Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 22 April 2010 (46th General Assembly, 3rd Session, Vol. XLVI No. 9)
2010-04-22
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
April
22, 2010 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS
Vol. XLVI No. 9
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!
Admit strangers.
Today the Chair would like to welcome twenty students from the Harbour Grace
Discover Centre in the District of Carbonear-Harbour Grace. The students are
accompanied by their teachers: Debbie Snow and Joanne Mullins.
Welcome to the House of Assembly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: The House will hear the following members' statements: the
hon. the Member for the District of Topsail; the hon. the Member for the
District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi; the hon. the Member for the District of Port
aux Port; the hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North;
the hon. the Member for the District of Humber Valley; and the hon. the Member
for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
The hon. the Member for the District of Topsail.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. DAVIS: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize
seventeen-year-old Paradise resident Sarah Davis, and to congratulate her on her
successful play in the recent IIHF 2010 World Women's Under-18 Ice Hockey
Championship held in Chicago, Illinois. As the only player representing
Newfoundland and Labrador on the Canadian National Team, Sarah scored three
goals and had one assist for four points in the five-game tournament.
On Saturday, April 3, 2010, the Canadian team, with Sarah in the lineup, was
triumphant after coming from a 3 to 1 deficit to beat the United States team 5
to 4 in overtime to win the gold medal.
Mr. Speaker, I had the pleasure of first meeting Sarah a few years ago when
she was a student at Villa Nova Junior High School and was competing in a
regional speak off competition. Her abilities were obvious at that time as well.
Sarah has continued to work hard and is now a full-time student at Warner Hockey
School in Alberta and was recently awarded a NCAA position at the University of
Minnesota where she will begin to play and study in September this year.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating Sarah Davis,
her parents, Jeff and Donna, and brother Bryan, and wish them all well for the
future.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Before doing my statement, I would like to recognize the first time that the
Member for Topsail has stood in the House.
Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to stand in the House today and
recognize the success of the Newfoundland and Labrador Council of St. John
Ambulance and congratulate them on the marking of their 100 anniversary in this
Province.
Mr. Speaker, today all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians understand the
importance of first aid in saving lives in an emergency.
One hundred years ago a group of volunteers met and agreed to work together
to promote skills that would improve the health, safety and quality of life of
the people of their community by providing training and community service. Could
those people at that first meeting have imagined how successful their work would
be?
Today, St. John Ambulance trains over 25,000 people in the Province each year
in courses such as: Standard First Aid, Emergency First Aid, Emergency Scene
Management, Shock, Choking, CPR, Severe Bleeding, Automated External
Defibrillation, and much more.
If we all think about it we do not go anywhere in this Province, no event,
without seeing St. John Ambulance present.
As this is Volunteer Week, I want to congratulate the many people in my
district and all over Newfoundland and Labrador who work to promote the goals of
St. John Ambulance, through community service, first aid and CPR training.
Volunteers are at the heart of any community and when any group of people
gets together with the idea of working together to serve their community, I
advise them to look to St. John Ambulance as an inspiration.
I ask all members of the House to join with me in congratulating St. John
Ambulance on its 100 anniversary.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Port au Port.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. CORNECT: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to congratulate
the winners and nominees at the recently held Stephen Awards Banquet in
Stephenville on April 17 as part of Volunteer Week.
The Citizen of the Year Award went to Terry Smith of Kippens, who devotes
extraordinary amount of time and effort as chairman of the Rotary Music
Festival, second vice-president of the Bay St. George Snowmobile Association, a
director with the Provincial Music Federation, a director with the Stephenville
Theatre Festival, and co-chair of the Stephenville Theatre Festival's bar
committee. I commend Mr. Smith for his hours of volunteer work.
Also, Mr. Speaker, other Stephen Awards presented that night were: Jennifer
O'Quinn honoured with Youth of the Year for serving as a Youth Advocate for the
Children's Wish Foundation and for her outstanding voluntary work in the
community; Patric Alexander won the Junior Male Athlete of the Year Award; and
Jillian Forsey was presented with the Junior Female Athlete of the Year Award.
Mr. Speaker, also that evening, sixteen Certificates of Merit for Outstanding
Volunteer Work were also presented to individuals for their exceptional
volunteer work for the community. I extend congratulations, Mr. Speaker, to:
Barry Aucoin, Gerry Clark, Robert Dollard, Jenny Downey, Ruth Doyle, Florence
Higgins, Val Hulan, Dianna Kung, Marsha MacInnis, Marjorie McKay, Margaret Rowe,
Wayne Simon, Lisa Smith, Terry Smith, Maureen Tiller and Cyril White for their
hard work and dedication and their contribution in making our area a better
place to live and work.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members of this hon. House of Assembly to join
with me in congratulating all the award winners and nominees of the Stephen
Awards on their invaluable contributions to the community, the region, and
indeed the Province.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White
Bay North.
MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate fifteen-year-old
Cole Walsh from Flower's Cove who recently won a local essay writing contest,
and then Cole had the opportunity to explore the Chemistry and Biochemistry
Departments at MUN in St. John's.
For a full week, Cole sat in on lectures; he participated in laboratory
classes and met with former department heads. He also observed and took
part in
research in Dr. Brosnan's lab. It is certainly an exciting experience for Cole,
a young student all the way from Flower's Cove, to be able to come to MUN.
So, Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join with me in
congratulating Cole on such a unique opportunity and extend him best wishes as
he plans to explore this field further in his future.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Humber Valley.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KELLY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, April 18-24 is National Volunteer Week. Volunteer Week is an
opportunity to recognize and celebrate the great work of volunteers across our
Province and across the country. Today I am so pleased to rise in this hon.
House and recognize the recent successes of the Jackson's Arm Volunteer Fire
Department.
Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, March 6, 2010, I had the great pleasure of
attending their twenty-fifth anniversary celebration and brought congratulatory
remarks. Volunteer fire departments in my district and throughout our great
Province do exemplary work on behalf of the residents they serve. Jackson's Arm
Volunteer Fire Department certainly does exemplary work and that work is well
respected by Mayor Jones, the council and the community of Jackson's Arm.
Mr. Speaker, during the celebration, it was my great pleasure to present
awards on behalf of Fire and Emergency Services. These awards and the
recognition that firefighters received are very important and well deserved.
Seven firefighters received special recognition for twenty-five years of
service, and included: James Hewitt, Carl Wicks, Hugh Hewitt, Vernon Combdon,
Colin Hewitt, George Gillingham, and Bruce Wicks.
Mr. Speaker, twelve members of the firettes also received special recognition
for the Town of Jackson's Arm for their twenty-five years of dedicated support
to the fire department. They were: Louise Jones, Bonnie Wicks, Mary Wicks, Elma
Jones, Hilda Bungay, Golda Hewitt, Ethel Brophy, Madeline Bungay, Laura Brown,
Rita Cassell, Ivy Wicks, and Theresa Pittman.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join me in saluting the
Jackson's Arm Volunteer Fire Department on the occasion of its twenty-fifth
anniversary.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au
Clair.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to congratulate the
Labrador Metis Nation on selecting a new name to better reflect who they really
are as an Aboriginal people.
Mr. Speaker, the Labrador Metis Nation Corporation recently held their annual
general meeting and a resolution was unanimously passed to change the name from
Labrador Metis Nation to Nunatukavut, meaning our ancient land. Mary Adams, the
elder of the Inuit Society can be attributed with this instrumental change.
President Chris Montague stated that their research confirmed that they are an
historic and continuous Inuit community; therefore the decision was made to move
forward to more clearly illustrate their identity as a people Inuit
descendants in the land of their ancestors.
Mr. Speaker, since its formation as a society in 1981, the Labrador Metis
Nation has grown to become the largest Aboriginal group in Labrador. It is an
affiliate of the national body, the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples. Labrador's
Inuit-Metis population today number more than 6,000 descendents of the residents
of Inuit and Europeans who travelled to Labrador in the 1700 and 1800s.
Mr. Speaker, the Inuit Metis are a nation whose people continue to rely upon
the resources of the land, the water and the sea. Their ties to the land and its
resources form the core of the Inuit Metis existence, and I ask all members in
the hon. House today to join with me in congratulating the Nunatukavut people on
this significant occasion.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and
Recreation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
First, Mr. Speaker, I must congratulate the Member for Topsail, Mr. Davis,
who I am looking forward to working with in the next, hopefully ten or twelve
years anyway, it would be nice. We both represent the Town of Conception Bay
South and I certainly want to welcome him to the House.
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend Newfoundland and Labrador and the City of St.
John's hosted the thirty-ninth annual JUNO Awards, a celebration of this
country's extraordinary musical talent, and also a celebration of our capital
city and our Province as a whole.
Mr. Speaker, the event was not without its challenges - but Newfoundlanders
and Labradorians are well known for rising above a little adversity. We can look
back now and know that all involved did a fantastic job of making this event an
incredible experience for the artists involved, and for music fans in
Newfoundland and Labrador and indeed throughout Canada.
The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador invested more than $1 million
into the JUNOs, and we anticipated a short-term return on investment of about
$10 million in terms of economic activity generated. The national exposure we
received, included the opportunity to showcase 260 local artists, will also
bring long-term benefits to the Province - particularly in terms of highlighting
Newfoundland and Labrador's vibrant cultural scene, an important sector, Mr.
Speaker, to which this government has contributed over $28 million since the
launch of our cultural strategy, Creative Newfoundland and Labrador in
What struck me most during the weekend was how a little fog and damp weather
did not discourage people from having a good time - and for showing our visitors
an exceptionally good time. Mr. Speaker, JUNOs on George was a great success.
For the first time in JUNO history, the show was broadcast simultaneously at an
outside venue allowing even more people to be part of the JUNO excitement.
Thanks to Kim Stockwood and Damhnait Doyle for doing such a great job hosting.
Special congratulations are extended to local singer and songwriter, Amelia
Curran, for winning a JUNO for Roots and Traditional Recording of the Year for
her album, Hunter, Hunter .
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FRENCH: It was certainly great, Mr. Speaker, to see a local artist
receive national recognition.
I also ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Ken Marshall, Chair of
the JUNO Host Committee, and all of the staff and volunteers who made Ruckus on
the Edge such a rich and diverse celebration of music in the week leading up to
the JUNOs. It was an amazing week, and all the hard work certainly paid off.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FRENCH: Thanks to them - and thanks to the people of St. John's - for
once again showing that this city, and this Province, has what it takes to hold
a world-class event.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. It is great to see
the JUNOs back in St. John's again. They were here, of course, back in 2002. I
had a great time then, and it certainly caused a Ruckus on The Rock this time.
We had musicians, of course, and entertainers and artists from all over the
world. Not everybody got in some volcanic ash might have kept a few away, but
most people did get in, and eventually, despite the weather and the aircraft
circumstances, everybody did eventually get away. What is important, of course,
is what they did when they were here. They had a great time, they experienced
our hospitality, and our culture and our heritage, and it was indeed a fine
party.
I think, also, we should extend congratulations not only to Ms Curran, a St.
John's native, upon her win, and to Mr. Marshall, but also to the hundreds of
volunteers, of course, who took
part in this event and made it a success;
including the police forces, for example, who made everybody feel safe and
secure while they enjoyed the events. We would like to extend thanks to them as
well.
The feedback from the performers involved, and the people who enjoyed the
events was certainly positive as well, and we hope we can see the day when we
can host the JUNOs again in the very near future.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I, too, want to
thank all the volunteers for the work behind the scenes. I am sure that those of
us who did get to take in some parts of the JUNOs could not miss the volunteers
as they went around with their red t-shirts on, and they were always there to
help, no matter what the venue was. We could not have pulled it off without
volunteers. It is wonderful to see the City of St. John's getting to host again
such a celebration of music of all varieties from all the parts of Canada. I am
sure we are all waiting for the next JUNOs to come here.
I especially want to congratulate our own Amelia Curran, as well as all of
the musicians who performed, but she does need to be recognized for her first
JUNO, Roots and Traditional Recording of the Year. I think everyone in the
Province would agree with those who gave her the award, that Hunter, Hunter
is really the culmination of all of her hard work to date. All of her albums
have been great but this one stands out. It was the first of her albums to be
recorded in St. John's and that makes it even more meaningful for us.
Clearly, the JUNOs were not just an award show, but a huge music festival
that allowed talent, a national audience, and generated economic benefits for
the city and for the Province. The JUNOs represent the culmination of a lot of
hard work by a lot of individual artists, and we must not forget to continue
supporting those artists as they are in the beginning stages of their careers so
that we can have more JUNO winners down the road.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I should also point out, on the topic of the JUNOs, it was
actually a Green event, too. So I think that is noteworthy.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize
Earth Day a day founded on the premise that all people have a right to a
healthy, sustainable environment. Founded by Senator Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin
in 1970, Earth Day is a time for us to reflect on our actions and recognize the
need for ongoing environmental education, continued action and change.
Earth Day 2010, Mr. Speaker, marks the fortieth anniversary of this
celebration. Last year, on this day, the Green Generation Campaign was launched,
a two-year project that focuses on the promotion of renewable energy. The goals
of the campaign are continued this year, Mr. Speaker, as people around the world
remain committed to responsible, sustainable consumption and creation of a new
green economy that helps create quality green jobs and transforms the global
education system into a green one.
The celebration of Earth Day is an opportunity to address worldwide
environmental concerns, as well as an opportunity to focus on local
environmental initiatives. More than one billion people in 190 countries are
taking action for Earth Day, Mr. Speaker, and Newfoundland and Labrador is also
doing its part.
To celebrate Earth Day, the Multi-Materials Stewardship Board is
participating in a number of activities to promote the importance of waste
reduction and encourage families across the Province to cut their waste in half
to protect our Province and our planet for future generations. The MMSB is
participating in an Earth Day Fair at the Fluvarium and promoting the
Get-to-Half at school message at St. Bernard's Elementary and Fatima Academy in
St. Bride's during their Environment Fest. The Get-to-Half message will also be
presented to Brownie groups in Foxtrap and Paradise this week, and the MMSB will
also participate in the Newfoundland and Labrador Landscape and Gardening Show
this weekend in St. John's.
Forty years after the first Earth Day, Mr. Speaker, governments,
organizations, businesses and individuals remain committed to taking action
every day to reduce their environmental impact through saving energy and
reducing waste and emissions. Earth Day 2010 represents an opportunity for
everyone to make a personal commitment to the environment.
I encourage all residents of Newfoundland and Labrador to consider options
for responsible, sustainable consumption in all aspects of their lives on Earth
Day and throughout the year.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and a happy Earth Day to all.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr Speaker.
I want to thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement and to say
that we, too, want to take
part in the celebration, I guess, of the fortieth
anniversary of Earth Day.
Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the schools, St. Bernard's and Fatima Academy
for taking
part in Get-to-Half school program and hopefully other people
throughout the Province, schools and other organizations, will become involved.
As we recognize Earth Day this year, I just want to say to the minister, I do
not want to sound in a critical way but I want her to recognize the
sustainability act that was brought before this House in 2007. As we speak
today, my understanding is it has not received Royal Assent. That was where, Mr.
Speaker, we were supposed to have the outdoor Bill of Rights put forward where
all stakeholders interested in whatever aspect of the environment, were to come
together in a round table session so we could take care of many of the problems
that we encounter today.
Just to name a few, we know that logging is taking place in the caribou
habitat, the waste management on the Avalon Peninsula is not onboard any more
with the program, St. John's has its recycling. The people who have concerns
about the pesticides, Mr. Speaker, they have been trying to get a meeting for
close to a year and they have not had that meeting yet.
Mr. Speaker, I want to join the minister in saying congratulations to all
those involved with Earth Day this year, but hopefully that the minister will,
in her wisdom, be able to go back to the sustainability act and hopefully see
that come forward.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy of her statement. It is good
for us here today to celebrate Earth Day and recognize the principles that are
behind Earth Day.
I particularly would like to take this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to
congratulate the Town of Pouch Cove for being the first rural community to set
up a recycling program. I think it is great that it is coming about around the
same time as Earth Day is being celebrated. It is good also seeing organizations
in the Province promoting the different activities that are going on today, both
in the schools and also with the various groups concerned about the environment.
I would have liked to have seen the government announce something very concrete
today as a government action to celebrate Earth Day.
Last year, the Province of Ontario marked Earth Day by banning cosmetic
pesticides; that was its contribution last year. Last November in our own
Province, Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador at their annual convention
passed a resolution to lobby government to ban the use of cosmetic pesticides in
this Province.
The minister said in June that she is looking at the studies and recently,
she says, she is still doing that. I am asking the minister, how much time does
it take? I would love this time next year, minister, to see that Earth Day in
our Province was being celebrated by banning the use of these unnecessary
poisons to the environment.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
Oral Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions today are for the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
Mr. Speaker, we have still seen no progress in resolving the impasse that is
going on in the crab industry, yet thousands of people in this Province are
depending upon this fishery this year for an income. The minister said in a
media interview this morning that government would not be bringing forward any
short-term measures, and also that the anniversary of the MOU would occur in
July and hopefully they would have some solutions to implement at that time.
My question today for the minister is: Is he telling us that they are
prepared to lose this season in the crab fishery without getting this issue
resolved?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I reiterate, again as I said this morning and I
said on Friday, that short-term measures are not the fix. Mr. Speaker, the
Leader of the Opposition was the Fisheries Minister for, I believe, about six or
seven months. We can look back to one of her quotes that said short-term
measures are not the solution.
Mr. Speaker, that is not the solution. I have to say, Mr. Speaker, that there
is progress being made, that both parties met this morning
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, both parties met yesterday morning. They met
yesterday afternoon. They met again last night. I am hoping, Mr. Speaker, that I
will get to meet with both parties before this afternoon is out. Mr. Speaker, I
hope that something favourable comes from those meetings.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to remind the minister that during that year we settled the
impasse in the crab fishery and made sure those plants opened. We made sure that
the shrimp industry was going after the boats were tied up for a number of days.
We also fought the federal government on the closure of the Gulf cod stock, I
say to the minister. We did not sit on the sidelines and be observers while
thousands of people in this Province, Mr. Speaker, went without jobs.
I ask the minister today: Is he prepared to lose this season in the fishing
industry, in the crab industry, by sitting back, doing nothing, and committing
to not invest in the fishing industry of this Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I do not think this is any time to get into, I
will say, the gutter politics of it.
The most important thing here, Mr. Speaker -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. JACKMAN: The most important thing here, Mr. Speaker, is to get this
fishery open.
Mr. Speaker, during these talks there have been ideas brought forward that I
think have very much potential for long-term impact in the fishery. Mr. Speaker,
she can say what she wants about getting that season open, but all harvesters,
processors and plant workers will tell you that they are tired of the annual
repeat that every spring you can expect disruption in this industry. It cannot
continue, Mr. Speaker, it cannot because of the success of this fishery and the
importance of this fishery to the entire rural parts of this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The minister is not prepared to look at any short-term measures to get this
industry going. He is not prepared to invest any money. He has already indicated
he has two studies that tell us that the industry for harvesters and processors
is not viable at today's standards.
So I ask you, Minister: What action are you prepared to take?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to have all parties engaged so
that we see structural changes in this industry for the benefit of the industry
and for the success of the industry in the future.
Mr. Speaker, the thing that has been proposed opens up the potential for
trade issues. Once you open that door, you do not know what is going to come
through it, Mr. Speaker. We cannot take that chance; it puts too much at
jeopardy. Again, Mr. Speaker, it may have some merit for the long term
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, there may be merits for some of this for the
long term, but that is exactly what we have to do. We have to get this industry
open this year. I am hoping that both sides will have come closer to reaching an
agreement, and for the long term, we have to make structural changes.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We certainly see what happened when we opened the doors to Abitibi, I say to
the minister.
Mr. Speaker, sealers in this Province have had a very tough season as well.
In fact, the markets for their products have been greatly weakened with the ban
on seal products in the European Union. We are aware that in Nunavut today there
is an ongoing discussion about a ban on liquor products being imported into that
territory from the European Union.
I ask the Premier today: Has your government considered putting in ban in
place on European alcohol being imported into Newfoundland and Labrador, sold in
government operated liquor stores as a means of showing solidarity and our
discontent with the ban in the seal industry?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, what this government is very, very proud
of is we are the only jurisdiction of thirteen jurisdictions in all of Canada
who has not gone along with the European Free Trade Agreement which Canada is
trying to enter into. We are the only ones who have stood our ground and said we
are not prepared to agree unless there are certain conditions. The seal
industry, of course, is obviously one; the shrimp tariff is another one. We have
been very successful in having the shrimp tariff reduced and, in fact, removed
over time. It has made a huge difference to the shrimp industry.
We will continue to fight for what we believe in. If, in fact, there has to
be some kind of a ban on a liquor product or some other European product, that
is something that this government would actually be prepared to consider, but it
would have to be for the right reasons. We would have to make sure it is
properly researched, but it will not be a knee-jerk reaction.
I can say that we are very proud to be the only jurisdiction in Canada
standing up for what we believe in on European Free Trade.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am sure it is not lost on the government what the impact of that ban in the
European Union has meant to sealers in this Province, especially at this time of
the year. I would encourage the government to consider looking at a ban on the
import of alcohol from the European Union to express our disgruntlement.
Mr. Speaker, government continued with its $100,000 commitment this year for
communications related to the sealing industry, but they did not provide any new
strategies or any new marketing plans in terms of how they are going to overcome
the severe challenges that we are facing in this industry.
I ask the minister today: What plan does government have to deal with this
severe problem and the loss of markets that we have for seals in this Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister for Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I think everyone recognizes the challenge that
confronts the sealing industry this year. If you listen to the broadcast, the
ice conditions are certainly an issue, the markets are there and the price of
the pelt is down.
Mr. Speaker, let me assure the Leader of the Opposition that we are working
with the sealing industry; we are undertaking some new initiatives. I cannot
tell you exactly what they are now, but we are working on them. In conjunction
with the sealing industry, Mr. Speaker, we intend to roll those out.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am really comforted to know that there are lots of initiatives being worked
on in the sealing industry, but the minister cannot tell me about any of them
today. So, maybe tomorrow maybe the cone of silence is down, the cone of
silence on the sealing industry.
Mr. Speaker, we do know that the federal minister has stated and in fact
she indicated this in a meeting I had with her myself in December that the
federal government was looking to China to develop some new markets for
different products in the sealing industry.
I ask the minister today if there has been any recent discussions with his
federal counterparts, or if there was anything that came from those discussions
with China that could certainly help us in the future in developing a new
market.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, it would have been good if she had been in
Ottawa to try a little seal tasting, Mr. Speaker. One of her Senator colleagues
put off a wonderful little feast that she was not there for.
Mr. Speaker, Minister Shea and I have discussed her representation in China.
As well, Mr. Speaker, there are companies within this Province that we have had
discussions with who are looking at expanding some of their products into the
Chinese market. Those discussions are ongoing, Mr. Speaker, and we look forward
to success in those particular areas.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to remind the minister I do not have to go to Ottawa to eat
seal. I got a full carcass last week. I got it in bottles, Minister, and I would
be happy to bring one into you tomorrow, so there you go.
Mr. Speaker, my next question is for the Minister of Environment. The Quebec
courts recently ruled that this Province is not a secured creditor for
AbitibiBowater's environmental liabilities. I know the minister indicated
earlier this week that they have appealed this decision; however, the existing
court ruling basically states that we are on the bottom of the pile to be
compensated.
So I would like to ask the minister today: How much will it cost the people
of this Province to clean up the environmental mess that has been left behind by
Abitibi?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As the hon. member mentioned, we did seek leave to appeal the
section 99
Environmental Protection Act orders. We understand that that leave to appeal
will be heard on May 12.
In terms of the cost of the environmental liabilities, until Abitibi files
with us a remediation plan that we in the Department of Environment are
satisfied with, only then will we be able to put an actual cost, an actual price
tag on the cost of cleanup.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In questioning in the House of Assembly on May 7, nearly a year ago, I asked
the government at that time if they would outline the inventory and costs
related to the environmental liabilities that were left by AbitibiBowater. The
minister said they would undertake to do that, or you were already in the
process of doing that.
I ask you: If you have completed that inventory and if you have cost it and
if you are prepared to table it?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, under the act the way that we - under the orders
that we issued we require Abitibi to submit to us a remediation plan. There were
five orders: Botwood, Stephenville, Grand Falls-Windsor, Buchans and some
logging camps. So, until they submit a remediation plan to us - and they had one
year to submit this plan and they have done some work on it in the past. Until
they submit that plan and until we are satisfied with the plan to ensure that
the environmental liabilities will be dealt with, I cannot give you a firm,
actual cost until that comes to us and we are satisfied with it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is my understanding then that government did not carry out this inventory
or costing within their own department.
Mr. Speaker, in last week's edition of The GEORGIAN newspaper,
officials with AbitibiBowater confirmed that no environmental work has taken
place at their former site in Stephenville since last year and the company has
no immediate plans to finish the cleanup.
I ask the minister: What are government's plans to ensure that this site is
fully remediated and all the environmental issues are addressed?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This government takes issues of the environment very seriously and that is
why we issued the orders in the first place. We went before the courts, a
decision was made, and now we are appealing that decision. So while this is in
the courts, before the courts, Mr. Speaker, we are going to let that process
unfold.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My next questions are for the Minister of Natural Resources.
Yesterday, I asked the minister about the $8 million expenditure in her
department for professional services. She admitted that some of it was spent on
Abitibi related litigation. However, she refused to give me the full breakdown
of the expenditure and instead asked me to get it through Access to Information
- which the Premier complains he is getting too many of those requests, by the
way minister. Anyway, I think the appropriate place to ask and have those
questions answered is in the House of Assembly.
I ask the minister again today: Will she commit to provide a break down of
the $8 million spent by her department for professional services?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources and Deputy
Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, there was in fact approximately $8 million spent on professional
services related to the expropriation of Abitibi by my department last year. We
paid a substantial amount of that money to CRA, to Navigant Consulting, to
Weirfolds, a legal firm, and Enda Searching, to do particular work around the
expropriation itself, around land registry consolidation; CRA, particularly with
regard to the remediation requirements in Grand Falls. That work informed our
budget, Mr. Speaker, where we budgeted over $9 million to deal with the mess
left behind by Abitibi in Buchans.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I do not know what the issue is that the minister will not table the
information in the House of Assembly.
I will ask her this question as well: Can she tell me if any of this $8
million was used to cover any of the legal costs for AbitibiBowater?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Premier and Minister of Natural
Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: No, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this was work done within
government, within the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of
Justice to cover off costs associated with the expropriation. There were legal
fees and legal firms engaged outside of government in that piece of work. They
were law firms engaged around the filing and potential filing of an after claim.
There was work required to ensure that lands were transferred appropriately from
Abitibi to the Crown. All of the money that was spent was with regard to that
and to remediation that was going to be required immediately in Buchans.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Government wants to be open and accountable, that is one of the trademarks
that they have certainly tried to convince the people of the Province in terms
of how they govern.
I ask the minister today: If she would be prepared to table the information
and the break down of the $8 million in expenditure?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, we have a freedom of information process in
this Province for a very particular reason. We want to
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS DUNDERDALE: be as open and as transparent and as accountable as
possible, providing as much information as we possibly can to the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador, but at the same time, Mr. Speaker, we have a
responsibility to protect information that could be used against us in court
hearings, in NAFTA hearings, and so on.
The access to information process makes information available, but also
protects proprietorial information that we need in legal proceedings and so on.
So that is why we use that process. I do not have that legal background, Mr.
Speaker. So through the process all of those values are protected, and that is
why we encourage people to use it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: No openness, Mr. Speaker, no transparency. I suggest to the
minister, Mr. Speaker, the only one they are trying to protect here is their own
botching of this entire issue and deal, Mr. Speaker.
Thanks to the government's lack of due diligence in finalizing the
expropriation legislation, we accidentally inherited the whole of Reid lot
fifty-nine and the former AbitibiBowater mill and assets.
I ask the Premier today: How did such a major error take place and why wasn't
this picked up during your review and that by the Department of Justice and the
top legal advisers you claim to have gotten on this file, and how much will this
mistake cost the people of the Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the pulp and paper industry has been in turmoil worldwide for
quite some time. A primary objective of this government from 2003 forward was to
do everything that we could do to sustain the industry here in Newfoundland and
Labrador. We worked hard to do that in Stephenville. We were working hard to do
that with Abitibi in Grand Falls-Windsor. It became very clear in a very short
period of time that our efforts were not going to be successful because of
circumstances way beyond the control of the Government of Newfoundland and
Labrador. We realized that we had to move quickly very quickly to ensure
that the assets that truly belong to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador
stayed in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, in the rush to do that, there were mistakes made and we did
expropriate a property in Grand Falls-Windsor, the mill itself, where we did not
intend to do it. That is a reality that we have to live with. We cannot return
it while the CCAA process is ongoing. Mr. Speaker, we will deal with it when the
time is right for us to do so.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
No doubt, the industry may have been in turmoil but it has absolutely nothing
to do with the fact that there are loopholes in the legal agreement that
government launched. Right now, today, we have had $8 million in legal bills to
show for that. We have a 500-million-dollar lawsuit being launched. We have a
property, a pulp and paper mill that we did not even know that we were getting.
As a result of government's accidental expropriation of these assets,
AbitibiBowater is now looking to be reimbursed for security and environmental
monitoring costs that have been associated with the former mill site.
I ask the Premier today: How much will this cost the people of the Province,
not just now but on a go-forward basis?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, when we reached the decision that it was
critical that we move in protecting the interests of Newfoundland and Labrador
by the expropriation of Abitibi assets, the first people after Cabinet and our
caucus that we informed of our intention were the Official Opposition and the
NDP. We invited them to a meeting. We then made our officials available to them;
we provided them with every piece of information we had, the legal advice we had
at the time. They unanimously supported what we did, Mr. Speaker, and nobody was
behind them with their arm twisted up behind their back.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS DUNDERDALE: I suppose they asked a few questions themselves given
whatever advisers they may have in their back rooms, Mr. Speaker. What we did
was the right thing. We will not pay $500 million for the assets. There were
legal fees. How naive would you have to be to think that there would not be
legal fees involved in the expropriation of any kind of an asset, Mr. Speaker?
They have legal advice over there that is supposed - a former Attorney General,
I surely thought he would have known that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
There were a lot of gaps in the briefing we had, and I remind the minister
there was no $8 million in legal opinions. We had about eight minutes, I would
say, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, in addition to that, now that the government has expropriated
the former mill and the people of the Province are responsible for its upkeep
and monitoring costs, I ask them if they can provide to us an update on what the
future plan will be for that mill and the associated assets in Grand
Falls-Windsor.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, when it was discovered that we had inadvertently expropriated
the mill our first thought was to return the mill to AbitibiBowater. Because
they were already in bankruptcy protection, we were not able to do that. The law
prevented us from doing that.
Right now, Mr. Speaker, we are maintaining the mill as Abitibi goes through
the legal processes associated with its bankruptcy protection. Mr. Speaker, we
continue to seek other uses for that mill. That will not stop, Mr. Speaker, and
we have under consideration any kind of interest from anywhere in the world in
activating that property in Grand Falls-Windsor. We will continue to do
everything we can to rebuild and to continue to rebuild the economy in Grand
Falls-Windsor.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the minister that during
those briefings, as well, we also indicated that there would be a net zero cost
to the Province as a result of all of this, in terms of the exchange of assets
and environmental liabilities. Mr. Speaker, I can only say that I hope they do
not have the same legal counsel on their lawsuit on the Upper Churchill as they
had on the Abitibi deal.
Mr. Speaker, we know that AbitibiBowater had partners on the power projects
on the Exploits River; namely, Fortis, and the Italian company Enel. There was
some question as to what compensation those companies would be entitled to
receive from government for their losses and the timeliness of such payments.
So I ask the Premier today: Has any discussions taken place with these
companies, and has government provided any compensation as a result of the
expropriation?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, let me say, first of all, that the Province
has in its possession, in trust for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, the
generation assets on the Exploits River as well as hundreds of thousands of
hectares of fibre that can be put to the use to drive the economy of
Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: The value of that is not to be underestimated, even in
terms of our pride and being the stewards of our own natural resources and using
them to the advantage of the people here in the Province.
Mr. Speaker, we made a promise when we did the expropriation that partners
involved in the generation of electricity on the Exploits River will be kept
whole. We are still working through that process. We hoped that it would be
concluded sooner than it is. The legal processes that Abitibi has engaged in
under bankruptcy protection have slowed all of that process. We are working
through it, but we intend to stand by our word.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to ask the minister again: Is there a legal obligation now by
the government, as a result of this expropriation, to pay out compensation to
Fortis and to Enel? If so, how much has been done and where is it, at what
stage?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, we are in discussions with Fortis and Enel.
There are a number of arrangements that have been made with them as we work
through this process. We made a commitment to both of those companies that we
would keep them whole at the end of the day. We have not moved off that premise,
Mr. Speaker. It is a complicated process. It is taking some time to work through
it, but at the end of the day those companies will not be penalized because of
the action we took with regard to the expropriation.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, between 2004 and 2008, Newfoundland and Labrador lost more
physicians to other provinces than it gained in each year. Net losses are mainly
due to family medicine physicians moving to other provinces. One glaring example
of this problem that the Province was given last week by family doctors was that
in thirteen years in Botwood alone there have been twenty-three different family
doctors for the same five positions.
Mr. Speaker, the basic themes and the presentations by the doctors over the
past few weeks that they have given to government is that in order to have a
well functioning health care system we have to have a stable workforce.
So, Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier to tell the House what plans his
government has not just to recruit but also to retain doctors in this Province.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As the Premier indicated a couple of weeks ago, sometimes it is a matter of
looking at whether the glass is half empty or half full. We currently have 1,042
physicians in active practice in this Province, Mr. Speaker, the most ever. In
the last eighteen months, we have had a net increase of fifty-three physicians.
Between September 2008 and September 2009, eighteen specialists were recruited
and we lost seven.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, our present physician-to-patient population
ratio is the highest in the country. We have now, between 2008 and 2009,
recruited 72.5 per cent of Newfoundland and Labrador medical students who
graduate. In 2008, Mr. Speaker, seventeen new family medicine physicians took up
practice in this Province. So it is a question, Mr. Speaker
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. KENNEDY: Again, interrupting me.
It is a question, Mr. Speaker, of whether or not you look at the situation
that it is better today than it has ever been or you look at the fact that, like
elsewhere in the country, we are still trying to recruit the physicians we need.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I am sick and tired of hearing about the glass being half empty or half full.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS MICHAEL: I would like to point out that we need to decide where we
look for reality. If we look to rural Newfoundland and Labrador, those figures
that were just quoted do not mean anything, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair is having difficulty hearing the hon. member pose her question.
The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Let's take an example from rural Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker. We
heard today that rural Newfoundland is operating on 50 per cent capacity for
psychiatrists.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, we also heard that there are no psychiatrists
full time in Labrador nor on the Northern Peninsula, which places great strain
on other psychiatrists in the Province to visit those regions, or the patients
who must travel to St. John's or other places where psychiatrists are. Mr.
Speaker, we graduate four psychiatrists a year and we cannot even hold on to the
four of them.
My question, Mr. Speaker, is: How is this government working with the doctors
to recruit psychiatrists to our Province? It is a crying need.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, in this Budget we made several very significant
investments in mental health and addictions. We announced a new addictions
treatment centre for the Harbour Grace area, to deal with long-term substance
abuse. With that, Mr. Speaker, there are oftentimes concurrent disorder and
mental health issues.
We are actively recruiting physicians. We are opening up the youth
residential treatment centre in Grand Falls-Windsor. We are opening up the
centre for youth with complex needs in St. John's.
When you look at the steps we have taken in the last two years in dealing
with these issues
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: - and then you hear some psychiatrist today, in the middle
of negotiations, trying to paint a picture that is inaccurate it is really,
really unhelpful and, Mr. Speaker, I would suggest also not the way to be
dealing with these very important issues.
Mental health and addictions is a very significant issue for this government,
one in which we have invested approximately $20 million in the last number of
years. We will continue to invest and, Mr. Speaker, what we will do: we will
invest in counsellors, we will invest in treatment centres, and we will help
people help themselves.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The time allotted for questions and answers has expired.
Before the Chair moves on to other proceedings, the Chair would like to
recognize and welcome the hon. Mayor of Corner Brook, His Worship, Neville
Greeley.
Welcome to the House of Assembly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Tabling of Documents.
Notices of Motion.
Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I am proud today to stand and present a petition on behalf of the residents
of Deer Lake, Corner Brook, Springdale, Norris Point, Hampton, Grand Falls,
Stephenville and Stephenville Crossing, Port au Port, Kippens and St. George's.
I will read the prayer of the petition, Mr. Speaker.
MS JONES: Where is the member? What happened to their member?
MR. BUTLER: There are a lot of members, I would say, (inaudible).
WHEREAS we, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, have always built cabins
and tilts away from our houses for hunting, fishing, berry picking, or just
spending time up in the country or places around our shores, sometimes just away
from the stress of everyday living, a place to relax and enjoy the great
outdoors; and
WHEREAS your government has come down hard on the thousands of cabin and
trailer owners that are out on our land, with eviction notices and forcing them
to move without providing them with alternatives; and
WHEREAS Kruger Inc. has timber rights to approximately one-third of all
forest land on this Island and is refusing the vast majority of applications for
cabin development;
WHEREUPON your petitioners call upon all Members of the House of Assembly to
urge government to have compassion on the citizens of this fair Province and
allow them the right to enjoy what is rightfully ours. We were born on this land
and should have the right to enjoy it.
Mr. Speaker, we had a statement today from the minister, on Earth Day, and
what better time to recognize the concerns of the people of this Province. They
are not only in my district; they are right throughout this Province. I have
1,900 names on petitions that I will be presenting on their behalf.
There is no one saying I know I heard the comment across the floor, when I
was reading the petition: the Whiskey Pit. Nobody wants to see some of the
issues that were involved in the Whiskey Pit, but I have to say, I spoke with
the minister yesterday and she is dealing with the people from the Whiskey Pit
and they are trying to come up with an alternative so those people can be looked
after. That is all the residents anywhere in this Province are dealing with.
I remember back some time ago, up in the Wolf Pond area, where a deal was
struck; and I know people in the government now are saying that should never
have happened, but it happened. It happened under this government's watch, and I
believe it was the right thing to do, to provide a place for those people to go
out and enjoy the countryside. They have been there on those lands for forty
years - and I know they are probably Crown lands. If there are environmental
issues, I do not condone that. If there are environmental issues, that should be
taken into consideration, Mr. Speaker.
Those people right throughout the Province have major concerns. There are
some 5,000 or 6,000 of them, and all they are asking government is to consult
with them. Do not just come and put a poster up on our cabin or on our trailer
and say you are going to destroy it or burn it. Sit down with us and see if we
can come to a conclusion that we can enjoy the great outdoors like we always
did.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?
Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
From the Order Paper today, we will continue with the Budget debate.
Therefore, we will call Motion 1.
MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1, the Budget Speech.
The hon. the Member for St. John's East.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. BUCKINGHAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It has always been one of my favourite things when a TV show comes on and
they give you a quick little recap of what happened last week so you know that
you are keeping everything in sequence. I thought I might take the opportunity
right now to bring people back up to speed as to where we are.
On March 29, just prior to the Easter break, the Minister of Finance brought
down the Budget Speech and we spent the entire day on that. Now, according to
parliamentary procedure, the Finance critic gets a certain amount of time - I
believe it might be three times as long as the Finance Minister, up to three
hours; I am not quite sure - but he gets that amount of time to give his
perspective and to sort of walk through what he saw in the Budget and how he
wants to present it. So, on March 30 the Opposition House Leader did take up his
very significant amount of time to basically go through all those aspects that
he saw of it. Anyway, he concluded with a motion which was essentially a motion
of non-confidence. Now, for those people who are not familiar with it, a motion
of non-confidence essentially says that if this motion goes through then the
government falls and an election takes place; but, again, that is more of a
technicality.
One of the things that people need to realize, though, about a Budget debate
- and I am going to be guilty of it myself here today - is that any time you
talk on a money bill you have a great degree of latitude in terms of what you
can talk about. You can talk about your district; you can talk about what you
brought to the laundry last week. There is really not a lot of emphasis put on
relevance and, trust me, the Opposition House Leader played that card to the
max.
A Budget is not only a money bill; it is the money bill. It is the plan that
the government has to go forward to outline how it is we plan to address the
business of government for the year coming up; and, while you might have a lot
of dissenting opinions as to exactly how a Budget should be structured,
eventually, through a process of compromise and discussion and all of that
taking place within the framework of what we intend to do in the long run, a
Budget is put together, it is put to paper and it is delivered and debated.
There is quite a lot of process that goes on to making sure that this Budget
does take place.
Unfortunately, on March 30, the day that the Opposition House Leader gave his
remarks on the Budget, I was not able to be in the House that day; so, in
preparing for these remarks today, I went to Hansard to see what exactly it was
the Opposition House Leader had said. As you can imagine, reading two-and-a-half
or three hours of discussion was a task, particularly given the author. It was
quite a task, but I did go through it because I though it was perhaps important
to find out exactly what had been said.
Well, I spent three hours reading not a whole lot of anything, to be honest
with you. That being said, that being said, there is a certain amount of
rhetoric that you expect to happen, and nothing out of the ordinary happened
here. However, I was somewhat disappointed to come back into the House, and when
the sorry, perhaps I should backtrack a little bit.
As I said, at the end of this long discourse on the Budget a motion of
non-confidence was laid down, and that ended the day on March 30. Now, because
of that, we deal with that motion or that amendment right away. So as the mover
of the amendment, the Opposition House Leader was then able to stand up for
another hour and again continue on with the train of thought that he had. Well,
as he was speaking my thoughts immediately went to the Minister of Environment,
because it occurred to me that I was going to ask the Minister of Environment if
there was an environmental award for speaking. Because without question, the
one-hour speech that I heard on Monday was reused, recycled, and the only part
of it, the only failing was that it was not reduced. Other than that, I think he
could have been up for an MMSB award for speaking in the House of Assembly.
Now, one of the things that was brought forward and I guess was really harped
on was the fact - and I will put it out there as a fact, because it was in the
Budget document, that the GDP reduced by 8.9 per cent. Not only that, but it was
significantly higher than probably the historical previous high GDP drop. That
is just the reality. That is just the reality. In the global economy, being as
it is, our economy dropped by 8.9 per cent. Okay, we live with it, we deal with
it, but the question isn't: Did it go down, or did it go down a lot? The
question really becomes: Did this government handle that economic situation in a
manner that people would consider to be appropriate, in a manner that people
would consider to be responsible, in a manner that people would consider to
inspire confidence to know that the right people are at the helm to get us
through this economic time? I would suggest, and of course I am perhaps a little
biased or perhaps a lot biased, that this government has done the type of
activities, the type of planning, the type of decisions that worldwide have
shown to be positive steps in dealing with the situation as it stands.
Some of the standards you might use to judge the quality of the work that we
did in this time might be: How did we compare to other provinces? How did we
compare to the country as a whole and how did we compare internationally as to
how things were dealt with? I think if someone looks at this in an objective way
- and I have to emphasize objective here because as objective as I might try to
be, I wear a very distinct stripe. In the same way the Opposition wears a very
distinct stripe in terms of how they choose to look at it. It is up to the
people of this Province to look at what has happened and say: Does this
represent the kind of a direction that I would like the government to have? Does
this represent the kind of direction of a government that when it comes time to
vote again, will this government have my confidence and will I ask them to
continue on for another four years? I would suggest, all bias aside, perhaps,
perhaps not, that the people of this Province will in fact ask this government
to stay in for another four years.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. BUCKINGHAM: One of the things about being in the House is that most
people only get to see me standing here and do not get to hear a lot of what
goes on besides. I have to say, the comments are always in good taste, meant to
distract. The member opposite has done his job well, but I will continue on from
where I left off.
When we talk about this environmental award for reusing and recycling, if you
look at the context of what is there, a lot of it is just old catchphrases,
clichs; things that I am sure if you went back right through fifty, sixty years
of Hansard you might find that it is trotted out every time. I suspect that if
we looked at the Hansard of the time when this party was in Opposition, you
might find some of those tried and true catchphrases there also. That is
probably the nature of the beast.
The real turning point comes, and I think if you look back through where this
party was in 2001, 2002, 2003, that we got beyond the point of just naysaying
everything that came forward. We presented real alternatives, we presented
different plans, we presented a type of an attitude that contrasted the current
government of the time and people saw something and they liked it.
One of the things that the finance critic did was devote at lot of time to
the many strategies that this government has, forty strategies, or perhaps there
were more. Now, to my way of thinking, isn't that why we are here? Aren't we
here to develop strategies? Aren't we here to have a plan? This is essentially
what strategies are. We identify that problems exist. Now, do we identify those?
Do we sort of sit here in an ivory tower and sort of cast our eyes about and
say: problem here, problem there? Well, as representatives of the people, we
come to this House fully in the knowledge of what some of these problems are,
what the local issues are, what the regional issues are, and we extend our gaze
and we look to what the provincial, and how we fit into even what national
issues are.
The idea then is to deal with it, to move forward. It is a mistake, I think,
to look at all of these things in isolation, and just deal with them and go
forward on one track and then go forward on another track. Then, at the end, you
might have a lot of things accomplished, but the question is: Have you done it
efficiently and has it been part of a plan, has it been part of a process that
brings us as a government and us as a Province further ahead in a unified way
that was interdisciplinary, interdepartmental and efficient? Again, when you
look at all of these strategies - and a lot of them, when they stand on their
own might seem to be just that, but when you pull back from it and look at the
totality of how they are presented, how they are integrated, how they tie in,
how they create partnerships and require partnerships, you will find that a lot
of these things do represent decisions that are made in an overall framework of
how this place should be run.
One of the interesting comments I found was that the Member for Burgeo & La
Poile took a certain amount of time to try and position the Premier and the
Finance Minister as being a little at odds. Some statements that were proudly
made might not seem to be all on the same page. I would suggest that probably
there is. In fact, I would go even more than probably. I am sure there is a
certain amount of disagreement between the Premier and the Finance Minister as
to how things should go because that is the nature of government. We all have
opinions of how things should happen.
I have had the privilege in the last two-and-a-half years of having a number
of discussions with the current Minister of Finance. His position, I guess, on
debt reduction is very similar to my own. I am very much in favour of some
short-term pain to get the long-term gains that come from debt reduction. In
fact, I am sure on a clear day the Minister of Finance would have loved to
perhaps pull forward a balanced budget. We all would, but at what cost?
On the other side, you cannot go and have just this mad spending spree where
you deal with all people's needs, just lay the money out there, money that we do
not have, because a cost is associated with that. The cost of a balanced budget
is the costs that are associated with cutting programs.
We see calls in the House everyday for more support for various programs, for
the creation of new programs, and, Mr. Speaker, we never consider any of these
calls to be frivolous. Many times, the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi will
bring forth a program, and to my mind, her intentions are very, very well
intentioned. A lot of programs that she requests and that she brings forward, we
recognize the need exists. We are not blind to that. The question becomes: Can
you do all things? The answer is, obviously, no, and this is where the decision
part of it comes in.
I believe a number of years ago there was a call to eliminate the cost on
textbooks. The call was there, the government did not do anything about it for a
number of years, but then the capacity to do something about it existed and we
dealt with it. That is just one small example.
Now, getting back to the business of balancing budgets, as I said, the
Finance Minister and I are much of the same space as to where we would be on
that, but I suspect the Premier probably got a little bit of a bigger heart than
the Finance Minister and I do. He looked at what the cost would be and he turned
around and I am sure he brought his own opinions to bear on this, as one would
expect from the leader, and said: We have to balance off the cutting of
programs, the maintaining of programs, with the building up of debt down the
road.
I think that this Budget that we see right here is an excellent compromise
between the two. Was it exactly what I wanted? Not by any stretch of the
imagination. Well, I should not say that; it was not exactly what I wanted, but
it also did not meet the excessive demands of some other people who are there.
It is a compromise and that is the very nature of it.
So, if anyone were to get up and say that I find fault with this Budget,
their argument probably have some merit because we could not meet all requests,
all demands. There is compromise involved, and I think that this Budget a
Budget that has been the catalyst for a non-confidence motion in fact does not
warrant that non-confidence motion. I think this Budget represents very, very
closely what people want, the type of leadership that people would like to see.
It is all about balancing the choices.
One of the real things about budgeting, I suppose, is that while you have to
put these long-term plans in place, you also need to make sure that you retain
the capacity to deal with day to day issues that come up. There are a number of
things, whether it is a breakwater in Ferryland that no one would have forecast
- a lot of things like that across the Province no one would have forecast. You
cannot take all of your money, you cannot take all of your resources and say
here is what we are going to do with it, we are going to lockstep it in, and if
anything else comes up, too bad.
It is very similar, to me, taking any excess money I might have or projected
I might have, putting it into an RRSP, because I know down the road that I will
need that money in my retirement, and not have enough free cash to fix a leak.
You just cannot do it. It does not make sense on a household level; it does not
make sense on a provincial level. You cannot tie yourself down so that you do
not have enough resources to react to what is going on.
Again, this Budget, I believe, allows us to engage in long-term planning,
meet short-term plans, and also keep capacity to deal with day to day issues.
Now, Mr. Speaker, in the last few minutes I have, and of course, this might
sound to be a little odd with an MHA for St. John's, but I just find it really
disingenuous to constantly portray this party as being anti-rural, as being just
only focussed on the urban areas and letting the rest of the Province just sort
of go along its merry way, whatever might happen. The reason why I feel probably
justified, as a St. John's MHA, to get up and talk about this is that I feel I
can talk candidly and not in a self-serving way about the representation that
the rural MHAs bring to this government.
Every day I see the rural MHAs off to meetings, representing their
constituents, meeting delegations that come in, bringing forward the issues that
are in their areas, making sure those issues are front and centre, they are
dealt with, that they are integrated into the day to day planning of this
government. To hear what is getting to be a fairly monotonous message that this
government does not care about rural, I am sorry, but I just cannot stand by and
say nothing about it. Mr. Speaker, I see the passion that these members bring to
their positions, I see the problems, I see the pain that some people feel, and
these members bring it forward every day in their jobs. As a St. John's MHA, I
would like to assure anyone who is listening that from my perspective and I
consider it to be somewhat an objective perspective your needs are being well
represented, and in a year-and-a- half you will have the opportunity, of course,
to decide if those needs have been met.
Mr. Speaker, rarely are great society problems solved in grand strokes.
Little by little we find ways to improve, we find ways to integrate, we find
efficiencies, we find as we see in the fisheries real, hard, solid discussions
about what has to happen to make industries viable in the short term and in the
long term. All of these things go into the whole thing of government.
Yesterday the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development used the
analogy of spokes on a wheel, and I do not know if it just came to him in a
flash or was this something he had given some consideration to, but when I
thought about that analogy and how the different strategies represent the spokes
of the wheel, it really made a lot of good sense to me in terms of how it goes.
We can see ourselves in the government as being the hub of that wheel, and these
spokes go out and they support the outside of the wheel which is our Province,
which is the different segments, the different regions, the different
demographics of this Province. When everything is said and done, if you look at
the structure, it is not the spokes coming from the hub that keep the wheel
where it is, in fact, it goes both ways because without that wheel the hub does
not get to stay where it is. The hub is what we are trying to be. The methods
that we use try to support those spokes and eventually we are trying to make a
stronger Province. Because of that and because of the plan laid out by the
Budget, I really believe that this motion of non-confidence put forward by the
Opposition House Leader is unwarranted and should fail.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER (T. Osborne): Order, please!
The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I am very pleased to stand today in response to the Official Opposition's
non-confidence motion to the Budget brought in some weeks ago by the Minister of
Finance.
I shall be supporting this motion, Mr. Speaker, for reasons that will become
obvious. I consider what we do here today very serious and it is one of the
reasons that - I do not do this very often - I am using a text today that I plan
on sticking with. The reason being, I want to lay out very clearly where we come
from as the NDP when it comes to economic analysis.
Budgets are very important because they are a clear statement of a
government's priorities. The government has called Budget 2010: The Right
Investments For Our Children and Our Future. The question I get to ask today,
Mr. Speaker, is whether or not what the government says is actually what they
have delivered.
Budget 2010, Mr. Speaker, is an excellent example of smoke and mirrors. The
government is counting on their ability to fool people into thinking that
spending money means investing in the future. My party is delighted, Mr.
Speaker, that the Budget has money in it for new school construction and
replacement; for new hospital construction and replacement; for the maintenance
needs of Memorial University; for maintenance and reconstruction of our highway
system; and for a host of other infrastructural expenditures. Guess what, Mr.
Speaker? These expenditures are just that expenditures. They are not
investments in children and the future. They are expenditures that must be made
to meet the needs of our society. New schools must be built where student
populations are rapidly growing. Schools must be repaired and replaced when they
can no longer be safe environments for the occupants. The same is true of
hospitals and other medical facilities. Highways must be improved and maintained
for the sake of safety of people on the roads.
The dollar signs that the government is flashing around in its Budget, Mr.
Speaker, are only expenditures on what government is expected to spend money on;
it is their job. A responsible parent does not expect praise for keeping the
house in good physical shape, for making sure there is adequate money for food
or for keeping children clothed. The parent is doing what a parent must do. If
the parent does not do those things, the parent will be found derelict of duty
and could end up losing his or her children.
A government, Mr. Speaker, that does not do its duty will lose its power. It
is the job of elected government to ensure that systems are in place to deliver
what is needed for the well-being and security of people as individuals and as
members of a community. It is the job of elected government to make sure that
the communal pot is shared so everyone is living in a healthy and nurturing
society. It is the job of elected government to create systems that work for
everyone, not just for some.
Where is the vision in Budget 2010, I ask, Mr. Speaker? My concern about this
and previous budgets of this government, Mr. Speaker, is that there are no plans
for the present or the future. The government says that this Budget is an
investment in the future, but it does not talk about what that future holds, Mr.
Speaker. This Budget shows a drop in provincial revenues in almost every area,
Mr. Speaker. There is a drop in taxation revenue, a drop in investment revenue,
a drop in consolidated revenue funds and other entities. The only major increase
in provincial sources of revenue, Mr. Speaker, is in offshore royalties. This
Budget floats on a pool of oil, a pool that began draining from the moment it
was tapped. We need a long-term plan from this government for sustaining our
economy and our society beyond when oil is being pumped from the floor of the
Atlantic. Mr. Speaker, we need a vision, we need a plan.
Where is the $2 billion in revenues that we see in Budget 2010 going to come
from in the future? From the fishery, a potentially, sustainable industry that
this government is slowly watching die without any idea of how to stop the
bleeding? From the creative, new environmentally friendly projects that they are
planning but not telling us about? From new manufacturing industries that are
connected to our natural resources, such as we see governments developing in
other parts of the world?
Mr. Speaker, for all intents and purposes, this government has no plans. They
say they have plans but what are they really, Mr. Speaker? Let's look at some
them. They say they have a plan to reduce poverty, Mr. Speaker. However, in the
past three years they have presented us with Budgets that benefit the wealthy
rather than those with lower incomes. How is that going to help reduce poverty?
What kind of a plan is that, Mr. Speaker? The so-called investments in poverty
reduction, Mr. Speaker, cover everything from enhancing the Family Justice
Services Division to budgeting $200,000 for the continuation of the home Heating
Oil Storage Tank Replacement Assistance Program. I would like to know, Mr.
Speaker, how being able to access the court system or having government pay for
a new oil tank that government regulations say must be installed is helping
reduce poverty in this Province. I do not see a plan, Mr. Speaker. I see spin; I
see smoke and mirrors.
The government did take action two Budgets ago to raise the minimum wage. I
applauded them for that. The last increase in that plan takes place on July 1 of
this year. Already, Mr. Speaker, the increases that have been made are not worth
what they were worth two years ago. Does this government have a plan to build in
annual increases to reflect the increases in the cost of living that they
forecast in the Budget? If they do, they have not told us. If they do not, in
two years time the minimum wage increase will be worth half of what it is worth
today. What kind of a plan is that? It is not a plan that will help home care
workers who make just over the minimum wage.
Another of government's plans, and one that they are so proud of, Mr.
Speaker, is the plan for this Province to have the lowest rate of personal
income tax in the country. Once again, the tax levels will be reduced the most
for the highest income brackets. This government is being absolutely aggressive
regarding so-called competitiveness of our tax system. What are the implications
of this approach, Mr. Speaker? What exactly has been the result of the tax
changes that this government has made?
Mr. Speaker, when we get to the end of this fiscal year the average benefit
to the wealthiest people in this Province will be an annual tax cut of $25,500.
The tax break for those in the middle income bracket will be a small fraction of
that while there is nothing new at all for the poorest taxpayers. Who is this
government favouring, Mr. Speaker? Who is really being favoured by this plan? Is
it people who feel the effects of poverty or is it people who benefit from the
effects of wealth? I think the answer is obvious, Mr. Speaker.
The government started on the right track with the lowest bracket of income
tax payers, when they changed the income tax rate for them in Budget 2008.
However, the government stopped there. What they should have done is put in
place a policy of no income tax for anyone with an income under the poverty
line. Such a policy, Mr. Speaker, would go a long way to reducing poverty. Now
that is a plan, Mr. Speaker; that is a vision for poverty reduction, no income
tax for people with incomes under the poverty line.
In order to really reduce poverty there must be real changes to our whole
social and economic system, Mr. Speaker. Poverty is the result of inequality
caused by high unemployment, low wages, inequitable tax regimes, low education
levels, gender inequality and discrimination on many levels. It is not enough
for this government to say that it is reducing poverty by bringing the minimum
wage up to $10 an hour while at the same time giving tax breaks to corporations
and wealthy individuals. Those tax breaks take away from program spending that
is needed in the real fight against poverty.
According to the Estimates document, this Province is going to receive an
extra $308 million this year in equalization and offsets revenue from the
federal government. I would have hoped, Mr. Speaker, that this increase in
revenue would be used as investment in education and health. I have to ask the
government if it is accidental that this amount almost equals the $332 million
cut to corporate income tax, or did government plan the cuts to income tax based
on the increase in federal monies? The money coming from the federal government,
Mr. Speaker, is meant to give the people of this Province equal access to health
care and education, our right under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
It is not meant to allow government to give tax breaks to those who do not need
them.
Mr. Speaker, the government says that it is offering tax breaks in order to
bring skilled workers and professionals to this Province. Mr. Speaker, I point
out to the government that if there are jobs in this Province that pay salaries
on a par with other parts of the country, workers will come. Especially if they
are workers originally from the Province who have had to leave the Province to
find work, and who want the quality of life offered here at home for them in
this Province.
Changing our tax regime to the point where we are losing income needed to pay
for services to the population of the Province is not going to benefit the
people of the Province in the long run. If the government continues in this
direction, we shall continue to have deficit budgets that are not necessary. I
have no problem with deficit budgets, but you have to show me that they are
necessary and that there is no other way to get the money.
This government likes to point out, Mr. Speaker, that it is unlike the
actual fact, they are very much like the Harper government. Cutting taxes and
cutting programs is the direction in which the federal government has gone. I
admit, this government is not cutting programs, but it is not building the
social infrastructure that is needed for our society to be healthy, an
infrastructure that Canadians in other provinces enjoy.
It is noteworthy that a Budget news release from the government talks about
supporting social infrastructure. I acknowledge that the items under that
heading are all good; however, Mr. Speaker, I cannot read that list without
wondering about what is missing. I have to ask: Where is the money for a child
care program under social infrastructure? Imagine if the money from the increase
in equalization and offsets revenue were used to start a child care program
instead of for tax breaks that benefit mainly corporations and wealthy
individuals. We would have a program that employed many new workers, a program
that permitted more parents to join the paid labour force, and a program that
contributed to the growth of our economy, as has happened in other provinces.
Imagine the benefit to people and our economy if some of the extra revenue
went into fully meeting the need for affordable housing instead of just putting
a band-aid on our housing crisis, which is all the government has done in this
Budget. Money into maintenance is absolutely essential, money into upgrading the
old stock of Newfoundland housing is absolutely essential, but it is not new
money for affordable housing in the social sector. Imagine the benefit to
government if $75 million of the $308 million that is coming from the federal
government went toward offsetting income from addictive VLTs. Government would
not have to advertise about the effects of addictive gambling if they did not
have VLTs. It would save health care costs we now spend on people affected by
the addiction. We would not have people unemployed because of addictions to
VLTs. We might even have fewer people taking up space in our jails.
Imagine what would happen, Mr. Speaker, if this government had a vision that
would see us look a lot more like the rest of Canada because of the programs
they were putting in place, programs that Newfoundland and Labrador currently
lack. We do not need more tax breaks for people making over $250,000 a year, or
tax breaks for companies or subsidies for companies such as Rolls-Royce.
Guess what, Mr. Speaker? Putting in place programs and services, such as
those I have just listed, would create not just more jobs they would build
healthier communities which, in turn, would result in growth in the economy,
more people in the workforce, more seniors able to stay in their own homes, more
young people accessing post-secondary education, fewer young people dropping out
of high school, a larger skilled trades workforce, more professionals trained at
home to take care of needs in this Province, an end to food bank dependency; the
list goes on, Mr. Speaker.
Imagine what would happen if this government had a vision of sustainable
communities all over this Province and could encourage creative ideas that would
help build those sustainable communities.
Imagine if the custodians of Nalcor, the government of this Province, had a
fresh new vision for becoming leaders in the sustainable energy field. Imagine
if the custodians of Nalcor understood that Nalcor could become directly
involved in wind energy through turbine manufacture and ownership of wind farms,
not just paying foreign companies to make electrical power for us. That Nalcor
could become more directly involved in research about tidal power
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair is having some difficulty hearing the member that is recognized to
speak. We understand the need for discussions in the House from time to time to
discuss business, but I would ask members to remain cognizant of the time
allotted to the member speaking.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Imagine if the custodians of Nalcor understood that Nalcor could develop a
vision for how hydro, wind and tidal power could be used together in this
Province, thinking that is going on in other parts of the world.
One has to wonder what bubble this government exists in, Mr. Speaker. They
are listening too much to their own propaganda. They have convinced themselves
that they are building the communities of this Province for a bright future.
They actually believe that if they say something often enough, it will be a
reality.
This government can throw the dollar signs around as much as they want, it
will not take away the fact that the gap between wealthy and poor in this
Province is growing. It will not take away from the fact that we have a growing
homelessness problem. It will not take away from the fact that rural
Newfoundland and Labrador is dying. They cannot convince a family who has to go
regularly to a food bank that things are alright. They cannot convince the
senior citizen who does not have enough heat in the winter or who is choosing
between buying food or essential pharmaceuticals that they are being taken care
of. They cannot convince an adult child who is stressed because of the unmet
home care needs of a parent that their money is being well spent by the
government.
This government does not have a vision of what can be done in this Province
to build a self-sustaining economy for the future. If they have a vision, it is
based on the belief that leaving it to private business will yield what we need
to create employment and sustain communities. Obviously, that tact is not
working as we can see from the lack of money being spent under business
attraction in the Department of Business. We do not have people with amazing new
ideas flocking to our shores; however, we have people here who do have great
ideas and who need more help in gaining access to capital.
This government has to do more than dole out money to businesses that may or
may not fail. They need a real blueprint, one that the people of this Province
would help them with if they really sought the help, a real blueprint that is
based on the values and principles of community development.
This government must become proactive in providing expertise and resources to
communities so that they can develop their creative ideas. Strategic community
partnerships will not work without resources to help them work. One reason why
our Affordable Housing Program is not working adequately is because the
not-for-profit sector does not have sufficient resources to put projects
together. Neither is the government offering adequate incentives to the private
sector to find it profitable enough to get involved. Government has to do more
than to say money is there for 230 more units under this program. They have to
ensure that the tools are also available to help people take
part in the
program.
The kind of growth that I am looking for, Mr. Speaker, is not flashy and
grandiose. It is not based on large developments which seem to be the bent of
this government, Mr. Speaker, not unlike other Administrations we have had in
the past. Our future will be determined by the infrastructures that get put in
place because of revenues from large developments we might be blessed with at
this moment. We have to use that money, Mr. Speaker, for the future but that
will only happen if Administrations understand that such community-based
development does not happen automatically or from the top down.
Last fall I was quite excited, Mr. Speaker, about a presentation that I heard
from a member of an Irish regional economic development organization who spoke
of a model for stimulating regional enterprise and improving quality of life.
This model, called LEADER, is quite impressive. It is based on the notion of
bottom up planning and decision making. I do not have time to go into the
details of the Irish program, Mr. Speaker, but I put it out as something that
the government should seriously study. It is based on the concept of
partnerships in special areas of disadvantage, both urban and rural. These
partnerships are based on trust and a shared understanding between politicians,
private enterprise, community and other sectors. It is also based on the
principle that economic, social, and community goals must all mesh together.
The Irish model recognizes that if LEADER is going to work, there have to be
resources put into it. The Government of Ireland anticipated in 2006 that they
would need to put in excess of $1.6 billion Canadian between 2007 and 2013 into
LEADER. That, Mr. Speaker, is what I call long-term investment in community;
that is what I call a vision for the future.
If I could just have time to clue up, Mr. Speaker, I am at my conclusion.
When is this government going to realize - if I may? I know my time is up. I
am in my conclusion; if I may have leave to conclude?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member has asked for leave. Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: I remind the hon. member that her time for speaking has
expired.
MS MICHAEL: I do not have leave from the government to make my
conclusion?
MR. SPEAKER: We need unanimous consent of the House for leave.
The hon. member's time for speaking has expired.
The hon. the Member for the District of Ferryland.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, it is certainly a pleasure to rise here today in the House and
speak to Budget 2010, and in particular to speak to the motion that was put
forward
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, I cannot hear.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I recognize the hon. Member for the District of Ferryland.
MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is certainly good to stand, Mr. Speaker, and speak to Budget 2010, in
particular to the non-confidence motion that was put forward on this Budget by
the hon. Opposition Leader. As well, I will make some comments certainly on the
last speaker, the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, in regards to her
commentary which speaks to the issue of no plan by this government.
Everything this government has done since 2003 has certainly been well
directed; strategically directed and is a plan. The results of those plans are
certainly visible just about everywhere in this Province. Everything we have
done, whether it is investment in health care, investment in education, social
policies, rural Newfoundland and Labrador, urban centres, you name it, Mr.
Speaker, this government is under the leadership - it is strategic, it is well
directed plans, certainly fiscally we know.
In 2003, when this government came to power, certainly great fiscal problems;
time to bring those in check, put the Province on sound financial footing, and
that was certainly a plan by the government to do that and certainly has done
it, bringing our overall liabilities in terms of this Province down from almost
$13 billion to under $8 billion. So that is well planned, Mr. Speaker, and very
strategic. It shows the leadership of this government and certainly moving
forward in doing what needs to be done.
Mr. Speaker, I want to take a second too, if I could, this week being
Volunteer Week in the Province, in appreciation for all those many people out
there throughout Newfoundland and Labrador who give so freely of their time in
volunteering in communities, towns and cities and the great work they do, all
the way from fire departments, seniors clubs, youth groups, recreation, you name
it. A tremendous amount of people out there who are giving up their time, giving
so freely of it and doing very much in the communities that government cannot
do, but the work they do and the delivery of service they do is so important to
building our Province, making it a great place to be.
I know this Saturday evening coming up, Mr. Speaker, I will be in Petty
Harbour-Maddox Cove for a celebration down there in terms of a great town, great
work they do, a great community, great spirit. I will be there to celebrate with
them as they say thank you to their volunteers.
Mr. Speaker, if I could, in regard to the Budget, I would just like to look
at, I guess where we have come from over the past couple of years. We all know
in the last year-and-a-half in terms of the global economy, we have struggled in
terms of economically around the world. Newfoundland and Labrador, through its
planning and strategic direction, was able to weather much of the storm. In many
respects, it is one of the places across Canada that has done well. That was not
because it was just immediate, but it was regarding long-term care planning that
was started a number of years ago. So when we did get a downturn we were able to
weather the storm. Many of the economic indicators show that we were able to do
that. We were not as hard hit as many other places in Canada or even in North
America. So we were well positioned, and that goes back to the planning again of
this government and how we did it.
If we look back to 2009, Mr. Speaker, we saw that retail sales grew by 2.6
per cent, even in that environment. That was the strongest performance in the
country. Even in that environment, in a downturn, our retail sales were up. We
are one of only two provinces to record record sales growth last year, Mr.
Speaker. So that is an indicator of how we did.
Labour income increased last year 4.2 per cent. It was the second-best
performance among provinces right across the country. Once again, an indicator
of how we were doing. Housing starts, an indication of people's confidence in
the economy; consumer confidence, people are willing to go out and spend and
invest because the future looks bright. They have confidence in their
government, and confidence in the economy, and confidence in where we are going.
So they were up over 3,000; the second-highest in twenty years, Mr. Speaker -
significant.
Capital investment growth ranked fourth among all provinces in the country;
once again, huge investment, both private and corporately. When the economy is
strong and people are pleased with the direction the Province is going in
certainly from the corporate side. Private investment is there, they are willing
to step up to invest, because they see the promise of what is happening.
Personal income growth, Mr. Speaker, 3.9 per cent, and disposable income
growth of 4.7 per cent; once again, more money in people's pockets, in
consumers' pockets, every Newfoundlander and Labradorian, so they can use that
in terms of services. Once again, it talked about housing developments, goods
and services, which drives the economy.
Again, Mr. Speaker, a population of over half a million people. We had an
increase of 0.5 per cent, the largest percentage increase since 1983, and that
is something we are seeing in terms of this Province, in terms of net
in-migration. With many years of seeing out-migration, we are seeing now this
Province continue to grow in terms of its residents, and it is so important in
terms of the future and where we are going and where we want to be.
Again, a big economic driver in this Province is tourism. Last year we saw
non-resident travel and tourist visitors' increase by 0.7 per cent to almost
484,000, with expenditures of 1.4 per cent, for $375 million. Once again, Mr.
Speaker, I point out, that is in an environment where globally things were not
well. Tourism was predicted not to do that well, but yet, here in this Province
we even exceeded from the prior year, in terms of increases and the number of
people who visited our Province, and certainly the amount of money that was
spent. No doubt, that is attributed to the investments made by the Department of
Tourism, Culture and Recreation, in terms of the fantastic Newfoundland
commercials that we have seen right through North America, and the return on
those. A tremendous job done on those, and certainly have been recognized all
throughout North America in a number of awards, so they provided a huge return
in terms of the strategic investment in those commercials.
Mr. Speaker, we look to 2010, the economic outlook in terms of where we are
going in terms of this government and what the economy is looking like on a
go-forward basis. We are projecting forecast growth of GDP of about 4 per cent,
which is indeed significant. We are looking again at employment growth of
approximately 2.3 per cent, up to about 219,900 in that range, once again up
from last year when there was a small drop due to, as we said, the economy and
what was going on, and recognition of the global economy.
The unemployment rate is again forecast to decline this year; personal income
tax, disposable income growth of 3.9 per cent and 3.3 per cent respectively, and
that is by wage gains and employment growth. Once again, we are seeing a growth
looking good.
We are seeing retail sales growth of 5 per cent, which again will be up from
last year. Retail sales growth certainly is an indicator of the confidence that
people have in the economy, in what they are doing, and bodes well for the
economy. Capital investment last year was up. Again, this year we are expecting
an increase of 23 per cent, almost up to $6.2 billion which is quite a figure,
Mr. Speaker, in terms of capital investments. Housing starts again are expected
to rise to 1.5 per cent to over 3,000 residential starts; a tremendous amount of
spending, up to $1.6 billion, an increase of 3.5 per cent from the prior fiscal
year.
Again, we are expecting a bounce back in terms of commodities. Natural
resources are so important to this Province. We are hoping to see a rebound,
especially in mineral shipments, expected to increase by almost 60 per cent; a
significance of $3.1 billion.
Once again, our tourism industry; we are expecting to see an increase by 1.3
per cent, where last year it was 0.7 per cent; so, again, it is continuing to
grow. I know in my district, Mr. Speaker, along the Southern Shore are a number
of tourism sites very heavily travelled. The Mistaken Point Ecological Reserve,
the Colony of Avalon, the bird sanctuary off Witless Bay-Bay Bulls, tourism, all
of those are so important to the area and we have seen a great influx of tourism
over the years.
As we look at the overall fiscal framework, Mr. Speaker, in 2009-2010 we are
looking at a decrease in terms of the deficit of $294.9 million, a decrease of
approximately 60 per cent from Budget 2009. That is certainly due in large part
to the return from our natural resources.
Our taxation again, the direction given in this Budget in terms of freeing up
monies and putting it in the pockets of the residents of the Province, we are
seeing a total tax reduction of $48.5 million and a total since 2007 of about
$1.2 billion. Mr. Speaker, that is enormous in terms of the amount of investment
that is put back in people's pockets to drive the economy, and that is planned;
that is strategic. That is the economic outlook this government has. We want to
be the most competitive in terms of taxation rates in Atlantic Canada - in
Canada as a whole and this is the type of initiative, the type of plan, we are
using to get there.
We see the age amount non-refundable tax credit increased from $3,681 to
$5,000, and low-income seniors' benefits increased from $803 annually up to
$900. So that again is an initiative to help out seniors. We recognize that in
some cases that assistance is required and we are doing a whole range of
initiatives to help them, and under the taxation scheme that is one area where
we are certainly doing that.
We also look at, effective July 1, 2010 would see a reduction of personal
income tax, income brackets, a reduction there as well. Mr. Speaker, we all know
small business all across this Province but certainly in rural Newfoundland and
Labrador is so important in terms of growth. They are the drivers of the economy
in most small towns, and again this year the Province recognizes that and is
certainly doing what it can. The income tax rate will be reduced from 5 per cent
to 4 per cent, so freeing up money again for small business to make them more
competitive.
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about, too, if I could, a couple of investments
in particular in the Budget but I think I would like to highlight a couple of
them that I hear from, from constituents and people in terms of what is
important to them and where they would like to see investments. One of them is
certainly education, and this government has done tremendous investments in
education over the past years since coming to power. You know, whether it is new
buildings - primary, elementary and high schools - whether it is repairs to
existing facilities, certainly the investment has been huge: hundreds of
millions of dollars in terms of education. This year from K to 12 we will be
looking at $14.3 million invested to continue the high priority of building and
maintenance projects throughout all the school districts in the Province,
bringing the investment to a total of $34.3 million. It is certainly significant
in terms of our education system, Mr. Speaker.
I also want to mention post-secondary. One of the opportunities that I had a
few years back, when I was Parliamentary Secretary to Human Resources, Labour
and Employment, was to be involved in the Youth Retention and Attraction
Strategy. Interestingly enough, when the Opposition House Leader mentioned about
the vote of non-confidence, he sort of mentioned strategies and all the
strategies we had, and alluded to them and so forth and so on, but it is the
strategies and the direction, and that we had consultation on those strategies
and came up with sound and concrete public policy, that we were able to meet
some of those objectives that I talked about in terms of financially, the
investments.
So that is where it comes from. That is the result of sound strategies, to be
able to bring direction, make people aware of where you are going and lay it out
for people. The other side of it, too, people from that perspective, too, can
follow your progress, as they should. As an elected government, you need to lay
out what your strategy is, what your direction is. People can follow that, and
people can see how you are doing. Sometimes you might stray from the course.
Well, people know your strategy; you lay it out. Certainly, there is more
consultation and they bring it to you as a government, that this is where you
said you were going and this where you need to go. So certainly, from a
leadership point of view, strategically you have to lay out your strategy so
people can see where you are going, on how you are going to spend the public
purse, on how you are going to guide people in the years to come. It is so
important.
Mr. Speaker, we have done tremendous investment in post-secondary. I know,
obviously, as everybody knows, we probably have the most competitive tuition
rate in the country for our post-secondary students at university. I hear, and I
know from students in my district, and others I speak to, how important that is.
The Youth Retention and Attraction Strategy; going through that process we
were told, government was told, that second to finding employment the second
most important initiative in terms of retention in this Province was ensuring
that they were competitive in terms of post-secondary education, and that they
could get it at the best possible price as anywhere in the country. That is some
of the initiatives that we worked on, certainly, in doing that.
The Youth Retention and Attraction Strategy talked about priorities:
affordable and quality education. Whether it is high school, primary,
post-secondary, this government is committed to it and we continue to invest in
it again in this Budget. Again, the priorities in the Youth Retention and
Attraction Strategy, as I said, are affordable and accessible quality education.
They wanted initiatives from school to work transitions, some assistance;
obviously, entrance to quality-level jobs. Look at things existing, like the
Graduate Employment Program, which was one of the programs that this government
has continued to invest in, in the last Budget, and again this year, in terms of
allowing young people who get a trade or get post-secondary training, that they
can make that transition from that formal education into the workforce, and get
that experience they need. Again this year we saw a particular investment in
terms of engineering programs at Memorial. This government stepped up and put
more money into that program because it was much needed.
Again, the Skills Task Force report, working on that in terms of
apprenticeship programs has been successful. We have had some challenges in
regard to the downturn in the economy. Once again, the government stepped in,
did an investment in terms of the apprenticeship program. Actually, government
itself stepping up and making more spots available for those who are looking to
get in and get that training in government. That strategy looked at connecting
graduate students with the voluntary sector. So once again they get the
experience, but the volunteer sector gets the experience of those individuals
working for them, and their knowledge as well, which is so important.
So, Mr. Speaker, that is just an example of a strategy that was based on
consultations with the public, not only here in Newfoundland and Labrador but in
Ontario and Alberta, young Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Four hundred youth
sessions across the Province, asking them what was important to them as
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. They came up, they told us, and we set
forty-one priorities. We are following up on those priorities and we are seeing
the results of them and it is quite positive.
Mr. Speaker, that is just an example of a strategy this Province has adopted
and is working towards it and is doing quite well in terms of meeting those
objectives and in laying it out too. I guess the point is that the public can
follow it, and so they should, in terms of how the government is doing, what
government's priority is, and exactly how they are doing overall on meeting
those.
In the couple of minutes of I have left, Mr. Speaker, I just want to comment
on a couple of great initiatives of this government just recently in terms of -
an ongoing one from the Department of Health and Community Services, the whole
wellness program launched in 2006 and looked at the overall health and wellness
of the Province, because health too is about prevention. It is about us leading
healthy lifestyles, taking care of ourselves, and the results from that are
obvious in terms of our health care system. Some of the things that focused on
in the initial phase, the first phase: healthy eating, physical activity,
tobacco control, child and youth development, as well as a number of other
wellness initiatives. That is so important and that was a strategy, obviously,
of this government as well. As part of that, this year and every year there are
wellness grants that are given to various organizations and groups out there at
the community level.
Those volunteers I spoke of when I first spoke, in terms of them
administering it on the ground and knowing what types of activities they are
doing in terms of youth, seniors it does not matter. There is a whole array of
activities that are put out there, on the ground, all over the Province that
this government is investing in and people are taking a lead role in them.
Certainly, we are seeing the results.
I know even in my district, I see it as well. There was a program in St.
Bernard's in Witless Bay, an after school program for the children there. As we
know, studies show that the most inactive time of our youth is from 3:00 to 5:00
in the afternoon. This program directs funds at that to allow the Bay
Bulls-Bauline Athletic Association to run a program there for those kids to stay
after school. They are active, whether it is indoors or out, and it is certainly
a benefit to those kids.
Mr. Speaker, those are just a couple of strategies that I identified that we
had referenced to before in terms of all our strategies. Well, all our
strategies are laid out for the general public to see. It is the direction we
are taking. The public can see how we are investing. They can monitor and see
how we are doing. We are doing well and we are investing, and to say this
government does not have a plan or is not strategic, you just have to look at
what we have done since coming into power, our success in doing that in a whole
range of activities.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity and I look forward to
speaking again on the Budget.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I certainly am pleased to rise today and to participate in the debate around
the Budget. Obviously, there is no shortage of things that we can talk about as
it relates to this particular Budget or indeed about the current circumstances
and issues that are ongoing in the Province.
Mr. Speaker, over the next little while I would like to take the opportunity
to talk about a number of the initiatives that government has indeed embarked
upon, but also to talk about a number of the gaps that exist within the system
right now where they are not meeting the demands that are being placed on them
by the general public and by people in general.
Mr. Speaker, every day in the House of Assembly we have the opportunity to
raise issues that are of importance to people in the Province. We do that around
many different issues, and oftentimes some of the positions and some of the
lobby that we engage in is what really form the initiatives and policies that
government launches. Over the course of the last year we have been successful in
getting the attention of government to move forward with some of these
initiatives. However, we have not been able to move forward on many of them.
Just recently, Mr. Speaker, when we had the Budget introduced in the House, I
guess we were all somewhat surprised to find out that government again this year
was going to run a deficit that would reach almost $300 million; that they were
forecasting deficits for the next two to three years, Mr. Speaker. We were
surprised to hear that because this was a government that had really made a
decision and almost went as far as to invoke legislation that would forbid
deficits as a part of the budgetary process. They were adamant that we should
have balanced budgets in this Province. Yet, Mr. Speaker, they continued to run
deficits.
What was even more surprising to me is that back in the fall of 2009, when
the Minister of Finance was doing media interviews, this is what he said: We
have to get control now. Regarding and referring to our spending as part of the
budgetary process. He said: I am not talking about cutbacks. There will be new
initiatives and programs but we have to temper our expectations and we need to
keep things under control. We have to make sure that the spending we do today is
sustainable for the children of the future.
This was the message that the Minister of Finance was delivering to the
people of the Province in the fall. It is a very different message that he was
delivering in the spring, just a few months later when he introduced his Budget.
He also went on to say that he felt that the pace of government spending was too
fast and he issued a warning to people. He said: We have to ensure that the
investments we make, whether we make them in health or in education or anywhere
else, are sustainable over the long term.
Mr. Speaker, the messages were very confusing because we were getting a
message from government that our spending was not sustainable, that we had to
get control of it, but yet we continue to see that same spending climb on an
annual basis in programs and services and we continue to see the government
forecasting deficits.
Mr. Speaker, this is a government today that has twice the money to spend
than governments before them. In fact, Mr. Speaker, in the last five to six
years the amount of disposable income to spend