PDF Version

November 20, 2013

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLVII No. 32

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Today before we start proceedings, I want to acknowledge some guests in our

galleries. We have Ms Emma Sharkey, provincial co-ordinator of the Transition

House Association of Newfoundland and Labrador, together with Debbie and Philip

Hibbs of Conception Bay South.

Welcome to our galleries.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today we have members' statements from the Member for the

District of Bellevue; the Member for the District of Harbour Main; the Member

for the District of Bay Verte Springdale; the Member for the District of Bay

of Islands; the Member for the District of St. John's North; and the Member for

the District of Mount Pearl South.

The hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PEACH: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize the Town of Come By Chance on

winning an award for Municipal Government Carbon Footprint Challenge Contest.

Each winner proposed innovative ways to save energy, lower greenhouse gas

emissions, and reduce their own operating costs.

These ideas reflect responsible decisions and are in line with government

commitment to plan and prepare for climate change events.

The Town of Come By Chance committed to increase the number of recycling bins

in municipal buildings, installing energy efficient lighting, and promoting

energy efficient driving habits.

The Town of Come By Chance, along with the Towns of Burin and Wabush received

a $5,000 award for their proposed innovative ways by a municipal government.

Everyone has a part to play in tackling climate change and I would like to

congratulate all the communities that took

part in this challenge. These winners

are setting a great example and I encourage all municipal leaders to adopt these

initiatives for their future.

I ask all members of the House to join me in congratulating the Town of Come

By Chance in taking this initiative and winning this award.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Harbour Main.

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

congratulate the Town of Holyrood on receiving the Torngat Municipal Achievement

Award for its exemplary efforts and innovation in economic development at the

Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador Annual Convention on November 9, 2013.

At the root of Holyrood's economic development strategies is its recently

launched Oceans Holyrood Initiative, OHI. OHI is a regionally-focused economic

diversification initiative and its mission is to foster, enable and accelerate

an oceans industries community of practice in the Holyrood area of Conception

Bay.

Underpinning OHI's early successes is the visual amount of ocean technology

development and testing as well as offshore safety and survival training

happening in Holyrood harbour which is being conducted by the Marine Institute

of Memorial University of Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join with me in

congratulating Mayor Gary Goobie, councillors and staff with the Town of

Holyrood on winning this prestigious award.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Baie Verte

Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. POLLARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize the outstanding accomplishments

of the Valmont Academy Viking's female softball and soccer teams.

Mr. Speaker, on October 5 and October 12 respectively, they captured the goal

medal in both provincial 2A school sports Newfoundland and Labrador

championships. To seize the softball title, Valmont out hustled Dunne Memorial

by a 9 to 1 score.

In the soccer championship game, they squeezed by Belanger Memorial, posting

a 2 to 1 victory. Both teams, which were comprised of mostly the same athletes,

are to be commended for their team play, their strong work ethic, and their

undying dedication.

In addition, Coach Tanya Warford, assistants Drake Noble and Adam Matthews

are to be applauded for the invaluable contributions. Furthermore,

congratulations to Brittany Andrews for receiving the most sports minded award

in the softball tournament and to Natalie Burt in the soccer tournament.

Please join me in congratulating the Valmont Academy girls' softball and

soccer teams for their outstanding achievements and to wish them every success

in their quest for three titles in a row.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize a

group of athletes from Templeton Academy in Meadows.

On the weekend of November 2-3, the Templeton Tigers volleyball team

participated in the Volleyfest tournament held in St. John's, playing in the B

Division, Tier 2. Thirty teams from all over the Province competed in the

tournament. The Tigers played Roncalli in the semi-finals and in the final game

they defeated Gonzaga High in both sets to win the match.

Mr. Speaker, this past weekend the Tigers competed in the Western Regional

Tournament held in Piccadilly against three other high school teams, and again

they won gold and earned the right to move on to the provincial championships,

which will be held in Avondale at the end of November.

Under the direction and guidance of their coach, Jamie Brake, these players

exemplified true sportsmanship and are great representatives of Templeton

Academy.

Members of the Templeton Tigers team include: Thomas Lovell, Mitchell Park,

Patrick Park, Wilfred Bellows, Daniel Lawrence, Andrew Kendell, Cody Otto, Adam

Blanchard, and Kyle Blanchard.

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

Templeton Tigers volleyball team and wish them every success in their upcoming

competitions at the provincial tournament.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Mr. Speaker, I stand in the House today to recognize a

resident of St. John's North whose spirit of volunteerism truly surpasses the

ordinary.

Mr. Al Dunphy has lived in the Rabbittown neighbourhood for over forty years,

and he has been actively involved with the Rabbittown Community Centre for the

past decade.

Al helps out where and whenever he can by lending an eager hand. When he is

not participating in the Rabbittown Community Centre's programs, Al regularly

finds opportunities to assist with them. He frequently pitches in by helping

with the preparation, the set-up and take-down of the community centre's special

events.

The staff at the Rabbittown Community Centre tell me Al is a tremendous

support to them, and they are looking forward to his continued service to the

Rabbittown community for many years to come.

This past year, Al Dunphy received the Volunteer of the Year Award from the

Rabbittown Community Centre. This was in recognition of his ongoing

contributions to the Rabbittown community and the important work of the

community centre itself.

I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating Mr. Al Dunphy on being

recognized for his exemplary volunteer work.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

MR. LANE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise in this hon. House to recognize an

outstanding young man in my district. Daniel Kelloway graduated in 2012 from

O'Donel High School with an Honours Late French Immersion Diploma, and thirteen

years of perfect attendance.

Daniel has been invited to join Simon Fraser University in January to

complete his studies and compete in the NCAA in track and field. He will be

receiving an academic scholarship based on his current 3.7 GPA at Memorial, and

an athletic scholarship based on his record-setting year.

Daniel broke every provincial sprint record in both the junior and senior

divisions, making his seven records in one season the most by a single athlete

in a season. He also received the Premier's Athletic Award and a Sports

Newfoundland and Labrador Scholarship in 2012.

Daniel was the Atlantic 400-metre champion and is the sixth ranked 400-metre

runner in the country. He narrowly missed a bronze medal in the 400-metre sprint

at the Canada Summer Games in Sherbrooke, Quebec by 1/1000 of a second. He will

be the fastest 400-metre runner at Simon Fraser, and will surely make an impact

with his NCAA division school while proudly representing Newfoundland and

Labrador.

I would ask all members of this hon. House to join me in offering Daniel our

congratulations on his tremendous accomplishments, and wish him all the best in

his future endeavours.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Service NL.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House to recognize today

as National Day of Remembrance for Road Crash Victims. Today we pay tribute to

the lives of loved ones lost or those seriously injured on our Province's

roadways.

National Day of Remembrance for Road Crash Victims also provides an

opportunity to raise awareness of road safety, and the true consequences of

dangerous driving practices. I urge all hon. members to join me in encouraging

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to reflect upon the impact of unsafe driving

habits, and to reflect on ways to make road travel safer for their families and

communities.

This government is committed to improving safety in our roadways. We have

maintained that commitment with our work in bringing forward various

enhancements and updates to the Highway Traffic Act.

Mr. Speaker, this week I was pleased to bring forward amendments to the act

to protect enforcement, emergency, and service personnel at roadside. Drivers

approaching these workers must slow down and move over to give a wide berth for

the safety of those working. This will have a major impact on the risks faced by

these individuals.

In addition, tractors and other slow-moving vehicles will be prohibited from

travelling on highways where the speed limit is greater than eighty kilometres

per hour, reducing the occurrence of potentially dangerous scenarios caused by

interrupting the flow of fast-moving traffic.

Mr. Speaker, if we take it upon ourselves to affect positive change and put

forward a culture of greater road safety in our Province, we can most certainly

make a difference. By taking the time to plan our trips, eliminating

distractions, and driving more defensively, we are taking important steps toward

saving lives on our roads.

In memory of those lost or seriously injured, I urge all drivers in

Newfoundland and Labrador to look at their own habits. Please slow down, buckle

up, and watch the road ahead, and never drive under the influence of alcohol or

drugs. The life you save may be your own or a loved one's.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. Mr. Speaker, we

also pay tribute today to those who have tragically lost their lives on our

highways and our roads. All of us have been affected in one way or another by

tragedies that occur on our roads and highways by different kinds of motorized

vehicles, including ATVs, snowmobiles, and automobiles. It was great to see

legislation that strengthened the Highway Traffic Act aimed at making our

highways safer for the travelling public.

Mr. Speaker, I find it somewhat ironic that we are here today honouring the

victims of highway tragedies and talking about making our highways safer when

only yesterday this government shot down my colleague, the Member for St. John's

South, for suggesting that they consider authorizing the use of photo radar to

control speeding. Speeding remains one of the leading causes of accidents and

everything possible should be done to implement traffic-calming systems,

including photo radar.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement today. Road safety

is everyone's responsibility, but there are things government must do to help

keep people safe on our highways.

Passing move-over legislation the other day, and particularly in this session

of the (inaudible) committee, is a good move but there are too many roads in

this Province in terrible shape, forcing drivers to navigate everything from

potholes, washouts, eroded shoulders. Yes, we are still dealing with a high

number of impaired drivers as well as distracted drivers out there. That says a

lot about getting the need for more policing out there.

Other road hazards include changing weather conditions. It is important for

drivers to help keep this in mind whenever they venture out, especially on days

like today and tomorrow where there is heavy snow in the forecast over on the

West Coast.

We also remember those whose lives were lost on our highways this day, and

our condolences to their families.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today in this hon. House to recognize National Child Day, which takes

place annually on November 20. On National Child Day, we commemorate two

historic events for children: the adoption of the United

Nations' Declaration on the Rights of the Child in 1959 and the

Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1989.

Mr. Speaker, earlier today, I had the pleasure of visiting Memorial

University's Childcare Centre for story time, as well as participating in a play

group hosted by Family and Child Care Connections in St. John's. Family and

Child Care Connections is a community-based, non-profit early learning family

resource centre and family child care agency that provides programs and services

designed to support children from birth to six years of age, their families, and

the child care community.

During story time and the play group, Mr. Speaker, I was able to interact

with the young children and their parents, as well as early childhood educators

and other staff and volunteers at the centre. The highlight of my visit to mark

National Child Day was reading a story to the energetic, but attentive group of

children.

The provincial government recognizes that children and youth are truly our

most valuable resource; therefore, in Budget 2013: A Sound Plan, A Secure

Future , our government allocated an investment of $31.1 million in 2013-2014

for child care here in Newfoundland and Labrador. With this investment we are

continuing to focus on the implementation of Caring For Our Future:

Provincial Strategy for Quality, Sufficient and Affordable Child Care in

Newfoundland and Labrador .

With the many initiatives of Caring For Our Future , we will continue

to see growth in regulated child care services and I am delighted to say we are

well on our way. We are very excited about the direction that child care is

taking in this Province. Currently, we have 7,787 regulated child care spaces

throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, which is almost a 70 per cent increase in

the total number of regulated child care spaces in our Province since 2003.

Our government's commitment to ensuring the health and well-being of all

children and youth in Newfoundland and Labrador remains at the forefront, and I

ask all members of this hon. House to join me in marking National Child Day.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. Certainly, we are

also happy as the Official Opposition to recognize National Child Day. We have

our blue ribbon on to symbolize it as well.

I would also like recognize the good work done by the Family and Child Care

Connections in St. John's, as well as the play groups and the Family Resource

Centre on the Southwest Coast of this Province where I witnessed firsthand the

good work they do with children all over the Southwest Coast. I would like to

commend Jodie and Krystle for all the great work they do.

We can sit here and talk about the good things this government has done for

children because there are a number and it is reflected here as well. There has

been a 70 per cent increase in regulated child care spaces, and that certainly

is a step in the right direction. I think when government does good work we

should recognize them for the good work that they do; however, in recognizing

the good work we can also recognize the realities.

The 2012 report on child and family poverty finds that we have the fourth

highest rate of child poverty in this country with 16.5 per cent of our children

living in poverty, which is certainly above the national average.

I think we should take today to reflect on the good things that we have done,

but also recognize the realities that many of our children do not have it as

good as they should have. We have to continue working together to make sure that

happens.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. I, too, am glad to

see that the Child Care Capacity Initiative is continuing to help

community-based child care centres expand to new communities.

Ultimately, to meet the need of working families, we need to build a publicly

administered program of high-quality, centre-based early childhood education.

Ultimately, we need to do more to help working parents who are shouldering a

financial burden of $800 to $1,000 a month for each child in daycare.

Accessible, affordable child care is an investment in our children and an

investment in our future.

Congratulations to Family and Child Care Connections and other organizations

that have effectively supported families and child care providers across this

Province. Thank you to all the dedicated early childhood educators who work with

expertise and generosity to provide quality child care for our children. Bravo

to them all.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the Member for The Straits White Bay North have

leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. Affordable

child care is a foundation for a better education and a stronger economy. My

constituents of the Straits region are very thankful for the commitment by

government to operate a non-profit child care centre in Flower's Cove.

Good work, and let's keep building.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share a recent experience I had

in Gander when I had the privilege of attending this year's Provincial Student

Leadership Conference.

Attending these annual conferences has been one of the highlights of my

tenure as Minister of Education. The energy and enthusiasm displayed by our

young people at these events each year is incredible to witness. These students

are leaders in their schools; they are role models for their fellow students,

and they are the future generation of leaders in our communities, in our

Province, and in our country.

I was particularly interested, Mr. Speaker, in hearing their views on

bullying, harassment, and intimidation during an interactive session hosted by

the Office of Public Engagement. When asked, for example, where the majority of

this behaviour takes place, 75 per cent of the approximately 400 participants

indicated it takes place online.

Our young people are growing up in a world very different than the one we

in new, increasingly insidious ways for our children to be hurt and humiliated

sometimes with tragic results and it has to stop.

Mr. Speaker, we are now finalizing a new Safe and Caring Schools Policy,

which I expect to release in the coming weeks. We also plan to introduce

legislation designed to strengthen our ability to prevent and respond to

incidents of this nature. These actions are the result of recommendations

received from an independent consultant, followed by an extensive consultation

process involving school board and district personnel, the NLTA, the Federation

of School Councils, RNC, RCMP, other community agencies, school administrators,

teachers, parents and, of course, students themselves.

There was also an online component to the consultations, which encouraged any

member of the public with an interest in this issue to offer their suggestions

on what we can do as a government and as a society to combat this issue.

Mr. Speaker, a great deal of work has been done by all of our education and

community partners, and by the media, to raise awareness of this issue among

students, parents, and the public at large.

I commend these efforts, and I invite my colleagues in the House to

congratulate Valerie Abbott, Chair of this year's Provincial Student Leadership

Conference, and all the organizers and volunteers who reinforced the

anti-bullying message and help make this year's conference a resounding success.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for the advance copy. I,

too, commend the efforts of the people at the school level who are trying to

advance safe and caring schools.

The biggest obstacle would appear to be the Department of Education and the

minister. The Safe and Caring Schools Policy was introduced in 2007, Mr.

Speaker; five years later, government hired Goss Gilroy to do a review, and this

is the review provided to the government. The review said the role of the

Department of Education in the safe and caring schools includes providing

policy, guidance, and resources in the area. Yet, it went to say that this plan

was not as good as the one before. The issue of safe and caring schools does not

seem to have the same prominence as under the previous plan prior to 2007.

Also, the investigator generally found out that people were unaware of the

policy, that it clearly was not working whatsoever. The minister sat on this

report from August 2012 until November, and a year later he is saying now we are

going to have a new one.

Mr. Speaker, if you planted a tree, you would not wait five or six years to

see how it was growing. If consulted a specialist and they said fix the tree,

you would fix the tree; you would not say let's plant another one. This is a

dismal failure in safe and caring schools, Mr. Speaker, and I hope that the

government will go back to the drawing board and get it right, for our

children's sake.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

The NDP promoted the issue of bullying in a private member's motion in this

House in May, 2012, asking government to include anti-bullying measures in the

Schools Act, but they did not support it. The fact is bullying, harassment, and

intimidation are still prevalent in our schools but there is no legislation to

assist teachers, administrators, parents and guardians in addressing the issue.

An anti-bullying policy needs to be backed up with legislation. Other

provinces are doing it. I hope, Mr. Speaker, that this government will soon step

up and get it done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for St. John's North have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Thanks to the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

I would certainly welcome any proposed amendments to the Schools Act to

address bullying in schools. In fact, on May 14, 2012 I introduced a private

member's motion here in the House of Assembly to enshrine anti-bullying in the

Province's Schools Act. It would be great to see that finally done.

When the new legislation does come into force there will still be much more

to be done in our schools to ensure they are safe, that there are proper

procedures and consequences when bullying actually occurs in schools.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

One year ago the Premier stood in this House and said that all of the

information we have gathered on the development of the Lower Churchill has been

made available to the Opposition Parties, but yesterday outside this House she

finally admitted that her government is still withholding information on the

Muskrat Falls Project.

I ask the Premier: Before you sanctioned Muskrat Falls, why did you tell the

people of this Province that all of the information was available, but based on

your comments yesterday that is clearly not true?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to say once again what a wonderful

deal, what a wonderful development this is for Newfoundland and Labrador.

Because of what we are doing here in Newfoundland and Labrador, first of all for

our ratepayers, Mr. Speaker, and then enabling other economic development, we

have also created opportunities for Atlantic Canada and beyond.

Mr. Speaker, more information on this project has been released than any

other project in our history. I get that the Opposition does not understand

that, Mr. Speaker, because they still think that Muskrat Falls falls under the

ATIPP legislation, and it does not, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Mr. Speaker, my question was about the comments that were made

by the Premier yesterday outside the House saying that we did not have all the

information. She seems to be more concerned about the benefits in Atlantic

Canada and beyond than she is about Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BALL: We have asked for, as an example, the power purchase agreement

between Nalcor and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. We have asked how much money

is committed to the project contracts. We have asked for the clarification on

the size of the transmission line from Labrador into the Island and we have

asked for details on scheduling, to name a few, but we do not have this

information.

I ask the Premier: What other information do the Opposition Parties and

people of this Province still not have on the Muskrat Falls Project?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in the question the Leader of the Opposition has asked lies the

essence of the disconnect between the government and the Opposition party. He

inquires about the power purchase agreement with Hydro, something they have

raised in the House any number of times and has been answered in the House of

Assembly any number of times. That agreement is not yet negotiated. When it is

completed, it will be made available.

Mr. Speaker, commercially sensitive information has not been released to the

public because we need to protect ratepayers. There is sound reasoning for it.

It is a practice in this project, but it is a practice in every project in this

Province and across the country, and across the world.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What the Premier just said is that commercially sensitive information for the

people who are actually paying for the project is kept from them. I just heard

the Premier say that.

Mr. Speaker, while the Premier continues to hold back information on the

Muskrat Falls Project, there is about $700 million of taxpayers' money spent on

this project. Meanwhile, the Government of Nova Scotia has no investment into

this and has assumed no risk.

I ask the Premier: How can you insist that everything is fine with Muskrat

Falls when Nova Scotia is placing more conditions and looking for more benefits

since you have placed our Province in such a weak negotiating position?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, Mr. Speaker, a demonstration of the misunderstanding of this project

from the Opposition party. Mr. Speaker, we have not negotiated an agreement with

the Government of Nova Scotia. We have not. Nalcor has negotiated an agreement

with Emera.

MR. BALL: I didn't say you did.

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: You just did so. The Leader of the Opposition just

talked about our negotiations with Nova Scotia. We are not in negotiations with

Nova Scotia, Mr. Speaker. Nalcor has an agreement with Emera. Emera is going to

form a contractual agreement with the Government of Nova Scotia to sell them

power. That is what the UARB hearing is all about. It is not about the contract

between Nalcor and Emera.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The final cost numbers of the Maritime Link were due on October 1, but this

deadline has been missed and we still do not know how much the line is going to

cost. We have a vested interest in this, as you know.

So I ask the Premier: It has been over a year since Nalcor released its DG3

numbers; have you asked for the final numbers on the Maritime Link, and why are

they still not available?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in every project that we have engaged in, since we came to

government in 2003, we set out timelines, because you have to have something to

work towards, to incent the work to get done in a certain period of time;

however, the overriding principle has always been to get it right, rather than

get it done by an artificial date.

This piece of work is being done. We are well-informed through Nalcor, with

their partnership with Emera, how the work is progressing, Mr. Speaker,

everything is on track, and this information will be in the public arena by this

spring.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Well, getting it done right would mean that you would have your

firm partnership, in this case with Emera and with the people of Nova Scotia

and we already know we do not have that.

Mr. Speaker, the C-NLOPB announced this week that over a trillion cubic feet

of natural gas has been discovered offshore in September. The Ballicatters

reserve is between Hibernia and White Rose, and is the third largest discovery

off the Grand Banks.

So I ask the Premier: With such a significant discovery, why didn't you or

the Department of Natural Resources make a public announcement on this find?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when we give licences to companies to come in and develop lands

or explore lands in our offshore, they have certain rights and privileges. One

of those rights is to announce their finds. When they think it is appropriate to

do it, given the circumstances of their company, the markets, their development

plans and so on, they do so. So we are just following normal practice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Interestingly enough, the Premier calls it their finds; I

thought we had some vested interests out there.

Mr. Speaker, we have significant natural gas reserves offshore, but this

government has done little to further develop the industry. In their 2007 Energy

Plan, the government said that natural gas was becoming an increasingly

strategic commodity, but they have not followed up with any action.

So I ask the Premier: With this significant discovery, will you now admit

that there is enough natural gas offshore to start the development of this

industry?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, just a point of clarification, when we put lands up for

nomination and companies bid on the lands, then they bid for the resource within

the land. So that is when the transaction occurs.

No, it does not still belong to the people of the Province. What we do have a

right to do is then negotiate a benefits agreement a royalty agreement and a

benefits agreement. That is what we have done in this Province, to the great

benefit of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

Mr. Speaker, we all look forward to the day when we can commercialize gas off

our offshore. It is constantly on our radar. In our Energy Plan in 2007 we

offered special incentives for a pioneer project on gas. It is on our radar, it

is always on our radar, and (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have also known that Great Western Forestry is no longer on the Muskrat

Falls job. This company was awarded a major forestry clearing contract last

March.

I ask the Premier: We know that the job is not completed, so why are Great

Western no longer involved in this project?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

MR. DALLEY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, Great Western was awarded a contract for

the right-of-way clearing for the transmission line. Nalcor has been unsatisfied

with the work of Great Western. As a result of that, they have been removed from

the contract.

I think it speaks to the oversight that Nalcor is applying to the project,

ensuring that project costs are managed, Mr. Speaker, in the best interests of

the project and certainly in the best interests of the people of Newfoundland

and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, Innu partnership companies like Nukem Forestry,

for example, have submitted competitive and realistic bids on Muskrat Falls

projects, but have been denied in favour of non-Aboriginal companies. Such is

the case with the contract just taken from Great Western Forestry Limited.

I ask the minister: Why are you not living up to the terms outlined in the

Muskrat Falls agreement which states that Aboriginal-owned companies get first

priority?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, there is a process that is laid out. Our

government, our leaders, and our Premier were very firm in negotiating the

benefits agreements surrounding Muskrat Falls development. The Innu, the people

of Labrador, and the people of the Island would benefit from that.

In this particular case, I am not sure if the member opposite is advocating

that Nalcor should allow Great Western to continue to mismanage the project,

continue to mismanage the work that they have been committed to do. It is good

oversight on Nalcor; it is responsible.

The idea of this is to keep the costs down, Mr. Speaker. I think Nalcor has

certainly proven that they are going to continue to keep the costs down and go

through the ordinary process of awarding contracts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, I remind the minister, the Muskrat Falls

agreement gives preference to Aboriginal companies.

Mr. Speaker, Nukum Forestry Limited has received an AAA rating from Nalcor on

a previous contract. The contract taken from Great Western Forestry has been

re-awarded to another non-Aboriginal company.

I ask the minister: Why are the terms of the Muskrat Falls agreement once

again being ignored in the reissuing of this particular project?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member opposite and certainly

the people of the Province that Nalcor has a very rigid process, it is

extensive, when they look at all opportunities and all contracts that come in

through the bidding process. Through that analysis, we fully expect Nalcor to

choose a contractor who is in the best interests of the project and the best

interests of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, if that happens to be an Innu contractor, then absolutely they

will be awarded the contract. Above all else, Mr. Speaker, the commitment is to

ensure that the project is done right and it is done in the best interest of the

people of the Province, and that means keeping the costs down for the project.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS DEMPSTER: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Premier said ratepayers on the

Island were subsidizing electricity rates for residents in coastal Labrador. She

failed to mention the billions of dollars Labrador contributes to the provincial

coffers through the development of its natural resources.

With the benefits of Labrador resources to all the Province, I ask the

Premier: Will you admit your comments yesterday were divisive?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, no government in our history has shown

the respect that should be afforded to Labrador than this government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, in the past, absolutely, Labrador has

made significant contributions to the economy of this whole Province.

Now, Mr. Speaker, in terms of revenue coming to the Treasury of Newfoundland

and Labrador, there are not billions of dollars that come into the Treasury on

an annual basis from Labrador. That is just not so. In terms of the royalties,

mostly from mining, from companies that were started in this Province forty or

fifty years ago, the royalty rate is very low.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS DEMPSTER: Mr. Speaker, residents of Labrador on diesel power take no

comfort from the high rates they continue to pay, especially those who are

trying to operate family-owned businesses and paying commercial rates.

I ask the Premier: Will you apologize for your insensitive remarks and live

up to your commitment of providing affordable commercial electricity rates for

coastal Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Contrary to the suggestion from the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair,

I am proud of this government's record in Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: We have made, and will continue to make, Mr. Speaker,

significant investments in Labrador in infrastructure, in services. In our

isolated communities on the Island of Newfoundland as well as in Labrador, there

are challenges in getting energy to them in an economical way. We are dealing

with that very specifically in Labrador by subsidization to start with, and that

is warranted and justified, Mr. Speaker, and looking to develop alternative

power sources to bring costs down.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, the Premier stated earlier the overriding factor

in projects is to get it right. Let's talk about the pellet plant in Roddickton.

Mr. Speaker, it is bad enough that the Premier handed over $10 million in

taxpayers' money to the Roddickton pellet plant without due diligence, but she

also gave the owner an additional $1 million in tax rebates.

I ask the Premier: How can you justify more tax rebates for a company that

already took $10 million of taxpayers' money and never produced one commercial

pellet?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, our government takes economic development very

seriously. We saw an opportunity on the Northern Peninsula where we could

support that region. Some of the economics changed, Mr. Speaker, but what the

member is referring to, the million dollars he keeps referring to, there was an

agreement with Holson for a $10 million agreement.

During that process, Mr. Speaker, it was not clear on a tax base but as a

result of that, further receipts were complied with. The funding that was

supposed to be provided legitimately within the agreement has been done. There

is no extra million dollars gone to anyone, Mr. Speaker.

The member opposite is not clear on his facts but I certainly would ask him,

does he support us supporting the economic development in the region?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: I say to the minister, if I am incorrect that means the

Auditor General is incorrect and your own officials are incorrect who stated it

in the Public Accounts.

Mr. Speaker, this government gives tax rebates to the company for invoices

that were not confirmed to be paid. In Public Accounts hearings, government

officials admitted they never checked to see if invoices were paid by the

company.

I ask the Premier: How could you allow $11 million in taxpayers' money to be

handed over to this company without ensuring all invoices were paid?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite, I guess, is referring to

the non-political Public Accounts debate. It is interesting that it would show

up here on the floor of the House.

Mr. Speaker, that agreement, it was not clear on whether the taxes could be

used for reimbursement. Thanks to the Auditor General, who we brought in, Mr.

Speaker, to ensure that the work is done on behalf of the people of the

Province, we have accepted the Auditor General's recommendations. The clarity on

the taxes has been clarified, receipts are ongoing, and it has been fully

provided and legitimate expenses in the agreement with Holson.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Just to let you know, it is in the Auditor General's report if

you would take the time to read it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member to direct his comments to the Chair.

MR. JOYCE: I am sorry, Mr. Speaker.

You can ask him to look in the Auditor General's report because that is where

it is, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, with $11 million spent on an idle pellet plant and no due

diligence by the Premier or the company, I have one simple question for the

Premier. Can you confirm if this same company is now on the short list for the

former Abitibi site and resources in Central Newfoundland?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, what I can confirm for the member opposite is

that our government is committed to economic development in the Province and we

do not pick and choose which area. The people of the Northern Peninsula needed

our help and we provided the economic support, Mr. Speaker. That is the role of

government.

Mr. Speaker, I will say the economic opportunities are there. We continue to

work with Holson. We believe, Mr. Speaker, that there is going to be a way

forward with Holson and the people of the Northern Peninsula. I can tell you,

the economic development and support we are providing there, we are also going

to provide it in the Corner Brook area too, in the member's own district. I

wonder if he will stand and challenge that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for the District of Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Just to let the minister know, there are over 500 jobs in

Corner Brook, not five for $11 million in Roddickton.

I ask the minister a very simple question: Is the same company on the short

list for the resources and the Abitibi site in Grand Falls, yes or no?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, the ongoing discussions I guess the

discussions are ongoing around the fibre basket that is available through

Central, through an EOI request. That is still confidential information, Mr.

Speaker, but I can assure the member opposite that we will do all we can to

ensure that it becomes commercially viable. We support the economy in Central.

We will support the other integrated saw millers as well, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. DALLEY: Everything is on the table and discussed in this, Mr.

Speaker. We are nearing the end stages and I will be glad to report it to the

House when the time comes.

Mr. Speaker, again, just to reiterate, our economic support was there for the

mill in Grand Falls and we are looking at doing the same in Corner Brook. We did

it on the Northern Peninsula. We did it on the South Coast. We did it on Fogo

Island. Mr. Speaker, our government has been firm in our economic support for

the people of the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for the District of St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, the Premier promised to table documents on

CETA, including the fisheries fund during this session of the House.

Predictably, in the spirit of her infamous Bill 29, she still has not done so.

I ask the Premier: Will she provide the CETA documents in time to have a

meaningful debate on this issue or will she hold on to them until the House

closes to avoid debating this landmark giveaway of our resources?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we are very delighted in terms of CETA and the negotiations. We

are looking forward to the conclusion of those negotiations. We talk again about

the fishery and the great package we delivered in regard to the fishery in terms

of removal of tariffs, the removal of end-use restrictions, and a $400 million

fund to continue to build the industry.

The Premier has indicated that those documentations will be presented here in

the House. Indeed, they will be. That has been a great agreement for

Newfoundland and Labrador. I am not really sure why the hon. member does not

support it, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Premier said she was happy to

pocket $280 million from Harper without the feds even coming here for a briefing

on the CETA deal. Meanwhile, the feds are paying presenters from our Province to

travel to the CETA sessions in Halifax so they can avoid coming here.

I ask the Premier: Why isn't she fighting for our Province so we are treated

the same as other Canadians instead of accepting this federal brush off and

disrespect?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, during negotiations we had very good

discussions with Minister Fast, when I was Minister of IBRD, and collectively

our officials. In the next six months, the minister will be in many provinces;

all the provinces he hopes to be. To date, he has visited Ontario, Quebec, Nova

Scotia and British Columbia. I spoke to him most recently. He will be coming

here over the next six months.

Over the next little while Minister Shea and the Minister of the Department

of Fisheries and Oceans Canada will be here to talk about the benefits of CETA

and certainly the benefit to the fishery of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Rental rates in many areas of the Province have increased to the point that

affordable housing and homelessness affect our most vulnerable. The average cost

for a two-bedroom apartment in St. John's is $800 a month; yet, Income Support

only provides a maximum of $522 for a family, which will not secure a family

sized apartment.

I ask the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills: Without taking money

from their food allowance, how do you expect families to pay rent with a maximum

rental allowance of $522?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, this government has always been cognizant of

the challenges that people have in regard to rental properties right across

Newfoundland and Labrador. As a matter of fact, that is why the provincial

government doubled the Rent Supplement Program by up to $8 million. I think we

have 1,700 rental supplement units now across the Province. Those are the kinds

of things that we are doing.

We are aware of the issue in regard to affordable housing in Newfoundland and

Labrador. In light of the economy that we have created over the last number of

years, we will be working with all partners at all levels, the councils, the

City of St. John's, whatever councillor it is to certainly address their issues.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

For months the Premier has said she has provided all the information we need

to understand the Muskrat Falls Project. Yesterday, she said Opposition Parties

here and in Nova Scotia had not been given all the information they needed to

understand the project.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: When may we have this information?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, commercially-sensitive information is not released at large it

isn't, and it isn't for a very good reason. We have to protect ratepayers. We

follow the proper practices that are not only at work here in Newfoundland and

Labrador, but across the country and in the world.

Mr. Speaker, I would be delighted if the members opposite would delve into

the information they already have. We would have a much more informed Question

Period.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I point out to the Premier that without an outside body, such as the PUB or

the commissioner for access to information, we have to take her word for what is

commercially-sensitive information. We do not know if all the information they

are keeping is commercially sensitive.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier brags about how open and transparent her government

is. On the other hand, she spoke yesterday about key information on the Muskrat

Falls Project she has kept secret from all of us information, she implies,

would make us change our minds on the project.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Which is it: openness and transparency, or

secrecy?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as we have said many, many times and which has been confirmed

by arm's-length experts such as MHI, such as the federal government, the Bank of

Canada, our financiers, other experts we have asked to look at different aspects

of the planning of this project this is a good, sound financial project for

Newfoundland and Labrador ratepayers first, for industries in this Province,

potential industries in this Province, and for Atlantic Canada and the continent

as a whole.

Mr. Speaker, it is important to keep certain information confidential because

it is sensitive. If it is in the public purview, it could drive the cost of the

project up. It is simple, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday the Premier incorrectly said that all the information has been

released on the CETA trade deal but, in fact, the full negotiating text has not

been released we all know that. An EU memo says the fish package includes

better access to Canadian fish for the EU processing industry, but the Premier

says there will be no impact in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Which is it?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, during the CETA negotiations we invited industry, the FFAW, the

processors, all those concerned in regard to the industry moving forward in

terms of the opportunities that lay ahead under CETA, in terms of accessing an

unprecedented market of half a billion people unprecedented in terms of us

getting access to that.

We brought all those folks around the table and had discussions. The FFAW

obviously represents the harvesters, plant workers of Newfoundland and Labrador

in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. We went through the process. It is not only

us; it is the other Atlantic Provinces and Quebec to look at what are the

benefits of having an exemption for the EU. In the final analysis, it was in the

best interests of Newfoundland and Labrador to go down the route we did.

Industry supports it. The FFAW supports it. The NDP does not.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister said he cut the Family Violence Intervention Court because it

only had twenty-six cases last year, but his numbers were based on only half the

year. By the end of the fiscal year, there were forty-four cases.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Why did he use inaccurate numbers as a

rationale for cutting the court?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The whole debate around violence in the Province, family violence, domestic

violence, violence against women, is one that we take very seriously, and I

thank the member for her interest in that. I just wish the member would expand

her view on the topic to more than the Family Violence Intervention Court.

Back some years ago, our government took the issue serious enough that we

brought in the Violence Prevention Initiative that had more than 100 initiatives

to combat violence in this Province. I would remind the member that while the

Family Violence Intervention Court is a tool to assist and I have said all

along that I respect the outcomes of the court, I respect that those who went

through the court benefited from it, and I accept their opinion. Mr. Speaker,

there is a far longer period on the other end of the spectrum where we need to

raise the awareness of violence in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, an internal review was done on the Family

Violence Intervention Court before it was cut. It found that the court was a

success, fulfilling its mandate of early intervention and treatment.

Mr. Speaker: Why is the minister refusing to release this report?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: As I was saying, Mr. Speaker, the whole issue of violence in

the Province, there is a real spectrum. You take young, who enter the school as

school-aged children; and you have the other end of the spectrum where people

have admitted to violence, have done terrible things in their homes, and come to

the point where they admit it, they plead guilty, and they go through the Family

Violence Intervention Court.

I have never said it has not been beneficial. What I have said, though, and

our key priority is focusing on this end of the spectrum where we raise

awareness and talk to people about why they do not want to get to that end of

the spectrum. It is why we invest in resources like the domestic violence

co-ordinator with the RNC, who is currently carrying a caseload of more than

forty.

I remind members, Mr. Speaker, in this House, it is a very serious issue.

Less than 10 per cent today of those who are abused in violent situations come

forward, and those are the ones we have to target.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the member to get to a very quick question without

preamble.

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Why did he cut the court when

it was successful and recidivism rates were 10 per cent compared to 40 per cent

without the court?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice, for a quick response.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, we take our advice from groups on a daily basis on

where our investments go in Justice. As I said before, I have never once said

that I do not acknowledge that those who went through the system felt the

benefits. I also understand that the 90-plus per cent of individuals who are

affected by violence in this Province have a right to have resources directed

towards them as well.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today to read a petition from the residents of York Harbour, Lark

Harbour, and Route 450 concerning the hazardous road they find themselves into

after countless attempts to try to have some repairs done by the Minister of

Transportation and Works the former minister, I should say.

Mr. Speaker, I will read the petition:

WHEREAS we are concerned over the deplorable condition of Route 450; and

WHEREAS many residents of the Town of Lark Harbour and York Harbour travel

this road on a daily basis; and

WHEREAS after repeated requests for upgrades and repairs the road has

continued to deteriorate; and

WHEREAS there is only one road in and out of these communities and many of

our residents are of an aging population with health issues; and

WHEREAS having the road completely give way would pose a whole set of issues;

and

WHEREAS we feel the condition of this road presents an accident waiting to

happen;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the

House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to give

serious consideration to making repairs to this road.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I brought the concerns of this road up to this government and to

the former minister for over a year. I have numerous letters. I have numerous

correspondences about the condition of this road. The current minister is

looking at some small measures that can be done now because of the lateness in

the year, and I thank him for that, but there are two or three areas, Mr.

Speaker, that are very, very dangerous.

Out by Copper Mine Brook there is a dip now which is very much of a safety

hazard. The speed has been reduced from eighty down to 30 kilometres per hour.

There is a dip in the road where the road gave way, which if someone did not

know and were not aware of it it is definitely an opportunity for a serious

accident. There are parts of the road, 450, that had major flooding and damage

last March last March, Mr. Speaker.

I wrote the government and wrote the minister on these here. I received

correspondence back saying, yes, it will be fixed. I received correspondence

back later: oh, we are hoping to get it fixed. The government at the time it

is a responsibility upon any government to keep their residents safe. One of the

ways you keep them safe is to keep the road conditions in a way whereby it is

passable and it is safe. They are not asking for any luxuries, absolutely no

luxuries. This is just a safety concern.

I urge the government, I call upon the government, it has been brought to

their attention, the residents now are very active, the town councils are very

active, and I urge the government to do what they can to ensure that these roads

are safe.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: I remind the member he has less than a minute. I do not know

if he wants to start.

The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a petition here: To the hon. House of Assembly regarding the Southwest

Coast and the TCH. I have read this, this is my third time this week, so I can

probably skip the

preamble and get I wish I could skip the

preamble and get

right to the meat of this, Mr. Speaker.

WHEREAS residents of the Southwest Coast must travel the TCH between

Channel-Port aux Basques and Corner Brook for work, medical, educational, and

social reasons; and

WHEREAS Marine Atlantic ferries dock at Channel-Port aux Basques at various

hours on a daily basis resulting in a high volume of traffic; and

WHEREAS the government initiated a twenty-four hour snow clearing pilot

project that excluded the

section between Channel-Port aux Basques and

Stephenville;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, are calling upon this House to

urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to include that section.

I have a study here, but do you know what? I have enough petitions here; I

can stay here until Christmas talking about this issue. It is the right thing to

do. Government has the studies here to show that it should be covered.

I will have a further opportunity at another time to continue entering this

petition and tell the minister and the department, make the right call.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Day

MR. SPEAKER: This being Private Members' Day, I call upon the Member for

St. John's Centre to introduce the Motion that is on the Order Paper in her

name.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

WHEREAS the Family Violence Intervention Court provided a comprehensive

approach to domestic violence in a court setting that fully understood and dealt

with the complex issues of domestic violence; and

WHEREAS domestic violence continues to be one of the most serious issues

facing our Province today; and

WHEREAS the cost of the impact of domestic violence is great both

economically and in human suffering; and

WHEREAS the Family Violence Intervention Court was welcomed and endorsed by

all aspects of the justice system including the police, the courts, prosecutors,

defence counsel, Child, Youth and Family Services, as well as victims,

offenders, communities agencies and women's groups; and

WHEREAS the recidivism rate for offenders going through the court was 10 per

cent compared to 40 per cent for those who did not;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly urge government to

consider reinstating the Family Violence Intervention Court.

Seconded by the Member for Signal Hill Quidi Vidi.

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to stand today to speak to this private member's

motion. I am speaking about a very specific, concrete program. A very specific,

concrete program that is based on expertise, that is based on best practices,

that is grounded in the culmination of extensive research and expertise. The

Province itself took years of consultation, years of research to develop this

court, to respond to a very specific group of people.

I am not talking about family violence in general but a very specific tool

that was lauded by the community. Both justice and in the non-government

organizations lauded it as a successful program. The Family Violence

Intervention Court was a progressive initiative that finally understood and

dealt with the very complex dynamics of domestic violence and abuse.

It was established in March of 2009 as a pilot project. After years of

research and consultation with community, anti-violence groups, and the entire

justice community, it was extended by government in 2011 as an initiative to

keep families safe. It dealt with offenders, it dealt with victims.

For the purpose of this debate, Mr. Speaker, I will use he because,

overwhelming, the offenders were male; overwhelming, in the partnerships, the

victims were female. For the purpose of the debate, I may use he and she in

those contexts, as well as children.

In 2011 and 2012, the Department of Justice had intended to make this a

permanent program as part of their attempt to deal with family violence. It was

very successful. Nova Scotia, as a matter of fact, modeled their Family Violence

Intervention Court on the Family Violence Intervention Court of our Province,

through our Department of Justice.

It was an active court that was concerned with early intervention and that

is key, Mr. Speaker; it was early intervention. It was concerned with treatments

and prevention. It was doing what it was supposed to do, and that was early

intervention while providing supports and protection for victims most of whom

were women and children and treatment for offenders.

The specific thing about this program, Mr. Speaker, is that the offenders had

to take responsibility for their crime. They had to acknowledge and take

responsibility for their crime. They had to own it. It was cutting edge. It was

interdisciplinary and collaborative. Defence lawyers, Crown attorneys, and

Victim Services, who all have competing priorities, they were actually working

together. This had never happened before in the history of our justice system.

It was five years of hard work; hard work that was paying off, Mr. Speaker.

It was cross jurisdictional with all the team having specialized training and

expertise. Not only was a team brought together, but the team was given training

and they were experts in their field. The Department of Justice was committed to

this program because they knew this program was based on evidence, it was based

on research, and it was based on best practices.

There was a Victim Services team, there was a half-time position from Child,

Youth and Family Services, and there was a bail supervisor. Again, Mr. Speaker,

it was so important to keep in mind that these were experts in the field of

domestic violence, because we finally had a court that had expertise in this

area, in this very complex area.

There was a Crown attorney who was specifically assigned and trained for this

particular court. There was a defence lawyer through Legal Aid who was

specifically trained and pulled for this particular court. There was a risk

assessor and this was a key position because it was based on the assessments

done by the risk assessor whether the offender was eligible to take

part in the

Family Violence Intervention Court.

There was a judge. A judge who was specifically dedicated, who had other

duties, but one day every second week this judge sat over the Family Violence

Intervention Court. This judge had a particular expertise and was able to

exercise his role with that expertise and confidence.

There was also a court co-ordinator, and this was all about keeping women and

children safe. Families who wanted to stay together and who relied on the

Department of Justice to fulfill its promise to the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador, that it was committed to giving the best possible service through

Justice to victims of violence in our Province.

It was a court that was great for young couples, because many young couples

came to the court. It found that women were more willing to press charges

because often one of the very difficult situations in family violence is that

women would call the police, but then they would drop charges because it took so

long for the case to get to court. What this court did was it responded

immediately, which is so important in dealing with issues of domestic violence.

It found that the women were less likely to drop the charges because they

knew that there was immediate action. They were more willing to press charges if

they knew that their partner was going to get help and probably not go to jail.

There was an 85 per cent retention rate. Judges love this type of targeted

and specialized court because it allowed them to focus on the main issues behind

the crimes. This is not just about crime and punishment, it is about prevention,

it is about treatment, it is about early intervention.

These Family Violence Intervention Courts are all across the country. They

are the best practice to combat family violence. They are a concrete, effective

program that is part of the continuum of services in the area of family

violence. This court was driven from a victim's perspective, not just the

individual victim but the entire family. It was ground-breaking work, social

workers and facilitators working together. It had knowledge, information, and

expertise.

The goal of the court, as stated in literature from the Department of Justice

report, was to prevent and reduce incidents of family violence. "Through a

collaborative approach, access to support services and intervention programs is

accelerated. The FVIC focuses on enhancing victim safety as well as emphasizing

offender accountability and treatment for moderate risk offenders."

The majority of the offenders and victims were people who are interested in

staying in a relationship, but only because the risks were such that there was a

possibility of treatment.

Here is how it worked. Upon an incident, the police would refer the offenders

for their first appearance before the family violence intervention judge. That

judge sat once every two weeks. The police were trained and this took quite a

while to encourage and train the police to refer the offenders, for their

first appearance, to the Family Violence Intervention Court.

They were allowed to go there as long as the potential sentence that the

offender would get would legally be a community disposition. The offender had to

agree to a risk assessment and the offender was offered a specialized Legal Aid

lawyer. Then the date was set, at least within two weeks because again, what

was so important was that it was a very quick response, that within two weeks

they would then go to the Family Violence Intervention Court.

In the meantime, they would meet with the risk assessor, they would meet with

a specialized Legal Aid lawyer, they would agree on their statement of facts,

and they would enter a plea of guilty. They had to enter a plea of guilty in

order to be able to take

part in this court because, again, the goal of the

court was for the offender to take responsibility for his actions.

Then he had to participate in family violence programming, which was really

intense work, where he had to acknowledge, among his peers, his behaviour and he

had to take responsibility for it. He had to agree to have all of his

information shared among the whole team that was working on his case. He had to

agree to be supervised by the bail supervisor, and that was very important

because the bail supervisor was intimately involved in the case. If there was an

increasing risk to the victim or the family, the Victim Services person would

alert the family.

Consequently, what we had was very close expert supervision on the offender

in order to keep the family safe. There was no false hope here; this was

expertise that was absolutely focused on the safety of the victims and the

potential treatment of the offender.

The Family Violence Intervention Court would keep close track of progress and

participation. Upon completion of treatment, only then would the judge take into

account sentencing. What we have in the regular court system, Mr. Speaker, is

that after the offence, it could take up to a year before the offender goes to

court up to a year. Someone may have hit someone, shoved someone, or

threatened someone, and the victim has to wait for a year or perhaps even longer

before the offender goes to court. Then the victim is taken to the stand and

possibly torn apart and challenged. Who who goes through that type of court

procedure? Of course, women will then drop the charges because they do not want

it and it has been so long.

The research has shown, the research is absolutely solid, that intervention

as close to the time of the crime is the most effective, and that is what this

court was doing. This is not being done in any other program in the Province.

Nowhere else in the area of treatment on the issue of family violence is this

kind of work being done. The work that is being done in other programs is

absolutely crucial; it is also expert and effective in their areas, but not in

terms of what the Family Violence Intervention Court was doing.

So the benefits of those who qualified for this program were that offenders

agreed to treatment, it kept people out of jail that could be kept out of jail,

and then the offenders could continue to earn for their family. The benefits for

the victim, the women and the children: the process was accelerated, they were

not waiting one to two years to go to court, the bail supervisor was keeping

close track of the offender, and the victim was informed and she could avail of

counselling and programs for herself and her children. Victim Services responded

quickly and thoroughly, which is exactly what needs to happen, Mr. Speaker.

The research that has been done in this area is over thirty years old. There

are people who have become absolute experts in this area. The Family Violence

Intervention Court is a culmination of that research, of that expertise, and of

that commitment.

Also, because the offender had to plead guilty, the victim was not a year or

so later forced to stand in the courtroom and be pulled apart by a defence

lawyer. Mr. Speaker, there are so many aspects of this program, but the

important thing is the immediacy, the expertise, the collaborative team approach

to providing services for victims, keeping families safe, and keeping offenders

in check. This is about victim safety and offender accountability.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to look forward to getting up and standing again, but

I want to say that this court was supported by the women's community. It was

supported by the judicial community.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the member that her time has expired.

MS ROGERS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is a little unusual to have the Premier speak on Private

Members' Day, but I asked for the privilege of doing that today because this is

an issue that is not only very important to our government, and to the people of

our Province, but this is an issue that is very important to me personally.

I cannot tell you when I became really aware of some aspects of violence, or

people suffering from violence at the hands of people who supposedly loved them,

Mr. Speaker. I became somewhat aware of it in the community growing up; but,

like many things that are not healthy in our communities, they were not often

talked about. Sometimes, in fact, the community became the holders of the

secret.

It came home to me in a very personal way when I was at university and one of

my friends arrived at my door in her bare feet, without any clothes, in the

middle of a snowstorm, just a little dress on. She was escaping from her partner

who was abusing her, Mr. Speaker. From that time, I took a very personal

interest and started to educate myself around this very, very complex issue that

is rampant.

This is not a new issue in Newfoundland and Labrador. This is an issue that

has been with us since the earliest days, and been here not only through our 500

years but since the beginning of civilization. It is a terrible blight on our

society. It has taken a lot of pain and a lot of sorrow.

For particular members of our community who have either been victims of

violence, or somebody they love have been a victim of violence, it has been all

of that pain that has finally raised this issue into the public purview where

it should be, Mr. Speaker under the harsh light of day for all of us in this

Province, in this country, to consider all the aspects of what happens within a

culture that tolerates violence, and what the responsibility of all of us is in

combatting this issue; because a civilized society absolutely has to deal with

this issue.

I, like others, have toiled for over thirty years, Mr. Speaker, doing various

things to help people who were affected, and families that were affected and are

affected, by this. We are all affected by it, Mr. Speaker, in one way or

another.

Since 2001, twenty-three of the forty-five murder victims we have had in this

Province have been women who have been killed by their ex-partners or their

current partner. Mr. Speaker, that has an effect on every man, woman, and child

in this Province. This is an extremely important issue. If there is any good to

come of it at all, it is because it has triggered a debate recently within this

Province that is long overdue.

Mr. Speaker, when we talk about victims of violence, they are victims. They

do not ask for the abuse. There is no reason in the world that they deserve the

abuse. This is a violation of a person and of their human rights. Because of the

complex nature of violence, it is not always straightforward what the resolve to

the issue is going to be.

How many times have we heard people say: Why doesn't she just walk away? Why

doesn't she leave him? I agree with the former speaker; it certainly is an issue

that is most prevalent with women. One in two women, Mr. Speaker, in this

Province will experience some kind of violence in her life. That is your mother,

your sister, your aunt, and your friends. This is an issue that concerns every

one of us.

Would it be so simple that they could get up and walk out the door and that

would be the end of it? It is not the end of it, unfortunately. It is not the

end of it. Most women in these abusive situations are assaulted, or beaten, or

tortured in some way thirty-five times before they finally tell somebody on

average, thirty-five times. They suffer in silence because there is so much

shame associated with having your partner abuse you.

That has something to do with the rest of us as a society, Mr. Speaker. If we

were walking down the street and some stranger walked up and gave us a smack, it

would not take us long to call the police and have an intervention. People,

particularly women who find themselves in these violent situations, do not feel

that is an option for them until they get to a point that they really do not

care if they live or die, or believe that they are going to live or die

regardless of what they do.

Mr. Speaker, as a social worker, I had significant experience with this issue

and what to do with victims of violence, especially in an isolated part of the

Province. How did we get them to the services, the existing services that were

operational at the time, to get the care and support they needed?

In my volunteer life I did much of the same, so I have been engaged in this

issue for a very, very long time. When I came to government I brought a very

particular perspective with me, a perspective that had been informed by these

many, many people. Not only the victims of violence but the people who work with

them and supported them, often women working in communities without any kind of

visible support, Mr. Speaker, only what they could cobble together themselves.

Mr. Speaker, it is a very, very complex problem that requires a whole

spectrum of interventions. When we came to government in 2003, the Violence

Prevention Initiative was one important step that we took, and over 100

initiatives there to address the issues of violence. What we have done in our

anti-bullying campaign and what that looks like you know, Mr. Speaker, we

still have a lot of work to do not only with our children but with our adults in

this area.

How do we educate our young people and sensitize our young people to the fact

that you do not tolerate control? Because that is how it starts, Mr. Speaker.

How do you identify that and disentangle yourself from that as soon as you are

able to identify it, so you do not get drawn down deeper into these destructive

relationships?

We have tried to create an awareness program, not only within our schools but

in terms of educating our public. The Respect Women Campaign arose out of that.

We need to respect women, Mr. Speaker, and we need to teach that to our children

from the earliest days.

Mr. Speaker, when we negotiate IBAs, when we negotiate agreements with

resource development companies in this Province, we have a gender and diversity

agreement always now attached to the benefits that need to come to the people of

the Province. We do not do that, Mr. Speaker, just because it is a nice thing to

do.

A significant number of women, particularly, who are caught in abusive

situations and do not feel they can get away from them is because of the

economics they face living on their own, Mr. Speaker. We need to raise our

children we raise our boys to know that they need to stand on their own two

feet, provide for themselves, and provide for their families. We need to do the

same thing for our girls, Mr. Speaker. We absolutely have to do that for our

girls.

We make sure that whatever economic engine is driving the economy here in our

Province that it is inclusive of girls and other marginalized people, Mr.

Speaker. It is extremely important. It is an important tool in escaping from

violence to be able to look after yourself and look after your family.

Mr. Speaker, we have invested in shelters, in status of women's councils. We

funded international women's groups. All of these people advocate on behalf of

women, particularly, and children, and our resources that victims of violence

can go to for help and support and direction, Mr. Speaker.

We funded shelters. We have built new shelters. We have worked with our

police forces to try and make our laws more effective, to make their response

more effective, Mr. Speaker. We continue to make these kinds of investments

because they are important. It is not enough to do one thing.

There is a full spectrum of tools and resources we need to bring to this

issue, but more than anything else, Mr. Speaker, I would argue, that we need to

have this public discussion. Everybody in the Province needs to engage in this

discussion about violence, violence particularly against women, violence against

children, and our responsibility in eliminating it, Mr. Speaker.

There has to be zero tolerance for violence against women, violence against

anybody, Mr. Speaker, but in this issue absolute zero tolerance. Everybody in

our Province needs to adopt it. That needs to become intrinsic to their

thinking.

When we look at a full spectrum of resources, the toolkits that we have to

counter this blight on our society, Mr. Speaker, there is a balance you are

trying to achieve all the time. Mr. Speaker, we have to make decisions, and

sometimes they are not always where you want to be, but sometimes it is more

important to weigh your investment on an end of the scale that is about public

awareness, that is about educating people about what is available to them,

sensitizing them to the dangers they need to be aware of, so they can identify

that they are in situations they need to remove themselves from.

Mr. Speaker, we have to educate our people across the Province to the issues

that are real and to the fact that we all have a right to live in dignity and

without fear of persecution. For a significant number of people who live in this

Province, that is not the case.

We need to continue to invest, Mr. Speaker. We need to try to continue to

understand what it is we need to do. Sometimes we will do pilots to see if that

is where at this time a significant investment needs to be made. While we may

see very good work come out of that, it might not be, at this time in our

development, where we would get the most reward from our investment, the better

outcome from our investment. It might get moved somewhere along the spectrum.

I heard the member opposite talk about the fact that we have all these

wonderfully trained people within the system, Mr. Speaker. We have not lost

those people. They are still working within the system, working with the victims

of violence, and working with families. It is important that we do that.

Mr. Speaker, everybody needs to realize that none of us are safe and secure

from violence in today's world. We worry about things that might happen to us

because of strangers. We need to worry about what could happen to us from people

we know and who are intimate to us.

We are going to continue to invest. We are going to continue to bring

awareness to this issue, Mr. Speaker. As a government, we are going to continue

to invest in these many, many initiatives until we do everything we can to erase

this blight from our society.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am very happy, very pleased, to speak to the motion today. It would be

wonderful if we did not have to have a motion like this on the floor of the

House, but we all know what the situation is when it comes to violence in

families and that most of the violence that happens is violence with intimate

partners. As my colleague from St. John's Centre said, where the majority of

those who are assaulted are women, I am going to refer to the assaults as

assaults on women by men because that is the majority.

In Canada, one out of every four women suffers partner and sexual violence.

In this Province, it is one out of three. So we are talking about one-third of

women suffer family and sexual violence, and the majority of those suffer it in

the intimacy of their home, with a partner.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say I am quite disturbed. Everything that the Premier

has said was correct and everything that she said points to the fact that we

should still have the Family Violence Intervention Court.

When I look at the fact that a choice was made to close a program that was

designed to stop offenders from offending, how we could say that that is not as

important as doing education at the other end of the spectrum, that the Premier

and the minister spoke about he spoke about it in Question Period today and

the Premier has spoken about it here in debate. To say that it is not as

important to stop re-offenders as it is to do education and prevention at the

beginning, both of them deal with stopping violence. This program costs a measly

$500,000. I say measly because we have a budget now of billions a measly

$500,000.

I want to speak to part of the resolution, the last

WHEREAS, which is

extremely important. "WHEREAS the recidivism rate for offenders going through

the court was 10 percent compared to 40 percent for those who did not".

For those who may not fully get it, that means that the reoffenders, those

who abuse, who reoffended after going through this program, only 10 per cent

reoffended;

whereas, offenders going through the normal court system, not the

Family Violence Intervention Court, 40 per cent of them 40 per cent

reoffend. How the government could look at this court and to look at that fact

and to stand here today and rationalize that it was okay to close this court, I

cannot believe it. Everything that was seen in the evaluation and the report

that was done, this court was succeeding.

No, it had not eradicated violence. It had not stopped sexual violence. It

had not stopped violence in the home yet, but for 90 per cent of the offenders

who went through the program in its short life, they had not reoffended. So

there was violence that was being stopped. The re-offenses were not happening at

the same rate.

I cannot tell you how shocked I am by the Premier standing, saying what she

said here today, and still justifying the closure. One of the things she said

is: Would it be that women could get up, walk out the door, and that would be

the end of it? It will not be the end of it. Well, that is what the Family

Violence Intervention Court was about. It was about trying to put an end to it

so that when the woman walked out the door, when she went to a safe place, and

when she made sure that charges were laid against the offender, by going through

the Family Violence Intervention Court, she had a 90 per cent chance of that

person not reoffending.

How can we say that closing the court was justified? I am in shock. I was in

shock at the time it happened. I am more in shock today, standing here and

listening to what I just listened to. Everything the Premier said was right. I

know it, too. I have worked with women all my life as well. We all know it. We

all look around as we all know we have it in our own families, whether it was an

aunt or maybe it was a grandmother. I doubt there is a family in this Province

who cannot somewhere in its history find it.

We are mystified by it. We do not understand how it happens, but we know it

happens. We can find it everywhere, yet we stand here today and try to justify

the closure of a court and of a program that, to use the government's language

here today, at the other end of the spectrum was also putting an end to violence

for people who were in violence.

It is like saying in our health care system we have to do prevention and we

do have to do prevention, we have to make sure that we try to have healthier

people, and we have to have preventive health measures; but if somebody goes to

a doctor and the doctor says you have cancer, we are not going to treat it

because we are concentrating on preventive health, well, we have a big problem

there.

That is exactly what the government is saying. We have a serious problem. One

in three women in this Province can expect to experience violence in their home,

yet we are saying: Well, if it happens to you, too bad, try to take care of it.

There are things there to help you. There are safe houses and there are

programs, but our focus right now in on prevention. It cannot be one or the

other.

The thing is that while violence happens in all walks of life it is not

confined to one group of people making a certain amount of money. As a matter of

fact, a recent study tells us that the great majority of women in Canada, 70 per

cent of the women who are victims of intimate partner violence are working women

and women with university or college degrees. That is really interesting.

One-third of all Canadians who reported having experienced sexual assault had

household incomes of $100,000 or more.

This is not something that happens only to people at the lower end of the

income scale. It happens to women who have education, who have college and

university degrees, you have heard it; however, the Family Violence Intervention

Court, in particular, I think, would have helped people who were at the end of

the lower end of the economic scale, who do not have the resources to go out and

get help.

This Family Violence Intervention Court was there for women who really could

not see a way maybe for years and years and years. Imagine having this court and

being able to point to it, being able to educate women to the fact that if you

dare to speak out, if you can get the courage to walk out of the house, if you

can get the courage to break away, there is this wonderful tool that is there to

be used to help you so that you can have a sense of you will not be going

through it again. That is what this tool was all about.

How can this government face the women of this Province and say: we are

really trying, we are really educating, and we are really doing programs to show

what violence is? We are really going to try to get people to start recognizing

what violence is, but this tool, which would have given you some sense of

security, this tool which could have helped you feel: well, if I do break loose

maybe there is something that can make me feel I do not have to fear for my life

for the rest of my life because of this person because that is what it is

about.

These women fear for their lives. They fear for the lives of their children.

They are terrified. They need to know that if they speak out, if they try to

break loose, there is going to be help there so that they can stop fearing the

person who has been assaulting them. That is what the court was all about. That

is why that rate is so important, and it is so important that it is there in the

resolution.

I am going to repeat it again because it is so important. Ninety per cent of

the men who went through the program up to the point that it ended did not

reoffend. For men who went through the regular court system, it was 60 per cent

who did not reoffend. In other words, 10 per cent recidivism rate opposed to 40

per cent 40 per cent reoffenders for those who went through the regular

system.

I do not know what to say to this government except do what is being asked.

Put this program back in the system. Do what you have heard the women's

community ask. They were shocked when this came out. Do what your own

prosecutors have said. Do what lawyers have said. Put it back in.

For the sake of $500,000 a year, put the program back in so that it will

strengthen what you are doing at the other end of your resource spectrum, as you

call it. So that you are not making a choice between trying to stop it at one

end and not helping at the other, when the women are actually in the violent

situation. We have to do both. We cannot do one or the other. None of it makes

sense to me. None of it makes sense.

It feels like total unreality standing here and hearing a Premier who could

speak with all of the authority that she called upon herself today as a woman

who has worked with women, and who knows how hard it is for them to get out of

violent situations, say what she said. It is hard to leave, and it is not going

to end. You are not going to walk out the door and it is all going to be over.

That is what the Premier said. If she knows that, then why as leader of that

government and leader of the government in this House isn't she showing the

leadership and saying because she knows all that, the Family Violence

Intervention Court should go back in?

I am so shocked by what has happened here today, I really am. I do not

question the Premier's experience or anything like that. That is not what I am

doing. I am saying, Premier, because you know all that, because you have had the

experience that you have claimed here today, then in the name of every woman in

this Province who has suffered violence or who has lost her life, put the Family

Violence Intervention Court back in.

The Minister of Finance is there, I say it to him. The Minister of Justice is

there, I say it to him. This is not acceptable; it is a blight on us. After our

program came in, provinces actually followed us. Some already had one, others

followed. It is recognized as an extremely important tool in the fight against

violence.

I recognize everything that the government is doing, but this is a tool they

should not have let go, just like they should not let go of the other tools

either. Of everything that this government wanted to make cutbacks in the last

Budget there are others I disagree with too, but not with the passion that I

disagree with about this one. This is not acceptable.

I ask the government be humble, admit you have made a mistake. You did it

with other things. You did it with other things when you made cuts inside the

Department of Justice. You rose up pretty fast when there was a voice of protest

there over the cuts.

I think it has to happen with the Family Violence Intervention Court, too.

Admit a mistake has been made. Put the court back into place so that women know

that if they try to get out of the situation, if they enter into the justice

system, if the person who has abused them is charged well it goes through the

system first before they even go into getting sentenced that they have a sense

of security they are being protected because they have come forward, that there

is a tool there that is recognized as a very special tool. I plead with this

government to be humble, admit the error, and put it back in.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS PERRY: I rise in this hon. House today to speak about domestic

violence and the measures we are taking

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune, your

mike is not on.

MS PERRY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly appreciate the privilege and honour to rise in this hon. House

today to speak about domestic violence and the measures we are taking to address

this most serious issue, which has touched each and every one of us in some way

or another. The hon. members opposite have raised some great points here today,

but they have been focusing on a single initiative, the Family Violence

Intervention Court pilot project.

Mr. Speaker, we all recognize the value of this pilot, and we are not saying

that we will never see these types of initiatives again. What we are saying is

that we want our initiatives to benefit each and every part of Newfoundland and

Labrador, each and every Newfoundlander and Labradorian. As a member from a

rural area, I would like to see programs and services that benefit my

constituents as well as constituents all across the Island.

This program has been available only to the St. John's region. Last year, Mr.

Speaker, just twenty-one people completed that program at a cost of $530,000. In

looking forward, we certainly want to ensure that we can reach every person who

can benefit from more awareness, prevention, and intervention of domestic

violence.

Mr. Speaker, we take this issue very seriously and it is a key priority for

our government. Reducing and, please God, one day eliminating family violence in

any form begins with prevention. Law enforcement and the provision of

appropriate supports to those affected by family violence are crucial as well,

but the fact remains that society as a whole must be part of the solution.

Research conducted by the World Health Organization has clearly told us that

prevention is a key factor to reducing violence generally. We, as a government,

are one of the few provinces in Canada who have taken this advice very

seriously. We developed a six-year plan to take action against violence. For the

last six years, we have been spending $1.6 million each and every year in this

initiative, Mr. Speaker, and we are going to continue to be there in the future.

Mr. Speaker, the impacts of family violence are devastating, and each and

every one of us has a role to play to end violent behaviours. As was discussed

earlier in this House today, statistics show that a mere 10 per cent just 10

per cent of those who are abused actually come forward and admit it. To this

end, awareness is vital.

As a government, in this regard we are investing heavily. Over $2 million has

been allocated on four anti-violence campaigns: Respect Women; Outrage NL,

targeted at youth violence; child abuse reporting; and preventing violence

against older persons. We have all seen these campaigns, and they touch us to

the core. I certainly recall the first time seeing them; they brought tears to

my eyes, and I am sure they did to many people.

I reiterate we all have a vital role to play. The Department of Child, Youth

and Family Services has developed and implemented the child protection act,

which places a legal requirement on each and every citizen to report abuse of

children. We also have a duty, Mr. Speaker, to be ever vigilant about the abuse

of any person, man, woman, child, adult, or senior.

I just said how only 10 per cent of abused persons will report it, so let us

make sure that we all have a keener eye. If someone starts becoming withdrawn or

if someone shows up with mysterious bruises, ask the questions, provide your

support, and contact the appropriate authorities. Excuses like I fell changing a

light bulb are not to be ignored. Dig deeper, probe harder, and let them know

there are ways to escape.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member mentioned it is not one or the other, and it is

not one or the other. We have initiatives targeted at awareness, at prevention,

and at intervention. Certainly if time permits I would be glad to discuss some

of those.

Mr. Speaker, stakeholders and communities need to be involved as well, and I

am talking communities all across Newfoundland and Labrador. As part of our

measures to reduce domestic violence we have spent over $1 million on violence

prevention training for front-line workers and community organizations

throughout the entire Province. In fact, over 1,000 people have been trained,

and we will continue this most important work. There is $500,000, Mr. Speaker,

for enhanced violence prevention initiatives with the Department of Education,

for example, to support the Safe and Caring Schools Policy, including the

development of My Gay-Straight Alliance and the training of educators to support

lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students.

There is $300,000, Mr. Speaker, for annual Violence Prevention Initiative

stakeholders' conferences, which have addressed issues such as: community

capacity building, youth violence, violence against women, violence against

children, and homophobia and heterosexualism. Hundreds of stakeholders come

together at these events to give government advice on what priorities we should

pursue in the upcoming year. In particular, I am very pleased to see as a member

representing an Aboriginal community we also have targeted workshops

specifically for Aboriginal women, certainly one of the groups that has been

identified as being at higher risk, as well as persons with disabilities and

seniors.

The Department of Justice has revised the Students Taking Responsibility in

Violence Education, otherwise known as the STRIVE Program, delivered by the RNC

and a new program was launched in 2008 targeted towards Grade 8 students. That

is very early intervention, Mr. Speaker. We do not want our sons and daughters

growing up in the type of world and subjected to the type of violence that we

have seen, and this is where we have to start.

The Department of Justice has also implemented the Family Violence Protection

Act and training has been offered to police, court staff, other justice staff,

and community partners. Victims may obtain Emergency Protection Orders, which

make emergency help available to adult victims of family violence and their

children. Mr. Speaker, this is particularly important because women no longer

have to leave their homes, pack up their children, and leave everything behind.

This allows the law to remove the offender from the home and that certainly is

boding well for our women and children.

The Department of Advanced Education and Skills provides emergency support

for victims of violence, for those to leave a violent situation, and it includes

transportation to shelter and assistance in finding and paying for emergency

accommodations. Mr. Speaker, it is very important to note this program is

available to any person in Newfoundland and Labrador, not just people who

qualify for assistance. If your partner is earning $100,000 or $200,000 a year,

you can still avail of this program because it is there to address victims of

violence regardless of your income. Certainly people need to be aware that these

programs are out there, and supports and help are out there for you to avail of.

The Women's Policy Office, Mr. Speaker, has also been playing a vital role in

targeting violence, particularly violence against women. They receive annual

funding to have ten regional co-ordinating committees against violence and these

are front line service providers who are out in the community. They are speaking

to schools. They are offering sessions at the mall, at seniors' homes, at

hospitals, to the police force.

They have undertaken initiatives like the Silent Witness program, which I was

very pleased to participate in in my region. We have had some devastation

tragedies. We know all too well the pain of family and domestic violence. These

types of initiatives are increasing awareness and taking great strides in

ensuring that not only the victims themselves, but other people who witness the

abuse are encouraged and now have the strength and courage to come forward.

The Purple Ribbon Campaign; we are wearing purple ribbons here in the House

today. I am sure many of you driving around the Province have seen these purple

magnets on cars. In my region alone, almost everyone has them and it is

certainly great to see. Every day we are raising awareness and every day we are

ensuring that more people know this will not be tolerated. As the Premier said

earlier, zero tolerance is what we have set as a goal for ourselves.

Mr. Speaker, it is such a difficult thing to talk about because it does

affect so many people. For all of us who know people who have been victims of

abuse, it is such a difficult time. I, for one, strongly support prevention and

awareness because that is going to ensure the adults of the future will no

longer condone this type of behaviour. None of us in this Province will condone

this type of behaviour.

To this end, Mr. Speaker, I would like to propose an amendment to today's

private member's motion. I propose the amendment, seconded by the Minister of

Environment and Conservation, as follows:

In the fifth recital, by deleting the word "court" and by adding instead the

words "pilot court program", and by adding immediately after the word "not" the

phrase "partake of the pilot court program".

By adding immediately after the fifth recital the following:

AND

WHEREAS government is committed to being proactive in identifying ways to

provide programming and services that address root causes of family violence;

AND

WHEREAS family violence is a complex societal issue, and finding

solutions requires active participation by the public, community, police and

social agencies of government including Health and Community Services,

Education, Child, Youth and Family Services, Justice, and the Women's Policy

Office;

Finally, by amending the resolution paragraph by deleting the words "to

consider" and by adding instead the following phrase "to explore all avenues for

addressing family violence with a focus on preventive measures when

considering".

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Speaker will take some time to consider the amendment as put forward by

the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune and will come back with a decision as

to whether or not the amendment is in order.

The House now stands in recess.

Recess

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

We have considered the motion as put forward by the Member for Fortune Bay

Cape La Hune. The motion is in order.

I now go back to the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune to continue with

her speech.

MS PERRY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am certainly very pleased that this amendment is in order today.

When I started my speech, I spoke a little bit about how, if time permitted,

I would discuss some intervention initiatives. Mr. Speaker, there is

intervention all across the spectrum. Our spectrum is complete. We are providing

services from one end of the spectrum to the other. At the intervention end, Mr.

Speaker, that includes the RNC, the toll-free crisis line, the social workers

that we have in place and the housing supports that we have in place.

For example, Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing have a Victims of

Family Violence Policy where victims are always given priority when applying for

housing. These are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the types of supports

that are out there.

We, as a government, are certainly very much committed to continuing to

evaluate these services and continuing to improve the services that are offered.

I, for one, am extremely proud to be a part of this government, a government led

by our first female Premier, and I certainly applaud her for the outstanding

efforts she has undertaken in terms of advancing women's issues in Newfoundland

and Labrador.

I have never been prouder to be a part of this government and never been

prouder to stand here in the House and be part of a critical debate. I am

certainly very pleased that this government and this Premier place such

significant emphasis on violence prevention for every citizen of Newfoundland

and Labrador.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and I look forward to the debate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very happy to stand here in my place today and speak to this very

critical private member's resolution that was put forward, and as the only male

who has stood and spoke to this very important private member's resolution that

was introduced by the NDP.

It is a very serious matter and one that I can indicate, right off the top,

that I was happy to support the PMR that was put forward by the Third Party. It

is something I have asked questions on in this House of Assembly not only in

this session, but the session before. It was a bad decision back in the spring

of 2013, and it is still a bad decision now to shut this down.

I have seen the amendment here. I think all it has done is really watered

down what the initial motion was trying to do, which was urge government to

consider reinstating the Family Violence Intervention Court. It is worded in

such a way that I will support this as well. It is hard not to support the

different steps that are being taken to address violence in this Province when

it comes to not only women but men, children, and seniors. Anything we can do to

address this has to be done. I think it has watered it down significantly and

taken away from what we are really supposed to be talking about here, which is

specifically the Family Violence Intervention Court.

It was good step that was taken. I have the press release here, April 6, 2009

talking about the Family Violence Intervention Court pilot project based on the

principles of therapeutic jurisprudence. It was brought forward by our current

Minister of Finance who was the Minister of Justice at that time. It was a great

idea at that time; it was a great step forward. We have to try new steps to

combat old issues. Anything we can do in that way is a positive step.

I am going to apologize, Mr. Speaker, I have a bunch of notes made; I had

some that I brought in. What I have done is I have sat and listened to all

speakers. I have listened to their points of view, I have listened to the points

that they have made, and I am going to try to respond in order to them. I have

been making my notes. I wanted this debate not just to be based on what I

brought in here, but based on the points I have taken from all the different

speakers to this so far.

I notice one of the points that I have to bring up is the Member for Fortune

Bay Cape La Hune said that we as the Opposition are only concentrating on one

point. That is true; we are concentrating on one point of a greater initiative.

I do not think at any point anybody in Opposition has or will say that we do not

commend government for their efforts to curb this horrendous situation. I do not

think that is the case at all. The Violence Prevention Initiative, which was

announced a few years back, commends government for doing that. I think we need

to do more of it.

I was disappointed because one of the terms that I heard both the Premier say

and I heard the member say and I am sure anybody who speaks to it on the

government side is going to say is awareness. Awareness is key; I have heard

it on numerous occasions. They are absolutely correct when they say that.

It is disappointing when I say that I tried to find out what the review on

the Violence Prevention Initiative said they did a review of it. We asked for

it; we were turned down. We were not allowed to see how it turned out. We tried

to do an ATIPP and we were shut down. So again, it is hard to have awareness

when it is only one side. We are not getting the opportunity to look at the

results of the work that you are doing. I think it is good on its face, but I

cannot see the results.

The second part and I am going to speak about this, and I have spoken about

it in the House before we keep hearing awareness is key. I am not going to

disagree with that. I think awareness is key not just in this debate but when

it comes to any issue that we debate in this House, awareness is key. It is not

that long ago that the issue arose about an exploitation report that was

commissioned by this government that was a significant piece of work that was

done to curb sexual exploitation and, again, put under lock and key.

Now, one of the things that we will talk about here, and it has been brought

up here before, is when we talk about violence, and again, the need when we are

talking about offenders is about future generations and the Premier said it,

this is not just a problem here today, it was not just a problem here yesterday,

it was a problem for years before, and she is right.

Research shows that children who witness violence are more likely to grow up

to become victims or abusers, and suffer more mental health issues than children

from non-violent homes. That is a point that I am going to refer to now and a

little bit later, because I think it has some merit. At the end of the day, this

was not done because the Family Violence Intervention Court was not a success.

This decision was not made because it was the right thing to do. It was a

dollars-and-cents decision, and not a priority with the Budget.

So, if we are not looking at this Family Violence Intervention Court as a

priority, that is an issue. This was done because of fiscal mismanagement. We

had a tough Budget last year; we all know about it. Justice was particularly

hard hit. I recognize that the trouble that the minister and the department must

have had to go to. I do not go through it. I do not think these decisions are

made lightly and I certainly do not think that they are made willy-nilly and you

just do this. I know that the time goes into this. When we make a decision like

this based on budgetary reasoning, we have to realize the cost down the road

that this is going to result. We are making decisions now that could have a

larger financial impact down the road by making them.

I think that was the wrong decision. Again, to echo the words of speakers

previous, we know when mistakes happen that it is okay to correct them. There

were mistakes made when it came to some of the Justice cuts. They were

acknowledged very shortly thereafter when we announced reviews of them, very

quickly, and that was done on public reaction to this and the fact that in that

case it was attorneys who came out. Legal aid and Crown prosecutors came out and

said: Look, this is going to have a huge impact on the system.

The mistake was made, the mistake was acknowledged, and we have a review that

was commissioned, which was the right step to take in light of that. I am pretty

sure that come November 30, when I am expecting the legal aid review is going to

be passed in, we will be able to look it over and see the results of it. The

government has hired very qualified people to do these. I do not doubt that for

a second very qualified people but the step is: Are we going to listen to

what they say? That is the trick here; that is the key.

When you come back to the Family Violence Intervention Court that was

created, it was a pilot project and it is like any pilot project. You do it to

see how it works and make a decision from there. That pilot was announced April

6, 2009 and it went until the spring of 2013, so I would assume there was some

success seen. Now, I do not need to stand here and recount the numbers that were

put there earlier. The numbers spoke for themselves. There was success and when

you talk about lowering the rate of recidivism that is huge.

We have a system that is based on people going into court. I know the

Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services, someone who has served in the RNC

for many years and is very familiar with the court system, knows what it is

about. You get people who get in the system, they offend, they reoffend, and

they continue to reoffend. It is a huge burden. They are trapped in a cycle;

they do not know how to get out of it. The fact that this could have such a huge

impact of reducing that rate is fantastic.

I think the biggest problem with the Family Violence Intervention Court is

that we did not give it enough time to flourish. It is like anything. You start

the system and it takes time to create that awareness. It takes time to make

people aware of what it is and what it is all about. People are wary of new

systems, but in this case the fact is you did not get in here unless there was

the admission of guilt. Then we work through that system and try to work through

people finding out the root causes and why this was happening. If we could take

someone who made that mistake, has acknowledged they made the mistake, and tried

to fix that, and help this person reintegrate into society we were on the right

path.

I am not downgrading anything government has done on the other initiatives. I

am not at all. They are all steps in the right direction. This was a good move.

It was a good step. It was a good step when the minister announced it. The