Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 7 May 2013 (47th General Assembly, 2nd Session, Vol. XLVII No. 16)
2013-05-07
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
PDF Version
May 7,
2013 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol.
XLVII No. 16
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!
Admit strangers.
Before we start today's proceedings, I want to welcome some special guests to
our galleries. There is a delegation from the Town of Grand Bank. There is Mayor
Darrell Lafosse, Councillor Bruce Warren, and Town Manager Wayne Bolt.
Welcome to the House of Assembly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: Today we will have members' statements from the Member for
the District of Port au Port; the Member for the District of Bonavista North;
the Member for the District of St. John's West; the Member for the District of
Kilbride; the Member for the District of Torngat Mountains; and the Member for
the District of Exploits.
The hon. the Member for the District of Port au Port.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. CORNECT: I rise to congratulate the winners and nominees who were
honoured at the Stephen Awards Banquet in Stephenville on April 27 as part of
Volunteer Week.
Debbie Brake-Patten was honoured with the Citizen of the Year Award, while
Amber LeRoy was the recipient of the Youth of the Year Award, both being
recognized for their outstanding volunteer service to the community. Jesse Byrne
won the Junior Male Athlete of the Year Award, Jillian Forsey was presented with
the Junior Female Athlete of the Year Award, and Chris Dugas was presented with
the Senior Athlete of the Year Award. Also, twenty-three Certificates of Merit
for Outstanding Volunteer Work were presented.
Congratulations are extended to Val Alexander, Larry Bentley, Debbie
Brake-Patten, Stephen Brown, Irving Campbell, Irene Collins, Jeff Dehart, Cyril
Gale, Frank Gale, Darlene Greenham, Amber Harper, Lisa Henley, Valarie Hulan,
Arch Locke, Albert Le Roux, Brenda MacIsaac, James Mercer, Roxanne Mercer,
Brenda Pittman, Greg Reid, Colleen Ryan, Donna Sheppard, and Terry White for
their contributions.
I ask all hon. members to join with me in congratulating all the winners and
all the nominees of the Stephen Awards on their invaluable contributions to our
communities, our region, and our Province.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. CROSS: I take great pleasure today in throwing a bouquet to a
wonderful bunch of people from Bonavista North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. CROSS: The Pearson Park Committee was struck just a few short months
ago with a desire to construct an outdoor fitness and recreational area adjacent
to Pearson Academy in New-Wes-Valley. They model their desires from other
projects that have recently shown great success around the Province.
Principal Juan Gill summoned several leaders from around the region that
comprise the Pearson Academy community from Deadman's Bay to Greenspond. Mr.
Speaker, I say they followed a model, but after the first meeting they broke the
mould in every way.
On the day they found out they were receiving a Helping Hand award from Let
Them Be Kids Foundation, they shattered the first-day volunteer sign-up record
for Newfoundland and Labrador with over 300 pledges.
On April 28, a community channel telethon was held. It realized $91,234 in
contributions. Not only has there been a growth in funds, but also growth in a
sense of community and region, and on June 22, Pearson Park will literally grow
before our eyes.
Let everyone here, please, join in my congratulations of these worthy
citizens.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Roberta Stanford
on receiving a Volunteer Award at the recent Volunteer Recognition Night. I had
the pleasure, Mr. Speaker, of attending this event, which celebrated the
important contributions of volunteers throughout our Province.
Roberta received this award for her work with the Citizens' Crime Prevention
Association of Newfoundland and Labrador. Roberta first became involved with the
Clarenville Crime Prevention Committee back in 1989 and joined the provincial
executive in 1995 where she served as both chair and vice chair.
Through her commitment and passion over the past twenty-four years, Roberta
has had a profound impact on crime prevention across this Province. She was a
driving force in recognizing projects such as the Rachel Project, anti-violence
campaigns, and crime prevention awareness. Roberta recently played a lead role
in mobilizing her charity to receive $29,000 from the recent RCMP Klondike
Night.
Mr. Speaker, many of us in recent days have brought attention to the generous
contribution made everyday by volunteers in this Province, and I ask all hon.
members to join me in thanking Roberta Stanford and all our volunteers for the
important role they play in the development of our communities.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, in today's world the ability to express oneself
publicly in oral and written form is becoming increasingly more important. Our
schools are very aware of this need, and consequently, most of them place a
great emphasis on public speaking as part of their curriculum.
On March 7, 2013, Hazelwood Elementary hosted its Annual Public Speaking
Event. Students in Grades 4-6 prepared poems or speeches, and the finalists at
each grade level presented to an audience of parents, friends, and judges. I had
the honour that night to help judge the finalists in Grade 6. After a daunting
task, the judges arrived at a winner for each grade level.
Maria Nash, with her recitation of A Rock Makes a Wonderful Pet, was the
winner in Grade 4. Lucas Thornhill won in Grade 5 with his speech, Gaming:
Happiness or Hypnosis, and Megan Moret was the Grade 6 winner with her speech
entitled, The Dangers of Facebook.
I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating the three grade level
winners at Hazelwood, as well as all the other participants who did such a great
job that night.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate
Herman Webb of Nain on receiving the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Award.
Herman began working in his uncle's store as a young boy and eventually took
over the business in 1980. Hayne's General Store was established in 1956. Herman
has been operating the business for over thirty years, and continues to do so to
this very day, providing the community with a first-class service.
Herman comes from a large, close-knit family that spent their early days in
Webb's Bay, located just north of Nain. The family later relocated to Nain.
Mr. Speaker, Herman's respect from the residents of Nain is not because of
any particular accomplishment within the community. What he is recognized for
are the countless acts of humanity where Herman has helped out many residents of
Nain in need. He has asked for nothing in return. Herman's business continues to
be the cornerstone of the community a business that has offered respectable
prices despite its isolation and the rising cost of retail.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating Mr. Herman
Webb of Nain on receiving the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Award.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Exploits.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FORSEY: Mr. Speaker, November 2011, Thomas Maloney and Ben Hayley
from the Exploits Valley region launched an ambitious fundraising campaign: to
run in the Toronto Waterfront forty-two kilometre Marathon and to raise $20,000
for the Children's Wish Foundation. These post-secondary students worked
tirelessly selling their Run for a Wish bracelets, knocking on doors for
sponsors, holding car washes, bake sales, sports tournaments, and more.
Mr. Speaker, Ben admitted he is very competitive by nature and he trained for
months leading up to the race, but finishing the forty-two kilometre race was a
struggle. Although they were met with much doubt, Ben made it to the finish line
and the pair exceeded their fundraising goal by $7,000.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating Ben
Hayley and Thomas Maloney on successfully making wishes come true.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that students who are lesbian,
gay, bisexual, or transgender have been on the receiving end of bullying and
harassment in schools and communities throughout this country and around the
world.
We have taken real action to address this issue, Mr. Speaker. As part of a
three-year plan to build awareness around LGBT issues, the provincial government
invested $90,000 in MyGSA (or My Gay-Straight Alliance) resource which is
designed to provide support for administrators, teachers, and students who want
to establish a gay-straight alliance in their school. Developed in partnership
with Egale Canada, I am proud to say Newfoundland and Labrador is the only
Province in the country to offer such a resource to all schools that offer
Grades 7-12.
I am equally proud to report that on Friday past, Egale Canada made a
presentation to an international conference in Switzerland, where participants
spoke about best practices taking place around the world to create safer and
more inclusive schools. Mr. Speaker, our work around the development and
distribution of MyGSA resource was highlighted at that conference as an example
of providing leadership, and creating partnerships, will which help address this
issue.
Our work continues, Mr. Speaker. The Province has invested a further $100,000
in professional development to build awareness in the education system of issues
around sexual orientation and gender identity. To date, sessions have been
completed with all Kindergarten to Grade 12 principals, vice-principals and
guidance counsellors, as well as school district staff and the Department of
Education. I am among those who attended this training, Mr. Speaker. I hope that
speaks to how strongly I feel about this issue as minister, as a former
educator, and as an individual. Our next step will be to provide this
professional development to all teachers in the Province, starting in the new
school year.
Mr. Speaker, this investment of time and money speaks to our commitment to
ensuring schools are safe, caring, and inclusive for everyone. I strongly
encourage teachers to use the MyGSA resource to generate discussion in their
classrooms and to support the creation of gay-straight alliances in our schools.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Burgeo La Poile.
MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advance copy of the statement. We all know school
can be a tough environment for kids, and GLBTQ youth face tremendous pressure
stemming from homophobia.
Mr. Speaker, it was shortly after I graduated high school that I heard about
the murder of Matthew Shepard, a college student killed in the States because he
was gay. We were roughly the same age. I can remember thinking how tragic and
terrible it was that his life was cut so short.
Showing support for all students regardless of sexual orientation and gender
identity is an important stance for our government to take. My Gay-Straight
Alliance is a positive resource for encouraging all students to embrace
tolerance. I understand, though, the resource is not being mandated in schools.
Perhaps that is the next step.
I would be interested in knowing what percentage of our K-12 schools is
making use of the resource. I am also glad to hear that teachers, the pillars of
our children's education, will be availing of this professional development.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would just like to say I commend this investment
by government and let's continue this positive initiative.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is important to recognize the efforts of the Minister of Education, this
government, and the staff who work for the Department of Education in our
schools in promoting and advancing this initiative to create safer and more
inclusive schools and to build awareness of issues around sexual orientation and
gender identity.
I do want to point out that we need to work towards addressing the
shortcomings highlighted in the recent review of the government's Safe and
Caring Schools Policy which said that additional efforts are required to ensure
that there is a sense of urgency and priority brought to a government's
anti-bullying policies. Some obvious ways to accomplish this, I say to the
minister, would be to provide adequate staffing and adequate training, as well
as consistent and clear guidelines for policy implementation.
As my colleague, the Member for Burgeo La Poile has pointed out, we do not
know what the take up is on this particular initiative, but we hope that the
government will do whatever they can to try and advance it and promote it.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Does the Member for St. John's South have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to commend the government for the investments and the effort
that have been put in, in this regard. Bullying of any type is unacceptable, Mr.
Speaker. Government has made great strides in this regard to ensure that
students feel inclusive. While that is not always the case, more needs to be
done. Government has made great strides in this regard.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to stand and inform this
hon. House about the official start of the forest fire season in this Province.
The season began on the Island on May 1, begins in Labrador on May 15, and it
will extend into late September. At this time of the year regulations come into
effect in the best interest of public safety.
Mr. Speaker, all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are privileged to use our
forests for hiking, for camping, and other activities, and of course the forest
provides much wealth to the people of the Province as well. It is our
responsibility to take care of this tremendous resource. It is the
responsibility of all of us. The official start of forest fire season is an
appropriate time to remind residents to be extra vigilant when they are in the
woods.
During forest fire season, a permit to burn is required, at no cost, for
lighting outdoor fires for the purposes of clearing land or burning brush within
300 metres of a forest. Permits and regulations can be obtained at regional or
district forest management offices around the Province. The lighting of fires
for cooking and camping does not require a permit, but certain regulations, of
course, must be followed.
The Province has a toll-free number that can be used to report forest fires
during the season. The number is 1-866-709-FIRE.
Last year, in 2012, warm temperatures and a lack of precipitation created
ideal conditions for forest fires. Our fire suppression staff responded to 197
forest fires between May and September. It was a busier than usual season,
especially in Labrador. In some instances, Mr. Speaker, new fires were reported
daily.
Mr. Speaker, I know all members of this House will agree that our
firefighters, our permanent staff, the Incident Management Team, Air Services
pilots, and maintenance crews are to be highly commended for their tremendous
efforts. We can help them by being extra careful when we are enjoying the forest
areas this year.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. There is
no question that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, on every occasion they get,
will enjoy the forests. As we often hear, on the weekends you spend it in the
country or in the woods enjoying our forestry resource.
What is important too, I would say it is important for all us who use the
resource for enjoyment and for recreation, that we accept the fact that if we
pack it in, we should bring it out. We know that leaving garbage in the country
can cause a fire at some future date.
The minister mentioned about picking up a permit at no cost, and that it
should be easy to do. For those who live in some of the rural areas, getting to
the forestry regional office is not always easy. We need to look for ways that
we can make it easier to collect those permits.
It does not go unnoticed either that in this year's Budget 2013, we have seen
the reduction of one complete water bomber crew. We will, as will people of the
Province, be monitoring that to see the impact.
The minister mentioned 197 forest fires last year. It is always amazing when
I look at how volunteers and communities come together. I was in Labrador last
year when we saw the evacuation of North West River and Sheshatshiu. The
community came together to respond to that fire.
I would encourage all of us in the Province to really put due diligence in
everything we do when we go into the country. I want to finish up by thanking
all the people in the communities, both volunteers and our staff, for the great
job they do in protecting our resource.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.
MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I, too, thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. Our forestry
resources are an important provincial asset which must be protected. I certainly
acknowledge the role that government must play in educating the public on fire
safety and the great outdoors. We need to have clear regulations when it comes
to having a safe season, accompanied with a public service campaign and
messaging around that.
I do hope we have the resources, like the Leader of the Official Opposition
stated, for the upcoming season and that we do have reduced fires. I want to say
just a big thank you to all the firefighters, pilots, other professionals, and
volunteers who put their lives on the line to protect our forests and our
communities.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Does the Member for St. John's South have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FRENCH: Last evening, the Newfoundland Independent Filmmakers
Co-operative, Telefilm Canada, and the Newfoundland and Labrador Film
Development Corporation celebrated the fifth anniversary of its PICTURE START
program at Empire Theatres. The event showcased highlights of the program over
the past five years, including interviews with the filmmaking teams that have
participated.
The PICTURE START program focuses on skills enhancement of emerging
filmmakers by pairing them with established filmmakers and film industry
professionals. The hands-on approach is complemented by a series of workshops
offered by local and national experts, and senior filmmakers mentor junior
artist throughout the development, production, and post-production phases of the
projects.
Mr. Speaker, each year the program's jury selects three scripts from an open
competition and the winners are provided with the various resources they need to
produce their first film. The program allows for access to expertise, equipment,
and mentoring that is often a challenge for many up-and-coming filmmakers in the
Province.
Undoubtedly, this program will continue to contribute to the growth of the
Newfoundland and Labrador film industry by fostering future professionals who
will potentially establish production companies and continue to create
programming based here at home. In its five-year history, PICTURE START has
completed fifteen films, and all thirty-three participants are currently
employed in the film industry in the Province.
The success of PICTURE START is evident in the numerous careers that have
their roots in the program's short history. Filmmakers such as Jordan Canning,
Joel Hynes, and Sherry White to name a few, have had their careers launched
through this innovative program. Their success, Mr. Speaker, has been realized
both locally and abroad.
Mr. Speaker, the provincial government invests approximately $6 million in
the film industry which generated more than $41 million in film and production
activity in the Province during the last fiscal year. Our government is pleased
to be a strong supporter of our cultural industries and Budget 2013: A Strong
Plan, A Secure Future includes more than $17 million for the cultural and
heritage sectors, bringing our total investment to $87 million since the launch
of Creative Newfoundland and Labrador: The Blueprint for Development and
Investment in Culture in 2006.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. Once again, we see
a group of volunteers in Newfoundland and Labrador who are willing to give their
expertise to people who are up and coming, people who are in the film industry.
To those people who are giving up their time, energy, and passing on their
knowledge, thank you very much on behalf of the Opposition. Because if the film
industry thrives in Newfoundland and Labrador, we are going to create employment
in this area and it is going to be beneficial to all of Newfoundland and
Labrador.
I noticed back years ago there was $1 million invested in some equipment for
Western Newfoundland. I am not sure what happened to that equipment because it
was supposed to be an investment to increase the film industry for the Corner
Brook, West Coast area. The minister may, some time, stand and speak on that $1
million in equipment that was bought.
In the statement that the minister made, which is very good, is that there
were fifteen films and thirty-three participants, and all those films that were
created, the thirty-three participants are still in the film industry in
Newfoundland and Labrador. That is a credit to the program itself. That is a
credit that this program, PICTURE START, does actually work.
Once again, I thank all the people who are mentoring the young filmmakers in
this Province. To the young filmmakers, do not give up; keep it going because
you will do well eventually in Newfoundland and Labrador because it is an
industry that is up and coming. It is an industry that has nothing to do but
grow in this Province.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I congratulate my fellow filmmakers at NIFCO. I had the honour of attending
the reception last night. There was lots of excitement and pride in the room. It
was actually bursting at the seams.
About eighteen years ago I had the honour of being President of NIFCO. It was
at the time when we developed ourselves into a full-fledged industry, that is
was no longer just somebody's tree house, yet still protecting the right for
experimental and art films, that it is not all about industry and we have to
protect that.
There was a time when people were telling our stories; now we can tell our
own stories. That is so vital for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, for
us to be able to tell our stories in our own way.
For the past thirty years the cost to be a member of NIFCO was $5. Today, Mr.
Speaker, that cost is still $5. It means that everybody has access to filmmaking
opportunities; it means that everybody has access to training. Nobody graduates
out of NIFCO. We continue to support one another.
We are the envy our film co-op is the envy of film co-ops worldwide. Film
is such a collaborative medium. It involves all aspects of the arts and many
local businesses. Mr. Speaker, any money invested is a good investment, and
sociologist Richard Florida says the health of the arts in a community is a
measure of the health of the community and society itself.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Your time has expired.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
Oral Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Minister Responsible for Fire and Emergency Services yesterday met with
the Minister of National Defence to discuss search and rescue in our Province.
The minister said that he had outlined all the concerns of Newfoundland and
Labrador, but failed to request the federal involvement in a search and rescue
inquiry for our Province.
So I ask the minister: Why did you not raise this important issue with the
federal minister during your meeting?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, the reason I did not outline the need, as he
said, for an inquiry was because I considered the federal AG report the actual
inquiry. The federal AG report has outlined issues within the federal SAR
system, which we have actually communicated to the federal minister at various
occasions over the last couple of years.
Now is the time for action, Mr. Speaker. As well, I outlined some ways they
could address those issues immediately by partnering with private industry and
other ways they could actually augment the services now that are provided by the
military across Canada, especially out of Gander, which 103 operates out of.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I think the minister, if he is thinking the federal AG's report is indeed a
public inquiry, is missing the mark on all of this. The federal AG himself quite
clearly said he did not audit provincial responsibilities. He did not even audit
the RCMP involvement into search and rescue in our Province.
The Premier and this government have repeatedly asked for our federal Liberal
MPs to get involved in the call for improved search and rescue, which they have.
Now we finally have the federal minister onside. We have the federal MPs onside.
The federal minister has said that he would co-operate in an inquiry.
I ask the minister: Why is it everyone, except for this government and except
for this Premier, agrees to call for a public inquiry into search and rescue in
our Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Simply, Mr. Speaker, it is because now is the time for
action. Eighty-five per cent as regards to search and rescue in Canada, not only
in Newfoundland and Labrador, is provided by the federal system. The Auditor
General has outlined certain issues within that system and now is the time for
action.
We do not need more talk. We do not need meetings on top of meetings. We need
action, and action now. We have expressed that to the federal minister. We will
express that time and time again, each and every chance I get to get the action
that is needed for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I think the minister should understand that taking action for the sake of
taking action is not good enough. That is an example of what happened in Budget
2013. They went out, they took action, they did not talk to people who were
involved, and the people who are feeling the impact of Budget 2013 right now.
Last year Newfoundlanders and Labradorians protested across the Province
demanding action from this government. They were the ones who asked for this.
They wanted to see this government take action on an inquiry into search and
rescue. The minister says he raised all the concerns, but did not raise this
one.
Why do you feel that an inquiry is not a concern for people in Newfoundland
and Labrador?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, over the years, I spent sixteen years in the
Reserves and the Canadian Rangers. I know the system well. I have a lot of
faith, as a minister, in the system in Newfoundland and Labrador and our
volunteers. Now is the time for action.
There are identified problems with the SAR system in Canada, identified by
the Auditor General, the federal Auditor General. Now is the time for action.
Now is the time for access. He has personnel issues. I have suggested ways to
overcome that issue. So now is the time to move on the recommendations, which
they have endorsed in the federal government, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Speaking of the time for action, Mr. Speaker, I would say that
the Noseworthy report gave a scathing review of the Department of Advanced
Education and Skills. It says the department is lacking co-ordination. It is
lacking communication, evaluation, strategy, and direction. The report contains
eighty-seven recommendations. In the Blue Book in 2003 you want to talk about
action it says that they would act on recommendations within sixty days.
So, I ask the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills: When can we expect
an official response on this report?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite would know from
participation in Estimates and other debates in this House, we are taking
significant action to realign the Department of Advanced Education and Skills
with the needs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. We are making those choices,
we are making those decisions, and we are taking those directions in the
interests of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
The future has never been brighter in this Province, Mr. Speaker. There are
tremendous opportunities for people to get an education here, to work here, to
build a home, and to raise a family. We are making sure that the services
delivered through the Department of Advanced Education and Skills are aligned to
match what is required and to support Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: Well, I will talk about the action from that department. This
is the kind of action that the Noseworthy report talks about. It actually
cautioned about cutting EAS offices, which this government has done. It talked
about making budget cuts, it talked about decreasing jobs. It also says that
this would increase challenges within the department. He also went on to say
that this department is already dysfunctional and facing enormous challenges.
I ask the minister: This report cost $150,000, yet the changes in your
department conflict its own recommendations, so how can you reconcile the two?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite would know that reports are
commissioned, written and developed on a weekly basis in government, just like
in the private sector. Reports are used to inform decisions, Mr. Speaker.
Let's be very clear, there is nobody who ever said that the Noseworthy
report, or any other report will be final and binding and that the
recommendations therein would be implemented. We take all of those pieces of
information, just as we take consultations with people right across the
Province. That is what is driving the agenda of the Department of Advanced
Education and Skills.
I remind the member again, it is this government that has created an economic
climate that has never been better for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador,
and it is this government that is aligning the Department of Advanced Education
and Skills to ensure that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians avail of every
opportunity available to them.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. BALL: I thank the minister, because the economic climate just
listen to this economic climate. Seven years after launching a Poverty Reduction
Strategy the Noseworthy report stated that AES is not doing a good job at
transitioning Income Support clients into the labour market. This government is
saying that we have this looming labour market out there but we are not
transitioning Income Support clients into that market.
If your Poverty Reduction Strategy is so successful, why is it there are more
people on Income Support today than there was in 2009?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I say to the member opposite, you cannot have it
both ways. You cannot stand in the House and criticize because we are trying to
change something and then when I give an answer talking about how we are
changing, stand up and say: Well, you should not be changing it.
The fact of the matter is when you are talking about transitioning Income
Support recipients into the workforce or any number of the many of activities
that the Department of Advanced Education and Skills is engaged in that is
exactly what we are doing. We recognize the opportunities that exist in this
Province. I have outlined them over and over again in this House, as has the
minister.
Income Support recipients are but one target group, and we will do what we
can to provide the supports, the financial means and the family supports to help
those people avail of the educational opportunities, and subsequent to that, the
employment opportunities that exist in the Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, yesterday we learned of a gruesome discovery of
moose carcasses close to the Trans-Canada Highway near the community of Benton.
We also learned they were deposited there by conservation officers.
I ask the minister: Is this common, and how many more of those moose
graveyards are around the Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I do not spend
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I do not spend a lot of time in the woods but
I would imagine that wild animals are born in the woods, and I would suspect
they die in the woods as well.
Mr. Speaker, conservation officers obviously have to deal with moose that are
killed on the highway. These carcasses have traditionally been taken into remote
areas of the Province far from the highway. Unfortunately, it did not happen in
this particular case. The senior officials have directed officials of the
department to ensure that this does not happen again.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, an official with Natural Resources admitted that
the dumping of animal carcasses in the woods does happen. Meanwhile, if a
private citizen did the same thing they would be charged with illegal dumping.
I ask the minister: Why are you allowing conservation officers to dump
carcasses in the woods while there is a major effort to curb illegal dumping in
our Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I am advised that for many, many years the
carcasses are in fact taken to remote sections of the woods. The carcasses, of
course, are eaten by other wild animals and disappear in that way. That will
continue.
There are some places, of course, Mr. Speaker, where landfills may be close
by that can be utilized if permitted. There are other areas where the Department
of Environment has even allowed pits for the burial of moose. I think
traditionally, as I said, wild animals are born in the woods and will die in the
woods.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, these animals died on the road. It is a major
concern for health with disease with the rotting carcasses. Minister, you should
take it a bit more seriously, especially when you take it and you pile all the
animals in one spot near a community where people are out walking.
I ask the minister, many municipalities are using cameras and other
electronic devices to catch illegal dumpers: How can you expect the citizens of
the Province to buy into the Waste Management Strategy when we have our own
officials creating moose graveyards throughout this Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is right, this is a serious
issue. The officials of the Department of Natural Resources and the conservation
officers take their responsibilities and their duties very seriously.
Unfortunately, this particular carcass was left close to the highway. The
officials have been involved to be more careful and ensure that the disposal of
carcasses takes place in the appropriate way and according to the rules and
regulations of the department.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: Just to let you know, Minister, there were three carcasses,
not just one, so this was not an isolated incident. It is a very serious health
issue, Mr. Minister.
Mr. Speaker, we have learned that the government bailed out the pellet plant
in Roddickton by paying $50,000 to cover their insurance premiums. Apparently,
the company could not afford to pay their own insurance.
I ask the Premier: After putting $11 million in taxpayers' money into this
idle plant, can you confirm that the government is now covering their insurance
bills?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the government is proud to stand with the
people of the Great Northern Peninsula. We have made a major investment which
an hon. member just made into a plant at Roddickton.
We are continuing to work with that company and to work with proposals that
it has put forward to the government to hopefully ensure that, for the benefit
of harvesters and citizens of the Great Northern Peninsula, there will an
opportunity to sell wood and to be employed in the industry there. Hopefully, we
can take advantage of markets throughout the world that might be available to
provide some prosperity to that particular plant and others throughout the
Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: I missed that, Mr. Minister how many people are working
there now, with the great investment that your government made, against all the
officials who said no, the money should not go there for several reasons. I
missed how many people are working there, Minister.
It has been confirmed by the Auditor General that government took on a
significant risk by giving the company $11 million. The Premier pushed this
project through the system without listening to concerns expressed by her
officials, and now the plant is sitting idle while we pick up all the insurance
bills.
I ask the Premier: How much of this money has been repaid to the people of
the Province, and when can we expect full repayment of this loan?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, we support industries throughout Newfoundland
and Labrador; we do it all the time. We are supporting a mill in Corner Brook,
and the hon. member does not have any problems with that. We also provided
support to a wood pellet industry and a sawmill company up in Roddickton. They
are having difficulties; there is no question about that. The plant is idle at
the moment.
One of the things they have done, they have formed some partnerships with
other stakeholders and in the call for expressions of interest for fibre in
Central Newfoundland and in Labrador, there are a number of proposals that can
see an enhancement and expansion to the wood pellet industry in Central
Newfoundland and in Labrador, and hopefully up the Northern Peninsula as well.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, the Labrador School Board is making a position
of education psychologist redundant in Labrador and replacing it with an
education assessor to accommodate the bumping procedure within the board.
I ask the minister: Why is the school board allowed to eliminate this very
important position through transfer, putting the learning ability of children at
risk?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I believe there was some concern raised, as the hon. member has mentioned,
about a position being removed. Mr. Speaker, quite simply, it is a collective
bargaining issue. We just have to allow those things to work its way through the
process.
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, the Labrador School Board has advertised for an
educational psychologist for seven years before it finally had a candidate in
the position last fall. With the elimination of the role, children in Labrador
may be required to travel to St. John's to the Janeway Hospital to be diagnosed.
I ask the minister: Why would the children of Labrador have to leave home for
proper care due to amalgamation of the school boards and the elimination of
services?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I have cautioned some members across the way
before about making statements that are creating anxiety in parents. This is
another case.
Mr. Speaker, the students of this Province, Labrador and on the Island,
receive first-rate service from this government. Our investment in special
education services is second to none in this country. Again, as I have said, the
position is there, it remains there, and there is a collective bargaining issue.
We will let that process take its course.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, this is the only qualified education
psychologist in Labrador, a member of Nunatsiavut with cultural ties to the
region. This person is also a clinical psychologist, adding to their level of
expertise and ability to provide the necessary services.
I ask the minister: Is this what you meant when you said in response to my
question last week and Hansard will confirm this "the programs that are in
place and the resources that are in place will be protected under this new
arrangement"?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, under a collective bargaining issue, a
particular individual does not have the determined right to that position. The
position is there. It will be filled. I cannot determine who the position will
be filled by.
Again, our investment and this Budget, Mr. Speaker, we decided we were going
to maintain those front-line services, and those services to special education
students will be maintained.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
In response to my clear questions yesterday on expropriated Abitibi
properties, the Minister of Natural Resources gave us an impromptu history
lesson but he did not answer the question. There are serious concerns about how
much the people of the Province are out of pocket and how long before they will
be out of the red.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Will he appoint an independent third party
auditor to assess the deal and report to the House on the merits of this
government's hasty botched expropriation?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, there is no need of such a person because they
already exist. The (inaudible) have their own auditor, or we have the Auditor
General who can do that.
Mr. Speaker, the hydroelectricity assets from Central Newfoundland are going
to provide tremendous value to the people of the Province. It already has and
will continue to do so. The benefit to the ratepayers of the Province from just
the cost of oil that has been displaced because this energy asset has now been
available, we have electricity replacing oil. It has already provided a benefit
to ratepayers in this Province that exceeds the value of what we paid for those
assets.
Mr. Speaker, my officials have met with Nalcor to make a determination of the
value over a twenty-five year period; in other words, what has happened since
expropriation in 2009, for a twenty-five year period. There are obviously a
number of factors that you have to take into that estimate, the offsetting of
fuel costs to Holyrood, market prices
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I am interested in what the minister is saying. What I would like to see in
this House, and maybe he will table it, are all the documentations, the
evidence, and the proof that he is talking about.
Will he table that information?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In calculating the value to the Province over the next twenty-five years, as
I said, we have to look at things like discount rates, the cost of fuel,
interest rates, market price of electricity and so on. Based on these factors, I
have been advised that they are projected to provide a total benefit to the
Province, to Nalcor, and to the ratepayers in this Province of hundreds of
millions of dollars over the next twenty-five years.
This is a hydroelectric asset that has been acquired. We have to pay only for
half of the value of the asset. This will provide benefits. It will be owned
ultimately by Nalcor. It will be owned by the people of the Province. It will
provide them with cheaper electricity than they are paying now based on the cost
of oil to Holyrood. This is a good deal for the people. It is a good deal. We
have the people's assets back where they belong.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, this government keeps throwing numbers around.
Yesterday, the minister did not provide an answer to my question about the
claims made by a government backbencher last weekend that government has made
$50 million in the past four years from the expropriated Abitibi hydro assets.
Now the minister is speaking about hundreds of millions as we move into the
future.
Will he please give us the correct information? Give us the documents to
prove what he is saying.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, obviously, the Leader of the Third Party does
not understand the difference between the past, since 2009, to today. The
benefit that we have received over and above the cost has been, to the end of
February, $55 million; to March 21, $65 million. On a go-forward basis over
time, over twenty-five years, somewhere between $369 million, probably around
$400 million, but who knows, based on the forecast for interest rate discounts
and the price of oil.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
It is the minister who does not understand. I am asking a simple question,
show us the proof.
Mr. Speaker, we learned in Estimates Committee for Justice that government
has no immediate plans for the Whitbourne youth secure, custody centre. The
minister noted government has to find an alternate way to deal with youth
offenders who need the service.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Justice: Can he elaborate on what he is
considering as alternate ways to help young offenders in this Province?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what there is to elaborate on. In
her
preamble she said I had no plans, so I cannot very well elaborate on
something I do not have.
What I can say to you, though, is that when we considered Whitbourne and we
considered the staffing at Whitbourne, we considered the fact that the number of
inmates on average has gone down from about sixty to I believe at the time of
Estimates around seven inmates per year. We were pushing well over eighty-plus
employees out there, Mr. Speaker. As we did a reconciliation of the resources
that were required to provide the services to the clients out there, we
recognized an opportunity to save some money and still provide the kinds of
services that were required, and that is what we have done.
We will take a further look at that as we move forward, Mr. Speaker, and if
there is an opportunity to move away from that service delivery model in that
facility, then we will explore that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I ask the minister then to tell us, they are considering alternate plans: How
long is it going to take before we know the plans so that we know that these
young offenders are being taken care of with justice and equality?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear for the member here, and for
all those who are listening or paying attention to this debate. The young
offenders in Whitbourne are being taken great care of. They are receiving
quality services from social workers and psychologists. They are receiving
outdoor recreational activities, farming activities, all of the same kinds of
activities, services and supports that they would have been receiving over the
last seven or eight years. Let me reassure the member opposite that will
continue, Mr. Speaker.
If we decide to transition away from that model of service delivery and
perhaps offloading an asset that is a tremendous financial burden to the
Province at this point in time for the number of youth who are there, if we
decide to go down that road, then we will certainly make that available to the
public for discussion.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's Centre.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, it is Nurse Appreciation Week and we want to thank the amazing
nurses serving the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. The minister directed
the RHAs to cut at least 125 management positions, the majority of which will be
nurse managers in the front lines.
Mr. Speaker, what is the plan? Has the minister done an impact assessment or
requested one on how these cuts will affect patient care and RN workloads? Will
the minister table that assessment?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, first of all, we will start with our normal correction. I did
not direct the RHAs to do any such thing. What has happened is that we have
started down the road of operational reviews. Eastern Health started their
operational review last year and in the process of doing that they identified
efficiencies that could be found through managerial positions within their RHA.
The other three health authorities, Mr. Speaker, are in the process now of
doing their operational reviews. We anticipate they, too, will find the same
efficiencies within the management structure. This is not a matter of direction;
this is a matter of due course being followed through the operational reviews.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's Centre.
MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Those management positions are going.
Mr. Speaker, professional development is a key issue for attracting and
retaining nurses. It helps nurses be current in their areas of expertise and
benefits patient care. This past year, the minister issued a moratorium to all
RHAs to discontinue all funding of registration, travel, and leave replacement
for professional development for nurses. Our nurses want to be current in their
areas of expertise.
I ask this minister: What exactly is the policy on ongoing professional
development?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS SULLIVAN: Once again, Mr. Speaker, I issued no directive. The RHAs, as
they looked to finding their own efficiencies throughout the system, identified
various areas within their work and within scopes of practice within which they
thought they could find efficiencies.
Mr. Speaker, one of those areas was in the area of travel; another was in the
area of professional development. Any essential professional development still
happens. There has been no curtailment of that whatsoever.
In terms of optional professional development, Mr. Speaker, the RHAs have
directed that they take a closer look at that. In some cases, some of that
professional development is still going ahead, but it may be that one person may
be going, as opposed to two or three people, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY: Mr. Speaker, as the Child and Youth Advocate pointed out
earlier this year, deficiencies in documentation and communication standards in
the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services put children at risk of
neglect and abuse.
When will government address these deficiencies and fully implement the
standard service delivery team model for child protection, adoption, and youth
corrections that was promised almost two years ago now?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, that question was asked and answered this morning in Estimates.
We have seen the recommendations of two or three of those reports, and we have
seen the recommendations as well that have come through the Susan Abell report.
Recommendations have been accepted by the department, are being acted upon by
the department, and are being implemented.
Mr. Speaker, one of the most important recommendations that the department
has followed up on has to do with the allocation of social workers within the
department. They aimed for a ratio of one in twenty, and currently they are at
one in twenty, Mr. Speaker. It is certainly a huge
AN HON. MEMBER: One in twenty-one.
MS SULLIVAN: One in twenty-one, thank you. It is a huge improvement over
where things have been. They also looked in terms of supervisors and social
workers, and they are now at one in six, in terms of a supervisor having
responsibility (inaudible)
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY: Mr. Speaker, there are currently a number of vacancies in the
front line, including fourteen social workers. The promised new team delivery
model for CYFS is supposed to include one social work assistant for every six
social workers to allow for improved communications, documentation, and plans of
care.
When will government provide staffing resources needed to ensure that the
department service delivery team model is fully implemented?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In response to the question from the member opposite, Mr. Speaker, I will
point out that there is, in fact, a ratio that is being worked on. We answered
that question this morning in the sense of saying that we are constantly looking
at recruitment and retention within this department. We recognize that the team
model is the best model, and it is a model that we are working toward.
Mr. Speaker, in most all cases, that is a model that is totally, totally
complemented. There are some areas, however, where we do not yet have assistance
for social workers, but that has not changed the fact that we are out recruiting
for those particular positions.
MR. SPEAKER: The time for Question Period has expired.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. LITTLEJOHN: Mr. Speaker, the Social Services Committee has considered
the matters to them referred and have directed me to report that they have
passed, without amendment, the Estimates of: the Department of Municipal
Affairs; the Department of Education; the Department of Health and Community
Services, and French-Language Services; the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing
Corporation; the Department of Justice; and, the Department of Child, Youth and
Family Services, and Women's Policy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Tabling of Documents.
Notices of Motion.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, Motion 7, pursuant to Standing
Order 11 that this House not adjourn 5:30 p.m. today, Tuesday, May 7, 2013.
Further, Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, Motion 8,
pursuant to Standing Order 11 that the House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. today,
Tuesday, May 7, 2013.
MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that this House do not
adjourn at 5:30 p.m. today, Tuesday, nor adjourn at 10:00 p.m. today, Tuesday.
All those in favour of the motion?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against?
Motion carried.
Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Burgeo La Poile.
MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have a petition to the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of
Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the
undersigned residents humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS Newfoundland and Labrador currently has the highest unemployment rate
in Canada; and
WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador anticipate a labour
shortage of 70,000 people by 2020; and
WHEREAS eliminating the career practitioner knowledge base is contrary to
attaching people to the labour market; and
WHEREAS EAS agencies are grassroots hubs in communities providing services
like skills development, resume development, interview skills, and facilitating
attachment to the labour market and community; and
WHEREAS loading the workload of 226 employees onto 139 Advanced Education and
Skills employees would be an overwhelming expectation, increasing staff
turnover, and thus decreasing rapport with clients;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to reverse
the decision to cut funding to EAS agencies in the Province.
As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, this is one of the things that was brought up in the Noseworthy
report which was a very comprehensive, thorough report done by John Noseworthy
at the cost of $150,000. I will tell you, he certainly earned the money, going
by the deficiencies that he pointed out in this department. It took him almost
300 pages to show what a state this department actually is in. Again, this is
what happens when you cobble together a bunch of different programs into a
department without actually thinking about what you are doing first.
The EAS agencies is one of those things that has been tossed out into the
wind; 226 people in this Province who were doing a good service, providing a
good service, contributing to our economy and making sure that the labour
shortage that is there is going to be addressed.
It is funny because Mr. Noseworthy actually cautioned that cutting EAS
offices, budgets, and jobs would increase challenges to the department which is
already dysfunctional. It seems like we actually went against the Noseworthy
report.
I am looking forward to doing the Estimates tomorrow for Advanced Education.
This is one of the questions we will likely ask, amongst many; exactly why did
we make this decision which goes against the report that be bought and paid for
earlier in the year that apparently we were not using when we made these
decisions.
Again, there are lots of questions coming up; unfortunately, EAS employees,
226 of them were tossed out without any serious consideration or thought given
to what was being done.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for The Straits White Bay North.
MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in
Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland
and Labrador humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS Route 438 (Croque-St. Julien's, Grandois Road), a former woods road,
is nearly thirty kilometres of gravel road; and
WHEREAS the students, workers, and residents must travel this road for all
education, health, business and other services; and
WHEREAS the Department of Transportation and Works has no immediate plans to
do major upgrading on Route 438 despite the current road conditions being
disgraceful; and
WHEREAS it is the government's obligation to provide basic infrastructure to
all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians;
We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to
allocate funds in the 2013 provincial roads program to upgrade Route 438.
As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, the petition is signed by residents of Croque, Roddickton,
Englee, Corner Brook, and Conche. Mr. Speaker, this road is a former resource
road that I travelled on Saturday and in it, the condition is absolutely
disgraceful. There are tree stumps and logs growing up through the road or being
visible, that students have to travel over, and all residents. There is no
commercial activity on this road, in these communities; there are no government
services there. It would essential to at least bring in some crushed stone and
to do the work that is needed so that the people can have a gravel road in this
region that is up to standard in today's society in Newfoundland and Labrador.
These people are not asking that the road be paved for the thirty kilometres.
There are a small number of residents there. They do expect that the Department
of Transportation and Works would provide an adequate level of crushed stone and
make sure the tree stumps and things like that are removed from this highway,
and not just covered over.
There needs to be work done. This matter needs to be addressed because this
is 2013 and we should not have to be living like this. So I submit this petition
on behalf of constituents and others in the Province.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. EDMUNDS: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. House of Assembly of the Province
of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the
undersigned humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS there is an identified need for all levels of care in all regions of
Labrador; and
WHEREAS the Paddon Home is suitable for all levels of care
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to conduct
a needs assessment to identify the needs of all levels of long-term care in
Labrador and to reopen the Paddon Home for care of long-term residents in Happy
Valley-Goose Bay.
As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Now, Mr. Speaker, this particular submission is signed by people in Hopedale,
Rigolet, Makkovik, and Happy Valley-Goose Bay. The reason they are coming
forward is because they know of the situation at the Melville Hospital in Goose
Bay.
I was actually at the hospital on Sunday afternoon visiting some of my
constituents and certainly some friends and relatives. As I walked through the
hospital, Mr. Speaker, I saw individuals in the hallways, some on beds, some in
wheelchairs, and many who have actually taken up hospital rooms that were
created for acute care patients.
I will say it, I said earlier in petitions I submitted and I will say it again,
as the population of Labrador increases, specifically Happy Valley-Goose Bay
with the construction of Muskrat Falls Project and the expected population to
rise to an extra 3,500 people, so will the demand on the resources in Upper Lake
Melville. One resource is going to be the hospital, Mr. Speaker. Certainly there
will be times when people may not be accommodated due to the over crowdedness at
the hospital.
I look forward to this government acting on the reopening of the Paddon Home
for long-term care in Happy Valley-Goose Bay.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's North.
MR. KIRBY: To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland
and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents
of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS students of the Adult Basic Education program at the College of the
North Atlantic do not wish to attend privatized educational facilities; and
WHEREAS College of the North Atlantic has the most accredited Adult Basic
Education program in Newfoundland and Labrador; and
WHEREAS students are concerned as to the availability of private institutions
and whether or not they can accommodate additional students;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to urge government to reverse this damaging decision to
students and reinstate Adult Basic Education programming at College of the North
Atlantic.
As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, on this petition today we have more petitioners from Labrador,
from North West River, Sheshatshiu, and Goose Bay. Yesterday, I presented a
different petition. There are now two petitions regarding Adult Basic Education
that are coming in periodically to my office: one is this one which is to
reinstate the program; the other one is for government to produce or release the
enrolments, funding and graduation figures that have been talked about. There is
much confusion in the information that has been released to the public.
This letter that was written to the Premier from instructors of Adult Basic
Education at College of the North Atlantic talks about the serious financial and
social costs of eliminating the program. They also talk about the fact that the
source for the figures that have been released publicly has not been revealed;
hence, their accuracy and relevancy to the argument are questionable in the
opinion of those instructors.
Also, yesterday I pointed out some of the things that have happened since,
the unintended consequences of this decision. For example, students possibly not
being able to get a place in residence because they are not College of the North
Atlantic students, and thereby do not have the first opportunity to get a
residence room as a result of that.
We continue to receive this petition. I and the Minister of Advanced
Education and Skills, the Premier, and members of the Official Opposition
continue to get e-mails almost on a daily basis about this from individuals
across the Province. So I would urge members opposite to rethink this decision
and ask government to change this, because it is a wrong-headed and foolhardy
direction for us to go in.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.
MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, a petition to the hon. House of Assembly of the
Province of Newfoundland in Parliament assembled, the petition of the
undersigned residents humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS home care allows the elderly and people with disabilities to remain
within the comfort and security of their own homes, home care also allows people
to be discharged from hospital earlier; and
WHEREAS many families find it very difficult to recruit and retain home care
workers for their loved ones; and
WHEREAS the PC Blue Book 2011 as well as the 2012 Speech from the Throne
committed that government would develop a new model of home care and give people
the option of receiving that care from family members; and
WHEREAS government has given no time commitment for when government plans to
implement paying family caregivers;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to
implement a new home care model to cover family caregivers.
And in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, what is being sought here is not something that was not
promised. It is not something that will cost government more. The promise was
made, Mr. Speaker, to cover the cost of family members who are qualified home
care providers for people who are already eligible to receive home care.
Mr. Speaker, the same recipients, the same patients, the same elderly people
would receive care from qualified strangers. What is the difference if they
receive care from qualified family members, people they know, people who are
close to them? Mr. Speaker, this does not cause an extra draw down of more funds
from the Treasury. It simply permits the government (
a) to keep a promise, and
(
b) to permit people to live in maybe a little more dignity than they would if
they were dealing with strangers for this particular service that is provided to
them.
Mr. Speaker, the issue really is: Did the government promise large and
deliver small? Most people would prefer somebody, including government, and in
particular political parties, who promise small and deliver large. In this case
the government made a large promise, there is a small commitment.
I know government has already made some very small steps toward it, but while
people are waiting time is passing and there is no reason that this could not be
implemented. The appropriations already sought in this year's Budget will
certainly be passed. So, Mr. Speaker, this is a simple request. Do it now,
because you promised it.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment
and Conservation, that we move to Orders of the Day.
MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that we now move to Orders of
the Day.
All those in favour of the motion, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Motion carried.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I call Order 3, second reading of a bill,
An Act
to Amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation
Newfoundland and Labrador Act. (Bill 1)
MR. SPEAKER: When the debate finished yesterday, I think the Member for
Mount Pearl South was the last person to speak to the motion.
The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.
MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, this is an important piece of legislation. It
is a piece of legislation that I have no doubt will receive uniform support from
all sides of the House. Eventually, there may well be amendments sought because
what we are looking at here is for safety for offshore workers. Safety for
offshore workers is very important.
This looks at people who are involved in the petroleum industry which employs
a large number of people in our Province and which is the cash cow that has
permitted government to be able to do the things that it has done in the last
half-dozen or more years. When we look at offshore safety, Mr. Speaker, people
in this Province have taken really huge risks with life and limb over the last
400 or 500 years since we were discovered by Europeans. Undoubtedly, even people
before Europeans took significant risks in earning a livelihood.
We are the Province that experienced the great sealing disasters, where we
lost hundreds of people on the ice. We are the people who go out to sea in small
boats, in bad weather, huge waves, to extract and to prosecute a living from the
ocean.
Mr. Speaker, many of the elements of what makes us who we are is the fact
that a lot of our industry is competitive. The fishery is a competitive industry
if one fisherman catches one fish, another fisherman does not catch that fish.
We see it today in all sorts of search and rescue issues. For example, if it is
a competitive turbot quota, if one fisherman puts to sea and catches that quota
or part of that quota, and somebody else does not put to sea because the wind is
too high, the weather is not so good, then that person loses out.
Historically, we have always known what it is like to risk life and limb in
order to make a living. That has taken on a new light in dealing with the
offshore, because when the Ocean Ranger went down we knew what that was like
with the deaths of eighty-four people. Somebody from the Ocean Ranger was known
to practically everybody in this Province, and if not, one of the people who
died on the Ocean Ranger, one of their family members.
There were discussions and talks about pushing safety, and pushing and
pushing to extract profit. It is one thing when the individual willingly goes on
the water and takes a risk and takes a chance in order to earn a livelihood and
maybe do a little bit better than the next person in the cove, or in the
harbour, or in the bay, but it is quite another thing when you have somebody
sitting in an office giving orders to somebody else saying: You go risk your
life, you risk your limb, you be away from your loved ones because we want to
make profits. Mr. Speaker, it is ever more important that we have appropriate
regulation and strong regulation that really protects our workers who are
working in the offshore.
Yesterday, the Minister of Natural Resources was speaking and spoke at length
about how we came into being with the offshore resources. I would like to add to
that part of the commentary because he spoke of the legal challenge that ended
up with the offshore oil resource belonging to the people of Canada. Well, Mr.
Speaker, it belongs to the people of Canada through the federal government but
we also are the people of Canada.
We are the people of Newfoundland and Labrador but that does not make us any
less Canadian. In fact, in many ways it may make us more Canadian because we
chose to join Canada and Canada for any other living Canadians certainly
evolved. There was nobody around from 1905, which was the last province to come
in before us. We chose Canada, we chose to join. We are content with the
offshore ruling with natural resources, with oil and gas, in that offshore
decision.
Mr. Speaker, there is another offshore decision which does not go so far
offshore, and that too is a Supreme Court of Canada decision. I hope that our
government, no matter which party it is led by, will take another look at who
has the entitlement to the resources out to the three-mile limit. Out to the
three-mile limit means out to the headlands, to all the points, then out three
nautical miles and all the way across. All of these inland waters, by another
Supreme Court of Canada decision, clearly belong to the people of the Province
of Newfoundland and Labrador as much as if they were on dry land.
Mr. Speaker, that is why in one way it troubles me somewhat when we talk
about drilling in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and when we talk about the horizontal
drilling, and ultimately the fracking that likely will take place. Why the
C-NLOPB has any application in that discussion is beyond me.
It is my view, Mr. Speaker, that clearly those are provincial resources
caught within the territorial sea of three miles that we brought to Canada as a
dominion when we joined. When we joined we were a fully autonomous dominion, the
same as Canada was a dominion, the same as Australia was a dominion, and the
same as New Zealand was a dominion. We came not as a colony and not as a
possession of somebody else, but as our own dominion. We brought those resources
with us.
Mr. Speaker, that Supreme Court of Canada decision says that out to the
three-mile limit it is clearly provincial. That means we need to make sure that
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER (Verge): Order, please!
MR. BENNETT: we appropriately manage that part of the near-shore and
the onshore resources.
Mr. Speaker, this bill that is proposed is something that in my view,
although it is necessary, is pretty feeble. It is a feeble piece of legislation
compared with what is available in the world today. If we look at another regime
for offshore regulation, in some instances we have looked at Norway, but most
importantly we look to Australia. If we look to Australia, we will see that the
Australian offshore is much, much larger than ours.
The Wells report in
article twenty-nine or paragraph twenty-nine, which my
colleagues have dealt with, called for a different regulator, a newer national
regulator. This is not contemplated in this legislation. Mr. Speaker, to show
you how far behind we are with this legislation, in 2005, four years before the
Cougar crash, Australia had that legislation. Australia already had that
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, if the Australians already had that type of legislation and
Australia is very similar to Canada, even though they call it the Commonwealth
of Australia it was still a dominion; and even though they call their federation
states instead of provinces, there is no doubt that it is pretty much exactly
the same as Canada is in composition. By comparison to where we are and
Australia is, if we look at simply in sheer size, the Australian offshore covers
approximately thirty platforms, fifteen FPSOs and FSOs, ten MODUs, ten vessels,
and ninety pipeline facilities. Compared to what we have, the Australians are
doing a much bigger job.
The legislation they passed in 2005, which was four years before the Cougar
crash, the legislation that we are shying away from today, the legislation which
should in my view entrench the Wells recommendation and the Wells
recommendation was made within a year and a bit after the Cougar crash. If we
were to get up to where Australia was in 2005, which is eight years ago, we
would have something similar to their offshore petroleum safety authority which
was established "to regulate the health and safety of workers on offshore
facilities in Commonwealth waters, and in waters where State powers had been
conferred.
Mr. Speaker, what we are looking at today is introducing legislation that
will have the similar aspects of the Australian legislation that was introduced
eight years ago, but we will not have a national regulator. Where are the
Australians today in this instance? In the beginning of 2012, they upgraded that
legislation. That legislation they upgraded at the beginning of 2012. They have
an individual who at that date was Jane Cutler, the chief executive officer of
NOPSEMA. NOPSEMA is the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental
Management Authority.
The Australians today, starting from a year ago, not only do they regulate
offshore health and safety, they also regulate the environment. The Australians,
eight years ago, came further than we plan to go today because we do not want to
have a national regulator. Since then, they have upgraded and improved their
legislation over the past eight years to have national health and safety, and
also to have national environmental regulation.
Mr. Speaker, what would it mean if we had national regulation? If we had
national regulation today, that cargo vessel that is not far from Change Islands
with 3,400 barrels of oil in it, with a crack in the hull that is leaking out
into the ocean, and jeopardizing our wildlife and our fishing industry, that
could easily be caught with the type of legislation, if it were a joint
endeavour between our provincial government and the federal government.
We hear that oh, this took fourteen years to put together this package
because they had to have the agreement of the Nova Scotians and the feds. We do
not need the agreement of the Nova Scotians to deal with our offshore with the
feds, when Nova Scotians have little to no application over there. They can have
their own deal with the feds; we can have our deal with the feds.
Mr. Speaker, how can it possibly take fourteen years to put together a piece
of legislation that will bring us not quite as up to date as the Australians
were eight years ago? The Australian legislation is there to compare; the
Australian legislation is there to contrast.
Mr. Speaker, it is not for want of representation by particular interest
groups. Various interest groups have very big concerns about the health and
safety in the offshore. In the Wells inquiry representations and submissions
were made by the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour.
The Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour said and recommended and
they seemed to be somewhat pleased with this legislation, maybe without
realizing how much further it should go. Their recommendation number four said
that the language in the proposed
legislation be as strong as possible including the use of words such as
administer, enforcement , inspect, and investigate; to do otherwise than to
use words such as compliance and examine (inaudible) self-regulation.
The Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour made this recommendation
three years ago and this is coming in the wake of the deaths of seventeen people
in the Cougar Flight 491 crash and that was years after the Ocean Ranger, so we
certainly should have had enough motivation.
The recommendation number six, which is also a critical recommendation of the
Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour, is that we recommend it to
ensure the right to know and participate by giving the support they need to be
real rights in the offshore workplace, that full-time paid health and safety
representatives are in place and on duty at every work rotation.
Mr. Speaker, the representation in the organized labour of the people who
work in the offshore were making these recommendations three years ago. Justice
Wells made the recommendation in the Wells report that there should be a
national regulator, and he went to great lengths to say that within his terms of
reference because, clearly, you cannot go outside of your mandate. He called the
C-NLOPB to make a request or to ask both levels of government to go together on
a national regulator. Having a national regulator improves the chances of more
compliance and better compliance.
The types of things that he said, "It is recommended that a new, independent,
and stand-alone Safety Regulator be established to regulate safety in the C-NL
offshore. Such a Safety Regulator would have to be established, mandated, and
funded by both Governments by way of legislative amendment, regulation, or
memorandum of understanding, or other means." He is practically pleading in his
report saying you need to do this. I do not really care what you call it or how
you put it together, but do it because it needs to be done.
He also said, "It is further recommended that if, for any reason, it may not
be feasible at this time to do as recommended in 29(
a) above, both Governments
consider the enactment of regulations, or a memorandum of understanding, or such
other mechanism as may be suitable, to do as follows". Mr. Speaker, regulations
are sub-statute. Regulations can be agreed upon by both levels of government, at
a ministerial level, at a Cabinet level, and it can simply be done.
The regulations he had in mind were to "create a separate and autonomous
Safety Division of C-NLOPB, with a separate budget, separate leadership, and an
organizational structure designed to deal only with safety matters. A suggested
design for such a Division is to be found in the Observations
chapter of this
Report."
He also said, "establish, to support the full-time leadership and staff of
the Safety Division, an Advisory Board composed of mature and experienced
persons fully representative of the community and who are unconnected with the
oil industry." Mr. Speaker, what a startling recommendation to say not only
should you have an independent national regulator, you should have somebody who
has no vested interest in the financial outcome, but somebody from the community
who has the best interests of the safety in the offshore.
He said, "The Advisory Board would not be expected to contribute expertise in
aviation or other specialized fields. Its role would be to give mature" and he
keeps on saying mature "and balanced advice and support to the leadership of
the Safety Division, its officers and staff."
He said to "ensure that the Safety Division would have the mandate and
ability to engage, either on staff or as consultants, expert advisors to assist
it in its regulatory tasks. (iv) ensure that the powers, duties, and
responsibilities of the Chief Safety Officer be transferred to and incorporated
in the new Safety Division."
He said under his "Terms of Reference, I cannot recommend directly to
Governments" that was not his job "and so this Recommendation 29 is being
made to C-NLOPB, which has as part of its role the delegated responsibility to
advise both federal and provincial Governments on offshore safety governance."
His "recommendation is therefore that C-NLOPB itself recommend to both
Governments the changes to the regulatory regime which" he had recommended.
Justice Wells, who was commissioned to do the inquiry following Cougar, said
this needs to be done. Years later the government is coming along, and not only
are they not doing this, their legislation is so weak, is so puerile, is so
childlike that we have not quite caught up to the Australians from 2005. By way
of analogy, by of comparison, Mr. Speaker, if the Australians were on a
ten-speed bike in a road race, we would be coming along on a tricycle with this
legislation trying to catch up with them.
I think the people of this Province deserve better than this from this
government. Clearly, they should be able to beef up this legislation a little
bit, give us a national regulator, really put the health and safety of people
working in the offshore foremost, and then get moving immediately on an
environmental package that would go with it so we can at least catch up to where
the Australians were a year ago.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is a pleasure to rise in second reading of Bill 1 today to participate in
what is an important debate. I am pleased that the Member for St. Barbe
acknowledged the importance of this piece of legislation. It is a complex piece
of legislation.
I take exception to the member's comments that this is a feeble piece of
legislation. On one hand, I am pleased to hear him say that it is likely that
all members of this hon. House will support it, but I am disappointed to hear
him suggest that it is feeble, to use his word. We are talking about a piece of
legislation that is rather comprehensive. We are talking about bringing together
multiple jurisdictions, and ultimately, we are talking about creating a safer
environment for our workers in the offshore.
I want to begin just with a few reflections on the comments from the Member
for St. Barbe, who talked extensively about the Wells inquiry, and specifically
Recommendation 29. Let me be very clear, Mr. Speaker. On this side of the House,
we support every single recommendation that came out of the Wells inquiry,
including Recommendation 29.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENT: Recommendation 29 calls for an independent offshore regulator.
We have been calling on the federal government for just that because we believe
it is the right thing to do and we support Commissioner Wells' recommendations.
At every opportunity that the Premier has had, that ministers in this government
have had, we have been calling on the federal government to implement
Recommendation 29.
We are pleased that twenty-eight of the twenty-nine recommendations have been
implemented, but we do believe the call for an independent offshore regulator is
absolutely the right one, and it is one that we will continue to advocate for.
In fact I said it to a couple of my colleagues late last week there is
probably no family in this Province that has not been touched by one of the
tragedies that has occurred in the offshore, be it the Ocean Ranger disaster, or
the Cougar Flight 491 tragedy. These are major disasters that have impacted just
about every family in Newfoundland and Labrador.
We have such a connection to the sea here. As a government, that is why all
members of this House consider issues related to search and rescue so important,
issues related to safety in the offshore so important. That is why I am so
pleased to have an opportunity to participate in this debate today.
For the member opposite to suggest that somehow we would not support
Recommendation 29, nothing could be further from the truth. We will continue to
advocate for that. In the meantime, we do believe this is a very comprehensive
piece of legislation that has been a long time coming.
It is national I believe throughout North America, actually. It is
Occupational Health and Safety Week. I am pleased the Minister of Service NL has
been doing numerous things to commemorate that occasion this week.
In my own department, the department I work in these days, Innovation,
Business and Rural Development, I am receiving messages on a daily basis from
employees who are actively engaged in the work of occupational health and safety
within our department. I know that is going on throughout government and
throughout North America this week. So it is a really appropriate time to be
addressing what is a very important piece of legislation.
There is great benefit to developing our natural resources offshore. There
are jobs created. There is huge economic benefit. It is generating huge wealth
for people in this Province, but we are very cognizant of the fact that we need
to do so in a responsible way. We need to do so in a very calculated way. We
need to do so in a very safe way. The safety of those women and men who are
working in that environment has to be paramount at all times.
When we talk about developing comprehensive offshore occupational health and
safety regulations and putting a regime in place that continues to address the
needs of workers in the offshore, there are a lot of things to consider.
Important things like safety inspections; accident incident investigations;
occupational health and safety committees; ensuring that the right kind of
safety training and an appropriate amount of safety training is available for
workers in the offshore.
We need to make sure that in all work environments, onshore or offshore,
everywhere, that there are appropriate emergency preparedness plans in place;
that there is an appropriate level of new employee orientation to address health
and safety; that employers have a proper safety auditing system in place; and
that employers have preventative maintenance programs in place. All of these
things are essential.
What we are trying to do here is ensure that these occupational health and
safety regulations, that an appropriate occupational health and safety regime
exists within the Atlantic Accord, which is why these amendments are necessary
at this time.
What we are doing through this act is amending the Canada-Newfoundland and
Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Newfoundland and Labrador Act. There are
actually amendments required to the Atlantic Accord to do what we are talking
about in this bill.
There is a safety regime in the offshore now, of course. There are rather
extensive regulations related to safety in place in the offshore currently.
There are safety provisions in the Accord Acts that provide autonomy of the
chief safety officer from the C-NLOPB to exercise certain powers respecting
offshore operations.
There is an MOU to give the C-NLOPB safety officers authority to administer
key provisions of the provincial Occupational Health and Safety Act. Those
principles, which are well known to many members of this House, include the
right to refuse, the right to know, and the right to participate.
We also currently have draft occupational health and safety regulations and
to do is come up with a single, comprehensive legislative framework to eliminate
this approach that we currently have with multiple jurisdictions, multiple
regulations, and multiple pieces of legislation involved.
This legislative framework that is proposed here incorporates key elements of
standard OHS policies and principles, but it also reflects joint governance
between the federal and provincial governments in the offshore. We need to embed
this occupational health and safety regime right into the Atlantic Accord, which
is what we are attempting to do through Bill 1.
This process started a number of years ago. It is rather complex and it has
taken considerable effort from the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, the
Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board, and working with the
Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board.
We have multiple jurisdictions that are involved because we identified a flaw
in the Atlantic Accord essentially that did not allow us to bring in the
occupational health and safety regime that makes more sense than the current
regulatory environment we find ourselves in.
These regulations that we are talking about will not only apply on oil rigs.
They will not only apply on vessels. They will also apply as workers are
travelling to and from work on these vessels or on these rigs. That is important
to note as well. We are simply creating a regulatory framework and comprehensive
occupational health and safety regime within the Atlantic Accord to protect
those who are working in the offshore environment.
My colleague almost had an incident himself, spilling his water, but he seems
to be okay. He is recovering well, and he is onshore at the moment, Mr. Speaker
we think.
Mr. Speaker, as a government we are very committed to offshore safety and we
support the creation of a comprehensive, legislative OHS regime for the
Province's offshore. We are pleased that the extensive collaboration has gone
well, and I understand that legislation is also being tabled by the Governments
of Canada and Nova Scotia. We have to do everything we can to protect the
individuals who are working offshore.
I know that the amendments we are proposing here are tailored to the offshore
working environment and they include things like a worker's right to refusal, a
worker's right to know, and a worker's right to reprisal protection for raising
health and safety concerns. It also includes joint allocation of responsibility
among operators, employers, workers, and suppliers on all matters related to
health and safety.
The new occupational health and safety regime that is proposed by the
amendments that we are debating here today, they apply to workers in transit to
and from offshore platforms, as I have said. Actually, the federal Transport
Minister will now be required to sign off on regulations for the application of
the occupational health and safety regime to workers in transit and the operator
will continue to be responsible for passengers as well.
I really think we are going to end up with a situation where we have
streamlined regulations and simplified occupational health and safety framework
for the offshore.
In the few minutes I have left, I would like to also touch on what
specifically these amendments will do. They will place authority and fundamental
principles of OHS within the Accord itself, as I have said. They will also
clarify the roles of the various parties involved, which I think is really
important as well. They will clarify the roles and responsibilities of
regulators, employers, employees, governments; and, in fact, the provincial
Labour Ministers and the federal Minister of Natural Resources, in consultation
with the Ministers of Labour and Transport Canada, will develop regulations for
offshore occupational health and safety while our offshore petroleum boards will
administer the new legislation. These amendments will also grant those offshore
petroleum boards the authority to disclose information to the public related to
occupational health and safety.
From a transparency point of view and from an access to information point of
view, we certainly support the move to ensure the boards have the authority to
disclose information to the public when it comes to safety and the health of our
workers in the offshore. I think it is really positive that these amendments
will ensure that the new regime also applies to workers who are in transit to
and from our platforms, and would require the federal Minister of Transport to
recommend regulations related to OHS for those workers.
Another thing these amendments achieve, Mr. Speaker, is provide clear and
specific enforcement powers for Occupational Health and Safety officers,
including the powers of investigation, the powers of inspection, warrant
provisions, and order measures in case of dangerous situations. I think these
are absolutely positive steps forward.
As the Member for St. Barbe said, it would not surprise me at all if
everybody in this House supports this important piece of legislation. It makes
sense. It has been a long time coming. It shows what is possible when various
levels of government and various authorities work together. It also demonstrates
our commitment to ensuring that all those workers who work in a very harsh
environment in our offshore have the safest environment possible to conduct that
important work.
That is why I am very pleased to have this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to rise
and speak briefly in support of Bill 1.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's East.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I think with this piece of this legislation we are at a bit of a turning
point. It has been a long time coming. One of the things I had to make note of,
of course, when the government first came out with the piece of legislation and
introduced it was a federal release on the matter. Let me just read one
paragraph here:
"Today's announcement is a result of our extensive collaboration with the
provinces to protect Canadians working in the offshore oil and gas industry a
sector vital to jobs and our economy,' said Minister Oliver. The proposed
amendments introduce measures that will further enhance Canada's offshore
industries' ability to operate safely and to the highest environmental
standards.'"
That was on May 2 of this year that they put out this announcement, of
course. Again it reiterates the fact, as the Natural Resources Minister said the
other day; it was a long road to get here. I keep asking myself why it took so
long, fourteen years from start to finish on this particular piece of
legislation. What the problem was, I do not know. What the work was that went in
behind it, I do not know. Still it was fourteen years, and fourteen years too
long.
We can go back to our history, of course, of accidents in our offshore, and
other members have already talked about it. I guess in some regard these are
ingrained in our history and ingrained in our culture as a result. Everybody
remembers, of course, the most recent accident of Cougar 491.
People would remember the helicopter accident, as well, in Placentia Bay that
happened several years ago. I think it was back in the 1980s. Six or seven men
and women died in that particular accident when it left in Placentia Bay.
Everybody remembers the Ocean Ranger. As other members have already said, we get
up and we state the case for occupational health and safety, remembering those
people we lost, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, people from the mainland who
came and pioneered the resource.
I remember in particular one gentleman, we used to hang around with in high
school, Mr. Craig Tilley, who was lost on the Ocean Ranger. He had quite an
impact on our lives back in high school. He was part of the culture of the early
years of drilling in the Province. It was, to me, representative of what can
happen when things get out of control and things get out of hand.
You do not have sometimes, I guess, enough education. Sometimes we are
younger and maybe we ignore some warnings that are out there, unlike some people
who were out there on the rigs that left it because they recognized the dangers
of working offshore. It is for this reason we all get together, and we have to
talk about an important piece of legislation like that. It is in their memory
that we do this, and it is incumbent upon us to make sure this legislation is
going to work.
From what I see in this particular piece of legislation, there are a lot of
things there that are going to work and we support the government move in that
regard. The only thing that was missing in this piece of legislation, that I
think we all agree on, is the simple fact of having occupational health and
safety separate under Recommendation 29 in the Wells inquiry, to have that
separate safety authority there.
Failing that, however, we should always be pressing for that. Of course,
others have expressed the reasons why. I think it was Justice Wells himself who
said at that particular time that we may never be able to get there, to have
that board in place, but this would be the next best thing to it.
Speaking to this piece of legislation, too, it is important to note. I think
some people would probably have some insecurity as regards to this legislation.
In particular, my thinking would be in knowing that I have talked to a few
people who have been put in this situation. This industry can be intimidating
for somebody who is new into the scene. I think newer employees would probably
face more pressures than people who have been in the industry for several years.
I just want to make some comments as to some of the mechanisms that are built
into this piece of legislation as regards to the powers of enforcement. I think
it is important to note what this piece of legislation is actually doing to
protect workers at the same time, who would be making the call whenever there is
a problem on the offshore or with the helicopter ride, or whatever particular
part of the industry they are working in. It could be one of the supply vessels
or whatever.
When it comes to that, there are protections in there as regards to false
statements of information that can be made. There are also sections in there
that deal with obstruction. There are also sections in there that deal with, for
example, warrants and the taking of samples for anything that might go wrong, or
the acquisition of evidence.
As well as that, the particular sections that would be most interesting I
think to the workers out there would be this particular
section under 201.82. I
think it is very important again to reiterate this
section to those people out
there who are going to be making the majority of the calls when it comes to
occupational health and safety. These are their rights for the workers and these
are their protections.
Under 201.80, "A person shall not prevent an employee from providing to a
health and safety officer or to the board, or to a person or committee having
duties or functions under this Part, information that they may require to carry
out their duties or functions."
We go from that particular
section to 201.82, "An individual to whom
information obtained under this
Part is communicated in confidence shall not
disclose the identity of the individual who provided it except for the purpose
of this Part, and an individual who obtains that information in confidence is
not competent or compellable to disclose the identity of the individual who
provided it"
I think that is a very important
section here that needed to be talked about.
If we are talking about protecting people from reprisal and where the agency,
the chief information officer if you will, has his information to investigate,
it makes it harder for the company or the service in question in order to come
down on that worker. I like that part of it, that there is a degree of
protection there for that particular worker who makes that initial report. At
least that is my
interpretation of it, anyway.
I just want to reiterate some of the things that are in there as regards to
this particular amendment to the Atlantic Accord Implementation Act. We support
these measures that are brought in here. The people we consulted with are very
receptive to this. With the exception of not having that separate agency, this
is pretty good. This is valued support, of course, supporting the workers who
are out there.
It is incumbent on us to have made changes to this act. Again, while it was a
long time coming, we commend the government for coming forward with these
changes. In the next couple of years we are talking about flying out a little
bit farther. We are also talking about drilling a little bit deeper. We all know
what can happen with accidents on the offshore when we drill a little bit
deeper. We have the example, of course, of the Deepwater Horizon in the
Gulf of Mexico that was drilling in about 2,800 metres of water. The rig went up
and we lost some people down there.
We know accidents can happen very easily, of course, with the various
resources out there. When you are dealing in areas where you have never drilled
before, we are going into undiscovered country here, if you will, undiscovered
ways of exploration, and in some ways untried when we are talking about the
Orphan Basin. We are talking about going very deep. It is now, more than ever,
more important to have the protective measures in there in case something is
seen to possibly go wrong out there.
The eyes and ears of the people who are working out there are going to be the
ones who are probably going to be doing the reporting on this. It is incumbent
on them to do so for the protection of their fellow working man or working woman
who is out there working off our shores. As regards to the culture of making a
call, again, I touched on that. Of course, I like the protectionist mechanisms
that are there.
How important is this as regards to the importance to the Newfoundland and
Labrador economy? I think it is pretty clear that government had to do this. As
we go farther along, the numbers are there certainly. If it was based on that
alone, the numbers of people who are working in our offshore needed this. It is
an industry that has great importance to the Province's bottom line.
The Hibernia field, for example, generates about 1,618 people who are working
out there on that project, and we have other projects. Of course, the numbers
should not be strange to government. There are 1,491 people working on the White
Rose project. We can go on through exploration, the Mizzen field. We are a
growing industry and we do need the protections there.
As regards to one thing, as well, that I wanted to have a little thought
about, if you will, or a couple of thoughts about, is the fact of night-time
flying because I think that was touched on in the Wells report and by the
employees who are out there. There is some fear, some concern, over night-time
helicopter flights.
Again, I think that the oil companies that are out there exploring offshore
can go ahead and fly a little bit more, if you will, particularly during winter
months when the daylight hours are shorter, merely with the additional of an
extra helicopter or so. Now that might sound like it is a big expense to an oil
company, but it should not be in the context, say, for example, if you are
talking to ExxonMobil, who in the last quarter made $6.2 billion I think it was,
over the last three months.
Money, as regards to a person's safety and as regards to getting the work
done, I do not think is an object here. What I think is happening here, I can
understand their reasoning for securing their bottom line for the shareholders,
absolutely, but the safety of employees should be first and foremost on people's
minds whenever we are talking about these helicopter night flights.
Of course, it was Wells again, in his report, who talked about the fact that
out of all the accidents that happen out there, you have a 39 per cent how
shall it put it? The survival rate, I should say, is about 39 per cent against a
70 per cent survival rate when it comes to daytime flights.
We know that the waters out there are very cold. The next obstacle that we
have when it comes to rescuing anybody, if anything happens, for example, on an
offshore helicopter flight, happens to be night. It is a barrier. It can be
overcome with a little bit more investment on the part of the oil companies out
there and the accusation of helicopter services, we can get them to do this at
the same time.
There is no doubt that there is a case there already to be made for the
addition of helicopter flights. We know that during the summer the helicopter
flights can occur more, but again during the winter, with the addition of an
extra couple of helicopters, they can get the same work done; they certainly
can. As far as I am concerned, when you are talking $6.2 billion that they made
in the last quarter, it would be at very little expense. I will leave that
there, but again there are ways around that.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that I have read over this legislation. I
have talked to people on this. It seems to be very good to all who are concerned
out there. It is a good move on the part of government and on the part of the
federal government. Again, the wait was fourteen years, but it has been a long
time coming. We support the government with this particular motion.
At the same time, we will continue. As well as the provincial government will
continue, we also will continue over here on this side of the House to make sure
that we keep pressing for that safety authority out there, that separate
occupational health and safety authority out there to look after the needs of
the workers offshore.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Humber West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRANTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is indeed a privilege to stand today and take a few moments to speak to
Bill 1. I believe it is also an appropriate time this week at the beginning of
North American Occupational Health and Safety Week 2013, Mr. Speaker, to be
debating this bill here in the House. I had the opportunity yesterday, as others
did in the House, to be out front for the flag raising with the Minister of
Service Newfoundland and Labrador. It was a great flag raising yesterday
afternoon.
Over the last while, Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity a number of
times to stand in this House and debate issues with people across the floor that
are of necessity and importance to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. I
want to stress today that Bill 1 is absolutely critically important to the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador, especially those who make their living from
the offshore. As the Minister of Natural Resources said yesterday, the health
and safety of all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, especially those working in
the offshore, is absolutely paramount.
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, Mr. Speaker, for hundreds of years have
been etching a livelihood from the sea. They have been doing it, Mr. Speaker, in
a climate that is the harshest in the world: high winds, sleet, fog, ice, and
rogue waves just to name a few. Our people, the people who work offshore, need
to be protected. That is what Bill 1 is introducing here in the House of
Assembly today.
The act is to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord
Implementation Newfoundland and Labrador Act. This act, Mr. Speaker, is
substantive, both in content and size, all 117 pages in length. It is a
culmination of much work and effort over the past fourteen years. It is
important to talk about what this act is. It is also important to talk about
what this act is not, by placing it in content, in context, in perspective, and
in time and circumstance in response to a question from the Member for St.
John's East.
Mr. Speaker, does this government want a regiment that is strong and protects
the safety of workers, a regiment that protects all Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians and all workers in our offshore? This is coming from someone who
has family and friends who for years have been making their livelihoods from the
sea. All members of this House on all sides I do believe, from all political
colours, have been touched by the enormity and strength of the ocean and it has
been referenced here in the House over the last couple of days. It is paramount,
I believe, that we all support this from all sides of the House and that we have
a unanimous vote in the positive on this bill today.
Mr. Speaker, this act is extremely extensive. They are the result of
extensive collaborations between the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador,
the C-NSOPB out of Nova Scotia. In addition, consultations with various
stakeholders during the development of these amendments occurred. They were
conducted in 2002, 2003, and again in 2010 as was illustrated yesterday by the
Minister of Natural Resources. A discussion paper out of those talks was
generated and developed. Written comments were solicited from all stakeholders.
People will ask what it is these amendments do, Mr. Speaker. Well, these
amendments today will provide a clear and enforceable regime and provide
appropriate regulatory making powers in offshore petroleum occupational health
and safety.
The process to get to where we are today took many, many years. They began
long before Commissioner Wells' study and the report he presented, Mr. Speaker.
I want to go on record here today, as did my colleague from Mount Pearl North
and others did earlier, that we support the recommendation of the Wells inquiry,
all twenty-nine of those recommendations. As was talked about here in the House
a number of times, twenty-eight of the twenty-nine have already been implemented
here in the Province, and we support the inclusion of all of them.
This government continues to advocate, as was mentioned in the House by the
Premier last week and the Minister of Natural Resources yesterday, for a
this report, he highlights and says he was aware of the work at that time taking
Scotia, the C-NLOPB, and the C-NSOPB; and that this work that we are taking
place that led to Bill 1 here in the House of Assembly this week, Mr. Speaker,
was taking place and was recognized by Commissioner Wells.
It is important for all of us to remember, and all Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians to remember, Mr. Speaker, this legislation today, and I think it is
recognized by all parties here in the House, does not and will not compromise a
new safety regulatory entity. This bill is comprised of standard occupational
health and safety principles and practices that would complement future
legislative changes.
The amendments, Mr. Speaker, that are included in Bill 1 will provide a clear
and enforceable regime and provide appropriate regulatory making powers in
offshore petroleum operations. This will be achieved by putting authority for
occupational health and safety into legislation governing the offshore petroleum
boards. That is what Bill 1 does. This bill, Mr. Speaker, provides clear and
clean legislation. I think that is important; it is clear and it is clean
legislation from a number of sources on a comprehensive, legislative regime for
occupational health and safety standards for workers in our offshore.
The new legislative regime discussed here in this House today will provide
government with the necessary mechanism, Mr. Speaker, to act on occupational
health and safety related matters. These mechanisms, for example, include the
initiation of audits, inquiries, and the creation of a provincial advisory
council to speak to occupational health and safety issues.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to take a moment out of the 117 or 118 pages to
refer to
section 201.114 on page 107 which talks about the advisory council.
This is important and I think it is a very friendly piece in the Act, Mr.
Speaker, with regard to this
section for the safety of workers in our offshore.
I just want to take a minute or two to go down through that section, 201.114 on
page 107.
It talks about the establishment of this advisory council, Mr. Speaker, "(a)
4 representatives of employees and 4 representatives of industry; and (b) 2
government of the province".
"
(2) In addition to the representatives appointed under subsection (1), the
chief safety officer or his or her representative shall be a non-voting of the
advisory council.
(3) Two employee representatives and 2 industry
representatives shall be appointed jointly by the provincial minister and the
provincial minister defined in paragraph 2(
t) and the other 4 shall be appointed
jointly by the federal count