PDF Version

October 28, 2020

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIX No. 59

The House met at 10 a.m.

MR.

SPEAKER (Reid):

Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Orders of the Day

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Order 2, Committee on Ways

and Means.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

motion is that I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into a

Committee of the Whole on Ways and Means.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a

Committee of the Whole, the Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Brown):

Order, please!

We are now debating the resolution and Bill 47.

Resolution

“That it is expedient to bring in a measure to

authorize the raising from time to time by way of loan on the credit of the

province, in addition to the sum of money already voted, a sum of money not

exceeding $1,000,000,000.”

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS.

COFFIN:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It is a true pleasure to see you sitting in that Chair

and guiding these discussions. It is a wonderful experience and thank you very

much for doing it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MS.

COFFIN:

Mr.

Chair, last night, we were here until midnight discussing the inequities that we

are seeing in our economy. Last night, we talked about the growing division of

income in our society and poor decision-making that is making that a greater

reality for individuals.

Mr. Chair, we have seen individuals who are not earning

a living wage. We see people who have been on a picket line for eight weeks

trying to earn enough money so they can support their families. These are the

individuals who have worked long and hard during COVID, were deemed essential

workers. They are now fighting for the right to go to work and be paid

appropriately for that.

Mr. Chair, last night, we found that police were

brought to the picket line where there was no injunction and it was a peaceful

protest. Individual workers and the union were trying to stand up for labour

rights. What we thought was going to be a simple dispersal escalated at midnight

to 30 riot police showing up at that picket line so that bread could be

delivered to fast-food chains. That is an abhorrent abuse of power.

Mr. Chair, these individuals are simply trying to make

a living for themselves. They are simply trying to show how important it is to

abide by the collective bargaining process and they are being escorted out by

riot police. Can you imagine what it was like for an individual who is possibly

getting part-time hours, earning less than $15 an hour, less than a living wage

with no chance of a pension, with no guarantee of full-time hours? They are

simply there defending their right to go to work and provide an essential

service and they are met with riot police when they are simply trying to defend

their rights.

Mr. Chair, that is abhorrent. Can you imagine the

little old lady who is trying to just top up a little bit of income for herself

so she can have Christmas gifts for her children. She is being escorted off a

picket line by riot police. How are they going to try to explain to their

grandchildren? How do they explain an arrest record when they want to apply for

something?

This is unconscionable. It is an abuse of labour

rights. It is an egregious breach of trust and it suggests to me that whoever

decided to call the riot police was not acting on behalf of the people who

provided us with food during a pandemic. They risked their lives for this.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MS.

COFFIN:

The

$2 they got was clawed back when it was deemed that they are no longer

essential. They are simply fighting for a right to go to work. These are the

people who fed us and they cannot afford to now feed themselves. I can listen to

the individuals on this picket line and they said: I work here. I provide this

food, but I can't afford to buy it because I am not making enough money. I have

to go to a food bank.

Mr. Chair, we've all heard about the individual who's

working part-time hours and getting a little bit of top-up and had to receive

income support to help her be able to raise her family. A single mother who

walks to work for shift work, who needs to pay for child care and just wants to

have a little bit of money for herself is being subjected to this type of

authority and is having their – just the ability to provide for their children,

to create a safe home for them, to be able to give them the clothes they need to

go to school. Maybe if they're lucky they'll get a new winter coat for

Christmas, and we're saying: No, you can't do that; no, you don't have the right

to defend your own job. You do not have the right to ask for reasonable

increases to your pay.

Mr. Chair, what we have seen going on is the

corporation has chosen to cut hours, not allow individuals to work full-time.

They're not giving full-time hours. There are no pensions; there are no

benefits. What they want to do now is tie any increases to a share of the cost

of living allowance. How is that reasonable? How are people supposed to get

ahead when we are going to try to keep them down?

First of all, they don't have a living wage and then

we're going to say: Well, you can have some increases, but not quite as much as

it's going to cost you to live the same way you were before. You'll have an

increase, but not quite as much as everybody else. Not enough to be able to

afford that same bundle of food that you were trying to provide for your

children last week; you won't necessarily get it this week.

I spoke to a lady on the picket line who was working

for 20 years. Twenty years they dedicated their life to working for Dominion.

And do you know what they were making? Fourteen dollars and 10 cents an hour,

after 20 years. There was no pension for this individual. This person was still

not making a living wage after putting that much time and experience into the

work she did.

Don't you tell me that these individuals are not

skilled and trained in what they do. If you go into any grocery store and ask

where is something, not only will they tell you exactly where it is, they will

tell you what the expiry dates are, how much of that product is on the shelves

and when it's going to be delivered again and who is going to deliver that. They

do inventory control; they do security. They ensure that those stores are clean

and safe for us, Mr. Chair.

Now we see our thanks to them is to call the riot

police at midnight to come and move them because, again, they wanted to deliver

bread and bread products to fast-food chains all across St. John's. How on earth

do you think that is? What does that tell these individuals about how we respect

labour rights?

Mr. Chair, if myself and the Member for St. John's

Centre weren't there, we would not have believed the amount of force that was

brought in to address a peaceful protest. Can you imagine what it was like for

somebody who was just sitting there saying, I want to earn a living, I want to

have a living wage, and you're sending 30 riot police in full gear with weaponry

and a paddy wagon to move them out of that?

How do you go home and tell your children about that?

How do you explain to yourself that you are just trying to provide for your

families and you are being threatened? You are being threatened with arrest; you

are being intimidated, just for standing up for your own rights. Mr. Chair, I

was up half the night trying to imagine how bad these individuals must feel for

defending basic rights.

Mr. Chair, we need to do more. We need to legislate a

living wage. We need to encourage a better dispute resolution. We need to

protect these individuals. We do not need to subject them to excessive force.

Mr. Chair, our role here is to protect citizens. It is

to ensure that everyone has the right to access reasonable services and to be

able to create a life for themselves. Our role is to protect these individuals,

not intimidate them.

Mr. Chair, I look forward to having a prolonged debate

about what happened last night.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

MR.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I applaud the previous speaker. Certainly, when I heard

it last night on the news or on the way in this morning, it was a bit appalling

what happened last night. I won't go down that road now, because I think the

Leader of the Third Party has done a very good job on that as well already this

morning.

It was interesting to come back here last night. I was

out in my district. I was attending an event – consultation, actually, on a

community park, and I emailed back because I knew we were sitting in the night.

I asked our House Leader, do you need me back there, or do I need to be back?

His response, well, if you have something to say, if you want to talk, yeah,

come on back. I'll never turn down the opportunity to get up and speak on behalf

of the residents of Topsail - Paradise and on other issues that affect everyone

across this province.

As we proceed along with normal proceedings, there are

not many opportunities to get it all in. So when we talk a money bill then we

get that opportunity. I certainly don't look at it as holding up progress, as

was suggested last night, because what we do and what we progress to do is on

behalf of residents of our districts and residents of Newfoundland and Labrador.

So we take whatever time is necessary to ensure that their issues and their

views and their concerns are brought forward.

What I'd like to just touch base on this morning

affects all of us, and we've talked about it as workers in this province, and

that's the community benefits agreements. We are going through an unusual time.

We have dealt with unemployment in the past and we've come out of it, but

there's a time where we really have to stand up for the employees and the

workers and jobs in this province. When we look at community benefits

agreements, making sure that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are the

beneficiaries of job opportunities here on publicly-funded projects is certainly

a place to start.

People will argue, or others will argue, you can't do

that because what happens in another province that won't let us go in and work?

Well, I can tell you we have gone to work in other provinces because we are very

highly skilled and competent workers. That's why we go elsewhere, because they

know the work that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians can do. They go where there

are no workers currently available to fill those roles. When you're in a

province that has the highest unemployment rate in the country, has an aging

population, we need as much work as we can here in the province.

I go back to 1995, when the Agreement on Internal Trade

came into power. That agreement was essentially in place to ensure the free

movement of services and workers and labour between different provinces. So you

couldn't put up what were called barriers or unnecessary barriers to prevent the

movement of goods or services, or to prevent workers or qualified employees to

enter a province.

I know under that act, when it first came in, there was

a

section where you could have a legitimate objective; you could be contrary to

that act in terms of labour mobility if you had a legitimate objective. That

might be you have a program for under-represented groups. It may be a public

safety issue that prevents some trades or professions from coming into the

province. There are a number of those.

When that agreement first came out, one other

legitimate agreement or objective that was there was labour market development.

You could keep it to your own employees because you're working on labour market

development. It's interesting because that came out around the same time as we

were getting into the oil industry and you wanted to develop your skill set for

that industry. It was very, very applicable at that time.

Somewhere along the lines – because in 2017 it became

the Canadian Free Trade Agreement – that particular legitimate objective is no

longer there. That does not take away from the fact that the intent was

initially there. I think policies, programs, agreements, they're not static;

they have to change. They have to change with the times and what's happening.

Some would suggest other jurisdictions are going to

complain. Under this agreement, there is opportunity for dispute resolution. I

would just look back through the agreement. They actually recorded all the times

there's been a dispute made. I go back through that and I can't find really

anything there in terms of labour mobility that some other jurisdiction founds

problems with.

If we are going to really work on our economy and set

the stage for coming out of this pandemic that we're in, increasing our

workforce and creating long-term meaningful jobs, then we have to look at things

like this. As I mentioned last night, I spoke about the flexibility of our LMDA

funding. We have to really start to think outside the box when it comes to

programming and stand up for the people who elected us and ensure that their

futures are secure.

When you see groups like Trades NL out there lobbying

for community benefits agreements, the immediate employment is one thing, but

there are also far-reaching circumstances here as well. We have an aging

workforce, especially in our skilled trades. If anyone knows anything about the

apprenticeship program, in order to proceed through to a journeyperson status,

you have to be an apprentice under a journeyperson. You have to be mentored; you

have to move from a first-year apprentice, to a second year, to a third, some to

a fourth and then your challenge exam for your Red Seal or your Blue Seal.

The problem here is, with an aging workforce and

individuals not getting work, we lose those mentors and we lose those

journeypeople. You cannot proceed through your apprenticeship unless you have a

journeyperson mentor – you can't. So the long-term issues when it comes to

community benefits agreements, the initial things is, yes, we're getting jobs,

but it's also the future of our tradespeople in this province, and with a Red

Seal in the world, wherever they can go.

We need to really start looking at the underlying

issues around things like the community benefits agreement; it's very far

reaching. It creates long-term, meaningful employment for people in the

province, yes. It contributes to our income in terms of taxes, yes. There are

all those, what I would call, more obvious issues that are addressed by having

people working. One we'll talk about later is poverty. It addresses poverty by

having people working. More income, more taxes in the revenue that we can apply

to what's needed in society. I think we do miss the point in terms of if we

don't have these jobs, if they're not created and journeypeople are not working,

then the apprentices are not getting the on-the-job training that they require

to proceed through.

It was only the other day we talked about trying to get

so many mechanics and so many staff. The government has advertised positions and

they're not being filled or people aren't applying. Well, there's a reason for

that, and that's because they may not be there. They may not have the

qualifications in which to come forward and apply. When we talk about major

projects, like Hibernia when that started, I can guarantee you when they come in

and they're looking for world-class tradespeople who are qualified and meet all

of the criteria for those jobs, then we have to ensure that continues on and we

have to ensure they get the opportunity to continue in their education

Community benefits agreements will certainly help in

that respect; it's an outcome that we don't always recognize.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Member for Harbour Grace - Port de Grave.

MS.

P. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It is certainly good to see you there in that Chair,

and I commend my colleague as well from last night, the Member for Bonavista did

a great job. It certainly is an example of everyone working together. As we

know, the Speaker's office is a non-partisan office and we certainly are

demonstrating team work here today and last night.

I also just want to go on record today, to wake up to

that news, what happened with those workers certainly is heartbreaking. I have

two Dominion stores in the region where I live. One in Bay Roberts and, of

course, one in Carbonear. They've been out there for so long. They've been out

there several months picketing in all kinds of weather, day and night.

We know they're in the private industry. We know the

negotiations are happening, of course, with Unifor, with their union and the

private company, Loblaw, but to drive by and to see those men and women there,

young and old, all ages, it's heartbreaking.

One night I met with the Town of Bay Roberts and I had

to run up the road to the Shopper's Drug Mart, and I saw those people. It was a

wet night, it was a cold night and I went and picked up some food. I went to the

picket line and I said: Guys, I can't offer you a deal, I'm not in the position

to do so, but as your MHA, as your friend, as your neighbour, I support you. I

went up there and had a chat with them. Enough is enough.

I thanked them on behalf of our government. I thanked

them on behalf of the district that I represent, Harbour Grace - Port de Grave

because let's just think back in March when this unprecedented pandemic struck,

not just our province but the entire world, those men and women went to work.

They didn't stay home in the safety of their own home like most of us did. They

went to work. They had a decision, they didn't have to, but you know perhaps the

situations, how they lived their lives and the things they considered in the

lives they lived, they had to go to work, but they did.

Imagine where we would have been, as a people, as the

province, if we didn't have our food stores to provide us the essentials that we

need. Just imagine the situation.

Amid the hustle and bustle of profit and making money

and being successful and getting the best business deal, what about goodwill? My

grandmother always said, you can make as much money as you want in this life,

but it's the life that you live, the decisions you make, how you treat others,

how you treat yourself, and you can't take it with you when you die.

I just wanted to go on record here today. I did hear

the minister on Open Line this morning

and I commend his support of encouragement for those parties to get back at the

bargaining table. I understand that the Sheraton Hotel, there's a reservation,

and I understand the workers, the union are inviting the company back to the

bargaining table. I can only speak for myself as an individual, as a human

being. I encourage them; let's find a resolution. Because those people, let's

face it – actually, it's a constituent of mine who made news. She works at one

of the stores. I think she's a single mom, and she needs to rely on our

provincial program for income support to make the ends meet.

Imagine, Mr. Chair, if you had to go take a second job

for the work that you do here as an MHA; yet, the pay wasn't cutting it, so you

had to go and take up another job or you had to go and ask for help, ask for

support. Now the situation that this individual is facing because she's

striking, because of the policies, she can no longer avail of that income

support. She's literally between a rock and a hard place, or she's up the creek,

as some people would say.

Again, I can only speak for myself here, but let's

remember the basics in life. We're human beings. When we die, when we leave this

world we're all the same and we will be judged accordingly. I sincerely believe

that.

I just wanted to add my voice as an MHA, as a friend to

those people in my district. Again, a shout-out to those essential workers in

Bay Roberts, as well as Carbonear, the region where I come from, Conception Bay

North. Thank you so, so much because without your support, without your

dedication, without you getting up and going to work everyday, this situation

that we're living in now, what we know as life in this pandemic with COVID-19,

would've been much worse had you decided to pack it in and say, you know what,

I'm looking after myself.

Please, if you're listening out there, to the company,

to the union, get together, let's make it work. We have a lot to be grateful

for. Although the hardship we're facing, the challenges we're facing fiscally as

a province, we are very fortunate to live where we live in this corner of the

globe.

We're leaders in how we've handled the pandemic; how

our residents of Newfoundland and Labrador have taken the guidelines that have

been given by our public health officials, including my friend, of course, Dr.

Haggie, the Member for Gander. Let's do our part. Again, I support them and I

hope to see a resolution. They deserve it because we're all the same, Mr. Chair,

when it comes down to it. I just wanted to put that out there.

Again, if there's anything I can do for my residents

out there to support them and to help them, please call my constituency office.

I'm here for you; I'll do whatever I can within my power. The number for our

office is 786-1372. Again, I hope they get everything they deserve because they

certainly do deserve it.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MR.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's good to see one of our own in the Chair. I know

you'll do a good job. Certainly, you do a good job of trying to keep the caucus

in order as well.

There are times when you go home and you figure you

just shouldn't look at the phone. Last night as I was going to bed, the phone

lit up and this was the Member for St. John's East - Quidi Vidi, our leader,

saying: You need to come to Loblaws quickly. That was a call at 1 o'clock last

night. It was disturbing, and I'm going to come back to that. As to why it was

disturbing: We need to put this into context with Loblaws.

You might remember, I think it was in 2019, that

Loblaws received $12 million of federal money to install new freezers. That's

taxpayers' money. That's our money – $12 million to install new freezers. I

listened to the debate here about helping workers and so on and so forth. We may

have differences here in the party in terms of how we deal with climate change

and the oil industry, but I will tell you this: You support your workers here.

You support the people in this province – but that's $12 million to a company.

Keep in mind, too, that Loblaws was also part of a

14-year bread price-fixing scheme. They pleaded guilty. Some of you might have

even gotten the little cards, a $25 card for bread. That was Loblaws. That's

what we were into last night; it was about we couldn't get the bread trucks out.

It reminded me of let them eat cake in many ways. It was just horrendous, and

I'm going to come back to that.

Also, Loblaws was involved in a Tax Court battle from

2015 to 2018 and ordered to pay back taxes of some $368 million, basically, in

an offshore banking scheme. This is the company that made such a big deal in

advertisements – I saw the ads of Galen Weston of how important its essential

workers are – yet, it's willing to leave the workers out on the picket line.

It's been two months. It's also willing to allow them to be accosted by police.

We're not talking about the ordinary police officer in

a cruiser coming out and having that chat with them. We're talking about people

in full body armour. I'm having a hard time imagining how our essential workers,

our most valued and most cherished – and I'm going to talk a little bit about

that – have come to the point where we're ready to move in on them with heavily

armed riot police, basically is what we're talking about, in full body armour. I

don't know what they expected these workers to be throwing at them. Muffins?

What?

Seriously, we weren't talking about a civil uprising.

We're talking about people who are fighting for a decent wage, a decent salary.

It's interesting that some of the workers a few weeks ago – because like the

Member for Harbour Grave, I do have a Loblaws in my district and I do bring food

to them every chance I get. It's interesting; one of the things they told me is

that while they were getting $2 an hour extra for the pay, some of the managers

were getting up to $5 or $7. The managers, the people we're talking about,

weren't unionized.

Then again, I can tell you there were people there for

30 years plus. Full-time, they weren't making enough necessarily to even have a

house. They were renting. I can tell you that when it comes time for them to

retire they won't have the benefits they need to continue renting in a safe,

secure home.

Here we are again two months in and what are we going

to do about it? We saw the strike out in Gander. I think it was D-J Composites,

two years, was it not? How long are we prepared to – I think it's time for

government to have that hard talk with Loblaws and say: Start doing something

here. Start applying pressure and not about getting a deal, but I can tell you

whatever deal comes, it's not like Loblaws is in the red. As I had one person

explain to me, often they'll set a forecast and if they're not making that

forecast, profits are down by this much. We're not even talking about whether

they're in the red or that they're bleeding, profits are down.

I think we always have enough to pay people a living

wage. Over the years – this started a long time ago, where people often talk

about these jobs as entry-level jobs. In university, I worked at the theatres,

as did my brothers as well. It was a great job, free movies and good pay. It was

unionized. It got me through university, helped me get through university,

that's for sure, but here's the thing, all work has merit, all work has honour.

Should it not be for the person that, yeah, do you know what, this is the job

that's going to sustain me for the next 30 years. This is the job.

I'll tell you going into a store where you can go up to

someone and say that's over in this aisle and they know exactly where it is and

they give you the details, that's worth gold. But if that's what their job is

for their life, that's where they are, should they not be paid a decent wage? We

can see a model in Costco. I heard Costco mentioned here the other day but

Costco pays its workers very well. It also takes from local producers as well.

What's wrong with paying a decent wage, of giving

people health benefits, so that they can retire comfortably? What's wrong with

that? There's nothing wrong with it. Instead, at midnight, in the dark of night,

under the cover of darkness, we have police in riot gear brought in. Maybe it

was simply to avoid the media attention.

I don't know who or how it escalated to this, but when

we showed up there was no one there with weapons. You could pick the Loblaw

workers out. They had the vests on, the reflective vests. So they weren't trying

to hide, they weren't trying to be subversive, but what they were doing there

was fighting for their rights: a living wage.

Do you know what? I don't know about any of you, but

it's not the most pleasant experience to go into a store to shop anymore. I go

in and I come out, but for the worker who has to be there behind the plastic

shield, they're not only serving people but sometimes they're taking the abuse

of the customer who is just totally frustrated with wearing the masks and

everything else.

I'm union all the way. I always have been because

that's how you ensure that your rights are looked after in the work environment.

If anything here, I think we should all be prepared in

this House to stand in solidarity with these workers if they show up here at the

Confederation Building or the next picket line because it has to be very clear

to Loblaws: You have enough from public money. You've taken enough. You've

sucked us dry. You've tried to evade taxes. You've sucked what you could out of

this country; it's about time you give back. How do you give back? You give back

to the workers. You pay your fair share of taxes. You pay people a living wage.

How many people would $368 million have paid?

CHAIR:

(Inaudible.)

MR.

J. DINN:

Thank you.

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Minister of Immigration, Skills and Labour.

MR.

BYRNE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I appreciate the opportunity, and also congratulations

on your ascension to such an esteemed Chair.

May I begin by saying that all of us, as

parliamentarians, are very concerned about any labour dispute where parties are

impacted and impacted negatively. We're always concerned when the community at

large is impacted. Labour disputes are a mechanism to resolve labour disputes.

There is a collective bargaining process which leads in the vast, vast, vast

majority of times to a resolution.

Recognizing that this is a dispute, which encompasses

over 1,400 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians as employees and the employer having

a significant footprint throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, it was incumbent

upon me to reach out, in

an act of hand in glove with our conciliation officer

from the Department of Labour, to both parties, both the national president of

Unifor, Jerry Dias, and as well to the CEO of the Weston group of Loblaws, Sarah

Davis, to encourage both parties to get back to the table. Because it is not an

opinion, it is a fact; a resolution cannot be achieved without the parties at

the table. That is the basis to collective bargaining, when there is a dispute

they have to get back to the table in order to achieve a resolution.

I did indeed reach out; I encouraged both parties to

get back to the table. I hope that is successful and fruitful. Again, the

Department of Labour, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, I'm sure

partnered with and supported by this Legislature, we have enabled a conciliation

officer to help facilitate that process, but, at the end of the day, it is both

parties that need to come forward and seek resolution with each other.

I also want to acknowledge that while it may be

construed by some that the police authorities of our province are directed by

the Executive of government – they are not. We all know that as parliamentarians

it would be absolutely wrong and, quite frankly, dangerous for that expectation

to be expressed or for that assumption to be made, that activities of police

authorities are directed by government – they are not.

That is an important clarification to make in case

there is some confusion about whatever activities may occur. The police

authorities do act and are accountable and responsible for their actions. That

is the basis of the division of powers of our government. The Executive does not

direct the judiciary, the Executive does not direct police authorities and

police actions and the judiciary does not direct the Executive. So there is a

very, very finite division of powers.

In fact, if anyone were to have a contrary point of

view to that position, we are in a minority Legislature today; you could pass a

resolution that the Legislature of Newfoundland and Labrador be granted powers

to direct police authorities. That would be very ill advised. We on this side of

the House would not support that and I don't think anyone else would.

The basis of the resolution to a very, very important

and serious and difficult labour dispute that's occurring right now between

Loblaws and Unifor, as the bargaining agent for 1,400 Loblaws employees, is best

resolved at the bargaining table. That is why I reached out to both the national

president of Unifor, as well as the CEO of Loblaws, to see if there is a basis

for the parties to come to the table. Beyond that, Mr. Chair, I'll obviously

leave those conversations in private, but that effort was made.

With that said, Mr. Chair, we do appreciate the fact

that we have a labour relations environment in Newfoundland and Labrador where

our conciliation officers have been very successful in helping to broker a

successful resolution to several deals. My initiative was a hand in glove effort

with our conciliation officer, and that is important to note. It does not

overstep the boundaries nor does it suggest that there is a prejudicial or

discriminatory action on my part towards one party over the other. Such event

would cause an imbalance of power and potentially protract the strike. It did

not happen. It was simply to encourage parties to get back to the table. I hope

it is successful.

Now, Mr. Chair, on a more pleasant note, benefits

agreements. This is something that as a minister, I personally, but as well the

government, is actively engaged with organized labour, with the labour movement,

with Trades NL, with our business community, with those who have important

special interests, important interests in gaining employment and, as well,

skills and certification in our province.

This is something that is worth doing. There are

examples of this in some respects, based on some of our other resource projects

that we can employ, but it is not directly comparable to individual resource

projects. Because what's being proposed by many within our community is an

all-encompassing benefits agreement that would be a standing agreement. It would

not be tied to a specific project; it would be a standing agreement.

I note to the Legislature that there is significant

approval of changing the workforce of Newfoundland and Labrador at our major

construction sites and resource projects. Changing the face of our construction

projects; changing the face to stronger involvement by women; changing the face

of our work sites by including greater participation by apprentices; changing

the face of our construction sites and resource projects by including more women

apprentices; changing the face of our workplace and our construction sites and

resource projects by including more Indigenous participation; changing the

workforce and the face of our resource and construction projects by including

those with disabilities, making sure that is included in the consideration.

Mr. Chair, this is a very, very broad project. It's a

very important project and one that cannot be done without strong consultation

and legal basis.

One of the considerations, which is paramount, which is

being discussed and I'm very interested in, is the notion of residency

requirement. Mr. Chair, this is an important issue that has to be handled

carefully but thoroughly. We obviously have many, many workers in our province

that transit the country seeking employment in other provinces on other major

construction projects and resource projects. So we want a reasonable assurance

that our actions do not prejudice their ability to find work in other parts of

the province. I can tell you that is a preoccupation of mine as well.

With that said, we also have a basis in law, a basis in

trade policy that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has signed on to.

It was alluded to by a previous speaker that we have the Agreement on Internal

Trade which is now broadened; it's changed its scope a little bit. It was

negotiated in 1994, enacted in 1995 and with significant subsequent amendments

in 2008. One of the issues – there was a

chapter on labour mobility within the

agreement on trade, and that included residency requirements.

Very quickly, I'll just read what was amended in 2008

to further clarify it.

Article 705 of the

chapter states, no party to the

Agreement on Internal Trade “shall require a worker of a Party to be resident in

its territory as a condition of: (

a) eligibility for employment; or (

b) certification relating to the worker's occupation.” This means that no

department of government, corporation or agency of government shall require a

worker to be a resident in its territory as a condition of eligibility for

employment with that organization. There are exceptions but they're on a

specific basis.

Mr. Chair, unfortunately my time is up, but this is a

very worthwhile discussion. We are going to provide best benefits for

Newfoundland and Labrador within the context of a lawful framework.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

The

hon. Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and it's good to see you up in the seat. Congratulations.

I'm going to touch on the labour dispute this morning

as well. It's a bit upsetting, and it ties into all the stuff that we've been

asking. These people are in there now for eight weeks and not getting paid; I

guess, strike pay. Bills are due; again, house payments due. I think we, as

MHAs, really have to put ourselves there. What if we don't have a job tomorrow?

That can happen to any of us. No money. How do you make your payments?

We're not in that position right now because we're

here, for however long, but we have to think about those people and put yourself

in their shoes. I know we have all those questions, and we've all been there

answering for our constituents, but just try to get in their shoes. That's all

I'm saying, just try to get in their shoes and think on the panic and the

frustration they're going through.

We spoke on the locked-in pensions as well. It ties in

to the same thing. They're struggling and sometimes – we forgot, they put us

here. So we can't forget them. We have to get right back to the people, and I

said that since I got in here. You have people messaging you; you have people

that you'll call back. It's heartbreaking, really, to watch it go ahead. It

really is.

Just take a step back and put yourself in their shoes.

That's all I'm going to say; I'll leave it at that. We have to do whatever we

can to help them get out of this situation and hopefully move it forward.

Listen, it's a private industry but whatever we can do. We should be able to

jump in and help and push it as much as we can. I know the minister made a call

and did his best, but maybe push a little harder here. I don't know what the

answers are but whatever we can do. I'd just like to leave that there.

Just sitting here and looking at where we are right now

in our economy and talking about jobs. I was just listening to everybody speak

since last night, and I try to sit down and listen to everybody and pick out

some points. It's hard to believe we're in the situation that we're in. We have

fishing, we have oil, we have minerals, we have electricity, we have forestry,

we have agriculture, we have aquaculture, and it doesn't seem like we're in

control of any of it.

I don't know if there's another province that has as

much as we have and we're in as little control as we are. Listen, I'm not

blaming anybody over there or anybody here because this was all done before we

got here. If you sit back and look at it, it's hard to believe we are not in

control of what we have. It's mindboggling.

Every industry is great. You have the fish. We had the

oil, and you didn't control the oil, nor did we. The prices go down. We looked

at that. We have minerals. That's great, going out in Grand Falls-Windsor -

Buchans and Exploits for Marathon, I think it is. It's great to see that

industry down in Labrador with the iron ore. We have all that. Let's make sure

that we don't give away all our rights to everything that we have.

We have a fishery here that the federal government – I

can never get my head around it because I'm from a small community. I can never

get my head around the federal government telling us how much we can catch, not

our own government controlling it. I don't see how it got to that point. It's

mind-boggling. They tell us, you can't do this, you can't do that. It's gotten

to the point now, how do we reel that in? You'd have to work pretty hard and

fight pretty hard to get it back. We gave away equity rights and they got the

control. It's just so frustrating when you sit back and look at it. I'll just

leave that where it is.

I'll get into a few more positive things that are

happening in my district. I did have the privilege of going up to Fermeuse last

week to visit a lady. Her name is Ms. Rita O'Brien. She's single and she lived

to be 100. I brought her up a certificate. Of course, the joke in the home was

they would ask her: How did you live to be 100? Her first answer was: I never

got married. I thought it was pretty funny. She was as sharp as could be. I wish

her congratulations on her 100th birthday. I said I hope I can come back and

replace that slip next year when she's 101 and so on. In my district, that's the

second person since I got in, in 17 months, that's 100 years old. That's a great

accomplishment.

I'm going to try to touch on all the stuff that's going

on in the district. I will say it out here that if I miss something, then it's

not intentional. There's so much stuff that's going on in the district in so

many communities, I'm going to say 15 to 20 communities that you try to visit

and try to mention them all and try to get them in there.

We have another home in Witless Bay. It's called

Alderwood Estates. If you haven't seen that on the news, then you're really

asleep at the wheel, because they have been awesome. The recreation director is

Renee Houlihan. They do a great job over there. She's just the recreation

director. I know the owners as well, Debbie Dunne. Yesterday, they got the

funeral parlour involved, the guy that is the undertaker in the community, to go

over and get them dressed up and do them up for Halloween. I think it made the

CBC news.

It's just so encouraging. They get them out to

functions at bars downtown. They call ahead and book it. They take 30 or 40

people on buses. They keep them engaged. You think they're going down there

having a cup of tea; they're going there having a drink. They're having a glass

of wine. It's so fun to see.

The 50-plus clubs, I'll touch on those as well. I have

one in Trepassey, one in Witless Bay – I'll call it a service area; I'm going to

say down the shore from Bay Bulls to Bauline in the area – and there's one in

the Goulds as well. Every year they run a winter carnival and put off an event

in the recreation centre in Bay Bulls.

The BBBAA runs a winter carnival and they put off a

function that we pay for them to attend. It is 200 people or 250 seniors that

attend. To go in and see it is unbelievable. They have a fellow that plays

music. I'm sure in some districts here in this area, Brian Finn playing and he

can play all – and it's in the middle of the day from 2 o'clock to 5 o'clock.

There are 200 people that attend. They're not in there sitting down at the

table; they're in there dancing. They can't wait to get there. They do a great

job with all seniors. They have dart leagues in these 50-plus groups.

They're stressed this time of the year – well, they're

stressed during COVID for sure. All those advantages that they had getting out

and walking in the areas, in the recreation centres; they're all restricted now.

COVID has put a lot of stress on the seniors. We always have to remember our

seniors. When you see them, they can't get out, they're afraid to go out, so you

have to remember them in your times for sure, you really do.

I'll touch on another one. The Minister of Fisheries

was up last week, up to Smiling Land Farm. I was in there as well in the

morning. It was unbelievable what's going on there. They're doing some planting.

You have goats and you have horses. It's a state-of-the-art facility and trying

to produce vegetables and trying to make Newfoundland sustainable.

If everything shut down here for a week and you

couldn't get on this Island and there's no food production, in seven days we can

run short of food, supposedly. Whether that's a fact or not, I'm not sure, but

I've heard that many times during this.

When you tie that in to the essential workers that we

have, and during COVID we had examples of people trying to go – we went to a

supermarket when COVID first started. You tried to go once a week, that was the

rule of thumb. If you needed something you didn't go, you waited until you

needed five or six things, or at least I did. I went down; I said I'm not going

to come down here every day. If I need a can of milk or a carton of milk, I'm

not going to come down here. She said you might as well; most of the older

people are trying to get out because they just go to the supermarkets and they

try to make a trip every day.

It's so sad to see the essential workers being treated

like this in on a picket line. They supplied us and stayed open while we were

home in our houses trying to do what we could do from home. It's pretty sad.

Back to the Smiling Land, we were in there and it was

so encouraging to see so many young people in there. We looked at bees; there

were 200,000 bees. I don't know, 300,000 or 400,000 bees, Mr. Chair, that we

looked at in there and had samples of the honey. It was incredible to taste and

so much product that they're trying to put out and all the stuff that they're

trying to do, so it's pretty encouraging to see something like that.

I'm sure that will be open to the public at some point

in time. They will have tours and family events in there, like all the other

stuff that's on the go at some of the farms here, like we see in Brookfield Road

where they have corn mazes during Halloween and all the farm produce in there

that you can go in locally and get it. It's great to see all that stuff in the

area.

I see my time is running out.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands.

MR.

LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to have a few words again this

morning.

There are so many things we could talk about, but I

think I have to make a few comments about what's going on with the Loblaws

strike, labour unrest and so on.

First of all, Mr. Chair, I think it's important – and

the Member from Bay Roberts, I know that's not the name of the district, but

anyway she knows who I'm talking about –

HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

MR.

LANE:

Port de Grave, raised this. It's an important point she makes. This is really

all about people and we have to bear this in mind. I wouldn't say there's hardly

a district, there might be some I suppose, but for the most part every district

has a Dominion store, either within their district or next to their district or

close to their district, and probably –

MR.

BRAGG:

Not all.

MR.

LANE:

Yeah, I know. The Member there is saying no. But they all go to Gander though,

from the New-Wes-Valley area there, they go to Gander and they goes to Dominion,

a lot of the people. There are a lot of Dominion stores all around the province,

so many of us here have constituents that work at Dominion. We have workers at

Sobeys and Colemans and other places too, but we're talking about Dominion;

we're talking about Loblaws here at the moment.

We all know these people. There are a lot of people who

have family members that may work there, friends that work there and certainly

constituents that work there. These are the people that we come in contact with,

certainly, on the election campaign. We're looking for their support then, for

sure. These are people we know that have children going to the schools in our

districts. Maybe they're friends with our kids' friends and so on.

These are people we see at our festivals and community

events that we talk to in church and so on. They're just average, normal human

beings, just like the rest of us. All they want to do is to earn a decent living

so that they can support their families, so they can keep a roof over their

heads, they can keep food in their bellies and that of their families; if they

have kids, that they can outfit them for school and they can get them a few

Christmas gifts, just like everybody else in this House of Assembly.

Now, we're very, very fortunate to be in the position

we are in and the remuneration we receive and the benefits we receive. As the

Member said, or one Member said, I believe the Member for Ferryland – sometimes

we have to put things in perspective and try to put ourselves in their shoes

because let's face it, our remuneration is a lot greater than what those people

get. We don't have those same issues and concerns day to day that a lot of those

people would have. At the best of times when they're at work, let alone at times

when they're not working, but even when they are working, based on the meagre

wages that a lot of those people receive, we really can't, I think, sometimes

come to grips with how they have to live, but it's important that we try to and

be mindful of that.

The issue around wages is just one issue, though – it's

just one issue. I've had family members and acquaintances and people in my

district that have worked for Loblaws, and it's not just wages, the amount of

money they make per hour. There's been much more abuse – and that's all I can

call it is abuse. By any standard it is abuse, where people are hired and

they're saying you're going to be a full-time worker. They're not full-time

workers. They might get 15 hours a week, 20 hours a week, that type of thing.

You get situations where they're forced to do split

shifts: come in the morning for three hours, then go home for five hours and

then come back tonight. Your morning is gone, your day is gone and your night is

gone. Even between that, you still didn't get full-time hours. You're basically

on beck and call for us from morning till night.

I've heard of situations where a worker goes in and

they say, okay, you're coming in this morning now for four hours for argument's

sake. They have to make plans, just like everybody else, to come to work, in

terms of maybe if they have children, they have to have someone look after the

child or whatever the case might be. They come in for their four hours: Oh, it's

getting busy. You can't go now. But I'm supposed to be off at 12. No, you're not

off now until 2. Yes, but I have – I don't care what issues you have.

Now all of a sudden, four hours turns into six. On one

side you say, well, you're getting more hours, but the other side is they had to

plan. They have families; they had to get picked up or dropped off for work,

their kids or whatever. We don't care, that's not our problem. We need you for

those extra couple of hours because it got busy.

Conversely, I've heard people who've gone to work and

they were scheduled to work for five or six hours. They come in, make all their

arrangements, have to get child care and everything else. They go in and they're

working for three hours and then the manager comes over and says: Slow day

today, go home. What do you mean? I was scheduled to work for five or six hours.

No, we don't need you. Go home.

This is the kind of abuse, and that's all I can call it

is abuse, beyond the hourly wage. It's much worse than the hourly wage. The

hourly wage, that's an issue, absolutely, but it's much worse than that. This is

how they're taking advantage of people. All you're doing is you're taking

advantage of people.

The people that are in control of all this are

multi-multi-millionaires. How much money is enough money? At what point in time

do you say, I have enough? The old expression of more wants more, that's what

applies in some of these cases. I'm not against anybody making a good living.

I'm not against someone becoming wealthy. They worked hard for it; they worked

within the system. Now, sometimes they abuse the system.

The fact that the federal government, as the Member for

St. John's Centre pointed out – I was disgusted at the time when I saw that. It

was about a year ago or something when I heard that the federal government was

going to give Loblaws money to buy freezers. Are you kidding me? Fifteen million

dollars taken out to give to Loblaws to buy freezers, and they're reporting

quarter after quarter after quarter huge profits. I said, this has to be a joke;

this can't be real. I was like Donald Trump, I said this must be fake news, but

apparently it wasn't fake news.

We have to really start looking at some of our labour

laws. I really believe beyond the living wage, that's an issue, how we settle

disputes and how aggressive a government should be to end that, that's an issue,

but I also think we need to look at other labour laws about how somebody can

abuse workers with this idea of split shifts. Come in for a schedule, I'll just

change it on the fly. If I need you to stay longer, you're going to stay longer.

If I want you to go home, you're going home. There are so many things.

We look at what happened with D-J Composites, how long

those people were out – ridiculous. It should never have gone that long. There

should be something in place, whether it's binding arbitration or something

after a certain period of time.

We need to be lobbying the federal government on labour

laws in terms of when you hear about what happened to Wabush, I believe it was,

and the Sears. Remember the workers at Sears? Does anyone remember them? They

got shafted out of their pensions. I know that's a federal matter but we should

be lobbying the federal government to change that.

If a big business or corporation is going to go out of

business, then before the banks and the other creditors get paid, the number one

person on the top of that list to get paid should be the employees. If they have

pensions and so on, they get paid first and the bank stands in line behind them,

not in front of them. It's ridiculous. These are our own people. These are our

family members, our friends, our neighbours and so on. We need to take a

stronger stance.

I will finish off by saying – and I hope this is asked

in Question Period, by the way, if anyone is listening. I hope someone asks, in

Question Period today, the Minister of Justice if he's had a conversation with

the chief of police to understand how riot police ended up there last night. I

hope someone is going to ask that question because it's a very important one.

What happened last night is very disturbing.

Thank you.

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

MR.

LESTER:

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and congratulations on your ascension to the Chair.

The topic of the day appears to be the issue that we're

having with the Dominion strike. Unfortunately, that incident did happen in the

district which I represent. We do have a fairly large Dominion store in the

area. The warehouse is located in Mount Pearl North and the incident that did

occur last night at the other business was indeed in Mount Pearl.

I've seen many on-the-job labour actions and rarely

does anybody come out a winner. We have to find mechanisms and ways to make sure

that we do not get to this situation. I am fully sympathetic to all the workers,

many of them are my children's friends or my friends or constituents of mine.

I can guarantee you just as those people on the picket

line last night were nervous, I can say that the men and women representing our

police force were also nervous. They were also out there just doing their job.

I'm glad it did not escalate any further, but we have to, as a society and as

leaders within this House, find means and ways that both the worker and the

employer are not put in situations where someone can truly, truly suffer.

My grandfather and great uncle were having a

conversation one time and I was just listening in. They said prior to

Confederation, our food and grocery needs were largely provided by small,

individual grocers. They said when we joined Confederation and the arrival of

the big stores, that was going to be the end of private grocers.

I can remember even as a young adult or in my late

teens delivering vegetables and products to different stores around town that

are no longer there like Murphy's out there on Rawlins Cross and Noseworthy's

out on the Southside Road. Thankfully, there are still some that have held on;

be it Bidgood's, Belbin's, Colemans, all those proud local enterprises. But as

we look to the larger takeover of the corporate and, I guess, grocery world, we

are going to see increased focus on small-margin profits. The agenda of large

corporations and chains has always been profit. Yes, there has been community

contribution and building, but the reality is, it is on profit.

If you walk around our local grocery stores, everybody

from Costco, Sobeys, Dominion and even some of the local ones, how much of those

products do we actually produce? It's all about supporting our own people. It's

about supporting the workers on those lines. It's about supporting the producers

and products that we produce here in our province.

It's often said that our people are our greatest asset.

What is an asset? An asset is an item or, in this case, a resource of value. As

a business owner, an asset only has value if it's productive. If an asset is not

productive, it is a liability. So we as legislators, community leaders, we have

to enable all of our people, which is our greatest resource, to be productive in

order for it to be truly an asset.

How are we going to do that? How are we going to turn a

potential productive asset into a productive asset? As I've said many times

before in this House of Assembly, it is by supporting our own. It is by

supporting the people and resource sectors that we have – and we have an

advantage over every other province in Canada.

How long has our iron ore kept other provinces and

other cities and other labour forces employed? We do not need to expand our

economy. We do not need to expand the exploitation of our resources. We need to

maximize the value we get from our resources. That is where we have perpetually

failed the people of this province.

We have not enabled industry to establish. We have

always had a perception of the faster we can get it out of the ground or cut it

down or pull it out of the water, the better it is. That has not been a

profitable way for us. It has subjected us to the will of international

commodity prices.

Whereas, if we were able to increase the value of our

resources, that is where our future truly is.

I know I've taken a few shots from across the way as my

perspective of how we need to reduce spending. And do you now know what? I've

done that twice now; said the same comment twice, because instead of, I guess, a

criticism of my comment, I was looking for a solution to the problem. This

administration has had five years to come up with solutions to our problems, and

now we're embarking upon another round of consultations. Mr. Chair, I don't know

where we're going with this, but the reality is there's a $3-billion gap between

what we spend and what we bring in. Now, how are we going to pull that together?

The first thing we have to do is we have to stop

denying it. We have to stop denying that we have issues that are as plain faced

as I am looking at this microphone in front of me. I would love to see everybody

be able to stay in their homes, stay in their communities and stay in this

province, but, as it stands now, we can't support everybody and we have to

change that. We have to shave off our expenses and increase our revenue. We have

to look at the investments we make into our economy and we have to look at the

return on that.

My colleague there in front of me, the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port, he had said if he had a million dollars. I remember

the first time the Barenaked Ladies ever came to St. John's. I was going to

university at the time. My cousin Gary Clarke, he was the head of the student

union centre at the time. That's probably not the right title, but he was the

head of the union; he was employed by the union. There were about 25 of us at

that concert in the whole gym because nobody had heard of them.

If I had a million dollars, I can tell you what I

wouldn't do. I wouldn't spend it on 200 overpriced cattle. I wouldn't spend it

on investing in one potato farm. I wouldn't spend it on putting a million-dollar

facility in Pynn's Brook when there's ample capacity at Wooddale to house

greenhouse production there. Yes, those are wants. We have to look at what we

need and what we want. We are not in a position to want. We are in a position to

satisfy people's needs the best we can with the limited resources that we have

without leveraging our future.

We're coming to a point where next year we're going to

have to borrow money again. Are we going to be able to do that and at what

interest rate? Because we have not been able to rein in our spending and

maximize our income, we are going to be subject to a credit review. I'm sure

everybody in this House is familiar with a credit review. We've probably all

pulled our credit reports at times. Even everything from loans we apply for,

mortgages, even right down to our car insurance is based on our credit rating,

what we pay for those services. Can you imagine what kind of effect it's going

to have on our ability to service our debt if we are downgraded from our current

level? We have to take responsible actions now.

The Member for Burgeo - La Poile last night spoke and

said: What are we doing here at this time of day? Everybody in this House,

everybody in this whole Confederation complex – East Block, West Block – knows

that right now people in the Department of Finance are working on next year's

budget. So if you ask me, this is the time we should be debating the budget, not

after the budget is already done and inked up. We need to look forward to the

future, plan for the future, debate for the future.

One of the things I always hear is: It's too late when

the horses have been left out of the barn. Well, Mr. Chair, the horses are left

out of the barn and the people are gone looking for them and we have nothing

left.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

The

hon. the Member for Bonavista.

MR.

PARDY:

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

You are doing a good job this morning. Don't follow the

precedent of the person or the Chair last night that led us to a five-hour

session. I hope that you have much more success in keeping it a little more

condensed.

Several things I would like to speak of and two that I

won't have time to, but I would like to discuss from last night's discussion

with the P3s, I would like to speak to that. The second thing I would like to

speak to would be on education and the exchange between my colleague from St.

John's Centre and the minister in Question Period yesterday, to weigh in on

that. I concur with my colleague from St. John's Centre.

I would like to start with the Breast Cancer Awareness

Month, and that maybe a little unique for the Member for Bonavista to be putting

out there, but, hopefully, I can give you context of which I bring it to the

floor this morning.

Many people are surviving breast cancer more than ever.

The future looks promising, but it is still the most common type of cancer. It

is the second-leading cause of cancer death among Canadian women. One of my

first engagements when I got elected last year was to preside and to speak at

the Relay For Life at Cabot Stadium in Bonavista. Many people in the stadium,

but there were about 150 in a yellow T-shirt and they were the survivors. Two

things that stood out in my mind in that event was the sheer number of people

who were survivors. When they did their victory lap around the stadium and

everyone applauding, it was a thing to behold and to embrace. It was fantastic.

I also mention the volunteers who made it all happen. I really applaud those

individuals who stepped up to make it happen.

In February of this year, I received a written note

from a lady who was diagnosed with breast cancer, and this is what I'd like to

present to the House. For us in the Legislature here, the decision-makers, we

have conversations that hopefully something resonates with us so that we can

embark upon change.

Her name – and I have permission to use it – is Karen

Johnson, she was Lodge. She was a classmate of mine back at T. A Lench in

Catalina. We went through the school together; a group of us hung out together.

She was diagnosed in November with breast cancer and she drafted a note, an

email to me explaining what her life was like in February. I can almost read

verbatim from the note that she had sent as how her life was turned upside down.

We all know and realize that anybody diagnosed with cancer, you know the mental

anguish involved with it. I think that goes without saying.

The biggest part from the email that I took was how her

whole life, financially, was turned upside down as a result of this diagnosis.

We had patients who would have to endure cancer, but on top of that is the

strain, financially, and with their resources that we put them through. When I

say we put them through, it's mostly through the federal government. The

provincial government would have some ability to assist.

If I may share her words, what she had written. She was

undergoing chemotherapy at Bonavista. She had to begin 16 rounds of radiation in

St. John's and she only had two weeks left on her EI claim. She left work on

November 19, had surgery and had a healing period. She did chemo; she had

another healing period and 16 rounds of radiation. She had to move to St. John's

for another healing period to make sure that everything went well.

The time to get back to work was when she had the

ability to do so, from her health perspective. I would say, Mr. Chair, that when

we look at those situations, there must be something in legislation or even a

lobby and a voice that we can provide to make the plight of those people who

have to endure cancer, who are the breadwinners of their family, who don't have

insurance, that we can assist them in the time. That will conceivably help and

enhance the healing of the individual.

So if my voice today gives a thought to the Minister of

Health and Community Services who's listening intently, if it's something within

his realm that future goes forward in assisting and giving voice to assisting

these people, then that would be wonderful, and it occurring in Breast Cancer

Awareness Month is just. I throw that out there from the district.

I would also like to acknowledge that I am super

pleased that we have a trustee now representing Zone 11 on the Newfoundland and

Jean Butt. I do thank the minister for the selection and having our district

represented. It's been some time that our district has gone without

representation on that trustee board. I'm sure pleased. We have a great

candidate for the 14 schools that serve Zone 11. That's wonderful.

One thing before I move on to the education piece; one

thing Karen Johnson did state was that she thanked all those physicians, the

oncologist, those working at the Bonavista hospital, and thanked them all for

the care she received because she had thought on the care provision, there

wasn't a whole lot of room for improvement. I think that's worthy of stating

with our system to know that she did get the medical treatment that she desired

and needed. The only thing being was the hardship that she had to endure while

she was getting that treatment.

Mr. Chair, there was a question raised in the House

yesterday by the Member for St. John's Centre and he talked about the public

exams. He had mentioned the public exams and whether they should be cancelled. I

would agree that they ought to be postponed.

One thing the minister stated in reply to the hon.

Member for St. John's Centre, he referenced that the Member wanted to have half

a school year this year for some students having to go on a rotational basis. I

was part of that discussion back on August 11 with the minister, and it was

something that we had presented. We had presented it to the minister because if

we did a jurisdictional scan, the largest school district in the country, the

Toronto District School Board, were doing the same thing. They were doing it

because they perceived that to be the safest method at that point in time for

school start-up.

It came across to be something at this point in time

that seemed really out of sync with what people would think, but back on August

11 it was a great suggestion. Remember, at that point in time, Mr. Chair, we

didn't know if we were going to bus children to school.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh,

oh!

CHAIR:

Order, please!

I want to hear the Member speak, please.

MR.

PARDY:

didn't know, Mr. Chair, if we were going to be able to bus children to school

and we went all September month scravelling in order to get children to school.

In the future we may look at what we did, the $26

million that we get from the federal government, but keep in mind $15 million of

that now is in busing. While we need busing, there's going to be – when we look

back, having that privilege of hindsight to look back and say in the inclusion

of the $15 million, was that the best place in order to place $15 million within

the education system that has so many great needs?

I look forward to speaking again sometime in the

future, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR.

PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's a pleasure to speak again on this piece of

legislation and, more importantly, to speak about stuff that's important to each

and every one of us in our districts and the people we represent.

I probably should start off as a follow-up to the

Leader of the Third Party, her commentary opening out today's debate about the

Dominion strikers and what happened last night being reported in the news. I

have a Dominion in my district. The workers are on the picket line. Everyday I

drive by, and I feel so bad for them. They're out there in the rain and they're

cold; not everyday has been sunny. We've had a nice fall, but there's a long

slog. You blow the horn and you wave to them. I've stopped a few times and had a

chat with them, but my heart goes out to them.

In my previous life, I was involved in the labour

movement for many years. I get what it's all about; I get what they're fighting

for. I admire what they're fighting for. We all should be supportive of everyone

fighting for their rights, no matter what it is, whether union or human rights,

whatever the case may be. I tip my hat, but they're also essential workers.

There in March and April, when we were all home working

and hiding for cover, they were on the front lines. People are realizing, they

started out first. They never had any protection. We were learning this as we

were going along. They were down there with little to no protection. Everyone

was wrapped up in hand sanitizers and what have you and wearing latex gloves.

We've progressed a lot in the last six, seven months.

When all of us were being looked after and protected

and working from home and getting paid to not to have to go out through the

door, they were going on the front lines and providing an essential service.

Let's be honest, food is one of the necessities. It's a necessity of life. They

did it with a smile on their faces. To see now that they're on the picket line

for much too long, in my mind, it's very disheartening. I can't put it in words;

I think it's outrageous. These multi-billion corporations to be treating people

such as those workers – the way they're being treated, I think it's absolutely

outrageous.

It saddens me, too, last night to hear that our riot

police, the riot squad, goes to a picket line. They're fighting for their

rights. We may have a shortage of muffins and bread today, so we had to bring in

the riot squad? It's outrageous. It's insulting. It's disgusting. I can be on

record, no matter who's there – and I have a lot of friends in the police force;

I have a lot of friends on the picket lines. I have a lot of friends who

probably work at Weston's, I don't know, in my district. This is outrageous.

It's uncalled for.

Leadership should be taken to show this shouldn't

happen. Whoever made that decision should be called out publicly. This should

not be let die. The society we live in now, you're afraid to say things, you're

afraid to do things, but you'll never be criticized for standing up for people's

rights. If you're in a leadership position, you should be standing up in your

place and condemning this. I know I'm condemning it. I know we as a caucus

condemn it. I know the Leader of the Third Party condemns it. I'm not sure who

else on the other side condemns it. It's outrageous. It's absolutely outrageous.

This is not party stuff; this is individual stuff.

When you drive home this evening and you drive by that

picket line, they're not out there because they want to be. They're not

millionaires. There's not big pay in those jobs, but they deserve the same

respect and they're not getting it. I think it's absolutely scandalous and I

think we all should stand against it, because this stuff should not happen.

It's akin to four or five, six, seven years ago someone

had a chicken coop in my district. At the same, I was having debates trying to

get a police detachment for the area because we have a major crime, drug problem

in Conception Bay South. Luckily, we have the detachment, but during that debate

and that back and forth, two police officers showed up at this man's door

because he had three chickens in the backyard. I was outraged and I made that

known, and whoever wanted to hear me I made it known. The town called the RNC

who showed up on the doorstep with two police officers and a municipal

enforcement because he had three chickens. Give me a break. That's not where we

need to be.

If I'm calling out our police force or I'm calling out

the leadership in that place, so be it. They're not above that. They're not

above the law. They're meant to enforce the law but they're not above the law,

and this is outrageous. I'll leave it at that, Mr. Chair, but I think that goes

– and I speak for every Dominion worker in my district and in this province.

Another issue in my time that – I moved off from, I'm

no longer Transportation critic, but I think it's important to go back and

revisit the idea of the five-year roads program. I remember in 2016 that was the

cure-all to taking the politics out of paving. This administration came in; they

were going to do it right and take the politics out of paving. I heard the

former minister forever and a day, who is no longer in this House, telling me it

was taking the politics out of paving. We had many debates in this House, many

debates. That was their golden five-year roads program.

That never took the politics out of paving. It clouded

it. It makes it a little bit more difficult to see. You have 25 per cent left

off this year, and you have 50 per cent coming up on elections, usually. That's

a real filler. We see the former minister, the current minister, blacktop

everywhere; yet, I hear colleagues on this side of the House, they can't get

tenders done. I have colleagues there; they are fighting forever to get tenders

done. There's nothing moving.

In the minister's district there are spreaders going.

If you stay in the same place long enough one might come over your boots, and we

can't get a tender. Some of our fellows can't get tenders out. Is that right?

No, but that's the five-year roads program. They took the politics out of

paving.

The former minister was $12 million one year, $9

million the next year and I think – I had the numbers, it was atrocious. I think

it was supposed to be $12 million this past year. I don't know if that got

continued on or not. Is that taking the politics out of paving when other

Members have probably $100,000 or half a million dollars, if they're lucky? Some

can't get a pothole fixed.

The Member for Exploits got nothing. Is that right? I

don't think so. The former administration was criticized because they were

spreading roads throughout the province. That was a criticism because they had

politics in paving. They were taking it out and they were going to do it right.

It's probably never been so bad. This is ridiculous.

Then you get questions – my colleague from Terra Nova

asked questions and the minister was laughing at it. Making no apologies. Now,

you know he's not going to apologize to his own district if he got everything

out there paved. The former minister is not going to apologize to his residents

because he got every road, every byroad, every nook and cranny paved.

We're asking for you to apologize to your residents.

We're asking you to apologize to everyone else's residents, the people that pay

taxes in this province. There's no monopoly on the taxes. It's not three

districts in the province that pays all the taxes. It's a $70-million budget.

What's so fair about that?

Yet, you hang your hat on the five-year roads program.

We hang our hat on the signature bill of the IAC, Independent Appointments

Commission. Now, I need about two hours to go on that one alone. That's the

heights, the heights –I can't go there. That's your signature bill. Now, you

tell me, the Independent Appointments Commission, the appointments that have

been made by this administration and continues to be made, because they have to

make recommendations but the Cabinet don't have to accept them.

Sure, they could go out and get it on a postage stamp:

I'd like to have these three people. Okay, we'll take that under consideration,

but we're going to put our own friends up there. That committee works great.

It's all smoke and mirrors, Mr. Chair. Everything that's done is smoke and

mirrors. That's been a problem with this administration from the get-go and they

can never seem to shake themselves.

As recently as yesterday, you watch the news or you

read on Twitter, we got all of these issues on the go, we got oil and gas, we

got that (inaudible) – even the Dominion strikers, believe it or not, it should

be an issue that deserves more attention in this House. The Premier, our new

Premier, I'm waiting to see what he got to offer.

He decides he's not going to go down to the scrum. He's

avoiding scrum. Donald Trump goes to a scrum every day. I know he loves the

media, but sure the President of the United States can go to a scrum, and he's

not in a particularly good situation with the media, but he will go down and

face the media. So what is it about the new Premier goes up in his office and he

avoids and (inaudible) the media?

HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible) the people.

MR.

PETTEN:

The

people are – he's the Premier for the province. He's everybody's Premier. It's

ridiculous to not come down and face the media and answer the questions, because

you can run for cover but you can't hide. You can run but you can't hide. He has

to face the people. That's what the job entails. That's what all of us, as

elected officials, have to do. When the rubber hits the road, we have to be

accountable to the people who elected us.

In my final seconds, the Premier needs to stand up and

answer questions from the media, because he's not answering questions for the

media, he's answering questions for the people of this province, the public.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

The

Member for St. John's Centre.

MR.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to start my comments by reading a message I

received from a teacher last night. Not one that I was asking for or anything

else but unsolicited and one that based on – certainly I didn't go madly off in

all directions to get it.

Hey Jim, I just wanted to reach out and say thanks for

bringing many educational issues to light over these last number of weeks. In

the high school setting you certainly get a sense that it's going to take

considerable time to get these children back into a groove, and we have a lot of

gaps in learning to make up for. Our best, top students, who did work their

(inaudible) off during the time out of school last year, are even feeling the

pinch a little bit and it is certainly taking more instructional time to fill in

some gaps in their learning.

Where we notice it the most is probably last year's

Grade 10s; this year in Grade 11. These kids appear to be the biggest cohort

that shut it down on March 13 and it is a daily struggle to fill in gaps. We are

working our guts out training and instructing these new Grade 10s to try and

instill high school in them. It's going to be a long, drawn-out process. The

biggest thing we're seeing is that we are losing some instructional time every

day, and we need every bit of instructional time this year, plus extra if we can

get it, to get things turned around by June 2021. It's going to take the full

school year to offer some semblance of recovery.

We are even looking at the possibility of eliminating

mid-year exams in January so we can get ourselves an extra week of instructional

time. In math and science over here, we unanimously don't know where we're going

to do a good job of instruction of the entire curriculum unless we and the kids

get some form of relief in the tune of no exams. We're hoping that we can

recover enough instructional hours to make up the gaps in time for June. I still

can't fathom how my chemistry students are going to write a potential public in

June.

You can see it starting to weigh on the kids' and

parents' minds. They're noticing that it's taking longer for them to understand

and apply concepts than in previous years. We're trying our best to deliver the

curriculum and plug last year's holes at the same time. It's rough. A lot of

teachers are June tired already.

I want to use that as the lead into a survey that was

carried out by the CBC, Mr. Chair. Two thousand teachers surveyed, more than 200

responded. Before we can say, well, that indicates there's not much of a

problem, I can tell you right now that those 200 are the ones that had the

temerity, I guess, or had enough is enough, I'm going to say it. I can tell you

that in the past, trying to get a teacher or any professional, I would argue, to

make a complaint, to advocate for themselves is a difficult challenge. That I

can tell you.

“The idea” of this survey “was to get experiences

teachers were having so far, now that everyone is back in schools.

“Many of the respondents indicated they're feeling

burned out, exhausted, and afraid, as they cope with being in classrooms during

the pandemic.

“Nearly half of them said they feel very or somewhat

unsafe while teaching in the classroom during these COVID times.

“The most concerning issue for roughly half of the

respondents was mental or physical health concerns for themselves or family, or

the mental health of students.

“More than four in five of the teachers who responded

said the province could have done a better job – or did a poor job – of ensuring

a safe and organized return to school.”

“It's so stressful.…

“It's a very scary time. Students are looking to us to

see if they are safe and we do the best we can, but fatigue is setting in. It's

somewhat like compassion fatigue. You are trying to manage the mental health of

students at the same time you are trying to keep your head above water and

support your own family.

“We're limited in how we can share resources…. The day

starts and there is just no time or space, or moments to catch our breath. Five

weeks in and I'm burnt out like never before…. I love teaching, but this is bad

all around…. I fear for the profession, for the students and my colleagues.

“The decision-makers responsible for the health and

safety of our children have failed.”

“Specific concerns raised by respondents focused on

perceived safety issues: class sizes, classroom sizes and the lack of space

separating everyone.

“Teachers were asked how often they are able to stay

physically distanced from their students when they're in the classroom. Nearly

four in five replied 'not very often' or 'not at all.'

“Only three of the more than 200 people who responded

to the questionnaire said students were two metres or more apart when seated in

the classroom.” That's three out of those 200 that responded.

“Students are in overcrowded classrooms with no

ventilation and are sitting shoulder to shoulder. Their elbows literally touch.

Some teachers can't even fit enough desks in the classroom for the students

enrolled. We are fine right now. But if a case gets into a school it will be a

tragedy.”

The president of the NLTA was quoted as saying he's

“not shocked to hear those concerns.” Neither am I; yet, the province announced

more measures in September.

In another part of this report: “In response to a

question at a Sept. 2 COVID-19 briefing about what it would take to ensure

schools have smaller class sizes or additional space for students, Education

Minister Tom Osborne said that would require a great deal of analysis.” A great

deal of analysis? This is two months in. What are we waiting for? It's a simple

thing. I'm always amazed how the term complex problem or it requires a deal of

analysis is used when it comes to investing money into a system.

“'However, in a controlled school environment, where

two metres was not possible between desks, the greatest possible spacing is

recommended,' the plan advises.” This is the Return to School Plan. “However,

the daily school routine should not be disrupted to accommodate smaller class

sizes for physical distancing.” Again, the notion that the school is a

controlled physical environment.

Here's a primary teacher who called me and said: So,

students come on a bus. They wear masks on the bus. They get off the bus. They

come into the school and they're not wearing masks. They don't have to wear

masks at all. Actually, at the end of the day, teachers are spending their time

chasing kids to make sure they put the masks on while getting back on the bus.

Here's the disconnect: In the bathrooms in this school,

you might have four or six stalls in a boy's bathroom; you're only allowed to

use half. There are two or three sinks, you're only allowed to use one or two.

There has to be that separation; yet, lining up outside, which is where a lot of

primary children are, they're lined up cheek by jowl. They're not wearing masks;

yet, at the same time, to go into that bathroom – teachers are having a hard

time. How do you even manage this? The rules lost track of the regulations.

Reading specialists have to wear masks, students do

not; yet, they're required to work one-on-one with students, which is why I've

often asked for the use of plexiglass barriers so that teachers can help

one-on-one. I bring this up because it comes at a very good time. This is a

survey of teachers. We've heard it from the president of the Teachers'

Association, you heard it from me and I hear it from teachers.

I always believed in an open door policy. Anyone can

come and talk to me. Of course, as my executive director said, an open door

policy is only as good as the willingness of people to walk across the door of

that threshold to speak to you.

Here we have it, a survey from teachers out there in

the field who are living it. I can tell you what I'm looking for and what I will

continue to look for here is that you have a group of the best professionals –

and I have a few more stories for later on, just about how teachers are doing a

remarkable job.

I will still say this year, Mr. Chair, let's get

through this year, let's put the resources into it and let's give the teachers

the tools they need so that they can help students in the best way possible.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

The

hon. Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

MR.

JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and it's great to see you in the Chair.

I'm just going to spend a few minutes talking about

this again and explain to people who are just tuning in that this is part of the

process we have here. There's part of the budget that needs approval. Everybody

has a right to speak on it and everybody has a right to bring up their concerns.

The good part for me, who's been around here – except for, I think, one Member –

the longest time in the Legislature, is that it's a nice healthy debate.

Everybody has their own views. Some are different views on different issues but

it's a healthy debate. That's what it's all about.

As I said to one Member last night when we were talking

about debating back and forth, it's a lot better than we see in most of the

world, that we settle disputes by guns. This is great to bring up issues and

this is why we call this democracy.

I just give a little shout-out to people in Lark

Harbour and York Harbour and the fire department. I know there was a fire out

there today on Little Port Road. From my understanding this morning in checking

on it, there was no one hurt but there was damage to the house. I just want to

thank all the volunteer firefighters out there who helped with that today and

all the residents. I hope the people are safe. I'll be checking on them later

this afternoon.

I heard about the Dominion strike and the issue that

happened last night; I was filled in on it earlier by my colleague, the Member

for Mount Pearl - Southlands, from his understanding. This is a difficult

situation. I know a lot of the workers out in Corner Brook. I know they're going

through a difficult time now. It's just the way things happened; when for the

first five or six months you're heroes because you're essential workers, now all

of a sudden you're out on the picket lines when things are getting a bit better.

I understand the issues that are facing them. I know a

lot of them, when I was speaking to them before, mentioned they have the split

shifts and some of their benefits – they're not permanent employees. They're

standing up for their rights and we all have to respect that also.

I remember back in the '90s when we had a civil service

strike. I remember I used to go up and talk to people in Corner Brook, and I

used to chat to them. My words to them at the time were, let's not make bad

friends because this is going to work out.

I know the union workers are going through a rough

time, but let's all hope they find a resolution to this so they can get back to

work and do what they do well. Then make sure that people like us are supporting

the workers in their plight right now, because this will work out and they are

great people. So hang in there with it all. Let's try to get back to the

bargaining table somehow and let's try to get this worked out.

Last night we had a great discussion on the hospital in

Corner Brook. There are some things we disagree on, but there are some things –

and that's all good. It's all good. I spoke to a few people today in Corner

Book, one in particular, and they were saying how great it would be when the

radiation unit is built in Corner Brook. They were listening to some of the

debate here last night and they were thinking, it's a great idea to have the

radiation in Corner Brook.

I heard the Member for Bonavista talking about people

with the yellow jerseys on. We had that for many years, the walk in Corner Brook

also. My heart and soul – I don't know if there's a person in this Legislature

who hasn't been touched by cancer somewhere along the line. I don't think there

has been.

We all support the people who went through this very

deadly disease, and a lot of them are such heroes in their struggles. I know a

lot of them personally. Three or four of them live next door to me. We lost

family members through cancer. This is why the fight for the radiation unit in

Corner Brook is so special to me. It's because of the people I know personally,

some family members also, very immediate family members. This is why the issue

on the radiation unit.

I understand people are talking about three Ps. I

accept all that. I understand all that. I will debate that. I understand and I

respect everybody's view on three Ps, but I have to stand up and say the reason

why I support the three Ps projects.

I just have one guy who's in here doing the treatment

also. Being in here alone without the family is tough, trust me. I don't think

anybody here would want to, say, stop the radiation because of three Ps. I think

the understanding is that we need the radiation; can we find a better way? I

don't think there's any concern or anybody here disputing the need for

radiation. The three Ps is a different story, but the radiation is another

thing.

When all this started, and I bring it up again, back in

2007, when it was first announced and there were many announcements, I don't

think there was any better day for us in Corner Brook, not as legislators but as

just private citizens, to watch. Then we had the advocate group, who are a bunch

of union workers, that were working with us. There was no better day when the

premier announced the hospital in Corner Brook, including a radiation unit.

I know the long-term care facility also, that there now

is a state-of-the-art facility in Corner Brook. I don't want to hash over how it

was done and the steps that had to be taken for 12 years, actually. I don't want

to go into that right now. I know many of the seniors that are actually in the

long-term care right now. I just have to recognize that. I will stand up to this

day about how we approached the hospital and the radiation unit in Corner Brook.

I respect everybody else's view on that, but I just thought it was a great day

for all of Western Newfoundland. I'm sure Labrador is going to be using that

also.

It's like I always said, one of the proudest days for

me as a person who's a parliamentarian is going to be the day that I learn that

the first person used the radiation unit in Corner Brook, who has that dreaded

disease. I hope it just vanishes; it won't. The first person that uses that

radiation unit in Corner Brook, I would say that would be something that I'll be

so proud of. It's a great accomplishment for all of us – for all of us – even

the debates that we had here in the House of Assembly and the government

approving it at the time, it was a great achievement for Western Newfoundland.

Everybody agreed that the old Western Memorial needed

to be replaced. Everybody agreed to that, that it had to be replaced and why not

replace it with a state-of-the-art facility that's going to help people with the

dreaded disease of cancer. Even the staff at the Western Memorial hospital had a

lot of input into it and each department had input into it for the design to

make it more compatible for patients. I know many doctors had input into it to

ensure we got a top-of-the-line facility in Corner Brook.

I got to thank the people of Corner Brook for sticking

with us to ensure that it was done because there were a lot of people on that

Action Committee that even up to the day they want to see shovels in the ground.

We seen before that there were roads built and no hospital. We seen before water

service, no hospital. We seen tractors going up.

I remember in 2011, we were at the old RecPlex and we

had a debate and then they said no construction was started on the hospital. How

can I deny that at the time? The tractors were up there. But what we found out

later, back in 2011 when Tom Hedderson admitted here that they didn't even have

the draft design done, the initial design, and that they were up their moving

gravel back and forth just to give the impression that the hospital was

starting. The hospital was never ever in the process of starting.

That's the kind of fiction that we had to fight with at

the time when we took over in 2015. We had to prove to the people of Corner

Brook and Western Newfoundland that no, no, this is going to be a reality. This

is going to be a reality. We're not going to go up and move gravel back and

forth during an election. That actually happened. When I was standing in the

debate at the RecPlex in 2011 and one of the Members at the time stood up and

said: No, they're up there now doing construction. I couldn't say anything.

Well, let's hope for the best – moving gravel back and forth.

I'm just so proud of all of the accomplishments that we

did for the hospital and the radiation. I'm proud to be a part of it.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

Seeing no further speakers, shall the resolution carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, resolution carried.

CLERK (Barnes):

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Shall the first clause carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK:

it enacted by the Lieutenant-Governor and House of Assembly in Legislative

Session convened, as follows.

CHAIR:

Shall the enacting clause carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK:

Act To Amend The Loan Act, 2020.

CHAIR:

Shall the title carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, title carried.

CHAIR:

Shall I report this bill to the House?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the

resolution and a bill consequence thereto, carried.

CHAIR:

The

hon. Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I move, seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader,

that the Committee rise and report Bill 47.

CHAIR:

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and

ask leave to sit again, the Speaker returned to the Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER (Reid):

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Ways and Means have

considered the matters to them referred and have directed me to report that they

have adopt a certain resolution and recommend that the bill be introduced to

give effect to the same.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

Chair of the Committee of Ways and Means reports the Committee have considered

the matters to them referred and have adopted a certain resolution and

recommends that a bill be introduced to give effect to the same.

When shall the report be received?

MR.

CROCKER:

Now.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Now.

On motion, report received and adopted.

MR.

CROCKER:

Pardon me, sorry. See, Jordan, you fooled me up this morning.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm working with the Clerk here, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader,

that the resolution be now read a first time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that the resolution now be read a first time.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK:

it resolved by the House of Assembly in Legislative Session convened, as

follows:

“That it is expedient to bring in a measure to

authorize the raising from time to time by way of loan on the credit of the

province, in addition to the sum of money already voted, a sum of money not

exceeding $1,000,000,000.”

On motion, resolution read a first time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader,

that the resolution now be read a second time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that the resolution now be read a second time.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK:

it resolved by the House of Assembly in Legislative Session convened, as follows :

“That it is expedient to bring in a measure to

authorize the raising from time to time by way of loan on the credit of the

province, in addition to the sum of money already voted, a sum of money not

exceeding $1,000,000,000.”

On motion, resolution read a second time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Finance Minister, for leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Loan Act, 2020, Bill 47, and I further move that

the said bill be now read a first time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that the hon. Government House Leader shall have leave to

introduce a bill entitled

An Act To Amend The Loan Act, 2020, Bill 47, and that

the said bill be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance to introduce a

bill, “An Act To Amend The Loan Act, 2020,” carried. (Bill 47)

CLERK:

bill,

An Act To Amend The Loan Act, 2020. (Bill 47)

On motion, Bill 47 read a first time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader, that Bill 47 be

now read a second time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that the said bill now be read a second time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK:

bill,

An Act To Amend The Loan Act, 2020. (Bill 47)

On motion, Bill 47 read a second time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader,

that Bill 47 be now read a third time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that Bill 47 now be read a third time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK:

bill,

An Act To Amend The Loan Act, 2020. (Bill 47)

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

bill has now been read a third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and

that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Loan Act,

2020,” read a third, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper.

(Bill 47)

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Before we adjourn for lunch, there wasn't enough time

for me to speak last night, but I want to mention the hon. Member for Bonavista

and the Member for Lab West for their contributions. They've both done a great

job over the last, I don't know, eight or nine hours in the Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

CROCKER:

thank them for that.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Deputy Government

House Leader, that we do now recess until 2 p.m.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that the House now recess until 2 o'clock this afternoon.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

The House is now in recess until 2 o'clock today.

Recess

The House resumed at 2 p.m.

MR.

SPEAKER (Reid):

Order, please!

Statements by Members

MR.

SPEAKER:

Today, we will hear statements by the hon. Members for the Districts of

Bonavista, Exploits, Harbour Grace - Port de Grave, Burin - Grand Bank and

Humber - Bay of Islands.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista.

MR.

PARDY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Through the efforts of a dedicated group of volunteers,

last year's Relay For Life at Cabot Stadium in Bonavista raised over $54,000 for

the Canadian Cancer Society. It may be the largest amount of money ever raised

for a cause in the district.

Again this year, during a pandemic, the dedicated group

of 20-plus volunteers are doing a virtual fundraising event this Sunday,

November 1, from 2 to 6 p.m. on Eastlink Community channel six. The returning

co-chairs, Bonnie Keel from Bonavista and Joan Sweetland from Port Union, are

optimistic that the event will again make another significant contribution.

In November of last year, a classmate and very good

friend of mine from then T.A. Lench school in Catalina, Karen Johnson, developed

breast cancer. In an email to me last February, she talked of the mental anguish

due to her diagnosis, as well as the financial burden due to her loss of work

during treatments. In her words: Her world was rocked. Fortunately, she is doing

well now and is one of the hundreds of survivors who are championing this event

to assist others.

I ask the Members of the 49th House of Assembly to join

me in congratulating those volunteers and survivors.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Exploits.

MR.

FORSEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Each year, MacGillivray Law awards a $5,000 scholarship

to one post-secondary student whose story of perseverance inspires them. This

year's scholarship was awarded to Ryan Carey of Bishop's Falls.

Ryan was diagnosed with Tourette's syndrome when he was

a young child and it has affected every facet of his life ever since his

diagnosis. While it was less noticeable when he was younger, by the time he

reached Grade 8, Tourette's began to take a large toll on his well-being.

Ryan had to concede and couldn't complete his Grade 8

requirements and was forced to stop participating in extracurricular activities.

Through Grade 9, Ryan insisted on having one-on-one teaching to stay on par with

his classmates. He was able to continue through Grade 12 and graduate from high

school, something he never anticipated he would achieve.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all Members of the House of Assembly

to join me in congratulating Ryan on his accomplishments, scholarship and

pursuing engineering in post-secondary education.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Harbour Grace - Port de Grave.

MS.

P. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, I would like to recognize a very strong woman

from my district, Ms. Catherine Williams Kleinwort of Spaniard's Bay. Born in

St. John's, moved to Ontario in 1959 and returned to Spaniard's Bay in 2001 when

she became a well-known volunteer in the community, serving on a number of

committees and implementing new ones, such as the Spaniard's Bay Environment

Committee. She also was elected chairperson of the Joint Management Committee

Incorporated, which has custodial responsibility of the shared wetlands of

Shearstown Estuary between Spaniard's Bay and Bay Roberts.

Ms. Kleinwort is one of five Canadians to receive the

2018 Sovereign's Medal for Volunteers and one of five recipients of the

Newfoundland and Labrador Seniors of Distinction Awards.

Cathy was instrumental in establishing the Baccalieu

Trail Seniors Outreach satellite office. Volunteering from 1965 to 2000 in

Ontario, she has continued enriching the lives of citizens in Spaniard's Bay

until just last week. Our community was disappointed when Ms. Kleinwort

announced her and her husband were moving back to Ontario to be close to her

grandchildren – where she is watching from today, Mr. Speaker.

My district will be forever grateful for your positive

impact and legacy.

Thank you, Cathy. You will be missed.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. Member for Burin - Grand Bank.

MS.

HALEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Anyone following soccer in Newfoundland and Labrador is

well aware of the Town of St. Lawrence's history in this sport. As a matter of

fact, Mr. Speaker, it has been dubbed the Soccer Capital of Canada.

One of the luminaries to come out of the soccer scene

in St. Lawrence is Gord Dunphy, Mr. Speaker, who last week became only the 12th

person named as an Honorary Life Member by the Newfoundland and Labrador Soccer

Association in recognition of his more than 50 years of commitment and dedicated

support to all things soccer in the province.

Gord began his career as a player with the St. Lawrence

Laurentians followed by several roles including president of the Laurentians and

coach of the team that won three provincial Challenge Cup Championships,

culminating with Gord being named Newfoundland and Labrador Coach of the Year in

1999 and Executive of the Year in 2014.

Following his time covering the games with the

Southern Gazette and CHCM Radio, Gord

has continued to promote the sport through Gord Cast livestream which is viewed

worldwide, Mr. Speaker.

I ask all hon. Members to join me in congratulating

Gord Dunphy on his latest recognition. Yet another header to the back of the

net.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

MR.

JOYCE:

Mr.

Speaker, I'm pleased today to recognize an individual from my district that is

an inspiration to everybody he meets.

Philip Beales of Curling is best known for his athletic

abilities as a winner of a gold and silver medal in the snowshoe races at the

Special Olympics at the Canada Games.

This week, he showed us all of his abilities on a new

focus by starting a job at Fox's General Store in Curling. Philip brings

enthusiasm, spirit and a sense of pride to all he will serve and engage with.

He's an inspiration of what we can accomplish and how a smile and serving people

can inspire us all.

Thanks to a person with a heart of gold, business owner

Michelle Payne and the Humber Valley Community Employment Corporation, their

work and efforts is making this a reality.

If you want great customer service, always a smile and

the best ice cream in town, I invite you to drop by Fox's General Store and meet

Philip. His smile is contagious and we're all so proud of his accomplishments.

I ask all Members to join me in congratulating Philip

and wish him all the best as he starts his new venture and his new job.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister Responsible for Labrador Affairs.

MS.

DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to speak in this hon. House today about

the work that is taking place to create an environment for economic growth in

the Big Land.

The Labrador North Chamber of Commerce is a leader in

showcasing the tremendous economic potential of Labrador.

Over the years, the staff and volunteer board members

have developed Expo Labrador, a first-rate, annual event that promotes business

opportunities through the exchange of information and partnerships.

As a participant, I welcomed the chance to network with

business leaders and entrepreneurs to learn about emerging developments aimed at

tapping Labrador's potential.

These linkages bring people and their ideas together.

This has resulted in significant advancements in Labrador's social and economic

growth.

Mr. Speaker, this year the pandemic forced organizers

to adapt. The three-day program, which ends today, was a virtual event which

generated registration from more than 130 businesses and individuals. I commend

the Labrador North Chamber of Commerce for meeting the challenge of developing a

program that provided valuable information and insights into what is happening

in Labrador.

The Premier delivered the keynote address and I was

pleased to join him for an informative question-and-answer session afterwards.

Mr. Speaker, Labrador is a vast land with tremendous,

untapped potential.

As the Minister Responsible for Labrador Affairs, I

applaud the Labrador North Chamber of Commerce for its effort to bring

discussions on Labrador's economic development to the forefront.

Please join me in passing on congratulations from the

House of Assembly.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MS.

EVANS:

thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement.

Mr. Speaker, although the Labrador North Chamber of

Commerce has been challenged this year due to COVID-19, I'm very proud of the

resilience and persistence of the organizers and volunteers who stepped up to

ensure Expo Labrador continues. The platform may be virtual this year, but the

value of continuing to build relationships and encourage investment in Labrador

is paramount.

Continuing Expo Labrador is a sign of our true Labrador

spirit and resilience. The Labrador North Chamber of Commerce and the Expo

Labrador are critical to promoting business investment in the Big Land. I

commend the organizers for their hard work and dedication.

Mr. Speaker, Labrador is a tremendous place to do

business. Even though I may be a bit bias, not only do we have the most

beautiful landscapes, we also have some of the hardest working and dedicated

people the world over.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for an advance copy

of her statement. It was a privilege to give opening remarks at this great

event. Expo Labrador brings excellent exposure to Labrador-based businesses and

helps share our innovations with the rest of the regions of this province and

with Canada.

I hope that the government will endeavour to continue

to support Labrador to enable its businesses and industry to remain competitive,

especially in these times of economic and social uncertainty.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Transportation and

Infrastructure.

MR.

BRAGG:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm pleased to provide this hon. House with an update

on how we are improving the way suppliers do business with the provincial

government.

In November, the Public Procurement Agency will launch

a new e-procurement system that will allow users to submit, view and manage bid

submissions online.

Vendors who do business with government will no longer

be required to drop off paper copies to the procurement offices of Tendering and

Contracts and the Public Procurement Agency.

Instead, they will be able to manage their own

accounts, identify types of open calls relevant to their business and receive

electronic notification when open calls are published.

Vendors will still be able to bid on open calls through

the current paper-based process if they choose. However, training webinars are

being offered so that all vendors can become familiar and comfortable with the

new system and we anticipate all vendors will be using the new online system in

the near future.

Mr. Speaker, the Public Procurement Agency and the

Department of Transportation and Infrastructure award hundreds of millions of

dollars in contracts each year. By launching the new e-procurement system, we

are hoping to help all suppliers do business with the provincial government in a

user-friendly environment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

MR.

PARROTT:

Mr.

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

I'm pleased to hear that the Public Procurement Agency

will launch a new e-procurement system that will allow businesses to manage

their business submissions online.

The transition to online services for business and the

public alike is a positive step to bring Newfoundland and Labrador in line with

jurisdictions throughout the country. The people of our province have an

expectation in today's world that processes should be able to be completed

online and that government should not be an exception.

I'm also pleased to hear that this may make our

procurement process more efficient and I look forward to hearing the feedback

from businesses in our province about the new program as it rolls out.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

MS.

COFFIN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would also like to thank the hon. minister for

receiving an advance copy of his statement. The Third Party caucus welcomes

measures such as these that reduce paper waste and make government function more

quickly while maintaining a competitive bidding process.

We hope that this new system achieves the desired

effects and that it improves the ability of our suppliers to provide us with

services. It is also our hope that the new system increases the amount of

openness and transparency in the bidding process.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, our government announced $25,000 for the Quidi

Vidi/Rennie's River Development Foundation for the delivery of educational

programs at The Fluvarium which has been heavily impacted by the COVID-19

pandemic.

The funding will allow The Fluvarium to continue those

programs this year in a virtual format.

Each year, students learn about the importance of

freshwater ecology and habitats. Approximately 10,000 students visit The

Fluvarium annually to participate in these educational programs.

With the funding announced today, The Fluvarium will

provide schools with videos that include footage from both their indoor and

outdoor environments, and will then host a virtual question and answer session

with students and teachers.

The virtual format will also allow The Fluvarium to

reach a greater number of students outside the St. John's area.

Mr. Speaker, this is an excellent example of how we are

all finding ways to adapt and change due to COVID-19. It is important that we

welcome and continue to offer fun and interactive learning experiences for

students and our government is pleased to assist with the necessary funding.

I ask my hon. colleagues to join me in recognizing the

work of the Quidi Vidi/Rennie's River Development Foundation in finding a way to

continue this programming for our students.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Bonavista.

MR.

PARDY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his

statement. I join the minister, Mr. Speaker, in recognizing the tremendous work

of the Quidi Vidi/Rennie's River Development Foundation.

Mr. Speaker, through The Fluvarium, the fo