Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 7 April 2003 (44th General Assembly, 5th Session, Vol. XLIV No. 10)
2003-04-07
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
April 7, 2003 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 10
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!
Before we begin our routine proceedings the Chair would like to welcome to
the gallery today forty Grade 6 students from St. Patrick's School in Bay
Bulls in the District of Ferryland. They are accompanied by their teachers,
Tracy Smallwood and Greg Woolgar, and chaperones, Rosearrie O'Dea, Debbie
Joyce, Maureen Walsh and Austin Hann, and bus driver, Christina Carey.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, as we all are aware, there was major flooding on
the west coast, Corner Brook and the Bay of Islands area last week.
There were provincial workers, town council workers, and volunteers who went
well beyond the call of duty to help with this tragedy.
One of the hardest hit areas in this flood was Cox's Cove, which is on the
North Shore of the Bay of Islands.
Mr. Speaker, I must congratulate the Cox's Cove Volunteer Fire Department
for their contribution to the residents of Cox's Cove during this major
flooding. As the severity of the flood progressed, the commitment and resolve of
the fire department became evident.
They rescued seniors from their homes, controlled the traffic, pumped water
out of people's basements, kept water levels lowered at crucial areas, moved
personal belongings for residents and helped the town residents in any way
possible.
Mr. Speaker, every firefighter who was available was on the scene. There were
cases where some firefighters did not go to work in order to remain on the scene
and had people fill in for them at work.
Mr. Speaker, every necessary piece of equipment, pumps, hoses, et cetera,
were in use belonging to the fire department, the town council, residents and
there were several who rented pumps. Many of those volunteers were on the scene
up to twenty hours without any break or sleep to help their neighbors and
families.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all Members of the House of Assembly to join me in
congratulating this outstanding group of volunteers who once again proved that
they are volunteers in name only, but their professionalism was very evident
this past week.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Today I would like to offer congratulations to the Grade 6-1 and Grade 6-2
students at Cowan Heights Elementary School who graduated from the Drug Abuse
Resistance Education Program. They are the first from the entire Northeast
Avalon to graduate from this program. I had the pleasure this morning to attend
the graduation, along with my colleague, the hon. Minister of Justice and Member
for Burgeo & LaPoile, and I am sure he will agree with what I have to say
today.
This program is offered by the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and by the
RCMP in their respective jurisdictions as part of community policing.
Drug Abuse Resistance Education is a seventeen-week course offered to
students in Grade 6. It is designed as an early intervention awareness of
drug/substance abuse and bullying, both of which we know are at the centre of
many societal problems. This program raises the self-esteem of students and
gives them coping skills to help them stand firm against peer pressure. It
involves a uniformed police officer who is the presenter, teachers who carry out
a supportive role implementing and reinforcing, and of course, the families.
Congratulations to Marilyn Flower, Principal of Cowan Heights Elementary
School, for being instrumental in bringing the program to the school; to Officer
Brad Butler of the RNC, who offered the program and who, as Principal Flower
said today, he went above and beyond; to the Grade 6 teachers at Cowan Heights
Elementary, Mrs. Shute and Ms Norberg; and to the Role Model, Jonathan Penney.
He was the young man from junior high who offered himself to answer any
questions from these Grade 6 students on drug abuse and on the problems that
they run into.
The DARE program had corporate sponsors: the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary,
Investors Group Inc., St. John's Maple Leafs Foundation, and VOCM Cares
Foundation, all of whom should receive a vote of thanks.
The value of this program cannot be emphasized enough. It is far better to
use resources for early intervention than to have to use them in a punitive or
rehabilitative manner later.
Once again, congratulations to the graduates of the DARE program and to all
who were involved in making it happen for them.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.
MR. RALPH WISEMAN: By leave, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, this is Members' Statements of private
members. If we could get through all of those and then we will consider giving
leave to the minister following when we conclude everyone else's, if that
would be okay.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS M. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today in this hon. House to congratulate a student from Marystown who
participated in the Fifth Annual Adventis Biotech Challenge at Memorial
University over the weekend.
Marystown's student, Jennifer Graham, placed second in the competition,
hosted by Bio-East, the Newfoundland and Labrador Biotechnology Network. She
submitted an exhibit which is part of a national campaign to promote science
education and job opportunities in the field of biotechnology to junior high and
high school students.
Mr. Speaker, her experiment looked at the problems to human health and
equipment posed by fungi and other microorganisms on long-term space flight.
Jennifer constructed a rotating platform on which fungus would be grown, a
common black bread mould, and then took measurements to determine whether the
reduced gravity would cause a difference in the growth rate.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Jennifer on doing extremely well at this
prestigious competition, and the high quality of her work is a true testament to
the future of biotechnology in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today in this hon. House to ask members to join with me in
congratulating Ms Christa Borden of Conception Bay South on her winning Popstars:
The One .
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FRENCH: This was a national competition that began some six months
ago with approximately 7,000 singers auditioning from across the country. Ms
Borden eventually became part of a group of twelve semi-finalists who were
eventually reduced to seven finalists, and they performed last night on national
TV. Her performance of You Keep Me Hanging On , originally performed by
the Supremes, was simply remarkable.
The judges evaluated the contestants based on musical talent, appearance,
dancing ability and their drive for success.
Ms Borden is a shining example and an ambassador to the people of our
Province that we can indeed compete at a national and international level.
The former Miss Teen Newfoundland and Labrador declared her victory a triumph
for anyone from a small town with a dream.
Congratulations and good luck, Christa. I am sure we will be hearing your
name for years to come.
Thank you very much.
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.
Mr. Speaker, on Friday afternoon, April 4, I attended the funeral service in
Happy Valley-Goose Bay for the late Dale Goudie. The service was truly a
celebration of Ms Goudie's life, with many stories being shared about her
humour, her forthrightness, her commitment to the community, and her love of the
land she called home.
Messages from family and friends spoke of her strong family values, and the
tremendous crowd that filled Bethel Pentecostal Church spoke to the love and
respect that Dale held in the community.
Mr. Speaker, the singing of Harry Martin's Song, This is My Home ,
was a fitting tribute to a lady who had an obvious love of nature, a love of
animals, and one who was very much in touch with the people and the land around
her.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to pass on our condolences
to Dale's partner, Mayor John Hickey of Happy Valley, Goose Bay, Dale's
children Anna, Janice and Charlene, her grandchildren Allison, Sydney, Paul and
Nolan, her parents Gerald and Hilda Dyson, and all those family and friends who
were touched by Dale throughout her life.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.
MR. RALPH WISEMAN: By leave?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. RALPH WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I, too, would like to recognize the special achievements of Christa Borden,
Canada's newest Popstar!
Last night in Toronto, in front of a live studio audience, Christa was judged
the winner of the television show Popstars: The One . This victory comes
at the end of a six month process involving some 7,000 stars from across the
country. Her winning performance was a rendition of Marvin Gaye's, You Keep
Me Hanging On.
For this achievement, Christa receives a recording contract and assistance to
produce her first album from the best talent that the Canadian music industry
has to offer. No doubt we will be hearing from her again in the future.
Christa is only twenty-two years old and comes from Chamberlains in my
District of Topsail.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RALPH WISEMAN: She is a graduate of Queen Elizabeth High School and
is currently studying classical music at the Memorial University Music School.
This is not her first time in the limelight. In 1998 she was named Miss Teen
Newfoundland and Labrador and was one of the three talent finalists in that
competition.
I know that her family is very proud of her: her mother Norma, her father
Fred, and her brother Craig, along with the rest of her family, her community,
and all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
Her success shows all of us that the people of this Province can hold our own
with the best from anywhere in any field of endeavour.
Mr. Speaker, Christa herself is quoted as saying, "The one thing I've
learned from all of this is, it doesn't matter where you come from. If you
believe, you will achieve."
This is a great motto for all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of the House to join with me in sending
congratulations to Christa Borden for a fabulous performance.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would like to take this opportunity to welcome to
the House of Assembly today Mayor Paul Bolt of Grand Le Pierre. As well, I would
like to welcome Mayor Rose of Bishop's Falls and Councillors Mills and
Saunders.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, last week I joined MHA's Bob Mercer and Eddie Joyce in
visiting Corner Brook and other communities on the West Coast to witness the
infrastructure and property loss caused by severe flooding one week ago. Premier
Grimes visited the region on Friday. The Minister of Works, Services and
Transportation, my colleague, Mr. Walsh, was in the area on the weekend.
Heavy rains caused shoulder washouts and flooded many roads in the areas,
from the Codroy Valley to the Gros Morne Park and the north and south sides of
the Bay of Islands. Some roads were closed, and others were reduced to a single
lane of traffic.
Hundreds of homes in the region, businesses and infrastructure have been
significantly damaged, with repair and replacement costs expected to reach
millions of dollars, but it is too early to speculate on a total dollar figure.
Mr. Speaker, this Province is certainly not a stranger to flooding disasters.
Less than two months ago, water and ice that gushed into the Town of Badger
resulted in the evacuation of that community and extensive property and
infrastructure damage. As the last of our unexpected visitors left the Province
after the events of September 11, 2001, Tropical Storm Gabrielle damaged more
than 1,200 homes in the Avalon area.
Once again, we have been fortunate that there were no fatalities. This is
largely due to the response effort of firefighters, community volunteers and
government officials who were quick in their response.
On Monday, March 31, there was a landslide on the Trans-Canada Highway in the
Gallant's-George's Lake area. The following day a bridge partially collapsed
in the same area. As a result, the Trans-Canada was closed for a portion of that
day, with it opening to light vehicles on Tuesday evening.
On Tuesday, Route 450, on the south side of the Bay of Islands, was closed
after a landslide in the John's Beach area.
Crews worked around the clock to open roads. On Wednesday evening, the
Department of Works, Services and Transportation was able to open the road in
John's Beach and Thursday night the installation of a temporary bailey bride
on the Trans Canada Highway was completed to allow heavy traffic through. I have
been advised by the minister that a new bridge will be constructed in this
location.
Other repairs may have to be carried out to roadways and bridges over the
next month or so. This will be determined after water levels recede and
departmental engineers are able to do detailed assessments.
The Province will once again be approaching the federal government for
participation and compensation under the Disaster Financial Assistance
Arrangements. As office to handle claims for submission to the Emergency
Measures Organization has been set up at the Fire Commissioners Office in Deer
Lake, which was open throughout the weekend. Claims packages are also available
at most municipal council offices in the region.
Financial assistance will be provided to homeowners to repair homes to
pre-flood conditions and replace essential appliances, furniture and other
items.
Provincial Adjusting Services Ltd., which has an office in Corner Brook, has
been appointed to co-ordinate claims adjustors. They will subcontract to other
provincial adjusting firms as necessary.
I was certainly very pleased with the response from the Fire Commissioners
Office, the Emergency Measures Organization and engineering officials from my
department. These individuals continue to meet the challenges that face them.
On behalf of the Minister Walsh, Works, Services and Transportation, I would
like to recognize the response effort of the staff of that department for their
efficient response and hard work.
Many communities were affected by last week's flood, where volunteer
councils and community leaders have been tasked with dealing with the damage to
community infrastructure and concerns of residents.
We recognize the greatness of this responsibility and will work with councils
and community representatives in returning communities to normal.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
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.
On the day before the minister and the members for the district arrived,
myself and Mr. Michael Monaghan from the district actually visited the
community. I apologize to this hon. House for being out of the House on those
particular days, but I felt that, because of the seriousness of the matter, I
should visit the district immediately. As soon as I arrived in town, I met with
the Mayor and city officials and got a briefing. I had a chance to view the
significant damage, of course, in the City of Corner Brook, basically from the
volume and the velocity of the water that moved in such a very short period of
time. I was satisfied on arriving there, though, that the city had the matter
very well under control, that city workers were out on the job and certainly had
secured the sites, and felt that they were safe and had been restored.
As well, that afternoon I also went down to Curling where there was some
significant damage as well. It is startling, actually, when you look at it.
There was a major, major scour came right down through the side of the hill. A
car was precariously hanging over a ledge there. I went with the fire chief.
Actually, I got rear-ended while I was down there, by the way, by a reporter. An
unfortunate circumstance. I have been ambushed by the press but it is the first
time I have ever been rear-ended. Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I went down there with
the fire chief and the deputy fire chief and viewed the damage that was there,
and, actually, discovered there were some concerns of safety, particularly with
the provision of water in the area. Of course, the fire department was very
concerned that if, in fact, a fire broke out that hydrants were secure.
MR. MERCER: (Inaudible).
MR. WILLIAMS: The Member for Humber East, this is a serous matter, if you
do not mind. If you would just allow me to finish, please.
So, anyway, we went there. Then we left that evening because I was informed
there was some significant damage in Bay of Islands District. Myself and Mr.
Monaghan then left and went down to Bay of Islands and went down to Cox's Cove
to view the damage there. It was a much different situation. Instead of sort of
scouring from, again, the volume and the velocity of water, there was more of a
pooling effect that occurred down there. There was some twenty-five to
twenty-six homes that had suffered some very serious damage. Two homes, in
particular, that I noticed, were actually down in the basements underneath them.
They had structural damage where, in fact, the basement walls had imploded.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. WILLIAMS: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. WILLIAMS: So, we had an opportunity to have a look at that. Of
course, I was really impressed, as the minister said, with the work of the
volunteer fire department down there, and, of course, as the member acknowledged
as well, a dozen people had gotten out and worked through the night, and worked
in such a manner that they alleviated a very serious problem. It was sad, of
course, to see that. One woman, in particular, was in tears in her home because
her groceries had, in fact, been flooded and were soaking wet.
The following day I went down with Kathy Goudie and we went to look at the
damage in the Jackson's Arm area. We were satisfied there and stopped and
spoke with the crews. I compliment the Minister of Works, Services and
Transportation on the work that was done by his crews in that particular area.
Again, as well, I need to point out, in the shortness of time that I have
here, because I notice here the minister has indicated that the Province will be
approaching the federal government. Well, that was a particular concern of mine
because of the relationship that the Province has with the federal government.
We know what happened in Stephenville. We know what happened in Gander. So I
took it upon myself to make a direct contact with the minister, Mr. Gerry Byrne,
the federal minister who is responsible for this particular Province and the
area, and had his assurance, his solid assurance, that he was on top of the
issue. He was all over it and he gave me his commitment that he would provide
that funding. So I was very, very pleased to get that assurance.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Finally, on the third day that I was there, I went down to
the other side of the Bay of Islands District. We went down and viewed the
repairs that were done in the Frenchman's Cove and John's Beach area, a
significant washout there that had been restored as quickly as possible. We
stopped again, and spoke to the crews there, and was satisfied that they were
working around the clock and working diligently.
So I compliment our workers, I compliment our councils, and I compliment the
EMO officials who were there, and as well, the volunteer fire department who
seem to be getting by with sparse funds from the minister who does not see fit
to give them proper funding.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I was not there when the rains came down so I cannot participate in the
play-by-play description and I want to confirm -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. HARRIS: - and I want to confirm -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quid Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I will say that I have a lot of respect for the volunteers who came forward
immediately and worked so hard day and night to ensure that their communities
did not suffer any more than they would have from this disaster. It is something
that is very significant and important, that we keep having these incidents
related somehow to extreme weather situations. We have to have emergency
responses ready to operate, and I will note there has been a quick reaction by
the government in setting up the office. I think this is noteworthy in this
particular case, and I do hope that the federal government will participate
quickly and fully on this issue, where we have seen problems and a lack of
response in such issues as the Gander Weather Office and the Stephenville-Port
Harmon situation. I do hope that they will response positively here and that our
own crews and workers can put this damage back together again as quickly as
possible.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister for Labrador & Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker, I stand today to announce that a new Labrador
Benefits Agreement has been signed with five unions, representing public sector
employees in Labrador.
This agreement benefits approximately 1,600 workers, including those with the
provincial government departments, the Labrador School Board, and Health
Labrador. It is effective from April 1, 2002 and expires on March 31, 2005, and
includes provisions for increased travel allowance and places a focus on
enhancing benefits for employees who work in isolated communities. The annual
cost of this agreement is approximately $8.65 million.
Mr. Speaker, the Labrador Benefits Agreement was first established in 1990.
This latest agreement will help address recruitment and retention concerns in
Labrador brought about by the higher cost of living and isolation in the region.
Mr. Speaker, I must commend my colleague, the President of Treasury Board,
and her staff for their hard work in negotiating this agreement. In the last
twenty-two months, our government has successfully negotiated thirty-two
contracts with unions representing more than 37,000 public sector workers.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker, we have provided our unionized workers with
their greatest salary increase in over a decade. Our government is committed to
maintaining a strong public service through recognition of their hard work and
by respecting the collective bargaining process.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. YOUNG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to thank the minister for a copy of his statement in advance. As
the minister has said, this is a continuation of a program that was first
established in 1990 and it will continue for another two years, which is very
good news. It is much needed to take care of the special needs of the public
sector employees in Labrador and put to rest any concerns they have. This will
rightfully see the continuation of a strong public service in Labrador.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I, too, would like to thank the minister for an advance copy of his
statement.
This benefits agreement, Mr. Speaker, goes a long way to restoring confidence
in the public sector workers in Labrador and, as stated in the statement, will
address recruitment and retention. It will also provide an opportunity to bring
the public sector workers in line with that of benefits received by most of the
private sector workers in Labrador. I would also like to commend the union
negotiators and their members -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. COLLINS: By leave, Mr. Speaker.
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. COLLINS: - commend the union negotiators and their members for the
hard work that they put into reaching this agreement and for their patience in
getting an agreement that took quite a while to reach.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural
Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House to advise members that
the Province's Small Business Advisory Council held its first meeting in St.
John's on Friday past.
One of the priorities for action outlined in government's Renewal Strategy
for Jobs and Growth released in March 2001 was the commitment to establish a
Small Business Advisory Council. Appointments to the council were made in
October 2002. Mr. Speaker, given how busy these people are, the first time all
council members were available to meet was last week.
The council is a sounding board for new small business development
initiatives being contemplated by government and will advise me, in my capacity
as Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development, on appropriate measures
government should consider to help stimulate and grow the small business sector
in our Province.
Mr. Speaker, the members of the council represent a broad range of small
business enterprises from across the Province and include the following
representatives: Harvey Short of Paradise, who is serving as the Chair; Darrell
Bennett of Happy Valley-Goose Bay; Karen Matthews of Corner Brook; Des Dillon of
Gander; Graham Wood of Grand Bank, Gordon Hopkins of Bay Roberts; Cathy Ivany of
St. John's, Nena Abundo of St. John's; Marilyn Thompson, who is representing
the Newfoundland and Labrador Chamber of Commerce; George Yates of Springdale,
representing Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters; and Brad George, representing
the Canadian Federation of Independent Business.
At the first meeting, we discussed a wide range of important topics related
to growing the small business sector in Newfoundland and Labrador, including
government programs and services available to small businesses, recent budget
initiatives including the establishment of a Red Tape Reduction Committee,
workers' compensation issues and access to capital for small businesses.
This initiative reflects government's ongoing commitment to growing the
Province's small business community and builds on the aggressive pro-business
measures we have implemented over the past several years, including the new
measures announced in Budget 2003.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the members of the Small Business Advisory Council for
sharing their time and expertise with government to ensure that the small
business sector is provided every opportunity to be successful.
I was pleased to participate in this successful first meeting and look
forward to working closely with the council as we work together in the best
interests of small business in Newfoundland and Labrador.
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, let me first join with the minister in complimenting and
congratulating the individuals mentioned in her release for taking their time to
donate to the people of the Province and to share their, I guess, invaluable
experience as small business men and women in terms of what direction a
government should be moving.
Mr. Speaker, to the real issue, there is nothing like the eve of an election
to stimulate a government. Fourteen years into a mandate and now they are
talking about a Red Tape Reduction Committee. Fourteen years into a mandate and
they are starting to talk about what we can do to the sector to our economy that
employs 85 per cent of the people in the Province. Well, I would say to the
government, it is about time they woke up.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Frankly, Mr. Speaker, what we have heard in the last
several years, in particular in the last two, in speaking to small business,
here is what they want: They want a government to stop taxing jobs. Eliminate
the payroll tax, is what people have said to us.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. E. BYRNE: They want to have access to incentives from government
based upon what they know, not based upon who they know, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. E. BYRNE: By leave?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.
MR. SPEAKER: No leave.
The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to join in recognizing the importance of the role of small business in
our Province, but I do have to question, when the government says it was one of
its priorities in March, 2001 -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HARRIS: I do have to question, Mr. Speaker, when the government says
it was one of its priorities in March, 2001, that they did not appoint the
council until October, 2002, and the first meeting did not take place for two
years later. I really wonder how high it is on the government's agenda.
Also, Mr. Speaker, in terms of representation , I do not see anyone here from
the West Coast, other than one person -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. HARRIS: - and no representation from the Northern Peninsula.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the Premier.
If I may, Mr. Speaker, before I start, I would like to acknowledge the staff
and the students from St. Patrick's in Bay Bulls. That is where my family came
from, and that is where my roots are all from, so it is certainly nice to see
you here and hopefully some day we will see some of the students actually
sitting here in the House. Myself and Mr. Sullivan will be ready in about
fifteen or twenty years to step down, so there will be some seats available.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, when the government brought down its election budget just two
weeks ago, they justified quadrupling the deficit and increasing the Province's
debt to well over $11 billion by saying they were only listening to the will of
the people. In that same breath, the Minister of Finance said she plans to
privatize the provision of long-term care in Corner Brook.
Mr. Speaker, the Romanow Commission into Canada's health care system
recently reported that the overwhelming majority of Canadians do not want a
private health care system. My question for the Premier is this: Why is it that
his government is prepared to listen to the people in order to justify its
election budget, but is not prepared to listen to the people when it comes to
privatizing health care? Could it be that government is only interested in
listening to the people when it suits their political agenda?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am delighted that the Leader of the Opposition is asking questions about
long term care in Corner Brook, because all through the last year or so the
public record, which is stated here in the local papers, The Western Star
and The HUMBER LOG , indicates that he has changed his position with
respect to whether or not long term care is a priority in Corner Brook on five
occasions so far.
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting today that the Leader of the Opposition would
want to completely and totally misrepresent what we are trying to accomplish in
Corner Brook. What we are trying to accomplish in Corner Brook, Mr. Speaker, is
publicly funded health care available for people who badly need long term care
in the area, also in Avalon North and here in St. John's; publicly funded
health care done in a manner that involves the private sector so that we can
afford to do it today rather than have people wait another five, six, eight,
ten, twelve or fifteen years.
Mr. Speaker, if he now wants to explain to the people of Corner Brook and the
people of the Province what his position is on the provision of long term care
and how important it is and whether or not it is a priority, I would gladly hear
it, as would, I am sure, the people of the Province.
Our position is clear. We understand there is a great need, we understand the
need is immediate and we understand that there is an opportunity to provide for
that need through publicly funded health care, Mr. Speaker, properly provided so
that there would be the same level or an improved level of care managed and run
so we can start doing it now, instead of waiting for ten or fifteen years, 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, there is a very big difference between publicly funded and
publicly controlled health care and publicly funded and privately controlled
health care.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: For the record, Mr. Speaker, our government will build that
long term health care facility in Corner Brook, but it won't be built by
buddies of the Liberal Government of this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, on March 18 of this year, the Newfoundland and
Labrador Federation of Labour issued a policy statement on public and private
partnerships, which specific references to the consequences of privatizing
health care. In that report, John Loxley, the Author of The Other Side of the
Ledger , said that such arrangements are an expensive way of cooking the
books, by converting capital costs to lease costs, increasing -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary, I ask him to get to his question.
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
- increasing long term expenditures and leaving the real financial burden for
taxpayers and future governments.
Mr. Speaker, would the Premier not agree that the private sector is in
business to make a profit and by privatizing long-term health care facilities,
it is the citizens and government that pays the premiums to these private
developers?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I do appreciate when the Leader of the Opposition speaks because every time
he speaks we do learn something a bit new about the type of person he is and the
kinds of views of the world that he does share.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, what we have heard him describe today is
that he feels when a government provides for something as important as long-term
care, that they are spending their own money - talk about his Liberal money.
There is no such thing as the government's money or Liberal money or PC money.
It is the people's money, Mr. Speaker, that we are trying to spend on what the
people have decided to be a priority for them.
Mr. Speaker, I am sure now -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER GRIMES: I am sure now -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I must say, if members continue to interrupt the Chair will have no other
choice but to name them.
The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am sure now that the people of Corner Brook, the committee that I met with
when I was there on Thursday evening, all the council I met with on Friday who
are trying to find a way to work with the government so that we can provide for
the long-term care needs in Corner Brook, I am sure they are delighted now to
know that the official position today - because it will change again I am sure
three or four more times in the next little while - from the Leader of the
Opposition, is that he is opposed to what the government of the day is trying to
do to meet the needs immediately.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer, quickly.
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, maybe we are getting an insight into some of
the platform. We have heard about a department of small business, that will
answer directly to the Leader of the Opposition, if he ever becomes the Premier
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer, quickly.
PREMIER GRIMES: - and we have heard that they are going to build a
long-term care facility in Corner Brook. So maybe he would lay out the rest of
the platform 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.
Mr. Speaker, officials from Western Memorial Health Care Corporation told me
that their estimates show that it will cost government $50 million to $55
million to construct a new long-term health care facility in Corner Brook. Yet,
on Friday, the Premier told a committee or a group of stakeholders that it could
cost taxpayers $70 million to construct the facility using a public-private
partnership.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, if it is cheaper to use the private sector to
build long-term care facilities, why is this proposal costing taxpayers an extra
$15 million or $20 million? Is it that the profit margin he expects to give a
private company is $15 million to $20 million of taxpayers' money?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In answering the question, let me point out again the desperate nature of the
Leader of the Opposition. The headline in the Western Star ,
"Long-term care facility for city is not a high priority: Williams."
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
PREMIER GRIMES: Let me read it again, Mr. Speaker, because we just heard
him say: If we are elected, we will build it. That is what we heard here today.
However, in the Western Star, Friday, October 18, 2002, not that long
ago, just before Christmas, "Long-term care facility for city is not a high
priority: Williams." It goes on to say - and this needs to be read into the
record, Mr. Speaker, "However, Williams has said that the problems in
health care should be looked at in a priority sequence and it may become evident
that a long-term care facility in the City of Corner Brook is not the most
pressing need at the moment."
Now, Mr. Speaker, he was brave enough to say that in October. Today, because
he wants to be opposed to the government, he is saying: If we are elected, never
mind anything else, never mind looking at the books - which is the answer he
gives for everything else -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer, quickly.
PREMIER GRIMES: - we must look at the books. We cannot make commitments
because we do not know the state of the affairs, the financial affairs of the
Province. Today he is willing to stand up and say: We will build (inaudible) in
Corner Brook.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the Premier refused to answer a $20 million
question as to where the taxpayers' money is going.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, people should not be surprised that this
government is once again attempting to privatize health care. We had seen it
before when this government contracted Trans City Holdings to construct a number
of hospitals across this Province. The courts later found that this government
contravened the Public Tender Act in order to award the contract to a company
with strong Liberal ties. It ended up costing taxpayers millions of dollars in
subsequent lawsuits.
Mr. Speaker, would the Premier not agree that the people have very good
reason to be concerned about this government's efforts to once again privatize
health care, given their deplorable record of achievement in taking care of
friends with strong Liberal connections?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I can report to the House of Assembly, to everyone gathered, and to the
people of the Province through our televised Legislature - an initiative of the
Liberal government - that what the Leader of the Opposition indicated was never
said in the meetings, Mr. Speaker. The meetings were held on Thursday evening.
The committee was delighted with the open and frank approach taken. Their
questions were asked and answered. This is what they understand. They understand
that we will not privatize health care. We will absolutely not privatize health
care, Mr. Speaker. This government will not do it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, they do understand that nobody under any
circumstances, whether the government builds it through a public tender process
or whether we find a way for someone else to build it through a call for
proposals, or an expression of interest, that the value and cost of it cannot be
determined until we get the first bids. There are some estimates that range
anywhere from $50 million to $70 million today. We are hopeful it might even be
less than that, Mr. Speaker, and that is what we would find out when we go
through a process of having an Expression of Interest and going out for actual
proposals.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer, quickly.
PREMIER GRIMES: Again, it is instructive though to see the Leader of the
Opposition being consistently inconsistent, which is the one thing we can count
on in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker. It is done and shown here again
today.
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.
For the record, I spoke with the member of that committee last night who was
very, very concerned about the privatization of health care services in Corner
Brook, and, as well, mentioned a figure of $70 million, which came from the
Premier, which he was staggered by. That is for the record, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the experience in the United States and Britain from
privatization of health care has been an erosion of services. In Britain there
has been a dramatic decline in health care services, and in the United States
numerous deaths have been attributed to substandard privatized auxiliary
services caused by malnutrition and infections. Would the Premier not agree that
as a result of the lack of public control, dietary services, cleaning services,
maintenance services and standard of care, may all suffer in order to achieve
the profit for the private sector operator?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have heard some pretty good attempts at fearmongering before, but when we
are talking about long-term care and our elderly people, Mr. Speaker, who need
the care and are looking forward to having it provided in quality modern
facilities, I think it is absolutely disgraceful what is being presented here
today in the manner of fearmongering.
Mr. Speaker, what the people of the Province do know is this, we have a
constant position. We have indicated that we treat this as a priority. It will
be publicly funded health care. We are not interested in private health care. We
are not interested in anything other than national standards for health care
anywhere in the Province, guaranteed by the government, whatever arrangement is
there. Unlike the Leader of the Opposition who, when he was asked by the same
paper whether it was a priority or not, wrote a letter to the editor in which he
gave two different positions in the same letter. One saying: I cannot give a
commitment to this because I do not know how much money we will have to work
with if I form the government; and in the same letter, the next paragraph
saying: however, I want to assure the residents in Corner Brook that a new
long-term facility is a priority for me.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer.
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I know he wants to be everything to
everybody everyday. But, Mr. Speaker, he has to make (inaudible) he stands.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, government say that privatizing health care
services will result in a more efficient and a less expensive delivery of
services. Based on this government's record of achievement in privatizing
health care, the Trans City experience shows that privatizing is not cheaper. In
fact, the cost of those lawsuits advertised was nearly $20 million.
Mr. Speaker, can the Premier confirm that costs will, in fact, be managed by
hiring people with low levels of training to provide patient care? Is that how
the Premier plans to cut costs?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I do understand why the members opposite are getting somewhat embarrassed by
the line of questioning. Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition now wants to
insult the people who are providing long-term care to the people of Newfoundland
and Labrador in our facilities today. The staff mixes consist of nurses,
licensed practical nurses and personal care attendants. The commitment that we
have given to the people in Corner Brook is that national standards for staffing
will be guaranteed. That is what will be in the proposal that goes out for an
Expression of Interest, that they absolutely have to provide a standard of
service that is there, that meets the national standards.
In Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, in every single area, the people
of the Province would be delighted, would be absolutely delighted, if the
government could stand up and say that in this area of service we are meeting
the national standard, in this area of service we are meeting the national
standard, in this area of service we are meeting the national standard.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer.
PREMIER GRIMES: The national standard will be guaranteed, and that puts
nobody at risk, not here, not in Nova Scotia, not in Ontario, not in Alberta,
not in British Columbia, nowhere, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier to take his seat.
PREMIER GRIMES: It is a national standard that is guaranteed.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I just have a couple of brief questions for the Minister of Education.
Minister, it has been brought to our attention that there is a serious
problem with respect to a school in your district, namely the school on New
World Island. It has been brought to our attention that the problem I am
speaking of is one of mould. This school, as I understand it, is 60 per cent to
70 per cent complete and this issue of mould is one that is of great concern to
the residents in the area. I would ask the minister, firstly, could he confirm
if, in fact, this is the case, and, secondly, explain the seriousness and the
extent to which this particular problem exists?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The hon. member is correct; there is a problem with mould and it occurred
during the construction phase of the building. We know what the problem is. We
have had experts in there examining it, and we have a program set in place to
remediate that problem and it should start as early as next Monday.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I understand that the brick, or certainly some of the interior brick, has to
be removed, siding has to be removed, much of the structural features have to be
remediated, which leads to the question, I guess, of: Who is really responsible?
My next question, I guess, is really to either the Minister of Education or
perhaps to the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation. How is it, on a
multi-million dollar project, a capital works project, an $8 million project,
that we see a situation where mould exists? Where is the monitoring? Where is
the inspection regime? Where is the management and maintenance of such a
project? How can this happen, and what assurances will the people of this
Province be given that major projects like this will not experience what has
taken place in New World Island at potentially the cost of hundreds of thousands
of dollars, perhaps leading to $1 million, of Newfoundlanders' and
Labradorians' money?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. REID: I will let my colleague, the Minister of Works, Services and
Transportation, address the issue of who is to blame for this; but, Mr. Speaker,
I can tell you when you are talking about bricks having to be removed and siding
having to be removed, I would like to assure the people of New World Island that
we will remove the whole building if that is what is required to make that
building a safe place for the kids of New World Island to go to school.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Each Member of the House of Assembly has the opportunity to hire a political
assistant. Some members who are a part of Cabinet have the opportunity to hire
more than one. The Premier, the Leader of the Opposition, the Leader of the NDP,
all have the right to hire their political staff as they wish. Civil service
positions on the other hand, Mr. Speaker, should fall under rules and
regulations of the Public Service Commission. To do otherwise is an affront to
the union movement and an insult to career civil servants.
Contrary to remarks made by the Premier in a March edition of The Telegram ,
that the Liberals have not used contractual positions as a way of stacking the
public service with Liberal supporters, I have to admit that just the opposite
of this statement is true.
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Premier today why his government continues to
ignore the Public Service Commission and continues to find jobs for loyal
Liberal supporters in the public service without going through a competition
process?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I think we dealt with that issue appropriately last week.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, with the list I have, we could be here all next
week dealing with this issue.
Mr. Speaker, in view of the Premier's statement in The Telegram , I
would like to ask the Premier: How does he explain the appointment of a former
executive assistant to the present Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods to
the position of policy advisor to that same minister? This position, which pays
an annual salary in excess of $50,000, was not advertised or competed for. Can
the Premier please tell us who held this position before the recent appointment
was put in place?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I say again, I believe we dealt with that appropriately last week.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Placentia
& St. Mary's.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, can the Premier confirm for this House that
even though several Cabinet ministers have recently vacated their portfolios,
that all - I repeat, all - except two persons that were hired as political
appointments, such as executive assistants, public relations people and personal
assistants, have been "taken care of" through the public service?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I indicate again the exact line of questioning last week, and we do know that
the member himself was taken care of when he was defeated in the last election.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Premier.
Ten years ago, when the Liberal government tried to privatize Newfoundland
and Labrador Hydro, we took the position that, instead, Newfoundland and
Labrador Hydro should be taking over Newfoundland Power. Now, Mr. Speaker, the
Consumer Advocate appointed by this government has stated that tens of millions
of dollars per year could be saved by a merger of the two entities, Mr. Speaker,
and the Consumers Group for Fair Gas Prices has also agreed with that position.
Can the Premier indicate that this is a policy that should be pursued by this
government? Do they not recognize that a fully integrated public energy
corporation could be more efficient and also a vehicle for conservation, for
economic growth in this Province, and also enable us to have greater control
over our own energy policy in Newfoundland and Labrador?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I appreciate the question. I do understand the comments were made by the
Consumer Advocate, I believe, on Friday. Certainly, the Minister of Mines and
Energy will look into the matter. My understanding of it is that everyone who
was in this Legislature at that time - that there was no vote and no action
taken to privatize. The debate was held. The people who were here at the time
were certainly opposed to it, in terms of Opposition members. However, the
Leader of the Opposition at that time, out in the public sector, the private
sector, was supporting the government of the day, and Premier Wells, and
encouraging him to continue on with the privatization of Hydro. So we will
certainly investigate the relative merits of what the Consumer Advocate has put
forward.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Why can the people of Newfoundland and Labrador not look forward to their own
energy corporation, just as the people of Quebec have Hydro-Quebec to be an
important engine of economic growth for their province, to control energy
policy, to be big enough and strong enough to be able to market Labrador power
and to also try and get some control over the Upper Churchill contract? Why can't
we have that kind of vision, as a corporation that we own for the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador, that includes Newfoundland and Labrador Power and
doesn't just feed the needs of Fortis to have worldwide ambitions and fill the
pockets of their shareholders? Why can't we do that, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. NOEL: Mr. Speaker, as hon. members know, we have a review of the
electricity policy for the Province undergoing for some time now. I am in the
process of reviewing what has been done and will be making recommendations to
government in a short time.
The hon. member should know that our commitments are to make sure that we use
Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to the best advantage of the citizens of our
Province and that we organize it in a fashion so that it delivers power to rate
payers in our Province at the cheapest possible price.
We are prepared to look at whatever options may be appropriate to determine
how that may be done. We issued a consultation paper about a year ago. In that,
we raised a number of options including the option of combining the two
electricity firms operating in the Province. That is something that is now being
addressed by hearings before the Public Utilities Board. It is something that is
being addressed in the advice that I will be giving to government in the near
future, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Signal
Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, a couple of days ago a representative of
Newfoundland Power speculated on whether or not Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro
was for sale. Will the minister, or will the Premier, confirm that there have
been no indications given by this government to Newfoundland Power or Fortis as
to whether Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is for sale? Will he ensure to the
people of this Province that they are not contemplating the sale of Newfoundland
and Labrador Hydro?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. NOEL: Yes, Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is not for
sale.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. NOEL: If there is to be a combination -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the minister now to conclude his answer.
MR. NOEL: If there is to be a combination of these two organizations, Mr.
Speaker, it will not be done under the watch of the member of this House who
stood up and fought against the privatization of Hydro when it was being -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the minister now to conclude his answer quickly.
MR. NOEL: Apparently, Mr. Speaker, what the Premier is saying is right,
contrary to the position of the Leader of the Opposition at that time who
apparently was in favour of privatizing Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.
Mr. Speaker, we are going to do whatever makes the most sense for our
Province, and whatever enables us to use Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to
accomplish as much as possible for the Province, and whatever is necessary to
make sure that electricity rates in the Province are as low as possible.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.
In March of 1999, a special warrant was issued to provide seed money for the
Newfoundland and Labrador Legacy Nature Trust. Of course, these warrants were
issued contrary to the Financial Administration Act, as there was no emergency.
In fact, the Legacy was not formally established until some time later and money
was locked away for safe keeping in the executive offices.
Each year, since 2000, the Legacy Nature Trust has accessed $200,000 a year
from the public Treasury for a total of $800,000.
Article 12 of the
incorporation documents requires the directors of the Legacy Nature Trust to
submit an annual report to the government together with its audited financial
statements. In the interest of openness and transparency, will the minister
confirm that government has received an annual report with audited statements
for the past four years; and, since this Trust has received $800,000 of
taxpayers' money, will the minister table these documents in the House of
Assembly?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.
MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, in the interest of ensuring that the public have
a clear understanding of the Legacy Nature Trust, I think the first issue I
should address is the fact that the Trust was given $1 million just in that
vein, in trust, and they were asked to use this trust to raise money for the
purposes of increasing conservation work and bringing money into the Province,
particularly to work for stewardship to develop it throughout the Province. They
were permitted, under the terms of the agreement that structured this, to spend
up to $200,000 a year on administration, as the member has referred to. Mr.
Speaker, what I will confirm is that, because of a slow start-up with the Legacy
Nature Trust, in fact, they have not spent $800,000, as the member opposite is
suggesting. They have been prudent with the use of the money, and they have
nurtured it in order to use it for just the purpose that we have asked them to
do, which is to bring in new dollars for conservation, for natural heritage. In
fact, Mr. Speaker, at this point they have spent approximately $200,000 in
total.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.
MR. E. BYRNE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, in response to Ministerial Statements today, while I was up
speaking, the Premier shouted out: Why don't you sit down and shut up out of
it, boy. Mr. Speaker, it truly is an unparliamentary comment and I ask you to
ask the Premier to withdraw it.
Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, let me say this to the Premier, that if he starts
issuing advice like that, maybe it is he, himself, when he is out gallivanting
around or talking to different groups, who should take his own advice.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair did not hear any such comments, and therefore there is no point of
order.
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I understand you have ruled there is no
point of order and, of course, we fully concur with the ruling and appreciate
it, because no such commentary was made. So, Mr. Speaker -
MR. E. BYRNE: That was so said, and everyone over there (inaudible).
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
What we are aware of and what we are witnessing is a standard diversionary
tactic by the Opposition when they are having a bad day, to try to suggest
something happened that did not happen in this Legislature, Mr. Speaker, and I
take offense to it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. LUSH: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, on a point of order.
MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I could have -
MR. E. BYRNE: You know you said it (inaudible).
PREMIER GRIMES: Oh, you saw something, did you? You saw something!
MS J.M. AYLWARD: He is lip-reading now.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. WILLIAMS: That is not easy to do.
MR. NOEL: Oh, that is not easy to do. He is no Andy Wells.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Government House Leader, on a point of order.
MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order related to Question
Period. As is my normal inclination, I stand after the Question Period, which
the rules of the House advocate.
I could have risen many times on this particular point of order, several
times during this session. It is a matter that I thought I should have risen on,
because hon. members may not be familiar with it. A lot of hon. members may not
be familiar, that welcoming people to the Galleries, welcoming people to the
House of Assembly, is the prerogative of Mr. Speaker. That is why we have
developed, over the years, the procedure of writing notes to Mr. Speaker to tell
him and inform him that somebody is in the Galleries and would he please welcome
them.
As with all parliamentary rules, that is done for a very, very particular
reason. It is to prevent members, Mr. Speaker, from playing to the Galleries, as
members might do, and cause all kinds of disorder. So, a tradition in this House
of welcoming members to he Gallery is the prerogative of Mr. Speaker, and to do
otherwise is an offence to the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition today - and though that might be
done from time to time, the place that it must be prevented, the place that it
cannot be allowed, is in Question Period, when we are to ask questions without
any
preambles and not to take up unnecessary time of the House by welcoming
visitors which is against the rules.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader, to the point of order.
MR. E. BYRNE: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, in the ten years that I have been here, anyway, while that is a
rule and a parliamentary rule, I have witnessed, Mr. Speaker, lenience being
provided by the Chair. For example, on many occasions I have seen ministers
opposite, and even former ministers, not only make Ministerial Statements but
bring people into the gallery, refer to their presence, say what a great job
they are doing to support government programs.
The point that I am making is this: If we going to get so picky to the point
where we cannot even welcome people to the gallery, as private members, and we
want to enforce the rules in Beauchesne and under our own Standing
Orders, well, Mr. Speaker, we certainly can do that. I am not sure that the
people of the Province ultimately will win if we want to become so narrow-
minded in our thinking that, in referencing someone in the gallery, or a
visitor, that any member, whether it be the Leader of the Opposition or any
member of this House, irrespective of what side they sit on, cannot make a
passing reference to say it is nice to see so-and-so in the gallery, if it comes
to that, I am not convinced that sort of narrow- mindedness is really going to
work for the people of the Province or for members in this Legislature.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. LUSH: I am as reasonable as any person is this House, and understand
when we can make those passing references, Mr. Speaker, and probably it is
because we did not nip it in the bud that we had it today in Question Period.
I say, Mr. Speaker, Question Period is not a place to allow it, above all
other places in the House, because of the reasons that I have articulated
earlier. Because of the reasons why we leave that responsibility to Mr. Speaker,
it ought not be permitted in Question Period.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
To the point of order, the Chair has noticed on a number of occasions
particularly in this last session that members on both sides of the House have
taken it on themselves, even after the Chair has introduced people and welcomed
them to the Assembly, to do that again for a second time, and even on a third
time it has occurred.
As the hon. Government House Leader has said, this is not an acceptable
practice in most jurisdictions although there are some jurisdictions that do
have a part of their Standing Orders and their Routine Proceedings where members
can introduce distinguished people from their own constituencies. That is not a
general practice in this House and it has not been a general practice in most of
the jurisdictions across Canada. As a matter of fact, in some jurisdictions, in
any reference to the gallery, members would be immediately reprimanded for doing
that. So, I ask hon. members to refrain from referencing people in the gallery
and leave that to the Chair.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to table the 2001-2002 Annual Report for the
Department of Justice. I am also pleased to table for hon. members, five reports
from agencies which report to the Department of Justice, namely: the Sheriff's
Office, Legal Aid, Human Rights Commission, Provincial Court, and the Public
Utilities Board.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.
MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am pleased to table for your information today the 2001-2002 Annual Report
for the Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, the Municipal Assessment
Agency, and the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation. Copies have been
forwarded for distribution to the members through Mr. John Noel, Clerk of the
Assembly.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to table the 2001-2002 Annual
Report for the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.
I am also pleased to table for hon. members, six reports from agencies
reporting to my department: the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council; the
Newfoundland and Labrador Heritage Corporation; the Newfoundland and Labrador
Film Development Corporation; the Marble Mountain Development Corporation; the
Special Celebrations Corporation, and the Heritage Foundation of Newfoundland
and Labrador.
Many of my department's activities require close co-operation and
partnership with public bodies and with other levels of government, and I want
to acknowledge the dedication and hard work of these public bodies and
volunteers in all areas during the mandate on the review.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Petitions
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. The petition reads: To the House of
Assembly of Newfoundland and Labrador, in legislative session convened;
The petition of the undersigned residents of Lethbridge, Bonavista Bay, in
the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
WHEREAS the stretch of gravel road situated in Lethbridge between the
Discovery Trail and Route 234 is in deplorable condition and in desperate need
of paving;
WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador
to pave the approximately point seven kilometres of road located between the
Discovery Trail and Route 234.
And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, this is the second petition that I have presented here. I think
I presented one in the last session. This is the first one this session, as it
relates to this 700 metres of gravel road situated in Lethbridge. What it is, is
a road where in excess of forty people live, 700 metres of road that travels
beside Route 230. It is a gravel road. There have been many new homes built on
this
section of road, and the people are asking that their road be paved. They
are not asking that the road be upgraded. The road is in fairly good condition
now, for a gravel road, as far as the width and the surface of the road. What
they are asking is that they be afforded the privilege of being able to go and
open their windows in the summertime. They are asking that they be afforded the
privilege of being able to go and have clothes hung on the line in the
summertime.
When the weather dries and when we get into June and July, the Department of
Works, Services and Transportation will go and put calcium chloride on this
section of roadway. While, yes, it will keep the dust under control, Mr.
Speaker, then the residents who live on this particular road are faced with
another problem where all of this calcium chloride, and the mud that is produced
from it, is then tracked in over the homes where people live in that area.
Mr. Speaker, people are asking for the government to look at this
section of
road in this year's capital works budget. It is 700 metres, point seven of a
kilometre, and ask that they be afforded not the luxury but the necessity of
having some pavement put on this
section of road where there is in excess of
twenty houses and over forty people live. Mr. Speaker, they are not asking for
water and sewer. They are not asking for sidewalks. They are not asking for
streetlights. All they are asking for is that their road be brought up to a
standard to compare with road conditions that should exist in the year 2003.
Mr. Speaker, those people have asked and met with me about this
section of
road. They have met with the former Minister of Works, Services and
Transportation. They have written letters. They asked for this road to be
included last year.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. FITZGERALD: Just a minute to clue up, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
MR. FITZGERALD: They asked to be included last year, but the government
of the day saw fit not to include that
section of roadway. So they are pleased,
through their member, through me, to ask the government and ask the Minister of
Works, Services and Transportation to include this
section of roadway, point
seven of a kilometre, to be paved this year under the government's Capital
Works project.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment.
MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have a petition today from some 1,471 residents of Western Newfoundland,
from the Corner Brook-Humber Valley-Bay of Islands region, down through
Stephenville, Port aux Basques, up the coast as far as St. Anthony.
It is a petition that I have presented several times in this House before
calling upon the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to begin immediate
construction of a long-term health care facility. It was my intent simply to
table this today because, in my view, the events of the Budget past has
overtaken this petition because the government of this Province has made a
commitment that we will, in fact, initiate the construction, or the call for
proposals, expressions of interest, for the building of a long-term health care
facility in Western Newfoundland.
Mr. Speaker, the events of time has somewhat overtaken the petition, but I
was rather disturbed, disappointed and, frankly, most upset, by the comments
that I have been hearing today in this House of Assembly regarding the long-term
health care facility in Corner Brook.
The whole notion of the P3 approach to building a facility in Corner Brook is
the option that is available to us. It is about the only option, Mr. Speaker. If
we were to wait until we get the dollars available in our budget to build that
facility, we might build it in five, ten or fifteen years from now. Too late,
Mr. Speaker, much, much too late. We need to get on with it now.
The facility which is being proposed is not privatized health care. It
is a building being built for the seniors of Western Newfoundland who are in
desperate need of such a facility. It will be publicly funded, Mr. Speaker. The
people who can go into the O'Connell Centre today, the people can go into the
Interfaith today, will be the same people who can go into this facility. There
will be no difference in the way in which they go in. They will write the same
means test as they would today. There is nothing that will change. I cannot
express the words, and I cannot control myself to the extend to express my
disgust with what I was hearing here today. I will not go that far.
Mr. Speaker, quality health care is what we need for our citizens in Western
Newfoundland and that is what the P3 proposal will deliver: Long-term health
care, quality service for our citizens. It will not be provided at low
standards, because the inference was made that the people of this facility will
somehow receive substandard care. Nonsense! Absolute nonsense!
MR. J. BYRNE: Not true.
MR. MERCER: Read Hansard, the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. MERCER: Just a moment to clue up, Mr. Speaker.
I just want to present this petition. I strongly support it behalf of -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present a petition on behalf of a number of residents of our
Province who suffer from MS, Alzheimer's and other diseases. I have presented
this petition many times in the past four years in the House of Assembly, and I
will continue to do so on their behalf as long as the inequity that exists today
between people of our Province and the rest of this country exist.
Mr. Speaker, I have to say on behalf of all these people who signed these
petitions, I have to express on their behalf my disappointment and their
disillusionment with the government of this Province in failing to respond to
their needs. We hear the Minister of Finance talk everyday in this House, and
the Premier, about how this Budget responded to the will of the people. Well, I
can say on behalf of all the people who suffer from MS and Alzheimer's in this
Province, that the Budget did not reflect their concerns very well. They did
make an effort to get out and meet with the minister when she was doing the
pre-budget consultations. They were looking forward to at least this government
making a start that will put the citizens of this Province on par with every
other jurisdiction in this country.
Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious situation that exists in our Province
today because people find themselves having to make some very hard and difficult
choices on whether to provide for their family or take a prescription drug they
need for their illness - a position that nobody in this day and age should find
themselves in. This has caused undue stress on families in this Province. It has
led to breakups of families because of the pressures and stresses involved from
a financial perspective where they have to make the choice between providing for
their families or purchasing a drug that they require.
Mr. Speaker, this government could have made a start down the road to
expanding the drug prescription plan coverage in this area. It is no longer
acceptable for people who get up each day and go to work to try to earn a living
and provide for their families to have to reduce themselves to income support
levels before this government will step in and offer any assistance whatsoever.
It is not acceptable. It is time that this government realized and recognized
the hardships that working people of this Province have and at least make an
effort to address some of these hardships by way of expanding the prescription
drug coverage in this Province.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, no other province in this country inflicts that
hardship on their citizens. Every single jurisdiction has coverage for these
drugs. It is to the point where people in this Province, with good paying jobs,
are looking at the possibility of resigning from these jobs -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. COLLINS: By leave. Just a minutes to clue up.
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. COLLINS: It is to the point, Mr. Speaker, sadly, that people with
good paying jobs in this Province are looking at the possibility of having to
quit these jobs and move to another province to get employment at a lower rate
of pay, at a lesser salary than they are earning here, simply to have a better
quality of life. They will have the ability to provide the things that their
family needs. They will have the ability to probably provide something for their
children's education, to put away some money for retirement, not having to
spend it all on the purchase of a drug that they do in this Province.
Mr. Speaker, I say to this government, that is a shame. It is shame on them
and it is time that they recognize the needs of the people of this Province and
did things so that people who require these drugs would be able to get some help
in the purchase of them.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
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.
Mr. Speaker, today I would like to present a petition on behalf of the
communities of North Boat Harbour and Wild Bight. Of course, it is a petition
related to the road conditions in the area. I will just read it briefly. It is
very short.
The petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador;
WHEREAS the roads in the communities of Wild Bight and North Boat Harbour are
in a deplorable condition; and
WHEREAS the residents of the communities are concerned about the safety of
their children, who have to take the bus to the attend school every day; and
WHEREAS the residents of these communities were promised in 2000, by the
government, that the surveying, upgrading and paving of these roads would begin
within two years;
WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador,
and in particular the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, to make
these roads a top priority and begin the upgrading and paving immediately.
And as in duty bound your petitions will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, this is approximately a ten kilometre road from Cook's Harbour
through Wild Bight and into North Boat Harbour. It is a very, very, very old
road. I suspect it is probably close on forty years old, and in that forty-year
period, except for the fuel that has been burned travelling graders and
snowploughs and those sorts of equipment over it, there as been very little, if
any, work done on the road.
Mr. Speaker, the people here, as they reference in their petition, are very
concerned about the condition of the roads from the perspective of their school
buses travelling over it. I am sure that if the Minister of Transportation
looked at the cost of maintaining this road, the cost of providing a grader, the
cost of snow clearing - and this is an area where snow clearing is extremely
costly. The road is so low that it is actually below the ditch, practically, in
a lot of cases, and any amount of snowdrift and so on, the roadblocks, really
the only way to keep this road open beyond one lane at most times of the year,
from early February until late April, it is only able to be maintained by a snow
blower.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to impress upon the government, and impress upon
the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, the need for the upgrading
of this road. Certainly, as the people said, they had been promised this in the
fall of 2000 when the road out to Cook's Harbour was upgraded and finally
paved. At that time, a commitment was made to them then to have work done on
that road. Surveying was certainly done on that road and there are indications
from various sources that the cost of upgrading this road would be very small
compared to some other areas of the Province. There is no bog that has to be
taken out, there is very little in the way of blasting that has to be done, and
it would be a very inexpensive road to upgrade, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
That is my petition.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I, too, would like to present a petition to the House today, following on
some petitions that I presented here last week. The prayer of the petition reads
as follows:
To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland in Parliament
assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of the Province of
Newfoundland and Labrador ask for the House of Assembly to accept the following
prayer:
We, the undersigned citizens of St. Mary's Bay Centre area, hereby draw
your attention to the unsatisfactory and unsafe conditions as they now exist on
Route 90, St. Mary's Bay.
WHEREAS it is the duty of government through the enactment and enforcement of
the Highway Safety Act to protect its citizens, not only from commuters but also
from unsafe highways; and
WHEREAS the safety of the travelling public must be the number one priority
of any government;
THEREFORE, your petitioners ask that government provide the necessary funding
to carry out the much needed repairs to Route 90.
As in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, this is another of several petitions that have been brought to
me over the past number of weeks by people from the St. Mary's Bay Centre area
in relation to the conditions of the roads that now exist in that particular
part of my district.
Mr. Speaker, the main concern that people have put forward, and doing so here
again today in this petition, is a safety issue. We have many people who travel
back and forth. As with most parts of rural Newfoundland now, we have many
seniors living in that part of the district, Mr. Speaker, who travel back and
forth to St. John's and other parts of the Province for medical treatment. We
have many people, Mr. Speaker, who travel on buses each day to Dunne Academy in
St. Mary's from this particular
section of the district that is addressed in
this petition, and a lot of people are very concerned about the safety of those
vehicles on the highways and the safety of their own when they are driving along
in their own vehicles. The road conditions, to say the least, are deplorable
right up through St. Mary's Bay. As a matter of fact, I was down that way this
weekend, Mr. Speaker, and found that with the spring thaw it is getting worse
and worse each passing day.
I ask the minister, when he puts into place this year's provincial roads
program, to take into consideration the concerns of the people of St. Mary's
Bay Centre and indeed throughout the district, especially the people who put
forward this petition today, and to ask him to look at providing funding to
address the concerns that people have in that area, to put funding in place to
address the safety issues that people have in that area. I think it makes
complete sense to say, Mr. Speaker, that all members of the House wish that the
people of the Province travel over safe highways. It is not the case, Mr.
Speaker, in St. Mary's Bay. In most cases here people are swerving away from
the potholes in the road and this in itself could cause some major accidents.
We have, Mr. Speaker, especially as I said, people who travel by ambulance or
through their own vehicles or through the buses and it is certainly very, very
difficult to navigate your way around -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. MANNING: Just a moment to clue up, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. MANNING: - trying to navigate their way around, Mr. Speaker, the
conditions of the roads. Certainly, it is a major concern for the people in that
area. They have asked me to present this petition here today and I do so, Mr.
Speaker, willingly and to assure the minister that there is a major concern here
in this part of my district and I hope that he addresses it, Mr. Speaker.
I take the opportunity today to invite the minister down into St. Mary's
Bay and throughout the District of Placentia & St. Mary's to have a look
first-hand, to see for himself the condition of the road and to know full well
that this is not some apparition that people have. This is a reality, this is
what they are dealing with every day, and they would certainly like for the
government to address it. Hopefully, through raising the concerns of the people
through the petition here today in the House, the minister will take it into
consideration and provide funding to address the needs of the people who travel
Route 90 in St. Mary's Bay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I, too, rise today to present a petition. This petition is mostly, I guess,
from the residents of a community in my district, the community of Marysvale,
but in particular these would be customers of a business in that community;
customers of the Hill Top Video and Variety.
This is an extension of a petition which I had originally presented in this
House some days ago.
Whereas the residents and the customers of this particular
business are still addressing it by signing the petition, I just want to present
this part of the petition that has recently come to me.
Mr. Speaker, the prayer of the petition basically is for government to look
at the state of the road that leads to this particular business. The state of
the road is such: it is a gravel road, it is on an incline, and throughout the
year, whether it is summer, spring, autumn or winter, there are problems that
arise. What the undersigned want are improvements to the conditions and physical
state of Ryan's Road in Marysvale. They have to use this road on a daily basis
to gain access to the only variety store in the area. If possible, of course,
they were hoping that it could be paved. At best, the drainage problems need to
be properly done. The bottom of the road should be paved, regardless, to prevent
future problems; and, of course, they are thanking the minister.
The minister is aware of this petition. He has a copy of it himself. It has
been addressed to him, and he has responded by indicating that he made a
commitment to have it placed on the Capital Works for the local depot. It is my
hope, and the hope of the residents of Marysvale, that this indeed will be
actioned this coming season. Actioned in the sense, Mr. Speaker, just to
maintain that road to a level whereby the people who are using this business -
and also, I might add, there are residences on this particular stretch of road
and they, too, need access back and forth to their homes. By presenting this
petition in the House there is a hope that the reminder will encourage some
action to have this addressed.
With the drainage problems, especially in the springtime, the road washes
out. The people using the road, their vehicles have incurred damage as a result
of the state of the road. More importantly, Mr. Speaker, this is a small
business. It is small enterprise in a small community. It is the only one of its
type in that community. People have to use the business; it is a convenient
store. The other point, too, is that is does create employment.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. HEDDERSON: Just one minute to clue up.
In cluing up, Mr. Speaker, again, the need is real. The amount of attention
to it is not necessarily major, and it can be covered in the budget of the local
depot. It is my hope, and hope of the residents, that this will be actioned this
coming summer so that the business can survive; that the residents and customers
using this business will not have their vehicles damaged; that the road will be
safe, and that the business can continue.
With that, I present this petition to the House in the hope that the petition
of the people will be addressed.
Thank you, 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 1, to move that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of
the government. I think the Member for Ferryland adjourned the debate.
MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1.
The hon. the Member for Ferryland.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I will get an opportunity today to say a few words on: this House approves in
general the budgetary policy of the government.
Mr. Speaker, we do not approve the budgetary policy of this government. There
are many things we do not agree with. They said a commitment made is a
commitment kept. That is not the case. There are many instances of that. I
recall back two years ago, the very first commitment the Premier of this
Province made to the people of this Province - the very first commitment upon
his leadership back in 2001 - was that he would reduce the size of Cabinet. That
was the first commitment. He was announcing his Cabinet - the very first
announcement as Premier was announced through Cabinet. Before he went on to
announce their policies and commitments, he announced a larger Cabinet. The
first promise made is a promise not kept. Now that is what - I might add. That
is a promise that was not kept.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) a promise made and a promise broken.
MR. SULLIVAN: That is right, a promise made and a promise broken.
Today I am going to take some time to go through and look at aspects of this
Budget Speech 2003, and to comment on most of these areas as I go through it. As
the minister laid out the government's twist on things and their spin on many
of the items there, I certainly would like to put out our version and our
interpretation, basically, of many of the things mentioned here.
To start off with, the very first sentence, "Mr. Speaker, this budget
will demonstrate once again that any commitment made by this government to the
people of this Province will be a commitment kept." I just commented on the
very first commitment. Far before this Budget there have been many commitments
that have not been kept.
What about the commitment they made a few years ago that they would reduce
income tax? The Premier sat in that Cabinet. They announced that they would
reduce personal income tax from 69 per cent - as it was at the time of the
federal rate - down to 62 per cent; then 55 per cent of the federal rate and 49
per cent of the federal rate. But what happened? Well, when he found out that
the federal government were reducing theirs down, they figured a percent of a
lower rate would be less revenue in our Province. What they did then, they
separated the provincial tax or divorced it from the federal tax system as a
percent. Now, there is nothing wrong with doing that. I do not have a problem
with separating it from the federal tax. We should have control over our own tax
revenues, what we take in. The federal government dropped - it is good to have
it separated and I never opposed that.
Right now, today, we are not getting what they said we are getting. In fact,
not only is it not down to 49 per cent of the federal tax, government says it is
down to 55 per cent. You ask the people today who fill out their income tax
forms - the calls I get from seniors, the calls I am getting on their tax forms
here, that I look at on a regular basis. I have had some experience in the past
being fairly familiar to assist or give advice to hundreds of people, as to what
they should do in the completing of forms, historically, before I became a
Member of the House of Assembly. That is not what has happened. Today, seniors
are telling me - there is one, in particular, who pays 500 per cent more
provincial tax than they pay federal tax. It is supposed to be down to 49 per
cent, or even 55 per cent as government says, but not 500 per cent. One
gentleman, I looked at his individual case, a gentleman I met with last year - I
spoke with another gentleman, just in this past few days, again telling me they
are paying 74 per cent, 76 per cent and 78 per cent of the federal tax. They
have done numerous things.
In the Budget here - I will get into more detail when I get to it - what have
they done? The federal government has increased the disability. This Province
never did it last year or the year before. They made an announcement today, or
in this Budget that was announced, that they are going to rise the exemption for
disability. I called for that last year. I spoke on it last year. I do believe I
asked questions in the House on this last year, the same issue, and on income
tax.
What happens to student exemptions and others? Federally, you could claim for
every student who is at university. Here is what they are doing: They are
telling us they are reducing tuition, but here is what they are doing instead.
As they are saying a reduction in tuition, education deductions you can get for
each month you attend university. Each month you are attending as a full-time
student, it is now at $400, I believe, $400 per month as a full-time student you
get. In addition, you will be able to claim your tuition. This government is
only allowing $200. If you took even 55 per cent of that $400 it would be $220.
You are only allowed to deduct $200. What they have done is reduced it in
tuition but they have not moved the scales for education deductions for tuition
and other education costs. They have not moved that accordingly, so when a
student gets in the workforce or has income and fills it out they are not
getting the benefits. When they finish and graduate, they are not getting the
benefits because they are not being allowed, or their parents who may be paying
for their education are not getting the benefits under this because they have a
different scale - much lower than federal - on education deductions.
It not only applies to that. It is not only on education deductions. This per
cent can be much more significant, I can tell you, more significant than the
tuition drop in terms of income in their pockets at present or in the future
when they will have some taxable income that they carry forward. They can carry
it forward. If they cannot use them this year, they can carry forward to future
tax years.
For instance, the maximum now you can carry forward, I think, is - or the
maximum amount that someone could use as a deduction for them - is $4,900 or
$5,000 maximum. Anything beyond that, they carry forward to when they go to work
and they have income.
We are not getting the benefits on it. You are giving it on one hand in the
tuition cut; you are taking it back in the other hand by not allowing that
deduction on income tax purposes. That, to me, is not being fair. It is talking
out of both sides of your mouth. A commitment made, they said, will be a
commitment kept. Give on one hand and take on the other hand. That is what I am
seeing with this government here. They are trying to distort the truth, trying
to camouflage it and put it out there.
The same way with disability, and seniors and other people, low income people
who would be affected by this, all of these areas are areas in which this
government has not been up front.
The very first page of the Budget says, "As a government, we have worked
too hard to strengthen social programs to begin dismantling them now, in our
view unnecessarily." What other government in the history of our Province
has done more to dismantle the social programs in our Province? This government.
What do we see? We see the longest lineups we have ever seen in our history on
health care. We see increasing lineups. We have more people waiting for
diagnostic tests, longer lineups for diagnostic tests, longer lineups to get
into hospitals. I know that emergency, even emergency mammograms, are two to
three weeks, I have been told. Two to three weeks. I have been told that urgent
cases, under scans and so on, take weeks. Emergencies, in some cases, can get
done, but certain others - if you are under fifty, there was one who was under
fifty, who could not get a mammogram. They had to wait, I think it was, over a
year or a year-and-a-half for an appointment. It was a constituent in my
district, by they way. What did she do? She went to her in-laws in Ontario, in a
small rural community with several thousand people, and got a mammogram in a few
days. Here she was told, because you are under fifty, it was almost a
year-and-a-half. That, to me, is not improving standards of health care. It is
increasing waiting lists and subjecting the people to longer waits, worse than
it has ever been before, I might add; longer waits than ever before.
Government's attitude seems to be: You do not need an MRI. We cannot
overuse equipment. Look, if you can get the best possible diagnosis, why not? If
you can get it, why not? I heard they used it on a weekend. They used it here on
a weekend for other purposes, that somebody paid for it. I have heard of dogs
having been done in there. One in the media just recently, I think it made
reference to one there, and I read the comments there. So, we are finding out
that equipment is not being used.
I have called for some time, and I have said here in this House, why do you
spend over a million dollars, in the millions of dollars, for a machine that you
only use for eight or ten hours a day? I mean, if you bought a piece of
equipment, if you were in business, and you could not get longer utilization out
of it than that? The hospital system works around the clock. There are people
sick twenty-four hours a day. You cannot tell people not to get sick in the
summertime when you reduce staff. You cannot tell them when to get sick. You do
not know those situations. Emergencies arise.
We have one now on a international scale, the SARS, Severe Acute Respiratory
Syndrome. That is one. Who knows? Hopefully it does not hit here, but all of
these are areas that we have seen here in our Province where we have been
subject to longer waiting lists. We have seen a weakening, not a strengthening,
in our social programs here in our Province.
We have more people today who are concerned about health care and access to
it. I have not heard many people, to be honest with you, at all question the
quality, and a lot of them have said many complimentary things about our health
care workers when they come out of the hospital. The biggest problem they have
is trying to get in, trying to get the scheduled surgery, doctors having
surgeries cancelled, no operating time available, having to tell their patients:
Look - and I have spoken to some - if you can get to another doctor and try to
get that done, I just cannot get the operating time. It takes too long.
Those types of things are not happening in other jurisdictions. If we are
spending more on health care than everybody else and we are not getting it,
there is something wrong within the system. There is something that needs to be
fixed in the system. That is something that needs to be done.
It is not what you spend; it is how you spend it. You can spend a million on
nothing or you can spend a million on a useful purpose. It is not just the
quantity of money you throw at the problem. If there is something not working
efficiently, the more money you throw at it, the more it guzzles up. You correct
the problem. You do not throw money at it. You correct it and deal with it
efficiently. Yes, throwing money at things will improve things, but why throw
millions of dollars in areas before you fix the problem? Let's get to the root
of the problem. Let's correct it.
It reminds me, every year out in a park, you notice that there was always a
spot where all the grass was burnt every year in a park area. They looked at and
they realized that, look, something must be done. They went out and they had to
resod it and grow it all back again. The next year, again, the same problem
there, but they fixed it and they resodded it and the whole area looked
beautiful again by the time the summer was over again. But what happened? They
did not look at the cause of it. Burning Christmas trees, throwing them and
burning them in that area destroyed it. So, when you stop it, you prohibit it,
the burning of trees in that area, you did not need to be reseeding it or
resodding it and putting the area back. Simple, basic common sense. You deal
with the cause of the problem. You do not just deal with the problem itself.
That is important.
That is why, Madam Speaker, we need to be looking at fixing the problems so
we have less problems to deal with, which means we have more money to direct
toward useful purposes. More productive use of our money; more productive use of
our time; less pressure on people working in the system; less stresses; lower
numbers; higher levels of acuity in people in hospitals. What is that causing?
It is causing more stress; longer work, more burnout. It is causing higher sick
levels. People who are off get paid, someone has to come in their place. You
have to staff at certain levels. It is compounding and increasing. Sick leave in
the system went - sometimes it has gone extreme. Why has it gone extreme?
Because people today who go to work in a hospital setting and health care are
finding they are so stressed out, the demands that are put on them, that they
need the break. Physically, if they do not get a day off they probably might end
up being off for a week, or who knows, a month.
You have to deal with the underlying cause of the problem. We have not seen -
if anyone really thinks in this Province today the minister read out in her
speech: we have worked hard to strengthen social programs to begin dismantling
them now in our view unnecessarily. No government in the history of our Province
has contributed more to longer waiting lists, to more difficulty getting into
hospitals. Why is it difficult to get into hospital? Well, they tell us that we
are moving people through quicker, but there were 3,100 hospital beds in this
Province in 1989 and today we have in the vicinity of about 1,700 hospital beds.
There was more before last summer. They never opened some. They said: we are
closing some for the summer. I said the same thing happens every summer, they
all do not get opened. They will close more, and they will shrink it and shrink
it. You have closed one hospital here in the city. Now you have two and you have
empty beds in all of these. It is great to see empty beds if there are no people
on a waiting list. It is great to see empty beds. I would like to see all of
them empty, to be honest with you, in hospitals if there are no waiting lists.
But, when there are waiting lists and people cannot get in.
We need to put increased emphasis on areas. Some initiatives have started,
some have occurred but we need to put increased initiatives on education, on the
preventative aspect and the promotional aspects in health care.
We were told when they restructured the hospital setting here in St. John's,
the hospital situation, that we would be able to afford to put more money into
the community health problem when we get these structures all organized and we
get the savings out of this system. We would be able to use those savings to
give us better health care in the long term. We could use this money. Well, from
day one I was skeptical. They told us it was going to cost $70 million to
reconfigure the health care system here in the City of St. John's, for
example. Then the $70 million, Madam Speaker, became $100 million. The $100
million grew to $120 million and $125 million. Now, it is my understanding, that
the Health Care Corporation had permission to borrow on the books of the Health
Care Corporation, permission to borrow and they had to spend - they owe
financial institutions $130 million in long-term capital debt that they were
going to pay.
We were told at the beginning - and here is what we were told at the Holiday
Inn when I attended there as health critic, I think I was at the time, or Leader
of the Party, I am not sure which. At the time I was told it was $100 million
that we were going to borrow, and we were going to pay that money off over a
twenty-year period, I think is what they used. Over twenty years it comes to
$100 million. Pay $10 million a year for twenty years. That is $200 million.
That covered interest and all; but we are going to save $10 million. By doing
this we are going to save $20 million in operation; $10 million will go toward
our debt and the other $10 million we will have saved to put back into the
system to give us a better quality of care. That is what was said to us in a
public forum. It was in the media; it was carried.
As the cost went from $100 million, $130 million, they did not have the
savings because by the time it got there, there were no savings in the system.
Here we have spent money now. We have to pay our $10 million or more a year.
Maybe it is more than $10 million now, if it is twenty years. It is probably $12
million or $14 million. I do not know the exact amount they are paying, but it
is higher a year. We have to pay more money now to finance that and where is it
going to come from? Out of the grant they get from the taxpayers of the
Province, through the Budget, through the government. That is where they get it.
The more money you pay on debt and interest, the less money you will have to
provide the ongoing services that we need on a daily basis. You are siphoning
money from operations and channeling it out, and it is going to pay for debt. It
is going to pay for bricks and mortar. The time comes when bricks and mortar are
important. We need structures to deliver health care, but have we invested
wisely? Have we made the wisest decisions?
Back in the beginning - I said at the time when the new PACS system, that is
the imaging system, when they were changing from the old Janeway. I raised the
issue and said: Why aren't they going modernized where you could look on a
computer and see the diagnostic test, the x-rays that people had? If they go to
surgery, wherever, you can access it through Picture Archiving Communications
System, I think is what it is stands for, PACS. No, they would not invest the
money. By tying everybody in - you could be in a hospital in St. John's and
someone comes in, you could access their records, their pictures and so on,
their x-rays, through a computerized system. That was important. In fact, they
could tie in the whole Province under this system. No, not at day one. They
realized after that there is a certain percentage of x-rays always lost. We are
dealing with chemicals on these. It has been reported that some of the chemicals
that are used are harmful to the health. We have staff, people running back and
forth with x-rays to people. All of this is time and money, and more efficient.
A capital investment upfront saves money in the long term. By investing today
in something modern, you can save operational costs for the next ten, fifteen or
twenty years. But, we did not do that. I have seen some allocation here for it,
and I am pleased to see that, to be honest with you, Madam Speaker. I am pleased
to see that we are trying to move more into the modern forum in picture
archiving and communication, and moving this area to another. That can be done
electronically through the system rather than sending couriers back and forth.
Lost x-rays; redo it; higher exposure to radiation. There are a whole host of
other things, the pros and cons, that I am not going to get into; but they are
all part of that.
Then we are talking about here in the Budget how we are going to strengthen
them rather than dismantle it. This government has presided over the greatest
dismantling of social programs that I have seen in some time in this Province.
We had a growing increase of people. We had health care people say: Give us the
system we had years ago. Give it back to us. Today it is a revolving door. You
are in one door and through an operating room and out the other door. Revolving
doors. You are probably still turning around by the time you come back to be
discharged. Very short periods. I am not opposed to having short periods in the
hospital if people have the support systems in their communities to do it. We
are gradually building that. I had an opportunity to participate in a primary
health care project, the nursing model, and had an opportunity to see some of
the things there and some of the aspects in that program. It was not just
dealing with curative aspects of it, dealing with rehabilitative. An important
part of that is preventive, the educational aspects of that, so that people are
aware that taking responsibility for your own health care can reap dividends
down the road. Certainly, in the long term it can be beneficial not only to
yourself, from a health perspective, but also on the bottom line of our Province
so we can use that money to direct to other areas and so on.
As we have an aging population in our Province, there is going to be an
increased need for more long-term care beds. I asked the Minister of Finance,
when she was the Minister of Health and Community Services, I said, we do not
have enough long-term care beds in our Province. That minister said, yes, we do.
We have sufficient numbers of long-term care beds.
If there is a sufficient number of long-term care beds in our Province, why
do we have to put thirty people in Chancellor Park? Why are they crying out for
more long-term care beds in the Clarenville area and in the West Coast of this
Province a new facility? I know the old one is outdated and it has probably
outlived its usefulness.
There is a need today for more long-term care beds in this Province, because
we have an aging population. Many people today are getting sick, some at younger
ages. Overall, when you visit those institutions, one of the main reasons why we
need them is because people are living longer. If you go through these homes,
there are not many younger people in the homes any more like they were at one
time. There are a lot of elderly people - people in their nineties and even in
their hundreds in those homes. A higher per cent of the population is getting
older, an increasing number, less getting in the middle category, and that is
why we need it. That is why we need more long-term care beds in the Province.
We have talked about the minister in her Budget Speech. She went on to say
that the Province led the country in economic growth in 2002 for the third time
in five years and for the fourth time now in six years. We have had good GDP
growth in our Province. We have had pretty good GDP growth, but GDP is not the
only measure of the success of an economy. When Gross Domestic Product, when a
lot of the dividends, the economic rents on our Gross Domestic Product go to the
Eastern Seaboard and the rest of the country, we are not the beneficiaries of
those particular resources that are going out of here. We are getting minimal
return. People say: Well, we are going go get so many jobs up front.
We just do not want only a certain number of jobs up front. We are told we
should get 60 per cent or 80 per cent, and we seem to be satisfied that is all
we should get. We should fight for every single job. We should fight to see that
there is other spinoff benefits that happen from our resources in the Province.
We do not want to see the main employers hiring people in the United States on
our resource. We want to see employers here in this Province hiring people
because of our resource. We have been too long being not only charitable to
others, which is good to be, but when it comes to giving away resources we do
not want to be charitable. We want to be greedy when it comes to our own
resources, we want to fight for these, because the more we can maximize the
returns the better it is for everybody here in our Province, and that is
important. With an economy that grew by 8.2 per cent last year, beyond
expectations, we still had a significant amount of deficit in our Province. We
are projecting with the top growth in the country. We are projecting this year
that our deficit will be $666 million. If you take out other basic accruals and
things, when you look at capital construction and our current account base, we
are looking at about $286 million. An economy that is growing, we are told, in
leaps and bounds! The economy is outpacing everything in Canada! We are also
outpacing everything in Canada in debt.
If it is so great, why is that happening? I heard the Premier say that we can
better afford to pay our mortgage today than we could several years ago. Well,
if you look at the Budget figure there, in the table that is shown - I think it
shows Public Sector Debt over here in Exhibit V - it shows $7.8 million. Well,
that figure, total Public Sector Debt, $7.8 million, $7.9 million, was only $4.8
million back in 1989. When you look at the total debt of our Province, from our
Public Accounts up to the most recent one, our debt is pegged at almost $9
million. When you look at all our costs there, associated with paying that debt,
it is very expensive, I might add.
We can better afford to pay our mortgage, we can better afford to pay $3
billion or $4 billion more than we did ten years ago? Our debt is going up, our
interest payments are going up and the cost of servicing that debt is going up.
We are paying on a higher debt. I wouldn't be so concerned, Madam Speaker, if
the benefits from that debt were equating into other revenues here and our
economy was growing, not only GDP but we were being the beneficiaries of that
GDP growth. We haven't been proportionate beneficiaries of the growth in GDP.
We have seen numerous concerns and numerous problems that haven't come back
here to reflect in jobs from the export of our resources. That is a major
concern.
If the best we can manage is a growing deficit in the best economic times, we
are told, this Province has ever had in growth, if we can manage to increase our
deficit four times in that period of time, how, in the name of God, I say, Madam
Speaker, can we better afford to pay our mortga