PDF Version

November 28, 2013 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVII No. 37

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

MR. KING: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, on a point of order.

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to just correct some information that I gave in Question Period

yesterday which contradicted the Minister of Fisheries. The House Leader asked a

question around the $17 million commitment to the St. Lawrence mine. The actual

amount drawn down on that for engineering and design work is $637,000.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Thank you.

MS MICHAEL: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party, on a point of order.

MS MICHAEL: I rise on a point of order.

Yesterday, at the end of the debate on the government private member's

motion, there was a vote on the motion and the Speaker ruled the motion defeated

twice.

Once the Speaker has ruled on a motion, the House cannot revisit that

question, even if the Government House Leader calls for it.

Pages 567-568 of O'Brien and Bosc, the House of Commons Procedure and

Practice, Second Edition, 2009 , states that when the question is called, the

Speaker will take a voice vote. "He or she will ask for the decision of the

House by saying, All those in favour of the motion will please say yea'; and

then, All those opposed will please say nay'. The Speaker listens to both

responses, judges the voices and the sense of the House, and states his or her

opinion as to the result: In my opinion, the yeas (nays) have it'. If there is

no objection, the Speaker then declares the motion carried or negatived, as the

case may be."

In the case of the vote yesterday, the Speaker ruled two times that the vote

was defeated, and then adjourned the House.

We find also on pages 582-583 of O'Brien and Bosc, referring to results of a

vote: A Decision Once Made Must Stand.

This is what it says, "A decision once made cannot be questioned again but

must stand as the judgement of the House. Thus, for example, if a bill or motion

is rejected, it cannot be revived in the same session, although there is no bar

to a motion similar in intent to one already negatived, but with sufficient

variance to constitute a new question. This is to prevent the time of the House

being used in the discussion of motions of the same nature with the possibility

of contradictory decisions being arrived at in the course of the same session.

It is not in order for Members to reflect" upon (i.e., to reconsider or go back

upon) votes of the House, and when this has occurred, the Chair has been quick

to call attention to it." Reference 360 in O'Brien and Bosc. "Members have also

occasionally called attention to the rule." Reference 361.

"The House may reopen discussion on an earlier decision (i.e., a resolution

or an order of the House) only if its intention is to revoke it" reference 362

"this requires notice of a motion to rescind the resolution or discharge the

order, as the case may be." Reference 363.

We are asking that the Speaker stand by his decision that the motion was

defeated. As well, Mr. Speaker, the daily proceedings were adjourned for the

session of the House of Assembly, it being 5:00 o'clock as per Rule 9.

From our own Standing Orders, Rule 9 says; "If at 5:30 o'clock in the

afternoon except on Wednesday, the business of the House is not concluded, the

Speaker shall leave the Chair until 7 o'clock. At the hour of 5 o'clock on

Wednesday afternoon the Speaker adjourns the House without question put." Rule

33 says basically, "A motion to adjourn shall always be in order."

Mr. Speaker, how can a member try to function in the House of Assembly if the

practice becomes that the government can simply say the House is in session

after it is 5:00 o'clock on Private Members' Day when the House has been

declared adjourned by the Speaker? The only way that the Opposition can do its

job under such a system would be to camp out in the Chamber all the time after

adjournment in case the government decides that the House should be suddenly

seized of a Division.

Therefore, we ask that the Speaker's decision, that of the decision that the

motion was defeated, stand, and also that he remind the House that once

adjourned, the House cannot be recalled except under the House rules until the

hour outlined under Rule 8.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that you review the end of the proceedings of the House

yesterday and let the motion stand as per your original ruling. If government

members wish to reverse the vote, that they move a motion with proper notice and

take the proper action.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, to the point of order.

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do want to speak first of all to recognize that Division is in page 13 of

our Standing Orders here. Division is provided as part of the rules here any

time a member wants to call Division so that the votes are duly recorded, where

each member stands in his or her place to indicate how they wish to vote. That

is a practice provided in the Standing Orders and it has been an ongoing

practice provided in this House of Assembly, at least since I have been here,

I have also, and some of my colleagues, had a chance to review the video that

the member opposite references. It would be my suggestion that I stood here, as

House Leader, on my feet before 5:00 o'clock asking for Division. I think you

may see some conflict between the time the House was adjourned and when that

occurred, but the video clearly shows, in my viewing of it, that I was on my

feet before 5:00 o'clock, before the House was adjourned, and had every right,

as any member does, to stand here and call for Division as provided for in the

Standing Orders.

I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, that we acted yesterday, as a government, the

way we have every right to do, just as members in the Official Opposition or the

Third Party have a right to do. We followed the Standing Orders. A vote

occurred; you made a ruling. We called for Division to record the vote, and that

is provided for in the Standing Orders, so I do not believe there is a point of

order here.

MR. SPEAKER: Any further comments to the point of order?

The hon. Leader of the Third Party, to the point of order.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, just one more point in response to the Government House Leader. The

difficulty in reviewing both Hansard and the video, which I have done, and done

more than once, is that there was a whole

section of what happened here in the

House that is not recorded, because the minute that the Speaker said this House

is adjourned, with everything that goes with that, the minute that happened, the

recording ends. The vocal recording ends.

There was a whole interchange here in the House that now is not part of the

public record. It was after that interchange that the decision to allow Division

happened, which was after the adjournment of the House. We will not see either

in Hansard or in the video a whole

section of what happened between the call for

adjournment and the decision to allow the Division to happen after the call for

adjournment. I would like that to be considered by the Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, to the point of order.

MR. KING: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

I recognize there may be lapses in the video, and I want to say this in the

kindest of regards to the Speaker, and in respectful regards, but it is my

contention that I stood in my place before 5:00 o'clock as Government House

Leader and I had a right to be recognized when I called Division. The grey area

seems to be when the House had been adjourned by you and when I had been

recognized, but I would suggest clearly, a Government House Leader has a right

to stand here on a point before 5:00 o'clock, before adjournment, and be

recognized by the Speaker.

Again, I submit to you that I see no point of order here.

MR. SPEAKER: Thank you.

The Speaker will undertake to review the tape and transcript of Hansard and

report at a later date.

Statements by Members

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

the District of Exploits; the Member for the District of Bonavista South; the

Member for the District of Harbour Main; the Member for the District of Port de

Grave; the Member for the District of Bay of Islands; and the Member for the

District of St. John's North.

The hon. the Member for the District of Exploits.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY: Mr. Speaker, in the spring of 202, a neighbourhood senior

approached the staff at the Dr. Hugh Twomey Centre and asked if he could turn

some sod and grow some vegetables on that property.

With interest and support from the community groups like the seniors working

group, the Boys and Girls Club, Legion Action Committee and funding from the

Central Regional Wellness Coalition, the Community Garden Project was born.

Mr. Speaker, today there is a Community Garden Committee in place and they

have been working hard to recruit hobby farmers to guide the project.

The committee is utilizing a resource manual from the Newfoundland and

Labrador Food Security Network. The project is open to residents fifty-five

years of age and older.

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

Community Garden Committee on their recreational and healthy initiative.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Honourable colleagues, I rise in this House today to applaud the Bonavista

Mockbeggar Mudslashers, a team of seven young boys, who, in June of this year,

won the Under 17 Play On provincial tournament. The two-day street hockey

tournament took place at Memorial University, where the Mudslashers beat out

approximately thirty teams.

The team's victory can be attributed to a lot of practice and hard work.

After much fundraising throughout the summer, the boys headed to Yarmouth, Nova

Scotia, to represent Newfoundland and Labrador in the Under 17 Play On street

hockey championship on the nationals. Right now, Play On is Canada's largest

street hockey competition. We can certainly be proud of these boys who played

some great games and took home an impressive third place finish in Canada. We

also need to recognize the parents who helped the team with training and

fundraising.

Mr. Speaker, hon. colleagues, please join me in congratulating Matthew

Fisher, Tristan Gray, Ethan Street, Nathanial Duffett, Conal McNamara, Brent

Monks and Brad Paul in their outstanding performances during both tournaments,

and the true sportsmanship each member displayed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

to congratulate eight outstanding high school graduates in the provincial

District of Harbour Main.

The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador awards $1,000 Electoral District

Scholarships to three high school graduates in each electoral district with the

highest marks. This year, Mr. Speaker, the three recipients were Katie Cranford

and Amy Barrett from Ascension Collegiate in Bay Roberts and Yaneesh Jerath of

St. Bonaventure's College in St. John's.

Also, Mr. Speaker, there were five students who received the Centenary of

Responsible Government Scholarships, which are valued at $1,000 each to

individuals with the highest marks. This year the recipients were Kristin Downey

of Ascension Collegiate, Bay Roberts, Courtney Cole, Harrison Lake, Cassie

O'Leary, and Devon Percey of Roncalli Central High, Avondale.

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

these students and wishing them well in their future education and training.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today in this House to recognize Mr. Greg Smith, a teacher at

Amalgamated Academy, Bay Roberts on receiving the Prime Minister's Award for

Teaching Excellence.

This award recognized fifteen teachers from across the country for their

innovative and outstanding teaching techniques. Teachers instill in their

students a love of learning through information and communication technologies

to better equip their students for the twenty-first century.

The award has been called the Nobel Prize of teaching by a recent recipient.

Mr. Smith believes doing equals learning and it is hard to argue when you see

his students in action. He regularly finds ways to connect his students with

classrooms in other countries through the Global Virtual Classroom community or

through ePals, a pen pal project, and encourages his colleagues to do the same.

A colleague said his passion for teaching and his students is evident daily.

From his approach to curriculum and technology integration, to crazy costumes

for Halloween, Mr. Gregory Smith is one of our finest.

I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating this outstanding and

innovative teacher.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, on Friday evening, November 22, the sky became

brighter with a new star as Heaven received another angel. Fifteen-year-old Alex

McCarthy of Benoit's Cove was taken from us at a much too young of an age.

Alex was a Grade 10 student at Corner Brook Regional High School, loved life,

was very charming and free spirited. His smile could lift your spirits and the

twinkle in his eyes could brighten any room. For such a young age, he touched so

many people in a positive way and his grandmother, Anne Marie, told me that he

is gone to Heaven to get some hugs and kisses because he gave away all of his on

earth.

Mr. Speaker, Alex was kind hearted, friendly and always showed acts of

kindness to his family, friends and strangers. He will be remembered for his

kind acts and volunteer work as a junior firefighter with the Lark Harbour/York

Harbour Fire Department.

In Alex's memory, scholarships to educate on seatbelt safety and Acts of

Kindness are being set up by two local fire departments.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members to join with me in extending condolences to

Alex's family and trust they will find the strength and comfort in knowing that

Alex's life, while cut short, made a difference in the lives he touched and his

legacy will live on.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KIRBY: I stand today to congratulate the students and staff at St.

Andrew's Elementary School and, in particular, Kindergarten teacher Mrs. Susan

Jackman, on their successful efforts to access funding for their "Happy, Healthy

Heads" project.

Last July, Mrs. Jackman applied to the Awesome St. John's Foundation for

funding to purchase 100 helmets for students at St. Andrew's Elementary, a

centre city school in St. John's North.

The trustees of Awesome St. John's, who fund initiatives through their own

donations, awarded a $1,000 grand prize to Mrs. Jackman's proposal at a public

event at the Rocket Bakery in August.

Canadian Tire's Jumpstart program also gave significant support to the

project by donating an additional 255 helmets as well as an assortment of knee

pads, elbow pads, t-shirts, and sports bags.

In the end, this excellent school-based initiative provided each St. Andrew's

student with a helmet and other safety equipment. Because of the generous

support shown from the project sponsors, Mrs. Jackman and her students had

enough helmets left over to donate to another school in the neighbourhood.

I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating Mrs. Susan Jackman and

St. Andrew's Elementary on this awesome community initiative.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the latest

President's Report from Memorial University. On Monday, November 5, I was taken

on a virtual tour of Memorial's annual retrospective called Face Forward:

President's Report 2013 by Dr. Gary Kachanowski. For the first time, the

report is a standalone multimedia Web site, which provides an overview of the

university's accomplishments.

Back in 2003, the provincial government capital investment in Memorial was

$1.2 million. Today, in 2013, this government, Mr. Speaker, is investing $40.8

million, an increase of 3,300 per cent. This substantial funding is paying for

research, new labs, residences, teaching and research space. This support also

includes planning for the new core sciences building, which will create nearly

1,440 direct and indirect person years of employment and approximately $94

million in labour income during its construction phase.

Today, at Memorial's campuses in St. John's, Corner Brook and Harlow,

England, plus online education, there are 18,678 people enrolled at our

university an impressive number.

I would also like to include a story of accomplishment from Labrador, where

seventeen students in Happy Valley-Goose Bay completed a customized, four-year,

Bachelor of Social Work program this past June. This partnership between

Memorial, the Labrador Institute, the Nunatsiavut Government and College of the

North Atlantic has resulted in over 90 per cent of graduates being employed. The

program also won the national Changemakers Initiative: Inspiring Approaches

to First Nations, Metis and Inuit Learning award in 2012.

Mr. Speaker, as announced in Budget 2013, Memorial is undertaking an

efficiency review. The review will help position the university for the future

and tell us how to best target investments to continue to support innovative

growth and programming. Any efficiencies the university finds will be reinvested

to it post-secondary programming, students and other priorities as the

Province's only university continues to deliver world-class post-secondary

education. With an ongoing tuition freeze, millions invested in research funding

and infrastructure and planning for the future, Memorial University continues to

set a course as a leader in post-secondary education across Canada and the

world.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the President's Report at Memorial University is an award

winning publication, having earned top prize in the past by the Council for the

Advancement and Support of Education for its creativity and edgy presentation.

The marketing and communications division at Memorial itself is an award

winning team of creative professionals. I think government could learn a lot

from Memorial on harnessing its internal creativity for marketing and

communications.

Memorial University is a world-class institution, having surpassed its

fundraising goal during its Dare To campaign where over $50 million was raised

for the university. Memorial is poised for exciting growth. The story of a

customized social work program for students in Happy Valley-Goose Bay is an

inspiring example of how institutions can collaborate to overcome challenges

like geography to prepare students for the future our students.

As the member for a rural region, I hope to see more of this. I am not

comforted by the minister's statement that an efficiency review at Memorial will

position the university for the future. Memorial is not only an incredible

incubator for today's youth; it is a great place to work.

Cutting investments to post-secondary education and research, not to mention

the stalled commitment of this government to replace provincial student loans

with grants, are a step backward. Memorial is instrumental to our Province in

many ways, and cutting funding would be reckless and short sighted.

Thank you.

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

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

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: MUN students, faculty, and staff must be breathing easier

because of the prospect that long overdue investments in buildings and

facilities are in the works. Given the serious problems with asbestos and mould

in the Science Building we are hearing about, the new investments could not come

soon enough.

I hope the upcoming efficiency review is not going to have the same

devastating results for workers and programs as the core mandate review of

government departments and agencies did in 2012; however, Mr. Speaker, I do

congratulate

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: MUN on its 2012 Changemakers Initiative award for the

social work B.A. program cited in Labrador. I hope we will see more initiatives

that build on the designated Aboriginal seats program, with the goal of more

Aboriginal students graduating from post-secondary institutions.

Thank you.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.

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

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

Memorial University of Newfoundland and College of the North Atlantic are

world-class institutions that we can be proud of.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KIRBY: By keeping tuition affordable, we are creating access for

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians of all ages, but also attracting a great number

of students from across the country and around the world. Those students also

see the excellence in our public college and public university.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, today I rise to speak to this government's

tremendous success in creating partnerships with municipalities, corporations,

and landowners across the Province to achieve conservation of wildlife through

habitat protection.

The Municipal Stewardship Program is unique to Newfoundland and Labrador, and

was developed to encourage municipalities to recognize the value of wildlife

habitat found in and near their municipal planning boundaries by accepting a

stewardship role.

Mr. Speaker, this has been a banner year as seven municipalities have signed

or expanded their existing stewardship agreements. These include new agreements

in Flatrock, Bonavista, Frenchman's Cove, Garnish and St. Lawrence, as well as

expansions of existing agreements in Grand Falls-Windsor and Deer Lake. Mr.

Speaker, this brings the number of municipalities that have signed municipal

stewardship agreements with the Province to thirty-three.

The provincial government's municipal stewardship is a result of the Eastern

Habitat Joint Venture program a partnership of governments, conservation

organizations, and local people implementing the goals and objectives of the

North American Waterfowl Management Plan. This plan was signed by Canada and the

United States in 1986, expanded to include Mexico in 1994, and pursues a

partnership approach through habitat and species joint ventures. These partners

work together to conserve wildlife habitat, including waterfowl, seabirds and

sea ducks, but also for all bird species, right across North America.

Mr. Speaker, since the inception of the Eastern Habitat Joint Venture, the

department's Wildlife Division has administered and fostered this partnership in

Newfoundland and Labrador and has taken a leadership role in working towards its

goals and objectives.

The Department of Environment and Conservation will continue to work with the

Stewardship Association of Municipalities to achieve future agreements.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for a copy of her statement. I will say

that partnering with municipalities to conserve wildlife habitat is important. I

am glad to see that the Province is now up to thirty-three. I think that is

important.

I recall signing a couple of those stewardship agreements myself, Mr.

Speaker, so I know the importance of those.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, before government gets too excited, I will say

that government's job on this has not been consistent. It is good to partner

with municipalities to conserve wildlife, but government has not been consistent

in this area.

If you look at this year's Budget, with Mistaken Point and the cuts to

positions out there

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OSBORNE: the bird sanctuary in Placentia and I know they do not

like hearing what I have to say. I know it strikes a nerve.

Mr. Speaker, even more importantly than this, I understand that they cut

those positions because they cost money but something that is completely obscene

is the reserve out around Burgeo where the federal government and my colleague

for Burgeo La Poile has spoken on this want to do a study that will not cost

the Province one cent, not a cent.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OSBORNE: All the federal government wants the Province to do is to

sign off on it. The federal government will do this study to put

MR. SPEAKER: I remind the member his time has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE: a coastal reserve out in Burgeo if the Province would sign

off on it.

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, would like to thank the minister for the advance copy of her

statement here today. I commend the thirty-three municipalities which have

signed stewardship agreements with the provincial government

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MURPHY: that have taken on the tremendous responsibility of

preserving the wildlife habitat within their boundaries. It is a very important

role for municipalities. Some municipalities have made this commitment in the

face of development pressures on open space with a goal of preserving our

environment for generations to come. Mr. Speaker, they will be dealing with

future issues, for example, like fracking. It is an important issue coming up.

I hope the government recognizes this commitment by municipalities by

ensuring that municipalities have sufficient operating resources into the future

as well. It is pretty important.

Municipal stewardship of wildlife habitat needs to be backed up with a

provincial commitment to finalizing the long-awaited protected area systems plan

as well, the first step of which is to reactivate the Wilderness and Ecological

Reserve Advisory Council. We look forward to hearing more from the minister on

the Wilderness and Ecological Reserve Advisory Council in the future.

Thank you very much.

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

leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.

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

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement. I would also

like to acknowledge the work that the department has done on the Great Northern

Peninsula through the Limestone Barrens Project in places like Flower's Cove,

Sandy Cove, and Raleigh.

We need to preserve flora and fauna. We need to look at spaces like our

ecological reserves and make sure they are resourced as appropriately as they

can be.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday, I asked the Minister of Justice about the $17 million repayable

loan at the St. Lawrence fluorspar mine. He clarified those statements today and

it is in line with what we have seen in Estimates in April of this year, around

$700,000. The minister went on to say that the company has availed of other

sources of funding from Natural Resources and other departments.

I ask the minister: What other departments and what funding has this company

availed of? What is the total amount to date?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was asked in regard to the St. Lawrence fluorspar

mine and the reactivation. It is a significant project that we are very close to

moving ahead with in regard to any drawdown in funds. I indicated there was a

drawdown on funds; the actual figure is $637,000 for engineering and design.

It was delayed a little bit. The company went back and had to revisit the

overall cost structure of the project. That has been done; that has been settled

away. This year we are looking forward to moving the project forward. It is

great for the Burin Peninsula, a great project, and we are happy to partner with

the private sector on that project.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A thirty-minute run dry is a key recommendation of the Transportation Safety

Board's 2011 report into the Cougar crash. Over two years ago since that report,

there is still no requirement for the thirty-minute run dry on helicopters

offshore.

I ask the minister: When will we finally see a thirty-minute run dry as

recommended by the Transportation Safety Board and Commissioner Wells?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, I have stated in this House a number of times

our government's commitment and support for offshore safety and it being

absolutely paramount and one of the main priorities of our government and I am

sure for the people of the Province. For the people who work offshore, it is

important that they be able to get to work, Mr. Speaker, and get home safely.

We did have a terrible tragedy in this Province, Mr. Speaker, that resulted

in an inquiry. There were twenty-nine recommendations that came from that

inquiry and we have been very clear, Mr. Speaker, that we support all

twenty-nine recommendations. We have also been clear that the C-NLOPB has the

expertise and experience to evaluate and address, not only I guess the offshore

safety concerns, Mr. Speaker, and issues and be able to build a relationship

with the industry but also in terms of working with Transport Canada as well.

Mr. Speaker, make no mistake about it, our government supports offshore

safety and whatever it takes.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, supporting the recommendations is one thing. We know that the Transport

Safety Board made that recommendation and Commissioner Wells, of course,

supported that. We know now that the thirty-minute run dry is possible but we

understand that the C-NLOPB has left this to industry or the oil companies in

this particular case.

I ask the minister: Your position to support is one thing, but what are you

going to do to see that we get thirty-minute run-dry capacity within so we can

protect our offshore safety workers?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, we are going to continue our role and

responsibility to advocate for the offshore workers, to advocate for safety and

advocate for whatever safety measures that can be implemented. If there are

measures that the C-NLOPB in particular feel is warranted and should be put in

place and it can be done, Mr. Speaker, in terms of feasible, technical and it

can work, we are going to support that, there is no question, and we are going

to rely on the experts to make that decision.

Mr. Speaker, with the thirty-minute run dry, obviously, it is a topic of

debate. I think we read recently that the capability may be there but there are

also challenges with that as well. I do not think we need to lose sight of that,

that there is no perfect system, Mr. Speaker. Any of the technology, we will

leave it to the experts to evaluate and implement if it is going to support

offshore safety.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday we learned that the government scrapped seven forestry proposals

from Central Labrador. These proposals included 450,000 cubic metres of wood

that is currently being cut for the Muskrat Falls Project. It is currently being

cut and stockpiled.

I ask the minister: Why did you walk away or dismiss those seven proposals?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, as minister, I want to acknowledge there are

certainly tremendous challenges around the fibre supply and the wood that is

available in Labrador. In my discussions with industry, they acknowledged that

as well. We have worked with industry to try to find some solutions.

We did have an expression of interest. There were seven proposals received.

There is an interdepartmental committee, Mr. Speaker, that does an evaluation on

these proposals. Our goal is to be able to use this resource. It is a renewable

resource. We want to develop that to make it commercially viable to sustain the

timbre resources in Labrador for the benefit of the people of Labrador. That is

our goal and that is the lens in which we evaluate the proposals. So far, Mr.

Speaker, they have not met that requirement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I remind the minister that the 450,000 cubic metres of wood that is being cut

to clear the Muskrat Falls Project is not renewable. That is enough wood to

operate a pulp and paper mill, for instance, on the West Coast right now.

Government rejected the seven proposals from an open RFP and now there are

private discussions with other potential proponents.

I ask the minister: Were these potential operators that you are now in

discussions with part of the original seven?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, we have had two calls for expressions of

interest in the fibre supply, particularly the Muskrat wood. If there is a pulp

and paper mill in the Province that could use that, we are more than willing to

make it available to them, but they have not come forward. They have not come

forward to get that because of the challenges in Labrador in terms of limited

local demand, in terms of harvesting cost, in terms of a short shipping season.

All of that has implications in terms of the viability of an operation in

Labrador.

We had seven proposals, Mr. Speaker, that were rejected. We are talking to

another proponent who came in after the EOI. Make no mistake about it, our goal

is to be able to develop the timbre resources in Labrador to be able to take

care of the Muskrat wood supply and certainly for the benefit of the people in

Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, yesterday when I raised the need for bike

helmet legislation, the Minister of Service NL shrugged the responsibility off

on municipalities. The reality is that head injuries represent the most severe

injuries that occur amongst children and youth bicyclists and this government

should be taking the lead.

I ask the minister: Why are you choosing to ignore bicycle helmet legislation

and injury prevention?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the health and safety and well-being of Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians is of utmost priority for this government. With all due respect to

the member opposite, what is happening in our jurisdictions today is

municipalities are taking the lead. We certainly are listening to our

municipalities and what they are doing. They are taking the lead on this.

Fifty per cent of the urban municipalities, Mr. Speaker, in the Province have

these bylaws in place. As well, we encourage anybody who is on a cycle or on a

bicycle to wear their helmets. Safety is everybody's responsibility. We want to

make sure that we live in a safe community, a safe Province, Mr. Speaker, and I

believe that most people out there do understand and do get this.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I am glad the minister responded in such a

way because he answered my question. They are shrugging off the responsibility

to municipalities; many who do not have the means to take care of this very

important issue. We are one of only three provinces in the country that do not

have this legislation.

The Canadian Medical Association, the Canadian Paediatric Society, the

Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association, they all feel that legislation

increases the use of safety gear, reduces the risk of head injury, and

systematic studies show that the legislation quadruples the use of bicycle

helmets.

I ask the minister: I am listening to the experts, why won't you?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Speaker, municipalities enact bylaws every day. This is

a bylaw that they do enact on a regular basis. It is a good bylaw.

AN HON. MEMBER: No cost.

MR. CRUMMELL: There is no cost to the municipalities, Mr. Speaker, to

enact these types of bylaws. Again, Mr. Speaker, it is the responsibility of

parents to make sure they are making their children safe. It is common sense,

and that is what this is all about. In order to encourage a safe culture within

our communities, within our society, we need to take responsibilities, Mr.

Speaker, on a daily basis and bring our children

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In September, the Department of Environment and Conservation allowed the

organizers of Mud Immortal to use a provincial park to host their event. Mr.

Speaker, we know there were safety issues, we know there was not enough water,

there was little organization, and very little protection of the park. There

were approximately 5,000 people in attendance, and the minister only allotted

four staff members to oversee those 5,000 people. The minister put those 5,000

people at risk. The minister put a protected area at risk.

I ask the minister: Why would government not have more oversight of an event

with 5,000 people in a provincial park?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, a park is for recreational use as opposed to a

protected area. So people use that for recreation all the time.

Mr. Speaker, the Mud Immortal event happened with about 5,000 people. As a

result of that, and because it was somewhat of a unique event in one of our

provincial parks, we are reviewing the policy to look at the contracts that

groups would require if they are hosting such an event.

In doing so, Mr. Speaker, we still want to make sure that groups, such as

probably the Boy Scouts or the Girl Guides, would still have access to our parks

in a way that is user friendly so those groups as well are able to use the park.

Mr. Speaker, we will take the event that happened and we will make sure we

develop a contract that reflects the needs that would be required under such an

event. In doing so, we still want to make sure our parks are ready for the

groups who use them most frequently.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Parts of provincial parks are protected areas and this event saw trampled

pitcher plants and other sensitive areas. Mr. Speaker, this was a for-profit

event that had so little oversight. Only after an ATIPP request from our party,

did we find out that government had no formal contract with the organizer.

Without a formal contract, there was very little commitment from the organizer

and no commitment from government.

I ask the minister: Why would you allow an event of 5,000 people

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OSBORNE: to take place in a provincial park without a formal

contract, putting people at risk, putting a provincial park at risk, and putting

the Province at risk of liability?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member, as a former Minister of

Environment, should know that the contracts were in place. If he was so worried

about the contracts, he would have developed them while he was the Minister of

Environment and Conservation.

Mr. Speaker, we encourage groups to use our parks; groups, whether it is

school children, or schools, or classes, or Girl Guides, they use our parks all

of the time, and we want to encourage the continuation of these groups being

able to use our parks.

We also want to make sure that when there are events like the one that

happened, Mud Immortal, that are outside the normal use of our parks, we want to

make sure that we have an appropriate contract in place.

Mr. Speaker, the department is looking at the policy regarding these events

and making sure we have appropriate paperwork in place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I did not need to develop a contract because I

did not allow 5,000 people to trample over pitcher plants in sensitive areas.

Mr. Speaker, I will ask the minister again: Why did this government, why did

the Department of Environment, allow 5,000 people into a provincial park without

a formal contract?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, we welcome many people into the provincial parks in

Newfoundland and Labrador. We want the school children, we want the Brownies and

the Boy Scouts, and we want environmental groups to have access to our parks in

a user-friendly way.

Mr. Speaker, we want to make sure that the processes and the contracts that

are set up encourage them to come in and use our parks. In saying that, the Mud

Immortal was a unique event that happened in our parks. It is not something we

are accustomed to in our parks, but it is something that we will look at and we

will ensure

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS SHEA: that we have the appropriate policy, paperwork, and contracts

in place in case a group applies for a similar event in the future, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, yesterday when I questioned the minister on the

delayed opening of the Fortune plant, he responded that OCI was living up their

commitment to the people of Fortune.

I ask the minister: How can that be so when

article 3.3 of the agreement

states that OCI would employ 110 people full-time from the date of execution,

and eleven months later the plant is still closed?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we entered into an agreement last December in regard to OCI, the

good news of opening up the Fortune plant, a significant investment, and

employment of over 100 people. There were about ten components to that. I went

through some yesterday in regard to purchasing of a vessel, in regard to

redfish. That vessel is purchased; it is fishing with the majority of crew on

it, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians living in Newfoundland and Labrador.

There is a requirement for a $1 million investment in the facility. When they

started the work at the facility they recognized there was more work to be done.

To date, there is in excess of $1.5 million invested in the plant. That does not

include other material and equipment that have been brought in, that is new

investment. My understanding is very shortly there will be a dry run in

production and in the new year the plant will be operating, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, last year the Opposition said we would not

oppose this deal; we were cautiously optimistic in hopes that the government

could do a deal. Clearly, they cannot do a deal. Another condition of the deal

was OCI was to invest $1 million in capital improvements at that plant within

six months from last December.

I ask the minister: Has this commitment been met; or, if not, what are the

penalties for this company not complying with the deal?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: With all due respect, in his

preamble he could have

incorporated the fact that I answered the question he asked before he even asked

it. In excess of $1.5 million has been invested in the plant as they went

through it in terms of the agreement put in place. They recognized there had to

be more infrastructure put in place.

As a Province, we are delighted that they are investing more than what they

originally indicated. It means they are there for the long term, longevity of

the plant, longevity of Fortune for the region, for the people. I am looking

forward to the plant reopening, I said, in the weeks to come. It is a good

project.

I do not know where the hon. member is again. He is against aquaculture, he

is against Fortune, and he is against activities in rural Newfoundland and

Labrador. He is all over the map; we do not know where he is, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, last week two hunters from Conche was rescued

by Coast Guard auxiliary that took the initiative after the hunters were

reported overdue. Captain Ralph Randall called for a Coast Guard helicopter and

eventually had to risk his own life to save the stranded hunters. Contrary to

JRCC reports, the helicopter did not arrive on scene at any time.

I ask the minister: Are you aware if a helicopter was dispatched, given it

did not arrive on scene?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Intergovernmental

Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, our officials were in touch with the centre in

Halifax. It is our understanding the protocols were indeed followed, and the

appropriate aircraft was, in fact, dispatched.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is the chopper did not show up.

Mr. Speaker, situations of miscommunication such as the one in Conche are

happening way too often. Lives depend on properly co-ordinated search

strategies, Mr. Speaker, which is not happening.

I ask the minister: What are you going to do to ensure that the people of our

Province have a reliable search and rescue service?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Intergovernmental

Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, in terms of the situation that the hon. member

references, what is really important is that people were saved. It is quite

common in these situations for the nearest vessels to respond, and whoever can

get there the quickest should get there as quickly as possible.

Search and rescue is a high priority for this government. We continue to call

on the federal government for increased search and rescue presence in

Newfoundland and Labrador. We have raised that issue with the federal government

at every opportunity. Mr. Speaker, I assure you, we will continue to do so.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, three hours and fifteen minutes is considered

acceptable. This helicopter did not show up. JRCC had one dispatched.

I ask the minister: Does he know where the helicopter went?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Intergovernmental

Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, this government's position on search and rescue

services affecting the safety of those in the waters of Newfoundland and

Labrador, our position has been very clear. We will continue to press for

implementation for a twenty-four seven, 365 service. We will accept nothing less

and we will continue to call on the federal government for increased resources

and increased search and rescue presence in Newfoundland and Labrador.

In terms of this particular incident that the member is referencing, we were

in touch in JRCC in Halifax. It is our understanding that the protocols were

indeed followed, and we are glad that everybody is safe, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, one quick question, given the helicopter did

not show up, I ask the minister again: Where did the helicopter go?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Intergovernmental

Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, when an incident is resolved, when people are

rescued, when people are safe, obviously any aircraft or marine vessels that are

on their way to a particular site will turn around and go back to where they

came from, Mr. Speaker. I fail to understand why the member opposite cannot

comprehend that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, we have continued to raise the issue of search and

rescue with the federal government at every opportunity. The Premier has shown

tremendous leadership on this. I recently had a meeting with Rear Admiral

Newton, who is in charge of JRCC in Halifax, to discuss our concerns. I assure

you, I made it quite clear to him that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador

expect nothing less than improved search and rescue services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS DEMPSTER: Mr. Speaker, John Noseworthy recommended changes to the

Income and Employment Support Act. One of those recommendations was to give

staff the authority to make mandatory referrals. He cited one employment program

offered by AES where less than 4 per cent of clients showed up.

I ask the minister: Will you amend the current legislation to reflect your

own consultant's recommendations?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, before I entered politics I clearly understood

from the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, especially the people I served as

a pharmacist, that sometimes they want to make a choice themselves. We take into

account the consultant's reports and the recommendations but at this point in

time on review, I believe, we believe, that people should have a choice. That is

certainly the position we have today, but we will be evaluating as we go forward

and we will make a decision one way or the other at various times and continue

to evaluate the issue, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS DEMPSTER: Mr. Speaker, people who go off Income Support for more than

thirty days to work have to go through the intake process again. Your own

consultant, Mr. Noseworthy, called this a disincentive to attach to the labour

market and recommended it be removed.

I ask the minister: Will you remove this barrier to employment from the

legislation?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to see that after some months, six

or seven or eight months, whatever it is, that the Official Opposition has

finally embraced the Noseworthy report.

I remember in the last session of the House various questions about wasting

money and whatever, but I am happy to report to the House that we have

implemented and actioned about 60 per cent of that report. We are looking at the

rest of that report and we take the report quite seriously. As a matter of fact,

it is quite beneficial in regard to the everyday operation of my department, the

Department of Advanced Education and Skills. Certainly I will be looking at it

in a go-forward basis, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile, a very quick

question without

preamble.

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, my question is on the Medical Transportation

Assistance Program. The financial burden is leaving many people juggling the

necessary cost, the upfront cost.

I ask the minister: Why are you allowing people who require medical treatment

having to suffer financially just to get this medical care? Should there not be

equal access?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services, for

a quick response.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, our Medical Transportation Assistance Program has been

identified across this country as a superior program. In fact, it has been

identified as one of the best programs amongst my colleagues when I go to

various meetings with my federal-provincial-territorial counterparts. Our aim is

to give help to those people who need help with any transportation.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

We are now seeing in this Province international companies hire strike

breakers instead of negotiating with workers. Voisey's Bay Mine workers were on

strike for eighteen months because Vale Inco was able to fly in scabs. Now the

workers of Labatt have been on strike for eight months.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: When will she finally introduce legislation

to ban the use of scab labour in this Province once and for all?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the member for bringing attention to that important issue. We are

certainly very familiar with the ongoing labour disputes in the Province,

particularly the one at Labatt. I have been engaged with that issue for some

time, and my officials have been engaged. It is the policy and the belief of

this government that any resolution to a dispute ought to be by mutual

negotiation and conciliation, and ought not to be imposed by a third party. I

stand by that.

I am also very familiar with what is happening in other parts of the country

with respect to that type of legislation. I can say that, as far as I am aware,

there are only two provinces that have moved in that direction. A third province

moved and then backed away from it. There has been somewhere in the area of

fourteen attempts on the federal scene to implement legislation that has been

defeated.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In 2007, this government promised to look at implementing anti-scab

legislation and have done nothing. Anti-scab legislation would help workers and

their families to avoid months of lost wages and encourage both sides to bargain

in good faith so that labour disputes do not drag on needlessly for months, and

over months in many cases, over a year.

I ask the Premier again: Will her government keep its promise and introduce

anti-scab legislation, or were they just politicking during election time in

2007?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I think very clearly we have met our promise. As

the member said, we promised to look at it and we have looked at it. I cannot be

any clearer than I am going to be right now, that we have no intentions of

bringing in anti-scab legislation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I know the workers in this Province are going to be really comforted by that

answer.

A helicopter company is in the Province trying to drum up business with the

offshore oil operators.

I ask the Premier, Mr. Speaker: Does her government have any influence with

oil companies to ensure safety requirements remain the primary concern in the

purchase of helicopters that ferry workers offshore?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, if she is asking if our government will choose

which helicopter company is going to be providing the services offshore, the

answer is no. We are not doing that.

Transport Canada has strict regulations for certifications for helicopter

operations. Mr. Speaker, the C-NLOPB is the governing body, the experts that

work with industry to develop offshore safety.

Collectively, Mr. Speaker, when there is an opportunity for a contract to

come up, companies will bid, proper evaluations will be done, which will

include, no doubt, the regulations from Transport Canada and the requirements

for offshore safety that the C-NLOPB has in place on behalf of the people

working offshore. Mr. Speaker, no, our government is not going to select the

contract.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Then would the Premier recommend to regulators a committee

consisting of workers, regulators, and the oil companies to review the purchase

of any new helicopters?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite, not that long ago she was

talking about campaigning in 2007 or 2011, I am not sure wanted to tear up the

contracts of oil companies. That is how she wanted to treat business. Now she

wants to insert herself into how they select contracts.

Mr. Speaker, these contracts are big contracts. It is about offshore safety.

They are highly technical. Transport Canada has oversight and certification in

certifying these helicopters, and the C-NLOPB has oversight with expertise to

look at what is the safest, best investment, the best contractor to provide that

service. No, Mr. Speaker, we are going to leave that to the experts. We are not

going to bring this to the House of Assembly. We are certainly not going to ask

politicians to stand up and decide which helicopter is best to fly (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Labrador-Island Transmission Link has passed its federal environmental

assessment. Concerns remain that Nalcor plans to use Agent White to clear

vegetation along the power lines right-of-way, even though 97 per cent of the

cancer-causing poison ends up in groundwater.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Environment and Conservation: What plan

does her government have, her department have in place to monitor Nalcor's use

of this dangerous chemical?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, Agent White is not a chemical that is prescribed to

be used in Newfoundland and Labrador, or in Canada.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MURPHY: I beg to differ, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to Tordon 101.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Environment and Conservation if she will

commit to ensuring full public notification of all Nalcor's use of Agent White

including advance notice, areas sprayed, and the amounts of herbicide deployed?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, it is important to know that Tordon 101 is not

Agent White. Agent White is not used in Canada or in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Has Nalcor done an analysis of the cost effectiveness

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MURPHY: of mechanical methods of vegetation control; and, if so, is

it publicly available or will her department make that publicly available?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, as with every aspect of the development of Muskrat

Falls, Nalcor will follow the rules and regulations as set out by the

environmental assessments and will be subject to the policies that are

prescribed by the Department of Environment and Conservation.

That will be done, whether it is including pesticides or any other work that

is being carried out by Nalcor.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party, for a very quick

question.

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: What makes her and Nalcor

think they will be able to control the cost of their Muskrat Falls Project,

which was approved by Manitoba Hydro when the Manitoba Hydro (inaudible)

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A quick question.

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources, time for a quick response.

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, we are very confident in the work of Nalcor. Our

government, on behalf of the people in Newfoundland and Labrador, are committed

to developing the lowest-cost option for power in our future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for Question Period has expired.

I want to respond to a point of order that was raised yesterday by the Member

for St. John's South when he raised a point of order with respect to comments

made by the hon. the Minister Responsible for Advanced Education and Skills with

respect to actions by the Member for St. John's South during the vote on this

year's Budget.

I have checked Hansard and the Member for St. John's South voted against the

Budget in May, 2013.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will ask leave to

introduce a bill entitled

An Act To Amend The Schools Act, 1997, Bill 28.

MR. SPEAKER: Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

AN HON. MEMBER: Another notice.

MR. SPEAKER: Another notice?

The hon. the Government House Leader, Notices of Motion.

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice under Standing Order 11, I shall move that this

House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, December 2, 2013.

Further, I give notice under Standing Order 11, I shall move that the House

not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. on Monday, December 2, 2013.

MR. SPEAKER: Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. House of Assembly of the Province

of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the

undersigned humbly sheweth.

WHEREAS there is no cellphone service in the Town of Trout River, which is an

enclave community in Gros Morne National Park; and

WHEREAS visitors to Gros Morne National Park, more than 100,000 annually,

expect to communicate by cellphone when they visit the park; and

WHEREAS cellphone service has become a very important aspect of everyday

living for residents; and

WHEREAS cellphone service is an essential safety tool for residents and

visitors; and

WHEREAS cellphone service is essential for business development;

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

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

with the private sector to extend cellphone coverage throughout Gros Morne

National Park, and the enclave community of Trout River.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that cellphones are as common today in most

places as any other form of service. A cellphone, in most areas, is now being

seen as more of a necessity than a convenience. I would bet that all members of

this House carry cellphones; some probably carry two cellphones.

The people of Trout River are asking government not to spend any money, not

to invest anything, not to do anything except partner with the private sector to

help extend cellphone coverage to the Trout River area and also to other areas

of Gros Morne National Park.

How much less expensive of a request, of a petition, can this possibly be?

Mr. Speaker, it is a request for government to partner with the private sector

to extend the service that the residents themselves will pay for. Mr. Speaker,

it is a simple request. It is a well-founded request, and I am pleased to

present this petition.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS Labrador-Grenfell Health employs a nurse practitioner at St. Anthony,

able to take appointments and operate a full scope of practice for which nurse

practitioners are licensed to operate; and

WHEREAS Western Health at Port Saunders and Norris Point on the Great

Northern Peninsula has similar nurse practitioner practices; and

WHEREAS nurse practitioners have advanced education and training beyond the

registered nurse level and provide comprehensive care ranging from health

promotion and prevention to diagnosis and treatment, including other diagnostic

tests, prescribing pharmaceuticals, and performing procedures within a

legislated scope of practice; and

WHEREAS nurse practitioners are alleviating physicians shortages in rural

areas across Canada and Newfoundland and Labrador, by operating clinical

practices in collaboration with physicians and other health practitioners,

leading to better access to services and shorter wait times;

WHEREAS residents from Eddies Cove East to Reefs Harbour deserve to have

regular nurse practitioner clinics that is available to other residents of the

Great Northern Peninsula;

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

House of Assembly to urge government to ensure that a nurse practitioner

clinical practice be established at the Strait of Belle Isle Health Centre to be

fully integrated with clinical practices of physicians.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, at this facility, under the employ, is a nurse practitioner

unable to operate the full scope of practice, unable to take appointments. It is

causing increase in delays in getting better patient care. There are many times

when this facility does not have the full complement of physicians. This is a

way to make sure that there is continuity of care, and that residents in the

region can see a nurse practitioner, people who have and what we see in many

rural health centres, we see where physicians have quick turnover and they

leave.

The nurse practitioner currently employed at this centre is a local resident,

has a commitment to the region, has a family there, and likely would stay for

the long term. These types of things need to be considered when we are looking

at being able to provide care, because they have that knowledge and they have

that ability to work in a team. This is a way to get better value for our health

care dollars. I think it is something that should be implemented, and can save

the health care system money.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. KIRBY: To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland

and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents

of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS current government regulations deny busing services to students who

live closer than 1.6 kilometres to school; and

WHEREAS parents have expressed concern that children living within 1.6

kilometres of school face dangers in walking to school, such as congested

streets and busy intersections, especially during winter weather conditions; and

WHEREAS the $75,000 review of the school transportation system completed by

Deloitte recommended that the Department of Education consider reducing the 1.6

kilometre eligibility zone for kindergarten and elementary students; and

WHEREAS the $75,000 Deloitte report also noted that only 10 per cent of those

surveyed for the school transportation system review agree that the current 1.6

kilometre policy is reasonable for students and families; and

WHEREAS parents are continuing to demand more flexible policies to meet to

the current needs of school children;

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

House of Assembly to urge government to change the outdated 1.6 kilometre school

busing eligibility policy in order to ensure safe travel to school for primary

and elementary school children in the Province.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, there is no question the Minister of Education

can sing a song but he did not get this report for a song, I say; $75,000 is a

significant expenditure for this review.

The petitioners who signed this if you look at the communities here New

Harbour, Dildo, South Dildo, Green's Harbour and Hopeall, these are people who

rely on school busing services for their children and agree that it is

unreasonable to expect those little ones to walk that distance to school,

especially in bad weather.

This is not just rural districts either, Mr. Speaker. If you go up Thorburn

Road in the District of St. John's North, you will encounter what is classed as

one of the most dangerous intersections in all of St. John's, at Mount Scio and

Thorburn Road. There are a number of individuals, pedestrians who have been

struck there.

I am very concerned we are going to have problems there again this winter. I

am very concerned that it will involve small kids from the neighbourhood who are

required to walk to school because the school bus, that is half or

three-quarters full of kids, passes by them because of this regulation.

If we can change this regulation before the winter comes in, it would be a

great idea, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

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

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

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS as a result of a recommendation in the Green report about wrongdoing

in the House of Assembly, there is now legislation that protects anyone who

speaks up with evidence of financial abuse or other impropriety in the

Legislative branch; and

WHEREAS it is unfair for one group of civil servants to be protected by

whistle-blower legislation when another group is not; and

WHEREAS Justice Green stated that the financial wrongdoing in the House of

Assembly might have been discovered sooner if whistle-blower legislation had

been in place; and

WHEREAS the Cameron Inquiry into ER-PR testing found that problems with tests

would have come to light sooner, therefore lessening the impacts on patients, if

whistle-blower had been in place; and

WHEREAS the task force on adverse events recommended an amendment to the

Regional Health Authorities Act to provide legal protection for employees

reporting occurrences or adverse events; and

WHEREAS whistle-blower legislation is in place elsewhere in Canada and the

provincial government promised similar legislation in the 2007 election but has

not kept that promise;

We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge government to

enact whistle-blower legislation to protect public sector employees in

provincial departments and agencies, including public corporations, regional

health authorities and school boards.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

This is an important petition, Mr. Speaker, that I am very happy to stand and

present. While the presenter does not have to agree with the petition that comes

forward, we are obliged to put petitions to the floor if they follow the rules

of our House by people who bring them forward. I have to say that I am very

happy to bring this one forward and I absolutely support what is here.

Government, in 2007, said it would put whistle-blower legislation in place.

They have done it in bits and pieces so that we find in the Environmental

Protection Act, for example, there is whistle-blower legislation. In the Labour

Standards Act we have a piece of whistle-blower legislation. In the occupational

health and safety, that is the one where we have it under the Labour Standards

Act. Also, in the Personal Health Information Act we have whistle-blower

legislation. Recently, we just passed, last week on November 22,

An Act

Respecting Food Safety In Food Premises which also has whistle-blower

legislation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: I find it very strange government is willing to put these

protections in particular pieces of legislation. The ones they have put it in

are very important because they all have to do with public safety in one form or

another, but most of our legislation does. That is what our legislation is all

about is the public good. Having protection for people

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the member her time has expired.

MS MICHAEL: Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS DEMPSTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS until 2013, calcium was applied to provincially-owned gravel roads in

and around communities to suppress dust; and

WHEREAS dust suppression is very helpful for residents experiencing health

conditions like asthma and allergies; and

WHEREAS the cost of administering the calcium program is very affordable to

government; and

WHEREAS dust suppression is an effective way of improving safety for the

travelling public;

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

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

in 2014 to reinstate the calcium application program on provincially-owned

gravel roads in and around communities.

As in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I believe ever since the gravel roads were put through my area

anyway, we have always had calcium on the part of the road that was government

owned and this year that was cut for a nominal amount of money. What a huge,

negative impact it had on our residents in a number of different areas, which I

will quickly outline.

Health, we have a growing population of people with asthma and allergies.

Actually, it was in June while I was campaigning in Cartwright down the

government stretch in twenty-five degrees of heat, and it was like I was in a

winter snowstorm the dust was so bad. I was very saddened that night to find out

a little girl, seven years old, was medevaced out of that community. I thought:

How many medevacs would we have to have, to make up for the cost of what the

calcium would have cost to put into place?

Then we look at the environment. Mr. Speaker, we know we have aging

demographics. We know most people in our region are seniors and a lot of them

burn wood. They hang their clothes on the line to try and save money, but they

were not able to do that with the calcium.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS DEMPSTER: Also, it is a big safety issue, Mr. Speaker, when you are

walking and there are kids out on the road and you cannot see because of the

dust. I had a number of calls this summer from people who had to stop walking.

We have to look at the growing obesity and the prevalence of type 2 diabetes and

things like that. We are talking about communities that have no or very little

recreational facilities. We need to do all we can to encourage them to get out

and walk.

Mr. Speaker, I believe when you look at all the deterrents that this lack of

calcium cost we certainly would be wise to continue because it is a very good

investment into the area, and it is a petition that I plan to bring forward from

now to the spring.

Thank you.

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

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS government has a responsibility to ensure that Internet access is

broadly available so people have the right to be able to access the Internet in

order to exercise and enjoy their rights of freedom of expression and opinion

and other fundamental human rights; and

WHEREAS Bide Arm was bypassed under the Broadband for Rural and Northern

Development initiative, which saw high-speed Internet added to thirty-six

communities on the Great Northern Peninsula in 2004; and

WHEREAS nearly a decade later Bide Arm still remains without broadband

service despite being an amalgamated town with Roddickton; and

WHEREAS residents rely on Internet services for education, business,

communication, and social activity; and

WHEREAS wireless and wired technologies exist to provide broadband service to

rural communities to replace slower dial-up service;

We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to

assist providers to ensure Bide Arm is in receipt of broadband Internet services

in Newfoundland and Labrador.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to get petitions from residents of Bide Arm and the

Northern Peninsula East because they recognize the importance of working

together to make sure the infrastructure in terms of telecommunication resources

are available to all residents on that side of the peninsula, as well as when it

comes to infrastructure and other needs. It is about working together in a

regional collaboration that we can achieve.

If we have broadband Internet for a community of Bide Arm, which was a town

previously and now is an amalgamated town as well, it would be a means to

greatly promote tele-learning using various centres. We could expand the role of

the College of the North Atlantic by having students attend on site, whether it

is through distance education or at a site in Bide Arm, for example, where the

students would not have to travel over two hours to St. Anthony. They could

participate via video and stream, and be able to have that opportunity. This

could be a way in which we could save money by creating new opportunities in

rural communities.

Also, there is a federal government program we had previously called

Broadband Canada, in which 225,000 households received broadband Internet in

unserviced and underserviced areas. The Province of Newfoundland and Labrador

received zero coverage under that program. I am hopeful that under the new

federally and with the Rural Broadband Initiative a town like Bide Arm will see

coverage.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS with the passage of Bill 29, the Access to Information and Protection

of Privacy (Amendment) Act, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has

weakened citizens' access to information and reduced government transparency;

and

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has moved towards greater

secrecy and less openness; and

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is breaking its own

commitment for greater transparency, accountability, and freedom of information,

which it said at one time was the hallmark of its government;

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

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

the passage of Bill 29.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I particularly would like to speak to the issue of the Family

Violence Intervention Court. We know that the Family Violence Intervention Court

was cut in the last Budget and we have repeatedly asked for the report. There

was a report that was done on the Family Violence Intervention Court.

It was a report where all those involved in the operation of the court and

those who were clients of the court were interviewed, and there was an

assessment done of the court. We have not been able to get a copy of that

report. The response has been that it is covered under Cabinet secrecy so it is

exempt from access to information.

Mr. Speaker, it is beyond me why a report of one single individual program

within the Department of Justice, a program that was working well because we

know elements of that report. We know that the Minister of Justice has said that

program was working well. It is beyond me why that would be covered by Cabinet

secrecy. It makes no sense whatsoever.

It is a report that showed that program was working well, it was fulfilling

its mandate, and it was doing what it was supposed to be doing. Why, Mr.

Speaker, would that be covered by Cabinet secrecy? What other reports on

programs are covered by Cabinet secrecy?

That should be a report that is in the public domain. This was a public

program. There is no commercially-sensitive material. There is no sensitive

material that highlights individuals and for privacy issues. Why that report? It

makes no sense that a full report like that would be given to Cabinet and that

all of Cabinet would be concerned of it. It was a small program that cost

$500,000. It is obvious, Mr. Speaker, that Bill 29 is not in the best interest

of the people of this Province.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. House of Assembly of the Province

of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition humbly

sheweth:

WHEREAS Cartwright is an existing port of call for the MV Northern Ranger ;

and

WHEREAS Cartwright is connected to the Trans-Labrador Highway, providing

access to truck freight destined for the North Coast of Labrador; and

WHEREAS Cartwright could eliminate unnecessary travel and cost for freight

destined for Northern Labrador now being trucked to Happy Valley-Goose Bay; and

WHEREAS there has always been and continues to be commercial trade between

the South and North Coasts of Labrador;

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

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

designate Cartwright as a shipping port destined for the North Coast of

Labrador, beginning with the 2014 shipping season.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we had hoped to open up Cartwright this year as a shipping

port, but two previous ministers responsible said it is not an option. It is

probably a little bit too late to push for this year the Northern Ranger

is on her last trip. Mr. Speaker, we have until 2016, as this government across

the way is committed to, to having a new ferry in place.

So we have two more seasons with the Northern Ranger . You can look at

pictures of the Trans-Labrador Highway; you can listen to the statements made by

my hon. colleague for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair, Mr. Speaker. It is

impossible to drive trucks over that highway at the best of times, not to

mention equipment that is brand new and the wear and tear on that equipment, not

to mention the increased cost.

Mr. Speaker, in this petition, the very first statement says that Cartwright

is an existing port of call for the Northern Ranger . Now, if you look at

the democratic process, the government elected (inaudible) ministerial

positions, and the ministers are responsible for the areas that they have been

designated. There is a minister that is responsible for Labrador and Aboriginal

Affairs, Mr. Speaker. The petitions that we have submitted, this is not the

first time that I have spoken to this petition. My hon. colleague from

Cartwright L'Anse au Clair has spoken to the same petition, and the names on

this petition are the names that the minister is responsible for. I would like

to point that out very clear, that the minister is responsible for the names on

this petition.

So, the people who live in the area that have access to Cartwright are asking

the minister to open up shipping for a vessel that already uses the community as

a port of call, and I ask him to do that before the next season.

Thank you.

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

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

I have a petition. To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the

undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS residents of the Southwest Coast must travel the Trans-Canada Highway

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

educational, and social reasons; and

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

hours on a daily basis resulting in extremely high volume of commercial and

residential travellers using this

section of the TCH; and

WHEREAS the world-renowned Wreckhouse area is situate along this

section of

the TCH; and

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador initiated a twenty-four

hour snow clearing pilot project in 2008 that excluded the

section of the TCH

from Channel-Port aux Basques to Stephenville.

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

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

the

section of the TCH from Channel-Port aux Basques to Stephenville in the

twenty-four hour snow clearing project.

As in duty bound your petitioners will every pray.

Mr. Speaker, you know I have entered this petition on a number of occasions

and it is on today, actually before we came into the House, we are getting

reports that the highway between Port aux Basques and Stephenville has been shut

down. While it is not due to snow today, it is due to the fact that there is 180

kilometres worth of wind in the Wreckhouse. We have flooding; we have the road

washed out. It can be a very treacherous area, even in the best of times. The

fact is when you mix snow into that equation we have an area that becomes

virtually impassable, as it is right now. That is why I continue to raise this.

I put a request in with the minister's department to have a meeting, to sit

down and discuss this again because I think the numbers and the logic support

making this initiative active in covering this

section of the roadway. To date,

I have not heard back. I am hoping that if the minister's staff is listening

they will make sure to get that done.

I appreciate the former Minister of Transportation, when he was there he made

sure I had that meeting. The current minister has been very accommodating on

every other request that I have had, so I do hope to meet and discuss this. I

think it is a very important issue. The fact is you can continue to present

these petitions, they do get action.

We are having a very tough time out there today. That is why I am hoping we

can discuss this issue now before the winter season really and truly sets in.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Child, Youth and Family

Services, to ask leave to introduce a bill,

An Act Respecting Adoptions, Bill

27, and I so move that it now be read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of

Child, Youth and Family Services shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act

Respecting Adoptions, Bill 27, and that the said bill be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the minister shall have leave to

introduce Bill 27, and that the said bill be now read a first time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services to

introduce a bill, "An Act Respecting Adoptions", carried. (Bill 27)

CLERK: A bill,

An Act Respecting Adoptions. (Bill 27)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time.

When shall the bill be read a second time?

MR. KING: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 27 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I move that

An Act to Amend the Highway Traffic Act No 2, Bill

13, seconded by the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador, be now read a

third time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a

third time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that Bill 13 be read the

third time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act No 2. (Bill 13)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill is now read a third time and it is ordered that

the bill do pass and its title appear as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act No 2", read a

third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 13)

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

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Advanced Education and

Skills, that

An Act To Repeal the Health Care Association Act, Bill 26, be now

read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a

third time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that Bill 26 be read a

third time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Repeal The Health Care Association Act. (Bill

26)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill is now read a third time and it is ordered that

the bill do pass and its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Repeal The Health Care Association Act", read a

third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 26)

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

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, this time I call from the Order Paper, Order 9, second reading

of a bill,

An Act to Amend The Insurance Adjusters, Agents and Brokers Act.

(Bill 21)

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

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I moved, seconded by the Member for Bonavista North, that Bill 21,

An Act To

Amend The Insurance Adjusters, Agents And Brokers Act, now be given second

reading.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 21,

An Act To Amend The

Insurance Adjusters, Agents And Brokers Act be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Insurance Adjusters,

Agents And Brokers Act". (Bill 21)

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

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Consumer Commercial Affairs Branch of Service NL is

responsible for the regulation of insurance in the Province. The Insurance

Adjusters, Agents and Brokers Act ensure business licensing and appropriate

practices among insurance adjusters, agents and brokers of insurance in this

Province. Currently, there are 3,923 individuals licensed to sell insurance in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

An issue has arisen with the

interpretation of the legislation concerning the

reporting requirements for insurance agents and brokers. Mr. Speaker, these

amendments will clarify legislation and wording in the act for the purpose of

maintaining current practice that has been in place since 1996. In making this

clarification in the wording of the act, Service Newfoundland and Labrador will

maintain a lower regulatory burden on insurance agents and brokers.

Mr. Speaker, this issue was raised in the Auditor General's 2013 report. As a

result, we have reviewed the legislation and determined it needed to be amended

in order to more clearly reflect current practice. The current practice that is

accepted throughout the country is not to require the filing of financial

reports from licensees who do not hold consumers' premiums in trust accounts.

As such, these changes to our legislative language will keep Newfoundland and

Labrador in-line with the rest of Canada. As the provincial insurance regulator,

Service NL does not believe there is a risk to consumers because these

individuals do not maintain trust accounts. When dealing with these individuals,

consumers pay the insurance companies directly.

Mr. Speaker, if all licensees were required to file financial statements

regardless of whether they maintain trust accounts, government would have to

penalize those individuals and companies who fail to report. This certainly is

not the intention of the act nor is it a reasonable regulatory practice. These

proposed amendments will ensure the original intent of the legislation and

current practice is properly reflected in that financial reports will only be

required from those agents and brokers who do hold consumers' premiums in trust

accounts.

Secondarily, Mr. Speaker, these amendments also provide that where similar

requirements exist both in Newfoundland and Labrador and in other provinces

where an agent or broker conducts business, the Superintendent of Insurance may

grant an exemption from financial reporting requirements for the effected

companies in this Province, therefore reducing red tape created by duplication.

Mr. Speaker, that is all I have to say on this bill. These are pretty

straightforward and simple changes. I look forward to hearing what other people

have to say. Again, this is a typical piece of housekeeping that comes up on

occasion. I look forward to the support of the House on this.

Thank you.

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

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure to rise today and speak to Bill 21,

An Act to Amend the

Insurance Adjusters, Agents and Brokers Act.

Mr. Speaker, as the minister said in his remarks, this is nothing very

complicated. It is more of a housekeeping bill. The changing of the legislation

is there to reflect the current practices within the government. The reason this

legislation is coming forward is probably because of the Auditor General's

report in January of this year. This report identified a number of concerns with

respect to the regulation of insurance adjustors and the problems that have come

out in the division. If you read the Auditor General's report, it does point

that out.

Under the current legislation all agents and brokers need to be licensed by

the government, Mr. Speaker. The Auditor General said that the legislation was

not clear and that everyone would be required to report to the superintendent. I

think that government does not see the need for anyone who does not hold trust

accounts to file reports with them. I think that would be just increasing a

burden. This amendment with this bill reflects the current practice. It is an

appropriate step to addressing the amendment.

Over 4,000 insurance adjustors, agents, and brokers are all licensed with the

government under the act. I think this legislation removes the need for all of

them to file financial reports, Mr. Speaker. Again, this would increase the

burden of the department, so it is clear housekeeping and something that is

already ongoing within the department.

I think the groups that deal with insurance are mostly with auto and mortgage

insurance that utilize trusts, and not much with the accident or the sickness

side of this legislation, Mr. Speaker. Right now the reporting is done twice a

year. This gives government an opportunity to detect any issues with trust

accounts at an early stage and to try to address them.

Mr. Speaker, there are some questions about issues. What if issues are filed

with the financial reports? This is not something that the government would

broadcast. As a matter of fact, they would try to deal with them very quickly,

and I think that is purpose of this legislation. If there is an issue that is

found, the plan is resolve it very quickly so as not to harm the people who are

involved in investing or their insurance companies themselves.

I am sure the focus would be to try to determine why it happened and

certainly do whatever process to try to resolve the situation, whether it be

conference calls, meetings, on-site visits, or whatever strategy that would be

best applicable to any issue that may arise.

The other amendment to the bill allows the superintendent to provide

exceptions on people or groups that are filing reports the two largest groups,

being insurance adjustors, agents and brokers, in the Province that utilize this

trust are actually Newfoundland based and Ontario based. They deal in multiple

jurisdictions, Mr. Speaker. If you are from out of Province, you may have some

regulatory reporting in place. In this case, the superintendent may feel that it

is covered in another jurisdiction and there is no need to report.

Mr. Speaker, there are over 4,000 insurance adjustors, agents and brokers,

all licensed with the government, and I think it would be certainly an

overburden to have them all come forward at once filing financial reports. I

think this legislation is being put in place with the changes to try to

alleviate unnecessary burdens that will come out with biannual or semi-annual

reporting, Mr. Speaker.

As I said, this is just pretty much housekeeping and we certainly will be

supporting this bill. Anything that the member said in his Ministerial Statement

that cuts through red tape and saves us a lot of unnecessary work, that fall

within the regulations and fall within the trust of insurance companies, agents

and brokers is something that we would support.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): The hon. the Member for Bonavista North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CROSS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is indeed a privilege to stand today to speak to Bill 21,

An Act to Amend

the Insurance Adjusters, Agents and Brokers Act.

MR. LANE: No, Sir, the privilege is all ours.

MR. CROSS: I am sure by the time I am finished the pleasure will be all

yours, I say to the Member for Mount Pearl South.

As the minister alluded to, this is sort of a regulatory amendment that is

clarifying some wording and it maintains a practice that has been in place since

1996. The minister also referred to the fact that there are almost 4,000

individuals in this Province who are representatives. They are representatives

of either agents or brokers.

For most of the people who buy insurance and every single one of us know we

buy insurance for our vehicles and our houses; we buy life insurance. What

happens when we buy that insurance, the person we are actually paying the money

to is not the insurance company or the insurer. That person is a rep. Now, it

could be a rep for an agent, and the agent is a one-on-one relationship whereby

the agency that that rep is working for is actually the insurer. So when we talk

about an agent, that is what that one refers to.

We also talk about brokers and this is just so that all of our viewers as

well can understand the language of what we are talking about. When you refer to

a broker, a broker is someone who goes to three or four different insurers and

tries to find the best deal for the consumer. Sometimes it is the cheapest deal,

but sometimes you can have a more appropriate deal, depending on your claims

history or depending on the choice that the consumer would want. So, therefore,

we know that that broker looks for what conceivably is the best deal for the

person who is seeking insurance.

The other word that we need to define here is the insurer, and that is

probably the larger entity or company. It is not 3,923 insurers in this

Province; that number is quite less. It is probably the insurers and the agent

or the broker that this refers to.

When the agent or the broker accepts money, Mr. Speaker, either money coming

from the person seeking insurance, the consumer, and holds it for a short period

of time before it is passed on to the larger company, or it could be coming the

other way from an adjusted claim that the money is coming back through an agent

or through a rep to a consumer then there are times when this money is not

paid directly in other ways. So it is held in a special trust account. That is

what we are referring to here in this amendment, Mr. Speaker, is when there is

actually a trust account set up and it is held. Right now, the revision, the

last revision, shows that this has a limit of fifteen days before it is either

passed on to one or the other in this trust account. While this money is held it

must be monitored. It is in the monitoring of this that we need to adhere to

this restriction or this recommendation from the Auditor General.

The monitoring that we are going to do will adhere to the Auditor General's

request. It will comply and mean that there is safety to the consumer, and also

to ensuring companies that the movement of this money is done at an appropriate

time. By knowing there is a report that has to be done, this is a deterrent for

any delays or mishandling of the funds. This means all the business acts

appropriately and it moves through the proper channels at the right time.

The Superintendent of Insurance has the right to offer an exemption to

certain agents. They do not have to file a report. If this was clear-cut and the

wording said everybody must file a report, then you have a lot of people who do

not even have trust accounts would have to file a report at the end of the year.

By granting the ability to make this exemption, then the Superintendent of

Insurance allows someone who does not actually handle any money and keep it in a

trust account, relieves the burden of having to file a report.

If there is a larger company that is part of a bigger corporation that does

business in some other jurisdiction in the country and the member opposite

referred to the fact that some of the insurance companies here, the insurers

deal with Ontario, then if they are filing a report in Ontario that covers the

small portion of business they do here in our Province, in Newfoundland and

Labrador, what happens is they do not have to file a second report. If it is

showing all of the activity that is happening in Newfoundland and Labrador on

the report they are doing there, they do not have to do a separate report here.

It gives the superintendent the ability to do this.

It is quite clear, and as our minister alluded to, it is pretty

straightforward. Just in summarizing, there is safety to the consumer and the

insurer through this. There is a deterrent to any mishandling of funds. Purely

from an industry perspective, there is really no change in business here. The

business model and the business plan just flows as normal. It is talking about a

reporting period, but the actual business does not change.

The officials in the department this morning when we were doing the briefings

were quite confident with the standards we have set up here in the Province for

this. That these checks and balances are in place and they are reducing any

unnecessary activity.

We feel quite confident that this legislation is protecting the consumer and

the insurer. It respects our Auditor General's wishes. It is something I can

very easily support, and I assume most or all of our hon. colleagues assembled

will support this legislation amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I take pleasure to come to my feet again and talk briefly on Bill 21. There

does not seem to be anything major to it but there are a couple of points. First

of all, we had a great briefing this morning from the staff. I would like to

commend the minister on the quality of staff he has working right now in that

office. Again, thanks to the officials in the department.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East, is your mike on, I

ask the hon. member?

MR. MURPHY: Yes, Sir, it is.

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

MR. MURPHY: Okay. I do not know if you heard me or not, Mr. Speaker, so

just to repeat, I want to thank the minister for the briefing this morning. It

was a good briefing. It was pretty quick and everything. There is not too much

detail to this particular piece of legislation that we are dealing with here

today, the amendments in question, but I want to thank the minister for the

briefing from his staff. He has good staff there, so thanks to the officials of

his department.

Mr. Speaker, there is really not too much to this, like I said. What they are

doing is addressing a

section of the Auditor General's report of 2012 when the

Auditor General came out and said there were a few problems here that needed to

be addressed. It was the Financial Services Regulation Division of the Consumer

and Commercial Affairs Branch at Service NL that is responsible for regulating

individuals and companies that provide financial products and services to the

public. The Auditor General came forth with a couple of these points that he

wanted his department to delve into and the minister is handling that.

The first amendment dealt with "change to the annual financial filing

requirements so that it only applies to those individuals, partnerships and

corporations that are licensed as agents, brokers and representatives and

maintain trust accounts". It seems pretty straightforward what they doing here.

To the staff point, the writing from what the Auditor General is saying, the

change has to do with a clarification here in the standards of reporting.

I think the amendment is a good one. We will, of course, be supporting this,

but at the same time when it comes to consumer protection, it is the consumer's

money that is being handled here for a certain period of time by a go-between if

you will, an adjustor, an agent who would be covered under this particular act.

Mr. Speaker, we do not see any problem as regards to what is being done here.

I just wish sometimes government would pay a little bit more attention to other

places where consumers are getting money from either a financial institution

where somebody else is a go-between.

For example, when it comes to payday loans, we would certainly like to see

the Department of Service NL tackle that particular issue in the future.

Hopefully they will, so we can get some more protection for consumers in that

particular field when it comes to dealing with their money. Again, it might seem

outside the purview of this bill here now but just to bring it to the minister's

attention on that, that we would like to see them address the payday loan

problem that is out there, too.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. the Minister of Service NL speaks now, he will

close the debate.

The hon. the Minister of Service NL.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Everybody seems to have gotten exactly what we are trying to do here, Mr.

Speaker. They captured the essence of this amendment very well.

I just want to clarify one little point there. These amendments also

recommend that where similar protection requirements exist both in Newfoundland

and Labrador and out of Province where an agent or broker conducts business, the

Superintendent of Insurance may grant an exemption from financial reporting

requirements in Newfoundland and Labrador for the affected companies, therefore

reducing red tape.

For example, Mr. Speaker, I just want to make sure everybody is clear on

this. If an agent or broker operates in Ontario, they have the same reporting

requirements in Ontario. If the superintendent is satisfied that we can rely on

those reporting requirements, then the superintendent may exempt the agent or

broker from reporting to us. Mr. Speaker, that is one other little change, other

than the clarifications that we did.

Mr. Speaker, the agents and brokers will be pleased. With this clarification,

industry is going to be happy. There is not a change in policy here, just a

clarification.

So I will rest my case, Mr. Speaker, and hopefully we will move to Committee.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a second time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

CLERK:

An Act To Amend The Insurance Adjusters, Agents And Brokers Act.

(Bill 21)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a second time.

When shall this bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?

MR. KING: Now.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Insurance Adjusters, Agents And

Brokers Act", read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole

House presently, by leave. (Bill 21)

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador, that

the House do now resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider Bill

21,

An Act To Amend The Insurance Adjusters, Agents And Brokers Act.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that I do now leave the Chair for

the House to resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider the said

bill.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr.

Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Littlejohn): Order, please!

We are now considering Bill 21,

An Act To Amend The Insurance Adjusters,

Agents And Brokers Act.

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Insurance Adjusters, Agents And Brokers Act".

(Bill 21)

CLERK: Clause 1.

CHAIR: Shall clause 1 carry?

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Yes, Mr. Chair.

I have a question of the minister: Does this mean that some people who handle

other people's money in the Province are not required to have trust accounts?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Chair, I will take that under advisement and get back

to the Member for St. Barbe.

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Chair, if there are certain individuals who could hold

other people's money without using trust accounts, has the Province provided any

protection for those people that they would be protected in case of the

bankruptcy of those individuals?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. CRUMMELL: Again, Mr. Chair, I would take that under advisement as

well. That is a legal matter that I am not familiar with; but, for sure, we will

have a response for the Member for St. Barbe that would be satisfactory, once I

have the right information.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Chair, I understand that the purpose of this bill is

simply to exempt from filing those people who are not required to have trust

accounts to hold other people's money. Is that correct, I ask the minister?

CHAIR: Shall clause 1 carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK:

Be it enacted by the Lieutenant Governor and House of Assembly in

Legislative Session convened, as follows.

CHAIR: Shall the enacting clause carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Insurance Adjusters, Agents And

Brokers Act. (Bill 21)

CHAIR: Shall the title carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, title carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report the bill without amendment?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the bill without amendment,

carried.

CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I move that the Committee do now rise and report Bill 21,

An Act To Amend The

Insurance Adjustors, Agents And Brokers Act.

CHAIR: The motion is that the Committee rise and report Bill 21.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit

again, Mr. Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have considered

the matters to them referred and have directed me to report Bill 21 without

amendment.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair of the Committee of the Whole reports that the

Committee have considered the matters to them referred and have directed him to

report Bill 21 without amendment.

When shall the report be received?

MR. KING: Now.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

On motion, report received and adopted.

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills, the House

resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on Ways and Means to consider a

resolution on Bill 24 respecting The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that the Speaker now leave the Chair for the

House to resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on Ways and Means.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr.

Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Littlejohn): Order, please!

We are now debating a resolution and Bill 24 respecting The Loan And

Guarantee Act, 1957.

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957". (Bill 24)

Resolution

"That it is expedient to bring in a measure further to amend The Loan and

Guarantee Act, 1957, to provide for the advance of loans to and the guarantee of

the repayment of bonds or debentures issued by or loans advanced to certain

corporations."

CHAIR: Shall the resolution carry?

The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It is certainly an honour and a privilege to get up on my feet here once

again, Mr. Chair, and speak to the Loan and Guarantee Act. If I may have a

little bit of latitude, I would like to send a little bit of congratulations out

to my daughter who successfully got her driver's licence; it seems a little

fitting.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: Earlier on while we were discussing, in today's proceedings,

Bill 21, we talked about insurance and all of that, and I would just like to

give a shout out to the Young Drivers' programs that exist in our communities

across the Island and the Labrador portion of the Province. Basically it gave us

a little more peace of mind, if you will, Mr. Chair, that she was going to be a

safe driver out there and she learned all the rules and was going to respect

them, too.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: Not to mention since we were already discussing insurance as

well the fact that she did complete the course and received her certificate, it

also gave the folks a little break on the insurance too when adding her to our

vehicle. I am saying it is a good idea for everybody.

With that, Mr. Chair, I just wanted to get up here and talk a little bit

about what we are seeing back in the District of Lake Melville in regard to

Muskrat Falls. I believe last week I got up and I had a few words to say about

the employment levels, the Labrador Aboriginal Training program, a few of those

things, Mr. Chair. It is still growing in terms of the numbers. It is not only

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, but, specifically, Labradorians and people

from my district are getting some gainful employment from the project at this

point in time, Mr. Chair a great thing to see.

In terms of the Labrador Aboriginal Training program, I would just like to

talk about that a little bit. To date this is still a wonderful program we

have invested $30 million in to that program. We are seeing 200 people, 200

Aboriginal members, of our Province are in t