May

27, 2010 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVI No. 28

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Today the Chair would like to welcome twenty students from Levels II and III

from MSB Academy from the District of Baie Verte-Springdale. The students are

accompanied today by their principal, Ms Sandra Young-Robinson, Mr. David Snow,

Ms Chantelle Bowers and their bus driver, Charlie Bursey.

Welcome to the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today the following members' statements will be heard: the

hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi; the hon. the Member

for the District of Baie Verte-Springdale; the hon. the Member for the District

of Exploits; and the hon. the Member for the District of Lewisporte.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure today to stand in the House and

recognize Jessica Grant and Tom Dawe, two wonderful authors who recently won

prizes in this year's Newfoundland and Labrador Book Awards sponsored by the

Writers Alliance of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Jessica Grant took home the 2010 Downhome Fiction Award today for her novel,

Come, Thou Tortoise.

Tom Dawe was awarded the 2010 Bruneau Family Children's/Young Adult

Literature Award for his children's picture book, Moocher in the Lun ,

illustrated by C. Anne MacLeod.

These awards were presented at Government House in St. John's recently. Both

authors each received $1,500.

Each of these writers has added greatly to the canon of literature in

Newfoundland and Labrador. Jessica Grant has had an amazing year, Mr. Speaker.

This award puts another exclamation mark on a banner year for Ms Grant, who also

took home the Winterset Award for the same novel in March. Not bad, Mr. Speaker,

for her first novel.

Tom Dawe is the author of several collections of poetry and a co-founder of

the literary journal TickleAce and was recently suggested as Newfoundland and

University, Mr. Speaker, Tom Dawe has inspired his students by impressing upon

them his own passion for literature.

I ask the members of this House to join me in congratulating Jessica Grant

and Tom Dawe on their awards.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Verte-Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. POLLARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is with great pride and pleasure that I rise in this hon. House today to

congratulate the MSB Regional Academy Wildcats of Middle Arm for capturing the

3A Boys Ball Hockey provincial title that was held on April 29 to May 1.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. POLLARD: Not only was MSB Academy the host school for this provincial

tournament that saw ten teams converge upon Middle Arm, but it also marked the

first time that the school has won a school sports provincial title.

Principal Sandra Robinson, the teaching staff, students, parents and the

people of surrounding communities are to be applauded for welcoming the teams

and for volunteering their efforts to make the tournament such a huge success.

We are all proud of their outstanding achievement.

Some of the team members include: Jonathan Dawe, Jasper Dicks, Jordan Edgar,

Zack Goudie, Marcus Martin, Quentin Newbury, Zach Penney, Kyle Prowse, Brett

Robinson, Jordan Robinson, Miguel Saunders, Corey Shiner, Austin Welshman, and

coaches Adam Matthews and Stephen Earle.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all colleagues in this hon. House to join me in

congratulating MSB Regional Academy Wildcats of Middle Arm for winning their

first provincial championship. We wish them every success in their future

endeavours.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Exploits.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to recognize the accomplishment of

Mr. Woodrow Hibbs for his forty-five years of active service with the Peterview

Volunteer Fire Department.

Mr. Speaker, Woodrow is the type of dedicated individual we hope inspires not

only those around him, but all of us in the Province as an example of the

personal satisfaction gained and the many friends earned through service to

one's community.

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, May 7, I had the privilege to attend the annual

volunteer firefighters' dinner and awards presentation in Peterview, at which

time, Woodrow was recognized for reaching this milestone, and was also named

Firefighter of the Year for 2009.

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

Woodrow Hibbs on his forty-five years of active service with the Peterview

Volunteer Fire Department.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Lewisporte.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

resident of Campbellton, Mr. Cordell Hillier. Cordell was recently honoured with

the Crime Stoppers Volunteer of the Year Award.

Mr. Hillier, acting president of the local branch of Crime Stoppers, has been

an active member of this organization for twelve years.

Like all our volunteers, Mr. Hillier volunteers his time without personal

gain, and for the sole purpose of making his community and area a better and a

safer place to live. Through Cordell's efforts, and also through the efforts of

other dedicated members, our local Crime Stoppers group has been one of the most

active groups in the entire Province.

Members of the House of Assembly, please join with me in recognizing and

thanking Mr. Cordell Hillier of Campbellton for his tremendous volunteer spirit.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, consensus-building, shared-understanding, problem solving and,

most importantly, co-operation serve as the guiding principles for The Strategic

Partnership.

It is the commitment to these principles that enables leaders from business,

labour, and the provincial government to participate in ongoing dialogue and

collaboration that addresses both the challenges and opportunities impacting

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Glen Hodgson of the Conference Board of Canada described the partnership as

"building relationships and developing cohesive policies and practices" through

a process "that is unparalleled right now in North America." Armine Yalnizyan

from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives indicated that it is an

initiative "the rest of Canada could do well to learn from."

As a government, we are very pleased to hear this commentary. We are very

proud of the partnership's work and the open relationship that it has created.

It has emerged as a pipeline where there is a free-flow of communication

exchanged on the Province's social and economic development.

Relationships developed through the partnership, for example, helped advance

our work with local union officials last May when the decision was made to make

the unprecedented investment of $43 million in severance to the more than 800

people abandoned by AbitibiBowater. It allowed for a collective, united approach

to supporting displaced workers.

Lana Payne of the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour, was highly

supportive of our action and viewed our approach as being the right one for the

region.

Currently, through a series of committees, the partnership is examining a

wide range of issues related to labour market development, innovation, and

employment relations. It is also helping to facilitate research on social and

economic development issues in collaboration with Memorial University.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to take this opportunity to thank Mr. Denis

Mahoney. Over the last five years, Mr. Mahoney has worked tirelessly in his

position as Chair of the Newfoundland and Labrador Business Coalition and was an

important conduit in championing the interests of the business community while

respecting the views of his peers.

A constant in his approach was his willingness to recognize the merits of

specific issues and finding common ground. I am pleased to report that he will

remain a part of the partnership through the Employment Relations Committee.

In the wake of Mr. Mahoney's departure, I would like to welcome Mr. Roger

Flood to the Strategic Partnership as the new Chair of the Business Coalition.

Mr. Flood has a long history of working with labour, business, and government

that will benefit the partnership for many years to come.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I would like to thank the minister for an advance copy of his

statement.

It is certainly good to see the positive feedback from partnerships and

organizations such as the Conference Board of Canada. I would also like to

acknowledge the efforts of Mr. Mahoney in his position as chair and wish his

successor all the best.

Of course, on this side of the House we are very keen on the Strategic

Partnership because it was something that started back in January, 2002, I

believe, under Premier Roger Grimes' government at that time and it was designed

to foster a new collaborative consensus building approach to advancing the

social and economic interests of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Certainly, we need to hear more of that in these times. It is all about

collaboration, as you say, and dialogue and the philosophy that we can,

together, do what we cannot do separately. So it is good to have this statement

today and to just be able to make a comment or two.

Thank you.

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

Vidi.

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

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

There is no doubt that the Strategic Partnership is an important initiative

and that dialogue is important. It is important that government, business, and

labour sit together at this table and listen to one another. Communication is a

two-way street and it is not enough to listen, people have to speak together.

The dialogue is essential, we know that is true.

I find it interesting that the minister quoted Armine Yalnizyan from the

Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. She certainly recognizes how good this

initiative is. I would like to point out though, that she is also an economist

who works on the alternative federal budget that the CCPA puts out every year. I

encourage the minister, and the other members of government, to look at the

approach of the alternative federal budget when they put their budget together

next year, Mr. Speaker.

The other thing I look forward to is the issue of anti-scab legislation being

resolved inside of the Strategic Partnership. I have heard government refer to

labour and business together, but government is at that table too. I would like

government to make sure that we eventually, some time before very long, finally

get some anti-scab legislation in this Province.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, everyone is aware of the financial storm that

existed in the last year and the challenges it provided to many different groups

and sectors across the board and across the globe. However, Mr. Speaker, one

group in the Province met those challenges head on. I am speaking of the credit

union system of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I am very pleased to stand in this hon. House today and announce that credit

union assets grew by 9 per cent or $63 million in 2009 and this was also the

first year in history that all Newfoundland and Labrador credit unions were

profitable.

Mr. Speaker, this success can be directly attributed to the hard work of

volunteer directors, management and staff of credit unions. The Credit Union

Deposit Guarantee Corporation also had a role to play in this success through

the policies and procedures it has implemented over the years. It is also

reflective of the right decisions that the Williams government have made since

2003 to grow the economy in this Province.

With over 55,000 customer-owners and $763 million in assets, credit unions

provide a full range of financial services to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

They are the only financial service provider in some rural areas of the Province

and compete head-on with large banks in other areas. They are locally owned and

controlled, meaning profits stay in this Province. Also, lending decisions are

made locally, unlike some financial institutions where they are made outside the

Province.

Mr. Speaker, the credit union system is a key service provider in rural areas

and an employer of choice. Currently, there are eleven credit unions with forty

locations across the Province of which thirty-one are located outside the

Northeast Avalon. Those rural locations employ 203 employees earning total

salaries and benefits of over $8 million for an average of almost $40,000 per

employee. Provincially, they employ 317 people earning more than $15 million.

As the Minister responsible for the Credit Union Deposit Guarantee

Corporation, I am continually impressed with how in tune credit unions are to

the needs of their owner-operators. Mr. Speaker, it is because of their

initiatives that credit unions are a viable and attractive alternative for

banking.

I congratulate all credit unions on their achievements in 2009 and I look

forward to 2010 being another successful year.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.

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

I want to thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement.

We too want to pay tribute to the credit union system here in Newfoundland

and Labrador. I guess tremendous recognition should be paid because they all

started out through volunteer groups. I know in the northern part of our

Province and also the Labrador Coast, in one particular area where the banks

pulled out, the people came together and they formed the Eagle River Credit

Union. That has been a tremendous success story and I think there are six

branches now throughout Labrador and on the Northern Peninsula.

Mr. Speaker, it was just last year, we brought forward a piece of legislation

modernizing the Credit Union Act here in the Province. I can assure you that we

supported that at the time, the credit unions could sell insurance to their

members but it had to be done through a subsidiary. By passing that piece of

legislation, Mr. Speaker, now it can be done right through their own branches.

The group, my understanding is, has grown by some 4,000 members and by $130

million since 2008. So it just goes to show what the volunteers can do when they

put their minds together, not only on the Coast of Labrador and the Northern

Peninsula but right throughout this great Province of ours.

So, Mr. Speaker, we want to commend them and say keep up the great work

because much of this is taking place in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Vidi.

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

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

I am not quite sure why he chose today to recognize the credit union movement

but at least I am very glad that he is doing so because credit unions of course

are part of the whole co-operative spirit, a separate arm of the co-operative

movement but strongly rooted in the community and in community working together.

Right across this country, credit unions are a lynchpin for local economies in

particular and they also make sure that money gets invested here in our

Province. They played a very important role in strengthening communities

everywhere in Canada but also here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

My colleague has already mentioned what happened in Southern Labrador when

the Eagle River Credit Union picked up the lack of what happened when the banks

pulled out. The role of the Eagle River Credit Union, along with the fishing

industry in Southern Labrador, has been extremely important for maintaining

strong local economies.

I am glad the minister recognizes the work of the credit unions. I really

hope it continues to play a very strong role, and I really hope it will find new

and innovative and creative ways to help rural businesses in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Finance indicated that government had

reduced the number of VLTs in the Province by 26 per cent. This morning he noted

that the Atlantic Lottery Corporation has declining revenues partially because

of these moves and are looking for new ways to make money. They see the future

as getting into on-line casino gambling. So on one hand the minister is

promoting the reduction of VLTs, on the other hand he has allowed himself to be

open to creating a whole new problem with on-line casino gambling.

I ask the minister: If you are committing to addressing gambling addictions

in the Province, why would you even entertain the idea of introducing on-line

casino gambling through the Atlantic Lottery Corporation?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the ALC has indicated, the Atlantic Lottery

Corporation, which is owned by the four Atlantic Provinces, has indicated an

interest in getting into on-line gambling because of the fact there are over

2,000 sites, 2,000 illegal sites that people can access right now, and they want

to do it to offer more responsible gambling. Our government has not made any

decision on whether we are going to support that initiative or not. That is

something that we will consider at some time in the future. The only people that

I know, who are actually supporting on-line gambling, are the Liberal Party in

Prince Edward Island and the Liberal Party in New Brunswick.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What the Liberal Party does in other provinces has no reflection on us, I say

to the minister. You have certainly liked to distance yourself from your federal

cousins in Ottawa on many occasions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the minister did state that on-line casino

gambling is happening anyway, so it would be better to have it regulated and

make money from it. He stated this morning on the Open Line show that government

can hide in the sand or they can get into it.

I say to the minister: If you are committed to reducing the number of

addictions and the number of VLTs in this Province, why would you even consider

going into on-line gambling? Why isn't the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador

saying no today?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, what I did today, is I pointed out the various

arguments that are being made pro and con. One of the things involved when we

deal with gambling, there are very strong views on all of the issues that come

up - very strong views.

I will just note that Jeff Derevensky, who is co-director of McGill

University's International Centre for Youth Gambling, referred to the on-line

industry's arsenal of technology saying, "You have the opportunity to do

(consumer protection) better than other forms of gambling." So there are very

strong arguments in favour of it, Mr. Speaker, and there are arguments against

it. Government will consider the evidence from all sources and in due course we

will come to a consensus as to how we are going to move forward.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, if we were to legalize drugs, such as cocaine in the

Province, we would make money off it and we would be able to regulate it as

well, but it does not dismiss the impact that it has on people.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Why would the Province even consider

introducing a new legal form of gambling that will most likely target and affect

younger people in this Province, creating addictions for them at a much younger

age?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, again, this government has not made a decision

as to how it is going to go. We are going to consider all options.

When you talk about youth gambling, I note that the study that the Leader of

the NDP referred to yesterday said that young people had engaged in one gambling

activity of eight of them and the least common reported activity is with

Internet gambling.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, there are arguments pro and con. Why don't we banish

alcohol? That argument comes up as well. We are going to consider the evidence

that each group puts forward and we will make a decision in due course.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday the minister stated that he did not know how much the Province

would potentially make in revenues from this type of gambling. However, we do

know that the Atlantic Lottery Corporation has already done a lot of the work on

this initiative in completing the cost estimates.

I ask the minister: What were the preliminary estimates that have been

supplied to your government from the Atlantic Lotto Corporation?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: I cannot recall the total right now. We have to remember,

there are 2,000 sites out there worldwide that people in this Province can

access. That is totally unregulated. They can do it from their homes. I believe

the number, and I will have to check this, is that they feel we can make a

potential $55 million from on-line gambling revenue, if it were introduced.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On April 10, 2008, the former Minister of Education informed the House of

Assembly that the government had no plans to close the School for the Deaf. I

ask the minister today, if that is still the case?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, our intentions for the School for the Deaf have

not changed since the previous minister spoke in this House. The School for the

Deaf still operates and we still offer governmental support to the same degree

that we have in the past couple of years. There are no changes at this point in

time from government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Government has announced its intentions to build a new school for the west

end of St. John's.

I ask the minister: Will the School for the Deaf and the adjacent properties

be the site of this new school, and if so, will the current buildings be

renovated or incorporated into the new school design?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is asking me to draw a lot of

conclusions and make a lot of assumptions. The future of the School for the Deaf

as I said before, we have no intentions and have not laid any plans to do

anything with that school at this point in time. The member opposite knows full

well that as demographics change and student enrolments change and parent

choices change, we will react accordingly. I am not going to speculate on where

that will be at any time in the future.

With respect to the announcement for the new west end high school, we have

done just that. We have announced a commitment, as a government, to the people

of the west end of this region that we will build a new facility. There is a

long established process in place, Mr. Speaker, that engages school councils and

school boards to identify possible sites for the construction of new schools and

through that process a list of possibilities will be brought forward to the

Department of Education for consideration. Mr. Speaker, that is a long ways out,

so pretty well everything that has been asked by the member opposite is purely

speculative.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, maybe the minister can tell me where we are in the process of site

selection for the new west end school, and if he can table in the House of

Assembly or indicate to the public what sites are being considered?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, what I can say to the member opposite is we are

not much more than two months beyond a Budget announcement of a commitment. We

are in a process of trying to spend $121 million on infrastructure and

maintenance work in this Province, Mr. Speaker, and that project

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: - will proceed as we can turn our attention to it. What we have

done is we have notified the school board of our commitment and we have also

indicated to the school board that we want them to start giving consideration to

sites. At some point in time, we will appoint a consultant who will do a review

for that as will be done for any new school construction projects, Mr. Speaker.

Everything else that the member opposite is asking is assuming that I am

going to speculate and make assumptions here, which I am not prepared to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We also know that government is building two new K-6 schools in Paradise

because of the growing population of children and young families in the

community. Once these children enter junior high and high school they will be

forced to travel to Mount Pearl or Conception Bay South and overcrowding will

certainly become an issue.

I ask the minister: With a demonstrated need for a junior high and high

school facilities in Paradise, has government initiated any plans at this stage

to build those schools?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, let me share with the House what we have done in

instances where there has been a demonstrated need.

Out in Torbay, Mr. Speaker, there was a demonstrated need because of

population growth, what did we do? We announced a new school for that area. Mr.

Speaker, out in Placentia there was a demonstrated need for a new facility

because of ongoing maintenance and repair issues, what did we do? We built a new

facility.

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite has asked about Paradise, I was in a former

job at that the time that that discussion was initiated and we encountered a

number of problems out there, one of which was population growth. What has this

government done? We are building two new K-6 schools, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: I submit to the member opposite the record of this government

is that we will work co-operatively with the school board and with the

communities and the people out there. We act when it is appropriate, Mr.

Speaker, but we are not in the process, nor in the habit, of building schools

based on what-ifs five and ten years down the road.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So the minister is saying that there is no demonstrated need for a school for

junior high and high school in the Paradise area.

Mr. Speaker, Tuesday, the Minister of Natural Resources stated that an oil

spill off our coast would not be of great concern because we had an oil spill in

2004 on the Terra Nova. That oil dispersed, broke up and went away was her

quote. Well the oil spill in 2004 was only 200 barrels versus the 70,000 per day

barrels that we are seeing currently taking place of the coast of Louisiana. It

is like comparing an eye dropper, Mr. Speaker, to a fire hose and it shows the

minister's lack of understanding of what is happening.

I ask the minister today: Besides the 2004 incident of an oil spill, what

other examples are available to show how a major spill off our coast would

react?

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

Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, my answer, earlier in the week, was to a question directed to me

by the Leader of the Opposition as to what happened to oil in an oil spill. I

answered in terms of our own direct experience with an oil spill that we had in

2004 when wind and wave action had dispersed and help vaporize the oil, and

subsequent studies of the sea floor showed that there had been no settlement of

oil on the sea floor or no damage to the environment that was able to be

observed.

Mr. Speaker, if she is going to twist that into a comparison to what is

happening in the Gulf, there is not much I can do about it, but that is not the

question that was asked, and that is not the question that was answered.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister might want to read her own response in Hansard, but certainly

the 2004 incident is not even comparable to what we are looking at in the world

today.

Mr. Speaker, government, through Nalcor, owns equity stakes in our oil and

gas projects, yet they are also responsible for providing environmental

regulations to the industry. We know that adhering to environmental best

practices is not always the priority to stakeholders who are trying to make

money. Government also makes political appointments to the C-NLOPB to ensure the

Province's interests are represented.

So I ask the minister, now that you are a developer and an equity owner in

the oil industry, why would you not support the concept of independent monitors

on rigs to remove any perception of conflict?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Premier and Minister of Natural

Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, let me say it is very difficult to have a discussion with the

Leader of the Opposition about responsibility for the environment when she

demonstrated in the House earlier the week she does not even understand what

level of government environmental responsibility for the offshore comes under.

She was attributing to the Minister of Environment and Conservation, who has no

responsibility beyond the high water mark.

It is really disturbing, Mr. Speaker, when it comes from a former Minister of

Fisheries for the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador who should have

understood that her responsibility did not go any further than that either as

far as the offshore was concerned.

Mr. Speaker, science has shown that independent monitoring on the rig is not

the best way to do oil spill surveillance. The best way to do it is from the

air. That is what is being done on a regular basis in our offshore.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

All we ever hear from the minister opposite is rhetoric and insults. Of

course, we continue to hear her trying to defend the Minister of Environment,

who really has no handle on the environment, but that is beside the point, Mr.

Speaker.

Maybe the minister could tell me why, as a developer and an interest earner

in the oil and gas industry

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: - that they are not prepared to put independent monitors and

observers on these platforms, but yet support independent observers on fishing

vessels in this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Premier and Minister of Natural

Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, one of those persons, one of those inspectors

is inspecting, counting fish and measuring fish coming on a vessel. Mr. Speaker,

it is hard to do that from 20,000 feet.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, to spot an oil spill on our ocean, the most

effective way to do that is from 20,000 feet or less.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister knows that you cannot monitor what is happening on the rig and

on the platform from thousands of feet in the air. The minister knows that, Mr.

Speaker. She is making light of a very serious issue in this Province today that

could cost us, as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, down the road.

I say to the minister: In light of what is happening in the Gulf of Mexico

today, and how the ecosystem and the environment is being destroyed because of a

spill in this industry, why will you, as a government, not take a proactive role

and put a task force in place to monitor the environmental regulations in the

oil industry in this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Premier and Minister of Natural

Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, we had a discussion earlier in Question

Period about gambling, and I am going to indulge myself at the moment, Mr.

Speaker, because I am willing to lay money that the Leader of the Opposition

knows no more about what the regulation is in the United States with regard to

drilling than the man in the moon.

Mr. Speaker, the C-NLOPB is having a technical briefing on Monday of next

week to talk about oil spill prevention and oil spill response. I suggest very

strongly that members of the Opposition take advantage of that briefing and try

to find out a little more about what they are asking questions about, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, we have an independent review ongoing in this

Province. When that review is completed and recommendations are made we will

consider them and then I will talk to the federal minister who shares

responsibility in this to see if we need to do further work.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this month in this House I highlighted the need for a

community voice in the MOU process. The Minister of Fisheries responded by

saying that community representation is a key to the evolution of the fishery,

as he termed it, and it was encouraging to hear him acknowledge this.

Based on that recognition, I ask the minister today: Will he commit to

formally including community representation in the MOU process, specifically by

modifying the agreement itself, so that communities will have a direct voice in

the industry as it undergoes the many changes required in the months and years

ahead?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, it is certainly important that communities have

a say in where the future of the fishery is going to be in this Province. Right

now, the MOU process, Mr. Speaker, we have working groups within that and

progress is being made. The group met last week and those discussions are

ongoing.

Mr. Speaker, at the appropriate time, when we feel and the process feels

there is a place for community input, then we will be seeking it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, the minister stated in a press release on March

18, there was an analysis of marketing issues facing the industry and he

expected this report in a couple of months. It has now been over two months

since that release.

While the minister indicated in his MOU, a progress report yesterday, that

the marketing group is actively engaged in this task, I ask the minister today:

Will he indicate to this House when this important work is now expected to be

completed?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, one of the things that came out of the talks

this year around establishing a price and so forth, was an acknowledgement and

an agreement between both sides in that discussion that there is a need for a

marketing strategy here.

Mr. Speaker, I am certainly hoping that both sides will remain true to that

commitment. Mr. Speaker, if that is indeed the case, for the next coming fishing

season we should see something in place that will allow us to market our

products in a much more reasonable and strategic way. As a result, Mr. Speaker,

have better results for prices for harvesters and processors.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, during the crab dispute the government was

reluctant to step in and help resolve the impasse with any investments, citing

the risk of a NAFTA challenge. As the minister admits, the MOU process will

certainly entail some sort of rationalization and therefore financial

assistance.

I ask the minister: Will the government consider commissioning a report that

would investigate investments that are possible under NAFTA as the MOU process

unfolds? Clearly, on this issue it will be critical to the success of any

recommended changes to the fishery.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: I swear, Mr. Speaker, I swear that these people the

Opposition wants another report. I swear to God, they are sounding like they

want another report.

Mr. Speaker, the plan; we have an MOU process in place, Mr. Speaker, and we

will let that MOU process unfold. We expect and we anticipate that there will be

good results coming from that.

Mr. Speaker, the people who can make a difference in the fishery of this

Province are sitting at the table: the union, the processors and government, Mr.

Speaker. I can assure you one thing, that we as a government will do what we can

to support that process.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, they must be giving out funny pills across the

House today or something or other.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DEAN: Yes, I know.

Mr. Speaker, you got to have funny questions for funny people. In the two

sittings of the House that I have been here, Mr. Speaker, I have never heard an

answer to a question, so you might as well ask something that will get a funny

response.

Earlier this month, I also questioned the minister on the status of the New

Ferolle plant on the Northern Peninsula. I understand a meeting was held a

couple of weeks ago with the owner, Greg Mullowney, who again promised the

residents of the plant that it would reopen. Other than a few pieces of old

furniture and dated equipment going into the facility, the plant remains idle

and it is increasingly frustrating for the residents.

I would again ask the minister: What is the status of the plant today in

terms of operating this season and why is the owner not being more accountable

to the people of New Ferolle and the area?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, there is nothing funny about the questions that

the member opposite is asking - I do not think there is.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, the New Ferolle plant, as he indicated, Mr. Mullowney

still, as far as we have been informed, intends to open that plant. We have a

number of plants on the Northern Peninsula that opened this week. The Member for

St. Barbe has met with the group, he has met with me, and we will continue to

monitor that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, we will continue to monitor that, and the

frustrations that the people have, Mr. Speaker, we will hopefully find a

resolution to it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Well, the member has met, Mr. Speaker, I guess the problem is

resolved, we will leave it there. Mr. Speaker, I will just wait for -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

They met last year, as well, and of course we all know how much work they had

last season. Given the uncertainty that has plagued this plant in the past

several years, the plant committee in that community has sent a letter to the

Minister of Fisheries requesting that the processing licence be transferred back

to the community.

I ask the minister today: Will he grant this request, and indeed, will he

commit to sitting down with those concerned citizens to discuss this matter and

help them bring stability to their community?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, more than willing to sit with any group at any

time. Secondly, when the letter comes forward, we will give it consideration at

that time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.

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

My questions are for the Minister of Environment and Conservation. Mr.

Speaker, I double-checked my questions, they are all above the high-water mark

so hopefully she will be able to answer them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to pose his question.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, yesterday -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked the minister about a tender

that was recently advertised in The Telegram for a turnkey operation for

the compaction and redistribution of the tires stored in Dunville. The minister

stated that they have a proposal that will hopefully come on stream and this

tender will make it easier to ship the tires.

I ask the minister: We have heard similar speculation from this government

over the past seven years, Mr. Speaker, what is the nature of this proposal and

when can we expect to see something concrete announced?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the Opposition was so concerned

about the environment and offshore she should have asked me a question where

jurisdiction does fall under my department and that is when the oil reaches the

land, Mr. Speaker. The reason that she did not do that, Mr. Speaker, is because

the fourteen years that they were in power when there was a very active oil

industry, not one policy, not one procedure, not one person hired to develop

policies to put in place when the oil should reach land. That is why she has not

asked me a question, Mr. Speaker.

To the question of the hon. member opposite about tires, we have been

actively involved with trying to find resolutions to the tires. In the interim,

we are trying to find ways to cut costs. That is why we put out the recent

tender in terms of baling. It is also a safer method, in terms of the hydraulic

compression of the tires, there is less opportunity for air to get in, and there

are less trucks that will be required once the final plan is in place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the 2007 Student Drug Use Survey commissioned by the governments

of the Atlantic Provinces reported that 23 per cent of students in Grades 7, 9,

10, and 12 had played on an Internet gambling site with money or points, and 5.1

per cent had played for money.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, the minister continues to say that government

has not made any decisions on allowing on-line poker, which is being promoted by

Atlantic Lottery Corporation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Finance: Has the Atlantic

Lottery Corporation given the Department of Finance any risk assessment reports

documenting the potential risk of on-line poker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I say to the hon. Leader of the Opposition that her time has been allotted

earlier to ask questions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Every time that the Member for the District of Signal

Hill-Quidi Vidi stands to ask a question in this House, she is drowned out by

members shouting back and forth. I ask members for their co-operation and

respect for the members that are asking questions.

Who is the question directed to, I ask the hon.

MR. MARSHALL: Me.

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, I had a chance to take a

look at that study last night and there has been information sent by the

Atlantic Lottery Corporation, but they can make their own arguments, Mr.

Speaker. As I said, we are not necessarily an advocate for the position they

have espoused. We have reduced the number of VLT machines by over 25 per cent in

this Province 25.1 I think is the actual number. Another seventy-three

machines were removed on April 1.

The best argument in favour of on-line gambling is the fact that you can

control things that are not controlled right now. They mention, for example,

that their PlaySphere, their Web site, has been called by Mark Griffiths,

Professor of Gambling Studies at Nottingham Trent University in the U.K., as the

most responsible gambling site in the world. I mentioned earlier that report

from McGill University which talks about that the on-line industry's arsenal of

technology gives you an opportunity for some consumer protection (inaudible) -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

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

Maybe the minister did not hear my question. Does the minister have risk

assessment reports on on-line gambling and would he make those now I add

risk assessment reports, if he has them, available to this House?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: I am only aware of the prevalence studies that we spoke

about yesterday. I am sure the hon. member has that, but if there are any such

studies I would be happy to make them available. I will consult with my

colleague, the Minister of Health. If we have any studies that can add help to

the debate that is going to go on, then I will be happy to share them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

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

The minister has made much reference today, and he just did again, to holding

consultations and there will be ongoing discussions and consultations. I would

like to know from the minister if he is willing to hold province-wide

consultations regarding governments' dependence on VLTs and the potential for

on-line gambling to hear what the people of the Province have to say?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I have not committed to any consultations. All

I said is that our government, because of the fact that our VLT action plan is

now coming to an end, this is the final year of a five-year plan, that we will

now determine which way the government is going to go forward. When we do that,

I will be happy to announce that here in the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The time allotted for Oral Questions has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

MR. SPEAKER: Pursuant to

section 10 of the Public Tender Act, I hereby

table the report of Public Tender Act Exceptions for April 2010 as presented by

the Chief Operating Officer of the Government Purchasing Agency.

Further tabling of documents?

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will call from the Order Paper, order 2, under Orders of the Day,

Concurrence Motion for the Resource Committee.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that the report of the Resource Committee be

concurred.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased today to rise and begin the Concurrence debate on the Estimates

that were considered by the Resource Committee.

Over the past three or four weeks or so the committee met on a number of

occasions and discussed the Estimates for the following departments: Department

of Business; Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, which also

included the Newfoundland and Labrador Research Development Council and the

Rural Secretariat; the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation; Department

of Environment and Conservation; Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture; and

the Department of Natural Resources, which also included the Status of Women and

the Women's Policy Office.

The total estimates, Mr. Speaker, for these six departments for 2010-2011 is

approximately $587 million. This is an increased expenditure of $175 million

over the previous year.

Mr. Speaker, as Chairman of the Resource Committee I would like to take a few

minutes to review some of the debate that occurred in the meetings that we held.

Some of the meetings took as much as three hours, so there were lots of

questioned asked by the committee members and lots of great information given

out by the different ministers and their officials.

The first department that I want to look at, Mr. Speaker, is the Department

of Business. That department is responsible for providing leadership and

co-ordination across government departments. It is mainly concerned with

attracting and promoting the Province for new business from outside of the

country and worldwide.

The Department of Business, this year, has a budget of just over $39 million;

$8 million of that, Mr. Speaker, will be used in the form of grants and

subsidies for strategic business supports, which will improve the investment

community in the Province. It has also helped to attract viable business

prospects and promote business opportunities by the government worldwide.

There is another $25 million allocated in that department, Mr. Speaker,

available for large-scale, strategic investments to attract businesses to the

Province. That would be businesses such as the aerospace and defence industry,

as well as the oil and gas industry.

The second department we considered the Estimates for, Mr. Speaker, was the

Department of Environment and Conservation. That department is responsible

mainly for the protection and enhancement of the environment in the Province,

the management of our biodiversity, endangered species, wildlife, inland fish,

water, climate change, and Crown land resources. They also have regulatory

protection for wildlife and inland fish, our provincial parks, ecological and

wilderness reserves, our natural areas around the Province, Canadian Heritage

Rivers and Crown lands. The Department of Environment and Conservation estimates

for this year, Mr. Speaker, the gross expenditure is anticipated to be in excess

of $63 million.

During our meetings, some of the expenditures or large expenditures that were

put forward by the minister and her officials were the remediation of the

Buchans area, $4 million, remediation of the Hopedale area, $1 million. There

were also provisions in the budget this year for capital expenditure of $1

million in upgrading the Salmonier Nature Park. This is an allocation of year

one of a master plan for the Salmonier Nature Park, and this expenditure this

coming year will include the construction of a visitor centre at the park and

upgrades to the existing buildings and trail infrastructure.

There is also provision in the budget of the Department of Environment and

Conservation of $3.6 million to replace the Crabbes River bridge. The Crabbes

River bridge is part of the provincial T'Railway system throughout the Province.

There is also an allocation of $1.5 million for the Lower Churchill Project.

While it has not started yet -any construction or anything nevertheless, there

is ongoing work with that project and there is $1.5 million there this year to

continue with some of the initiatives that already have started.

There is also a grant there this year in this budget of $500,000 for the

Aboriginal groups. This is monies that will help the Aboriginals to participate

in any environmental assessment processes that are part of constructing the

Labrador hydro link line between Labrador and the Island. It will give these

people an opportunity to participate in any of the environmental assessment that

is done with that project.

There is also $10.5 million in their budget this year for the extension of

the EcoTrust. This is available to businesses, to groups and organizations, in

the form of grants - businesses and organizations that can demonstrate in their

proposals how they will reduce greenhouse gases.

We also considered Estimates for the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

This is a department, Mr. Speaker, that means so much to our Province. It has

over the years, and it will continue. The problem with all of this with respect

to fisheries is the fact that the Province has very little control over the

management of that industry.

The department does promote the ongoing development of our fisheries, and

also in recent years the aquaculture industry. In support of this mandate, Mr.

Speaker, the policies and programs are related to culturing, to harvesting to

some degree, processing mainly, and marketing.

Budget 2010 contains $14.4 million in new monies for initiatives in the

department, for a total budget this year of just over $44 million. While that

may not seem like a lot of money, Mr. Speaker, in comparison to the other

Atlantic Provinces our budget for the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture is

more than all of the other three Atlantic Provinces combined. It is more than

Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, their budgets combined.

Since 2003 the budget for the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture has

increased five-fold. Back in 2003 the budget for that department then was less

than $9 million a year. This year, Mr. Speaker, it is almost $45 million.

Some of the items contained in the Fisheries and Aquaculture budget for this

year include the provision of $1 million for the Canadian Centre for Fisheries

Innovation. That centre will engage the expertise and the facilities of Memorial

University and the Marine Institute in its work on applied fisheries and

aquaculture research.

Also in the area of research and development, the department is providing $2

million to be allocated for the Fisheries Technology and New Opportunities

Program under the Fishing Industry Renewal Strategy. There is $450,000 allocated

for fisheries science and a cod recovery initiative. Again this year, there is

$100,000 being provided again for the sealing industry communications.

Safety, Mr. Speaker, is also a main part of the department's spending, and

this year is no exception; $250,000 has been allocated for a Fishing Industry

Safety Council initiative. This is also part of the new Fishing Industry Renewal

Strategy. It was only a week or so ago that the Minister of Fisheries took

part

in the release of a new video called, Getting Back Home . That video, Mr.

Speaker, is to help eliminate fatalities and injuries in the fishing industry in

this Province. It is my understanding that the video will be distributed to all

of the fishers in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Province's aquaculture industry reached record levels of production in

2009. The market value of the aquaculture industry increased to $92 million in

2009. This represents an increase of 45.9 per cent over the previous year. So

aquaculture is certainly becoming a growing industry in the Province, and

certainly supplementing what we have lost from the conventional fishery.

Budget 2010 also invests significantly in aquaculture infrastructure and in

research; $7.5 million has been allocated toward the construction of an $8.8

million Centre for Aquatic Animal Health and Development. This is located in St.

Alban's, and construction on this site has already begun. There is also an

allocation of $500,000 this year on laboratory equipment for that facility in

St. Alban's.

Nine million dollars has been allocated for aquaculture wharf infrastructure

as part of the Biosecure Wharves Initiative with our aquaculture industry, and

$6.6 million has been allocated for the Aquaculture Capital Equity Program. This

program assists in increasing production of commercial aquaculture products,

resulting in increased employment and spinoff opportunities in processing, in

manufacturing, and in supply and service sectors.

There is also a provision in this year's Budget, Mr. Speaker, for market

intelligence and market development in support of the fishing industry. That is,

again, going to be a main part of the new fisheries policy that will be

implemented over the next year or so. As a result of consultations and the

initiative of the current Fisheries Minister, marketing will be one of the main

planks in the new fishery. As of a few weeks ago now, indications are that all

sectors of the industry are in favour of some kind of new marketing strategy for

the fishing industry.

The committee also reviewed the Estimates for the Department of Tourism,

Culture and Recreation. That department is responsible for making improvements

to our tourism infrastructure. Also, major emphasis over the past few years has

been spent on arts, culture, and the recreation part of that department.

For the information of people viewing this, Mr. Speaker, to give you some

indication of what the tourism industry means to the Province. Last year, direct

and indirect employment in the tourism industry averaged 22,700 people. That is

an increase of 1,800 employees over the previous year. That department, Mr.

Speaker, has a budget this year, a gross expenditure anticipated of more than

$67 million.

The tourism industry to give you some idea of the contribution to the

economy; last year in our Province, the tourism industry contributed about $850

million to the economy of our Province. Last year also, there was an increase in

tourism visitation to the Province of about 1 per cent. Considering the declines

in most of the other provinces in Canada, that looks very favourable for what we

are doing in this Province.

Our Province has increased the tourism marketing budget from $6 million in

2003 to $13 million this year again, Mr. Speaker. During that period, 2003-2009,

the non-resident visitation to this Province has grown by 14 per cent. We are

ahead of the Atlantic Provinces for that period. When we think of P.E.I. in

particular, we normally think of that as one of the largest and most prosperous

areas in terms of tourism, but during that period, visitation to P.E.I. was down

by 20 per cent. Nova Scotia was down by 5 per cent. New Brunswick visitation was

down by 23 per cent. Like I said before, Mr. Speaker, during that period of

2003-2009 our tourism in-Province visitations increased by 14 per cent.

This year, Mr. Speaker, there will be in the Budget provisions for marketing

the Cupids 400 celebrations coming up in August. There is a new Labrador

advertisement which is generating interest in all of the Province now as a

travel destination for visitors. Also, there is a marketing campaign giving rave

reviews and awards. Our Province, over the past two or three years, has received

something like seventy awards, both nationally and internationally.

In terms of the arts and culture, Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland is one of the

most vibrant cultural communities in the country. We are continuing with our

investments into our arts and culture. Since 2006, we have more than tripled our

annual budget for the Arts and Culture Centre, going from $3 million to $9

million.

I would like to say that only recently I talked with the Minister of Tourism,

Culture and Recreation, and this year again there is going to be in excess of

$100,000 allocated to the Barbour site in Newtown in my District of Bonavista

North. I encourage all the members in the House, Mr. Speaker, to come to Newtown

this year and just see the tremendous job that they are doing with respect to

our arts and culture, and tourism in general.

We are also spending, in this year's Budget, $1.2 million in upgrading the

Colonial Building here in St. John's.

With respect to the Cupids celebrations coming up in August, our government

committed $5.3 million to that overall project and this year almost $3.6 million

will be spent in the Cupids Legacy Centre and year-long celebrations to include

project alone, Mr. Speaker, is expected to generate to the Province

approximately $15 million in revenue.

I only have a little over a minute left, Mr. Speaker. We also reviewed the

Estimates for the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development. That

department has a number of programs to encourage investment in the Province. One

of these is the Regional/Sectoral Diversification Fund which supports

development and contributes to the development of stronger, more diversified

communities in the Province. There is $11 million in that fund in itself, and a

lot of that money is spent in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

There are also grants through the Innovation Enhancement Program, $1 million;

grants and subsidies through the export and trade division which is supporting

local businesses, industry organizations and in the educational institutions.

There is a program also, the Business Retention and Expansion program. Over the

past few years that department has met one-on-one with approximately 100

businesses per year to identify new business opportunities and to address any

challenges impacting on their operations.

Mr. Speaker, we also reviewed the Department of Natural Resources. That is

one of the largest departments in government. Under that department we looked at

the Estimates for forestry, agrifoods, mining, energy. In addition to that, we

also considered the Estimates for the Women's Policy Office and the Status of

Women, since these agencies come under the purview of the Minister of Natural

Resources as well.

Mr. Speaker, my time has elapsed for now. So I will sit and look forward to

the debate throughout the afternoon. After the last speaker, I will rise and

move the motion for the Concurrence debate in the Natural Resources Committee.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Kelly): The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Port de

Grave.

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

It is a pleasure again today to be able to stand and have a few comments with

regard to the work that has been carried out through the Resource Committee. As

my hon. colleague mentioned earlier, which include the Department of Tourism,

Culture and Recreation; the Department of Business; the Department of Fisheries

and Aquaculture, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of

Innovation, Trade and Rural Development and the Department of Environment and

Conservation.

I had the opportunity to attend one of those meetings because I am critic for

the Department of Environment and Conservation. I guess, as my time goes on,

that is where I will be placing most of the emphasis on is that particular

department, but there are a couple of other departments that I do want to touch

on and one would be the Department of Natural Resources when it comes to the

agriculture end of that department. Not that any other portion of it is

important, but agriculture is an industry that is in my district and I just want

to touch on that for a few minutes. The other one would be the Department of

Fisheries and Aquaculture and just some brief comments there.

Mr. Speaker, we know that the Department of Natural Resources, as I said,

covers off on the department of agriculture. We see from time to time the

tremendous amount of work that is done throughout this Province. I do not know

what the percentage is of the products grown in my area, but I know there are

several farms there that grow various types of vegetables. There are also

blueberry farms there. Mr. Speaker, from time to time they do have good and bad

years. I believe that they have to, from time to time, make a tremendous impact

upon the department in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, one thing I noticed in the outlook that came under the booklet,

The Economy 2010, that we get from time to time and I have to say that I

noticed that there were some reductions that were noticed. The total farm

receipts declined by 4.5 per cent in the first three quarters of 2009 as

compared to 2008, but still, that accounted for some $78.9 million.

The fur production was also down by 58.5 per cent which accounted for $3.2

million. Egg production was down 0.7 per cent, Mr. Speaker, for some $9.9

million. There are quite a few people in this Province that are involved in the

agriculture. There are some 6,000 and 7,000 direct jobs employed in the system.

It is my understanding that Canada imports about 54 per cent of all of its

vegetables and most of that would be in the and a tremendous amount also would

be included for fruit.

Mr. Speaker, one of the issues, I guess, I heard a young gentleman, I will

not use his name but I know he comes from the hon. member's District of

Trinity-Bay de Verde, and I think he is involved in the farming industry and he

made a comment recently in one of the local medias where he said we need to

focus on food security, food safety and food sovereignty. He said: If we do

this, we have the cornerstone upon which to build a resurgent agriculture and

agrifoods industry that can offer a real future for many young people and solve

the crisis facing some of the communities in rural Newfoundland. How true that

is, Mr. Speaker, because agriculture is very important. The industry consists of

some 558 farmers and over 100 food and beverage manufacturers. The agriculture

industry is valued at - I think it is somewhere over $500 million.

Mr. Speaker, one of the programs that has been introduced in recent years is

what they call the eat local program. Mr. Speaker, in my area, I think in the

district alone there are approximately seven to eight vegetable stands that are

set up on the sides of the road as the new produce comes on stream. I can tell

you it is very important and many of the people use that rather than probably

some of the products that are brought in, when the local vegetables are in

season.

Mr. Speaker, another issue, and I have discussed this with the minister from

time to time, has to do with what has been classified as Class 4 roads but not

with regard from the transportation point of view because those roads, some of

them, are looked after by that particular department of agriculture. It is the

roads that go into the farms, and many of the people there want to make sure

that the road is kept up to a standard so that they can get in to their farms

and do the work that has to be done.

Mr. Speaker, I want to touch on some of the issues with regard to the

Department of Environment and Conservation. I guess I would be remiss if I did

not stand with regard to the issue that surfaced this year right throughout this

Province and encompassed many people, and that is in regard to the gravel pit

campers. I know government took a stand on this issue, but I have to say since

the petitions came forward in this House I have had so many calls from around

this Province about issues. The one, I guess, that comes first and foremost is

the one at the Whiskey Pit because that was the one that was mentioned in the

Auditor General's report and showed some unsightly buses that were there. From

there, Mr. Speaker, it began to snowball; however, every gravel pit in this

Province has not been dealt with the way some of them have, and some of them

have been allowed to go back this weekend. I have not heard any reports but

hopefully everything worked out for all concerned.

Mr. Speaker, why people go to those areas is because of the cultural

uniqueness and the historical meaning to it where they go out and enjoy the

great outdoors. I can assure you, the people I have been involved with, the

people who send in the petitions, they are not all for going out and being

un-environmentally friendly or unfriendly with the environment whatever you

want to call it, Mr. Speaker because they want to make sure that what they are

doing is above board so that they can continue to do the things that they always

did.

I have had calls from people in the area that they call Mings Pit. They came

there and they told them: Look, get out or else. There were no alternatives, no

discussions with them. I had calls from people in the there was another area

in Notre Dame Junction, some 100 campers, people who were there for many years.

I have had seniors call me who were very upset; they could not believe the way

they were treated, the way this unfolded.

It is not in regard to coming in and sitting down and saying: Look, we do not

think is right what is going on there. Maybe there are only two or three out of

100 that are there that is doing something wrong. Some people have even cried

because they had to leave, where they were there for so long.

The same thing, some ninety campers in the Greenspond Road area who have been

there for some thirty-plus years, they had no option but just to get out no

consultation saying that this can happen.

Mr. Speaker, just a couple of days ago when I presented one of the petitions,

I mentioned about a trapper who had a small place right up in the country that

he used to use for security reasons, safety reasons, if he had to go in and had

to stay overnight because of weather conditions or if he wanted to stay

overnight to check his traps the next day. This gentleman called me the other

day and he said: Look, I am not a gravel pit camper, but I am calling supporting

those individuals.

He said: There is another story I want to tell you. He told me the story

about this trapper; he was the trapper. Lo and behold, it was the same incident

that I relayed here to the House of Assembly. He told me that back quite a few

years ago I think it was back in the 1970s one particular year while he was

trapping, he made an excess of $10,000 for himself. He said: At the time, when

the notice was put on my little cabin that I had far back in the country and

he said: I was not near any ponds or doing anything environmentally unfriendly

because I was not living there. He said: At the same time, there were ten to

fifteen Quebec Inuit who had cabins similar to his in Labrador constructed. He

said: When they put the notification on mine, they also received their

notification. They came in, they burned mine down, and theirs are still

standing. He said: That is what I am against - why are those people still

allowed to have those cabins that they had there? He felt that this was totally

discrimination against him.

Mr. Speaker, as I stated before, many of those people and I think they have

a strong, legitimate reason to state the issues that they do state it was a

cost to them. They have been told: look, you do not own the land - and they know

they do not own the land, they know that. They do not think they are doing

anything environmentally unfriendly for the greater portion of it. They were

told that they have improper sewerage systems. We know from checking with them -

maybe some people have gone wrong when it comes to that issue, but I can assure

you, Mr. Speaker, the greater percentage are doing things right and proper.

Mr. Speaker, another issue, we hear so much about Abitibi those days. It has

been up for debate many times here in the House of Assembly. I just want to

relay an issue that I had a call about. It is not the greater part about the

mill or anything or any of the major sites in Grand Falls-Windsor or surrounding

area. It has to do with an area off the Bay d'Espoir Highway, and it is called

Wince Holletts Road. On that road, about seven or eight kilometres in, there was

a - I will call it a bunkhouse there that the company had with fifty rooms in

it. When Abitibi were finished cutting the wood in that area, they just went

away and left it. They left it to be destroyed by the weather.

There are individuals there, several of them, who have legitimate cabins,

built by regulations, they have their permits. Plus, there are three hunting

lodges in that area. That is when people travel in from outside the Province and

they do their hunting. Mr. Speaker, what they are saying, it is deplorable the

conditions that you find in that area. There is oil leaking from old equipment

there. There are oil cans being kicked around on the ground. Insulation and

asbestos are thrown all over the area. Anything that was left in there, whether

it is the old toilets or what have you, it is all out around the woods.

What those people are saying, when you get a chance, bring this up to

government. We are talking about the people in the gravel pit, gravel pit

campers who are doing, they think, nothing wrong. Here we have a company - and

we know the situation government is in with this company, we hear it each and

every day. Surely, what was done there, there should be more emphasis put on by

government to get that site cleaned up because it also affects the tourists who

are coming to our Province, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we thought about waste management. All too often we get calls in

the Official Opposition, and I am sure other members do as well. I know there is

a tremendous program ongoing. I have seen the tremendous work that is being done

in Robin Hood Bay. I know the plans that are being put in place by the various

levels of government throughout our Province; people from the local

municipalities are members. Only this week we heard about new members being

appointed to those committees.

Mr. Speaker, what a lot of the smaller communities are saying, we agree with

this, but there is a big but - we are unable to afford what is being put our

way. It is only this past week we heard the Mayor of the City of St. John's turn

around and say that it is going to cost the people in here, by the time they get

the full system in place, that it will cost an additional $250 per household.

Mr. Speaker, many of those small communities, as much as they want to become

involved, they are unable to afford it and they will not be able to afford it.

So they are calling on governments, at various levels, to be able to assist

them. They want to carry out what government is asking them, to be

environmentally friendly.

Mr. Speaker, I know I mentioned this one before, and I know the Minister of

Environment and Conservation has had this one on her plate for quite some time,

that is - and I will call it by its proper name today - the New Harbour

landfill, because all to often I use the word dump. That place has been closed

down, but and I know government are waiting. I think this has gone - there is

some division within the federal government now that is looking into it on

behalf of some of the residents. That site has been closed. I know government, I

think it was the Estimates probably two or three years ago, where the minister

made it very clear that they did have a membrane that had been purchased, that

they were going to cover this site.

The longer this goes on, and why I am bringing this up, hopefully - and I

know the minister said one day that, well this is probably with the courts in

the federal system. Mr. Speaker, the longer this is going on, and the longer the

rain can fall and fall on this site where the PCBs are and government knows

that. They have taken many tons out of it and taken it to other sites to get the

soil cured, but that site is still there, Mr. Speaker. Hopefully, they will deal

with this issue and they will force the federal government to come down with a

decision faster; sooner rather than later, Mr. Speaker, because this is an issue

that is going on.

The other one I want to touch on, and I guess it is an issue that has been

ongoing for some time. I know the past three or four years, during Estimates, I

bring it up. That is the used tires and the recycling program. I know that there

was an issue with regard to Mr. Speaker, I have a job to see now, there are so

many people trying on their sunglasses, but

MR. HICKEY: (Inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member for Lake Melville, the Minister

of Labrador Affairs, said he had to wear his sunglasses because of the top of my

head. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, there is more than one issue. I have a job to

look on that side with him.

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to say, with regard to the recycling program. When it

comes to the storage of the used tires, I know there were tires stored at the

Bull Arm site, those tires have been moved. Some of them were shipped out of the

Province but approximately one million of them were put on a site in Dunville.

We hear that those tires are stored by - one million, that is what I have in the

Estimates anyway. Another minister, when you were off Madam Minister, stated

that there were about one million of them moved to Dunville.

MS JOHNSON: (Inaudible).

MR. BUTLER: No? She is saying that is incorrect. Well, I am going to have

to check the Estimates numbers again.

Mr. Speaker, I know there were tires taken there

MS JOHNSON: (Inaudible) Quebec.

MR. BUTLER: All of them went to Quebec, okay, my apologies.

I know in the Dunville area there is somewhere in excess of two million tires

now, and I know government has a program. Over the next couple of days we will

find out exactly what the program is that is coming down, and that is good to

see because I am going to tell you, this program cannot move fast enough to get

those tires off that site. I say that for a reason, because the people are

really concerned out there. I know they are stored properly by fire regulations,

the Fire Commissioner went out, but, Mr. Speaker, they are not stored in a

protected area.

With all due respect to government, with all due respect to the contractor,

the property that they are stored on - they are stored on a site that is a heavy

equipment site, and there is only just one little swinging gate there. I had

calls from the area, as early as this morning, telling me that that site is not

protected. There is twenty-four hour coverage there by a security guard but that

gentleman is unable to do any foot patrols. He is not allowed. In the daytime

that is fine, you can probably see people coming and going, but the site is not

fenced with a proper fence to keep anybody out. It is just a swinging gate to go

in, and after hours there is no foot patrol. He is not allowed to leave the

little shed that he stays in there.

There are many avenues where you can go into that site, and God forbid,

hopefully nobody will go there, hopefully this program - and I know the minister

has an ad in the paper where they are calling for tenders. Hopefully, this can

be all cleaned up before something should happen, but the people do have

concerns. I know some of them were wondering if the departments would go out and

meet with them and so on. I know they are stored properly according to the Fire

Commissioner but the people are saying the fire protection that is there is

another issue. There is no firefighting equipment on that site. The nearest

truck is in Freshwater, that is not all that far away and I admit that, but once

that truck goes and offloads, if there should be a fire that truck has to leave

the site again. There is no means to hook up like we can in the cities or

smaller towns. On that site, that truck has to go to another pond or to a stream

and refill again. We all know what can happen if a fire ever got going with

those tires. God forbid if it should happen, and hopefully it is going to be

cleared up before that time.

The other issue I just want to touch on, and I know the minister said she was

going to check this out and her officials during the Estimates, is an issue

that has been coming forward to us, and that is the site at Bay Bulls. I know

there is a site there, and that it was to be, more or less, just for storage for

different items, whether it be vehicles or metal - a facility, I should say,

where it is just stored for shipment.

We have had calls, and I know the department was going to check this out

again, because we found out that dismantling was taking place on that site.

There were individuals who sent pictures to advise us of that. I know the

minister or her officials were going to visit the site again. I am sure she will

speak today with her department in this Resource Committee and maybe they can

give us a report on what happened. Maybe everything is there, but from the

reports that we have that has been the issue.

Mr. Speaker, I know my time is running out. I want to say it has been a

pleasure to be able to say those few words within my time frame and to say that

I believe the system, with the various committees, where we meet with the

departments, the ministers and their officials, is a process that is really

worthwhile. I want to thank the committee Chair and all members on the committee

for the work that they do. It is a long and strenuous situation, a lot of it

taking place after the House sits for the day, but it is a process that I

believe is worthwhile and we should continue. It gives us the opportunity to

bring forward issues that we think have not been dealt with properly and that

hopefully government will take a second look.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the hon. the Minister of Environment

and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak to the Resource Committee Estimates

today. I just heard the hon. member speak, and there is one thing I agree on,

and that is his comment at the end that the Estimates process is a very

worthwhile process and one that we should continue with. I think it was very

valuable. I would like to thank the members opposite for asking the questions

and having the conversations that we had on both sides of the House, and also

thank my staff members who attended. It is a really good process.

Mr. Speaker, before I get into some of the items that the hon. member

mentioned, I do want to take a moment to discuss the fact that the Leader of the

Opposition says that she has not heard a word from me on the issue with the

spill in the Gulf. Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious issue. It is one that I

have been watching very closely, and my condolences go out to the eleven people

who have had their lives lost. This is a serious issue, so if the Leader of the

Opposition would let me put out my condolences to these people I would certainly

appreciate that.

We do not often hear about that. It seems like and rightly so the

environment is a big issue with this, but I have not heard a whole lot on the

eleven lives that were lost. This is certainly all too familiar for us with the

incident we had with Cougar in the last year or so here, so my condolences go

out to the families of those eleven people.

Mr. Speaker, to say that she has not heard a word from me, we debated in this

House on May 12, actually, a motion about the oil spill preparedness and so on

in relation to the incident in the Gulf. Mr. Speaker, this was a motion that was

put forward by the Leader of the Opposition herself, so I would certainly expect

that the mover of a motion would listen to the speakers in the House of

Assembly. Mr. Speaker, I spoke on that issue during that day for fifteen or

twenty minutes, and spoke about the environmental implications, spoke about the

environmental assessment process.

Mr. Speaker, the other thing that is very obvious, that the Leader of the

Opposition does not realize, is that I do not have jurisdiction for the

offshore. The jurisdiction of the Department of Environment and Conservation

only deals with should the oil reach the land. As we know from the environmental

assessment work that was done, it is very unlikely, due to the wind and the

water currents, that it would reach land; but, should it reach land, that is

where the jurisdiction would lie with me. Mr. Speaker, that is exactly why I

have not heard a question from the Leader of the Opposition: the reason being

because she does not want to hear the answer.

For the fourteen years that they were in government, Mr. Speaker, there was

not one policy put in place, not one plan put in place, not one person hired to

be responsible for: What do we do should the oil hit land? When we formed

government, Mr. Speaker, we soon realized that there was nothing in place such

as this, and that is why we immediately did consultations; we did work with

other jurisdictions and other governments throughout Canada and beyond. We hired

somebody dedicated to work on this, Mr. Speaker, so that we can have the proper

policies and procedures in place.

So, Mr. Speaker, to say that she has not heard me speak on it is not fair; I

have not been asked a question on it that is in relation to my department.

Certainly, the Minister of Natural Resources is responsible for the offshore and

she very eloquently answers her questions when asked about the offshore.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, I spoke in this House for fifteen or twenty minutes

on the motion put forward by the member herself, so if she does not listen to

the speakers to the motion that she put forward, perhaps she can haul out

Hansard and see that I did speak to it. It is an issue that concerns all of us

here in the Province. It certainly concerns everybody in the country and

throughout the world, as the world is certainly watching what is happening

there.

Mr. Speaker, there is also one other thing that I would like to clarify while

I have the opportunity to speak on the Resource Committee, and that is on

questions that were put forward in this House on May 17. Mr. Speaker, it was in

relation to the human health risk assessment that was done for Buchans back in

2007. At the time, the Leader of the Opposition asked me a question and she

referred to the human health risk assessment and said that it was done back in

2007 but the information was not disclosed by my department until 2009, Mr.

Speaker. I pointed out that

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MS JOHNSON: It is right here in Hansard. It says, "yet the information

was not disclosed by her department publicly until the fall of 2009." It is

right there in Hansard for you to read.

Mr. Speaker, CBC did carry an incorrect story.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JOHNSON: CBC did carry an incorrect story, and CBC did follow up the

following day with an apology, Mr. Speaker. That was May 17; this is May 27, ten

days, and we have not heard one word about an apology about the misinformation

that she used in the House. So I would like to take the opportunity to clear up

that information, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, now I would like to move on to some of the issues that the

member opposite just mentioned, who was up before me. One of the items that the

member opposite talked about was gravel pit campers. Mr. Speaker, I just want to

state for the record that we have said publicly, we have no issue with anybody

who wants to do short-term camping to enjoy our great outdoors on a short-term

basis. Mr. Speaker, the issue becomes when people set down roots, set up

permanently; they put structures, outhouses, decks and so on.

Mr. Speaker, this is all about fair and equal access to all. I do not even

think the member opposite disagrees with that, because if somebody wants to

occupy a place for a week or two for moose hunting or whatever, then maybe his

buddy or a relative might want to go in that same place a couple of weeks later.

Mr. Speaker, some of the postings - and I would like to speak specifically to

Howley, because Howley was an area that the mayor and the councillors of Howley,

and the residents of Howley, have been asking government for some time to deal

with the issue. The over 200 structures in Howley were sitting right on the

water supply, Mr. Speaker. I know you know full well, Mr. Speaker, about this,

being from your district. This had serious implications from a health

perspective, an environmental perspective and so on, so government did the right

thing and posted those trailers.

Mr. Speaker, I suggest that if we had not, the Opposition would be up on

their feet saying why are you not posting these trailers? You have sewer going

into a water supply; what are you going to do about it? So, Mr. Speaker, it goes

to show that you just cannot win.

Mr. Speaker, since we have posted some of these trailers, we have had many of

them come to government. We have said that all they have to do is form an

association, go through the proper channels, through Government Services for the

proper septic and so on.

We have a most recent example in the area of Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune where

they have come together. They now will own the land. They purchased the land at

a very fair price and they will own that forever and a day, but, Mr. Speaker, it

is all done in accordance to life and safety and environmental control. That is

what is so important here, because what we see and I listened to CBC the day

that the member opposite was on. One of the things that you heard loud and clear

is that people want organized sites because when the mess is left behind, there

is nobody to call upon to see who left the mess there. One example I heard was

if somebody started a fire, if you are in an organized site such as a park, a

private or provincial park, you know who to go to if issues arise such as a fire

or leaving a mess behind and so on.

Mr. Speaker, it is all about fairness, it is all about safety, it is all

about the environment, and there are opportunities. The member opposite

mentioned we post them, and the words he used was get out or else. Mr. Speaker,

we post them for sixty days and if they then come forward and tell us that they

are forming an association; I have on numerous occasions extended that sixty

days. In fact, I have extended it until they resolved the Crown lands issues,

found their piece of land and gone through the Government Services process for

the septic, Mr. Speaker. So we have been very co-operative with these groups.

It seems like this issue that the member has been raising in numerous

petitions in the House in the past, it seems like it is only something that he

has taken an interest in recently, but I would like to remind the member

opposite - I have gone through the notes - that this is not something that this

government started. In fact, I have gone through the notes, and I only went back

as far as 1995, so that was the last eight years that they were in government.

Mr. Speaker, they posted numerous, numerous trailers, numerous cottages. In

fact, Mr. Speaker, they burned several dozen structures.

It seems like it is a revelation on his

part in this past couple of months

but, Mr. Speaker, this is a practice - and rightly so, that the Opposition did

it because it goes against the Lands Act, which is

an act that we make in this

House of Assembly. It is the law of the land and we have to follow the law of

the land. So the fact that they did burn dozens and dozens of cabins was the

right thing to do - if we are not following the laws of the House. Mr. Speaker,

I just want to point out, this is not something new that this government has

been doing. This has been going on for years and years, and I can show the

member opposite because they even took pictures of the cabins that they burned

when they were in at the time.

Mr. Speaker, he also mentioned a trapper who has contacted him. Mr. Speaker,

trappers can have cabins. There is absolutely no issue with trappers having

cabins. What they have to do is they have to supply us with three years of the

receipts from their trapping revenue. That proves to us that they are a trapper,

because anybody can say they are a trapper and put a cabin out there and say it

is for trapping. Again, we have rules that are in place to ensure fairness. If

that person had done that, there would not have been an issue. I suspect I know

the case he is talking about, and in that case there were no receipts provided

of trapping revenue for the three years of sales and there were numerous,

numerous opportunities to provide that information.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak about the tires for a moment. I know it

has been an issue. It has not been an easy issue to deal with, and I will be the

first person to admit that. Mr. Speaker, the member opposite should also know

that, because when they were in government they had two failed attempts at

finding a solution for tires. At the end of the day, a mess was left behind and

had to be cleaned up and in a lot of cases the tires went to Quebec. So it isn't

an easy topic to deal with, as they would know, but we want to make sure we do

it right. While we are not ready to finalize the plans yet, there are things

that we can do in the interim.

One of the things that I mentioned during Estimates is that any ongoing

generation of tires now are going off to Quebec because we have, as the member

opposite mentioned, about 1.9 million tires in Placentia, and yes, he did

mention all of the Bull Arm tires are gone. They were shipped to Quebec, but we

believe that is enough tires for the proposal we have before us to last them

about five years. Once we have signed off on the proposal, then any new ongoing

generation of tires would then be used for that proposal. In the interim, that

is one of the things we are doing to keep down on the space, is to ship them to

Quebec.

The other thing that we are doing, which the member referred to, is the

tender we put out this weekend, and that is for the baling of the tires. In

effect, this is hydraulic compression of 100 tires or so that is compacted down

and then caged in with five steel wires. Mr. Speaker, this was done, not to make

it safer, this was done primarily for economics. It will cut down on our space

requirements by 80 per cent. When you pay a cost per hectare of land, cutting

down by 80 per cent would certainly reduce the cost that is required.

Once we get the plan signed off on, it also has those tires ready, baled and

ready to move. So they can move more quickly when the plan is in place. Also

with the reduced space requirements, there is going to be a reduced need for

trucks to ship these to the desired place for the final plan, which obviously

cuts down on the amount of carbon that is emitted and so on.

Mr. Speaker, while it was done for economic reasons, there are some safety

benefits. We hire security there based on a twenty-four-seven basis. It is about

$750,000 for the space, but also for the security, Mr. Speaker. The member talks

about issues with security and people accessing the site. We have called out

there to see if there have been any concerns and we have been assured that there

are no concerns.

Mr. Speaker, it sounds like what the member opposite is asking for is

security for the security. We pay a private company and we expect them to

provide us with a service. If there should be an issue, Mr. Speaker, we will

certainly deal with it in the future because they are providing us with a

service and we expect them to live up to our expectations, but it sounds like

what the member is asking for is security for security. Mr. Speaker, it is just

not something that is necessary.

Mr. Speaker, the member also mentioned Abitibi. I would like to point out

that when we expropriated Abitibi, which is the best move this government has

ever made, we got back land about three times the size of P.E.I. As a result,

Mr. Speaker, in this year's Budget we hired two people in the Grand

Falls-Windsor area to deal with lands issues. So I would certainly like to take

this opportunity to tell the listening public that if they currently have grants

or leases that were with Abitibi, by all means, come forward to the department

and we will do the proper transfer of those documents. So, you can continue to

have ownership. It is just a different landlord now, Mr. Speaker. I would just

like to point out that we did hire people for that.

On the whole issue of Abitibi as a whole, Mr. Speaker, when we ran in 2003

our main platform was no more giveaways. That is exactly why we expropriated the

land from Abitibi, the timber rights from Abitibi, the hydro assets. We did that

so that there would be no more giveaways and we would not be giving these

natural resources away to some company that was going to sell them off anyway to

make money. Had we not had the foresight, and the Premier had not had the

foresight to expropriate those lands, Mr. Speaker, where we would be today, we

would be in a bigger mess than what we are in now and we would still have the

environmental mess but we would not have the assets.

Now we see interest. As the Minister of Natural Resources said, it is early

days, but we have interest and we are able to use the resources that we took

back because we had the foresight to take them back.

Mr. Speaker, we hear the Leader of the Opposition opposite go on and on about

the expropriation of the mill. While it was not intended to do so, Mr. Speaker,

I suggest that if Abitibi did have that mill, as I read in some headlines just

recently that they are selling off four mills, two of them in New Brunswick, one

in Nova Scotia and one in Quebec. So they are selling them off. They are selling

the equipment that is in the mills for scrap, Mr. Speaker. I would suggest to

the Opposition, where would that mill be today if we had not expropriated? It

all would have been sold off and gone, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, just to get back a little bit about the whole process here, when

we expropriated the Abitibi lands, the company was a solvent company. The

Environmental Protection Act had provisions in it for a company or a person

responsible who releases contaminants into the environment to be responsible.

Mr. Speaker, to even further strengthen that, when we put Bill 75 through this

House in December of 2008, we even added an extra level of protection to ensure

that the environmental liabilities still remained with Abitibi, and that was in

section 13 of the act..

Mr. Speaker, then when the company filed through the CCAA process, we went

before the courts to state: Just be reminded that while you are going through

this restructuring process, we have these regulatory orders and they are not

monetary in nature. Lo and behold, Mr. Speaker, the Quebec government sided with

the restructuring of Abitibi. Mr. Speaker, we believe that the environmental

liabilities should not be trumped by any restructuring process. I think this a

serious concern not only for this Province, but for every single province in the

country, including the federal government, and that is why I will be sending a

letter over the next day or two to the Ministers of Environment across the

country because this has serious implications.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to get in now a little bit of the department.

With May 24 weekend just beyond us I would like to speak about some of the work

that we have been doing with our provincial parks. Over the last four years, we

have spent a little over $4 million in the provincial parks and we are going to

continue spending money to do upgrades, but it is important to note that these

parks are in rural Newfoundland. They are generating economic spinoffs for many

of the businesses and so on in rural Newfoundland. Our $4 million investment

went into rural Newfoundland and went into contractors and suppliers in rural

Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker.

Just to give you some examples of what we have done to improve the services

for the people who use these parks, it includes things like: hot and cold

running water, showers and washbasins, cookhouses and kitchen shelters. We have

done boardwalk and trail improvements. We have had dumping stations. Mr.

Speaker, we have made some of the campsites bigger, and of course, we have done

a lot of work when it comes to electrical hookups, which is something that the

modern day camper looks to.

More specifically, in La Manche, J.T. Cheeseman, Sir Richard Squires

Memorial, and Pinware Park, we have put dumping stations in there. We have put

comfort stations in Squires Memorial, Butterpot, La Manche, and Pinware. We have

put playgrounds in some sites. Electrical services are now available in some

parks including: Notre Dame, Dildo Run, Frenchman's Cove, J.T. Cheeseman, and La

Manche.

So I know that this impacts a lot of the members around this House in rural

Newfoundland. It is an investment into our provincial park system, it is an

investment into our tourism and it is certainly an investment into the economic

stimulus overall.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, we will be continuing with these upgrades again this

year. Specifically, one of the things that the chair of the committee mentioned

was the investment into Salmonier Nature Park. I will not go into that one a

whole lot because the last time I was on my feet I did speak of that.

Mr. Speaker, one of the other items that the member opposite mentioned was

New Harbour. I really want to send out congratulations to the committee in New

Harbour, the seven communities who worked together to close down that site. They

have been very progressive in their thinking.

To date, Mr. Speaker, we have spent nearly $1 million on the New Harbour

site. We are continuing to do work there. We have removed about 140 tonnes of

PCBs. We have purchased a liner. We have installed monitoring wells. We have

been checking those monitoring wells and everything is within standard for the

environment, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that her time for speaking has expired.

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak to the Estimates. I certainly support

this. I will take my seat so somebody else can have an opportunity.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Signal

Hill-Quidi Vidi.

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

I am pleased to be able to stand this afternoon and take

part in our last

Concurrence discussion with regard to our Budget. Today the Concurrence that we

are seeking has to do with the Resource Committee that met during the time of

Estimates. It met with the different departments that come under the Resource

Committee: Natural Resources, forestry, agriculture and agrifoods, oil and gas;

Fisheries and Aquaculture; Innovation, Trade and Rural Development; Environment

and Conservation; Tourism, Culture and Recreation; and Business.

It is always an interesting time when we sit on the Estimates Committee. I do

find it very interesting, the carrying on of the question and answers that we

carry on with the ministers and with their staff. It is extremely interesting.

I am happy today in particular to be able to stand with regard to the natural

resource sector and to reflect a bit with us on what is happening in this sector

and some of the concerns that I have. I just have to find my notes here now. I

had notes that I am now missing. They are in my hands here and I do not want to

start without them, so here we go.

We are very blessed in this Province, as we all know, with rich resources.

The natural resource sector, of course, is where we deal with how we spend our

money and how we make money from those resources. So whether our resources are

mining, from mining, which is such a traditional industry in this Province, from

the forestry and forestry products, from fishery, which is, of course, the most

traditional in our Province, the fishery, because that is what our whole

province became based on. That is what occupation of the land by Europeans was

based on, was the fishery. Of course, in more frequent times, we have oil and

gas.

So our Province is rich, like all parts of Canada. We are blessed because we

have not just the resources on land, but also the resources in our ocean. Of

course, while that is a richness and while that is a wealth, it also has a

tension involved with it, especially the resources in the ocean, because we have

the potential of the resources in our ocean being in competition with one

another, because of the potential with the development of oil and gas, for

example, of contamination of the very environment in which the other resources,

our fish and seafood, exists and lives.

So, we have quite a challenge as some other places do, we are not the only

place in the world that have this challenge to see if we can get at both of

these resources, to maintain both of these resources in a way that benefits the

Province. Of course, the other interesting thing, Mr. Speaker, is that the

nature of these two resources is quite different because, one, fishery and

seafood, of course, is a renewable resource, and oil and gas is not a renewable

resource, as we all know. As we use up oil and gas, it does not replace itself.

It is a single source that can come and will come to an end;

whereas, we have

the potential with the life in our oceans, with the fish and seafood to be able

to help them continue to renew themselves so that as long as we want that

resource to go on, the resource can go on.

So, this is why, Mr. Speaker, we have to be very, very cautious as we move

ahead, particularly with the oil and gas industry. An industry that, right now,

is certainly benefiting us immensely and I recognize that. Over $1 billion a

year coming in from oil is certainly important for us here in this Province. The

billions of dollars that we will continue to reap from that industry are

extremely important, so we cannot turn up our nose at that industry. We are now

in a position in this Province where things are much better than they have ever

been before, because of that industry. At the same time, Mr. Speaker, we have to

make sure that we are using and getting at that resource in a responsible way,

in a way that does not hurt the other resource that is in our waters: the

resource of the fishery, the resource of our fish and of our seafood, that we do

not in any way want to contaminate that resource.

I know that we all know about this, and we think about it, but we have a

worldwide thing going on right now that should really be causing us to become

more cautious in the speed with which we are moving ahead in exploring the

seabed off our coast in the pursuit of oil and gas. We have to be concerned

because of what is going on in the Gulf of Mexico.

In the Gulf of Mexico right now we all know that for the past thirty-five

days - I think we may be into thirty-six days now - we have oil that is just

spewing out from the bed of the Gulf of Mexico, from the bottom of that ocean,

just spewing out, thousands and thousands of barrels of oil a day, and I do not

think we even know at this moment how many barrels a day it really is that is

coming out from the bed of the Gulf of Mexico. That oil is not only

contaminating what is on the bottom of the ocean, as the oil is coming up; it is

also contaminating the shorelines of where that water goes. Not only is it

contaminating the shoreline of the Gulf of Mexico; there is great concern that

the contamination from that oil is going to go up the Eastern Seaboard. This

terrible state of oil spewing out into the ocean without any ability to stop it

is really very concerning.

One of the reasons why it cannot be stopped is because of the depth at which

this well exists: 1.5 kilometres down on the bed of the Gulf of Mexico. The

technologies that exist for dealing with blowouts, which is what happened in the

Gulf of Mexico, those technologies have worked pretty well at more shallow

levels of water; however, with the well in the Gulf of Mexico, the depth of

water is such that the known technologies are not working.

Mr. Speaker, this really brings us to the point of the situation we have here

in Newfoundland right now off the coast of the Island where we have a well being

dug at 2.6 kilometres depth. That has to beg the question: What happens if we

get a blowout down at that depth?

Now, I know there are all kinds of people saying, well, the chances of

getting a blowout are pretty nil. Well, I am sure they said that about the Gulf

of Mexico. I know they did, actually; I know BP did say that. We are also told

that all kinds of safeguards are in place, that if there were a blowout at that

level safeguards are in place to actually prevent a blowout from happening; but

they thought that about the rig in the Gulf of Mexico as well.

We do not know, and this is why I am bringing it up, we do not know why the

safeguards did not work with the well in the Gulf of Mexico. They were in place,

but we do not know. We are waiting to find out, and we do not know how long we

are going to have to wait to find out why the safeguards did not work. In the

meantime, we have allowed a well to be dug; we have allowed the Orphan Basin

well to go ahead, the Lona O-55, to go ahead - a great project, I am sure - but

without answers as to why the blowout happened in the Gulf of Mexico and why the

safeguards did not work.

This is very disturbing, Mr. Speaker. The oil at the bottom of the ocean is

going to remain there; it is not going anywhere, and we could slow down our

process of drilling until we can be sure that we can deal with an accident, if

it happens, at the depth of the Lona O-55 project. If we had more answers then I

would say yes, let's go ahead; but we do not have the answers, Mr. Speaker. We

have to take more seriously what drilling at those depths is all about, and what

exploratory drilling is all about. Industry, you know, on their own, are not

going to be as careful as they are when government puts regulations in place;

and we have proof all over the world of that, Mr. Speaker, that industry does

what government demands of them.

One of the concerning things about drilling, and maybe a lot of people do not

know this, is that once upon a time it would be demanded that if a company was

going to do an exploratory drill in the bottom of the ocean, looking for oil,

that they would have to do an environmental assessment of the actual exploratory

drill. Back in November 2005 the federal government relaxed the environmental

assessment rules for offshore projects, eliminating the need for a comprehensive

study at the exploratory drilling stage.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS MICHAEL: I think they did, Minister, they did. So we do not have

adequate answers about what is happening during an exploratory stage, and we are

allowing it to go ahead

MS DUNDERDALE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Deputy Premier, on a point of order.

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the federal government did not relax the drilling regulations in

our offshore. Mr. Speaker, they took a different approach; they are

goal-orientated rules that are out there now, and goal-oriented regulations

which allow new technology and best practices to be applied directly and in a

timely fashion in the offshore, Mr. Speaker, to prevent the kind of things that

the Leader of the NDP is talking about. They certainly did not relax their

regulations.

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, the environmental assessment process for

drilling is not the same as the environmental assessment process for the

production stage, and that is what I am talking about. There is a difference in

the demand for environmental assessment. So, Mr. Speaker, I will continue.

We could put the drilling on hold until we have further answers. There is

nothing to stop that, for putting the drilling on hold, and we should make sure

that when we enter into agreements with companies, we should make sure we have

all the bases covered and we do not have all the bases covered.

Mr. Speaker, there are so many issues that it really bothers me to think

about the way in which we are going to continue allowing drilling out there in

the ocean in a way that can affect our fishing industry, that can affect our

ongoing, our renewable resource. Mr. Speaker, we just have to take more caution

when it comes to putting these two industries together. Mr. Speaker, that is one

of the issues that concerns me with regard to our natural resources sector. We

absolutely have to make sure that both of those industries can move together.

The other part of that, Mr. Speaker, is the way in which we have put so many

eggs in the basket of the aquaculture in the Province. I have no problem with

that; the aquaculture industry looks like a very good industry. There are

environmental concerns that are continually being looked at. There is also more

science around the environmental concerns of aquaculture, but we are starting to

put more money into the basket of aquaculture than we are into that of our

traditional fishery, our natural fishery, the fishery out there in the ocean.

Mr. Speaker, this is something that is not acceptable. It is something that we

have to really look at. We cannot let one suffer for the other. That is the

point I am trying to make, Mr. Speaker.

Whether we are talking about oil and gas and our deep sea fishery, or whether

we are talking about aquaculture and our natural fishery, our wild fishery, one

cannot suffer for the other, neither in terms of the resource itself and neither

in terms of workers. This is something, Mr. Speaker, that I find going on, that

we are getting sort of starry-eyed over new things and letting older and more

traditional things drop. This is something that I ask this government to start

looking at, the way in which the new, instead of existing side by side with the

old, is almost seen as replacing the old. This is not acceptable, Mr. Speaker,

and it will always be something that I will be concerned about and will keep

speaking about and hope that this government is going to continue to listen and

do something about because we cannot have one suffer for the other.

Another area, Mr. Speaker, where I would like to see this government more

proactive, and that I was not happy with as we had our discussions, is in the

whole area of our agriculture and agrifoods. We are doing some good things there

as well, there is no doubt, but what concerns me is that we really are not doing

serious research into the whole area of organic farming in this Province.

There are so many dimensions to the organic farming. There are the

environmental dimensions, of course. There is the whole question of organic

farming existing in semi-urban settings. We have a case right here going on in

the St. John's region right now of somebody who wants to put in an organic farm.

I think basically because of full knowledge from some of the people, the

decision makers involved, this person not being able to get this organic farm in

place, and I think it is because we do not have enough common knowledge in the

Province and we do not have enough research done around organic farming. It is

not the same to do organic farming as it is do traditional farming because no

pesticides are used, for example. It is a totally different way of doing

farming. I really would like to see much more money going into research with

regard to organic farming. It is something, of course, that could involve both

the Department of Natural Resources as well as well as the Department of

Environment. They could do research together around organic farming; the

benefits of organic farming; risk assessments, are there risks, what are they;

and how to put money into helping people get more into organic farming.

As much as is happening around farming, there is so much more that could be

happening, Mr. Speaker, because there are so many ways in which we could become

self-sufficient, especially with regard to our root crops in Newfoundland and

Labrador because we have such a potential for much more to be grown.

We could become more self-sufficient which would help people be healthier. It

would also help them economically, both through the perspective of those who are

working in the agriculture industry as well as from the perspective of people

who are buying their foods locally. We would get more farmers who would have

more people buying from them. We would have an all around better economy, Mr.

Speaker, if we could get more of that happening.

Mr. Speaker, there are many areas that we talked about when we were in the

Estimates Committees. I just have one or two more that I want to raise. I am

really looking forward to seeing what is going to