrador in
your Liberal Red Book, upon which you are elected. I can just imagine what he is
going to do with Voisey's Bay when we get an agreement.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the Labrador Transportation Initiative Fund
was a pledge, a guarantee, a trust, and even an insurance policy for the people
of Labrador, which was protected by legislation. The Premier proposes to strip
away that guarantee and replace it with a cheap political promise. The wording
of that legislation is very clear. I read this legislation myself, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary; I ask him to get to his question.
MR. WILLIAMS:
Section 8 says, it can only be used for transportation
initiatives in Labrador.
The only way that the Premier can get at that money is to break the law and
break the trust, or change the law and then steal that money from that fund.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is a supplementary. I ask the hon. member to get to his
question.
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, my question for the Premier is: Will the
Premier tell the people? What is it, will he break the law or will he change the
law and break the trust?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I appreciate the inflammatory language that has become very well associated
with the Leader of the Opposition, the trademark of the Leader of the Opposition
suggesting that people break the law or that they do things that are improper
and illegal.
Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that this is the Legislature. This
Legislature is empowered to make the laws of the land, and as a matter of fact,
in just one year, since I have been the Premier, we have brought sixty pieces of
legislation to this Assembly, about ten or fifteen of which were brand new and
about forty-five of which were amendments to the current law, which is a process
that if the legal opinions are such that we cannot take this money as revenue
without changing that particular act, we will bring an amendment here. Not break
the law. Change the law, Mr. Speaker, which is a process that this Legislature
does on a regular basis, because things are not static in this world. We give
our commitment, and if the commitment requires a change in the law so that we
can live to our commitment, that is what the people of the Province know that we
will do. They are still waiting as they have been every single day, Mr. Speaker,
on every single issue to find out if there is anything that the Leader of the
Opposition would suggest that he might do, because again, he asks questions and
poses things that might be problematic, but when asked would he still want to
talk about a $2 billion tunnel -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer.
PREMIER GRIMES: - while not giving a commitment to $100 million road, he
does not want to answer the question.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer.
PREMIER GRIMES: So, Mr. Speaker, questions go both ways in this
Legislature and the people of the Province know where we stand. They have no
idea where they stand or for what.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I can tell the Premier that the position of the Opposition is very clear,
specifically the PC caucus. We would not have raided that fund under any
circumstances.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, the members of the
Opposition, together with Liberal MP Lawrence O'Brien, are going to fight to
ensure that fund is protected for the people of Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Unlike the Premier and the MHAs opposite from Labrador who
do not care, who are going to walk away and are going to let it happen, we are
going to make sure that we use every legal and parliamentary safeguard that we
can use to make sure it is not raided.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary.
MR. WILLIAMS: This is the time to change your mind, Premier. Stand up in
this House and tell the people of Labrador that you will abandon your scheme to
raid that fund, that you will keep your promise that your government made in
1997, that you will keep the promise that was made in 1999 in the Liberal Red
Book, and that you will not force them to rely on a cheap political promise to
trust you in the future.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER GRIMES: The issue, Mr. Speaker, is this, that in the Budget that
was read on Thursday past by my colleague, the Minister of Finance, we indicated
to the people of the Province that we made some choices, such as this one, to
strike the right balance because we are going to run a deficit of $93 million,
which the Leader of the Opposition said: I have concerns about that, they are
spending money they don't have. Now he is saying he would not take this $97
million in as revenue, which means the deficit is going to be $180 million or
$190 million. Is that what he would do if he were the government, Mr. Speaker? I
think not, but he will not answer the question. Is he going to rollback the
salaries which he said he has concerns about because he thinks we have offered
too much to the public servants and to the teachers so far? He has said it, it
is on the public record, that he is concerned about the level of salary
increases. Maybe he sides with Mr. O'Brien from the Canadian Federation of
Independent Business who said we should roll it back. Maybe, Mr. Speaker, it is
like the weekend where he said -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer.
PREMIER GRIMES: - we are not spending enough money on job creation and
health care in Humber West, they should be spending more. People know where we
stand. We will defend our particular actions. We are proud of them and -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer.
PREMIER GRIMES: - Mr. Speaker, people are waiting to find out if they
stand for anything on any particular issue.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits & White Bay North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Over the last couple of months there has been great debate about the foreign
overfishing that is occurring outside of the 200-mile limit on the Nose and Tail
of the Grand Banks and the Flemish Cap. In all of this debate there has been one
vital, important issue that has not gotten the attention that it deserves, and
that is the issue of the American fishing boat, Mister B , that was
charged last August by Canadian authorities for fishing crab outside the
200-mile limit.
Mr. Speaker, is the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture aware that Canada's
right to manage the sedentary species outside the 200-mile limit on the Nose and
Tail of the Grand Banks is being challenged? And is he concerned about the
implications of the loss of this right on crab stocks and the industry in this
Province?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We certainly are concerned about is happening on the Nose and Tail of the
Grands Banks, especially those sedentary species to which you are referring. We
are talking the clams and we are talking the crab outside of our 200-mile limit.
I agree with the member opposite that, that American vessel should be charged to
every extent of the law.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for The Straits &
White Bay North.
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, the UN recognizes the jurisdiction of the
coastal state over sedentary species on the continental shelf outside the
200-mile limit. Maintaining the right to manage and regulate the crab fishery
outside 200 miles is of utmost importance to this Province. What has the
minister done to ensure that the best case possible is put forward to defend
Canada's right to mange this stock? Has he asked for legal advice on this
matter? And has he asked for intervener status for this Province when this
jurisdictional issue comes before the courts?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, the issue of foreign overfishing is not a new one.
All governments since 1949 have fought that issue with Ottawa. We are doing
everything in our power to convince the powers that be in Ottawa that they
should act on foreign overfishing and do everything in their power. What we have
proposed, Mr. Speaker, is that we take custodial management of the Nose and Tail
of the Grand Banks along with the Flemish Cap and I ask the members opposite to
also support us with that.
With regard to the issue that he is speaking about, Mr. Speaker, we will do
everything to ensure that not only the crab but also the clams outside of our
200-mile limit are protected for the benefit of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, my question if for the Premier or any other minister who may
have knowledge of what I am about to ask. Under documents obtained under the
Freedom of Information, the use of consultants or the hiring of consultants
through the Department of Industry, Trade and Rural Development poses many
questions. I would like to ask them in particular - the Premier or any other
minister who may have any knowledge - who is Peritus Canada Inc., and what have
they been hired for at the tune of $380,000?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Again, I will gladly have one of the ministers who are acting, instead of the
Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development, answer that question, if they
have that detail. I do not have it myself, but we will gladly provide it.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, there are people over there who do have
knowledge of it. My question is for the Minister of Human Resources.
This company was hired, a $380,000 contract, the administration under the
Jobs and Growth Strategy, the administration of it was transferred to the
Department of Human Resources, and I have a copy of a contract that was entered
into.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary; I ask him to get to his question.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister of Human Resources
and Employment is this: Is he aware that his department is managing a contract
between a company stationed out of Winnipeg, and that this company has been
hired to conduct Phase I of a study called The Newfoundland and Labrador Work
Culture Project? If he is aware, could he inform the House what exactly is the
Newfoundland and Labrador Work Culture Project, Phase I?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I do not have the detail at my disposal, to the question that the member has
raised.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I am trying to respond honestly to the hon.
member. I certainly will undertake to provide him with that detail. I do not
have it here with me right now, but I will certainly undertake to provide him
with the detail in short order.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, this is interesting. On July 24, this company
was hired. On July 27, Industry and Rural Renewal transferred administration of
the project to that minister's department. On the same day, they paid them
$50,000. To date, $309,000 has been paid out; and you are saying to me,
Minister, that you do not know what Phase I of the Newfoundland and Labrador
Work Culture Project is?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary.
MR. E. BYRNE: Minister, surely in your capacity as the minister, you
would have some knowledge of what your department is doing specifically to this
contract.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, it is not uncommon for departments to be
cooperating. My department has responsibility in the area of employment and
certainly it is not uncommon for my department to cooperate and to collaborate
with other departments in delivering programs on behalf of the people of the
Province. As I have indicated to the hon. member - and I do not know what he is
looking for here in this - I do not have the detail that he is referencing, but
I have given him the undertaking that I will provide him with the facts in short
order.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker.
In a letter dated July 27, the Deputy Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural
Renewal transferred his authority to your Deputy Minister of Human Resources and
Employment. Are you telling me today, and the people in this House, that your
deputy minister has not informed you whatsoever, of what the Newfoundland and
Labrador Work Culture Project is? Are you saying that you have no knowledge of
it and that your deputy minister did not inform you? Is that what you are
telling the people of the Province?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the hon. member for his question. I do say that I do not know what he
is angling for, but obviously he feels he is onto something and he is trying to
push it. Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member were really interested, truly
interested in wanting to get the detail, and not trying to play some political
games with it, I have given him the undertaking that I will try to provide him
with the details that he has asked for. Beyond that -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.
MR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, again I will try to speak to the issue. It is a
serious issue the hon. member raises and I have given him the undertaking that I
will try to provide him with the detail. In the meantime, if hon. members
opposite want to relegate themselves to the ravel that they get into whenever
this sort of issue comes up, then they are free to do that. In the meantime, I
am honestly trying to respond to the issue. I said to the hon. member already,
that I will undertake to provide the detail that he has requested. I do not have
it at my disposal, but I will say to him that if he is suggesting that something
is afoot here, that he is onto something -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SMITH: No. Mr. Speaker, the hon. member shakes his head but I can
assure you that -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. minister now to conclude his answer.
MR. SMITH: - this minister takes his responsibility seriously. When I say
to you that I will undertake to provide you with the details, I will indeed do
that.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Premier. Yesterday, I asked the Premier why his
government is contravening in some of the legislation, namely the Labrador
Transportation Initiative Fund, by taking $97 million out of that fund to pay
down the deficit?
Section 8(1) of the act clearly states what can be targeted to
pay out from that fund, and nowhere does it say to pay down the deficit.
However, since the Premier chose not to answer my question yesterday, but did
say in an interview later that as long as he was committed to making sure that
the equivalent of the money that is in the fund is going to be spent for
transportation, then they fall within the mandate of the legislation.
I would ask the Premier, Mr. Speaker: Can the Premier point to and quote, the
section of the Trans Labrador act that provides him with the ability to do that?
Can he quote that
section for the people of the Province, and Labrador in
particular?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The issue, again, has two components to it. One being the political component
in which, as was pointed out by the Leader of the Opposition, the political
commitment of this government is unquestionable. We are going to build phase III
of the Trans Labrador Highway because it is the right thing to do. That is
unquestionable.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: So, the politics of it is clear.
Also, Mr. Speaker, as is the case with any issue because that is a fund that
has its own piece of legislation, we will comply with the legislation or amend
it to make the removal of the money appropriate. We will do what is within the
law or this Legislature will do what it normally does, which is amend the law.
We do not break the laws. We are not allowed to, and we would not even think of
doing it. Mr. Speaker, this is the Legislature. This is the place where we
create and amend laws on a daily basis. We will respect the current law or we
will amend the law as we have done over fifty times in the last year to make
sure that what we are doing is right and appropriate, but the politics of it is
clear: our commitment is unquestionable and undeniable. There is no commitment
from the Official Opposition, and, for the life of me, I do not understand why
the New Democratic Party does not support the building of phase III of the Trans
Labrador Highway -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer.
PREMIER GRIMES: - because we sure do and we are going to do it, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I say to the Premier, maybe one reason that we do not believe it is because
you are going way beyond any mandate you have in this Province to deliver on a
promise for the future.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. COLLINS: I will also say to the Premier, yesterday you were also
quoted, Mr. Premier, in saying that as along as you are taking money from that
fund and if you promise to put it back over years in the future, there is legal
opinion that suggests that this falls within the current mandate of the
legislation.
I ask the Premier: Would he table those legal opinions, and could he give us
a briefing now on where they came from and what they say?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
With respect to going beyond a mandate, I think what the people of the
Province and the people of Labrador and the Northern Peninsula are really asking
the question about is: What mandate is the Leader of the Opposition referring to
when he talks about building a tunnel? Because his first issue, when he became
Leader of the Opposition and went to the Northern Peninsula, was that the answer
is to build a tunnel from Labrador to the Northern Peninsula. So I wonder what
mandate that is.
Mr. Speaker, the issue that we are dealing with, with respect to whether or
not the Labrador Transportation Initiative Fund legislation needs to be amended,
that is an issue that will be dealt with in the fall, during the legislative
session in the fall. If the legal opinions are conclusive in suggesting that it
has to be changed, because there are legal opinions on both sides right now.
There are one, two, three, four lawyers on the other side, and I bet you what
money I have in my pocket, I can get four different opinions if I pay the right
price. So, Mr. Speaker, probably five from the Minister of Justice.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER GRIMES: The only difference right now, Mr. Speaker, is that the
other four lawyers, by virtue of their position, not in the government, are free
to practice law; this one is not. He is a minister of the Crown and is precluded
from charging us at this point in time.
MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer quickly.
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, again there are legal opinions on both sides
of that particular argument. We will have them examined through the spring and
summer, and if it requires an amendment to the legislation we will do that here
in the fall.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Department of Environment has been testing for haloacetic
acids in the Province's water supply for some two years. The American
government have determined that haloacetic acids are more harmful to human
health than THMs. The Environmental Protection Agency has set new standards for
both THMs and haloacetic acids. The standards for haloacetic acids are far more
rigorous than those for THMs.
I would like to ask the minister: Why, after two years of testing, has the
significance of the testing results not been posted to the Province's water
quality Web site, and why hasn't the minister made public announcements to
inform the general public of the effects of haloacetic acids?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RALPH WISEMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
It is true that the department has been testing for haloacetic acids for a
couple of years now. The reason they are not posted on the Web site is because
it is not part of the Canadian drinking water testing standard, which is
required under the Canadian Drinking Water Standards.
What I find unusual with all this, Mr. Speaker, is, one minute my hon. critic
wants us to follow the Canadian Drinking Water Standards, and the next minute he
wants us to follow the American Standards.
Mr. Speaker, what I can say, though, is that the testing we have done in the
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador will be very helpful to the Canadian
government when they start to look at what they should do in terms of haloacetic
acids. The information that we have has been given to the communities that we
have tested, so it is not the kind of knowledge that we are keeping secret. The
hon. member ought to know by now that this government is pretty wide open. In
fact we are giving out more information than people want to hear. Anytime the
hon. member would like to be briefed in my department, he would like to see
those results, then the door is always open.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, the information being sent to municipalities
has no explanation of the possible effects of haloacetic acids, and no advice on
the possible precautions that can be taken where the numbers are high. If
haloacetic acids are important enough for this Province to be testing for two
years, why is it they are not important enough to be posted on the Web site?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, in the Speech from the Throne it states
here, -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary, I ask him to get to his question.
MR. T. OSBORNE: - ".... My Government will keep the public informed
of the results of its testing program, consistent with its openness and
accountability agenda."
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary, I ask him to get to his question
quickly.
MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, my question for the minister is this: Will
he follow the lead of the City of Ottawa and use the Environmental Protection
Agency Standards as a benchmark until Canadian standards are put in place, and
post those standards, as well as the testing results, to the Province's water
quality Web site?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RALPH WISEMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
As I said, we are doing this because we want to get a profile of what is
happening in all public water supply around the Province. The reason it has not
been posted on the Web site is, there is no parameter on the particular Web site
that has been created for haloacetic acids because it is not in the drinking
water standards.
The hon. member, only a few weeks ago, put out a press release that I
absolutely refused to pay for testing out in Carbonear/ Harbour Grace where
dioxin is burned. Mr. Speaker, there was no request made by the Town of Harbour
Grace for us to do it, and he had the audacity to put it out saying that we
refused to do it.
Mr. Speaker, one minute he wants us to follow the American standards, when it
is to his convenience, and then on the other hand he wants us to follow the
Canadian Drinking Water Standards.
Let me make it very clear: We are following the Canadian Drinking Water
Standards. We are doing all the tests. We are notifying the communities when the
results are available. I do not know what the hon. member is up to, unless he
wants to fear monger.
MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees
MR. LUSH: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I want to raise a point of order on a couple of
questions asked in the House today, and the direction in which they were going.
At least two or three questions centered around legal matters. Was it legal to
do something, or what legal advice the government had. For Your Honour's
benefit, and for the benefit of all members of the House, I quote for hon.
members Beauchesne , 408, Oral Questions, page 120. Here they are giving
the parameters of what questions should be asked. 408.(1) says, "Such
questions should: ...(
c) not require an answer involving a legal opinion."
Oral Questions in the House should not require an answer involving a legal
opinion.
Mr. Speaker, I also quote -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. LUSH: Maybe hon. members are not interested in the rules of the House
because it would not be to their benefit to follow the rules of the House. Maybe
they would not like that.
The next clause, Mr. Speaker, is 410 of Beauchesne , again where they
are further defining the rules for hon. members, what they should follow, and it
says in 410.(13), "Questions should not seek a legal opinion or inquire
as to what legal advice a Minister has received." And, that question was
asked today in that area.
Finally, 411, page 122, Beauchesne quotes, "Some further
limitations seem to be generally understood.. A question may not: (1) ask a
solution of a legal question, such as the
interpretation of a statute."
Again, questions that were asked today, Mr. Speaker, and the reason for these
are rather obvious because many times there can be many sides to a question and
the solution or the answer can be very complex and would only serve to waste the
time of the House.
Mr. Speaker, I present these cautions for the future direction of members of
the House.
Thank you.
MR. E. BYRNE: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
To the point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: To the point of order, the remarks and commentary made by
the Government House Leader are taken as they are intended, but he has failed to
point out one important fact in terms of Question Period. Mr. Speaker, it is Beauchesne,
Erskine May , and certainly standing tradition of the House, when a minister
or a Premier stands, in answering a question, and refers to any document or
legal opinion, then, Mr. Speaker, it is fair game for the Opposition to seek -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: - because in this case, Mr .Speaker, that is exactly what
happened. The Premier opened up the debate when he referred to the legal
opinions. They were not sought by the Opposition or another member. However, in
referring to a legal opinion in his possession, as Premier, it is completely
within our right and it is, in fact, our duty to seek that legal opinion.
Secondly, Mr. Speaker, let me say to the Government House Leader and the
members opposite, if they want to quote Question Period, in terms of the proper
decorum, parliamentary debate in Question Period, let me refer him to the
following, 408(2), "Answers to questions should be as brief as
possible...", Premier, "...should deal with the matter raised, and
should not provoke debate."
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: Secondly, Mr. Speaker. This is important.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Is the hon. member raising a new point of order?
MR. E. BYRNE: No, Mr. Speaker. The Government House Leader, I submit to
you, has raised the issue of Question Period. I am responding to his point of
order.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member has raised a specific point about Question Period, and I
think the comments should remain and be focused on that point that he has
raised.
MR. E. BYRNE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Pardon me?
AN HON. MEMBER: A new point of order.
MR. SPEAKER: A new point of order?
The hon. member will hear the point of order once we have heard on the first
point of order from the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Government House Leader quotes Beauchesne but I think he
misapplies it to the circumstances that arose in Question Period here today. No
one asked the Premier or the Minister of Justice for a legal opinion. The
Premier was asked, by the Member for Labrador West, on what authority was he
making a statement, and under what
section of the act did he feel he could do
what we believe, on this side of the House, he cannot do, which is take money
from this fund. He did not answer that question, so I do not know what the
problem is, but he was asked what authority, what
section of the act was he
relying on; a perfectly legitimate question.
He was also asked a second question, because he said outside the House
yesterday that there were legal opinions to the effect that they could do what
they are proposing to do. He was the one who raised the issue of having, in his
possession, legal opinions. He was asked to table those opinions. A perfectly
legitimate question, Mr. Speaker. It is not good enough for a Premier or a
member of the House to say, well I have a legal opinion, and not have to produce
it, when, in the past, the Premier has been quite happy to produce legal
opinions that he liked, Mr. Speaker. If he produced legal opinions that he
received from other Provinces, on other issues -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member now to conclude his comments.
MR. HARRIS: - he tabled them in the House, and there is no reason - and I
will ask the Speaker to rule on this issue as to whether or not the questions
asked in this House today were proper and legal and appropriate.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair will take the point raised by the hon. Government House Leader
under advisement. I will go back and review Hansard to find out the exact
context of the questions asked by members and rule on it at a later date.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS M. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave for on tomorrow to present the
following private member's resolution. The motion states:
WHEREAS foreign overfishing off our coast is a situation which needs
immediate attention; and
WHEREAS the closure of Canadian ports to vessels from countries who do not
follow proper conservation methods is an important first step in dealing with
this issue;
BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly supports the action taken by the
federal government to close ports to countries such as the Faroese Islands that
are not following proper conservation measures; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this House of Assembly reaffirm its position that
Canada should extend custodial management over all fishing areas off our coast;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this House of Assembly calls upon the Government
of Canada to contact officials from France and request that St. Pierre also
close their ports to countries who practice foreign overfishing outside of our
200-mile limit.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to present a petition on behalf
of over 4,000 people from this Province, indeed from this country, as well as
other countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Denmark. Evidently it
was posted on the Web and there were many who hit from other parts of the world.
The pray of the petition reads:
To the hon. House of Assembly of Newfoundland and Labrador in legislative
session convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and
Labrador and their supporters;
WHEREAS Gary and Karen Smith of South River, have applied to adopt an orphan
child from Kazakhstan; and
WHEREAS Gary and Karen Smith have been denied a letter of recommendation in
obtaining the adoption;
WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador
to provide the necessary documentation to Gary and Karen Smith allowing them to
proceed with the adoption of an orphan child from Kazakhstan.
In my time in this House, Mr. Speaker, I have presented any number of
petitions asking this government to consider action on behalf of groups of
individuals but this is the first time, I say, Mr. Speaker, that I have
presented a petition asking this government to grant a couple, Gary and Karen
Smith of South River, to write to bring a new citizen into this Province; to
allow the adoption of an orphan child from a country far away from our shores.
This couple, Mr. Speaker, have done everything required of them in
preparation for this international adoption; endless hours of researching their
country of choice, which is Kazakhstan, endless hours of filling out the
required forms, going through months and months of investigation by provincial,
federal, as well as international agencies, such an Interpol. Always confident
though that they were getting closer to the day they would travel abroad to
complete the adoption and return to this Province as proud parents of a darling
child. Everything was letter perfect. International approval from Kazakhstan was
pending. Canadian Immigration granted approval. All preparations were in place
except for one small detail, a letter of recommendation from the Director of
Child Welfare in this Province, a formality, as far as the Smiths were
concerned.
Two other couples who had adopted children from the same country had been
issued letters from the director; couples who had used the same agency, who
completed the same application as did the Smiths, who now have certainly brought
two orphan children from Kazakhstan into this country, into our Province.
When the Smiths asked for the letter of recommendation, they were denied. All
their efforts were in vain. The Director of Child Welfare would not issue the
letter because it was against policy, although there was no official policy in
place. Legislation evidently would have to be enacted in order to legitimize the
draft policy. The minister refused to make allowances, although she did admit
that she had granted another couple permission, but indicating that it had been
a mistake and, of course, two wrongs do not make a right.
The injustice was further explained by the fact that the Premier had used his
influence, his office, to have a letter of recommendation issued for the
successful -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. HEDDERSON: By leave?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Smiths reside in the District of Harbour Main-Whitbourne and could not
get any intervention on their behalf to further their cause. After months,
indeed years of planning, Karen and Gary Smith are still waiting for this
government to step up to the plate, treat them fairly, to allow them to complete
a process the officials of the Department of Health and Community Services
mapped out for them.
Reaction from the general public has been very supportive, and anyone
familiar with the plight of this couple cannot believe that they have been
treated so badly; that literally bureaucratic muddling can get in the way of a
loving couple welcoming an under-privileged orphan into their home. In one week,
Mr. Speaker, 3,625 people in this Province and outside the Province signed a
petition, and every day more and more names have been added.
I would ask the minister and the Premier to listen to the pleas of the
thousands of people who took the time to sign this petition, to the plea of this
couple who have worked so hard to make this happen, to the cries of a child in
Kazakhstan so much in need of a family setting with loving parents. Do the right
thing, I say to the minister and to the government, eliminate the barriers in
order to issue a letter of recommendation to allow the Smiths to become parents,
to allow them to open up their home to a child. Do the right thing. Do the human
thing. Show the true spirit of Newfoundland and Labrador so evident in our
culture, our history, our very souls. Find a way, I say, Mr. Speaker, to make
this couple's dream a reality.
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, indeed it is another petition on roads, I say to the hon. member. I will
read the prayer of the petition, Mr. Speaker, and then make a few comments.
To the hon. House of Assembly in legislative session convened:
We, the undersigned residents of the District of Baie Verte, do hereby
petition the House of Assembly to upgrade and pave our roads. The deplorable and
unfit conditions of the roads in our area make travelling to and from school
unsafe for our children, as well as jeopardize the safety of the travelling
public, hurt the economic growth opportunities, and, most of all, betrays a lack
of commitment to rural areas of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, there are hundreds of names on this petition again today. This
particular petition is referring to the La Scie highway, of which some eleven
communities take access from, Mr. Speaker; eleven communities on the Baie Verte
Peninsula.
Mr. Speaker, many times, the minister knows, his officials have told him
about the deplorable state of some of the roads in the area, and many times it
has gone unnoticed. This particular road is some thirty years old; it is
thirty-year-old pavement. As I said yesterday, we have the double problem of old
paved highways, as well as roads in this Province still that have not seen the
first lot of pavement, Mr. Speaker. So the problem grows day by day.
The current minister knows, as well as previous ministers, that every year
the problem gets worse. The problem is worse year after year. There are more
roads that are coming in a more deplorable state, and year after year it gets
worse. What happens, Mr. Speaker, is, every single year this Administration
waits until March or April and then finds out - it has maybe another skirt
across the Province to try to see which ones are kicking up the most fuss. Where
are we going to go this year, Mr. Speaker?
Eighteen million dollars, $18 million to $20 million dollars is what will end
up finally for provincial roads in this Province, Mr. Speaker. Here is a part of
the Province which had a very active and prosperous fish plant in La Scie for
years, as many as 600 people working there. They have contributed to the economy
of this Province, Mr. Speaker, and they expect to be treated with some respect
and dignity. They have paid their dues and they believe - and I know members
opposite, especially the Member for Bay of Islands, because he has driven down
over it with me. He knows the deplorable state of that highway, Mr. Speaker, and
how many people go back and forth.
Mr. Speaker, I just received a call before I came down this morning - and I
have been in contact with the Department of Health and hopefully will get an
answer back some time today - a call from a fireman in the area, Mr. Speaker,
who has a situation today where there is no ambulance service in La Scie. The
reason why there is none, Mr. Speaker, is because just three weeks ago they lost
their front end of the ambulance, and today it is in the garage with the read
end gone on the ambulance. There is no ambulance service because it is beaten to
death going up and down this road. We are hoping, Mr. Speaker, that this is
another example that this government will see and do the right thing and start
to really address the problems we have with roads in this Province which get
more serious as time goes by.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. SHELLEY: These people and the other eleven communities have
contributed to the economy of this Province, not just through the fish plant in
La Scie ,which has a long history, but also the only operating gold mine on the
Island of Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker, also down that highway, with trucks going
back and forth every day. Also, Mr. Speaker, with the reform in education, the
long distances that children have to go -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. SHELLEY: -up and down that road, every morning, every evening, over a
long stretch of road, Mr. Speaker, that is in a lot of cases worse than gravel
roads.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, I present this petition today on behalf of
these people, and hope that we will see some action on it in the very near
future.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I stand today to present a petition on behalf of approximately 350 people
from the Town of Catalina. The petition is brought forward here in this House
today to ask the government to provide funding in order to repair a bridge in
the Town of Catalina.
This particular bridge is located on what is known as the Bar Road. Anybody
who has been to Catalina would know the configuration of the community, where
approximately one-third of the population live on an area known as East Point.
In this particular point, Mr. Speaker, there is an area known as the Bar Road
which is a shortcut, if you would, to get from Catalina to East Point. This
particular bridge that I am referring to is a wooden bridge. It is on a local
road, and the bridge has deteriorated to the extent that the Town of Catalina
has had to bar off the bridge. They have had to close the bridge. You go to
Catalina today and try to drive across the Bar Road and get to East Point and
you will come to a barricade of rocks on a particular bridge because the bridge
has been deemed by the town engineers to be unsafe for vehicular traffic, Mr.
Speaker. The people in the area of East Point would like to have that bridge
restored to a condition of safety whereby traffic can use it again, where they
can go from East Point to Catalina by the shortest route possible.
Mr. Speaker, the Town of Catalina certainly does not have funds from their
budget to carry out such a repair to this bridge. What they are asking for is
that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador make money available to the
Town of Catalina in order to repair this bridge on the Bar Road. A lot of our
communities, including Catalina, have seen their taxes, if you would, their tax
base, decrease and, for the most part, disappear when we saw the downturn in the
fishery back in 1992. The all-party committee that went to Catalina and Port
Union was taken on a tour. Port Union saw first-hand the devastation that has
been caused by the closure of the fishery and the closure of businesses in the
area. So, Mr. Speaker, this particular town cannot afford to maintain the
infrastructure as it exists today. Without special help from government, this
bridge will stay barricaded by rocks and closed off.
The plea of approximately 320 or 330 people from the Town of Catalina is to
ask government to provide capital expenditure, capital funding, in this year's
capital works project, to allow the Town of Catalina to repair this wooden
bridge so the residents there can access that bridge and use it as they have
done over the period of years that bridge has been accessible.
That is the plea that has been brought forward.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. FITZGERALD: It is the plea that I make here in this House today, to
ask the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs to make money available so
that the Town of Catalina might be able to repair this bridge and put it back to
use again.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits & White Bay North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present this petition on behalf of approximately 160 people
in the area from Eddies Cove East to Sandy Cove in the Strait of Belle Isle
area. I will read the petition:
To the hon. House of Assembly of Newfoundland and Labrador in legislative
session convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and
Labrador;
WHEREAS the roads on route 430 in the area of Sandy Cove and Eddies Cove East
are in very poor condition and are in desperate need of upgrading and new
paving; and
WHEREAS this road is twenty-five years old, and is in such a deplorable
condition making it a hazard for the large volume of traffic, including
residents, the many tourists, and transport trucks;
WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador,
and in particular the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, to make
this road a top priority and commit to begin the upgrading and paving of this
area of route 430 this season, as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.
As the petition says, this is route 430, approximately a 15 kilometer
section; specifically in the area from Eddies Cove East to approximately Pines
Cove. This area of road was upgraded twenty-five years ago. The pavement in this
area is now twenty-five years old and for anybody who has ever driven this area
in the past couple of years can see why the people in this area are petitioning
the government today to make it a priority in the roads work budget that the
minister is about to - in the next couple of months - announce.
Mr. Speaker, this road handles approximately 30,000 tourists. Approximately
30,000 tourists visit L'Anse aux Meadows every season and they all have to
travel over this piece of road in order to get there. Tour buses - on the other
hand, coming out of the area, on its way south there is approximately 50 million
pounds of crab, shrimp and turbot that is hauled over this road. I submit that
the people on the Northern Peninsula are sick enough of seeing fish being
trucked out of their area, and to add insult to injury, they now have to watch
their roads being worn out by this and see the government throw up their hands
and say that there is nothing that can be done, and go and do upgrading in other
areas of the Province that probably is not needed as badly.
We have tour buses, transport trucks that are going north on this road;
school buses in this area where we have students travelling back and forth to
school everyday on this road. The amount of damage that is being done to the
vehicles is certainly increasing dramatically in the last number of years.
Mr. Speaker, this is an example of where the lack of planning by government,
the lack of a federal-provincial agreement on roads, is causing a road to really
deteriorate, and it is not like it is a secondary road. This is one of the
primary -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. TAYLOR: Just ten seconds to clue up, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This just exemplifies why we need a federal-provincial agreement on roads,
why trunk roads, like the Viking Trail need to be maintained. If we are going to
have any kind of an economy on the Northern Peninsula we have to provide the
basic infrastructure for fish trucks, for tourists, for school buses, and what
have you, to travel over. Without it, Mr. Speaker, I think that the economy in
rural areas, like the tip of the Northern Peninsula, will continue to decline
and we will continue to see the effects of out-migration in this area.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. LUSH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion one, Bill 2.
On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of the Whole on
Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.
Committee of the Whole
CHAIR (Mercer): Order, please!
Bill 2, continuation by the hon. the Minister of Labrador & Aboriginal
Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Last evening, when I adjourned debate, there were a number of other things
that I wanted to also speak about in terms of the Labrador Initiative.
Mr. Chairman, if I heard correctly today in Question Period, the Leader of
the Opposition said we should put that money back in the fund. If I heard that
correctly, Mr. Chairman, then he is telling me that he is not interested in what
we have to do in terms of infrastructure development in Labrador. That appalls
me, because let me tell you, Mr. Chairman, if we put that money back in the fund
and leave it in the fund all that happens in that fund is that money is drawn
down over the next five years to provide marine services to Northern Labrador,
and also to the Coast of Labrador.
MR. SULLIVAN: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Ferryland, on a point of order.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am elevated to the (inaudible)
already. I might say, I am as good as the baker today I would say.
On a point of order. What the minister is saying there, Mr. Chairman, is not
correct at all. In fact, that minister in this House, in 1996, said by the year
2006 this government will have a paved Trans-Labrador Highway within ten years.
That was 1996, that in ten years a paved Trans-Labrador Highway.
That statement came from the minister on that day in the House, that I sat
here, when he made that statement. We do not even have a dirt road yet complete
and it will not even be done in the ten years that he said.
CHAIR: Order, please!
The hon. the Government House Leader, to the point of order.
MR. LUSH: The hon. member knows that that is not a point of order, to get
up to try and clarify a statement. It is just an attempt by the hon. member, he
was doing it yesterday, to cut into the time of the hon. minister who is
speaking. The hon. member knows he ought not to do that.
MR. SULLIVAN: You're cutting into it too. (Inaudible).
MR. LUSH: Of course, I have to try to correct it. I have to try and
correct it, that is what I have to do. To stop the hon. member from getting up
continuously and interfering on spurious points of order.
CHAIR: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
The hon. the Minister of Labrador & Aboriginal Affairs.
MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am glad that the Member for Ferryland decided to bring that quote up from
1996 because, Mr. Chairman, let me tell you one thing, that if that crowd over
there gets on this side we will never get a highway to pave. What we are trying
to do now is realign the money so that we can have funding in place to build a
road because members on this side understand that you have to have a road before
you can pave it.
Let me tell you, Mr. Chairman, there are people in Western Labrador and some
in other parts of Labrador who would rather see the road from Goose Bay to
Labrador City paved before we do the other section. I am not of that mind. I am
of the mind that we build the full network of highways in Labrador before we
start looking at pavement.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. McLEAN: Mr. Chairman, let me also say something in conjunction with
what the Member for Labrador West said yesterday about the Roads for Rail
Agreement. I have to correct him, because there was $19 million from that Roads
for Rail Agreement put into the Trans-Labrador Highway in the early 1990s. He
said yesterday there was no change in any of those agreements. There is, Mr.
Chairman, there are ways that you can change these agreements.
Let me go back again and tell these guys, and the Leader of the Opposition,
that one of the things that we are trying to do is build infrastructure in the
part of the Province that does not have infrastructure in place.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. McLEAN: I heard three or four members on the other side this
afternoon talking about re-paving, talking about bad roads, have to get them
fixed up. Well, Mr. Chairman, I can tell you and I have been saying that since
1996, we are still trying to get roads build so that our people can have some
access at all.
I agree that they need those roads fixed up too, I certainly do. I do not
dispute that, that they need to be fixed, but I cannot let that stand in the way
of allowing this government to put the money into the building of infrastructure
in Labrador. It is not only the Trans-Labrador Highway, we also announced last
Friday a whole new configuration for the main transportation along the north
coast of Labrador and also along the south coast where there is no road to be
built.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. McLEAN: It is a huge investment, because we have gone with the same
boats, the same routes, for years and years and years. I understand the Member
for Lewisporte having concerns because there are always concerns when you change
a configuration, but the time has come that we need improved services, both
marine and land links in Labrador. I think we have to try and help the people in
Lewisporte.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. McLEAN: Yes, I agree wholeheartedly with that, and we will do
whatever we can in that regard.
Let me get back to one thing. If we go back and say put the $97 million back
where it is, we will get nowhere. We will not be able to see at the end of six
years anything other than the Province having to take over the marine service
anyway. But the way we are doing this, we will be able to see in six years time
a full highway across Labrador in which we will be able to reduce the cost of
marine services because we will not need to have that service between Cartwright
and Goose Bay, which is another expense.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. McLEAN: Mr. Chair, beyond that, I am sure that over the years the
Northern Coast will also request the assistance of governments to build a
highway up to the North Coast, because that is progress. That is the kind of
thing we want to see from this side, Mr. Chair. I can read off all of the things
we have done on this side of the House since 1996, when I came here. I am very
proud of the record that we have, Mr. Chair.
I think one thing we have to understand is that we do not want to see
progress stopped. We do not want to see the people of Labrador have to sit
another six years or ten years and perhaps wait for the federal government to
think about coming onside, putting a bit of money into infrastructure in
Labrador. I do not think we deserve to be treated that way. We need to have the
ability for the Province to at least put money into infrastructure work in
Labrador, which is a part of the Province.
MR. SULLIVAN: But you didn't have to take the fund to do it.
MR. McLEAN: We did not take the fund. The Member for Ferryland - we did
not take the fund. We just announced $134 million in projects, and they range
from docks, shipping, roads, and infrastructure work.
Mr. Chair, what I will say is that the people of Labrador who are not in
favour of doing this really need to sit down and start going through the areas
and the issues that we need to deal with in order to see progress. We have the
Combined Councils, and they represent every community in Labrador, come out
today saying we are doing the right thing because we are providing
infrastructure work for people who never had it before.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. McLEAN: Mr. Chair, I have no regrets in what we are doing because it
is a good plan. It is the right thing to do. Mr. Chair, we will always try to
move forward on this side of the House. This government has been very good to
Labrador, and what we said in the Budget is that this is the decade for
Labrador.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. McLEAN: No, Mr. Chair, I have no regrets for the decisions we have
made because they are in the best interest. You will see, in six years time,
that you will be able to drive across Labrador, which is something that I have
looked for, for fifty-six years: to have the ability to drive across the country
in which I grew up. Mr. Chair, if somebody is going to take that away from me
just because you are talking about a pile of money you do not really understand
what is going on with it, then, Mr. Chair, I have a problem with it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. McLEAN: There are also other areas, Mr. Chair. I understand people
are concerned. I certainly accept the challenge to sit down with those people
and get them to understand why we made these decisions. I have no problem with
that. I will accept that challenge any day. We did last weekend, and I am going
to do it again this week. I will travel right throughout Labrador to do that,
which I have said I would take my Easter break to do. I have no problem with
that, Mr. Chair, to get people to understand what is happening and the reasons
why we always look forward. We do not look back. We look forward, and we always
look towards the day that we can have better infrastructure, when the people on
the North Coast can travel in a boat that carries vehicles, carries passengers,
has night accommodations, and doesn't take fourteen days to get to their
destination.
Mr. Chairman, that is the kind of progress we are looking at. We want to
service the areas on the South Coast, where there is no road to be built, with a
smaller, faster vessel.
CHAIR: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I will get another opportunity to get up again, and I certainly will take
advantage of it.
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am pleased today to stand and make a few comments on Interim Supply. Of
course, as we said earlier, and many colleagues as they stood: It gives the
members in this House an opportunity to cover a wide variety of topics. I am
certainly going to do that, especially with roads, municipal operating grants,
and infrastructure for rural Newfoundland. Those are some points I will make as
we move further into this debate.
Mr. Chairman, I can't stand today, after listening to the member for
Labrador, and not make at least a few comments about the particular issue that
is unfolding in this Province, that has surprised and shocked a lot of people,
especially the people of Labrador.
Mr. Chairman, the question that the member for Labrador, and the other
members for Labrador, has is: As the people in your districts and the people in
this Province listen to you today, what is so different -
AN HON. MEMBER: Not all members.
MR. SHELLEY: Not all members for Labrador; that is right. I understand
that, Mr. Chairman. What a lot of people of the electorate are looking at, and
the people who give us our jobs are asking is: Are you representing us and what
we believe is our right to that fund, Mr. Chairman, something that was brought
into law in this House? It wasn't just a flippant promise, it wasn't just
something thrown out during an election campaign, it wasn't just something
written in the Red Book. It was, Mr. Chairman, brought before this Legislature
and put into law. The word is trust. It was put in trust. It was the insurance
that this was certainly going to happen.
Mr. Chairman, in a complimentary way, I will say this: It was a plan that was
brought to this Legislature, voted on unanimously because we all believed, every
single member, with the utmost respect for every member in this House, right
down to the Premier of the day, that that would be the end result, that Labrador
would get the infrastructure, the infrastructure that they so rightfully
deserve.
I know Labrador. I have lived in Labrador also, Mr. Chairman. I know how the
people of Labrador feel. I lived in Labrador, I know how the people feel about
Labrador, and how they contribute to the economy of this Province. I understand
it very well, I say to the members for Labrador. I can tell you, that the
feedback I have gotten - and I still have family in Labrador, I say to he member
for Labrador, and I have spoken to them, as a matter of fact, in just the last
couple of days. They still refer to the fact, Mr. Chairman: Do we trust you to
put the money back into the fund, to finally complete the project? That is what
it all comes down to. The member for Labrador, or any member opposite, can get
up and go on all day long, hours and hours, but the people of this Province are
wondering about the trust. What is different today, Mr. Chairman, than what it
was in 1997 when we stood in this House and put this into law in this Province?
That is what they are wondering about.
I have to, Mr. Chairman, link these comments to what the Member for Terra
Nova was talking about yesterday, because this didn't happen yesterday. This
is not something that just fell in our laps. This is a culmination of things
over a number of years. An interesting number, Mr. Chairman, is thirteen. This
is thirteen years that this government, this Administration, has been in power.
This is thirteen years that they have been planning. This is thirteen years that
they have laid before the people their promises and commitments, in the Red Book
but also in law; and this happens to be one that was in law. This is the one,
Mr. Chairman, when he stood up for Labrador and waved the flag and said: We are
going to follow through. I remember it very well, the former Premier, the former
former Premier, who is now the CEO of Kruger and whatever else, stood in this
House wrapped in the flag from Labrador, when we all supported him, saying that,
yes, we are going to finish this commitment to Labrador.
Mr. Chairman, like that former Premier, and as we stand here today, people in
this Province, throughout the entire Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, are
wondering about the trust that they have in this government. At the end of the
day, are we really going to see the infrastructure that was committed to the
people of Labrador? People are questioning that.
The Member for Terra Nova - I have gone through a few quotes he said
yesterday - uses a phrase, and he can correct it if he wants to. He wouldn't
use financial mess; I will give him that. He said we shouldn't use that. We
have been using it, he said, and we shouldn't be using that. But, he did use,
Mr. Chairman, a financial bind, a tight squeeze. I think I will agree with that.
That is what it all comes down to, after thirteen years of administration of
this government, it is a bind. That is exactly what is happening today. It is a
domino effect. All of a sudden today we are hitting the Labrador fund, and now
they are talking about the measly $20 million on a provincial roads program in
this Province. I ask the Minister of Health: Next year, is it going to be the
Health Department? When is it going to hit the pension fund? When is it going to
hit the Department of Education?
Mr. Chairman, sooner or later, after thirteen years of great planning of all
these policies, I am wondering, at the end of the day, where is this commitment?
Where are we really going to end up for the people of Labrador? Because, a lot
of people have a lot of doubts about how this government has performed over the
last number of years. Thirteen years. Maybe the number thirteen is that
particular number of how lucky we are going to be, or unlucky, because the truth
is, there has been no plan for anything in this Province.
I have talked many times, Mr. Chairman, and I was asked to sit down
yesterday, on a petition. I am talking about the commitment to a roads program.
Let's do the general roads program, which I know very well, because I travel
the road on a daily basis, and people in La Scie today told me to stand up and
say: Listen, if they are not going to commit to a pavement for this area, come
down and tear up the pavement and we will go back to gravel roads! That is what
a resident said down there the other day. That is how sick and tired they are of
this government, year after year, waiting until April month so everybody can go
over and stand in front of the minister, like I have done year after year,
different ministers, and beg: Give us two kilometers. Give us five kilometers.
Imagine, $18 million. We do not need the Minister of Finance to stand up
today and tell us that with $18 million and $300 million in demands, at least -
I think it has gone up again this year - for provincial roads in this Province,
and we are going to face it with $18 million, $20 million again. We do not need
a financial genius to tell us it is not going to work. The people in this
Province know it is not going to work because there is no plan to it.
What is happening again this year, the minister is over there sitting down
listening to us do petitions, waiting for phone calls to come in, and he is
going to decide where all the fire is. Then he is going to throw a little bit of
water on the fire to keep it all down like he did last year in my district. Mr.
Chairman, he did it and I tried to help do it. I feel guilty for that at times,
because I am trying to settle people down. You know, talk about a gravel roads.
MR. J. BYRNE: Crisis management.
MR. SHELLEY: Crisis management, as the member said, every year the same
thing. The roads program is the perfect example. It is ironic, actually. It is
ironic that the roads program is now, Mr. Chairman, highlighting. The roads
program is now highlighting in this Province what this Administration is all
about, which is crisis management. Every year, year after year. The same thing
with the infrastructure in communities. To listen to the minister stand up on
her Budget the other day and, in a guilt complex, five times, if I am not
mistaken - maybe five, but at least four - referred to the 63 per cent of the
employment in the Province as outside St. John's.
Mr. Chairman, we were getting double takes here because we were looking
around to see who she was talking about. I was wondering whether I was going to
go home the weekend and everybody was going to be back to work . That is what we
were sort of expecting. Sixty three per cent, 63 per cent of what, I say to the
minister? Sixty-three per cent of the jobs are outside of St. John's. Listen,
we have to come back to the real world in this Province, Mr. Chairman.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SHELLEY: Myself and the Member for Bonavista South, when we talked
about jobs going outside of St. John's a couple of years ago, and the then
Premier stood up and said, we are going to help rural Newfoundland, you know, we
were excited about it. If you want to see rural Newfoundland - and the Member
for Fortune-Cape la Hune, the same thing, Mr. Chairman, a rural district, he
understands what I am talking about.
Just for an example, myself and the Member for Bonavista South listened to
that. We figured there was going to be a lot of jobs coming to rural
Newfoundland. That was the quote. I have thirty-three communities, the Member
for Bonavista South forty-four. That is seventy-seven communities. You would
figure, with a bit of luck in lottery, you would get at least one job. Not one.
Not one single job, out of seventy-seven communities, came to our area, Mr.
Chairman, not one single job.
I wonder, actually, if other members across the House, rural districts - I
will ask the Member for Twillingate & Fogo, Mr. Chairman, if in his rural
district, or any rural district in this Province, Mr. Chairman, because the
truth is, as we look at the statistics, statistics do not lie, Mr. Chairman. The
realty is this, as I look down through the census again, in my district, I look
down through the numbers: -27 per cent from Little Bay Islands in population,
-27 per cent from Beach Side, Mr. Chairman, -23 per cent, -18 per cent, -25 per
cent from Seal Cove, once a thriving community with mining developments,
forestry, fishery.
That is what made my district diverse, Mr. Chairman; we had all three. We had
the forestry, we had the fishery and mining. Now we are losing population like
this, after thirteen years, and that is where this is all coming home to roost,
I say to the member from Labrador. This is not something that just fell in your
lap the other day, because I do know it fell in your lap during caucus meetings
also. This has been coming for a long time. What it is, Mr. Chairman, we are at
a point in this Province where the backs are against the wall. It is a scramble,
it is desperation. When desperation hits, Mr. Chairman, there is not logical
thinking. We are about to embark on probably some of the biggest decisions in
this Province's history within the next two to five years: Voisey's Bay,
Churchill Falls, the offshore.
Probably, Mr. Chairman, I am no economist but I would say that most people
believe that those three things alone, if they are done right, is our best
chance, our best chance for reviving rural Newfoundland and Labrador, probably
our only chance in a lot of areas, because we do know the fishery that has been
the backbone for so many areas has gone through a major change in this Province.
When you look at places like La Scie and Little Bay Islands in my district, and
all the way around this Province, people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador as
they see 68,000 people - get your heads around that now, 68,000 people - left
this Province in the last decade. In the last decade. As a matter of fact, it
was within the mandate of this government since they took over, Mr. Chairman.
That is what has happened. Sixty-eight thousand people, just think about it.
I do not know the population exactly of Corner Brook and Mount Pearl now
because they are down quite a bit.
MR. SULLIVAN: Corner Brook is just over 20,000.
MR. SHELLEY: Twenty thousand, and how many in Mount Pearl?
MR. SULLIVAN: Mount Pearl is 25,000.
MR. SHELLEY: Let's put it this way, at least we could wake up tomorrow
morning and Mount Pearl and Corner Brook gone, disappeared. Sixty-eight thousand
people in a decade. It just so happens to be the decade that this government has
been in this Province. I will say, we all know with the situation in the
fisheries which, of course, we can lend our hands to Ottawa and we have all done
that, how they mismanaged the fisheries. We will give you that, that certainly
was an impact. That is what government is all about. That is why you ran on a
campaign and got elected - the people who had a mandate - because you knew these
times were tough. That is what you take on as a government, for better or for
worse.
When you take on that responsibility to govern this Province, you take on the
responsibility to provide at least the basic necessities that people throughout
the entire Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, not one or the other, not
rural and urban, the entire Province of Newfoundland and Labrador - it is just
over 500,000 people these days - and provide them with a bit of dignity. When I
am talking about dignity I am talking about a decent road and decent water to
drink. They are not looking for large museums or big stadiums or anything else,
they are just looking for the basics. That is what people in this Province - and
until they see some commitment - and every single petition that I have
presented, because they present it to me, and they have always used a quote at
the end of it, it was the lack of commitment to rural Newfoundland and Labrador.
That is what has been lacking in the last decade. As a matter of fact, the last
twelve or thirteen years.
So people in this Province are going to be asking a lot of questions in the
next little while. That is why the members for Labrador who stand today - and
there have been previous members from Labrador who did not stand with their
people, and they felt the wrath at the right time. People have the ultimate say.
They decide who gets their jobs in here. You are speaking (inaudible) you stand
shoulder to shoulder with the people you represent, the people who gave you your
job. Mr. Chairman, the people of the Province have the last say. That is what we
always have to remember, everyone of us in this House, stand with the people who
put you here. At the end of the day, trust is what it is going to come down to.
If the member for Labrador thinks that will carry the day - I do not know
which hon. member, but there was a news clip where one of them said recently -
CHAIR: Order, please!
The member's time is up.
MR. SHELLEY: - one of the members from Labrador, that it would take
trust.
I will wrap it up, Mr. Chairman, and I will -
CHAIR: Does the member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
CHAIR: By leave to clue up.
MR. SHELLEY: Just a minute to wind it up, Mr. Chairman. I will wind it up
but I will come back again because I have a few more notes here that I certainly
want to relate to, but I got off on a little tangent today because of what the
member from Labrador was saying.
I will leave it to this, that at the end of the day the people who gave us
our jobs are going to be the ones to say: Look, I trust you, we will put you
back in. I guess that is what we will have to answer to.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I wanted to rise today and certainly have a few comments on Interim Supply,
and especially the debate that has been ongoing within the public in the last
couple of days with regard to the Trans-Labrador Highway Initiative Fund. It has
certainly been raised in this House on a number of occasions.
Mr. Chairman, I have lived in Labrador all of my life and so have my family
through many generations before me, and I can honestly tell you that there is no
member in this House who has made any greater contribution to Labrador than what
I have as a member.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: I can stand here today and I can say that with my head held
high because I have been a living resident of Labrador all of my entire life.
Long before I walked into this House of Assembly, long before the day I came to
take my seat in this place, I could hold my head high knowing I had made
valuable contributions to Labrador and to its people.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: Mr. Chairman, in the days that I grew up in Labrador we went
through some very challenging times like a lot of communities across our
Province. Like a lot of rural communities we, too, faced issues of resettlement,
employment and so on. Most communities on the Island through the 1950s, 1960s
and into the 1970s were given proper infrastructure in transportation and their
communities were connected, one at a time, from one bay to the next bay, to the
next bay, until finally most all the areas in the Province were connected with
transportation networks. Labrador has never had that privilege or that
opportunity until this government, in the recent years, took office -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: - and made a commitment, not to just segregate the people in
Labrador West, and not to segregate the people in the Labrador Straits, but to
make an honest, genuine, commitment to start bringing these communities
together. That started with the phase II of the highway from Red Bay to
Cartwright.
I am a person who lived in this district before there were roads. I am a
person who is living there today as the highway network is being completed,
unlike other members in this House. I have seen the change, the progress, the
tremendous benefits that have accrued to communities in my district because of
this piece of transportation infrastructure.
It is not good enough to connect communities and do half a job. Building the
road from L'Anse au Clair to Cartwright, and from Goose Bay to Labrador West
is half a job. We have to complete the network, and that is building the
section
of road between Cartwright and Goose Bay. Only then, Mr. Chairman, will we
realize the full economic benefits that this transportation investment will
bring to Labradorians.
Mr. Chairman, in the last couple of days I have listened to all the debate. I
have listened to the political spins that have been given this issue. I have
listened to all the innuendos, the people who played to the cameras, and the
people who played to the public, but I was on the ground in Labrador on Thursday
evening. I was there all day Friday, all day Saturday, and I was there Sunday. I
met with communities. I met with the people in my district. I did so prior to
the budget coming down, I did so after the budget came down, and I can tell you
that there are many people across Labrador who are applauding the commitments of
this government, are applauding our efforts to have a full transportation link
in Labrador from one end to the other end.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: Mr. Chairman, this weekend alone - and I want to tell you this
for the record - I travelled to three public engagements in my district, three
public forums in which I spoke on this budget and this initiative; three public
forums, Mr. Chairman, where there were standing ovations for me and this
government on the contributions that we were making to Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: Mr. Chairman, I can tell you that until the last seven years,
six to seven years, there has been very little contribution made in
infrastructure in Labrador. Through the twenty years previous, the
infrastructure money that we got were in special agreements from the federal
government, not in revenues from the Province. I can tell you, Mr. Chairman -
and I hope that hon. members listen to this because this is an indication of the
progress that has been made in Labrador.
In 1992 I sat in a (inaudible) council meeting in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. It
was a meeting of all the leaders from around Labrador. I walked into that
meeting - and I was fairly young at the time, just getting involved in community
development and municipal politics. I walked into that meeting and for two days,
Mr. Chairman, the discussion in Labrador was resettlement. It was resettling the
communities in Southeastern Labrador. That was the topic of the day. Which
community was going to be phased out first? Which community was going to be
closed first? Which school would disappear? Mr. Chairman, that day I stood in
that room and said I would be no part of an agenda that was focused on
resettling communities in Southeastern Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: Mr. Chairman, I committed that day that I would lead a charge
and I would work with the people on the Coast of Labrador to make sure that our
communities were built for the future and not left to go to the wayside and to
be resettled. Mr. Chairman, I asked the people in that room that day, I said you
can stand up and you can be a part of changing Labrador or you can sit here and
you can wallow in self-pity and let things just disappear. People stood up that
day, Mr. Chairman. It took us a long time to get from where we were then to
where we are today. Do you know where we are today? Today, Mr. Chairman, we have
communities on the Southeast Coast of Labrador that will be there, not for the
next fifty years, but for the next 150 years, Mr. Chairman.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: They will be there simply because they have had a government
that has invested; they have had people that have been leaders, that have had a
vision, that have known the right direction in which to follow. Mr. Chairman, I
can tell you that in my district today, in the District of Cartwright-L'Anse
au Clair, some of the strongest, most visionary people that you will ever find
exists, and they have a vision for Labrador and their vision includes Labrador
being first, not only in the Province, but in the country. In order to do that,
they need to ensure that they have proper infrastructure in place. This is the
role that our government has to play. We cannot leave Labrador out of the
picture. We cannot do that. You talk about this fund that is there. We could let
this fund sit and pay for marine services or we could do what should be the
responsibility of the government, and that is to fund marine services in
Labrador the same as they do in every other region of this Province. That is a
provincial responsibility, and that is the way that those services should be
mandated and the way that they should be operated.
The people in Northern Labrador deserve to have a long-term commitment,
marine services the same as the people in Fogo Island, Bell Island, the
Southeast Coast of Newfoundland or wherever they may live. They are no
different. They can be assured, Mr. Chairman, that they will have their marine
services. They will have a first-class marine service, they will have the best
service that they have had ever had in their lives, and they know that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: When the highway was announced for Cartwright to Red Bay, I am
going to tell you that day, Mr. Chair, in my hometown in Mary's Harbour in
1997, with about 600 people in the room that day, most of them were crying
because that is how much it meant to them. Crying because they were so happy,
could not believe that finally they were going to get a road. Well, I thought
that was very much one of the biggest highlights in my entire life. Two years
later, Mr. Chairman, I was part of an announcement -
CHAIR: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MS JONES: Can I have a couple of minutes, Mr. Chairman, to clue up?
CHAIR: Does the hon. the member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
CHAIR: By leave.
MS JONES: Two years later, Mr. Chairman, I was part of an announcement in
which this government decided to build a road into St. Lewis, connecting it to
the highway. Two days ago, I had the privilege to go into a small community,
probably one of the smaller communities in this Province, in Pinsent Arm, by
snowmobile, with my colleagues the minister for Labrador and the Minister of
Works, Services and Transportation, a community that has 100 per cent
employment, fully serviced with water and sewer infrastructure, but, Mr.
Chairman, cut off from all other services and everyone else on the Coast of
Labrador. Well, that will change today.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: We will build the road to connect Pinsent Arm to the
Trans-Labrador Highway, and this community, too, Mr. Chairman, will be given an
opportunity to continue to grow and to continue to build.
In concluding my remarks - and, believe me, I have lots more that I want to
add to this subject and I will in the coming days, you can be sure - in
concluding my remarks, I want to say this: In order for my district to be able
to prosper, foster good economic growth and protect the communities for many
years and many generations to come, we have to ensure that all the traffic in
Labrador passes through our district. We cannot continue to build our
communities on seasonal industries. We need to make sure that we have a
year-round industry, and that will only come with a full transportation network.
Mr. Chairman, I will tell you today that in six years from now, when I am
driving the Phase III of the Trans-Labrador Highway and watching the dollars
pouring into the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, I will be the first
person, you can be sure, who will be on the podium and will be telling the
people, the naysayers who are out there today, the people who do not want to
commit to Labrador, I will tell them, that day the real change will be taking
place in Labrador; the real leaders will be emerging. We will be let out, and
once we are let out you can be sure that the investments, the growth, and the
economic base of this Province will be far greater than it is today.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: I am going to let the hon. members across the floor know, I
want to let them know, that there are people in Labrador who have waited all of
their lives, not the last couple of years, all of their lives, to have a road
across Labrador. They have waited long enough. They are a part of this Province.
They deserve to be treated with the respect - and that is what this government
is showing, respect for the people of Labrador. No one is taking $97 million and
letting it go into other revenues with no return for Labrador. That is not what
is happening here, Mr. Chairman. There is return for Labrador. There was $130
million in returns for Labrador only four days ago.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: As long as I am the member, Mr. Chairman, as long as I stand in
my place in this House, you can be sure that the people of Labrador will always
be looked out for, their interests will always be represented, and the progress
that they make will be forward not backward.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today to have a few comments on Bill 2, which is
commonly referred to as the Interim Supply Bill.
For the people who do not know it, this bill needs to be approved and passed
by March 31 to give government the authority to pay the bills, to pay salaries,
and to pay other costs of government before the Budget is approved some time in
April or May. Probably May.
Mr. Chairman, what the government is looking for today is $1,214,081,000 to
be approved for that purpose, to pay the bills, et cetera.
Over the past couple of days, I have listened very attentively to the
previous speakers. I have listened to the Government House Leader, I listened to
the Minister of Mines and Energy, I listened to the Minister of Finance, and I
have listened to the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair. But I have never,
since I have been in this House of Assembly, heard such a self-serving speech.
Mr. Chairman, I will tell you this: Obviously there is no support from the
Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair for the other members, her colleagues,
in Labrador: the Member for Lake Melville and the Member for Torngat Mountains,
when she says, and I quote: There is no other member who contributes more to
Labrador than her.
Now we have the Minister of Labrador & Aboriginal Affairs, Mr. Chairman,
who has been in the Cabinet for a few years now. Obviously, the Premier will now
take him out of that position and put the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au
Clair in that position. I would say that is what she is looking for, that is
what she is bucking for.
Basically, forget my colleagues, Mr. Chairman. Take care of myself. That is
her attitude. With that attitude, we can see why this Province is in such a
financial mess, as the Member for Terra Nova, the Government House Leader, said
yesterday, that this Province is in a financial mess, is in a financial bind.
That is why they have to take this $97 million out of a trust that was put there
a few years ago by the Government of Ottawa and the Province for the
Trans-Labrador Highway.
Now, I do not know if I have this quote right, but I will try it,
Shakespeare, I think, said: Me think thou dost protest too much.
We are getting that from that side of the House, Mr. Chairman. They are
trying to justify, trying to rationalize, this move, Mr. Chairman, which cannot
be done.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: I won't go there.
Mr. Chairman, when the member was up - and I remember her when she was
sitting on this side of the House of Assembly, when she was sitting as an
independent. I would recommend that the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair
go back, dig up Hansard - a record of what is said in this House of Assembly -
and read some of her speeches and see what she thought of the government at that
time, just a few short years ago. People's mind obviously change pretty
dramatically.
Now, Mr. Chairman, this Budget, you can say what you like - and I am not
going to have enough time this afternoon to say what I have to say on this. We
will get into debate after the Easter break on the Budget itself, Mr. Chairman.
We will be discussing the Budget itself and we will have much more time. Now we
are discussing the Interim Supply, and basically we only have ten minutes this
afternoon to say a few words on this. But the Budget itself, Mr. Chairman, the
government members have been up and said, and I think the Minister of Finance
said, there have been no job cuts in this Budget. Yet, if you look at the Budget
itself, and talk to the teachers of the Province, there is going to be basically
over 200 jobs gone from the teaching profession in this Province of Newfoundland
and Labrador, in the schools across this Province. There is going to be 200
teachers gone, there is going to be 100 positions gone out of health care in the
next year, and 300 public servants.
The minister may say that there are no job cuts, but if you have a position
and someone retires and it is not filled, then we are losing people out of the
public service. That, in itself, increases the workload of individuals within
the public service, within any sector that is going to lose hundreds and
hundreds of jobs.
Mr. Chairman, I heard the Government House Leader saying that the Opposition
only had one objective. The one objective is to grasp power in the Province of
Newfoundland and Labrador. Well, Mr. Chairman, we have thirteen years of Liberal
Administration. We had the Minister of Finance stand in her place the other day,
when she read the Budget, and said that the unemployment rate now is the lowest
since 1989. Now, I thought about that, and said to myself: Isn't that a
backhanded slap in the face to the very government that she is representing?
Since 1989 when they first got elected, this Liberal Administration, the
unemployment rate is now lower than it has been in the past thirteen years when
they have been in power. If we look at it, she also said that there have been
thousands of jobs created, and 63 per cent of those jobs have been created
outside of the Northeast Avalon. If I do recall, I would say that some of these
jobs are in the urban centers. Most of them are in the urban centers outside the
Northeast Avalon, such as Grand Falls and Carbonear, and these places, where we
have the call centres. Again, this Budget is doing nothing for rural
Newfoundland. They may try to stretch it as much as they want, but it is doing
nothing at all for rural Newfoundland.
The Government House Leader said that this Budget is not cutting jobs, which
is obviously not true. The Government House Leader said that this Budget did not
raise taxes. Well, Mr. Chairman, it did raise taxes. We saw cigarettes go up. I
am not complaining; I never smoked in my life. I have no problem with that to a
certain extent. The income tax, as the critic for Finance talked about in this
House of Assembly - we had liquor; aren't they taking $10 million out of the
liquor board?
MR. SULLIVAN: They could have taken it last year but they deferred it
(inaudible). In other words, they are deferring (inaudible) to manipulate to get
the results they want.
MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, they are going to be taking $10 million out of the
liquor board. So where are they going to come up with this money? Either borrow
it or they will have to increase liquor taxes down the road.
The Government House Leader says the Province is in a financial bind so they
had to take this $97 million. Now the government is trying to say that there is
only a deficit - only now - of $93 million. Last year they said it was $22
million and it worked out to be over $200 million, according to the Auditor
General. This year they are saying it is $93 million. If you take that $97
million - if they left it in the fund where they should leave it - now we have a
deficit of $93 million plus $97 million; $190 million. They still have to come
up with this money.
The Member for Lake Melville, the Minister for Labrador & Aboriginal
Affairs, is trying to rationalize it by saying that this $97 million is a good
thing for Labrador; to take this $97 million and put it into general revenues
because they are committing to build phase III of the Trans-Labrador Highway.
Well, Mr. Chairman, I would not bank a lot of money on that, I can guarantee
you. If I was a betting man, I would not put a lot of money on that scenario, I
can tell you that. Not at all, because they have the money there now. They are
saying that this $97 million was never allocated for phase III, but it was
allocated for the Labrador transportation system. I do not think it is a stretch
to say, if they have $97 million there that they can put into phase III, that
the federal government would oppose it.
The government members, the Minister of Finance and others over there, are
saying that we have gone to the federal government and, hopefully, they will
cost-share the phase III. Now, how realistic is that, Mr. Chairman? How logical
is it, to take $97 million of the money that was given to them by the federal
government for the Trans-Labrador Highway and for the transportation system in
Labrador and put it in general revenues and now go back to those very same
people and ask them for more money to cost share the Trans-Labrador Highway? Is
it logical? Does it make sense? Not in my books it doesn't, Mr. Chairman, not
at all.
I want to say a few words about the deficit. The deficit now, according to
government as I just said, is $93 million. That is what they admit to, but I
will say this time next year, when we get the Auditor General's Report, it
will be somewhere up over $400 million. Why are we in such a financial crisis
today in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador? Why? There are a number of
reasons, of course. Over the past few years, and I have referred to this many
times, is this: one shot fixes that this administration seems to have a habit of
going after. They have, in the past, taken $50 million out of the Labrador Fund,
similar to what is in place now in Labrador that they are going to raid - $50
million that was to be put away, in perpetuity, so the interest off that money
could operate the south coast ferry system. They took that money and put it into
general revenues to help balance the budget in previous years. Now each year the
Province has to come up with millions of dollars to run the south coast ferry
system which the money should have been there and is not there now.
They took money out of Term 29 when we joined Confederation. Millions and
millions of dollars they took upfront, one shot deal, when the previous premier,
Tobin, was there and pumped it into general revenues. Money that we were getting
every year, millions of dollars from the federal government. What happens now,
Mr. Chairman? That is more money that we have to come up with each year out of
general revenues. No wonder we are in such a financial mess.
The HST, Mr. Chairman, they did the exact same thing with that. They took the
money from the HST upfront and left us in the lurch again. In my mind, as we
said in the past, this is very, very poor planning on behalf of this
administration. We said in previous years that it was going to come home to
roost. I said in the past, where and when are we going to get to the point where
we have no more rabbits to pull out of the hat? What is coming next? Is it going
to be the -
CHAIR: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: - Public Service Pension Fund?
CHAIR: Order, please!
The member's time is up.
MR. J. BYRNE: Just in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I will not take
advantage.
CHAIR: Does the member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
CHAIR: By leave.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just in conclusion, I had a lot to say on this, as I said in the beginning.
There is so much to say on this Budget and as was said, we only have ten minutes
this afternoon. I will sit down now but I want to say this, when the Budget
debate is brought before this House, after the Easter break, I will have much,
much more to say, as I am sure all members on this side of the House will have.
Thank you.
CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.
MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to have a few words as well on the Interim Supply. First of all,
I want to say that I can identify with what Yvonne said a few moments ago about
the isolation. I talked about that here last week. This past weekend was a
typical example of that. I had a function in the town of Gaultois. I went there
in the morning with the intention of going to Bay d'Espoir that night, but
because of high winds we had to stay in the community overnight. If there had
been an emergency there, then I do not know how we would have gotten out; too
much for an helicopter and too much for a boat. These people who live in
isolated areas, when they have an opportunity to be connected to the outside
world, it is a feeling that those of us who have never had it can never enter
into. It is an awesome feeling to realize you are in a community and you cannot
get out. I understand that, and I am sure that every person in Labrador who is
connected to the highway can say it to themselves. What a feeling it is. There
is no way to describe it unless you have been there and done that.
I want to take a couple of moments to talk about my own department here, the
Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. I hear across the way many, many
times government does nothing for rural Newfoundland. Just leave them out there
stranded and, in a sense, let them fodder for themselves.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. LANGDON: If you didn't, some of your colleagues across the way just
said it. It is in your own news release. I can say to the Member for Baie Verte,
when you talk about the MOG grants, and you were saying that the smaller
communities in the Province will receive less this year. That is not going to
happen. We have made a commitment. If you had read the Budget Speech 2002, the
things that we had talked about - said that they would remain the same, and they
are not going to be lessened.
I want to say to you, when you talk about Municipal Operating Grants - I said
in the House once here before that the Federation of Municipalities, the
Newfoundland and Labrador Administrators Association, with us, we are working
at. We recognize that within the department and also within the federation and
every small municipality and large municipality out there, that a status quo
cannot maintain. We have to change the Municipal Operating Grants. It has been
in the works for a long, long time, so therefore we have made a commitment to do
it. As I speak, we have those three groups that are working toward it and,
hopefully, a resolution before it comes to (inaudible) this fall. But, it will
be done in partnership.
Mr. Chairman, that is just one part of what this government has done for
rural Newfoundland, and it is primarily for small municipalities. Since 1996,
and that is only six years, this government has put in $35 million primarily in
small rural Newfoundland communities for debt relief, and we have taken care of
more than 103 of the communities. Guess what, this year, Mr. Chairman? We have
fifty-three communities left that their debt has not been restructured. Some of
them over across the way have come to me and seen about it. You know what this
government has done? We have said that this year we will put in an additional
$12 million to take care of the fifty-three communities out there that their
debt has not been restructured. That is a commitment from this government. That
is a commitment for small communities in rural Newfoundland. That is the second
prong of it.
We also, Mr. Chairman, had representation from many of the larger
municipalities, from the different cities: City of St. John's, City of Mount
Pearl, Corner Brook, larger towns like Grand Falls-Windsor, Gander, Happy
Valley-Goose Bay and even from the towns of Torbay, Conception Bay South and
other communities looking for multi-year capital works programs. They said to
me: You know, that is the type of program that we want where we can plan. Guess
what, Mr. Chairman? We delivered. In the Budget we delivered for those people,
for the larger municipalities. Do you know what that does? It allows the smaller
municipalities like the Westports of the world and like the Gaultois' of mine
and for the Pacquets in the Member for Straits & White Bay North, for small
communities in Labrador where we can do more. Do you know what? This government
also - you talk about commitment to rural Newfoundland. Last year, I said to my
colleagues and the previous minister, the Minister of Finance, who did some of
the work when she was there herself, to the federation and the small communities
said: Look, our small communities, 500 people or 1,000 people or less, we cannot
expect to ever get infrastructure in our communities if we are going to go
50-50, which had happened years previous to that.
What did this government do? We changed the formula and in my critic's
district, the Member for Baie Verte, there were communities last year that we,
as a government, took up approximately 94 per cent of the communities
contribution. This government did so, so we could help the small municipalities;
not only his but the people in mine as well. That, to me, says one thing:
commitment to rural Newfoundland. If we did not, then there is no way that
communities in Westport or in Gaultois or in any other town could ever hope to
have infrastructure within their communities. It could not happen.
You know, I sit here some days and I do not say a lot in the House. Sometimes
I should probably say more. I think the House Leader said it yesterday; we get
the impression that there is no patriotism here, that no blood flows through our
veins, that we do not care about rural Newfoundland. I have been here for
thirteen years. I won't say that I am the best MHA that has every been here. I
would never say it. That would be condescending for the other people who are
here.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. LANGDON: She didn't say that. She did not say that.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. LANGDON: No, she did not. She said nobody has ever done any more than
I did.
That is what she said, and she probably has the right to say it. Every one of
us here work at that. What I can say to you is that, for the thirteen years that
I have been here, I have done my part to represent the people who sent me here,
especially in small rural municipalities. There are people over here who have
done no less.
I think of the guy from Bonavista South. I had a delegation from Bonavista a
few days ago. I talked to them and said, we will do our best for you. It is a
town that is struggling. You know what? I have been there; I have done that. I
was with the Federation of Municipalities for five years. I was elected as a
councillor for thirteen, and there was nothing worse than ever wanting to see a
minister who says, no, he does not have the time or his time table does not
allow you to do it.
I have said to people in my area, over in my department, do not cancel out on
one request. That is why I have had a number of occasions when