May 10, 2001 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 24

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Before we begin our routine proceedings the Chair would like to welcome to

the gallery today fourteen Grade 10 history students from Pasadena Academy in

the District of Humber East. They are accompanied by their principal, Mr. Victor

Kendall, and chaperone, Mrs. Trudy Read.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to send congratulations to Mr. and

Mrs. Rees, of Seal Cove, in my district, on Monday past they celebrated a

milestone in their life when they celebrated their 70 th wedding

anniversary. I think that is a tremendous thing to have been together for

seventy years. They are both still in great health. They celebrated this on

Monday past. I just wanted to bring that to the attention of the House.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.

MS M. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to

congratulate the Burin Salvation Army Corps on their 112 th

anniversary of providing care and service to residents of the Burin area.

This past weekend, I was pleased to be part of the Corps anniversary weekend

which included a delicious anniversary supper, as well as other activities.

Mr. Speaker, May is Red Shield Appeal month for the Salvation Army, and we

are all very much aware of the contributions they bring to our communities,

especially to those less fortunate.

I want to thank the Burin Corps officers Captains David and Wavey Chaulk, as

well as the rest of the Burin Salvation Army Corps for their service to Burin

for the last 112 years and I look forward to many more years. May they look

forward to many more years of service to the local communities.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to recognize in this

House, the efforts of Bob Toms of Forteau, Labrador, who has been a member of

the Canadian Rangers for ten years. Mr. Toms, a school teacher, who started the

first ever Junior Canadian Rangers Program in Newfoundland and Labrador in

September, 2000. Through his efforts the Junior Canadian Rangers now have seven

patrols in our Province, including Churchill Falls, Black Tickle, Postville,

Port Hope Simpson, Forteau, Conne River and Millertown.

In my district there are eighty children in the Junior Rangers from ages

twelve to seventeen.

The aim of the program is to promote traditional cultures and lifestyle by

offering a variety of structured activities to young people living in remote and

isolated communities of Canada. Outdoor skills, camping, canoeing, map and

Compass are some of the many activities they participate in. They also engage in

public speaking and have a peer support group. The Labrador Straits team, which

is led by Mr. Toms, is a model for other Junior Ranger groups across the

country.

I would like to congratulate him on his efforts and also offer

congratulations to the Labrador Straits Junior Rangers team on being selected to

the prized program to pilot the program called: Prevention of Harassment and

Abuse through Successful Education. This pilot will be done on behalf of all

Junior Rangers groups across the country.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, today I would like to follow up on an

announcement government made when the provincial budget was handed down in

March.

At that time, government reiterated its commitment to improving

transportation infrastructure in the Province and outlined funding for the

provincial highways and roads. Government announced we would invest $22 million

into our roads this year, a $6 million increase over last year.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, this is a tremendous investment in the roads in

rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

I personally travelled to many communities and met with residents to discuss

roads in their respective areas. I listened to these people and we are now

following through on our commitment. Over the past week my department has been

announcing specific projects throughout the Province that will respond to these

requests.

While not all needs can be addressed in any one year, I believe that the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador will be very pleased with the roads program

we have prepared for this year, with its extra emphasis on paving gravel roads.

Mr. Speaker, added to the $22 million roads budget is the $4.5 million

government is investing in coastal roads in Northern Labrador, and the $2

million, representing 20 per cent of the cost that we have committed towards the

construction of the Long Island Causeway, if our federal counterparts agree to

cost share this particular project. This puts our provincial investment at $28.5

million this year.

To these provincial investments we add the $50.3 million announced in

February under the federal/provincial Roads for Rail Agreement, and the $43

million we will spend on construction of phase two of the Trans-Labrador

Highway, making this year's total funding for highways in the Province $121.8

million.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, my department is also planning to upgrade

several wharves around the Province, including a $1.5 million project for St.

Barbe.

My department has started calling tenders for the roads projects and we look

forward to working with the construction industry in what we believe will be a

very successful construction season.

Mr. Speaker, we recognize there is a need for more upgrading of our highways

and roads, but funding for road improvements has to be balanced with funding for

health care, education, and costs associated with providing other government

services to the public.

Mr. Speaker, this is a significant investment in our highway infrastructure.

At almost $122 million, it is one of the highest allocations in highway

construction in this Province since Confederation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: During our Jobs and Growth consultations last year,

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians told us they wanted government to invest more

in transportation infrastructure. Mr. Speaker, government is responding to that

request and investing more in transportation in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for a copy of his statement just before

the House sat today. The minister talks about $22 million in the budget for road

work this year, $6 million over last year. Better, I say to the minister,

better, but not nearly enough.

The minister himself, when he became minister -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, what is wrong with them?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, the minister himself, when he became minister,

after waiting nine or ten years to become minister, said that if he did not get

the amount of money for roads this year doubled, he would not accept anything

less. Now we get $6 million - 33 per cent - not nearly enough.

He talks about, over the past number of weeks, making announcements. He is

trying to get as much good publicity out of this as he possibly can. He talks

about the Long Island Causeway, $2 million. Who deserves credit for that other

than the Member for Windsor-Springdale, who brought it up in this House of

Assembly many, many times?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: Also, the minister has the face and the gall to take about

the Roads For Rail Agreement; ten or fifteen years later, still thanking John

Crosbie for money for the Roads for Rail in this Province, and trying to get

good publicity out of that, Mr. Speaker.

Now, get this: how many times -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. J. BYRNE: By leave, just to conclude, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: No leave.

The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, the only thing that he has forgotten to do in this

Ministerial Statement is to total up the amounts spent from 1949 to 1972. He has

covered most years between then and now.

Mr. Speaker, transportation is no doubt a critical element in our Province

today; and highways, being the most common form of transportation, are very

critical. However, there are still many dirt roads in this Province, and there

are many paved roads in our Province that are in deplorable condition and

certainly need work done, some of them in my own district. I think what is

lacking for transportation in this Province is a long-term plan that will

systematically improve the roads throughout without any regard as to political

affiliation that the district may be in.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Youth Services and Post-Secondary

Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise before the House today to

update hon. members on the Student Investment and Opportunity Corporation, which

has an initial investment of $8.8 million that was announced during the Speech

from the Throne and in this year's budget.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS KELLY: In addition to absorbing $4.8 million in existing youth

employment programs, the corporation has $4 million for new initiatives.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS KELLY: I am pleased today to announce the allocation of the first $1.4

million for new programs and supports for our young people. We will announce

other initiatives as they are developed in the coming weeks and months.

The purpose of the corporation is to help potential and current

post-secondary education students gain work experience and employment which will

offset the cost of their education. The corporation has now been officially

established and a board of directors is in place.

Mr. Speaker, through this new corporation, my department is building on the

successes of existing programs, like SWASP, and identifying areas where new

supports are needed, especially in rural areas. The new initiatives are based on

recommendations and advice from the Province's Youth Employment Co-ordinating

Committee as well as reviews and evaluations of existing programs.

I am pleased now to provide highlights of how these new initiatives will help

our young people:

We currently have a Student Work and Services Program, commonly known as

SWASP, which provides work experience, paid employment and tuition vouchers for

students. We are very proud of this award-winning program which was devised in

this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS KELLY: I should say that similar models, after this Province developed

it, have now been adopted by other provinces across Canada.

Through funding from our new corporation, students employed through SWASP who

have completed one year of post-secondary education are now eligible to have the

duration of their work periods extended from eight weeks up to a possible

maximum of twelve weeks. The additional funding will also allow for more

placements in rural areas of the Province and will enable us to increase the

overall number of placements available through SWASP.

The corporation is also making SWASP a year-round program for young people

who need work placements during periods other than the summer. Additional funds

from the corporation will go towards work placements, counseling and career

planning supports.

We also identified a need for students in industrial training to gain work

experience. Through funding from the Student Investment and Opportunity

Corporation, we are developing a career-related program to provide employment

opportunities for students enrolled in industrial arts programs. This initiative

will be developed in consultation with the private sector as well as the College

of the North Atlantic and private colleges.

AN HON. MEMBER: You are going to have everybody working, if you don't

watch it.

MS KELLY: Yes, and three more to come yet!

Working in partnership with the federal government, we will target additional

funding towards the Community Access Program, which we all know as CAP, which

employs youth in Information Technology positions.

We are also providing funding towards Increased Wage Programs for

Post-Secondary Students. This initiative is aimed specifically at students from

rural communities who need to live away from home in order to gain work

experience that is directly related to their course of study.

Another way that we are addressing the needs of our students from rural areas

is through the Memorial University/College of the North Atlantic and Community

Service Council Small Enterprise Cooperative Placement Program. This program is

receiving funding from the corporation to provide opportunities for students in

co-operative education programs to obtain paid work terms for not-for-profit

agencies or rural businesses.

Mr. Speaker, the new initiatives my department has developed are intended to

provide work experience to our young people, to help reduce student debt levels,

to address specifically the needs of youth in rural areas and to help young

people in our Province to save towards their post-secondary education. While we

already have a number of youth initiatives in place, the Student Investment and

Opportunity Corporation is focused on building on these existing programs and

directing funding towards areas where additional supports are needed.

My department will be pleased to provide additional details to MHAs in the

very near future so that they can help their young student constituents across

our Province avail of these new employment opportunities.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I would like to thank the minister for forwarding me a copy of

her Ministerial Statement today. Certainly, I take the opportunity, on behalf of

members on this side of the House, to congratulate the department on some of the

initiatives that are put forward in her statement, and I congratulate them that

we finally see a government that is taking the youth of the Province very

seriously and are starting to address some of the concerns that are there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: What concerns me the most when I look at this statement, I

say, Mr. Speaker, is that several times throughout the statement they talk about

rural areas and the concern that people have in rural Newfoundland. Representing

a rural district, I certainly understand some of those concerns: the lack of

employment opportunities; the lack of training; the lack of wage subsidy

programs; and the high amount of student debt levels throughout our Province and

moreso in rural Newfoundland.

When we talk about these programs: most of the students that go out on these

programs have to work for minimum wage, another concern that the minister should

be looking at, doing something with the minimum wage of these students. The

concerns that the people who come from rural Newfoundland have are: the high

cost of attending school here in the city or other parts of the Province; the

travel; the lodging; and the fact that they are away from home, Mr. Speaker. The

opportunity for employment in rural Newfoundland is basically nil in a lot of

cases, and I hope that some of these programs address that concern.

We have a high amount of student debt that I don't see addressed in this

here, Mr. Speaker. Just within the past hour, I met with a young fellow from my

district who has a $50,000 debt and is planning in the next couple of weeks to

head off to Alberta. I would like to ask the minister and the government what

they are planning on doing for that person in their programs?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Are they on their feet in the House of Assembly addressing

those concerns, Mr. Speaker? Are we trying to put a band-aid on what needs a

major, major hospital visit? That is what we need here in this House, not a

band-aid solution but a visit to the hospital itself to check it out.

Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of concerns here in regard to student debt and

work experience. I say, we look out into rural Newfoundland and we look at the

businesses that are out there and we talk about wage subsidy programs - a lot of

those businesses are just keeping their heads above water. You are going to have

to put a little bit more emphasis into the students themselves, the training

that they have, and give them a light at the end of the tunnel, give them

something that they can look forward to.

When we look at a budget of $8.8 million, we had $4.8 million that was there

last year. Mr. Speaker, to get up and announce $8.8 million, it is really $4

million new dollars. It is $4.8 million that was in the existing youth

employment program that has been moved around and changed around.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MANNING: I say, Mr. Speaker, it is time that you start listening to

the youth of this Province and put the money where your mouth is.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for making available a copy of her statement in

advance.

There are several important improvements to the youth employment strategy

contained in the minister's statement, and we look forward to the details as

to how these are actually going to work. I will say that we certainly commend

the improvement of the SWASP program to make it a year-round program so it is

available to all students, and also the notion of providing an increased wage

program for post-secondary students who, if they have a job, may end up spending

all their money or most of their money supporting themselves, for board and

lodging or paying the cost of living away from home. I think that is very

positive.

One of the most creative ones can be, Mr. Speaker - we will wait to see the

details on how it works - the support for students in the industrial arts sector

of our schools who don't really get job opportunities and training

opportunities on the job, because it is very hard to get that job to get the

training. I look forward to seeing how this program is going to operate and hope

that it is a successful initiative.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform my hon. colleagues that a

general election for school boards will be held September 25, 2001.

This will be the second general election of school board trustees since

education reform. The first general election was held in February of 1998.

School board elections will be held on the same day as municipal elections.

Trustees elected at that time will hold office for a four-year term.

There are ten regional school boards and one Francophone board, the Conseil

Scolaire Francophone, in the Province. There will be fifteen trustees elected to

regional boards in the general election. Trustees to the conseil scolaire are

elected by individual school councils.

I commend the work of the trustees elected in the last general election, who

embraced the challenge of guiding the ten new school boards for the first years

following educational reform. During the term of the first fully-elected school

boards, these trustees took on many challenges, not the least of which was

consolidating schools and school populations. We are deeply indebted to them for

their monumental efforts in the initial years of our new school system. The

students in our schools were well served by these dedicated individuals and as a

result of their hard work and vision, these students are able to avail of

improved educational programs and services.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of government, I thank all of those trustees who have

given freely of their time and talents to serve the interests of education.

There can be no better way for a person to volunteer services than in the

interest of children, in particular in the interests of children in our schools.

Therefore, I encourage people throughout the Province to consider offering

themselves for election to one of the 150 positions to be filled on September

25. There will continue to be many opportunities for our school boards as they

work with all education stakeholders to improve the high levels of education in

this Province.

As our student population continues to decline, we must find innovative ways

to ensure our children are provided access to the educational programs and

services they require to meet the challenges they will face throughout their

lives. Students in our schools today will live and work in a global economy.

They will compete with students from all over the world for employment.

Therefore, we need school trustees with a vision for the future which will

prepare our children to be the best in the world. Serving children can be one of

the most gratifying tasks a person can undertake.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage those who want to make a difference in the education

of children in their area to offer themselves for election on September 25.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, unfortunately I did not get a copy of your release,

but in response to what the minister has said, certainly, when it comes to

trustees they have had such a difficult term in coming to grips with the, I

suppose, reform and the restructuring.

I hope, minister, when the elections come up this fall that we, indeed, have

enough people who will put their names forward, to go forward as trustees, to

carry on that job. Again, I say to you, I am not convinced that there will be,

because this government, when it came to school boards, I say to you, Mr.

Speaker, that they used these school boards for their own purposes and as buffer

zones against the decisions they were responsible for but which they placed upon

the shoulders of the trustees as they went around this Province closing down

schools, trying to balance budgets, trying to deal with a system that is

certainly underfunded.

I say to the minister, yes, I do hope that people will come forward as

trustees -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the member's time is up.

MR. HEDDERSON: - and that they can continue on to give the very valued

service that I know they have given.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess everyone already knew there was going to be a school board election

September 25 because of the legislation placed. It is an opportunity to thank

those who have served school boards, but also to acknowledge that the people who

took on the task were, in fact, given responsibilities by this government which

were downloaded to them to carry out budgetary restraint, and forced to make

decisions that this government did not want to make themselves. At the same

time, when they were looking for improved budgets, for capital budgets, the

purse strings were held by the government so they could not do the things that

were positive.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: I hope, Mr .Speaker, that in this next round of elections

those people will actually have some control over the future of school

operations in their districts.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, if I may, I would like to rise on a point of

personal privilege. If I heard correctly -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

MR. MATTHEWS: I heard the hon. member from the Conception

Harbour-Whitbourne area -

AN HON. MEMBER: Conception Harbour?

MR. MATTHEWS: Wherever he is from, the hon. the critic for Education -

AN HON. MEMBER: Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. MATTHEWS: - say in his response to the statement from the minister

that government uses school trustees for our own advantage and for our own ends.

Essentially, Mr. Speaker, my

interpretation of what he is saying is that he

interprets the role and the function of a school trustee as being some sort of a

lackey or a person who is incapable of using their own intelligence, performing

their own functions, doing their job adequately, doing what they were elected

for.

I want to say to the hon. member that, as a former school trustee for eight

years, I take personal exception to the aspersions and to the slur and to the

slant that the hon. member has put on the character, the role, the obligation

and the capability of school trustees in this Province!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: I believe, Mr. Speaker, it is incumbent upon him to either

affirm that he has no respect for trustees or else to withdraw the scurrilous,

slurrilous' comments that he just made with respect to their function!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair will certainly take the point that the hon. minister has raised and

will review the Hansard and take it under advisement.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is about time for the Minister of Mines and Energy to wake up; and if we

have had any

part in waking him or that government up, then hear, hear, I say to

the Member for Conception Bay!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Premier. In

1994, the government of Newfoundland and Labrador basically called for proposals

to privatize what was formerly known as Newfoundland and Labrador Computer

Services. As I recall at the time, the government invited proposals from the

private sector and eventually accepted the proposal submitted by the consortium

led by NewTel. Newfoundland and Labrador Computer Services then became known as

xwave and became part of the Aliant group of companies. As part of the

privatization deal, government contracted all of its IT requirements at the time

to xwave for and until March, 2002; a contract which was worth approximately

$170 million over its lifetime.

I would like to ask the Premier today: A couple of weeks ago he was

confronted with the issue in Corner Brook, which he said that he would meeting

with NATI, which is the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Technology

Industries', that if they were going to sole source it again for another

several years, that he would sit down with them and explain it.

I would like to ask the Premier today: In view of the public commitments that

you have made, have Cabinet discussed this issue? If so, what detail have you

discussed? Have you made a decision on what you will do for the government's

own IT requirements? For example, will you sole source it or will you call

public tenders? Has that decision been made yet?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TULK: No, no, I am just waiting.

Mr. Speaker, let me just say that there has been no decision made on the

awarding of any contract for government services. As a matter of fact, I think

the President of Treasury Board and myself are meeting with NATI to discuss - we

have met with them on a couple of occasions and we are meeting with them further

this afternoon to discuss their concerns at -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: I think it is at 5 o'clock this evening, if I am not

mistaken.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: We are meeting with NATI this afternoon to discuss their

concerns.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a question to the Premier.

This is a huge potential contract. We are probably talking in the vicinity of

$200 million. The provincial government, as most people in this House know, is

the largest possible or potential client for IT companies in the Province. It is

absolutely huge. I would like to ask the Premier this question: Has government

conducted an independent, objective analysis of the current procurement

arrangements? If you have done that, did that objective, independent analysis

include an economic analysis of the sector, an analysis of the value of

expenditures received made under the current arrangements or current agreements,

of benefits and constraints of the agreement to the local industry? Have you

done that analysis to guide government and Cabinet, ultimately, in making a

decision on which way they go or what they will do with their IT requirements

from 2002, when this agreement expires, and beyond?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I hope, I say to the hon. gentleman, that the same

thing does not happen to us that has happened to maybe some of the information

services in the Province where, if you call out of here now, you get somebody in

Ontario.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the hon. gentleman that what we are doing-

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Pardon me?

AN HON. MEMBER: You are the fellows who let those contracts, not us.

MR. TULK: To who? A great Newfoundlander.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. gentleman that we have had

our people analyze this situation, take a look at it, and that we are meeting

with NATI this evening, this afternoon, to try to -

MR. FITZGERALD: (Inaudible) had nothing to do with the contracts you

awarded.

MR. TULK: What is your problem, Rog?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: - to alleviate their concerns and to discuss them with them,

and to see if indeed we can address everybody's concerns involved.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess the concern surrounding -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: The concerns that I am interested in leaving are not the

concerns of any particular group or company but the concerns of the people of

the Province. This is a huge piece of business that government is about to make

a critical decision on. It is my understanding that government has not conducted

a thorough analysis of this contract over the last seven years. It is my

understanding that government has not looked at the economic analysis of the

sector; that government has not looked at the benefits and constraints of this

agreement; that government has done no research, for example, to try to

determine and ascertain departmental views. In other words, government is about

to make a decision without any detailed information before them.

I would like to ask the minister this question: If he has that information -

he says they have had a look at it - will he table what government had the

public service do in evaluating this contract over the last seven years?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman would obviously love to be a

member of Cabinet. Sometime in the future, the distant future, when his hair is

as gray as mine, maybe he will be.

Let me say to him that whatever has been done has been done for Cabinet, and

Cabinet has not made a decision on this issue as of yet. When that decision is

made, any documents that are not related to Cabinet, sure, you can have them.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, we will give it to you whenever we want,

whenever we are ready, whether it is applicable now or later, because they have

so much contempt for the public of the Province when it comes to -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Yes, you do! Yes they do, Mr. Speaker!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: And your record as a government demonstrates that clearly.

Don't say no to me when I can say yes and demonstrate it clearly to you, I say

to the minister!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member now to get to his question.

MR. E. BYRNE: I will ask the minister this question - or the Premier. The

contract in the last seven years was worth about $170 million. This one is worth

about $200 million. There were good reasons in 1994, Mr. Speaker, to enter into

the situation that we did; but today there is no good reason, as I see it, not

to open up the entire call to anybody who wishes to make a proposal so that the

people of the Province can -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question.

MR. E. BYRNE: The question to the minister or to the Premier, Mr.

Transparency and Accountability, is why won't you do it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, Hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, when you talk about contempt for process, the hon.

gentleman knows as well as I do that there is a Cabinet progress in place in

this country. He knows that, as well as I do, if you destroy that Cabinet

progress you basically destroy our form of government. He knows that, but yet he

will continually day after day get up here and ask for documents that are

Cabinet documents, and he knows full well. In the process of his sham openness

and transparency, I say to him, because that is what it is, he will stand up and

twist the words of people and twist the actions of government to try and make

believe that he is more open than somebody else.

Let me say to the hon. gentleman: Cabinet has not made a decision on this

process. We are meeting with NATI. Hopefully we will address their concerns, and

there are concerns on both sides of the issue, and we will address (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Here is what this member knows: You wanted to charge me $10,000 to get access

to information on THM levels in the Province. Here is what this member knows. I

ask you: Do you know?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member now to get to his question, since he is on a

supplementary.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me ask the minister this question. He knows full well of all the

information requests that he and his government have turned down from me. I am

not going to get into that debate. We will save that for another time. Let me

ask him this question: Has government talked to xwave, Aliant, any company or

individual associated or contracted by xwave, in looking at, or being lobbied by

xwave or any company or individual associated with xwave, in trying to ensure

that this contract remains sole-sourced?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. gentleman, let me just

answer his question very quickly. We talked to everybody who is involved in this

process. We will continue to talk to them, and we are going to talk to NATI

again this evening.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, my question again is for the Premier or the

minister. Under the current contract, xwave was required of its original, over

the last several years, to spin off some IT activity - worth about 1 per cent or

2 per cent of the total contract - to other IT companies in the Province. What

are you proposing to do now, Minister? Will you call a public tender? Are you

planning to extend and open up the process so that every company - why can't

you make that commitment? If you have a benefit analysis done why don't you

just open up the process, put out the criteria and let evert single company, who

can provide that type of service to this Province, bid on it, so they can

provide the type of service to the government, and ultimately, all of us will

benefit by cheaper, better productive and more competitive stuff being provided

to the people?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, again, the hon. gentleman knows that - and this is

what was done the last time around - there are reasons for sole sourcing

contracts, for sole sourcing people to do certain things. As you move along a

certain line, obviously, you can get more into the public tender contract. He

knows that. There is no point in me saying any more than that to him about that

side of it, but we will try to work out the best deal for the people of

Newfoundland and for the IT industry in Newfoundland by talking with NATI, xwave

and anybody else, I say to the hon. gentleman, who is concerned. The deal will

be whatever is in the best interest of the IT industry in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to discuss with

officials from the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Technology

Industries in a concerned paper that they have provide to me. I believe they

have also provided it to government. Clearly, it shows that the IT industry has

grown significantly, worth about $700 million since 1994. They are ready to

compete in an open, fair, level sort of way if government provides them that

opportunity. The question is: Why can't you stand up today and make the

commitment that whatever process and terms will evolve, that it will be open, it

will be fair, it will be level, and that every company, who has the expertise to

deliver services to the government and to us, the people of the Province, that

they will in fact have an opportunity to do so?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development.

MR. TULK: Let me say to the hon. gentlemen that we will do - through

analyzing the situation, through discussions with xwave, through discussions

with NATI, through discussions with other people concerned - what is in the best

interests - and I hope he is listening - of a developing industry, a very good

industry, namely; the Information Technology industry in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, we will try to increase the salaries of people - and that is one

of the problems in the IT industry. We will try to ensure that we have a good,

core functioning IT industry in the Province. Hopefully, we can accomplish that

through discussions with NATI, xwave and others concerned. (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Yes, as a matter of fact, Minister, there are a few other

things that I want to ask you now - was there anything else?

Mr. Speaker, final supplementary. My question for the minister is this,

particularly in view of his answer just now: Wouldn't you agree, and wouldn't

the Premier agree, that the only way to continue to grow an IT industry in the

Province is to encourage competition amongst Newfoundland IT companies? In doing

that, wouldn't you agree that growth will stall here if you continue to shut

other companies out of the largest and biggest market for IT services in the

Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural

Development.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, obviously the hon. gentlemen must know that when

you get into a developing industry there are certain things that you can do

through a public tender. That is the purpose of the changes that were made to

the Public Tender Act. There are certain things that you can do through the

Public Tender Act and there are certain things that you cannot. As the industry

grows -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: As the industry grows there should be an increasing amount of

public tender. We have seen that in this Province on a number of occasions; in

the telephone industry, the cable industry, and so on. We have seen that happen.

It is a progression that has to take place.

What we will be discussing with xwave and NATI - what we are trying to do

here is to keep a core industry and at the same time, as people develop the

capabilities to be competitive and to carry on certain aspects of the work, to

see that they get it. That will be the aim in our discussions with NATI, with

xwave, and with any other IT group in the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Premier about the state of the Province's water

report.

Premier, other members of your Cabinet have said that the document has gone

to Cabinet. You say it has not gone to Cabinet. Really, you are all over the

place on this. If what you are saying is true and it has not gone to Cabinet,

Cabinet no longer have an interest in it, then you no longer have a reason to

withhold this report from the people fo the Province. Premier, will you table

this report and share with the people of the Province the information that is

contained within it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate an opportunity to give an answer in the Legislature today that I

gave outside the Legislature to the media yesterday; which, of course, they

decided to carry what they thought were the pertinent parts for their reporting.

The issue is this, and the clarification is good for the public record and

for Hansard. There was a document in draft form by an official of the Department

of Environment in 1996, that found no agreement. It was intended for Cabinet. As

I said yesterday, outside the Legislature, the Cabinet, the government, this

government, was looking for information five years ago about the water supplies,

the drinking water in Newfoundland and Labrador, because we want to make sure

that we are on top of the issues and protect the water supplies in the best

interests of the health and safety of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. We were

being proactive and looking for information, through our officials, about the

condition and state of the water supplies in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The official who was given the primary responsibility to begin drafting a

report - because it does cover four different departments now: Environment,

Health, Government Services and Lands, and Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

There has been an interdepartmental committee, for several years, looking at

water quality issues. The official who wrote the report, based on certain

statistical information, when he subjected it to other officials in the same

department, and other officials in the other departments that have

responsibility, found nobody who agreed with the thoughts and ideas.

The statistical information is clear and is available anytime, in terms of

the testing that was done, the assessments of water quality levels. It is

available today, just like it was five years ago, to any Newfoundlander and

Labradorian.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Premier now to complete his answer.

PREMIER GRIMES: There were some thoughts and ideas, and some

recommendations that other officials disagreed with. The Cabinet and the

government -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER GRIMES: That you know nothing about because you have never been

in one, and probably will never be.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, we can only use information from officials

if there is agreement and consensus, and it can provide direction for decision

making. The standard that we have set as a government is that if there are

reports and documents -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Premier now to complete his answer quickly.

PREMIER GRIMES: - that are used by the government to make decisions, we

would gladly make them public anytime because we know that the people of the

Province would come to the same conclusions based on the same.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Premier, you just said yourself that there are

conflicting opinions about this report. Even if there is one official who feels

that there is information in this report pertaining to the health and safety of

the people of this Province, then there is no justification for withholding the

information.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary, I ask him to get to his question.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Premier, you have a moral obligation to the people of this Province to share

with them information regarding their public health and safety. I will ask you

again today: Are you going to release that report?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I don't know what the issue is that the

hon. member is trying to pursue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The fact of the matter is this: The statistical information that was in that

draft report - which did not form the basis of a final report on which the

Cabinet could take any decisions because there was so much disagreement amongst

the officials - that talked about the measurement of certain levels in water

supplies of certain potential contaminants is in the public domain, has been

given to every single town council and municipality, has been used by them to

judge whether or not they change chlorination levels or not. It was five years

ago, Mr. Speaker. What is important, and what has been very important to that

point in time, is that all of the relevant information, in terms of the testing

of water supplies, has been made available publicly in Newfoundland and

Labrador. It is on the Web site today. There is a report that is in the process

of now being established in terms of last year's issue in 2000. There is

another report for this year, for 2001. That is on the Web site as it is being

compiled.

The relevant question was asked yesterday by a member of the media who said:

Don't the people of Newfoundland and Labrador have a right to know what the

state of their water was that they drank five years ago? I said: Yes,

absolutely, they do. The information that gives them that, they already have.

The statistical information in that report is available, and has been available

for some time, for anyone who wants it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Premier, if you are telling me today that the information that is in that

report is already out there then what are you hiding? Why will you not release

that report?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Who are you to say to the people of this Province that

they have no right to the information pertaining to their public health and

safety? Release the report.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary. I ask him to get to his question.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, let me restate for clarity the position of this government. This

government, Mr. Speaker, this particular government, firmly believes that the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador, given access to the same information - and

listen carefully, Mr. Speaker, if they would. What I have said repeatedly, and

what this government believes, is that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador,

any time, given access to the same information that we use to make decisions,

would probably, fair-minded people, come to the same conclusions.

There was no information in that particular report that was used to make

decisions by the government because there was an incredible amount of

disagreement amongst officials as to what the statistical information should

conclude to. All of the statistical information is already in the public domain,

has been used by the managers of water systems in the Province to take

corrective actions over the years, Mr. Speaker. There is nothing in there that

is being hidden from anybody, and there was nothing in there that was used by

the government to make any decisions about water supplies in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, my question today is to the President of

Treasury Board, one simple, straightforward question that requires a very

simple, straightforward answer. The minister budgeted $40 million for salary

increases this year in the budget. This figure, the minister had stated

publicly, was based on 3 per cent in the public sector. I want to ask the

minister now: Will she give the House the revised figure based on the tentative

agreements now that are going for ratification?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think it is important to note that they are not ratified at the moment.

MR. SULLIVAN: I said, they are going for ratification.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: They are not even out before the membership right now.

As we pointed out in our joint press conference, this year we will be assuming

an extra deficit in addition to the one we have to offset the cost of public

service wage increases, which we believe was a reasonable, respectful way to

show all the public sector what they have been through over the last ten years,

what we have all been through with respect to wage freezes and an economy which

we have all worked together to try to improve.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Is the minister telling us that she does not know the cost of the agreements

that are going for ratification, or that she is not going to give us the figure?

Which one?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I believe I have answered in terms of where

we are. First of all, the agreements have not been ratified. This year, as we

all know

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible) budget $40 million?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: This year, as we all know, all of the contracts come in

at different points in time with respect to when their contracts expire and the

annualized amount. So, in addition to the portion of the $100 million which we

have allocated, about $50 million, we have also identified a deficit which we

will bring forward for next year to add on to our budget in the tune of $36

million.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, regarding

the decision to drop alpine skiing from the Newfoundland and Labrador Winter

Games this coming February in Gander. This sport has been part of the last four

provincial Winter Games and often acts as a springboard for athletes who aspire

to compete in the Canada Winter Games, where this Province has had

representation now for more than a quarter of a century.

Alpine skiing is considered a traditional winter sport, Mr. Speaker, and I

ask if the minister can explain why alpine skiing has been dropped from our

provincial Winter Games, especially since the White Hills Ski Lodge has proposed

to host the event?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, we are looking forward to a very exciting

Winter Games in Gander, coming up in 2002 -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. AYLWARD: - where we will have the most ever, the highest number,

of athletes competing.

We would say that there is a minimum criteria that is established, and one of

the criterion includes the number of sites. There has to be a minimum number of

sites in the Province participating. At this point in time, the proposal that

was put forward to the provincial games committee does not include the minimum

number of sites. Our officials have been looking at it, but that is the problem

at this point. It is a sport that has been there traditionally but we also have

to have a certain number of sites to make it a credible event. The criteria has

to be met.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The sites that are represented, of the eight regions, five do meet the

criteria, I say to the minister; but, through the selection process, there was

no communication whatsoever with the governing body for alpine skiing. They

filled out their application to be included and heard nothing until they

received a letter saying that they would not be. Why, I ask the minister, was

there no consultation and no effort to reach some kind of compromise and find a

way to keep alpine skiing in the games? I ask the minister if he will review

this decision with the view of including and keeping alpine skiing as part of

the Newfoundland and Labrador Winter Games?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. AYLWARD: Certainly, Mr. Speaker, we are always open minded. The

games committee, which consists of the individuals in Gander who want to host

the games, along with our own officials, I certainly will ask them to review the

information. I already did, as a matter of fact, because we have had

representation on this matter. I have already asked them to review what

occurred, and the exchange of information and so on, and I ask again for a

review of the criteria that we are using, because it is a traditional sport. I

give that undertaking today. We are already underway at this moment and I will

certainly be able to report where we are in the next short period of time.

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.

MR. HARRIS: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, on a point

of order.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to raise a point of order which I guess borders on a point of

privilege as well. I note that there is a very strong habit with members of the

Official Opposition, in asking questions, rather than asking questions to the

minister through the Chair, to refer to people directly - the Premier: What are

you trying to hide, et cetera, et cetera.

I recognize that some members are new and are not used to parliamentary

procedure, but I know the Chair has brought it to the intention of members

before. My concern is this: if this is a strategy of the Official Opposition to

sort of personalize - and it is a more aggressive stance, I recognize that, and

perhaps a more effective one - I do not want to be in a situation, Mr. Speaker,

where, if we are following the rules in the House in asking questions directly

through the Chair to the minister, and the Official Opposition is taking a far

more aggressive approach: What are you trying to hide? You answer this question

MR. FITZGERALD: You are being outclassed, boy, in Question Period. You

are being outclassed. You argue when you get up (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr .Speaker.

I say to the Member for Bonavista South, this is not a question of being

outclassed. I can be just as aggressive and shout just as loud as the next

person, and I can point fingers and yell and say: You and you this. I can do

that, and I would be quite happy to do it, but what I want to know is, if that

is a new rule of the House and the newest style of asking questions, then we

will also adopt that very same strategy. If we are not going to change the rules

of parliamentary procedure that go back however many decades or hundreds of

years, then we should ensure that it be consistently applied and that members

not be allowed to do that.

I simply say that, Mr. Speaker, because I would be quite happy to adopt a new

strategy if that is the rule of the House; but if it is not, I would want to see

that other members are not permitted to disobey the rules in that way.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I just want again to respond to the hon. member's point of order, and

indeed it is a very legitimate point that he raises. The Chair has, on a number

of occasions, pointed out to members that when questions are being put, and when

answers are being put to the House, that they must be in the third person and

directed to the Chair. On a number of occasions I have asked members to do that.

I know that on occasion members, when they get into their questions, sometimes

ignore that rule, but I have brought it to your attention. Again I want to ask

members that when constructing the questions, make sure that your questions are

directed to the Chair, not to individuals in the Chamber, and in the third

person.

MR. SULLIVAN: And the answers too.

MR. SPEAKER: And the answers as well, of course. Yes, the answers must be

directed through the Speaker to members.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave

to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Provincial Court Act, 1991 No.

2. (Bill 20)

Petitions

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a petition about the bulk export of water from the Province:

We, the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, wish to petition the House of

Assembly, with copies to the House of Commons, to oppose the bulk export of

water from this Province. Every major resource, such as Churchill Falls, that

has been developed in Newfoundland and Labrador has resulted in the majority of

benefits going outside the Province. It is time that we demand our full and fair

share. With water being one of the few resources remaining where we have the

opportunity to deliver maximum benefits through jobs, spinoff from secondary

processing, as well as royalties, we demand that any water sold must be bottled

and processed in this Province.

These petitions came in from the Pouch Cove area. We continue to receive

petitions. It is an issue that I have addressed on a number of occasions in the

House. I will continue to address this issue in this House for as long as it

takes to convince government of the same opinion that the former Premier had

taken, that water has to be bottled and processed in this Province to provide

maximum jobs, maximum spinoff benefits, and the royalties as well, to this

Province, as opposed to doing to what the Premier is suggesting and allowing

water to go out in bulk to perhaps be processed elsewhere, to be utilized

elsewhere, to give the maximum benefit to somebody else.

We should have learned a long time ago that we cannot continue to allow our

resources to go out of this Province as raw resources without the secondary

processing in this Province. We have to demand that the people of this Province

get the jobs and the spinoffs from our resources. That is what is wrong with the

economy in this Province. The fact that our people, our young people, our

educated people are moving away to find work elsewhere because they have not

been able to find employment in this Province. The only reason for that is

because we are shipping our resources out as raw resources and not demanding

that we get our maximum benefit, our maximum spinoff, from those resources. That

is what the people of this Province want. We are going to continue to demand

that on behalf of the people of the Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. LUSH: Motion 3. I move first reading of a bill entitled,

An Act

Respecting The Citizens' Representative. (Bill 10)

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to introduce a

bill, "An Act Respecting The Citizens' Representative," carried.

(Bill 10)

On motion, Bill 10 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

MR. TULK: Motion 4. I move first reading of a bill entitled,

An Act To

Amend the Shops' Closing Act. (Bill 19)

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Labour to introduce a bill, "An Act To

Amend The Shops' Closing Act," carried. (Bill 19)

On motion, Bill 19 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. LUSH: Order 13, Mr. Speaker. Second reading of a bill,

An Act

Respecting Municipal Elections. (Bill 7).

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act Respecting Municipal

Elections." (Bill 7)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It gives me great pleasure to stand in the House today to introduce the

second reading of Bill 7,

An Act Respecting Municipal Elections.

This bill, if enacted, will replace four pieces of legislation: St. John's

Municipality Elections Act; the provisions of the Municipalities Act, 1999; the

City of Corner Brook Act; and the City of Mount Pearl Act, and will therefore

then become the enabling legislation for all future municipal elections in the

Province.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say at the beginning that this legislation has been

developed in consultation with direct input from the municipal stakeholders. My

officials have met with the City of St. John's, the City of Mount Pearl, the

City of Corner Brook, and representatives of the Newfoundland and Labrador

Federation of Municipalities, Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Municipal

Administrators Association. Also, the office of the Chief Electoral Officer has

provided valuable assistance in the development of this legislation. The

involvement of these stakeholders has been invaluable to us, and has served to

ensure that the legislation evolving from this process provides the appropriate

legislation tool for municipal elections in the Province for years to come.

Mr. Speaker, as everyone knows, municipal elections in the Province are

currently - as was already repeated - administered by four different statutes.

This situation arose due to the fact that elections were included in the

statutes at the time of their enactment and no previous consolidated effort has

been undertaken. Subsequent then to the 1997 general municipal elections,

discussions between my department and the St. John's, Mount Pearl, Corner

Brook, Federation of Municipalities and the NLAMA group, resulted in a

consistent approach to the conducting of municipal elections in the Province.

This could best be achieved through the development of this Municipal Elections

Act.

It was also felt by stakeholders that in addition to consolidating and

modernizing the election provisions of the four previously mentioned acts, the

new legislation should also address the issues of alternate methods of

conducting municipal elections and issues of disclosure of campaign

contributions. Therefore, it was considered important that the new legislation

be developed in sufficient time to facilitate the elections in 2001, when these

elections will occur.

I would like to take a couple of moments to highlight some of the more

significant changes to the municipal electoral process outlined in the bill.

Returning officers are authorized to delay the opening of the polls on election

day, or to postpone an election for a period of up to seven days if the

conditions warrant. For example, like inclement weather.

In circumstances where the number of candidates nominated for an election, or

by-election, is less than the vacancies on the council, previously it would be

incumbent upon the councils to contact the minister and ask for the nominations

to be made. Under this legislation we are asking that the councils call for a

second set of nominations before the minister can appoint persons to fill these

vacancies.

Also, something new is that the town clerk of each municipality is the

returning officer now for the municipal elections. At the start of the election

process each council will be required to appoint an alternate who would be able

to carry out the duties and responsibilities of the returning officer, if for

reason the town clerk is unable to fill the role. The returning officer, as

opposed to the council, which is currently the case, is authorized to appoint

all necessary election officials and to determine the number and location of

polling divisions.

Each council will decide whether to hold nominations on one day, as is

currently the case, or more than one, but not exceeding five. The nomination

process will take place between the twenty-eighth and the twenty-first day

preceding election day, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays. If

nominations are held on more than one day the hour for nomination will be from

9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., not from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. as is currently the

case. Nominations for municipalities that conduct their elections by way of vote

by mail, will take place on each of the five working days between the

thirty-fifth and the twenty-eighth day preceding the election and will be held

from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. each day. That is something new that the City of St.

John's was asking for, and other people are interested in that particular part

of the legislation as well.

Residency requirements for candidates in municipal elections; normally six

months but has now been changed to thirty days, the same as for voters. Also

municipal employees, other than the clerk, manager and paid department heads,

will be able to take a leave of absence to run for the election. Any employee

who is elected must resign from his or her position with a council before taking

the oath of office. This provision, as many of you know, came about as a result

of the fire chiefs who wanted to run. So they can take a leave of absence and

run for an election under the now proposed legislation.

The chief administrator officer of an agency or a body established and

controlled by council will not be able to seek election to that council unless

he or she resigns from that position. Members of the House of Commons, the

Senate, the House of Assembly and judges of provincial and supreme courts cannot

be nominated for elections to a municipal council.

Any eligible voter who has reason to believe that he or she will be unable to

vote on election day can vote in an advance poll or by proxy. The requirement

for proxy voting has been streamlined to ensure the integrity of the process.

Returning officers will only be able to provide proxy applications directly to

an impeditive voter or to his designated proxy.

Mr. Speaker, municipalities will be able to use the provincial and federal

list of electors to assist in the preparation of their voter's list. As well,

the voter's list prepared for the municipal election can be used for election

purposes. Any election official, candidate, or agent, who uses the list for any

other purpose, is guilty of an offence.

Candidates and their agents are prohibited from campaigning or distributing

campaign materials within thirty meters of a polling station on election day. As

well, mobile polling booths can be used to conduct an election in institutions

where the number of eligible voters does not warrant having a polling booth

opened for a twelve hour period.

As well, municipalities are authorized to conduct their elections by way of

vote by mail, with the exception of the Cities of Corner Brook, Mount Pearl, and

St. John's. Any municipality that decides to conduct their election in this

manner will require ministerial approval. All municipalities that applied the

vote by mail methodology will have to adopt regulations to govern their election

process. These regulations will be subject as well to ministerial approval.

Mr. Speaker, another item where the margin of defeat in an election is ten

votes or less, or a higher number, that each municipality can establish and a

candidate makes a request, the returning officer must conduct a recount, the

cost of which has to be borne by the municipality. Any candidate can request a

judicial recount of the ballots cast in the election, irrespective of the margin

of defeat.

Also, within ninety days of the date of the election each elected candidate

will have to file with the returning officer a disclosure statement showing the

total amount of money contributions made to his or her campaign, the listing of

all individual contributions over $100, and the names of the contributors. Once

filed, campaign disclosed statements become official records of the municipality

and will be available for public inspection upon request. An elected candidate

who does not file a disclosure statement in the required time, or fraudulently

files an incorrect statement, is guilty of an offence.

Mr. Speaker, while this bill contains many provisions that streamline and

modernize municipal elections process, by far the most significant changes

relate to authority provided for municipalities to conduct their elections for

the vote by mail, and the requirement for elected candidates to file campaign

disclosure statement.

The vote by mail methodology was developed and is administered by Canada

Post. While the authority to apply this methodology is new to the Province, it

has been used in a number of Ontario municipalities in the last two general

municipal elections in that province. The experience of those municipalities has

been that voter participation has increased, and in some cases significantly,

and the overall cost of running their elections has been reduced, while at the

same time maintaining the integrity of democratic election principles. In

addition to its use in Canada, this method has been used sometimes in the United

States. For example, the State of Oregon uses vote by mail for all federal,

state and municipal elections. Our analysis of voting by mail indicates that it

could be an effective method of conducting elections for some of the Province's

municipalities. In fact, Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the City of

St. John's intends to conduct this year's election in this manner if the

bill is enacted.

The issue of the need for campaign disclosure has become a significant issue

in the recent municipal elections, especially in some of the urban

municipalities. It has now been addressed, and the bill requires that all

elected municipalities within ninety days of the election file with the

returning officer of that particular municipality, showing a disclosure

statement, showing the total amount of money contributed to their campaign, and

it must also contain a listing of all individual contributions over $100

together with the name of the contributor, which is pretty much like we have in

the provincial.

Mr. Speaker, I have outlined some of the most significant provisions of the

bill. There are other numerous ones, together with those outlined, that make for

a municipal elections act for this Province that consolidates, modernizes,

streamlines the municipal election process, and is strongly supported by the

department's principal stakeholders, and which government is proud to bring

forward.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to make a few comments concerning Bill 7, and, Mr. Speaker, to

inform the minister that we will be supporting this particular piece of

legislation. I personally believe that it is time we got into municipalities in

this Province, where they actually declare where their funding comes from to run

for municipal office, to run for mayor or deputy mayor. We feel that it is time

that this was put forward, so that we can have an open and very, very

transparent view for the people of our Province who are electing councils.

As many of the members in this House, I had the privilege of serving in my

municipality for five years. It is never easy. I guess being a councillor in a

municipality, from a political point of view, you are starting at the very

bottom of the scale. I say to my colleague - and I laugh - I believe the only

thing worse than this could be being a school trustee, but I certainly won't

get into that, I won't go there this afternoon.

I have read the legislation, Mr. Speaker, and I think it is a good piece of

legislation. Actually, I think what we are doing here is we are giving people

the right to vote by ballot, which is the same as a provincial election in the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I think that is quite right, quite fair,

and again, quite above-board. I believe we have to have the clerks in our

Province to be returning officers.

AN HON. MEMBER: Jack Harris (inaudible).

MR. FRENCH: The only way Jack might win now is if he got to count the

ballots himself; two for me and one for the other fellow. I say that in jest

now, Mr. Speaker.

The last comments that were made, you know, Mr. Speaker, as to who won what

election, as to what caused them to not win, I guess, can only be determined by

the candidate who runs for a particular office, himself or herself, and I guess

we have all, those of us who have served on councils, gone through this

procedure.

It is nice to see this legislation. It is nice to see legislation, Mr.

Speaker, where somebody cannot sit back and say: Well, we bought this person -

again he or she - body and soul. You know, we gave them a donation of X number

of dollars and because we contributed that money we now own that individual. I

don't like that, Mr. Speaker. I certainly don't like that, anybody being

owned, especially at that level of government, because that is the level of

government which sets the scale or sets the standard for all of our

municipalities. Those of us in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador who are

fortunate enough to have municipal councils, we know the benefit for the

council.

I always remember one time, when we get into paying taxes, how people do not

really want to pay their taxes. I remember being on council and being the

chairman of a committee and I heard a commotion in our hallway one day. A fellow

who was pretty angelical in his language was talking to the town manager. The

town manager, a little while later, came in and I said to him: John, what is

going on in the hall? He explained it to me and I said: Well, if this guy wants

a meeting with the committee, give it to him. Tell him we will meet him here

tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. Tell him the chairman of the committee has requested that

he be here at 9:00 a.m. and we are going to have a meeting. But, I said, before

we do that, I usually come down a bit early for meetings so I want you to make

sure that everything pertaining to this gentleman is laid on my desk so I will

have the opportunity to review it.

The next morning, of course, all of the committee members turned up, and

indeed the guy who owed his taxes. Mr. Speaker, when he got into the meeting he

was again very colorful, pointing out to us why he should not have to pay this

amount of money. After about ten minutes of listening to this fellow, who was

pretty colorful, I looked at the gentleman and said: Do you know what, Sir? You

are right. Of course, that led to another string of words. He said: There you

go. Look, even the chairman of the committee thinks I am right.

Now, he did not say it like that. He was a lot more colorful. I said: Yes,

Sir, indeed you are right, because the first notice you got was last October.

Somebody should have cut you off in October and here we are, five months later,

still talking about your case. So, before this day is out, I am going to find

out why we did not cut your water off five months ago; why we made a decision

and then waited five months to enforce the laws and the regulations of this

town. They are there for everybody else.

I knew at that time of probably eight or ten people who had their water cut

off. Of course, that brought on another course of very colorful words. He said:

There you are, the whole bunch of you. How stunned are you? Loom, even the

chairman of the committee thinks I am right. I said: Yes, I think you are right,

okay?

After saying that, of course, he jumped up and stormed out through the door.

Now, we had one gentleman on our council who was a bit older than most, a

fine fellow and a very hard-working man, and every once in awhile he would

interject to this guy: Look, pay your taxes. I have to pay mine; you pay yours.

These are the kind of people, Mr. Speaker, that I want to see run for

council. These are the people who are above-board, way above-board and who are

not owned by anybody.

When I ran and served for five years, I believe the highest donation I got

for my campaign was actually $200. Every other donation that I received was $5

or $25; and, at the end of the day, when all was said and done, I would gladly,

if I had to, have declared my amount; because the largest amount that went into

running my campaign came from me and my wife personally. I would gladly have

declared that, had I had to at that time, but at that particular time that was

not necessary.

I see by the new bill that it is now necessary, if a person gets a donation,

as we do in this hon. House, we have to declare where the money came from and

the amount of money we received. I am sure there are people who really do not

want to be associated sometimes with giving a particular candidate money, but so

be it. That is open, that is a policy that is above-board, and it is very

transparent. It is there for every person in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador who takes the time to see it.

As we all know now, Mr. Speaker, a lot of our municipalities are growing by

leaps and bounds. I know in my own area we are probably one of, if not the

largest and the fastest growing municipality in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador. I think this here says to me there is nobody now going to serve on a

council for ulterior motives because, like I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, we

cannot buy an individual now, he or she. The amount of money that somebody like

the minister, if he is sponsoring me to run for council, however much money he

gives me, or I give him if he is running, that amount of money has to be

declared, and at the end of the day there is nobody in the community who can

say: Look, that guy is bought and paid for; he is kept. Or: She is bought and

paid for; she is kept.

I welcome this legislation. I say this to you, Minister: I welcome this

legislation that brings in this openness and this transparency for the people of

communities in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We have all heard

this, if we live in a larger municipality, as to why so and so gets on council;

or, I can call him and have this fixed.

I have to say, in my own area - and I have two councils - I do not know of

anybody who works with these councils or serves on these councils who have been

bought and paid for by anybody; but I always find them very easy to deal with,

very easy to work with, and all their dealings with me have been very

transparent and certainly very much above-board.

Mr. Speaker, I welcome this bill. I am glad to see the bill here. It sets out

the guidelines as to what people who want to run for council can do. It talks

about no elections and so on. It talks about ballot boxes and it also talks

about having people declared as returning officers, and I welcome that. Who

better in a municipality to be the returning officer for a municipal election

than the clerk of that particular municipality? I know on election night in

September, for the two communities where I live, I will do my darndest to be at

both halls as the counts are being made and the announcements are being made as

to who gets elected to council.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I will close by saying to the minister that I think it is

a good piece of legislation. It is a piece of legislation which we on this side

of the House, the Official Opposition, will certainly be supporting; and when

the times comes to vote, we will certainly vote in favour of the motion.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you the but?

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

But, but, I say to the member.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say a few words on Bill 7. Finally, we have had -

AN HON. MEMBER: Give us an hour, Jack.

MR. J. BYRNE: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: Give us an hour.

MR. J. BYRNE: An hour? No problem.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, we have a piece of legislation that has been presented

by the Minister of Municipal Affairs, that seems to be taking the proper course.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: See? I give credit where credit is due. I always have, Mr.

Speaker, in this House, but then people will not give me a chance to say it.

AN HON. MEMBER: Let Hansard record the date.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: We will find out now.

Mr. Speaker, the minister today stood in his place and presented the bill. He

told us the reasons why the bill is being presented to the House. We also had

time enough, before it being presented in the House, so that we could review it.

As a matter of fact, we had a gentleman, Mr. Moore from Municipal Affairs, over

to review the legislation, to tell us the changes, or the proposed changes,

because they are not finished until it is voted on here in the House of

Assembly. We had a good meeting with him the other day on this issue and there

were some very interesting points happening here. This bill, by the way, is

really - it is too bad it was not included in 1999, when they did all the

changes to the Municipalities Act at that time. That is probably when it should

have been done. It is one piece of legislation that seems to be following the

proper process.

Usually we get legislation here that within months, or a year or so after, we

come back and have to change. Hopefully, this will not happen. It is logistics

within this legislation. I think the fact that there is going to be

consolidation of four acts now: The City of St. John's Act, the City of Corner

Brook Act, the Municipalities Act, 1999 and the provincial act with respect to

elections, it is a good thing. It simplifies it. Everybody is going to be

playing by the same rules. As a former mayor in a small town for seven years, I

know of what I speak when I speak about municipalities and the elections, and

the workings and the goings-on in the municipalities in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Now, some of the things that are interesting here, of course - one is the

disclosure with respect to candidates who are running for municipalities of the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The interesting point here with respect

to this change, the amendments here, would be the fact that only those people

elected will have to actually disclose the money they spent on a given campaign.

Rightly so! Because the people who are not elected won't be making decisions

with respect to the municipality and impacting upon people who are living in the

municipality.

Also, Mr. Speaker, within the changes themselves, now they are talking about

how there may be occasions where an election would have to be postponed or

delayed; for example, due to weather. That can be done, that is going to be

accommodated, within the act.

Also, opening of the polls: There may be some reason that the polls won't

open, for whatever reason. I don't know. There can be any number of reasons.

MR. SULLIVAN: A storm.

MR. J. BYRNE: A storm, for example. Say, if they are supposed to open at

nine and don't open until eleven, well they will be carried on a couple of

hours later in the evening, to give everybody the opportunity to vote within

that municipality.

Location of polls will be decided by the returning officer and not by other

people who, if the polls are in certain locations, would be more favourable to

certain candidates who are running.

Also, Mr. Speaker,

section 11. Previously, I think, if you had an election

and there wasn't an election called for a municipality and there weren't

enough candidates running, the minister could appoint people to the council,

councillors. Right now, with this change, there will have to be at least a

second call for an election, to give the people the opportunity to give second

thought to it and possibly encourage people to run. Again, a positive move.

Also, of course, the returning officer would be the town clerk. Again, a

proper position for the town clerk. Also, if the town clerk cannot make it,

there are conditions within the act that would allow them to appoint a

replacement, which makes sense also, Mr. Speaker.

Under

Part V, the minister talked about the mail-in vote or the ballot by

mail which is set up now by Canada Post. He said that the City of St. John's

is seriously looking at that procedure for this fall election, if this is

approved in this House of Assembly soon enough, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SULLIVAN: The Town of Labrador City is too.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes.

The other thing is that the cities can do this on their own, but the small

towns, if they want to have a mail-in vote, they have to get the permission of

the minister. There may be some arguments for or against that one, but I can

live with it. It is not a problem there, Mr. Speaker.

The mail-in vote impacts on the ability of the people to campaign. If a

candidate is running for election and they have a mail-in vote, it is great for

those people who are really well known or recognized within the municipality,

because once the people get the mail-in vote or they want to vote themselves,

they can vote, but once you vote you vote. So, if some other individual decides

to run and goes to the person's door, and then they decide they want to change

their mind, they really can't at that point in time, because they will have

already voted. So, that is one factor that should be considered, I suppose.

Also, the mail-in vote can actually reduce costs to the campaign and to the

municipality.

Section 14 sets the time, Mr. Speaker, with respect to the nomination

process, the nomination day. Previously, nominations were on one day. Now, if

they are going with the mail-in vote they can have a five-day nomination period

which certainly would be of benefit to the people who are trying to make up

their mind if they want to vote.

MR. SULLIVAN: I will mention another suggestion that I made that probably

should have been in it.

MR. J. BYRNE: What is that?

MR. SULLIVAN: They are supposed to be nominated by a certain date.

MR. J. BYRNE: Oh, yes. We do that. You have to be nominated by a certain

date, within a certain period, I say to the Member for Ferryland. That is

already there.

MR. SULLIVAN: There is no limit.

MR. J. BYRNE: There is no limit, I know.

Section 26. There is no need to be going into it clause by clause, because

there are quite a few clauses there. I am just picking out and highlighting

certain ones.

The voting by proxy. In the past, of course, that could be a very complicated

process where you have a number of candidates going to certain individuals, or a

certain group, and asking them to give them their authority to vote by proxy.

Right now, that is going to be simplified and it is going to be tightened up.

That will not be able to be abused like it has been in the past. Another good

move.

Also, the minister talked about it when he was up, and we will talk

(inaudible) was the list, the voter's list. We are working towards a universal

list, again, which is good for the people in the municipality, for the

candidates, and for all concerned throughout the Province.

As I mentioned earlier, Mr. Speaker, this is my last note here. The

candidates now, once they are elected, would have to disclose any money that has

been donated to them over $100. There is no limit on spending. They can spend

any amount of money they want, as far as I can understand with respect this new

piece of legislation here. The disclosure, anything over $100; most people, I

think, would agree that is a good thing.

MR. BARRETT: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I don't need to comment on that because I don't like to

be beholding to anyone, I say to the Minister for Works, Services and

Transportation.

Anybody who wants to make a contribution to my campaign are certainly welcome

to do so. I really do not go looking for any big amounts of money. I would

rather depend on the ordinary citizen within my district to give me

contributions, that way you get to represent the people who are voting you in.

Now the Minister for Works, Services and Transportation may have contributions

from big businesses, I do not know. He very well may. He has to live with that.

As I said, there is no limit on spending and maybe there should be some

consideration given to the limit on spending because in any given municipality -

for example, the City of St. John's - you might have an individual who is well

known, who has lots of money and wants to run, and a new person starting out who

is not in the system, relatively unknown, could be a great individual but does

not have the amount of money to spend. So there could be some unfair competition

from that perspective.

MR. BARRETT: Did Danny Williams give you a donation?

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I have to say, the Minister for Works,

Services and Transportation, and the Deputy Premier, says that one name more

often than everybody on this side of the House combined, since I have known the

man. It is unreal. The fear that that man has set in the heart of the Minister

of Works, Service and Transportation is completely unreal. I never saw it before

in my life. If the man is in the gallery that fellow is over there blood red

with blood pressure. Worried, worried to death.

Mr. Speaker, what I wanted to say with respect to this bill, other than the

interjections by the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, I said it.

I say to the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs: Hopefully, this piece

of legislation will not have to be amended in the near future and all the

concerns of the people who had input and consultation will be addressed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Mr. Walsh): The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am rising to speak at second reading on Bill 7,

An Act Respecting Municipal

Elections. The act, presently before the House, is a - I won't call it a

consolidation, because strictly speaking, it is not a consolidation, but what

has happened is a number of pieces of legislation have been replaced by this

one. Instead of having a separate elections acts for the City of St. John's,

the City of Mount Pearl, the City of Corner Brook, and the other municipalities,

generally, they are tied into the one elections act. A number of changes have

taken place as a result of this.

Generally speaking, I have to say that I support the act in principle, to

bring together this legislation and one set of rules that could be applied to

all municipalities. I do have some significant reservations, however, with

respect to some of the provisions that are included in this new act. The

principal one that causes me some concerns at the moment, and I have yet to be

satisfied by the explanations of them and it seems almost an experimental

process at this time, I am not so sure that we should jump right in to undertake

a voting by mail process for all the cities in the Province to undertake voting

by mail merely by a vote of council, and putting a set of rules in place that

are approved by the minister. First of all, we are dealing with a very short

time frame between now and September, and I do not know how soon these rules

will even be available or known, or be able to be vetted by the Minister of

Municipal Affairs. I understand that Canada Post is very interested in promoting

this issue of voting by mail.

I have some serious concerns. In the case of the St. John's municipal

election, for example, the voter turnout last time was fairly low, probably 55

per cent or so; but now, in addition to the 55 per cent of people who voted the

last time, the other 45 per cent is going to be ballots, to be put in people's

mailboxes, to 100 per cent of the voters.

It appears that there was at least 45 per cent who did not bother to vote the

last time, for one reason or another. Yet, the ballots for those 45 per cent of

the people will be put into people's mailboxes. It seems to me that there is

significant room for activity that would be inappropriate during elections. We

often hear of people so-called stuffing ballot boxes. It is very difficult to

stuff ballot boxes in a provincial election or municipal election under the

current rules, because the ballot box is there, there are people standing behind

it, there are individuals who have to come forward in person to vote, and there

are very special rules to be able to vote by proxy, very difficult rules to

allow people to have, in fact, a mail-in ballot if they apply for it. There are

very special ballots.

We do not have allegations of stuffing ballot boxes in provincial elections.

I have heard of them in nomination meetings, by various parties, from time to

time. I remember the famous one on Bell Island when there were many more ballots

in the box than there were people in the room. I do not know if Your Honour was

present at that occasion.

MR. SPEAKER: Just as a point of clarification, that was during the

federal election.

MR. HARRIS: That was in the federal election. That is a peculiarity,

fortunately, that we have not had experience of in provincial elections, where

there are more ballots than voters. We will not have that here either. We are

now proposing to allow a system that would - I will not say it would invite

fraud. I am not suggesting that it is inviting fraud. What I am suggesting is

that perhaps we have not yet figured out to what extent it would properly work

and to what extent it is open to abuse.

Mr. Speaker, I have seen some of the forms that have been provided by Canada

Post, who are interested in this business. When asked certain questions, the

officials of the Department of Municipal Affairs indicated that there is a voter

declaration that is required; that there must be an oath or affirmation taken by

the individual before identifying themselves and saying that they have not

otherwise voted, before they can do this.

To get back to the analogy of stuffing ballot boxes, all that has to be done

in this case, is that the ballot, and there are going to be thousands and

thousands of them out there, given to people who were not motivated enough to

vote in the last election but now, all of a sudden, they have a ballot which

they may well be willing to pass along to somebody who comes and asks for it, or

make it available to someone to get. In fact, all you have to do now, Mr.

Speaker, is sign a piece of paper. A signature on a piece of papers says: I, the

undersigned, swear or affirm that I am named on the voters' list for the

voting place and have not already voted in the election.

This is a document that is a sample of how this would all work, but there is

nothing here indicating that this is sworn or affirmed before a Commissioner for

Oaths; so I do not even think it would qualify as an affirmation or an oath and

thereby bring about the penalties for swearing a false affidavit or a false

oath, because it is not an affidavit, it is not an oath. It says it is, but it

is not.

I have, as I say, serious concerns because, in fact, by getting access to

these unused ballots, filling them out and putting them in a mailbox, you could

be literally stuffing the ballot box by putting a ballot in the mailbox. So,

instead of having a controlled, qualified voter booth where someone goes in

person or by proxy - and the proxy rules can be very strict and stringent -

every mailbox in the city or town in which the mailing vote takes place is a

ballot box. Instead of having numbered ballots that are controlled strictly by

returning officers, there are ballots in every household in the city or town in

which the mail ballot is going to be contained.

These are very serious derogations from the normal security that we attach to

democratic voting procedures - very serious. I am concerned that we have not

thought it through in terms of how the security for this could work and what

level of confidence we could place in an election conducted by a mail-in ballot

with rules that we know not what. Right now, there are a number of sections in

the act -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Well, actually one section.

Section 54 is the

section of the

act that governs ballots by mail - one

section of the act. I would submit that

this is a very complex process; complex if we want to ensure that the democracy

of one person/one vote actually applies, there has to be more than one

section

of

an act to be involved in it.

I know that the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs ultimately has

the authority to approve or disapprove of rules, bylaws, to be passed by the

municipality concerned. All it says is, "A council of a city..."- that

basically limits us to St. John's, Corner Brook and Mount Pearl - "...may

by resolution vote to authorize voters to vote by mail in an election."

That is fine. Other councils of the municipalities that are not cities can just

get the approval of the minister. That council has to then make regulations with

respect to a mail-in system that are necessary to carry out the elections, and a

regulation made under this

section applies to all elections for the council that

made the regulations that occur more than sixty days after that regulation is

made.

You have sixty days in a notice for the regulations. So the regulations would

have to be made by July some time. The procedures and forms only have to be

produced thirty days before the election day. So nobody is going to know what

these forms are until thirty days before election day. The only thing that it

says here is, "The procedures and forms established by the returning

officer, if they are consistent with the principles established under this Act

and the required form of documents established by the minister, shall be

considered to have been established under this Act."

Now, that is all very interesting, Mr. Speaker, but we are talking about

something that has never been done in this Province before. I understand it has

been done in Ontario, but it has not been done in Toronto, the largest city, in

Toronto. I do not know what actual cities it has been done in, but we do not

have any prototype regulations as to how it would work. We are performing an

experiment with the electors of any city that might choose to undertake a vote

by mail. I understand that perhaps there may only be one city that would do

that, the City of St. John's. I understand there may be only one city to do

that in terms of expressing an interest in conducting this.

I have some experience with municipal elections in the City of St. John's,

most recently in the municipal elections of 1997. I have to say that there were

many deficiencies in the system as it existed then, in terms of how the proxy

votes were conducted, how the elections were carried out, and how the vote was

counted. So, I have an understanding of how that works and some of the

deficiencies. In fact, other aspects of the legislation solves some of those

problems particularly with respect to proxy votes. There were some very narrow

rules that were more often breached than followed in some cases, Mr. Speaker,

and some of these problems have been fixed in a proper and appropriate way.

I do have very serious concerns if, instead of just fixing the problem, we

say: Okay, let's have an election run properly - according to the new rules

that solve the problems and fix the problems that were there - now we are having

a whole new procedure, a whole new procedure that says: Okay, if we have 66,000

voters in the City of St. John's, eligible voters that is, we are going to

send out 66,000 ballots to the mailboxes and whatever, to the doorsteps if they

have no mailboxes, mail slots on the front porches, or whatever, of people, and

for every person who is a voter there will be a ballot in that house. So, if

there are five voters in a house, five pieces of paper, five ballots, go to a

house.

When we are talking about a city in which the voter turnout in a municipal

election was probably 55 per cent, or probably a little bit better than that,

you can see that there are quite a few people who will have ballots who did not

exercise their franchise last time. Some of that may be legitimate. In fact the

mail-in ballot, if it is done properly, could allow people to exercise their

franchise who might not otherwise be able to. I do not have a problem with a

special mail-in ballot procedure, provided it is under strict controls, and we

have that under the provincial elections; but if we are going to say that not

only are we going to have mail-in ballot provisions but that ballot by mail for

the entire population, the entire electorate, is going to be the method - I do

not think it will stop them from having ballot boxes; you can still go and vote

in person on election day. We do not know what the rules are going to be. What

happens if five ballots come to a particular house for the five voters in that

house or apartment building and someone takes the ballots, they go missing? Then

you have somebody who collects them, somebody finds them.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: You do not know what the rules are yet.

They go missing. We were dealing with Canada Post here. I do not want to say

that there is open criticism of Canada Post, but we are talking about a mail

delivery system that first of all is not perfect and there is bound to be some

mail that does not get delivered within the relevant time frame, perhaps one or

two pieces out of whatever sample we have.

So, there are going to be some that do not get there for one reason or other.

There is going to be some mail that goes missing. There is going to be some mail

that goes to the wrong place. So, what happens if the ballot does not come? What

happens if someone has picked up a handful of ballots of people who do not want

to use them because they are not going to vote anyway, and they get sent in?

Because all someone has to do, according to the forms that I have seen, is just

sign a piece of paper, sign the name of the person that the package is made out

to, send it in with the ballot in a separate form, and it arrives at City Hall

or at the election office, and then the person phones up and says - or they show

up to vote: I am sorry, you cannot vote. We have a mail-in ballot for you; or if

they vote and their name is recorded. What happens if they go and vote? They

vote in person and there is a mail-in ballot in the box, and someone who looks

after it says: Oh, we have two ballots. This person has voted twice. Now, which

vote are we going to count? The mail-in ballot or the one in the box that came

in person; or if someone comes in and says: I did not get a mail-in ballot but I

want another one because I am not going to be around on election day. Who is

going to decide whether or not the mail-in ballot that has already been received

was their ballot or not? Is that going to be decided before an election or

afterwards?

I recognize that there may well be room Mr. Speaker, for a more efficient

procedure for voting, and I know Canada Post has given some -

MR. McLEAN: Are you running for mayor, Jack?

MR. HARRIS: I know Canada Post has given some thought to it.

The hon. Member for Lake Melville has asked whether I am running for mayor.

The answer is no. I am not running for mayor, so I have no vested interest in

the rules here.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: As far as I can make it - in fact, there is a provision

there, by the way, that says that I am not even eligible for nomination.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Are you allowed to vote?

MR. HARRIS: I can vote. Not only me, neither are you, I say to the Member

for St. John's East. You are not even eligible to be nominated for council.

MR. SULLIVAN: You're not?

MR. HARRIS: No.

MR. SULLIVAN: That's a relief.

MR. HARRIS: So, Mr. Speaker, we have - and I am not going to be moving an

amendment to make it possible either.

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible) stop him from running again?

MR. HARRIS: There is a new provision in the legislation, and I do not

have any difficulty with it. It says that there are certain people who are not

eligible for nomination and these would include: Members of the House of

Commons, Members of the House of Assembly and Members of the Judiciary, who are

not eligible to be nominated. That is the new clause: "15.

(5) A person is

not qualified to be nominated as a candidate for councillor if he or she is a

(

a) member of the House of Commons or the Senate of Canada; (

b) member of the

House of Assembly of the province; and (

c) judge of the Supreme Court or the

Provincial Court of province."

MR. SULLIVAN: I don't disagree with that.

MR. HARRIS: I don't disagree with it either. I am just saying, in

answer to the Member for Lake Melville: Am I going to run for Mayor? The answer

is no, I am not running for mayor and I am not even eligible to be nominated.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I do not have any personal interest, as a

candidate, but as a citizen of St. John's, that is the only municipality

likely to undertake this mail by ballot, I have some questions about this

procedure and whether or not it can be fair. To me, it seems like an experiment

and I do not know if we should rush into this. We have not seen any rules. I

recognize that this is only May but the rules do not have to be made until

thirty days before - or the forms and procedures do not have to be adopted and

promulgated until thirty days before the election, and the regulations do not

have to be made until sixty days and presumably approved by the Minister of

Municipal and Provincial Affairs sometime over the summer. So, there is really

not much opportunity to scrutinize these rules, other than the minister now -

with all due respect to the Minister of Municipal Affairs, perhaps he is not the

only one who should have a look at them and have some influence on whether they

are appropriate or not.

It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that having such a vague and broad

section of

the act which says that the regulations must be in keeping with the principles

and body of this act. Well now, there is a provision that you could literally

drive a truck through, because that is really a matter of

interpretation in most

respects. It is a matter of opinion whether particular provisions are in keeping

with the principles of the act, but yet, that is what

section 54 says.

Section

54 says that the regulations must be consistent. This is the wording:

"54.

(5) The procedures and forms established by the returning officer, if

they are consistent with the principles established under this Act and the

required form of documents established by the minister, shall be considered to

have been established under this Act." Now, that is a pretty big stretch,

Mr. Speaker. A pretty big stretch. Who decides whether they are consistent with

the principles established under the Act? Who decides? It is not very clear, Mr.

Speaker, unless it is the minister. It does not even really say that, Mr.

Speaker. It does not even really say that.

The regulations that we have here have to be approved by the minister. We

understand that, but how do we have an opportunity, as members of the public, or

members of this Legislature - how do we have any public discussion about this or

any debate on the issue?

Clause 97.(1) of the act says: "Where, under

Part V, a municipality

decides to conduct elections by mail, that municipality shall make the necessary

regulations to enable it to carry out an election by mail."

MADAM SPEAKER (M. Hodder): Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that his time is up.

MR. HARRIS: By leave, Madam Speaker, for a few minutes?

I won't go on for very long, just to clue up.

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: I don't mind. If the members of the Official Opposition

want to retaliate against me for raising a point of order, then I guess that's

the way she goes. I guess we have to live with that.

MR. J. BYRNE: No leave, Madam Speaker.

MADAM SPEAKER: Leave has been withdrawn.

AN HON. MEMBER: Jack, I was thinking about (inaudible) now I am not so

sure.

MR. J. BYRNE: Madam Speaker, no leave.

MR. HARRIS: A point of order, Madam Speaker.

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the member on a point of order.

MR. HARRIS: Do I understand, Madam Speaker, that the Member for Cape St.

Francis is denying me leave to address the issue, the Municipal Elections Act,

at second reading, in retaliation of the fact that I raised a point of order in

the House this afternoon after Question Period?

MR. SULLIVAN: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

MADAM SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

There are rules of procedure that gives twenty minutes to speak on the bill.

There is an opportunity to raise that in committee. The Member for Cape St.

Francis said that he did not give leave, and according to the rules and the time

limit set down in committee - that me and the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi

sat on. We revised it to have twenty minutes to speak, and leave is not granted.

There is opportunity in committee to speak at length on the bill and the

opportunity is there to do so.

MADAM SPEAKER: I understand that leave has been withdrawn.

The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I want to thank the speakers who have spoken in support, and some of the

questions that we had on the bill. I am sure, as we go into committee, that we

will be able to address some of these.

Again, thanks for the support. I think it is a good piece of legislation. It

is timely. It is long overdue. I have been involved with all of the

stakeholders. So in that sense, I am very pleased and honoured to be able to

bring it forth today.

With that I conclude second reading.

On motion, a bill, "An Act Respecting Municipal Elections," read a

second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House on tomorrow.

(Bill 7)

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. LUSH: Motion 15. Second reading of a bill,

An Act

An Act To Amend The

Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Act And The Occupational Health and

Safety Act. (Bill 16)

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Workplace Health,

Safety and Compensation Act And The Occupational Health And Safety Act."

(Bill 16)

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labour.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

It gives me great pleasure today to introduce Bill 16,

An Act

An Act To Amend

The Workplace Health, Safety And Compensation Act And The Occupational Health

And Safety Act, second reading.

In October of last year my colleague, the hon. the Minister of the former

Department of Environment and Labour, launched a review of the Province's

workers' compensation system. The minister appointed a task force in response

to requests by key stakeholders and in recognition of the fact that the

commission is facing serious financial issues that require immediate attention.

In fact, the workers' compensation act requires that government conduct a

review every five years, and this is the reason for this one.

Madam Speaker, the task force was comprised of five members of the Board of

Directors of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission, including

its chairperson, Wayne Trask. In addition to Mr. Trask as chairman, this group

included labour representatives: Reg Anstey, Judy Vanta, and employer

representative: Roger Flood, and at-large representative: Mr. Don Warr.

Honourable members will be aware that the task force held public meetings

throughout our Province and extensive consultations with stakeholders. They

received 110 written submissions, heard ninety-seven presentations and held

round tables with stakeholders.

On February 16 of this year, less than four months after being established,

the task force publicly released its report. The task force report confirmed the

serious financial challenges confronting the workers' compensation system in

this Province and the need for significant reform to protect the future

financial integrity of this program, which is so critical for workers and

employers throughout our Province.

The workers' compensation program pays either directly to, or on behalf of,

injured workers in this Province, approximately $100 million annually. The task

force report outlined forty-eight recommendations for action affecting

employers, workers, the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission,

and government. These recommendations reflect the strongly held view of the

stakeholders, that significant reform is required to ensure the system remains

intact and is a system that is fair, effective and sustainable.

The task force recommendations support the position of stakeholders at quick

fix solutions. Increasing employer assessment rates or reducing wage protection

levels of injured workers are not the answer. Instead, the clear message to the

task force and to this government is that the future success and sustainability

of the system is contingent on a fundamental change in mindset. In fact, that

was the title of their report: Changing The Mindset.

Among partners in the workers' compensation system, there must be

significantly increased efforts to reduce the numbers of workplace injuries.

Where injuries do occur, there must be significantly better performance in

returning rehabilitated workers back to their jobs.

These are the fundamental principles reflected in the legislation that I am

bringing forward today, Madam Speaker. Government believes that a package of

reforms outlined by the task force is the foundation upon which we will build

and encourage a safety culture. It places the workers' compensation system on

a sound financial footing and ensures an effective, fair and sustainable system,

which is so important to all workers and employers in this Province.

Madam Speaker, I would like to publicly state today how pleased this

government is with the work carried out by the task force. This report has not

only been unanimously endorsed by the task force but it has also been publicly

endorsed by key stakeholders groups, such as: the Newfoundland and Labrador

Employers' Council. I am pleased to see that we have a member of that group up

in the gallery today, Miss Marilyn Tucker. It is nice to see you here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: The Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour, and the

Fish, Food and Allied Workers Union.

It is in this context that I am pleased today to advise that government has

approved all of the core recommendations for action by government. The bill,

which this House has before it, outlines a series of legislative amendments to

implement these reforms.

Madam Speaker, prevention is a fundamental principle. The bill before us

today,

An Act To Amend The Workplace Health, Safety And Compensation Act And The

Occupational Health and Safety Act, significantly increases the emphasis placed

on prevention of workplace accidents and injuries. The bill requires that, all

employers, depending on size, develop a workplace health and safety program or

policy. Workplace health and safety representatives will be mandatary for

companies with less than ten employees. Health and safety committees or worker

representatives receive approved training relevant to their responsibilities.

Employers formally respond to recommendations made by workplace health and

safety committees or worker representatives. Health and safety committees or

worker representatives participate in workplace inspections which the employer

is obliged to carry out. Employers consult with workplace health and safety

committees or worker representatives on all matters respecting occupational

health and safety relevant to their workplace. Madam Speaker, these measures

will come into force on January 1, 2002.

Here are some interesting facts I would like to share with this House, Madam

Speaker. Soft-tissue injuries count for two-thirds of all injuries to workers.

These injuries cross all sectors from heavy industry and manufacturing to health

care and office work. To reduce the occurrence of soft-tissue injuries,

amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Act will provide the

Lieutenant-Governor in Council with the authority to introduce new ergonomics

regulations.

It was interesting to read -

AN HON. MEMBER: Ergonomics?

MS THISTLE: Ergonomics is the key word. So we can be sure that we are

sitti