May

5, 2009

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVI No. 15

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today we welcome the following private members'

statements: the hon. the Member for the District of Bay of Islands; the hon. the

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

District of Ferryland; and the hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

reputable volunteer in Corner Brook and the whole of the West Coast area. Mr.

Speaker, I am talking about Evelyn Hancock of Irishtown.

Mr. Speaker, Ms Hancock became involved with the SPCA as a teenager and has

not looked back since. She started out as a volunteer with the cleaning of

cages, to holding the present position as Shelter Director. She is also

recognized as the only Special Constable as peace officer for the SPCA for the

whole of the West Coast area. She works jointly with the RCMP and the RNC in

investigating any animal abuse.

Ms Hancock spends about six to seven hours a day working with the SPCA, which

includes paying her own travel costs to and from the shelter, et cetera. Ms

Hancock claims her pay is when she finds a home for an animal she knows will be

loved and properly cared for, for the remaining years of its life. She also

makes it quite clear the SPCA would be nothing without the core of volunteers

behind the organization.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members here today to acknowledge Ms Hancock's

thirty years of volunteerism towards the well-being of our precious animals.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to stand in the House

today and recognize Deborah Bourden, CEO of Applecore Interactive.

Deborah was recently awarded the Entrepreneur of the Year Award for

Innovation by Newfoundland and Labrador's Organization for Women

Entrepreneurs.

Each year NLOWE recognizes outstanding women in business and the important

contribution that they make to their communities and economies throughout

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Deborah and the Applecore team of innovative thinkers recognize that

technology is expanding and changing our lives daily. Under Deborah's creative

and infectious leadership, the team continues to diligently explore new ways to

use the Internet and Web 2.0 strategies to deliver their clients' messages to

global audiences. Applecore is the only interactive agency in Newfoundland and

Labrador to be ISO certified. Again, such a goal of excellence is part of the

visionary leadership of Deborah Bourden.

I ask the members of this House to join me in wishing Deborah Bourden and her

team continued success in their work and to acknowledge all the other NLOWE

award winners.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate the Volunteer

Board of Directors of the Community Youth Network covering the region from

Cappahayden to Bay Bulls in Ferryland District, and the successful work they are

providing in the region.

On February 12, I had the opportunity to meet with the Board of Directors and

its operating director, Mr. Robert Moran, in Cape Broyle. The discussion focused

on the initiatives of the Network over the past year dealing with activities for

our youth, including a Policy and Procedure Manual for the organization, various

youth workshops including the topics of drug use and abuse seminars, under-age

drinking, and guest speakers on various topics delivered both at Baltimore

School in Ferryland and Mobile School.

Mr. Speaker, on March 4, 2009, I attended a special concert at Mobile School

put off by the Community Youth Network as part of the Bay Bulls-Bauline Athletic

Association's Winter Carnival which saw the band the Navigators perform and

saw a student band perform from Mobile School called The Dean Maher Experience.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, the first ever newsletter was recently published

for the region by our youth, which provides a much needed communication forum.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the youth of the region for their efforts, and

the efforts of Community Youth Network Board of Directors. I ask all members to

congratulate this group of volunteers on their efforts, including: Beverley O'Brien,

Natalie Normore, Sean Walsh and Sandra Kavanagh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PEACH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand here in this hon. House today to congratulate the Trinity Placentia

Atom Hockey Team for winning the silver medal at the Bay Roberts Invitational

Tournament during the weekend of February 6-8, 2009, defeating the Northeast

Eagles.

Mr. Speaker, the silver medal winners are: Tyler Smith, Lyndon Throne,

Brandon Barrett, Jordon Barron, Emma Gilbert, Kaitylyn Mayne, Jacob Ryan, Emma

Russell, Tyler Kelly, Kyle Elliott, Nicholas White, Tyler Gillam, Ryan Higdon,

Lucas March, Ryan Thorne and Alex Day. Also, of course, a great applause to

their Coach Paul Smith, Assistant Coach Darren Thorne, and Trainer Bill Barron

for their dedication, commitment and for volunteering their valuable time to

make this possible for this young hockey team.

I ask that all members of this hon. House join me in congratulating the

silver medal winners, the Trinity Placentia Atom Hockey team.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to follow up

on an announcement that was made in Budget 2009. This year's Budget committed

$1 million for infrastructure projects on the Province's South Coast, with a

total provincial commitment of $5 million over two years. We have also been able

to secure matching funding from the federal government for a total of $10

million in aquaculture infrastructure funding over the next two years.

The level of aquaculture industry production in this Province has doubled

over the last four years. This has necessitated the need for more infrastructure

to support a fast-growing industry.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce today that my department is delivering

on this government's commitment to provide for more aquaculture infrastructure

on the South Coast of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Earlier this year we had a report commissioned, entitled,

the Marine Infrastructure Study for the Salmonid Aquaculture Industry. It was

prepared by Rutter Hinz Inc. The process of developing the report involved

extensive industry and community consultation. I was pleased to share this

report with the aquaculture industry and communities on the South Coast during

the past week.

The report addresses the operational and biosecurity needs of the industry

and provides a full suite of measures to address the industry's infrastructure

needs. The report focuses around three areas: existing wharves, new in-flow

wharves, and feed storage facilities.

The study outlines a number of projects that need to be completed, at total

cost of more than $24 million. As a first step towards meeting these

infrastructure needs, I am pleased to announce that we will be moving forward

with four new projects in the near future. These will be in-flow wharves at

Hermitage, Pool's Cove, Belleoram (St Jacques) and Harbour Breton. Based on

the estimated

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Based on initial estimates, the $10 million budgeted will

cover the costs of these four projects.

Mr. Speaker, there is also a need for improvements to municipal waste systems

and roads to further facilitate the growth and development of our aquaculture

industry. I will work with my colleagues in the appropriate departments to

address these needs as well. I am also working with my colleague in the

Department of Transportation and Works to advance the engineering work with a

goal of starting construction work on these initial four projects during this

fiscal year.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: As well, Mr. Speaker, I am advised that the Aquatic

Veterinary Diagnostic Facility that is planned for St. Alban's will go to

tender in June with construction to begin this year.

To date, the arrival of the new aquaculture companies in the Province has

created approximately 400 direct jobs in farming and processing sectors. More

indirect jobs will be created as the aquaculture industry continues to grow and

develop.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for a copy of his statement, and it is certainly good

news for the Connaigre Peninsula, indeed.

Mr. Speaker, anytime that you can have new developments and new industry in

small outport communities around this Province it makes a huge difference,

whether it is a few jobs or a lot of jobs.

Mr. Speaker, this is an area of the Province where we have seen significant

aquaculture expansion since 2003. In fact, the industry has practically doubled

AN HON. MEMBER: Since 2003?

MS JONES: Yes, it has practically doubled since 2003, Mr. Speaker, in

terms of its export value.

As well, Mr. Speaker, we need to be cognizant of the traditional fishing

industry that also exists in those particular regions of the Province, and the

concerns that are often raised by individuals and fishers in those areas.

Mr. Speaker, the aquaculture industry has no doubt become a new prominent

industry for Newfoundland and Labrador. I think that is why it is important that

issues that were raised in the Auditor General's report last year need to be

taken seriously and need to be addressed, and issues around site operators and

inspections, and we certainly want to encourage government to have some real

management plans around those issues and the codes of practice for that

industry. The Auditor General also raised the issue around the issues of

licensing and the need for improved licensing processes.

So I think all of these things are regulatory pieces that need to happen as

an industry continues to grow, continues to develop in the Province, and we will

certainly be looking to government to ensure that those practices are put in

place so that the industry can grow in a way that meets the needs of all the

people in that region.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal HillQuidi

Vidi.

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

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

am quite pleased to see the growth of the aquaculture industry in the Connaigre

Peninsula. I would be interested in knowing how many of the 400 direct jobs are

on that peninsula; maybe the minister can let us know that sometime. Well, it

says in the Province, Mr. Speaker, and there are other operations elsewhere in

the Province. So I would like to know how many around the Connaigre. I think

that is fair to ask.

One of the concerns I have and I am sure it is a concern of the minister as

well, is the impact of this new industry on the environment and the interaction

between the environment and the industry. So I do encourage the minister to

he mentioned working with other departments. I hope that one of those

departments is the Department of Environment and Conservation, especially when

the minister mentions that there will have to be improvements to municipal waste

systems and roads to further facilitate the growth. All of that has an impact on

the environment. So I am sure that we will find the way to sustain this industry

while at the same time sustaining our healthy environment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Before I get into my ministerial statement, I think it is only appropriate,

Mr. Speaker, that someone mentioned to me that it is your birthday today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, they thought you did not look too bad for

forty-five.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to inform

members of the provincial government's increased efforts to preserve and

promote our heritage resources by increasing professional capacity within the

heritage sector.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, Budget 2009 provides an additional $150,000 to the

heritage component of the Cultural Economic Development Program - or CEDP as it

is commonly known - bringing the total annual budget for heritage-related

project funding and professional development to $1.3 million.

This funding will be used to enhance professional capacity at our community

based, not-for-profit local museums and historic sites, and provide the

opportunity for many of our provincial heritage organizations to hire

professional staff or offer professional development opportunities to

volunteers.

Mr. Speaker, we want to help those working and volunteering within our

community museums throughout the Province to be trained in best practices. We

want to provide staff with the skills to ensure artifacts are stored

appropriately, handled appropriately, and displayed appropriately. We also want

to provide the staff with the ability to identify good fundraising

opportunities, develop innovative ways to present our heritage resources to the

public, and find meaningful ways in which to engage the public and encourage

them to learn more about our provincial heritage.

We expect that these efforts will help community-based organizations address

some of the changes and challenges of a declining volunteer base, and to ensure

museums and historic sites can continue to meet the expectations of the

visitors.

I note also that Budget 2009 provides $65,000 through the Health Aging

Strategy to encourage more seniors' involvement in museums, archives and

heritage attractions. This, too, is designed to address the declining volunteer

base in many community-based heritage operations.

Mr. Speaker, since launching our cultural strategy, Creative Newfoundland and

Labrador, in 2007, the provincial government has invested more than $25 million

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: - in new funding to strengthen and develop new opportunities

within our arts, cultural and heritage sectors.

The provincial government remains committed to the goals articulated in the

strategy and, together with our partners within arts, culture and heritage

communities we continue to make significant strides towards implementing this

plan and realizing its objectives.

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

acknowledge the importance of our provincial heritage organizations and the

volunteers and professional staff who dedicate their time and effort to

preserving and celebrating our heritage.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

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

be a polling period approaching again, when we get these types of statements

normally.

MS JONES: Fluffy.

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Fluffy statements we call them, a really substantive

statement here.

Of course, it is a motherhood statement as well. Anyone would have to support

anything that enhances our museums, our historic sites, our cultural capacities,

and anything that goes on in those sectors; that is a given. It is nice to see

that government is putting some money into these things.

The comment I notice in the minister's statement, too, that really stands

out is the issue of a declining volunteer base. That is not only in the cultural

and heritage sectors, I say to the minister; we are seeing that around this

Province all over. We had Estimates recently with the minister responsible for

volunteer and non-profit groups, and we had that discussion at the Estimates at

that time that, whether it is your fire department or just local service clubs

and people who enhance your community, that base is eroding. I guess we still do

not know the reasons why, fully. There are all kinds of suggestions as to what

might be happening, but that is indeed a case. So, in addition to putting some

funding into heritage and cultural things, maybe we need to put some research

and some funding into finding out the reasons for the declines, and doing

whatever we can to reverse that particular situation.

We are certainly supportive of anything, of course, that is going to help

museums. A lot of these people, as you say, do not have the professional

expertise as to how to store artifacts, how to identify them, what to do with

them when somebody does bring them in to you and so on. Anything that goes to

the enhancement of those things we would certainly be supportive of.

Thank you.

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

Vidi.

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

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

It is good news to know, and I think we have known it through the Budget, of

course, that additional funding for the heritage component of the CEDP was going

to happen, and it definitely is very welcome.

Our museums around the Province are wonderful places to go, and I love

finding new ones and going to them as I tour the Province. Any additional

funding that we can give to make those museums as professional as possible is

welcome, obviously, by staff who already work there, staff who will be hired,

and by the volunteers themselves.

It would be good for us to also look at the whole museum network as a place for

training for younger people, not just to be volunteers but to take on careers in

this whole area of museums and archives. It is a wonderful career, and setting

that as a goal in community economic development, I think, would be a very

healthy way to go to maintain younger people in the communities. It is not going

to be a major employment point, but it certainly could add to employment in

communities.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers.

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Fish Price Setting Panel has agreed to reduce the price of

crab from $1.55 to $1.40, a move that neither the Seafood Producers nor the FFAW

are happy with. As a matter of fact, we have learned just prior to coming to the

House of Assembly that as of 6:00 o'clock this evening the processors in the

Province will no longer buy crab and will not issue any bait or ice to fishing

enterprises.

I ask the minister to confirm that there is a scheduled shutdown for today at

6:00 p.m., and I ask him what action his department is taking to try and sort

out the pricing issues that exist in the crab industry right now.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I guess my information tells me that the

processors are going back to the panel, the Price Setting Panel, with a request;

and, of course, it would be inappropriate for me to make any comment on that

until the panel makes a decision as to where they are going with regard to that

request.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is our understanding that the processors in the Province have already made

a decision, and that decision will be communicated this afternoon, that the crab

industry will be shut down as of 6:00 o'clock today in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

I ask the minister: If they are going back to the table, what involvement do

you and your department have at that table to find a more favourable pricing

solution for this industry so that it can continue?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, from the aspect of my department, our

responsibility is to provide the intelligence, the research that is necessary

for the panel to make the decisions with regard to any requests that come in

from the processing side or the harvesting side. So, we will continue to support

the panel in their quest to make sure that they have the proper information, the

up-to-date information that is required in order for them to carry out their

decisions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the panel that sets prices for the industry in

this Province have been delaying a decision on crab prices for some time now.

I ask the minister if he is satisfied with the work that they have been

doing, and if there is some kind of a structural change that is required when it

comes to setting prices for fish in this Province.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Given the very uncertain and unstable conditions in the market, I really do

not think that the panel took an unreasonable period of time to make this

particular decision. In fact, I have every confidence in the ability of that

particular panel to set those prices and to see to it that collective bargaining

in this particular industry is alive and well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last week in the House of Assembly we asked the minister, were there any

contingency plans in place should the industry face a shutdown? The minister

stated that government was looking at options and he was not going to leave

anyone high and dry.

I ask the minister today: Now that it appears this industry will be shut down

as of this evening, can you advise the House what actions your government will

take to ensure that the hundreds of fish plant workers out there in the Province

will not be left high and dry?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, again about a shutdown and that sort of

thing, that can be pretty dangerous talk; because, again, we are on the floor of

the House of Assembly and the Leader of the Opposition is talking about a

shutdown when in actual fact the panel has not been engaged, no decision has

been made.

I would say to the Leader of the Opposition, that as a government we are

responsive to the needs of industry, and in this particular case the fishing

industry, but we are not one to just move without really looking at the

situation. We are monitoring this very, very closely. As I pointed out the other

day, we will do everything in our power to make sure that the season continues,

that if there are any contingencies that need to put in place that we will deal

with them as they arise.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, but I want to clarify it for the

minister.

It is our information that it is the processing sector that is shutting down

the crab industry in the Province today, not the panel.

I ask the minister, if he has information that is any different than that

which was provided to me, can he do so in the House at this time?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, again, I am just reiterating that the

processing sector has not given any public notice that they are indeed doing

whatever they are supposed to be doing and I would just say that I am not going

to engage in any type of fear mongering at this particular time. We will take

whatever comes our way but I would let it unfold rather than try to be

predictive of what might happen and if it happens, what will this do and all

that do. I think it is incumbent on both sides of the House to be a little bit

more reserved in what we say on the floor of this House so that we do not make

these uncertain times any more uncertain.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is obvious that the minister is not in the loop and I would say he is not

in the loop on this next issue as well.

Mr. Speaker earlier today the European Union voted to support a ban on the

import of seal products by a vote of 550 to 49. This is in stark contrast with

the minister's comments from yesterday that he hoped he had sown enough seeds

of doubt in the minds of the European Union representatives to actually vote

down the resolution or have it delayed. It is obvious, Mr. Speaker, once again,

that they have misread and misjudged this issue.

I ask the minister: If this issue was such a priority, why were you or

representatives of your government or your department not in Europe yesterday

attending these meetings and making a lobby effort on behalf of the fishing

industry in this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I have to shake my head. I have to shake my

head. Less than a minute ago I had the Leader of the Opposition on her feet

talking about a crisis that was looming in it, right? And you are asking me not

to be present in this Province at this time, when perhaps the crab season is

gone? I say to you, be responsible!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Lame excuse, I say to you, minister. Lame excuse for not doing your job!

Mr. Speaker, the minister promised an extensive advertising campaign and even

left the impression that his meetings in Ottawa with the EU Ambassadors could

help reverse the EU vote. That certainly did not happen.

I ask the minister today: What analysis has your department conducted to

determine what the economic impact of this ban will be on sealers and the

sealing industry in our Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the seal harvest, I think of

the 6,000 sealers out there today, who are reflecting upon where they are going

to go. I think we all in this House should reflect.

We passed a motion here not too long ago, and we had one speaker up from the

other side. Obviously, that speaker got up and, again, indicated how important

it was for us to support our sealers, the seal hunt, the harvest, and not to

give any ground to the European parliamentarians who are over there judging us

morally and telling us how we should manage our fisheries.

We, as the government and I suspect even governments before us have stood

their ground. I say, and I say to the House Leader

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his remarks.

MR. HEDDERSON: you are mumbling there or something. Get on your feet

and talk about it then. Get on your feet! You get on your feet, and I will

defend, I will defend! Get on your feet!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is only a few weeks ago that this government was going to go it alone on

the EU issue. They were going to take on the European Union themselves. They

were not even going to involve the federal government because they did not

believe that they could support their cause. What do we see today? Complete

failure on the issue to even convince, convince people at that table to delay

this decision.

Mr. Speaker, the minister has mentioned that this ban could be challenged

through the World Trade Organization.

I ask the minister today: Will this issue be taken to the World Trade

Organization, and if so, what strategy has been developed to launch such a

challenge?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, let me pick up where I left off when I got on

my feet the last time.

Again, I say to the Leader of the Opposition, this government has taken a

stand when it comes to European parliamentarians and where they want to go, and

that stand is very important for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. We

have been trying, as best we can, to work with our federal counterparts. We have

tried. They have refused to share strategies with us. We have tried logic and

reason. We tried to shuttle diplomacy, but to get up and say we have not been

successful is to undermine the efforts not only of myself, not only of our

government, not only of our Premier, but our sealers as well, and if you are

going to play those political games and try to get me up on my feet, that is

cheap. We want to make sure, Mr. Speaker, that the people of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador know where we

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do not know what the minister calls unsuccessful but a ban is complete

failure and demise for this industry in this Province and he knows it and so do

his colleagues.

I ask him today - he says that there was no co-operation from the federal

government. I ask him today: What meetings occurred between your government or

your Premier and the Prime Minister of the country to ensure that there was an

understanding and to engage their support on this issue? We are only aware of

meetings that took place with ambassadors from other countries that obviously

did not prove to be very fruitful at the end of the day.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, anyone that is following the seal harvest

fully expected a vote as the vote went today. That is not where our efforts

were. For us to try to undo that image that is out there, it is an

impossibility, let me tell you, and to try to convince these special interest

groups to change course is a waste of energy, but where we did direct it was

towards our federal government and also through the Parliament, the Cabinet

ministers that represent the council over there and the commission.

I say to you, and I say too, again, we have now asked our Prime Minister, who

I would say he is in Prague tomorrow, if he is there today - is certainly an

embarrassed Prime Minister in light of what has happened. We are asking them, we

are asking the federal government to immediately, what we have been asking for a

number a years, take the WTO action, put this on the table for our trade talks

and make

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I hope that the minister has called the Prime Minister and made that request

and he is not just making it here on the floor of the House as a grandstanding

piece to this entire issue.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Premier and the Minister of Finance used the time

frame of four weeks to describe the length of a nurses' strike should it

happen in the coming weeks.

I ask the Premier: Is this the official time frame that government is working

with in contingency plans or is it just an ad hoc figure that you put forward

yesterday?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the time frame that the government is

working on is zero. We hope there is no strike. We hope that the nurses do not

vote to strike, and that is our preference. If they decide to strike - what we

were doing yesterday was basically laying out the math for them - for every week

that they are out they lose 2 per cent. If they are out for a month they

basically lose 8 per cent, and that was the analogy which I drew. The 8 per cent

which was offered in the template was a very generous offer which went to all

our public service employees to enable them to catch up; it would be technically

lost if the nurses are out for a month. That is the math on it, quite simply.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier and the Minister of Finance stated in media scrums earlier that

nurses would be legislated back to work and a contract imposed.

My question today is: If government was to impose such a contract, will the

agreed-upon negotiated clauses that have already been settled by both government

and the nurses be maintained in that contract?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, we will allow the strike, if it happens,

to take its course. If it is for two days or two weeks or two months, it will go

on as long as it goes on. Our primary concern during a strike will be patient

safety. That is what will govern us, and that is how we will decide. So if, in

fact, the nurses are out for an extended period of time and it even goes for

more than a month, and the safety of patients happens to be jeopardized, then we

would be forced, under the circumstances, to legislate the nurses back.

As to what the content of that would be, we have not even contemplated. It

would certainly be a last resort for us, but that resort could be based on the

fact that we have no other choice to protect the safety of patients; however, it

certainly is my understanding from the Minister of Health that there is a very

elaborate plan that has been put in place in order to ensure the safety of

patients. The nurses, of course, essential services have been provided for

through the nurses. We will also be looking at the possibility of actually

flying patients out of the Province if there are any emergency situations that

arise that cannot be handled with the volume that happens to here at the

particular point in time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess we want to know for the record, because government has already

indicated that legislating nurses back to work is a high possibility in the

middle of a strike, and I guess we want to have some insurance that if there is

a settlement that would be imposed that it would be a settlement that reflects

the currently negotiated and agreed-upon clauses that exist in the contract

today.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the process of legislating anyone back is

a process that is brought before this hon. Legislature; it is a democratic

process. Debate will ensue, a proposal will be put forward, and then we will

engage in debate. As a result of that debate we will see where that ends up and

we will see exactly what the terms of that legislative proposal will be.

Like I said, that is a last resort. We have not even gone there. The minister

and I have not even discussed it. The Minister of Health and I have not

discussed it. Our preference is that there be no strike, but our priority is the

safety of patients and that is what will govern us in this particular

circumstance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Recently, Shirley Ryan's story was featured in The Telegram . She was

an injured worker four-and-a-half years ago, and she has had a number of

difficulties in dealing with the workers' compensation commission. In fact,

after having a gruelling leg amputation, she was forced to crawl back up her

steps to gain entry into her house simply because the commission had failed to

provide her with the proper form of assistance.

I ask the minister today: What is being done in order to assist injured

individuals in this Province who are dependent upon workers' compensation and

require special services and programs to accommodate their injuries?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Status of Persons

with Disabilities.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Of course, for privacy reasons, I am sure members opposite know that I am not

going to make any reference to any specific case or any particular injured

worker; however, what I can ensure all members of this House, and all injured

workers in this Province, is that the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation

Commission will work tirelessly with every single injured worker in this

Province to ensure that they do get all of the benefits that they are due and

that they are entitled to.

In addition to that, I would like to point out that we now have opened a new

client service office. That client service office is put in place specifically

to deal with such issues, and we are very concerned and very well aware of the

fact that injured workers in this Province deserve all of their entitlements.

That office will see to it that those entitlements are put in place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Many injured workers in the Province have had to wait in order to appeal

decisions that have been made by the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation

Commission. Typically, I think the injured worker must wait until they receive a

written document stating the reasons for the disapproval of their claim. The

minister should know that while the commission is processing these claims and

making those decisions these workers are suffering.

I ask her today: What is being done in order to speed up the processing of

claims and to assist claimants during the waiting period?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Status of Persons

with Disabilities.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I refer to the client service office that has recently been opened in

March 2008. Through that, we are ensuring very timely adjudication of all cases

that come before the commission. In fact, we are committed to responding to any

phone calls that come our way within twenty-four hours. We respond to any other

correspondence within ten days, ten business days. In addition to that, we have

been conducting both internal and external reviews of our processes.

While we recognize that there are times when we need to pay attention to

certain issues, we are also very cognizant of the fact that we have a very

dedicated staff, a very professional staff, who do pay attention to all of those

issues and who are acting in the best interests of injured workers in this

Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think, Minister, you should also realize that there are a lot of injured

workers out there who feel that they are not getting those return phone calls

from the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission. There are many of

them who feel that the case managers that are assigned to their cases do not

understand the extremity of their injury and the circumstances that they live

with. Mr. Speaker, it seems for many of them that cases are about delay and

denial within this system.

I ask the minister: Why are these vulnerable members of society being left

with nothing but frustration from the very agency that has been set up to

provide them with service at a time when they need it the most?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Status of Persons

with Disabilities.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, a recent study that was conducted, an

independent study, in fact, conducted by WHSCC is showing some very different

statistics than what the members opposite are reporting here. In fact, we are

showing statistics that indicate to us that out clientele are very pleased with

the level of service that is being offered to them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS SULLIVAN: There are circumstances, Mr. Speaker, where investigations

may take a little longer. There are processes that have to be followed, there

are procedures that have to be followed, but overall survey results are telling

us that there are huge improvements in the services offered and that our

clientele are very satisfied with those services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think the minister needs to go talk to some more of her clientele because

the way it is right now, injured workers who need to have their homes assessed

and renovations done take nearly two years before the contractor will actually

show up to do the work, simply because of the paperwork, because of the process

that is in place within the commission.

I ask the minister today: What is going to be done to speed up this process

to ensure that injured workers, like in the case of Shirley Ryan, are not being

discharged after critical surgical procedures and not being able to access their

home or have any mobility within their home?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Status of Persons

with Disabilities.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, home renovations, any modifications made to

homes, whatever we are talking about in terms of repairs, have to be submitted

to a particular process where there is an assessment done, first of all, by the

medical team, in some cases by an occupational therapist, and my information is

not showing anything in the area of two years for this. There is a particular

process. Medical providers are involved in this particular process.

Consultations are had between the client and the medical providers.

However, there are times, Mr. Speaker, when there are extenuating

circumstances. For example, whether or not the person owns the home or is

renting the home, whether we can get permission from the owner of the home to do

those particular modifications. It is not as simple as simply walking up to the

house and saying: yes, this is what we are going to do here today. There is a

process, Mr. Speaker. It is followed. It is not a two-year process.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I just have the one question for the Minister of Justice.

Minister, yesterday again we heard complaints involving the RNC and their

treatment of a mentally delayed teenager, and I am well aware that the RNC did

in fact have a press conference just before the House opened today to explain

what happened in that particular case and of course the most misunderstood and

avoidable situations, usually, often involve those suffering from mental,

emotional or neurological disabilities.

I ask the minister: In view of what has happened in the last two weeks

involving these teenagers, do you feel that the current offerings with respect

to training for the RNC is indeed adequate?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To answer the hon. member's question, the answer is yes, I do. There has

been more money put into training for police officers. All of our police

officers take - all of our new recruits take the Changing Minds program

that is offered by the Canadian Medical Association. They are about to receive

training in autism. Also, our correctional officers have received the Changing

Minds programming as well.

I am aware of the incident or aware of the story that appeared in the media

today about what happened yesterday but I think it is early to come to a

conclusion. I understand the police are investigating and the Chief of Police

will make a statement and we will wait it will be more appropriate to make a

statement after we get more of the facts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when the environmental assessment for District 17-18 was

released, the Department of Natural Resources was told to halt activities in the

old growth thickets area until a public consultation took place with

recommendations from the Minister of Environment. We know that a logging road

was built through this forest but no public consultations occurred.

I ask the Minister of Natural Resources: Are officials in your department

turning a blind eye to the directives from the Department of Environment?

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

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that that work has been

put on hold, but I will endeavour to find out and report back to the hon. member

the details.

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

MR. BUTLER: I thank the minister for that.

Mr. Speaker, when the environmental assessment for District 17-18 I am

sorry, that is the same one.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. BUTLER: I hope, Mr. Speaker, you do not take my time away.

Mr. Speaker, in wake of the shutdown of the Grand Falls-Windsor mill,

government recently called for expressions of interest for the development of

Central Newfoundland timber resources, yet

section 13.(4) requires government to

complete a comprehensive consultation process with all forestry stakeholders

before even beginning to consider offering new licences for this fibre.

I ask the minister: Will this consultation process take place before any

changes take place?

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

Development.

MR. SKINNER: Mr. Speaker, the Request for Proposals that the hon. member

refers to, we have a deadline date of May 22 for submission of those proposals.

We will wait to see what comes in. Obviously, anything that we are required by

our own regulations to do, we will follow. We will ensure to do that.

Understanding, Mr. Speaker, that we are in extraordinary times.

Obviously, the closure of the mill in Central Newfoundland and Labrador is an

extraordinary act, and it requires that we be able to respond nimbly and quickly

to the situation as it unfolds. Obviously, anything that we have to do,

vis--vis our regulations, we will endeavour to do so, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we heard of the terrible case of the woman who

received incorrect medical treatment in Clarenville. Hers is, unfortunately, one

in a series of continuing adverse events, such as inadequate maintenance of

sensitive equipment and personal information being released inappropriately.

Mr. Speaker, in December 2008, the government accepted the report from the

Task Force on Adverse Events. One of the recommendations of the task force is

that regional health authorities amended their disclosure policies to conform to

the Canadian Patient Safety Institute guidelines.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Health and Community Services, if whether

or not all the regional health authorities have amended their disclosure

policies to conform to the national guidelines?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: I understand that they have, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to speak to the incident that the member identifies before the

House, and clearly, that is not an issue of an organization having in place

protocols or procedures. What we are dealing with, as I understand it from

Eastern Health, is this was an incident involving the performance of one

individual who had not followed the appropriate protocols, had not followed the

laid out procedures, and as a result of that there was an administration of

medication error. So this speaks to the individual performance of an individual

and not a systemic issue, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question to the minister had to do with whether or not the authorities had

the disclosure policies in place. I think the minister said that he thinks they

have.

So now I ask him: Does he know if the disclosure policies were followed in

the case of the Clarenville situation?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Again, Mr. Speaker, from my discussions with officials with

Eastern Health, as soon as the incident was determined or found out what had

happened there was an immediate contact with the patient, which is one of the

first steps in that whole disclosure issue that the member opposite is

questioning about. So I understand the patient disclosure and the direction

around patient disclosure and the protocols around patient disclosure were

followed in this particular case.

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

Vidi.

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

According to the Task Force on Adverse Events on the national guidelines,

patients who are harmed by an adverse event should be supported emotionally and

physically. There are a number of supports that are mentioned. I will pick one

in particular, timely access to further health care and treatment.

I ask the minister: Why was it that Ms Mojica-Fisher had to wait four days

before medical treatment was offered to her?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: The member opposite is posing a question around the nature

of the intervention that may have been provided by health practitioners in this

particular case. I am not prepared to stand in the House and discuss an

individual patient's case. I am not prepared to discuss the kind of medical

intervention or clinical intervention or other supports that might have been

provided because through that process I would be disclosing the interaction and

contact that this person has had with the health system and who that person may

have seen. Mr. Speaker, I am not prepared to do that in a public way.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allotted for questions and answers have expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARDING: Mr. Speaker, the Resource Committee have considered the

matters to them referred and have directed me to report that they have passed

without amendment the Estimates of Expenditure of the following departments and

agencies: Departments of Business; Environment and Conservation; Fisheries and

Aquaculture; Innovation, Trade and Rural Development; Newfoundland and Labrador

Research Development Council; the Rural Secretariat; Natural Resources; Women's

Policy; and Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bonavista North,

Chair of the Resource Committee, reports that the Committee have considered the

matters to them referred and have approved certain Estimates and recommend that

the report that be concurred.

When shall the report be received?

MS BURKE: Now, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

On motion, report received and adopted.

MR. SPEAKER: Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice Has Been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

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

I appreciate an opportunity to bring forward again a proposal on behalf of

the residents of Southwestern Newfoundland with respect to the lack of dialysis,

or a satellite dialysis facility in Port aux Basques.

Now, there has been a little development brought to my attention since I last

mentioned this yesterday in the petition. I was speaking to some people on the

West Coast in my district and actually they advised me that a Dr. Thomas, who is

the Chief of Staff in Port aux Basques, has been working with and is concluding

a proposal for the minister and the department. He has been in consultation with

Dr. Steve Murphy, who is the nephrologist at Corner Brook. He is the doctor, of

course, the specialist who treats most of the people from Southwestern

Newfoundland and certainly the people from my district who have to travel to

Corner Brook.

The proposal that they are working on would see a satellite office set up in

Port aux Basques. It addresses the issue of the equipment that would be needed.

It addresses the issue of the personnel that would be needed, and the training

that those persons would have to have. So I say to the minister, there is a

proposal in the works now. It has been mentioned before.

We have not seen anything come back from the Department of Health or Western

Health to deal with this issue in a positive way as to how it could be done, so

we are going to bring the ball to your court, now, because obviously the

Department of Health does not want to deal with this. You can pound them over

the head all you want. You can make whatever assent you want in terms of

agreeing to pay for the equipment. The staff out there can agree to be trained,

but yet the Department of Health refuse to deal with an issue, so it is

unfortunate.

Anyway, the minister will have no excuse after this. The Chief of Staff

there, along with the head person in Corner Brook who deals with this, is

putting this proposal together, submitting it to the department, and hopefully

we will get some kind of a positive response in a timely fashion.

I understand it is going to be somewhat like the satellite that is in

Stephenville but not to the same extent, of course. It will not be as large and

service as many people as currently get the treatment in Stephenville. Also,

this proposal would not impact anybody who is currently using and wishes to

continue using the home dialysis system. Because the minister, of course, would

have us all believe that everybody in the Province who needs it can get home

dialysis, but that is just not the case.

Rather than pass the buck, or shirk their responsibilities, we have put it to

the minister that it will be landing on his doorstep very quickly, very soon,

and we would like to see him deal with that in a timely fashion.

As I said before, we have not only the people who need the treatments; it is

their families that incur the emotional, the physical, stress and strains, and

the financial costs in getting from where they live in Southwestern

Newfoundland, travelling through can you imagine in the wintertime now,

three days a week, trying to get through the Wreckhouse? They have to do it. It

is not a case of I do not want to go, or I will put it off until tomorrow. This

is a case of life and death. These people have to go, regardless of the weather.

In fact, it is so costly that if they go today and the weather forecast calls

for a bad day then they have to stay because they cannot take a chance on coming

back home.

This means huge dollars to these people, serious, serious stress levels for

these people. Hopefully the minister now - he has not done his homework, the

department has not done their homework, but hopefully now that the homework is

being done for them it is not going to cost them much in terms of the training

because it takes about six weeks to train a nurse to do it. We will buy the

equipment, so hopefully something will get done on this in a positive future

basis and we not have to look forward to some budgets or all kinds of reams of

excuses as to why this cannot get done.

This a case where the solution will be hand delivered to the minister and all

he has to do is say: Yeah. We will look after the rest of it.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions.

The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today with another petition on behalf of the residents of Triton,

Brighton, Pilley's Island and that particular area with regard to the Long

Island Causeway, Mr. Speaker.

Those residents, when they signed those petitions, all they are asking for is

that government would consider a causeway. They have researched and found out in

the estimates that they have done that this is more feasible than the ferry

service that they presently have, or any ferry service that may be considered in

the future.

By doing this, it would eliminate many of the concerns that the people have

there, Mr. Speaker, with regard in particular to the winter months, I guess,

when the ice conditions deteriorate and they find it difficult getting people to

the hospitals or transporting their students to school and so on. Mr. Speaker,

it has also been a problem for the individuals operating the plant, getting the

product to market.

Mr. Speaker, we know that those people were told back some time ago, in 2003,

that a causeway would be built from Long Island to Pilley's Island. We know

that it was placed on hold, but those people are calling upon government to

reconsider that decision and to see if they would look into the possibility of

the causeway again.

They have had a ferry service for quite a number of years, and have been

serviced fairly well; but, like they are saying now, if something has to be

done, why not go the proper route and a causeway be considered?

I know we get petitions on behalf of the residents there, and they are also

calling upon their member as well. I am sure he has put his issues forward to

government, even though there are times that he met with, I guess, roadblocks,

when he called officials within the department.

Mr. Speaker, I stand today on behalf of those people to present this

petition, that the government will undertake measures to construct a fixed link

from Long Island to Pilley's Island.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions.

The hon. the Member for the District of Burgeo & LaPoile.

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

I appreciate an opportunity to bring forward a petition again, on behalf of

the residents of Ramea, Grey River and Franois, with respect to the lack of

appropriate numbers of health care and nursing services which service those

communities. Today, of course, it is similar to the petition I have presented on

three previous occasions. This is my fourth one being presented.

I have had an inquiry, actually; the people of Franois want to know how

come their member is not up speaking on this as well. All of the names on this

petition today originate from the community of Franois and that, of course, is

in the District of Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

I have no problem, and I am more than pleased to present the petition on

their behalf, but they have made an inquiry wondering why the Member for Burgeo

& La Poile is making the petition on their behalf. They figure that their

MHA should be up making the submission for them. In any case, that is up to the

Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune to make that decision. I am more than

pleased to do it on behalf of all the residents who are impacted by this.

Basically, Ramea of course, is the larger community of those three. Grey

River and then Franois are two smaller communities. Regardless of the size of

the community, it is the need that exists because we do not have the proper

number of nursing people there.

Again, in terms of trying to help the minister out in presenting solutions to

the problem because we do not seem to be getting any answers or suggestions

coming back the other way as to how to resolve it. You get all kinds of excuses

as to, we cannot do this, we cannot do something else, but very rarely do we see

a solution.

Well, I say to the minister, one of the solutions in getting the second nurse

practitioner to be stationed in Ramea would be to change your recruitment

retention bonus system that you have, so that it is not restricted to new

graduates, and it is not restricted to people from outside this Province. Why

wouldn't you, in the case of isolated rural communities in this Province,

allow the recruitment retention bonus system to apply to anyone?

It might be some nurse, for example, in this Province, who has retired. She

has worked out her work career somewhere, but she wants to work on a part-time

basis. Someone might be prepared to go there for six months. Then, at least if

you get somebody for six months and you have someone else who is lined up for

another six months, you do what you have to do; but, no, this department is not

prepared to look at solutions. They are prepared to look at reasons why you

cannot do something.

That is the problem we have here. You can sit down and analyze to death what

the problem is, and you are still going to have the problem tomorrow, you are

still going to have it next year, if you do not look at solutions. So I say to

the minister again, and the people in his department, if that is an

unreasonable, if that is an untenable, if that is an undoable, suggestion that

has been put forward, can somebody tells us that it cannot be done and the

reasons why it cannot be done? Because that seems to be - when you tried all

over avenues and you keep banging your head against the wall, you just do not

give up. If you are going to solve the problem you must look for other

solutions.

Again, we have handed the minister, on a platter, a possible solution that

might be doable and yet we are hearing no response from the minister. We are

hearing nothing from the department as to can that be done. If it cannot be

done, I would appreciate if the minister would stand up some time and say this

is why we cannot do it, or instruct some official to tell us why we cannot do

it. Why cannot rural Newfoundland - we have different standards for different

communities all the time in this Province. If you cannot solve a problem, you

just do not close your eyes to it. You must address the issue.

Anyway, silence is not golden in this case I say to the minister. Silence is

not golden. Silence means you are prepared to give up on it. Anyway, this member

will not be silent. This member will continue to bring these petitions forward

on behalf of the people of those three communities, including Franois.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, at this time I take my leave but I will be back again

with petition number five on this issue as soon as the opportunity allows.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions.

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, when we met here in the House yesterday we were

debating, in second reading,

An Act To Amend The Pensions Funding Act, Bill 6.

I am not quite sure if we adjourned the debate appropriately yesterday

afternoon, but certainly we want to continue the debate today, so I am going to

call second reading of

An Act To Amend The Pensions Funding Act, Bill 6.

Mr. Speaker, it is our intention, as we call this, that the Member for Signal

Hill-Quidi Vidi had been speaking when we adjourned the House and it is our

intention to return so that she has remaining time left in her speaking time to

return to this bill in second reading.

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

Vidi.

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

I see I have just under fourteen minutes left, so I am very happy to be able

to continue speaking to this bill.

When I finished yesterday I was talking about the issue of workers who lose

benefits because of a company closing either through bankruptcy or for what

other reason, but especially through bankruptcy, because, of course, of what we

are experiencing with workers in Grand Falls-Windsor.

What I talked about was how important it is that both in our Province and in

our country on a national level, that we put in place legislation to protect

workers' rights in the case of bankrupt companies. We are finding, with the

workers in Grand Falls-Windsor, of course, that they are not sure what might

happen to their pensions. The unfunded pensions have already stopped for some

pensioned workers and widows, and severances have not been paid, so we know that

we have a serious situation. I was starting to get into this issue of talking

about legislation to protect workers in the case of bankrupt companies.

As we know, there is going to be a meeting of creditors on May 14 with regard

to AbitibiBowater, and I am sure that the workers, through their unions, et

cetera, are going to be part of the group of creditors that are going to be

heard; however, one of the big issues is there is nothing to say that the

workers have to be considered first in the list of creditors. However, when we

consider what the contribution of workers in Grand Falls-Windsor and the general

area, not just from the Town of Grand Falls-Windsor, because workers came from

all over the region, what the contribution of the workers in AbitibiBowater has

been, both in this generation and generations before them, it seems like a

stupid question to have to ask: Will they be considered first?

Unfortunately, knowing the history of other bankrupt companies, they probably

will not be considered first. We have no control over what is going to happen on

May 14 as decisions are made with regard to the creditors; however, we do have

control over the future and can look at putting in place legislation that would

protect workers in such a situation.

One of the things that could be put in place, and it is something that is

being considered by our counterparts on the federal level, is the creation of a

pensions guarantee fund. We could have a fund here in our Province, as well,

where Canadian workers would actually receive or, in our case, Newfoundland

and Labrador workers would actually receive - the retirement benefits they have

earned even if their employer goes out of business.

This kind of legislation would make sure that no company would be able to

pull the trick that AbitibiBowater pulled. Now, I do not mean that they did not

have to shut down, they did not have to claim bankruptcy, but to think the way

in which that company announced that severances, for example, were not going to

be paid - made that announcement the day before the severances were supposed to

be paid, and the day before they went bankrupt - was not honest and was not a

way to treat the workers of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I think that looking at a pensions guarantee fund to make sure that workers

who do not have the same protection that we have as public servants we, as

people in the public sphere who are paid by government and whose pension is

going into a public pension, we get protected. We do not have to worry about it.

Yet, workers who are out there in the sector, the private sector, working in the

industries that are the backbone of our economy here in Newfoundland and

Labrador, these workers get no protection, so I am certainly going to be

considering the kind of things that could be put in place with regard to

protection for workers' rights and will be continuing in this session to bring

more ideas to this House about how workers' rights can be protected.

Mr. Speaker, as I look at this act, which is trying to correct a conflict

that existed between the Pensions Funding Act and the newer Transparency and

Accountability Act, I think that I cannot speak to this act without at the same

time speaking to another group of pensioners, not just the workers who are

dealing with a very particular awful situation in Central Newfoundland and

Labrador. I would like to speak also to our public pensioners in this Province.

We have, over and over in this House, since I have been here, had the issue

of the situation of our public pensioners raised in this House. I am sure that

all three parties represented in this House, the government and the two

opposition parties, have had these groups in their offices, being lobbied by

them, because of their situation as public pensioners.

Now, in spite of saying that we are lucky as people who have a public pension

because we are protected, and we certainly are lucky as MHAs because we have a

very generous pension, certainly those MHAs who have been elected in 2007 are

rather on pins and needles because they have not had any firm decisions made yet

about their pensions, and I want to recognize that. I do hope for their sake

that we will soon be setting up the committee of the House that must be set up

to deal with members' entitlements. However, having said that, there are a

group of public pensioners, pensioners who worked in various services that are

offered by government, the services that are needed to keep our society going,

pensioners who have been suffering because their pensions have not been kept up

with the cost of living, pensioners who have members who are living in poverty,

pensioners who have members who are going to food banks, pensioners who have

members who cannot put heat on in their house in the winter, who go to malls in

Newfoundland and Labrador, sit in heated malls so that they can have warmth

during the day, pensioners who have closed off parts of their houses in the

winter so that they do not have to heat all the house, so that they heat

probably two or three rooms, maximum. This is really an unacceptable situation

in our Province, that we have public pensioners going through this situation.

We did have a system here in the Province, going back eighteen years ago,

when the pensioners of the public services were indexed, that they could look

forward each year to having an improvement in their pension, an improvement that

kept up with the cost of living. But eighteen years ago a government in this

House stopped that and those pensioners no longer could look at having their

pensions increased to match the cost of living in this Province.

Right now, the pensioners' dollar is worth about sixty-two cents, and right

now, though seniors is a broader category than pensioners, many of the seniors

are pensioners, 10.6 per cent of the users of food banks are seniors and I would

be willing to bet that a good three-quarters of them might be pensioners. This

is really an unacceptable situation, Mr. Speaker.

The retirees presented a pre-budget brief in 2008-2009 and a number of issues

were raised by those retirees, none of which have been addressed by this

government. The main one of course and the one that is dealing specifically with

what we are dealing with here today is that pensions must be indexed to the

annual rate of inflation. They have been presenting this over and over. It is

not something that has to be part of collective agreements, as has been thrown

back at the pensioners by this government, saying: Well, this is what you people

agreed to before you retired; too bad. I am sorry but what was done to them

eighteen years ago, when the practice of indexing was stopped, that can be taken

up again and I really challenge this government to look at that and to make it

happen again.

Another thing that the pensioners have asked is for the basic income tax

exemption for pensions that is currently set at $1000 to be increased to $2500.

That would be something else that would help them. That could be a step that

would help them deal with the low incomes that they have. We can deal with the

provincial part of their income tax, so we have the power to meet their needs

from the provincial government perspective.

There are other things that they are saying could be done to help them as

they deal with pensions that are inadequate, that all medical expenses not

covered by Medicare or insurance be made 100 per cent claimable. Because senior

citizens have so many medical expenses a lot of them are not covered by Medicare

or private insurance, or they are only supplemented partially by Medicare or

private insurance programs that they are part of. If they could claim all those

medical expenses, how much better that would be for them. That would help them

as well.

There is another way in which pensioners and all seniors, not just

pensioners, can be helped; by doing a reduction in the cost of various

government services for them. One of the things that government has done, for

example, is with various registrations. If you register online, for example, for

your driver's license, you pay less for registering online. Well, why could we

not give some kind of a break to our senior citizens, and if you are over 65 you

also get a break on how much it costs to do a registration? There are various

types of registrations that senior citizens still take

part in. They are full

members of society; they still drive, and they still register cars. There are

all kinds of things obviously that they still do, so why not give them a break

when it comes to the cost of government services?

Another thing would be to remove the tax on home heating fuels and

electricity for senior citizens, which includes pensioners. There are many

things that this government could think of that still are not part of the

strategy for helping older people in our Province. These pensioners and all

seniors are the backbone of our Province. They are the ones who worked for years

to bring us to where we are in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, my closing thoughts - and I only have a minute or so left and I

will clue up so that I do not go over time. Recognizing that pensioners are a

vibrant part of our community, we count on them - how often do we talk about the

older members of our society and their role as volunteers, for example? They do

not get any money for that, yet they continue to work for our community. I

really challenge this government at a time when, you know, it has

an act looking

at pensions to think about how we can make our pensions, our public pension,

much fairer for those who earned less money, for those who were not earning high

salaries when they retired. When we retire we are going to get a pension based

on the salary we now have, which is way beyond what a lot of these pensioners

worked for. All of us here, I think, have an obligation to think about the

fairness that needs to be put into our pension system, in the public pension

system, and the fairness with which we need to treat the current pensioners who

do not have any way of increasing their income, even if the government chose one

thing to do.

Indexing would be the major thing that would make a difference in the lives

of these pensioners, so I really ask our government members to think about that,

to push for that in their caucus, at the Cabinet table, because you are the ones

who have the power. All I can do is raise the issue here. You are the ones who

can make it happen.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly want to speak to Bill 6, which is

An Act To Amend The Pensions

Funding Act.

I guess this bill is looking at a couple of things, the reporting mechanisms

and so on, accountability and transparency, under the particular act and it

deals with a couple of different clauses that would be amended.

Mr. Speaker, any time you talk about pensions in the Province it is an issue

that has been certainly registered on the radar with the government opposite and

governments of the past for a number of years, and that is issues related to the

public sector pensioning plan in the Province. In more recent days we have a lot

of issues to deal with pensions for those people who work with private

companies. When you look at what is happening with the recession, the downturn

in the economy, the complete shutdown and elimination of the pulp and paper

industry in Grand FallsWindsor, then a lot of people's pensions come under

attack in terms of not knowing if they will be there for there for the long

haul. So, there is a certain amount of uncertainty that exists around it.

In fact, Mr. Speaker, today in Grand FallsWindsor there are hundreds of

people who are impacted in one way, shape or form, by the closure of Abitibi

Bowater. Many of them are affected, because of their pension plans, because of

bridging programs that would have taken them to receiving a full pension plan,

or because of severance benefits that they will not be receiving.

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to take a few minutes to talk about that as it pertains

to this particular bill because we are aware of a number of situations, and I

guess one of the most critical situations that exists in Grand Falls-Windsor

right now, as a result of the closure of AbitibiBowater, is the deal with the

119 workers who were supposed to have received a bridging program to their

pension benefits that are learning in the last few days, and the last few weeks,

that that program may not exist for them and that it is not there right now.

In fact, Mr. Speaker, they are very concerned, and you would be concerned as

well if you spent the last twenty-five to thirty-five years of your life working

for an employer, paying into a pension fund, paying into other benefits and then

at the end of the day, when you required that allowance, when you should get

that money back, you are being told that it is not there. It no longer exists.

So that stability and that ground level that you had hoped for is no longer

there. It is having a tremendous impact upon the lives of many of these people.

I have had an opportunity to meet with a lot of them, to talk to many of them

over the phone, and I can tell you that they planned their future and their

financial security around receiving these benefits. In fact, Mr. Speaker, they

planned to pay off their homes through severance payments, they planned to

maintain their homes and their standard of living on a smaller income through

their pension plans and those things right now do not exist for them. As a

result of it, they are being forced to make some difficult decisions.

In fact, I think we all seen one case that was in the news, or in the Grand

Falls Advertiser , whereby this couple had to decide between paying rent

and getting medication because their income level had dropped so low. They were

used to being able to make it on that income from a month to month basis. All of

a sudden, they were forced to have to live on a certain amount of money which

they found literally impossible to do. So, it is having a tremendous amount of

impact on these people.

Government has committed to pay out the severance packages to mill workers,

but only if they can secure the deal on expropriation and negotiate it into part

of the financial settlement. Mr. Speaker, that is not good enough. If they are

prepared to expropriate and to work a settlement with AbitibiBowater, if they

are already on record as saying that we will pay out the severances, then why

not do it now? Why not do it now? Instead of waiting for a year or two years

down the road until this settlement has been ironed out, because by that time it

will have been too late for a lot of people. There is no bank going to go out

and loan people money based on the fact that government might secure a deal, and

I might get my severance that I am owed in two years from now, or twelve months

from now.

So, these people are having financial difficulties today, and they need the

assistance today. That is why we have continued to put pressure on government to

do those settlements with workers now as opposed to later. They can still claim

back their money, deduct it under their settlement under expropriation if that

is what they want to do, or they have the other option; the other option being

to pay for that investment out of the assets that they have secured. We should

not kid ourselves, it is a significant asset.

What Nalcor Energy has taken on, in terms of the power operations and power

supply as a result of the closure of AbitibiBowater, will derive wealth to the

Province and to the corporation. So do not think that there isn't money in

this for government, because there is money in this for government. There is a

lot of money in this for government. So there is absolutely no reason why they

cannot honour the agreements that were made with these workers.

Now, when we talk about the 119 people whose bridging programs to their

pension plan have been impacted, I think it is absolutely shameful. First of

all, shameful on the part of the company that they would not see this as any

kind of a priority for people who have given their lives to this company, who

have worked hard, who have made it what it is and what it was for nearly for a

hundred years, and their families before them.

Mr. Speaker, we cannot do a whole lot about that. There are processes whereby

they can take it through the courts, and hopefully they will be successful and

win their case but those things are not predictable, or at least I would not

make a prediction around them, because they are very high risk and it has the

tendency and the probability of going either way; either in the best interests

of the retired workers that are impacted or in their very worst interests and

their worst nightmares.

Mr. Speaker, again, they are looking to government again. Oftentimes, people

will say: Why would they come to government to have government step in and write

them a cheque for this money that a company owed them and is refusing to pay?

Normally, most people would look at that and they would say: It is not

government's responsibility. I, for one, would probably look at it and say it

is not government's responsibility, with one exception in this case; with one

exception. Government assumed the responsibility.

When government came to this Legislature with

an act to expropriate assets

they, themselves, made the decision to take on the responsibility of managing

this issue in Central Newfoundland. It was their decision, and it was their

decision to make. In doing that, in passing that legislation, they not only took

on the responsibility but now they are being seen as being accountable to those

very people. I do not care which way you cut it, that is the reality of it,

because the only people today that are making money because of AbitibiBowater's

closure in Central Newfoundland is the government of this Province. They are the

only people that are putting money in the bank as a result of that particular

pulp and paper mill closing down.

Workers have lost their jobs, towns have lost their taxes, businesses have

lost their contracts, workers have lost their severance, pensioners have lost

their benefits, but there is one entity that is still earning money as a result

of the closure of that operation, and it is the Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador. Let me tell you how they are earning money. They are earning it

because of the security of the assets that they have taken on.

Then they will stand up and shrug their shoulders, it is not our

responsibility. You cannot expect government to pay for this. We sympathize with

the workers. Well, Mr. Speaker, while everyone else has hit rock bottom and does

not have a cent to see for a life's work, it is the government that is racking

up the cash in the bank accounts. That is why they are looking to them. It is no

rocket science here. That is the reason they are looking.

In another few months they will be earning money off the forest resource,

with any luck at all. With any luck at all, there will be some good proposals

come forward for the development of the wood operation in that area. It will be

proposals that will see revenues generated and more money coming to the

provincial coffers.

So, Mr. Speaker, it is while the government is building their account and

stacking up the cash from the AbitibiBowater assets, it is the same time when

workers who are displaced are making decisions about whether they will have to

let their house go, let their car go, and so on, because that is the financial

position that they find themselves in.

Mr. Speaker, today when we are discussing the pensions act in the Province

there are a group of pensioners in this Province that are dependent upon the

government, the government who is funnelling money from the demised Abitibi

operations into their coffers. They are looking to that government today to

secure their bridging programs, to secure their pension funds and to secure

their severance benefits, and so should they. The obligation is on behalf of the

government to do just that.

We have been unable to get from them even the ballpark numbers on what it

would cost if they were to step up to the plate and to pay out those benefits. I

do not want to think that they are so lax that they do not have their math done

on it and they have not done the analysis and the research. I think it is more

of a case where they do not want to release the information because they know if

they released the information there is going to be comparisons made, comparisons

made in how much profit they will earn this year on the power that is going into

the grid that they no longer now have to pay for, that is savings for them,

because before they were buying that power off Abitibi and they were feeding it

into the main grid in the Province. Well, that is money today they do not have

to pay out. That is money that they are banking right now.

Then there is the other excess power that was being used by Abitibi itself.

Now I do not know if they have funnelled that into the grid yet or if they are

storing the energy, but either way it will derive money for the government. You

only have to sit down and do the math. You know how many megawatts of power, you

know what the set price is through the PUB and you can do the calculations and

find out how many millions a year the government will put in their savings,

cash, from the demised Abitibi operation.

They do not want to get all of this information out there because they do not

want people to realize and understand that we are making more money than you are

owed. They do not want to get that information out there. They do not want the

public to know. If the information is skewed, well then it is up to them to

correct it. It is up to government to correct it. You can do the math and find

out how many megawatts of power is being produced at those hydro projects, how

much of it is being managed through Nalcor, and like I said, I do not know how

much is in reserve and how much is going into the grid. Obviously what is in

reserve, they are not making money off it today but they will make money off it.

They must have some interest to use the power. After all, they wanted to bring

800 megawatts from the Lower Churchill down to the Island. So they must have

someone around to use another fifty megawatts or sixty, whatever they have in

reserve.

So, Mr. Speaker, you do the math. You find out how much money they are going

to make. You combine that with the money that they are going to make off the

forest resources and the royalty there. You do the calculations and what needs

to be paid out to all these workers, and you lay it all out to the public. You

show the public.

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

MR. SPEAKER (Collins): Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development.

MR. SKINNER: Mr. Speaker, I have to bring to the attention of the public

because it is being brought forward from the member opposite that somehow this

government is holding back information that it may have relative to the value of

pensions, the values of severance and all that kind of stuff.

Just for clarity Mr. Speaker, because I think it is important that we be

clear when we speak about such sensitive matters. We are not the employers of

the people who were employed by AbitibiBowater. We do not have the employment

records. We do not have all the years of service. We do not have all of the

contractual arrangements. We are endeavouring to get that. We are attempting to

put that together, but for the member to leave the impression that this side of

the House, this government is somehow not bringing forth information that it has

is disingenuous at best and I believe playing with the emotions of the people

out there in Central Newfoundland and Labrador. They should not be doing it, and

she should concentrate on what it is we are debating, which is Bill 6, not

AbitibiBowater.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's comment is not a valid point of order but the member is

reminded, the hon. minister is reminded he has the opportunity to speak in

response in the debate.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister knows that he can speak in response to anything I say when my

time is up and not make frivolous points of order in the House.

Mr. Speaker, what is absolutely shameful here is that the government

opposite, after all this time, do not have any idea how much money is owed to

the workers in Grand FallsWindsor. I would be ashamed to stand on my feet,

minister, and admit such information. Absolutely appalling and shameful! If

government was serious about this issue, if they were serious about responding

to the crisis and the needs of the workers in this community they would know

today how much money is owed to these 119 workers who do not get a benefit. They

would know how much money is owed in severance pay to the workers who are in

that union in Grand FallsWindsor.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe what I am hearing here today. I cannot believe

what I am hearing here today, because I have asked these questions in the House

of Assembly. In fact, in asking the questions I never did get an answer, but I

never thought for one minute that the reason I did not get an answer was because

they did not have an answer, and I am just finding this out today. I thought it

was more a case of where they did not want the numbers out there in the public,

but it is not. It is a case where they have not done diligence, where they have

not collected information, where they have not done appropriate analysis, and

today they sit on the other side of the House while hundreds of workers in this

Province are out of a job and they cannot tell you how much money they are owed.

Absolutely ridiculous, Mr. Speaker! Absolutely ridiculous, but not unexpected

I say. Not unexpected coming from the members opposite, because they have a

tendency to go out there on issues with both barrels blazing like they are going

to take on the world until all of a sudden they do nothing. They do absolutely

nothing! They fall down on their face, and we have seen it over and over and

over again on issues by this government, about how we are going to take on the

world. We are going to take on this one and we are going to take on that one.

Well, Mr. Speaker, in all their actions of taking people on, there are a lot

of people out there today who are not getting any benefit from all of that.

Government was smart enough to expropriate the assets when it needed to be done,

but at the same time they failed to meet their own responsibilities to the

workers that have been impacted in that particular area.

Mr. Speaker, I think today, when the books of AbitibiBowater are wide open to

the international market, when the books of AbitibiBowater have been presented

in the courtrooms all around North America, when this company is open to every

shareholder and their books are open public knowledge at this stage, that it is

ridiculous that the government opposite does not have a handle on what the

financial impact is to the people in this Province who are dependent upon it.

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the act to amend the pensions fund today.

That is the act that we are talking about, and that is the reason we have gotten

onto this issue, because these are pensioners in the Province. They are people

who are impacted. They are people who are depending upon the government, a

government who has failed them and now failing to conduct a proper analysis and

get the proper information. You would think that after all of these months,

after all of these months, that at least one minister on the other side of the

House could stand up and tell you how much severance is owed to the workers who

were displaced at AbitibiBowater. Not on, they do not know, but I bet they can

stand up and tell you, if they wanted to, how much money they are pocketing out

of the assets. I bet they can stand up and tell you how much money they are

stashing in their bank accounts as a result of the demise of the Abitibi

operation, because they are the only people who are still earning money as a

result of this project.

They might say oh, we are not earning the money, but it all being earned

through Nalcor, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: It is all being earned through Nalcor.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair wishes to point out that there is a fair amount of latitude given

at second reading. The bill is to amend the Pensions Funding Act. I get the

impression that the hon. member is straying somewhat from the theme here, so

relevance. I just caution the member; that is all. We are debating the

Pensions Act here.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe I am wrong, but I thought when we debated financial bills in the

Legislature that it did provide for broad leeway for discussion, and my

discussion today is related to the pension benefits of workers in the Grand

Falls-Windsor area who were displaced by AbitibiBowater. In order to make my

argument, Mr. Speaker, I need to indicate the revenues that accrue to government

as a result of this project as well.

Mr. Speaker, these are one group of pensioners that are affected, and they

are in great numbers. They are desperate and they need the support of

government, and they are not getting it. They are not getting any support, Mr.

Speaker, no financial support whatsoever. Some of them will have to wait for

years and years for the bridge to a pension fund, and many of them will never,

ever get there, will never, ever see that pension because of the terms and

conditions in which they were employed and because of the fact that the employer

has reneged on the benefits in the bridging program.

Mr. Speaker, they did send a proposal to government. It was a proposal that

went to the Minister of Industry. I am sure it went to the local MHA, the

Minister of Human Resources and Employment, and I am sure it probably was copied

to other MHAs for that area: the MHA for the WindsorSpringdale area; the MHA

for the Lewisporte area; the MHA for the Bishop's FallsBotwood area. I am

sure they would have all gotten a copy of this proposal from the 119 pensioners

in their districts, because they all live in their particular districts, but

these workers have gotten no response from government. They have gotten no

response from government.

What they were proposing is an investment program where they would invest

their money from their pensions and receive an amount back over a period of a

number of years, and they saw it as a way to stimulate economic stability in

that particular area; because, with that money gone out of the local economy, it

does have an impact. Mr. Speaker, so far there has not been a response even by

the government opposite to their proposal, no response whatsoever.

These people, they did not do this easily. They took this very seriously.

They took their time and they sat down and they put together a proposal that

they felt could work for them, could work for government, and could work for the

area in terms of a pensioning benefit. So far, they have not gotten any response

from it whatsoever.

Mr. Speaker, while we are dealing with the Pensions Funding Act, I also want

to deal with another group of pensioners in the Province and they are the public

service pensioners. I think that we all are aware of who they are, the thousands

of them out there that are impacted. I have seen a number of people on the

government side actually show up at rallies that they had, Mr. Speaker, because

I was there at those rallies and I saw them when they were in the back of the

rooms, so I know there are people inside of government who understand the issue

around public sector pensioners, and I also know that they like to skew the

facts when it comes to this group of people.

I have often heard it said by ministers on the other side: Oh, a lot of these

public sector pensioners are already getting a good pension. Yes, a lot of them

are, but there are a lot of them who are not. There are a lot of them whose

pension is below the poverty line that they should have to be living on in this

Province today. That is the reality, Mr. Speaker.

The Member for Mount Pearl is trying to speak over there, and he has a lot of

them in his district. In fact, Mr. Speaker, when I went to a rally at one point

it was actually in his district, or in his colleague's district; I am not

sure, Mr. Speaker. There are two of them over there; there is Mount Pearl South

and Mount Pearl something else - two Mount Pearls.

Mr. Speaker, I will not debate trivial matters in the House. If the members

were on their feet more I would know what district they represent, but we will

not debate the trivial matter. We will debate the real issue here, and the real

issue is this: there are a lot of those public sector pensioners who do not get

enough money to live on, and they are being told by government that, because you

did not negotiate indexing in your pension, you do not get it. Okay, there is

one argument.

There are many ways, Mr. Speaker, in which you can enhance the benefits to

public service pensioners in this Province and it does not necessarily have to

do with indexing. There are other innovative ways to do it. Indexing is just one

of them. It was the catchphrase that got government deterred from giving them

additional benefits, but it should not be a deterrent. In fact, Mr. Speaker,

they should be able to look for solutions.

In fact, I think the unions themselves need to do more. The unions need to do

more, as well, because when the unions go to the table to do collective

bargaining on behalf of the public servants in the Province they should be

putting this issue on the table to governments as a priority: a priority to

ensure that public service pensioners are increased to a certain rate in this

Province.

I am not talking about giving raises to those who already get a good, decent

pension to live on. I am talking about giving raises to the many hundreds and

thousands who do not. Mr. Speaker, there is a way to do it, and when unions go

to negotiate they should be making this issue a priority as well, and raising it

with government and trying to get it addressed, but that is not necessarily

happening either and that is a disappointment because there is more that they

could be doing.

In the absence of the strong support of unions, and in the absence of a

response from government, these union workers, pensioners, have had to take

matters into their own hands and they have lobbied aggressively. They have

provided a lot of information that is factual around the earnings and the wages

and the pensions that their members receive. In addition to that, Mr. Speaker,

they have provided the hardship cases as well. I have heard many of them as

testimony when I went to their rallies. I can guarantee you, they do not hold

small rallies. I do not know if I have ever gone to one where there have been

less than 800 or 1,000 people in the room. They have huge turnouts for their

rallies, which tells me it is indicative of the seriousness of the issue, and of

the support that exists around the issue, but also of the impact that it has

upon these particular individuals.

Mr. Speaker, the members opposite will sit back today and they will shout

from the other side of the House, but they need to be shouting on issues that

are important and not just on foolish propaganda. These pensioners today who

live in our Province, living on a very low income with very little support, they

do not have it easy, Mr. Speaker. They do not have it easy. In fact, I think

they really thought that when government was bulging at the seams in terms of

surplus budgets, huge amounts of royalties coming in on the oil and gas, when

they saw governments out touting about having parties and celebrations because

of have status, that they actually thought for one minute there was a glimmer of

hope for them, that maybe we are going to get some top-up on our pensions. Mr.

Speaker, that did not happen. Once again the government opposite, although their

members slid into the rooms at the rallies, Mr. Speaker, failed to deliver for

those pensioners who were very vulnerable in our Province.

Mr. Speaker, let me just say this: these pensioners had a glimmer of hope for

one reason, and that is because when they were engaged in the public service,

when they did work for the people of the Province, they worked at a time when

revenues were low, when there were no surplus budgets or there were no cash

accounts of the government that were bulging at the seams, when there was no

money to throw around at every single problem to find a solution like this

government has had. They realized that when they gave their time and their

service to the people of the Province, they did so at a time when there were

tight fiscal situations. They did so at a time, Mr. Speaker, when the finances

did not allow for them to be remunerated in a way that they wanted to be. The

glimmer of hope came for them when they sat every day and saw the government

opposite tap their desks because of the bulging bank account of the Province,

when they saw the government opposite respond to every situation and every

crisis in this Province with a blank cheque. That was when the glimmer of hope

came for them.

There was no problem out there that the government opposite could not fix

with a bit of money, with a few dollars, and that was the impression that they

left in society when they got up every day, Mr. Speaker, and talked about how

much money they had, the surpluses, what they were going to do with it all, how

they would throw $2 million into this account and $2 billion into that account.

That was the way, Mr. Speaker, that these people sat through this entire period.

The first time in their lives when they knew there was an opportunity for them

to be able to get an increase in their pension fund, they were let down by the

government opposite.

Mr. Speaker, they did not give up. In fact, they held another rally. Do you

know why they held another rally? They held another rally because the government

was out saying: We are have status, we are going to have a party. In fact, the

party was being planned. I believe they even had a committee struck called the

party committee for the have status. They were going to have the big

celebration. The pensioners held another rally because they said: We are going

to have the have status, the party is coming and sure as the party is coming we

will get an increase. We will not have to turn off the heat in our house next

year. We will not have to make a decision between buying groceries and buying

medication. We will not have to take the tough decisions and sit for hours in

public buildings that are heated so we do not get cold. This government is going

to have a have party, so there is an opportunity for me now to get a little bit

of money out of the pension plan.

Mr. Speaker, the Member for Exploits has been flapping in the backbenches for

the last ten minutes. He never stands in this House of Assembly to talk or to

make a speech, which he should because of the situation going on in his

district. He can sit in the backbench like a puppet and flap all day long

because it is not going to change one thing that I have say in this House of

Assembly, other than the fact he proves his annoyance with every word he says.

Mr. Speaker, let me just say this: He has the opportunity to stand in this

House, and you go back at the end of the session and you count and see how many

times he stood and debated the piece of legislation, because I think in the last

session he did not stand to debate one piece of legislation. You can go and

check the numbers. There were actually ten of them who sat in their seats and

got paid to come here for a full term who never once stood on their feet on a

bill in this House of Assembly, but they will sit in their seats, they will flap

their gums, and they will say absolutely nothing whatsoever of any importance,

and their constituents think they are working hard on their behalf. What a

farce, I say to the members.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the members for their cooperation.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Of all times to be intervening, by the Member of Exploits, on an issue, when

you are talking about pensioners in his own district who are not going to get

paid, workers who are not going to get their severance pay, and public service

pensioners who are living in poverty in this Province. That is the time he

decides to sit and flap his gums and say nothing, Mr. Speaker. Absolutely

ridiculous! Absolutely ridiculous, Mr. Speaker! Should be ashamed. Should be

absolutely ashamed!

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, the pensioners were let down in this Province on more

occasions than one. I know that the government hates to hear this, but the

reality is it was the resources of this Province that allowed them to have

bulging bank accounts in their time of office. It had nothing to do with a deal

they ever did. It had nothing to do with a plan they ever focused on. It had

nothing to do with an industry they ever created, Mr. Speaker. It had all to do

with deals on resources by their predecessors, and they were just the bankers,

Mr. Speaker. They picked up the cheque, they put it into the account, and anyone

who came with a problem they dished out a cheque to fix it. That was the way

they operated for the last four to five years, Mr. Speaker, as a government.

Why wouldn't public sector pensioners in this Province, who are living in

poverty, who are going without heat in their homes, who have to make decisions

between their food and their light bills and their medications, why wouldn't

they have an expectation that, at a time when they have given their life to the

public service and the people of the Province, that at the one time in our

history when there is a government who can well afford it, who brags every

single day about the amount of money that they are building up in their bank

accounts, why wouldn't they expect that there would be some benefit, some

reprieve for them?

Mr. Speaker, that did not happen, and today, when the minister introduced

amendments to the Pensions Funding Act, we did not see anything in this that

would give them a raise either. We did not see anything in this bill that would

give them any kind of benefit or any kind of a break.

Mr. Speaker, we are debating a bill here today and it is a bill that, no

doubt, provides for a framework for accountability and transparency. There is no

doubt there are some clauses in this which need to be amended. What is

unfortunate is that there are still a lot of pensioners out there in this

Province today, thousands of those who have retired from the public sector and

hundreds more who have been displaced from their jobs with AbitibiBowater, who

have not had an opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to get what they feel they are owed on

their pension funds.

Mr. Speaker, it is an opportune time for government to start paying a little

bit more attention to those people, to start looking at where there are possible

solutions to be able to aid them and to help them and to provide for them in a

way that they feel they should be provided for.

So, Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for an opportunity to have a few

remarks on that bill today and I will conclude my comments.

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

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

It is my pleasure to stand and speak to Bill 6,

An Act To Amend The Pensions

Funding Act.

We are allowed a little bit of latitude, as I understand it, Mr. Speaker,

given that this is a finance bill. I certainly appreciate the opportunity to

comment on the bill itself and what the amendments to the Pensions Funding Act

are going to be, but before I get into that I would appreciate the opportunity,

and I am going to take the opportunity and take my time to respond a little bit

to some of the comments made by the Opposition Leader.

There are two areas, Mr. Speaker, that I want to speak to. The first area

that I want to speak to is the whole area of the public pensioners. Now all of a

sudden the public pensioners have become somebody, some group that the member

opposite wants to somehow help. Well where were they when they stopped the

indexing of their pensions years ago?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: It was the government of the day, which was a Liberal

government, that stopped the indexation of the public service pensions, the

general service workers, some eighteen years ago. It was the government of the

day that tore up the contracts. It was the government of the day that treated

those public pensioners, who were then working in the public service, as though

they were not worth the time of day, because they tore up their contracts and

they stopped all of the indexation that was happening. So do not come whining in

here in this House of Assembly trying to make the case for these people when you

have already shown by your actions what you thought of them.

In terms of what this government is doing, because I am more interested in

talking about what we are doing as opposed to what the Opposition did not do. I

think it is more constructive if we talk about what we are doing. We, as a

government, have done a lot, not just for the public pensioners. We have done it

for all of the seniors in this Province. We have done a lot of stuff for the

seniors in this Province.

We can talk about the drug formulary, Mr. Speaker. All of the drugs that the

seniors today are looking for, we review that. We have expanded the number of

drugs on the drug formulary list and the seniors who call me thank me for that

as a government. They say that I am glad your government is listening to us. I

am glad you are expanding the number of drugs that you put under the formulary

so that people today, who have a variety of illnesses as they age and find that

their health is deteriorating, have something that they can use to help them

through that difficult time.

Besides increasing the number of drugs in the drug formulary, Mr. Speaker,

what we have also done is we have a number of drug plans to help with the

financial cost of these drugs for people. There are a variety of drug plans that

people can apply for and it is based upon your income, so that those who are in

the most need get the most assistance. Those that have a lesser need get less

assistance, and we believe that is a very fair and a very equitable way of

treating people.

There has been a lot done, and that is the point I want to make, Mr. Speaker.

There has been a lot done by this government to assist, not just public

pensioners. I agree that they need to have assistance and I agree we need to be

looking at other ways that we can assist. We have, over successive budgets,

shown ways that we can do that. We are doing a lot but we are not just doing it

for one group. We are doing it for all of the seniors in the Province. We think,

as a government, it is more applicable for us and more relevant for us, and

fairer for us, and more equitable to the seniors of this Province if we do it

for all. Any benefits that we as a government bring in get applied to all of the

seniors, not just public pensioner seniors. Not that there is anything wrong

with them but we think we need to extend the benefits to all.

The last point I want to mention, Mr. Speaker, on the public pensioners -

which I have heard again from a number of my constituents who contact me - has

to do with the changes we have made to the taxation levels. We have now raised

up all of the minimum amounts, in terms of your income now is higher and higher.

We are putting up the ceiling where people have to pay taxes.

When we took government I am going from memory, Mr. Speaker, my numbers

might be off a little bit, but people who were at $11,000, $12,000 or $13,000 a

year of income paid taxes. Well, that does not happen today. Now it is $18,000,

$19,000, $20,000, somewhere in that range. So those people, who have incomes of

say $19,000 a year or less, do not pay taxes now because we have changed the

thresholds that we had so that we would try and leave more money in the pockets

of the people who needed it most.

There has been a lot done, Mr. Speaker, to help the seniors of this Province

and I am proud to stand here and say as a member of this government, that we

have done those things, we will continue to review where we stand with the

seniors in this Province, and we will continue to make improvements in

successive budgets. So I make no apologizes for the work that we have done on

behalf of the seniors of this Province, and that includes the public service

pensioners.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: The second point, Mr. Speaker, I want to address while we

are talking about the Pensions Funding Act,

An Act To Amend The Pensions Funding

Act, has to do with the again, the Leader of the Opposition was up speaking

about the Abitibi workers. I stood on a point of order, Mr. Speaker, and I

respect the judgement you made, that you did not feel it was a point of order.

You said that I had an opportunity to get up later. Well, here I am. I am up now

to say my piece.

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite tried to leave the impression that we are

not sharing information with the people that we have, or with the people who are

employed or former employees of AbitibiBowater, information that she says we

have that we will not get out there, or that we do not actually have the

information.

The point that I am trying to make, Mr. Speaker, and I think it is important

for the people of the Central region to hear this point, is that we are

gathering information. We are gathering it from a number of sources. We are

gathering it from our own intelligence; we are gathering it from discussions

with the union. The union has been passing information back and forth to us. We

are gathering it from the company when the company gives us information that

they want to give us. They have not given us everything we have asked for but

they have been giving us some stuff, in fairness to them.

When the member opposite says: Well, tell us how much the severance is going

to cost or tell us how much pensions are going to cost? My point is we are not

the employer. We do not have that information. Those are private records. That

is a private company that has private information on each of its employees and

we do not have access to that. It is not that we do not want to give the

information. We have an estimate, we have a guesstimate, and I do not want to

put that out there because if I am going to stand in this House of Assembly and

speak to the situation in Central Newfoundland and Labrador, I am going to speak

from fact. I am not going to speak from conjecture. I am not going to speak from

estimates or guesstimates. I am not going to pull a number out of the air.

Unless I know what I am speaking about, I am not going to stand up here and give

that number out. So we are endeavouring to get that.

For the people in Central Newfoundland and Labrador who are wondering what we

are doing, I can say to you we are seeking the information from the union and

they have been co-operating with us. We are seeking information from the company

and they have been co-operating somewhat with us, not providing everything that

we would like because they have some concerns over privacy and access to

information but they are providing some information. We are using our own

sources and our own resources that we have to try and get that information as

well.

So it is not a matter of we have it, we will not release it. It is not a

matter of we do not want people to know it. It is a matter of we are trying to

compile it. We believe it is important that we deal with the facts of the

situation, not with guesstimates or conjecture or other numbers that we pull out

of a hat. So we are not going to do that, Mr. Speaker. It is not the way that I

am going to operate as Chair of the task force. It is not the way that this

government operates, and I am not going to give in to the member opposite in

terms of trying to draw some number out for the sake of having a number. I do

not think it would lend anything to the argument. I think it is only playing

with the emotions of the people out there. Until we know exactly what we are

talking about, we are not going to speak to that particular information.

Now, Mr. Speaker, again the member opposite, in my opinion, tries to drive a

divide into this community here, this community of Newfoundland and Labrador and

this community of the Central region. She tries to pit the government as somehow

not working for the best interests of the workers. That, to me, is something

that I really have difficulty understanding. We should be together on this. The

government, the unions and the employees should all be together working against

AbitibiBowater to try and find what it is we can do to ensure that the employees

receive everything that they are entitled to receive from that corporate enti