Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Statements by Ministers — 4 November 2021 (50th General Assembly, 1st Session, Vol. L No. 33)
2021-11-04
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
PDF Version
November 4, 2021
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS
Vol. L No. 33
The
House met at 1:30 p.m.
SPEAKER (Bennett):
Order, please!
Admit
strangers.
Welcome,
everyone.
Statements by
Members
SPEAKER:
Today we'll hear statements
by the hon. Members for the Districts of Harbour Main, St. John's Centre,
Topsail - Paradise, Terra Nova, Labrador West and Virginia Waters -
Pleasantville, with leave.
The hon.
the Member for Harbour Main.
H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I would
like to reflect on our veterans and acknowledge the Royal Canadian Legion
movement. November month, we remember how much was achieved for us and, yet, how
much was lost by those that fought so that we may enjoy the freedoms we have
today.
The
legion represents tens of thousands of veterans and legionnaire volunteers who
volunteer to ensure that there is support for veterans and their families. My
District of Harbour Main has two legions: Branch 64 Holyrood and Branch 65
Brigus. These legions are key contributors to the communities they serve through
their involvement in other community activities, such as schools and community
events.
Remembrance Day is about honouring our veterans. They, like many of our elderly,
have been isolated due to this pandemic. I would encourage each of us to reach
out to a veteran on Remembrance Day next week and thank them for their service.
We've had the privilege of sharing in 76 years of peace because of our veterans,
which is truly remarkable.
I ask
all Members to join me in thanking our Legions and our veterans for everything
they do to remind us “Lest we forget.”
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre.
J. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
École
Rocher-du-Nord, formerly Holy Cross Junior High, opened to francophone students
in September 2017. With an enrolment of 40 students from Grades 7 to 12, the
school accommodates the growing number of students seeking a French
first-language education in St. John's.
personnel petit, mais dévoué offre une éducation hors pair de haute qualité aux
étudiants. Les élèves ont l'occasion de participer aux concours de sciences, aux
fêtes du patrimoine, aux concours d'art oratoire et au programme À la découverte
de nos cultures.
Activities like la journée provinciale de la francophonie and les jeux de
l'Acadie foster the francophone identify of RDN, while the Duke of Edinburgh
program, cross country, badminton, sewing club, student council, yoga, rock band
and intramurals enrich their school experience. Food bank donations, Ronald
McDonald House's Just Like Nan's program and Janeway Day instill community
mindedness.
Rocher-du-Nord is proud of its track team's recent performance at the NLAA
cross-country run at Bowring Park, especially of its Grade 7 girls' two
consecutive second-place finishes in the 1.7-kilometre race. Healthy living and
the physical and mental health of students are just as crucial as academic
success for École Rocher-du-Nord, and the school is looking forward to a safe,
productive and pleasant school year.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.
P. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
I just
recently presented a certificate to Nina Thompson, a constituent of Topsail -
Paradise, for her community spirit and for bringing such joy, not only to
residents of Topsail - Paradise, but to those who drive by her home each day.
Nina
Thompson lives on Topsail Road and if you've passed her home you've seen her
concrete dogs standing so proudly out in her front yard. Ms. Thompson has been
dressing the dogs for over 15 years and it all started when someone made a
simple suggestion. The dogs have an outfit for every occasion: Halloween,
Christmas and Canada Day, Valentine's Day, hunting season, spring, summer,
winter, fall and any other day you can think of.
She
didn't know how big a splash the dogs were making until a few years back when
she started getting Christmas cards from people who got a smile out of the pups
when they drove by. I look at them each time I drive past and it always puts a
smile on my face.
Mr.
Speaker, I thank Ms. Thompson for taking the initiative to spread some joy in
the District of Topsail - Paradise.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Terra
Nova.
L. PARROTT:
Thank you, Speaker.
Today, I
speak as part of a fraternity that I'm very proud to be a part of: I'm a veteran
speaking for veterans. I speak for those who left and never returned and I speak
for those who returned and never came back the same.
November 11, if you're at a ceremony and there's a veteran off to the side, and
he's silent, give him a nod, a smile or a simple thank you. It seems small but
it means so much.
This
year I'm privileged to lay wreaths in my district to honour all veterans;
however, it will be with a heavy heart. I will remember two close friends, in
particular, that aren't with me this year: Ches Bull and Rodney Stroude.
“From
this day to the ending of the world,
But we
in it shall be remember'd;
We few,
we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he
to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be
my brother.”
Today
and every day we honour the thousands that are still serving and the thousands
of our fallen brothers and sisters that are no longer with us.
We will
remember.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Labrador West.
J. BROWN:
Thank you, Speaker.
I rise
today to acknowledge Gerri-lynn Stevens, April Farrell, Kim Hartery, Kayla
Edwards, Michelle Turpin, Lori Butt, Tina Ralph and Shawn Arnold, plus four
additional support team members, Mike Turpin, Cory Waterman, Danny Stevens and
Andy Kelloway, a group of cyclists called Kilometers for Kids or lovingly known
as Momma's Dream Team.
They
completed a 1,000-kilometre ride from Pidgeon Cove-St. Barbe to Ronald McDonald
House here in St. John's. Their initial goal was $34,000 but raised a grand
total of $100,000 for Ronald McDonald House.
Many
members are from Labrador West and have seen first-hand the stress that comes
when a family needs to travel to the Janeway.
There
are emotional and financial costs for a family when travelling to St. John's for
medical treatment and the selfless dedication of these cyclists and the
generosity of individuals in this province raised these funds to help families
navigate a really tough time.
I ask
all hon. Members to thank this outstanding team for putting others ahead of
themselves and raising money not only to help Labradorians but many families in
this province who have to be away from home during what can be a stressful and
isolating experience.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Virginia Waters - Pleasantville, with leave.
AN HON. MEMBER:
Leave.
SPEAKER:
Leave is granted.
The hon.
the Member for Virginia Waters - Pleasantville.
B. DAVIS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and
to my colleagues for leave.
I would
like to take a moment to recognize a person in my district who recently passed
away but left a significant mark on our province. Mr. Lee Shinkle was called the
grandfather of the oil and gas industry.
Lee
spent over 40 years supporting, encouraging, planning and envisioning the birth
of the offshore oil and gas sector in Newfoundland and Labrador. He will be
remembered for his teachings, mentorship and dedication and how that has shaped
this province and its prosperity.
February of 2019, Lee was given the highest honour by his peers, the Noia
Outstanding Contribution Award. Over the years he held numerous positions as a
member, the treasurer, a board member and president of the organization.
Lee
cared about people; he cared about our oil industry and also our province. Lee
also adored his wife, Martha, and kids, Malindi, Geoffrey, Jessica, David and
his nine grandchildren.
Lee was
known to have a passionate voice with an innate compass to understand what's
possible. Lee executed some of the smartest and strategic growth initiatives in
our offshore.
Speaker,
I ask all hon. Members in our House to please join me in remembering and
celebrating the life of a true advocate of our province, Mr. Lee Shinkle.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
Statements by Ministers.
Statements by
Ministers
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.
D. BRAGG:
Thank you, Speaker.
It's my
pleasure to highlight the recent efforts of Resource Enforcement Officer, Ryan
Collier. Earlier this fall, and with support from his colleagues, Officers Ryan
Knott and Mitchell Gillingham, Officer Collier rescued seven pilot whales which
had beached themselves near the community of Embree.
Upon
arriving at the scene, Officer Collier identified eight whales, seven alive and
one deceased, which were exhibiting signs of distress and extreme exhaustion. He
determined immediate action was required to save the animals.
After
learning officials with Fisheries and Oceans Canada were unable to respond in a
timely manner, Officer Collier initiated a rescue of each of the whales, which
took over three hours to complete.
Speaker,
many of us have seen photos showing Officer Collier up to his waist in cold
water and maneuvering a whale so it was able to return to sea – a process which
he repeated seven times.
Officer
Collier's efforts have deservedly received many accolades from across Canada,
and his work was even featured on CBC's
The National as the 'feel good moment of the day.'
The
actions of Officer Collier reflect the approach and attitude of all dedicated
members of our department who work every day in all parts of the province to
sustain our wildlife and resources on behalf of Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians.
Speaker,
I ask all Members to join me in congratulating Officers Collier, Knott and
Gillingham for going above and beyond the call of duty.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Bonavista.
C. PARDY:
Thank you, Speaker.
I would
like to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. The Official
Opposition would also like to acknowledge the selfless and kind actions
performed by resource enforcement officer, Ryan Collier.
Just a
short time ago, Officer Collier, along with his colleagues, Ryan Knott and
Mitchell Gillingham, saved the lives of seven pilot whales that were beached
near the Town of Embree in Notre Dame Bay. Collier, who was on his way to the
office, spotted the whales in distress and wasted no time going waist-deep in
the Atlantic Ocean to rescue them. These fine Newfoundlanders and Labradorians
put their own comfort and safety aside to do the right thing.
Some of
these whales were 14- to 16-feet long, making the rescue terribly difficult for
those involved. By the time it was done, the officers were physically exhausted.
Speaker,
Officer Collier and his coworkers went above and beyond their duties to perform
a great act of kindness and environmental stewardship that saved these whales.
It is a shining example of the quality and calibre of the officers working in
this department.
Speaker,
we join together with all hon. Members of this House in recognizing the selfless
acts of Officers Collier, Knott and Gillingham.
Thank
you for giving it your all.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
J. DINN:
I thank the minister for a copy of his statement. Protecting the environment and
the ecosystems of our province is something we should all embrace.
We, too,
join the minister in commending Officer Ryan Collier and his colleagues for
their actions in saving these whales. We therefore urge government to strengthen
environmental protections, as well – this is the larger part – so that our
marine life and our estuaries survive into the future for the benefit of the
next generation.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
Further statements by ministers?
Oral
Questions.
Oral Questions
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
D. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Speaker.
We're
into day six of the cyberattack that has devastated our health care system.
Speaker, during Snowmageddon and COVID, the Premier and the minister would
provide daily updates. Sadly, we've seen the minister out just once and the
Premier has been missing in action.
Will
government commit to regular updates to the people of the province until this
cyberattack is fully resolved?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy Premier.
S. COADY:
Thank you, Speaker.
I thank
the Member opposite for the question. We have been as open and transparent as we
possibly could be. As the Member opposite knows and the people of the province
know, this is an unprecedented cyberattack. We have confirmed that now. We are
taking the advice of world-class experts and we have provided information.
The
minister and the regional health authorities have provided information on a
timely basis to patients, to families and to the health care providers. It's
been a very challenging and difficult time for them, but I am pleased that we
are slowly and diligently starting to restore access to IT services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
D. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Speaker.
We've
been told and asked by the public here that they be updated daily so that they
can be reassured that the process is moving forward to get our health care back
up and running.
The
information vacuum created by the lack of regular updates from government is
dangerous. It's allowing rumours to spread and bad actors to spread
misinformation online. We need regular briefings on this situation to ensure the
correct information is out there, not misinformation.
I ask
the Deputy Premier, the Minister of Health and the Minister of Digital
Government: When can we expect the government to publicly update the people of
this province in how they're addressing this health care emergency?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy Premier.
S. COADY:
Thank you very much, Speaker.
I can
say that the minister and the regional health authorities have been out on a
number of occasions. The minister and myself have been available daily to the
media, to the public, being held accountable here in the House of Assembly.
As we
have said, this is a very challenging time for the province. We're listening to
world-class experts as we move through this cyberattack, Speaker. I can say that
progress is being made in our health care system.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
D. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Speaker.
When
criticized during the last provincial election for his daily COVID-19
appearances, the Premier said again and again: Residents need to see and hear
from their Premier during times of crisis.
Why
doesn't the Premier take his own advice now?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy Premier.
S. COADY:
Thank you, Speaker.
As the
Member Opposite well knows, the Premier has been heavily engaged over the last
number of days throughout this emerging situation. The Member Opposite has been
in contact; the Premier has reached out to the Opposition leaders and provided
information to the Opposition leaders. The minister has been public over the
last number of days since this situation emerged. The regional health
authorities have been out there.
Speaker,
as I have said, we have engaged world-class experts on this unprecedented
cyberattack and we're taking their advice. I hope the Member Opposite is
listening well to that advice as well.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
D. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Speaker.
Yes,
indeed, I have been talking to the Premier, but the Premier needs to be talking
to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
D. BRAZIL:
They're the people who he
serves.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
D. BRAZIL:
Speaker, the Premier has
taken to Twitter to offer his 280 characters on this emergency today. Cancer
care is at a standstill in this province and the Premier is offering tweets
instead of leadership. The Premier is trying to increase his online clout rather
than speak directly to the people of this province and show leadership during
this health care.
I ask
the Deputy Premier: Do you think sending two tweets is sufficient public
communications for the Premier?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy Premier.
S. COADY:
Thank you very much, Speaker.
I can
say to the Member opposite that he has been in direct contact with the Premier
where the Premier has provided information to the leaders of the Opposition on
this very difficult situation. The Minister of Health and Community Services has
been publicly available every day with a number of press conferences being held
at the regional health authorities. I think the Premier is showing strong and
incredible leadership during these unprecedented times.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
S. COADY:
That's why we're making
progress on restoring access to IT services. This has been very difficult and
challenging on patients, on families and on the health care system. I can tell
you this much, we're very focused on ensuring we restore service, not on playing
politics.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Official Opposition.
D. BRAZIL:
Thank you, Speaker.
definition of leadership is talking directly to the people you serve and
reassuring them that you've got this crisis under control.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
D. BRAZIL:
Speaker, I often get asked:
What's the difference between our party and government? Well, Speaker, I can
guarantee you, the leader of our party would be front and centre dealing with
this health care emergency for the people of this province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
D. BRAZIL:
So I ask: Why is the Premier
front and centre when election campaigns are on, but silent when the people of
the province need true leadership?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy Premier.
S. COADY:
I think that the Member
opposite is inflating the situation here, Speaker. He has a very solid team
here. I'm Deputy Premier. We have a very strong Health and Community Services
Minister. We have strong ministers and a strong caucus here in the House of
Assembly, and we're able to navigate through this difficult situation.
The
Premier has been engaged in discussions on climate change, which is another
emerging and possibly detrimental – will have detrimental impacts not only to
Newfoundland and Labrador but the entire world. He's shown leadership on that
issue as well. So not only is he showing leadership on climate change, Speaker,
he's also showing leadership on leading this province through a very
unprecedented cyberattack.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Stephenville - Port au Port.
T. WAKEHAM:
Speaker, we've heard from
diligent, compassionate and hard-working health care workers who are overworked,
but still doing their best to provide patients with quality care during this
crisis. Now, they have to deal with the added financial stress of not getting
paid.
Is the
Minister of Finance aware of problems with the payroll systems in health care?
SPEAKER:
The hon. Deputy Premier.
S. COADY:
Thank you very much, Speaker.
understand that everyone will be paid. I do not think that will be a challenge.
If there are any challenges that are met during this period they'll certainly be
managed, but I understand all will be paid.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Stephenville - Port au Port.
T. WAKEHAM:
Speaker, our office spoke to
several employees of Central Health who were expecting to get paid today but did
not. They have bills to pay and families to feed, Speaker. Yesterday I asked if
employees will be paid accurately based on their hours worked and was told yes.
Today we've learned that's not the case.
I ask
the minister: Were you out of the loop on the issues with payroll at Central
Health or just unwilling to disclose them?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you very much, Speaker.
I think
if the Member opposite checks Hansard
he will find he's misquoted me from yesterday's answer.
I am
aware of the situation. Central and Western Health get paid on a different cycle
than Eastern, Labrador-Grenfell and government employees. Central Health has
arranged payment through the banks, through the regular channels, and because of
that arrangement these payments will be processed over the course of today.
There is a guarantee that they will be in bank accounts no later than midday
tomorrow.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Stephenville - Port au Port.
T. WAKEHAM:
Speaker, for two days in a
row we asked the minister about payroll and was told there was no concern;
however, yesterday morning in Central Health, before Question Period, some
employees were quietly being notified about issues with payroll.
Why did
the minister repeatedly say there were no issues even though some workers were
being told to call their bank and defer their mortgage payments?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
I can't
speak to the nature of conversations between the regional health authority
employees.
The
information I have is that there is an arrangement to pay all Central and
Western Health employees. Western Health, as far as I'm aware, have had no
issues. Central Health, we are aware of a few out of the 3,000 employees whose
cheques or deposits were not made on time and that has been rectified and is
being rectified by the regional health authority.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Stephenville - Port au Port.
T. WAKEHAM:
Speaker, I don't think it's
any comfort to people who didn't get a paycheque to say that they will get a
paycheque. I think they need more assurances than that and something in the way
of leadership on that matter. It appears some workers were given a heads-up on
the issues relating to the payroll but not all employees were notified. There
was no formal notification process.
Will the
minister admit this was a mistake and apologize for not being on top of this
issue even though it was brought to his attention?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you very much, Speaker.
There
are two ways employees in Central Health get paid, some by direct deposit and
some by cheque. The cheque is a slightly longer process under normal
circumstances. Those people who were notified were those for whom Central Health
was aware there would be a potential delay. They have worked through that and
they have assured me that all payments will be complete by no later than noon
tomorrow. The majority of these, and there are only a few still outstanding,
will be completed today.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Grand
Falls-Windsor - Buchans.
C. TIBBS:
Thank you very much, Speaker.
That's
what should've been told to the citizens of Grand Falls-Windsor yesterday and
the day before when those questions were asked; not today when they expect their
cheque in their bank account.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
C. TIBBS:
Speaker, today we've learned
from Eastern Health and we had two updates from Western Health, but Central
Health has not given a live update of the effects this cyberattack has had on
its services.
I ask
the minister: Will you direct Central Health to address the media and give
updates on services for this region?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
Each of
the regional health authorities issue regular public service announcements. My
understanding, from what I heard on media today, was that the VP concerned from
Central Health did actually just that on radio.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Grand
Falls-Windsor - Buchans.
C. TIBBS:
I commend all the VPs, the
staff and management at Central Health for doing a great job.
Speaker,
the people of Central Newfoundland are feeling the effects of this cyberattack
just as much as, if not more than, other parts of this province.
I ask
the minister: Would Central Health be able to do a live update if the CEO was
actually living in Newfoundland and Labrador?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
We have,
over the course of the last 18 months, 20 months, used virtual technology and it
is not unusual for people working, for example, in Eastern Health not to
actually live in the region. The issue is the level of competence and the level
of service has not fallen below that which the board of trustees in Central are
concerned about.
The
chair of the board and the entire board of trustees of Central Health has
complete confidence and faith in not only their CEO, but the entire senior
executive team. Should that change, our approach would change.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Grand
Falls-Windsor - Buchans.
C. TIBBS:
I will remind the minister
that this CEO resigned almost 1½ years ago.
Global
pandemic, no CEO; doctors and nurses stretched to the maximum, no CEO on the
ground; and now a present cyberhack.
Speaker,
I ask the minister: Will he direct the CEO for Central Health to return to the
province and give the leadership that we need today?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
Oversight of the CEOs of the regional health authorities falls to the board of
trustees of those regional health authorities. The chair of the board and the
entire board of trustees have complete confidence in the abilities and the level
of competence and the direction the CEO is taking. I will rely on their
judgment.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Topsail - Paradise.
P. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
As a
result of the Cameron inquiry, whenever there is public communication on an
adverse event, it should be accompanied by toll-free numbers so that patients,
family members or the general public may call with questions; however, this
number is not effective if people can't get through.
The
complaints, despite more staff being hired, range from no message manager, no
call queue, or that it just keeps ringing and ringing without an answer.
I ask
the minister: What is being done to enhance the 1-833 phone line?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
The
phones in regional health authorities, some of these have been impacted by the
cyberattack. As a result of that I know, for example, in Central Newfoundland
Regional Health Centre the calls, no matter where dialed, automatically revert
to the switchboard. We are working through those and, as the rebuild, the
renovation mitigation – whatever label you would like to put on it – through
NLCHI and Bell proceeds, these services will be restored.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Topsail - Paradise.
P. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
something so critical as to what we're going through now, establishing new phone
lines should be an easy fix.
Speaker,
residents of the province that require health care, in particular cancer
patients, are under an incredible amount of stress due to this unfolding crisis.
They need more support than just a number to call.
I ask
the minister: What enhanced mental health supports are available to help
individuals navigate this difficult situation?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
As we go
about slowly and carefully, diligently, as I think the Deputy Premier said,
restoring services, cancer care, chemotherapy, cardiology are our priorities. I
have had extensive discussions with clinical leadership at Eastern Health who
runs the program, the VP and the CEO, as recently as less than two hours ago.
I'm
pleased to inform the House that, over the course of today, those people who the
oncologists feel have missed their chemotherapy and need it immediate
remediation of that will be being called. Chemotherapy in Eastern Health will
resume tomorrow and continue through the weekend and, until necessary, to catch
up with the backlog.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Topsail - Paradise.
P. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
I know
for mental health services we have the Stepped program, CHANNAL and we have
DoorWays.
So I ask
the minister again: What enhanced mental health supports are available to help
individuals navigate this difficult situation?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
Timely –
mental health and addictions services, by and large, have been only minimally
impacted, fortunately, across the province. They continue.
With
specifics for cancer care, we do have cancer care navigators now in each
regional health authority at each cancer treatment centre and, as recently as
last week, I was talking online with the national director of support programs
through the Canadian Cancer Society who is interested in offering us support and
we'll obviously look into that.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Ferryland.
L. O'DRISCOLL:
Speaker, the residents of
this province are concerned about how this cyberattack impacts them.
One
resident called our office after receiving an email about an incoming health
appointment. It contained a link to confirm the appointment. She was concerned
about opening it.
I ask
the minister: Why have you not released guidance to the residents on what to do
if they receive emails, letters and other communication which they are concerned
about?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Digital Government and Service NL.
S. STOODLEY:
Thank you, Speaker, and I
thank the Member for the question.
So the
incident that the Member is referring to – an email – the team is currently
investigating. My understanding is it's likely a result of some of the systems
coming back online, but the team is investigating and will get back to the
resident impacted.
Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Ferryland.
L. O'DRISCOLL:
Thank you, Speaker.
Cyberattacks say it is possible that these hackers have access to whatever is in
the system, which may include emails, date of births, MCP numbers, mailing
address and phone numbers. Speaker, people are concerned that their information
is in the hands of bad actors and could be used against them.
I ask
the minister: What assurances can you offer that personal medical information
will not be posted publicly online?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
In line
with some of the comments I made earlier on, I'm going to try and be careful,
yet open and transparent, when I answer this question.
We have
no confirmation that any personal health care information has been jeopardized.
Nor, however, do we have any reassurance that that is not the case. This will
become apparent as systems are restored and we will manage whatever scenario
comes forward as we have contingency plans.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Conception Bay South.
B. PETTEN:
Thank you, Speaker.
Good
communication is usually critical in crisis management, and something I guess
this government is going to have to improve upon.
Speaker,
Conception Bay South is the second largest municipality in the province, only
behind St. John's in population. Currently, vulnerable people in CBS are
struggling about insufficient Newfoundland and Labrador Housing rentals and
supplements when compared to many other areas of the province.
I ask
the minister: What are you doing specifically to address the gaps in housing
support for the community of CBS and all the districts? Many of my colleagues
have the same issues as well.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Children, Seniors and Social Development.
J. ABBOTT:
Speaker, thank you for the
opportunity to respond.
NLHC is
in the process now of doing a housing and homelessness plan for the province,
which we'll bring forward. But in terms of the Member's specific question, we
are in the position now to expand our rent supplements throughout the province
and we'll be putting those out over the next number of weeks and months to help
address the issues both in Conception Bay South and other communities across the
province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Conception Bay South.
B. PETTEN:
Speaker, actually that is a
good answer. It's about time –
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
SPEAKER:
Order, please!
B. PETTEN:
I guess when I asked about
good communication, they finally gave me a good answer and the people in CBS
appreciate it. Thank you.
Speaker,
Conception Bay South has a population of approximately 27,000 people, all of
which are without public transit. This makes it incredibly difficult for
low-income earners and those availing of government supports to access critical
medical appointments in St. John's.
I ask
the minister: What are your plans to address the medical transportation of some
of the most vulnerable residents of Conception Bay South?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
We have
a two main medical transportation systems. One is income support based and is
income tested, but covers in advance the cost, if need be, and certainly is a
complete reimbursement program. We have a universal program, in addition to
that, called the Medical Transportation Assistance Program. This is as generous
as many of those across the country and, indeed, more consistent across the
breadth of services that health care provides compared with any other
jurisdiction. We are, however, and have made improvements to it and continue to
do so.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Harbour Main.
H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I get
many calls from people in the District of Harbour Main regarding dental care,
especially from seniors who are struggling with the cost of living and
struggling to meet their basic needs. In 2016, the Liberal government cut the
access on 65Plus Plan and replaced it with an inadequate dental program.
Can the
minister please explain to the people of the Harbour Main District and other
districts in the province why dental care is no longer a priority for this
government?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
We have
an Adult Dental Program that is consistent with at least five other
jurisdictions in Canada. We have said, in response to this question before, that
should and as our fiscal situation improves, this is certainly an area in which
we would wish to invest, consistent with what I believe may be recommendations
from the Health Accord.
But we
do have a little financial albatross to deal with first – not that I'm going to
mention it by name, because people might get upset.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Harbour Main.
H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:
Speaker, let's take the
lead and do better than other provinces. Our seniors deserve better.
Speaker,
seniors in Harbour Main are struggling with accessible, affordable dental care;
cannot find a family doctor; they're forced to go to the emergency room when
they experience oral health issues.
Will the
minister admit that not providing seniors with dental preventative care is
causing unnecessary emergency room visits?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
expand on my previous answer, we are actually better than four jurisdiction in
the country in terms of the level of coverage.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
J. HAGGIE:
So what I can say is that
primary care in all regions of the province is an integral part of where we see
sustainability from our health care system. It is our understanding that Dr.
Parfrey and Sister Elizabeth's recommendation will be to base this very firmly
in community care teams, each of which will be big enough to sustain a practice
load of between 6,000 and 9,000, depending on the population.
At a
mutually convenient opportunity in the future when the fiscal situation allows,
we would love to be able to expand dental coverage.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Placentia West - Bellevue.
J. DWYER:
Thank you, Speaker.
The
people of Arnold's Cove, including the town council and surrounding area, are
concerned that the only doctor in the community could soon retire, leaving
residents without access to primary health care. The town has offered to
construct a building to try and attract a new doctor or a nurse practitioner to
the area.
I ask
the minister: Will he support this plan and give his –?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Oh, oh!
SPEAKER:
Order, please!
Continue
with your question.
J. DWYER:
Thank you, Speaker.
The
people of the Arnold's Cove area, including the town council and surrounding
area, are concerned that the only doctor in the community could soon retire,
leaving residents without access to primary health. The town has offered to
construct a building to try and attract a new doctor or nurse practitioner to
the area.
I ask
the minister: Will he support this plan and give his personal attention to
recruiting a new primary health care provider for the area?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
J. HAGGIE:
Thank you, Speaker.
Recruitment and retention of primary health care providers is a key part of our
interim strategy and our long-term strategy. Three weeks ago, we announced a
package worth about $30 million designed specifically to address primary care
physician shortages.
Certainly, in terms of primary care coverage, the municipality stepping up is
great. We would certainly be interested, through the health authority, in the
possibilities of a collaborative care team; however, the caveat, the drawback is
that solo practitioners are a thing of the past. We need to make sure that what
we put there is sustainable and we would love to work with the community to do
that.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Third Party.
J. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
Speaker,
cybersecurity expert David Shipley says that the cyberattack on Newfoundland and
Labrador's health care is the worst cyberattack in Canadian history. Since first
being elected, we have heard the government promote zero-based budgeting,
attrition and finding efficiencies.
I ask
the Minister of Finance: How much of this crisis is the result of budget based
decision-making that resulted in underfunding of security measures?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy Premier.
S. COADY:
Thank you very much, Speaker.
appreciate the question. This is an unprecedented cyberattack, no doubt, and we
are very much committed to working diligently to restore access to IT services
that's very important to families, to patients and to the health care workers.
address his issue, no, it has no impact at all. If he recalls the budget
Estimates, there is money allocated every year for cybersecurity. These attacks
are now becoming more widespread globally, and there's a tremendous effort
happening not only in Newfoundland and Labrador, but in every jurisdiction
around the world to limit and to ensure that we have the protections that we
need.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Third Party.
J. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
I guess
the question I would ask then: Is it enough?
Early
yesterday morning a home in Buckmaster's Circle was the target of a drive-by
shooting. In reality, all residents of this proud neighbourhood were victims of
this violent act.
I ask
the Minister of Justice and Public Safety: What measures will his department put
in place to ensure events like this do not happen again?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Justice and Public Safety.
J. HOGAN:
Thank you for the question.
As a
kid, I spent a lot of time in Buckmaster's Circle at the centre playing soccer,
so I do know it well. I know that the Members of that area of town, just like
everyone in this province, deserve to have safety. That's offered by the RNC.
What
this department has done is ensure that the RNC has the funding possible. In
situations where they need more funding, we're always open to speaking with
them, providing one-time funding to make sure they have the necessary tools to
provide public safety and do their job in this province.
It's
great that if everyone can get behind them and support them in tough times –
because obviously, there are situations that occur. That's the purpose of the
police: to deal with those situations when they happen and they do do that to
the best of their ability.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Third Party.
J. DINN:
Thank you.
One
resident stated that police show up when something bad happens instead of
maintaining a positive presence. Will the minister commit the necessary
resources and put them in place to ensure a positive community-oriented police
presence?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Justice and Public Safety.
J. HOGAN:
Thank you, Speaker.
I'm glad
to hear that the police show up when bad things happen. I think that's their job
and that's what they are paid to do and to keep the public safe.
They do
patrol places throughout this province, including St. John's and Buckmaster's
Circle, but I don't think the answer is to have police presence on every corner
and every street in this city and this province, Speaker.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Third Party.
J. DINN:
It would certainly help.
What
supports will the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development put in
place for residents who may have been traumatized by this violent act?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Children, Seniors and Social Development.
J. ABBOTT:
Speaker, thank you for the
opportunity to respond.
Our
staff at the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation have a team that are
now out in and will be in the Buckmaster's Circle area to talk and will work
with the residents who were affected by this serious event, and that's standard
practice for us when those situations do arise.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Third Party.
J. DINN:
Speaker, this is about a lack
of respect for the residents of Buckmaster's Circle and residents of provincial
housing.
January of this year, 11 families found themselves without heat and hot water
for over a week when the furnace that services the houses broke. They were
merely offered space heaters to make due. Provincial housing residents deserve
safe neighbourhoods. We know that provincial housing issues continue as a result
of a lack of investment in repairs and maintenance.
I ask
the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development: Will he commit the
necessary resources to upgrade provincial housing and make sure all units are
available and habitable?
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Children, Seniors and Social Development.
J. ABBOTT:
Speaker, I certainly
appreciate the question.
The
nature of the question, in speaking to our housing units across the province –
and we have a robust budget to make sure that all our units are kept up to
standard. We have – working with the federal government – sufficient funding to
continue to do that. More money would allow us to do more things faster. We have
very few vacant units now requiring repairs, because that's been a priority for
our senior management to make sure all units are available.
The
incident of a furnace going out – that will happen from time to time, but we
have an emergency response team to make sure that those issues are addressed as
quickly as possible.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The time for Question Period
has expired.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Tabling
of Documents.
Notices
of Motion.
Notices of Motion
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I call
from the Order Paper, Motion 1 –
S. CROCKER:
No, notices of motion.
SPEAKER:
Notices of Motion.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you. Still in training,
Speaker.
Speaker,
I give notice that I will on tomorrow move, in accordance with Standing Order
11(1), that this House not adjourn at 5:30 o'clock on Monday, November 15, 2021.
SPEAKER:
Further notices of motions?
Answers
to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Grand
Falls-Winsor - Buchans.
C. TIBBS:
Thank you, Speaker.
Residents of Central Newfoundland have been cutting wood for well over 100
years. It is a natural resource that we have availed to, relied on and protected
for generations. Over the years it has become more difficult for the same people
who have been cutting for decades and generations to benefit from a resource in
their own backyard. All while truckloads of wood are being shipped away from
Central Newfoundland and Labrador.
We the
undersigned call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador to commit to a comprehensive review of the timber
rights in Central Newfoundland and come up with a plan so the people of Central
stripped away from them with zero benefit.
What I'd
like to say, first of all, Speaker, is that we are all about free enterprise. We
know that there are great companies across this province that are in the timber
industry, and we support all free trade when it comes to that. But to have an
allocation for one or two companies throughout the Central district, it's not
fair. It's not fair to the people there who are looking to cut themselves, who
have done it for generations.
John
Shearing is in his late 60s and he's been cutting wood since he was six years
old with his dad. Now, he cannot get a permit. He lives on King Street in Grand
Falls-Windsor. He cannot get a permit to cut wood in Grand Falls-Windsor for the
first time in his entire life. He is told if he wants to cut wood, he has to
head down the Bay d'Espoir Highway to get it down there. That's not fair.
On top
of that, Speaker, truck loads of wood come in often throughout the district
there, whether it be behind the mill and on the roads, and are tearing up the
roads. They are tearing up the roads.
Now, we
know that there is a cost with that, but if these truckloads are continuously
ripping up the roads of my district, I think that the government should find
some way of getting these roads graded or fixed for the cabin owners that are
being affected by this. It's not their fault. So I think it's completely unfair.
I've had
a great relationship with the minister responsible for this and I will continue
to do so, but I encourage him to take a look – and I'd like a response – I
encourage him to take a look at the timber rights that are back there and divvy
it up a little bit better.
It's
absolutely shocking that somebody in Grand Falls-Windsor is told they got to
leave Grand Falls-Windsor, the bigger part of Central Newfoundland, to go cut
wood, even though they've been doing it for over 60 years of their life. It's
not fair. I'm just asking the minister to work with me on this and find a
solution.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture for a response.
D. BRAGG:
Thank you very much, Speaker,
and I thank the Member for the petition.
course, it's very serious, his concerns, but we have a Forest Management Plan in
this province that we've been adhering to. We have a total allowable cut each
year that we get into.
Yes,
there's not wood there for everybody who's got a desire to get into forestry.
We're trying to make it sustainable for the ones that are, Mr. Speaker. There's
a number of wood in this province, Cottle's Island comes to mind. I don't know
if you would consider that Central Newfoundland, I do.
Cottle's
Island has been a valuable employer of this province and they utilize the
resource. They work with Corner Brook Pulp and Paper. Wood, as you know and as
everyone would know here, comes from all over the province. I buy my wood; it
comes from Central Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker.
All I
can say is our people are managing this resource to the best possible measure in
which they can.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Humber - Bay of Islands.
E. JOYCE:
Thank you, Speaker.
I know
the bill has been already passed in the House but I'm going to present the
petitions for the people who signed – there were hundreds of people, 200 or 300
and there are more coming – concerning the helmet use. It is also concerning the
size of the 125cc that has been taken care of; a lot of people are pleased with
that.
I'm
presenting this petition today, Mr. Speaker, it's all over the Humber - Bay of
Islands and Corner Brook area that are presenting petitions the last couple
days. I just wanted to make the minister aware that this is affecting a lot of
people, when she's deliberating on the regulations. A lot of people take comfort
that she will give serious consideration to the regulations of the helmet use in
factory-sealed Side By Sides.
They
just want to express their concerns that they have with it through the
petitions, which they asked me to present, which I support them. People here
from Bonne Bay, down in the Premier's district. There are people from all over
that this is going to affect.
I ask
the minister, when she is making the deliberations, to take all these people's
concerns into account because they are real concerns. It is concerns that they
have, and the concerns they express will be more of a safety hazard than
actually wearing the helmets themselves.
I ask
the minister if she has time to review a lot of these petitions and take it into
account. There will be more coming again when we're back the following week
because there are hundreds of more people who have already signed petitions that
I will be collecting next week to present to show the severity and how much
anxiety this has caused to a lot of people who went out and bought
factory-sealed rigs so that they wouldn't have to wear their helmets.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for St.
John's Centre.
J. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
Today, I
am presenting a petition on reforming the justice system to better serve
survivors of sexual assault:
WHEREAS
the global MeToo movement has laid bare the gross inequalities and obstacles
facing survivors of sexual assault who seek justice; and
WHEREAS
serious concerns about how the justice system handles criminal offences related
to sexual violence are evident based on statistics about the reporting rates of
sexual assault in relation to other crimes. These concerns also emerge from the
reported experiences of survivors; and
WHEREAS
in Canada, one in three victimizations are reported to police but only one in
five sexual assaults are reported to police; and
WHEREAS
survivors hesitate to report sexual assaults because they don't believe they
will see justice; and
WHEREAS
these facts and conditions all combine and result in a failure of the justice
system for survivors of sexual assault;
THEREFORE we, the undersigned, petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows:
Acknowledge that the status quo is failing survivors of sexual assault;
undertake a review of the K-to-12 curriculum to identify gaps in education about
consent, healthy relationships and gender-based violence; implement alternative
justice options, such as transformative/restorative justice practices and/or
options rooted in Indigenous legal traditions and practices in response to
gendered-based violence throughout the province; have the Minister of Justice
ask the chief judge of the Provincial Court to consider a practice directive
which would prohibit opposing counsel from approaching witnesses and which would
prohibit counsel from yelling at witnesses; introduce mandatory training for
provincial judges on trauma, PTSD and consent modeled on the federal
requirement; and consult with key community stakeholders to identify and
appropriately fund new initiatives to prevent and address all forms of
gender-based violence.
Mr.
Speaker, this will be one of many on this issue here. It's an issue that we had
a town hall meeting on in my district. It's one that really, at this point,
needs to be resolved so that survivors of sexual assault won't feel victimized
again by the justice system.
Certainly the first one acknowledges the status quo as failing survivors of
sexual assault and you'll hear that they are looking for alternatives, such as
specialized training for judges, and also consideration of other models to the
criminal justice system, such as restorative justice, which would also involve
the victims of these assaults and give them the opportunity to take agency over
the trauma that they've suffered.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Torngat Mountains.
L. EVANS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We, the
undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, bring attention to the House
of Assembly to the following:
WHEREAS
according to the document The Way Forward
on Climate Change the province is already experiencing the effects of
climate change; Newfoundland and Labrador joined the Pan-Canadian Framework on
Clean Growth and Climate Change in 2016, but is not on track to meet the 2020
targets; financial costs resulting from climate change will unequally impact
municipalities due to the responsibilities set out in the
Municipalities Act, 1999 ;
THEREFORE your petitioners call upon the House of Assembly to urge the
government to declare a climate emergency; establish a task force on decreasing
the effects of the climate crisis while building community resilience; and
consider climate in all policy and decision-making.
Mr.
Speaker, I was very proud yesterday that two of my fellow Labrador MHAs from
Lake Melville and Lab West presented this exact petition because it is a real
concern for us. I presented this petition several times before and one thing I
always say is every effort has to be made to reduce emissions and increase
removal of atmospheric carbon.
Now,
just looking at reducing emissions. I was listening to the radio this morning,
Labrador Morning , and the Mary's
Harbour mayor was on and he was talking about Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is
planning to build a single, regional diesel generating station on the South
Coast. If we look at Churchill Falls, we look at Muskrat Falls and we look at
the hydroelectricity that's being produced in Labrador, but on the South Coast
and the North Coast, we can't access that. We're burning diesel and we're being
impacted by global change. The hypocrisy and the irony is really, really
difficult for us to fathom.
I was
listening to Mayor Rumbolt and he basically was saying that they just found out
on October 29 there's a deadline of November 4, which is today, for this public
consultation. They're requesting an extension and so I hope the government
allows them an extension so that they can actually contribute. Because what he
said his people want is the cleaner energy, basically hydroelectricity that's
being produced in Labrador, be joined to the grid. He said that that power is
more stable and more reliable and, very importantly, it's cleaner and then – I
was listening to him on the radio – he said hopefully cheaper.
But here
in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, in Labrador with our
hydroelectricity rates, what we pay for electricity is –
SPEAKER:
Order, please!
The
Member's time has expired.
The hon.
the Member for Topsail - Paradise.
P. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
WHEREAS
Route 60 through Topsail is a heavily populated area with physically active
residents; and
WHEREAS
residents and young children who walk daily to school are finding it very unsafe
with the deplorable state of erosion along the shoulders of Route 60 through
Topsail;
THEREFORE we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: We, the
undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador to find a more permanent solution, and install curb
and gutter in the areas affected by erosion.
Speaker,
I've presented this petition numerous times in the last number of years trying
to get some attention to this area. The full route is not in need of work, but
there are sections that are in, as I said, a deplorable state. I guess there has
been some leniency given to it when we went through COVID where kids were not in
school and so the traffic on these roads and the people walking were greatly
reduced; however, the shoulders continue to erode. Now, as we get back to some
sense of normal with kids in school and more people walking – and, of course,
now the evenings are darker and darker. Walking along these roadways, the
shoulders, there are ravines. I've seen people out with their own rake and
shovels fixing it up.
I know
the minister responsible spoke about the five-year plan, I guess, for lack of a
better word, is no longer in existence and moving to a new multi-year plan, and
that's good. I would hope that after a couple of years that this particular
piece of road would be somewhere near the front of that list now.
There
are other issues up there, similar to – I spoke to the minister only recently
about signage for Fowler's Road, which I'm confident he will have looked into. I
know we're at the end of the construction season, but this area, there's been a
lot of – I'll call it – scratch and patch or grind and patch been done there.
But those are temporary measures. So I do look for the minister to give some
serious consideration to this
section of the road. It's heavily travelled, a lot
of people walking that road, so in terms of safety it should be at the top of
the list in terms of priority.
Thank
you for this.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Transportation and Infrastructure for a response.
E. LOVELESS:
Thank you, Speaker.
I'll say
to the Member we'll certainly take that under consideration as I did before when
he brought a few items to my attention. They got done and he thanked me for it,
and I appreciate that very much.
When you
say the thank you for the multi-year agreement you might want to speak to your
guy to your left and tell him that it's a good thing because he doesn't think it
is a good thing.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Ferryland.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
L. O'DRISCOLL:
Thank you, Speaker.
The
background to this petition is as follows: The Witless Bay Line is a significant
piece of infrastructure.
WHEREAS
many commute outside the Avalon on a daily basis for work, as well as the
commercial, residential and tourism growth in our region has increased the
volume of traffic on this highway;
THEREFORE we petition the House of Assembly as follows: We urge the Government
of Newfoundland and Labrador to upgrade this significant piece of infrastructure
to enhance and improve the flow of traffic to and from the Trans-Canada Highway.
Well, I
spoke on this a good many times. It links the Southern Shore to the Trans-Canada
Highway for sure. I get a lot of calls from people that travel it going down to
the West White Rose. Hopefully a bit of work starting at Bull Arm again and
going to Long Harbour as well. There are a lot of residents in the area that do
travel that highway. I did have one of our MHAs on this side travel it the other
night, and we did ATV legislation and he said you probably need a helmet to
drive the highway when you're coming across it's that rough. He's not wrong, I
tell you.
We do
have a couple of ends of it done. One end is done towards the Trans-Canada for
four or five kilometres and on the other side it's done as well. But I would
love to see the minister have a look at this. It's a very significant piece of
infrastructure and people travel it daily. It is a rough patch of road and it
certainly needs to be looked at. I get calls from people that drive motorcycles
– well, no calls. I met a person who was driving a motorcycle and he said: Don't
forget in your petition to bring up about motorcycle drivers trying to zigzag
around the potholes and get through it. Campers are the same thing and they
would rather go out around St. John's than go across Witless Bay Line. It's too
hard on their vehicles and too hard on their campers.
I would
love for the minister to put this in his budget for next year and hopefully have
a look at that as well.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I call
from the Order Paper, Motion 1.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology:
THAT, in
accordance with Standing Order 8(8), notwithstanding the Parliamentary Calendar
issued by the Clerk for 2022 or any Standing Order on the contrary, the
Parliamentary Calendar for the spring 2022 sitting of this House shall be
modified as follows:
THAT
this House will meet in accordance with the daily
schedule prescribed in the
Standing Orders , as follows: From
March 15 to March 17, 2022, inclusive; from April 4 to April 14, 2022,
inclusive; from May 2 to May 19, 2022, inclusive; and from May 30 to June 2,
2022, inclusive;
AND THAT
the week of May 23, 2022, shall be a constituency week.
SPEAKER:
Is it the pleasure of the
House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
Carried.
The hon.
the Deputy Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I call
from the Order Paper, Bill 40,
An Act Respecting The Protection Of Adults.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Children, Seniors and Social Development.
J. ABBOTT:
Speaker, I move, seconded by
the Deputy Government House Leader, that Bill 40,
An Act Respecting The
Protection Of Adults, be now read a second time.
SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
Bill 40,
an act entitled,
An Act Respecting The Protection Of Adults, be now
read a second time.
Motion,
second reading of a bill, “An Act Respecting The Protection Of Adults.” (Bill
40)
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of
Children, Seniors and Social Development.
J. ABBOTT:
Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity today to talk about the changes
that we are proposing for the Adult
Protection Act .
We are
all familiar with the philosophy that says a society can be measured in terms of
how it treats its most vulnerable. In this regard, the
Adult Protection Act is a very important piece of legislation, as it
is designed to ensure the protection of vulnerable adults in Newfoundland and
Labrador who are at risk of abuse, neglect and/or self-neglect and who do not
understand or appreciate that risk.
Department of Children, Seniors and Social Development is responsible for the
administration of this legislation, including the creation of policies and
procedures, as well as monitoring for adherence and compliance. At the same
time, the four regional health authorities are responsible for operations under
the act, which means that regional health authority staff receive and
investigate adult protection reports and are responsible for working with
adults, as well as the provincial director of Adult Protection, to put supports
in place to mitigate the risk to those adults needing protection.
The act
includes a legal duty to report, which means that anyone who is aware that an
adult is at risk of abuse, neglect or self-neglect and does not understand or
appreciate that risk, is required by law to report their concerns to the
appropriate authorities, whether that be Adult Protection staff or their local
police. Ensuring a balance between personal autonomy and protection is a
fundamental pillar of the act. This is evident in its service principles which
recognize that every adult has the right to live their lifestyle of choice.
Now,
central to adult protection is consideration of an individual's capacity, that
is, an individual's ability to understand information and appreciate risks.
Capacity is the backbone of the act and the lack of capacity, along with abuse,
neglect or self-neglect, must be suspected for the act to apply.
The
Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for Health Information was instrumental in our
review of the current Adult Protection Act .
They worked with my department to produce a report on the first five years of
the act, including key statistics and opportunities for improvement. I would
like to share some of those statistics with you now.
In the
first five years since the current Adult
Protection Act was proclaimed, 1,671 adult protection reports were received
and, of these, 1,345 were accepted and evaluated. Of the 1,345 reports accepted
and evaluated, 80 per cent of those reports concerned persons 60 years of age or
older. Reports are still received on younger adults. Approximately 8 per cent of
these reports concern adults between the ages of 18 to 39. It is important to
note that the act applies to anyone above 18 years of age.
A total
of 85 of those reports proceeded to an investigation and only five – and I
repeat, only five – of that over 1,600 required an application to the court to
have the adults declared adults in need of protective intervention. This speaks
to the diligence and effectiveness of services by the regional health
authorities in mitigating risk and supporting vulnerable adults when brought to
our attention.
As well,
the Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for Health Information's report identified
opportunities for improvement that have helped to inform changes to the
legislation, which include enhanced procedural protections, enhanced cultural
sensitivity, establishment of temporary orders, reformed emergency interventions
and reformed declaration orders: all of which I'll discuss in detail in the next
few minutes.
In 2014,
when the current Adult Protection Act
was proclaimed, it was a modern and progressive piece of legislation, replacing
the 1973 Neglected Adults Welfare Act .
The changes in society and the experience we have gained by applying legislation
to situations that are often complex and nuanced teaches us that there are
always ways in which our laws can and should be improved.
Much of
this legislation creates and oversees court processes undertaken to ensure the
protection of vulnerable adults. As part of the statutory review, my department
took the opportunity to consider court decisions in our province, as well as
across Canada, in relation to procedural protections and lessons about how the
Charter rights of adults engaged in the adult protection system should and must
be ensured. That review has been invaluable in informing many of the
improvements I will discuss here today, such as the time limit on investigations
and orders, as well as the creation of clear, temporary orders which clarify the
authority of a regional health authority during their investigations.
We are
introducing a new act as opposed to making amendments to the current act in
order to address both feedback provided by key stakeholders in the review, as
well as legislative issues raised since the proclamation of the act in 2014, as
well as based on drafting advice provided by the Office of the Legislative
Council. Their recommendation was for a new
Adult Protection Act, 2021 being
proposed.
The new
bill – or this bill – will add clarity to what it means to be an adult in need
of protective intervention. In the current act, we say that an adult must lack
capacity and be at risk of abuse, neglect or self-neglect. The current act went
on to state that lack of capacity in one area does not necessarily mean a lack
of capacity in other areas, but this has not been clear and not consistently
adhered to in practice.
The new
bill adds specific domains to the definition of an adult in need of protective
intervention in order to strengthen the application of decision-specific
capacity throughout the adult protection process. These domains include health
care, physical, emotional, psychological, financial, legal, residential or
social needs.
Section 11 of the current
Adult Protection Act requires that the minister shall, every five years,
perform a review of the act and the regulations made under it, the principles on
which it is based and considered and the areas in which it may be improved and
report the findings to the Lieutenant-Governor in Council.
The act
was proclaimed in 2014, as I said, so this review began in 2019. The review was
comprehensive and included consultations with a wide variety of stakeholders,
including the general public. We wanted to make sure we were looking at it from
many different perspectives, including how other jurisdictions approach adult
protection in order to ensure that the changes we are proposing reflect best
practices.
partnership with the government's Public Engagement and Planning Division and
the Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for Health Information, we led an
engagement process for key stakeholders including: front-line social workers;
other allied health staff; management representatives from the regional health
authorities; members of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary; members of the
Royal Canadian Mounted Police; and the Office of the Seniors' Advocate.
The
general public was also invited to share their input via engageNL's website and
more than 40 other stakeholder groups, like SeniorsNL, the Coalition of Persons
with Disabilities, the Office of the Citizens' Representative, the Canadian
Bankers Association were all contacted individually and invited to submit
feedback.
Internally we consulted with the Labrador Affairs Secretariat, the Office of
Indigenous Affairs and Reconciliation, and the Department of Justice and Public
Safety. We also invited Indigenous governments and organizations to participate
in the review process. For instance, staff in my department's Adult Protection
division held an in-person meeting with the Nunatsiavut Government's staff to
discuss the legislation.
We also
reviewed case experiences over the first five years of the act and general input
from the regional health authorities because, as noted previously, their staff
are the ones who apply this legislation in their work every day.
addition to these activities, we also carried out a jurisdictional review to
gather information about best practices across the country. To address feedback
provided through the inter-agency process as well as the legislative issues
raised since the proclamation of the act, a new
Adult Protection Act, 2021 was developed and is what we are speaking
to today.
These
changes will ensure that we continue to balance our dual commitment to protect
vulnerable adults while upholding their autonomy throughout the adult protection
process. I want to now give you a high overview of the proposed changes.
Both the
five-year review, as well as case experiences since the act was proclaimed in
2014, have highlighted the need to strengthen the rights of adults involved in
the adult protection process. To achieve this, a number of changes are proposed
including: introducing timeline requirements on investigations; a 30-day time
limit on investigations, as proposed under the bill, will ensure investigations
are concluded in a timely and safe manner. In the interest of procedural
fairness, a 30-day time limit will also be placed on temporary orders under the
act. An option to renew or vary the order will also be included. The bill also
includes the right to retain and instruct counsel. This will ensure that the
right to legal counsel is protected under the act.
The bill
also provides the court the explicit authority to place conditions related to
the duration and review of declaration orders. This will provide additional
oversight to the orders where the court considers it appropriate. Speaker, these
progressive steps will better protect the rights of adults involved in the adult
protection process.
Also
during the five-year review, it became evident that there are opportunities to
further strengthen cultural considerations in the adult protection process. The
bill includes the addition of a service principle requiring that the delivery of
services under the act provide for the preservation of an adult's cultural and
community connections where appropriate. Cultural and community connections will
be considered through the adult protection process, including in-service plans
developed for adults declared to be in need of protective intervention.
The bill
also includes the introduction of new temporary orders. The proposed temporary
orders will give the courts authority to grant orders to protect an adult during
an investigation and through to a declaration order, if needed. And as I
mentioned, there were only five done in the past five years.
The
proposed scope of this authority includes an ability to make orders to
facilitate an investigation which is provided for in the existing legislation.
This can also include, but is not limited to, orders related to medical
assessments, capacity assessments and the evaluation of assets.
The
proposed orders also include the ability to protect the adult and/or their
assets for the duration of the order. This can include, but is not limited to,
orders appointing a guardian to manage one's finances, placing the adult under
the supervision of a director and appointing appropriate persons to make
decisions in areas where the adult lacks capacity.
The bill
also makes changes to the emergency intervention processes under sections 26 and
27. This is a last-resort option and is only used when harm is imminent and
there are no less-intrusive intervention alternatives available. The current act
requires the provincial director to make a declaration application two days
following an emergency removal. The five-year review and case experiences have
highlighted that this requirement is not only operationally unrealistic but it
is contrary to the service principle of being least intrusive and restrictive.
The bill
will require a director to make application for a temporary order following an
emergency intervention. This will provide time for staff to complete an
investigation if needed, problem solve and seek out less-intrusive options to
mitigate the risk, avoiding the more enduring and intrusive declaration orders
unless absolutely necessary.
The bill
also proposes changes to the orders that declare an adult in need of protective
intervention. Currently, declaration orders focus primarily on where an adult
will live and most orders granted to date have placed adults in the custody of
the provincial director.
The bill
proposes to reform these orders to include new options a court can order,
areas in which an adult lacks capacity. This will provide flexibility around
conditions that can be attached to the orders and will ensure that we respect a
person's decision-making abilities in areas where they remain capable.
Speaker,
in closing, the application of this legislation requires a careful balance
between protecting a person from harm and respecting their right to autonomy as
guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms . The proposed new act will both enhance the rights of
adults involved in the adult protection process, as well as strengthen the
protections for adults in need of protective intervention. These changes will
ensure that we continue to balance the protection of vulnerable adults while
upholding their autonomy throughout the adult protection process.
I ask my
hon. colleagues to support this bill and further strengthen the adult protection
process in the province. I look forward to seeing this legislation passed.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SPEAKER (Warr):
Thank you.
recognize the Member for Placentia West - Bellevue.
J. DWYER:
Thank you, Speaker.
The
Adult Protection Act received Royal
Assent a decade ago in May 2011 and came in force in 2014. It replaced the
Neglected Adults Welfare Act .
Section 11 of the act passed a decade ago states: “The
minister shall, every 5 years, perform a review of this Act and the regulations
made under it, the principles upon which it is based and consider the areas in
which it may be improved and report his or her findings to the
Lieutenant-Governor in Council.”
The minister commenced the review in 2019, five years after
its proclamation into law, and it continued until February of 2020. During the
review, feedback was considered not only from the relevant departments within
the government, but also from the regional health authority, staff and
management, the police, Indigenous governments and organizations, professional
associations and colleges, community organizations and the general public who
could also send feedback through engageNL.
This review was accompanied by a review conducted by the
Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for Health Information. The result is a new
bill, Bill 40, the Adult Protection Act,
2021 , which will replace the existing
Adult Protection Act .
What is the Adult
Protection Act ? The purpose of the act is to protect the adult residents of
Newfoundland and Labrador who are at risk of abuse, neglect and/or self-neglect
or who do not understand and appreciate that risk. This is
an act of last resort
and applies to anyone 18 years of age or older, regardless of their living
arrangement. The regional health authorities and the Department of Children,
Seniors and Social Development are mandated to take the least intrusive and
restrictive means available to support and protect adults.
We all have an obligation to report abuse, neglect and
self-neglect or a person who may not understand or appreciate that risk. A
report can be made to a social worker, a director, a provincial peace officer or
through a toll-free number which has been set up. While CSSD administers the
act, the four regional health authorities are also responsible for its
operation. For any adults who are declared to be in need of protective
intervention, the director in CSSD functions as a decision-maker for this adult.
Here's how the act works. One, first, a report is either
screened out or accepted, then an evaluation is completed with the adult's
consent, if possible. An investigation is initiated if the risk of abuse or
neglect is not mitigated and the adult appears to lack capacity. If consent is
not given, an investigation can still occur; however, the adult must be engaged
as much as possible. Finally, an application of declaration is made to the court
if the adult is determined to lack capacity in the areas where risk is evident
and services and supports cannot mitigate the risk.
The changes. This new act makes changes in five areas:
enhanced procedural protections, enhanced cultural sensitivity, establishment of
temporary orders, reformed emergency interventions
and reformed declaration orders.
Here are
some of the details on the changes to enhance procedural protections. While the
current act does not allow adults to have legal representation, the five-year
review found that not all adults had access to legal representation and the
orders involving these adults, including orders to investigate, did not include
time frames. Therefore, the new act will include a 30-day timeline on
investigations, time limits on temporary orders and a new provision which
provides the court the ability to include duration and court-review requirements
on declaration orders. This means that even if an adult does not have access to
legal counsel or if they choose not to have legal representation, the court will
impose the least restrictive means possible and a time frame will be put on it.
In many
ways, this adds a check to make sure temporary orders cannot be placed on an
adult for a long period of time while awaiting an investigation and a long-term
decision.
Here are
some of the changes to enhance the culture sensitivity. The provisions being
added to the act are similar to those included in the
Children, Youth and Families Act . We noted that cultural sensitivity
is also being added to the Adoption Act. The new
Adult Protection Act will include a
new service principle which provides for the preservation of cultural and
community connections.
Here are
some details on the establishment of temporary orders. The current act does not
provide for temporary orders at all. This means that adults who are at risk may
exit the safety arrangements put in place to protect them while awaiting a
hearing; that could leave them vulnerable during the intervening time. So
temporary orders can be used to protect an adult during an investigation or
while awaiting a declaration hearing.
Speaker,
this bill allows temporary orders, which will give the courts authority to grant
orders to protect an adult during an investigation through to a declaration
hearing and, if needed, a declaration order. Temporary orders can be orders
related to medical assessments, orders related to capacity assessments or orders
related to the evaluation of assets. Temporary orders also include the ability
to protect the adult and/or their assets for the duration of the order. This may
mean orders appointing a guardian to manage the finances, orders placing the
adult under the supervision of a director and orders appointing appropriate
persons to make decisions in areas where the adult lacks capacity.
It is
important to note, Speaker, that the legislation requires that a hearing must be
held within five days of filing the application and gives a 30-day time limit on
the order, which can be renewed or varied. With this being said, it is important
to note that there is a clinical threshold and a legal threshold for capacity.
The clinical assessment is not evidence of incapacity; rather, it is evidence
that is brought to the court for legal determination of capacity. The adult is
presumed to have capacity until the court makes its ruling.
Here are
some details on the reform of emergency interventions. Emergency interventions
are a last resort. They must only be used when harm is imminent and there is no
other less intrusive intervention alternative available. The current act
requires that the provincial director make a declaration application two days
following an emergency removal. The five-year review found that this is
operationally unrealistic. The new legislation will require an application for a
temporary order following an emergency intervention. Following this temporary
order, staff will complete an investigation, problem solve and seek out less
intrusive options to mitigate the risk to the adult.
Here are
some details on the reform of declaration orders. Current orders focus on care,
custody and where an adult resides; however, an adult may lack capacity in a
different area. A declaration order should be made in a specific area in which
the adult lacks capacity. The new act will recognize that capacity is
decision-specific and that a person's capacity and decision-making ability can
vary depending on the decision at hand. This means that a declaration order
should not only be related to the areas where the adult lacks capacity, but
should respect the areas in which an adult retains their own capacity.
The new
types of declaration orders include: An order that the adult be placed under the
the adult reside in a place identified by the director, subject to terms and
conditions; and an order that the director or another person is authorized to
make decisions in areas where the adult lacks capacity.
summary, the act that the House passed a decade ago called for a five-year
review and that has led to these reforms. The reforms represent extensive
consultation and feedback. The changes seem to be improvements. This is, of
course, a major ethical issue. When an order is put in place, essentially, we
are taking away an individual's right to autonomy in some respect for a period
of time. Is that ever justified?
A great
many of us know of people – for example, people with dementia – who lose the
capacity they once had to think clearly or accurately. If their former selves
could see their current selves in their stricken state, they would want someone
to intervene to protect them. We believe intervention in such a situation is
morally justified. There are other situations where the ethical questions are
more difficult to answer.
We know
that with respect to persons with disabilities and people suffering from mental
illness, it is being recognized more and more that autonomy and
self-determination is extremely important and should not be compromised except
as a very last resort. Even then, we must always be aware of our duty to ask the
tough ethical questions over and over. That is why we respect the amendments
that create temporary orders and time limits.
We can
serve as safeguards ensuring autonomy is protected whenever it ought to be. We
must recognize that some people will want to make decisions for themselves that
others believe to be wrong, reckless and evidence that the person lacks the
capacity for sound decision-making. Speaker, the authorities must be extremely
careful to respect adults' rights to control their own destiny to the greatest
extent possible. But the authorities must also be ready and willing to act when
it is crystal clear that doing otherwise would be morally indefensible.
The line
is very fine but there is indeed a line. This act is an attempt to define it
more precisely.
We look
forward to this act being further reviewed and tweaked, as required, as time
goes on. Speaker, I look forward to asking questions on Bill 40, the
Adult Protection Act, 2021 when we
transition to Committee.
Thank
you, Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER (Bennett):
Any other speakers?
The hon.
the Member for Topsail - Paradise.
P. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
I might
as well talk; I'm after breaking the mask.
Thank
you.
I don't
think any of us can be against anything that is designed to strengthen adult
protection in the province. It's certainly a piece of legislation that we need.
I was
listening to the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development in
providing some stats on what has happened in the last five years with regard to
adult protection. I stand to be corrected, but hopefully I'm in the ballpark on
the numbers he said.
I think
he mentioned that there were 1,671 adult protection applications, of which 1,335
were accepted. I believe he said 80 per cent of those – 80 were 60-plus. So
we're talking about seniors there.
AN HON. MEMBER:
Yeah, it's 80 per cent.
P. DINN:
It is 80 per cent. Okay.
It's 80
per cent of those applicants were 60-plus. When you think of that – and I
understand the importance of it because an adult is defined as anyone 18 and
above, as per this act, this legislation. But the huge, I call it lion's share –
and that's not to take away the importance of dealing with those who are under
60 because every individual case is certainly important – does have a lean
towards adults that are 60-plus or, as I would say, elders.
Just to
put it in context, because we talk about elder abuse. This act is certainly
designed to address that. If you look at stats, one in five Canadians believe
they know of a senior who might be experiencing some form of abuse. Of course,
seniors are from all walks of life and all are vulnerable to elder abuse. As the
minister stated, society can be judged by how it treats its most vulnerable and
that being seniors.
If you
take elder abuse, what is elder abuse? Elder abuse is any action by someone in a
relationship of trust that results in harm or distress to an older person.
Neglect is a lack of action by that person in a relationship of trust with the
same result. Commonly recognized types of elder abuse include physical,
psychological and financial. Often more than one type of abuse occurs at the
same time. Abuse can be a single incident or a repeated pattern of behaviour.
When you're talking about elders, financial abuse is the most commonly reported
type of elder abuse.
How does
it happen? Elder abuse often occurs because of the abuser's power and control
over an older adult. In some situations, the abuse may also result from
addictions, use of drugs, alcohol, gambling; mental health problems are there;
and a cycle of family violence or ageism. Abuse can happen when the aggressor
wants to intimidate, isolate, dominate or control another person.
So you
ask: Who's doing the abusing? Who abuses the seniors or older adults? Often
older adults affected by abuse know and trust the person mistreating them. Elder
abuse can be caused by a family member, a friend, someone who provides
assistance with basic needs or services or health care providers in
institutional settings. In many situations of elder abuse, the abuser is
dependent on that older adult for money, food or shelter. You may think that
older adults or older people are unable to make decisions. Some are but most
older people who experience abuse are able to make decisions for themselves.
Abuse
can happen to anyone in a family relationship. It can happen to people of all
backgrounds, ages, religions, races, cultures and ethnic origins. In many cases,
it doesn't become known because your older adults may feel ashamed or
embarrassed to tell anyone they are being abused by someone they trust. They may
fear a retaliation or a punishment or they may have concerns about having to
move from their home or community. They may also feel a sense of family loyalty.
Often,
older adults may not be aware of people and resources that can help them. I
suspect they feel trapped. They probably feel they have no other options
available to them. This act strengthens some of the protection for our adult
population. But this comes back to when I read that stat about one in five
Canadians experience elder abuse or know someone who experienced it. I would
almost suggest that's a little higher than that, especially when you look at the
applications and 80 per cent being 60-plus in the last five-year period.
Really,
when you look at it, elder abuse and neglect can be very difficult to detect.
Some of the following signs and symptoms may indicate that older adult is being
victimized or neglected. So if you know someone, an older adult, an elder, who
is showing signs of fear, anxiety, depression, or passiveness in relation to a
family member, friend or care provider, that may be an indication of abuse.
Unexplained physical injuries may also be a sign. Dehydration, poor nutrition
and poor hygiene could be a sign of elder abuse. Improper use of medication,
confusion about legal documents, such as a new will or new mortgage. As you do
get older, as adults get older, as you hit that 60-plus – and I know there are
some in this House that are 60-plus. As you hit those ages, you do become a
little bit more uncertain about what you're doing in terms of documents and
wills. A sudden drop in cash flow or financial holdings and, of course, a
reluctance to speak about a situation. Now, that may not always indicate elder
abuse. There could be other reasons for that. Those are some of the symptoms
that you want to be weary of.
Raising
awareness among seniors about their right to live safely and securely is seen as
the most important issue for governments when it comes to elder abuse. In fact,
nine out of 10 Canadians rate that as the highest priority. That goes back to
the minister's comment when he said: Every adult has the right to live their
lifestyle of choice. We need to be raising more awareness amongst our adult
community and, more importantly, our elder community.
When you
look at signs of abuse, I mentioned the physical signs. They include any
injuries or risk of injuries on an older person. Some of these are obvious. As
you get older, some may have a fall but striking, hitting, pushing, shaking,
burning, shoving are all indications of physical abuse of an elder or an older
adult. Inappropriate physical and chemical restraints and harm created over and
under medicating. We cannot forget there are psychological strains and stresses
that come with getting older, but there's also other abuse that really affects
that.
Psychological abuse of seniors includes actions that decrease their sense of
self-worth and dignity, and may include insults, threats, intimidation,
humiliation, harassment and treating them like a child. Probably some of us
think when you're talking to seniors that's an acceptable way, but they're
adults, they're seniors. Isolating them from family and friends and regular
activities, that all has an effect on their psychology.
As I
noted earlier – and I'm not sure, I'll cover this in the questions; I guess I'll
have a question on this – the most common form of abuse to adults and elders
that I noted was financial abuse of seniors. Financial abuse includes actions
that decrease the financial worth of an older person without benefit to that
person, and may include misusing or stealing a senior's assets, property or
money; cashing an elderly person's cheque without authorization; forging an
elderly person's signature; unduly pressuring seniors to make or change a will
or to sign legal documents that they do not fully understand; and, sharing an
older person's home without paying a fair share of expenses when requested. So
I'll give an ahead warning to the minister. I'll be asking a question on how
this particular act covers financial abuse.
There's
also neglect. Neglect includes inactions that may result in harm to an older
person and may include a caregiver or family member not providing appropriate
water or food, shelter, clothing, medication or medical attention and assistance
with basic necessities.
Seniors
most vulnerable to neglect include those who are socially isolated and those
with serious health conditions. I know it wasn't probably termed elder abuse or
that, but I know when we were going through COVID, I got calls – but I'm sure
everyone has received calls – of sons and daughters with elderly parents in the
long-term care homes and because of COVID, of course, you could not get in to
see them.
How many
times did I hear about being socially isolated, what an effect that had on the
elders. Of course, this is due to a public health issue. This goes back to,
again, the point made by the minister that society can be judged by how it
treats its most vulnerable.
It's
common sense – I call it common sense but I always say common sense is not so
common – abuse happens when one person hurts or mistreats another. I'm sure it's
taken into consideration when we're putting together and coming in with a new
act and strengthening that act, the Adult
Protection Act , it's probably something that we do need to be looking at on
a regular basis, maybe every five years. Because, I mean, some of the
legislation sits there for a while, but especially when you're dealing with such
a group that are maybe open or more prevalent to abuse.
We have
to remember when we're dealing with adults, the
Adult Protection Act – and again because we're looking at 80 per
cent being 60-plus in terms of those adult protection applications, we have to
remember that seniors are entitled to respect. Seniors have every right to live
safely and securely. There's absolutely no excuse for abuse of anyone that's
vulnerable, in particular, our adults, our older adults, our elders who have
done so much for us; done so much for their sons and daughters and
granddaughters.
I do
applaud this piece of legislation. I think anything that strengthens the ability
to protect our adults, in particular, our elders, and keep them from abuse and
mitigate from abuse, and, hopefully, our stats reported it the next time, the
1,671 adult protection applications will be – well, it would nice to be zero. It
would be wonderful to be zero but, hopefully, it's going down and, hopefully,
the elder abuse cases continue to fall and, hopefully, those one-in-five
Canadians that are victims of elder abuse becomes a negligible stat and we have
a zero.
I thank
you for this. I certainly will be supporting it.
Thank
you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the
Third Party.
J. DINN:
Thank you, Speaker.
I'll
certainly take every opportunity to remind the Member for Topsail - Paradise of
his commitment to respect his elders and appreciate them, especially his older
brother, oldest, you know, for all the work that he has done for him. I think
it's in Hansard , so I'll be looking
for every opportunity to throw it up to him.
I'm not
going to speak too long on this. I'm going to go back to the protection of
adults. I understand where the Member for Topsail - Paradise is coming from,
elder abuse and elders, but it is adults, I think, we got to focus on.
I have
been blessed, even in my own family, my parents and relatives who lived to a
very ripe, healthy age and my neighbour was a Dr. Robert Simms who is up to 89
and is still going out in a boat with his brother trouting out by South River. I
figure if that's old age, Speaker, that's where I want to be: Independent, with
all my faculties intact and so on and so forth.
I guess,
in many ways, I'm looking here – one of the statistics that stood out was
certainly that 80.5 per cent, or 80 per cent of the reports were for 60-plus.
That got me thinking in terms of what's the nature; why so many in that age
category? Is it just to do with age, or is it also to do with finances and the
precariousness of housing, food insecurity, you name it? Because after 62, for a
lot of adults, they're probably finding themselves living on some very fixed
incomes. If they don't own their own place and if they're renting, then life
becomes a little bit more precarious for them, Speaker.
So I'm
looking at that: of that 60-plus mostly self-neglect and neglect. Is a part of
that neglect and self-neglect a result of a failure to have proper finances or
supports in place for them?
The
purpose of this is to protect adult residents of Newfoundland and Labrador who
are at risk of abuse, neglect, self-neglect or who do not appreciate that risk.
I'm trying to tread a fine line here because adults should be protected. But I
will tell you, from my own point of view, as I begin that long, slow slide into
oblivion; it's very much about maintaining independence as well, as long as I
can, as the former Seniors' Advocate would say about aging in place.
How do
we define that, that they do not appreciate that risk, or that an adult is
incapable of caring for themselves or who refuses, delays or is unable to make
provision for adequate care and attention of themselves? So much of that is tied
up to income as well. But is it for all adults or do we tend to focus on the
seniors who maybe they don't feed themselves, eat as much or maybe they aren't
looking after their health the way they should or are unable to. How do we apply
this? Because I think it can't be
an act that also just targets seniors and
somehow infantilizes them or treats them as basically children, unable to look
after themselves.
It's an
interesting thing, Speaker, I'm sure that if you look at the rates of traffic
accidents, you'll probably find that the bulk of them are not seniors. Yet, when
it comes to putting measures in place, it is the seniors who are going to have
to require the regular checkups and so on and so forth and probably risk having
their licence taken away from them. In some ways, it seems to be age defined or
for seniors who are living in their own homes, who, all of a sudden, find
themselves under pressure to go into some sort of long-term care facility – or
as relatives of mine whose mother was there, they called it long-term death
facilities. Now, that's how they referred to it because of the lack of resources
that where there.
In many
ways, if anything else, I think the ideal health is aging in place, in your own
place, with the supports that you need. But I'm a little bit, I guess,
concerned. I understand where this is coming from and I'll support this, but I'm
always – if a person refuses to make adequate care: If they refuse to take their
medication; if they refuse to eat a healthy meal, does that indicate that
somehow they're in need of protection?
In many
ways it comes down to – and I'm wondering who's going to complain. It's no
different than anyone in this room here. If I choose to live on french fries or
poutine for the rest of my life, that's my choice. Is anyone going to object to
it?
I think,
in my ways, I'm always cautious about things about self-neglect. I'm more
concerned with people who are taking advantage of people, regardless of age, and
to make sure they are protected from that, that they don't see their life
savings taken from them or that they don't lose their house, that they don't
lose all those necessities that they need to survive.
But I
will tell you that a person may appreciate the risk and choose to do something
anyway. A person may refuse – as we see, there will be people who will refuse to
take the vaccine, and no matter how reckless we might take that to be, they will
still make that decision. There certainly seems to be enough measures in place
to protect that, but that's something that I guess I would have a concern.
Maybe, because certainly, to me, the ultimate goal I think of any human being is
if you are fortunate enough and blessed enough to live to that ripe age of
whatever, that you maintain your independence and that you will have to make
that decision on whether you refuse. If your decisions affect the health of
someone else, then fair enough.
I'm
looking through it, there are certainly balances and checks in place, but again,
it's who decides to make the report and how is that an example of self-neglect,
when many other younger adults may be doing the same thing and we would not even
bat an eye at it. We might think them reckless, but I don't think we would look
at them sometimes as lacking capacity. I can tell you that that's across all
ages.
I would
not want to see this as somehow we're looking at elders or people over a certain
age or along those lines. But people have the right to refuse help, refuse an
operation and refuse this. I know that's not what it's talking about, but in
many ways I guess I would like to make sure that adults at all times are not in
some way pigeonholed or characterized as in need of protection, when in many
ways they're just being their regular and maybe cantankerous self, and that's
their right to do so.
With
that, Speaker, I'll stop there. Those are my only real concerns with this and
maybe that's something we can address during the Committee stage.
Thank
you.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.
P. TRIMPER:
Thank you, Speaker.
SPEAKER:
Could Members – thank you.
P. TRIMPER:
I'm very pleased to speak on
this bill, and speaking and dealing with the pure spirit of the intention of
second reading and we are dealing with
An Act Respecting the Protection of
Adults.
What I
wanted to speak about – and, Minister, I compliment you and your team, as I did
back in Estimates this spring, because they have been invaluable to myself and
my office for so many issues that we've been dealing with in Lake Melville. It's
been the struggles and some of the maybe lack of clarity, confusion and
contradiction that's been in the previous legislation that's caused, I would
suggest, a very slow, inadequate response for so many issues that were
definitely of an emergency nature.
I just
want to talk a little bit about Lake Melville. I think most people in this room
have heard me speak about it before and I think it's quite well known we have a
very serious issue with many people, even despite the relatively lower
population. I look at some of the background; Labrador is dealing with many
people who are dealing with intergenerational trauma, the effects of the
residential school system. We only have to look back 24 hours for a very brave,
outspoken advocate in Toby Obed who was here yesterday and received a very
well-deserved standing ovation. But just some of the issues that are beneath the
surface and really need to be pointed out to the rest of society to understand
what's been going on and the struggles that are happening and, unfortunately,
the struggles that will continue. So I do see, though, that this legislation is
going to go a long way.
I would
suggest it's probably in the vicinity of three- to four-dozen people who
unfortunately are in a very dangerous situation living in parts of the community
around Happy Valley-Goose Bay, dealing with addictions, again the
intergenerational trauma, a very dangerous situation, unfortunately. In the last
few years we've had people suffer very serious exposure and, unfortunately,
we've had deaths and we've had several of them just because they were unable to
reach a safer place. Despite the supports that the government, my office and
others have worked so hard on, it's just not been there at the right time, at
the right place. It's incredibly frustrating.
I also
want to just mention another little example that, you know, sometimes things
happen to you and it just hits you right in the face. It was in 2014, soon after
I became a candidate for the election that was coming up in 2015, and I was
going door to door, and I was going along a particular street in Happy
Valley-Goose Bay and I saw a building and I thought: Oh, it's just an abandoned
building. I started to walk by and I looked at the roof of it, which had
completely collapsed and caved in. It was cold, it was probably a couple of feet
of snow on the ground, maybe minus 10, 20, and I saw a little wisp of smoke
coming up through an abandoned chimney pipe. I said: Wow, there is somebody
living in there. I went over, knocked on the door and met this gentleman and
that was the situation that he was living in. It took, I'm thinking, three to
four years before we were finally able to convince him to move into a much safer
location.
Again, I
use it just by way of an example. The willingness was there on behalf of myself,
your staff, Minister, and so many others, but the legislation really – I would
say – hamstrung us. So many folks that I see and interact with in your
department are available to me almost on a 24-7 basis. I respect the late
evenings but there is oftentimes on a Saturday or Sunday I'm talking to somebody
who's getting back to me and I so appreciate it. I just use that as one example
of the challenge and really the rationale why we need to be doing this today.
So I
just want to put a little bit of that out there. I want to thank advocates like
Toby Obed who was here yesterday and spoke so well about the need for us all to
pay attention. When you talk about sensitivities, it's really cultural
sensitivities that have led to so much of the disconnect, and I am really
looking forward to great progress. I watched your reaction to some of the other
speakers, Minister, and I think you're going to be able to provide us some
confidence that so much has been thought out because I've been aware of the
efforts of this bill for sometime. So thank you. I'm looking forward to watching
this go through the House of Assembly.
Thank
you.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for
Torngat Mountains.
L. EVANS:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Just
looking at the bill now and looking at adult protection. I wasn't really aware
of all the legislation required in adult protection, but I always knew about the
legal obligation to report abuse and neglect if a person may not understand or
appreciate that they are at risk. In my communities, and I know in a lot of
areas, a lot time the vulnerable people are the people that don't even realize
that they need protection.
What I
really like and what I'm really impressed by with the new act is that it
strengthens the rights of adults involved in adult protection and it strengthens
the protections. So with this act I think they're trying to find a balance. What
I'm trying to get at is sometimes when somebody is considered vulnerable or we
see somebody out there that we think needs help, there's always a rush to
protect them. When you're rushing to protect somebody, whether you're with
social services or CSSD or just an interested person, a lot of times we'll
trample on the rights of people. Especially the elderly or the vulnerable, like
a lot of people who may not be knowledgeable in a lot of things.
So a lot
of times we do rush to protect people, and I like that balance that this act is
trying to bring. It's trying to be fair to the people that need protection.
Also,
when we were going through the technical briefing and just looking at this, I'm
also really pleased to know that we are the only jurisdiction in Canada to
include the evaluation stage, which requires adult consent. That goes back to
respecting the person that we're trying to help. So I was really impressed with
that.
Also I
wrote in my book when we were doing the technical briefing it said an adult is
presumed to be capable, unless it is proven otherwise. That's something that we
as a province, when we're looking at this act and we're looking at protecting
adults, I think we should be really proud of, because it goes back to stressing
that balance. Protecting vulnerable adults while upholding their autonomy. That
was something that I wrote that was on the slide. I was so impressed with that.
Also,
another thing that was mentioned is this act is supposed to be considered the
option of last resort. There's even a mandate when you get to court, the social
workers or CSSD or anyone involved in it has to demonstrate that they looked at
all other measures. So when we're looking at this bill and we're looking at how
we looked after our adults and how we protect them, we should be proud of that,
as long as the process is working. Because I think adult protection is also
about respect. There are a lot of elders in my district, and one thing that we
grew up with is that we need to respect our elders, even sometimes if they're
not competent anymore or capable. So that's important.
Also,
I'd like to recognize the work that was done in terms of consultation with the
five-year review, how CSSD reached out to the Indigenous groups. At the end of
the day, you can only ask for input. If you don't get the input, at least you
know you've done your part. I think that's very, very important. The
consultation process really did recognize – in
section 8(
f) there's an addition:
a service principle that provides for the preservation of the adult's cultural
and community connections. So if we have a senior there that needs protection,
it's written in the act, embedded in the act, there's a requirement there to
look at cultural and community connections.
I will
have to say one of the greatest hardships for people on the North Coast is a lot
of times when our elders can't look after themselves they have to go out of our
communities. It's really hard for us to maintain contact with those elders who
have all this knowledge and tradition, and also for us to be able to support
them because it's so difficult for families. There are families on the North
Coast now who have never visited their grandparents or their parents who are in
Lake Melville or on the South Coast in homes. That's something that I don't know
how we can address, but it needs to be identified.
I would
like to say, just being an MHA and being involved in this process, I am pleased
at what I see when it comes to Bill 40.
Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Hear, hear!
SPEAKER:
Are there any further
speakers to the motion?
If the
Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development speaks now, this will close
debate.
The hon.
the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development.
J. ABBOTT:
Speaker, thank you.
I want
to thank my colleagues in the House this afternoon, certainly my appreciation of
your understanding and of what we're trying to accomplish through this bill.
It is to
maintain autonomy and independence. That's the primary objective here, as some
of the Members mentioned, but there is a fine balance in many cases. Part of
this legislation and the work we do at the health authority level and with our
director of adult protection is to help people determine and identify the risk
they may be at and support them in their decision-making.
We are,
as the legislation is intended to do, going to emulate best practices across the
country, and I think we're doing that. We want to move past the paternalistic
approach that we have had in our society in the past and, again, recognizing the
inherent right of the individual to make choices for themselves.
When we
get through the passage of this legislation, we do have to look at some
regulations to support it and they will largely focused on looking at the
parameters of capacity assessment: What rules will we put in place to determine
capacity, when that needs to happen and, obviously, the documentation that goes
around the bill.
So,
Speaker, that's where we are with this. I, again, thank my colleagues for their
support and will look forward to discussion in Committee.
Thank
you.
SPEAKER:
Is the House ready for the
question?
The
motion is that Bill 40 now be read a second time.
Is it
the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
Carried.
CLERK (Barnes):
A bill,
An Act Respecting The
Protection Of Adults. (Bill 40)
SPEAKER:
This bill has now been read a
second time.
What
shall the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole?
L. DEMPSTER:
Tomorrow.
SPEAKER:
Tomorrow.
motion, a bill, “An Act Respecting The Protection Of Adults,” read a second
time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House on tomorrow. (Bill 40)
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I call
from the Order Paper, Order 7, third reading of Bill 26.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I move,
seconded by the Minister of Health and Community Services, that Bill 26,
An Act
To Amend The Licensed Practical Nurses Act, 2005, be now read a third time.
SPEAKER:
Is it moved and seconded that
the bill be now read a third time.
Seeing
no speakers, is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
Carried.
CLERK:
A bill,
An Act To Amend The
Licensed Practical Nurses Act, 2005. (Bill 26)
SPEAKER:
This bill has now been read a
third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and its title be as on the
Order Paper.
motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Licensed Practical Nurses Act, 2005,” read
a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 26)
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I call
from the Order Paper, Order 8, third reading of Bill 27.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I move,
seconded by the Minister of Health and Community Services, that Bill 27,
An Act
To Amend The Pharmacy Act, 2012, be now read a third time.
SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
the said bill be now read a third time.
Is it
the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
Carried.
CLERK:
A bill,
An Act To Amend The
Pharmacy Act, 2012. (Bill 27)
SPEAKER:
This bill has now been read a
third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and its title be as on the
Order Paper.
motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Pharmacy Act, 2012,” read a third time,
ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 27)
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I call
from the Order Paper, Order 9, Bill 32.
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Thank you, Speaker.
I move,
seconded by the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, that Bill
32,
An Act To Amend The Liquor Corporation Act, be now read a third time.
SPEAKER:
It is moved and seconded that
the said bill be now read a third time.
Is it
the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Aye.
SPEAKER:
All those against, 'nay.'
Carried.
CLERK:
A bill,
An Act To Amend The
Liquor Corporation Act. (Bill 32)
SPEAKER:
This bill has now been read a
third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and that its title be as on
the Order Paper.
motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Liquor Corporation Act,” read a third time,
ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 32)
SPEAKER:
The hon. the Deputy
Government House Leader.
L. DEMPSTER:
Speaker, I move, seconded by
the Minister for Industry, Energy and Technology, that this House do now
adjourn.
SPEAKER:
Is it the pleasure of the
House to adopt the motion?
All
those in favour, 'aye.'