Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Statements by Ministers — 24 March 1998 (43rd General Assembly, 3rd Session, Vol. XLIII No. 3)
1998-03-24
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
March 24, 1998 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIII No. 3
The House met at 2:00 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am pleased to announce today that my department has identified a successful
bidder to provide marine services to Labrador. Burry's Marine Division Limited
submitted the lowest bid, along with a sound business plan, in a competitive
bidding process carried out in accordance with the Public Tender Act.
The contract is for a two-year period with an option to extend a third year.
Burry's Marine Division Limited will manage and operate the vessels, The Sir
Robert Bond and The Northern Ranger as well as the terminal in Lewisporte, where
the new operator will be headquartered, and the terminal in Happy Valley, Goose
Bay. The contractor will also be responsible for having a representative in each
of the wharf ports along the Labrador Coast.
Mr. Speaker, we anticipate a significant cost savings by contracting the
service to a private operator. The service will cost approximately $4 million
less than has traditionally been the costs of operating the service in previous
years. These savings will enable government to continue our efforts to complete
the Trans-Labrador Highway.
Not only will the marine service be more cost efficient, but there will also
be significant improvements in service delivery. Among them, Mr. Speaker, are:
For the first time in five years, there will be no rate increases of any sort
in tariffs or fares.
The minimum shipment rate will be broken down into two categories, this year,
such that shipments less than 50 kg will cost $20 while shipments over 50 kg
will remain at $35. Previously all packages under $50 were at the $35 rate.
The jockey charge for vehicles using The Sir Robert Bond will be reduced by
$10.
For the first time, residents of Labrador will be able to make reservations
on The Northern Ranger by calling a 1-800 number.
A 50 percent discount for community councils moving heavy equipment for use
exclusively by the councils.
Consistency in shipping schedules whereby a freighter will be departing
Lewisporte at least every 10 days.
The service will begin on
schedule with The Sir Robert Bond making her first
run from Lewisporte on June 9, ice permitting. The Northern Ranger will depart
from St. Anthony on July 1, calling at all ports to Nain, again ice permitting.
I am very pleased to make this announcement today. Our next step, Mr.
Speaker, will be to join with our new operator in visiting all ports of call to
hear the views and concerns of Labradorians and to ensure the
schedule
sufficiently meets the needs of the area residents.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to thank the minister for a copy of his statement before the
House sat today.
With respect to this statement, it is good to see the minister is finally
listening to the constructive criticism from this side of the House with respect
to public tendering, and that this went through the proper tendering system,
according to the statement.
It is good news for Lewisporte, in some respects, I suppose. The service will
be headquartered in Lewisporte, and there will be jobs saved for rural
Newfoundland, I would expect. I hope so, anyway. The minister talks about $4
million less it will cost the government to do the service, so in my mind that
has to impact upon the services somewhere. It is not stated in this statement
what impact it will have on the services, but it has to have some negative
impact somewhere along the way, I would assume.
The minister talks about no increase in rates, but here in the statement he
says that "shipments less than 50 kg will cost $20," which is
something new, I would think. I do not know if that is an increase or not. It
will have to be checked out, from my perspective.
One good note here, of course, is the 1-800 number for the people in
Labrador, which is a positive step for those people.
He talks about consistency in shipping schedules. A ship will be leaving
Lewisporte every ten days. Compared to what, I would ask the minister? Is there
a ship leaving every nine days now, every five days? Really, I do not know. I
cannot comment on it at this point in time.
Overall, if it is going to keep jobs in rural Newfoundland, if we do not lose
all the jobs, it is a positive step, I suppose.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi. Does he
have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave!
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The minister's statement of the privatization of the ferry service is another
example of privatization which is going to hurt somebody. This government
recently cried crocodile tears when the Goose Bay airbase was privatized at a
loss of a couple of hundred jobs, plus serious downgrading of income for the
remaining employees. That is probably where the money, the savings, is going to
come from here. What the minister has said when he talks about the more
efficient service is an admission that his own department is incapable of
running an efficient service.
It is amazing how history repeats itself, Mr. Speaker. One hundred years ago
the CN dockyard and the coastal service was run privately by the Reid
Newfoundland Company. It eventually got taken over by the public, and is now
being passed back into private hands. I guess we will have to take it over
again, Mr. Speaker, if it runs into trouble.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.
MS KELLY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The first thing I would like to do this afternoon is to apologize to the
Member for Conception Bay South, because my understanding is that his
Ministerial Statement has not been delivered yet. It will be momentarily.
In recent days, sporting events have taken on a huge profile in
Newfoundland and Labrador.
We have just this past weekend drawn the curtain down on the 1998
Newfoundland and Labrador Winter Games, held in Labrador West. It was a
wonderful experience and an enormous success.
I would like to thank all of the people who worked very hard to make the
Games a reality - the organizers, the volunteers, the sponsors, the athletics,
the coaches and families, and of course
our hosts in Labrador West.
Mr. Speaker, my department, along with the people of Western Newfoundland,
now must focus on our next major sporting challenge -the 1999 Canada Winter
Games - which will take place in the Corner Brook area eleven short months from
now. All of Canada will be watching as we put our athletes to the test against
the best our country has to offer. It is another great opportunity to show off
what Newfoundland and Labrador has to offer.
Mr. Speaker, my department is committed to the development of sport in this
Province, whether through the preparation of venues for major sporting events,
or competitive opportunities for our athletes, such as the Newfoundland and
Labrador games.
In this regard, I was pleased to be able to close the 1998 Newfoundland and
Labrador Winter Games with the announcement that we will call for bids for the
next two games later this spring, underscoring our commitment to this wonderful
event. Of course, those games will be the year 2000 Summer Games and the year
2002 Winter Games.
We realize the importance of supporting our athletes, and of playing an
active role in recreation and sport in our Province.
The 1999 Canada Winter Games will be an incredible experience for our
athletes. There will be a wide array of sporting events, including events for
the physically challenged.
Wheelchair basketball, for instance, is an official event at the Games and
this sport always draws an enthusiastic audience.
This Province has an impressive Wheelchair Sports Association, and I am
pleased to recognize the association's head, Mr. Gary Power, who is in the
gallery today.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: I am certain that our continued support of this association
will ensure that they thrive and represent us proudly.
In this regard, I am delighted to announce today that government has approved
a grant of $88,000 for the Wheelchair Sports Association of Newfoundland and
Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: Not only will this grant ensure this association has the
resources to compete in the 1999 Canada Winter Games, but it will help the
association address many of its aspirations, from athletic wheelchair purchases
to undertaking awareness programs.
I ask my colleagues to join me in offering best wishes to the Wheelchair
Sports Association as they prepare to compete in this prestigious sporting
event. The 1999 Canada Winter Games will be an excellent opportunity to promote
wheelchair sports in Canada.
Mr. Speaker, we are delighted to be able to provide this assistance.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the minister; I did get a
copy of your statement.
Minister, I certainly welcome the news on the $88,000. It is certainly good
news. I am surprised that the minister announced that, and not the Premier. When
there is any good news, the Premier usually does it.
I would as well today, Minister, like to congratulate the people of Labrador
for hosting the Winter Games. I know firsthand of the amount of work and the
time and energy that goes into it from the whole committee, the time and effort
that they have to take. Sometimes it is not a week or two weeks of work; it can
turn into a year or two years.
As well, to the committee in Corner Brook who are going probably even beyond
what we do in Newfoundland and Labrador for our own games, the people of Corner
Brook are going to be saddled with certainly a much larger responsibility, to
host the Canada Winter Games.
I can only assume that with people like Mr. Trask, and people from the
department who have been seconded to that division over there, who I have had
the opportunity to work with over the years - and I am talking about Jamie
Schwartz here - I think those games are in good hands. I am sure that when the
time comes for Newfoundland and Labrador to put off a show, our show will be as
good or better than anywhere else in this nation of ours. I have had the
opportunity firsthand to attend some of these games and, knowing Mr. Trask and
the rest of the people in Corner Brook, I am sure that our games will be just as
good as anybody else's, and hopefully even a little bit better.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi have
leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to join with the minister and the Member for Conception Bay
South in congratulating the organizers, the athletes, the volunteers, and indeed
all the people of Labrador, on a tremendous effort in putting on the Labrador
Winter Games.
I was particularly impressed with the figure that I heard on TV last night of
some 1,500 volunteers, which is a remarkable number of people to get involved in
a volunteer effort in a community the size of Labrador West. It shows a terrific
community spirit. I know that the Labrador Winter Games have provided a great
deal of support for the community spirit that exists in all of Labrador, and I
want to congratulate them on their effort.
I would also like to acknowledge my pleasure in seeing the contribution to
the Wheelchair Sport Association in the pre-Budget announcement that the
minister just made today, of $88,000.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I first want to apologize to the Member for St.
John's South for the lateness of which he received a copy of my statement.
My hon. colleagues will recall that earlier this year, Friede Goldman
International, a private sector company based in Pascagoula, Mississippi,
acquired the assets of Marystown Shipyard Limited.
I am pleased to advise my hon. colleagues that employment levels at the new
company, Friede Goldman Newfoundland Limited, are continuing to climb, and
currently stand at just over 850.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
AN HON. MEMBER: Unbelievable! What a minister! What a minister!
MS FOOTE: Employment at this time last year, Mr. Speaker, was just over
MR. FITZGERALD: Who was the minister then?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MS FOOTE: The increase in work at the yard has resulted in a management
decision to implement a third shift which took place on March 23, 1998.
This increased level of activity confirms that the decision to place the
Marystown Shipyard Limited in the hands of a credible international operator was
the right one, and is a testament to the skill levels and commitment of the
workforce at Friede Goldman Newfoundland Limited.
I am pleased also to inform the House today that the Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador has reached an agreement with the employee groups at
the former Marystown Shipyard Limited on the distribution of profit during the
period April - September 1997, which will result in an amount of $433,333 that
will be distributed among those employees.
Mr. Speaker, the work at the Shipyard has created spin-off activity around
the Burin Peninsula and throughout the Province and we expect the benefits to
continue well into the future. I congratulate all of the people at Friede
Goldman Newfoundland - union, employees, management and owners - and wish them
every success in the future.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like, as well, to join with the minister in congratulating the people
at Friede Goldman, the union and employees, and to join with the government
today in rejoicing with the people of Marystown, because this is a good news
story for the people of Marystown.
The only down side to this is I guess they will have to throw away that steel
plate. It is a better news story for the Premier, because they won't have to
drop him into the ocean now.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I spent yesterday going through the Auditor
General's Report, and I am sure there are some ministers, as a result of what is
in it, wish they could stand up today and probably have the ability and
foresight to write what is in the report. Because it certainly doesn't indicate
that the controls on the government purse strings, that controls on the
provincial Treasury, are in place.
This is the second Auditor General's Report in two years. In last year's
report and this year's report there are clear and consistent examples of where
government has not managed properly the public purse; where government has not
taken the initiative to follow up on deals that have been made; and where
government on the one hand has entered into contracts for divestitures of Crown
assets, but they forgot the ultimate test, and that is the strategic
implementation and the results we get from it.
I would like to ask the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, is he
concerned about what the Auditor General has outlined? Is he concerned about the
lack of accountability? Is he concerned about the issues that have been raised
in this report with respect to his government's record and control of the public
finances?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.
MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, we are always concerned and we welcome, in fact, the criticisms of the
Auditor General. They are often succinct and to the point. I have to say they
sometimes represent difference in opinions as to how matters should be accounted
for, and with those we sometimes have some issues that we take.
Having said that, and I am sure the member has read the whole report, each
government department and each Crown agency that is questioned provides a
response to the Auditor General. While she raises concerns, sometimes they are
addressed. When they are not addressed then we take measures to ensure that the
Auditor General's comments were accurate, and providing better advice as to how
we should proceed or implement, and that is something we look forward to doing
each other.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, a very smooth delivery, a very eloquent answer
to the question, but it didn't answer the question. The question is this: Why
has government, in particular the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board in this
case, not followed up to ensure, where public Crown agencies were sold, that the
benefits, financial and otherwise, that were supposed to come to this Province,
did not? Why didn't his department, or the departments associated with those
areas in the Auditor General's Report, follow up to ensure that the benefits -
again, financial and otherwise - came into the public Treasury? That is the
question the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board must answer.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.
MR. DICKS: My answer was, Mr. Speaker, that we have in fact followed up,
and I would like the hon. member to be more specific. I would be quite delighted
to speak to the Newfoundland and Labrador Computer Services Limited, if that is
what he is tending toward, but I have not heard the question. It is not a
question one can ask generally. If you have a question with respect to a
specific entity we would be delighted to answer it, particularly if it relates
to Computer Services Limited which I addressed in part with the press yesterday.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. E. BYRNE: No problem. I think what the Minister of Finance and
Treasury Board has done, and obviously the record is pretty clear, is that he
has made some basic assumptions with respect to the public Treasury that he
should not have made, and I will give him one.
Last year's report, 1996, talks about Newfoundland Hardwoods Limited.
Government divested itself of that agency in October of 1995, I believe. The
Auditor General outlined in last year's report that the transaction was not
completed, that the benefits and the finances supposed to come to the public
Treasury were not completed. His department and the government were alerted last
year.
This year, in this year's report, about fifteen months later, are the exact
same criticisms of government, where Newfoundland Hardwoods did not, and the
sale of it and the benefits supposedly coming from it have not accrued to the
Province. The question is, why, Minister? Why has it taken at least two Auditor
General reports to get you off your ministerial seat to do something about it
for the people of the Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.
MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I refer the hon. member to page 145 of the Auditor General's Report, where it
explains the very question that he raised and the response to it.
The problems with all of the proceeds from the privatization of Newfoundland
Hardwoods - they have been realized, in fact. The only outstanding issue on that
is the surplus funds from the wind-up of the pension plan which, as the hon.
member can understand, will take some time. It has to follow a formalized
process as required under the Pension Benefits Act. Issues related to the
collection of certain receivables, the pension plan wind-up and the disposition
of surplus storage tanks have taken much longer than anticipated to finalize.
If he wants to buy some surplus storage tanks at Newfoundland Hardwoods, we
would be happy to oblige him. There is not a great market for those, as Your
Honour can appreciate.
The financial statements will be available and following their receipt we
anticipate that the services of the divestiture consultant, which was a clause
of the transaction, will on longer be required. I understand that is the case.
So, do we follow up? Yes. Do we take specific steps? Yes. If the hon. member
fully disclosed what was in the Auditor General's Report it would be seen that
is in fact the case.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition, a supplementary.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Let's look at another
section of the Auditor General's Report. Yet again,
throughout the Auditor General's Report, we have seen exceptions to the Public
Tender Act, where a number of government's Crown agencies and entities, which
are supposed to report public tender exemptions to the House, through the
Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, have not done so; and, in some
cases, have not done so up until two years after those exemptions were made.
Can the public be assured, Minister, with that sort of activity, where
government does not know what is happening with its Crown agencies and entities,
that those exceptions are truly in the public interest?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.
MR. DICKS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, you can be.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, a supplementary.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I am not so sure we can be. If he reads the
report and sees what the Newfoundland Liquor Corporation did, in one respect,
that they pre-determined - there is no level of comfort provided to me with:
Yes, we can be.
The Newfoundland Liquor Corporation: In the report it talks about a public
tender exemption, that they pre-determined a site where they wanted to put one
of their stores and then they wrote the tender specific to that site. The only
thing that happened was they received one bid because only one bid would
qualify.
Is that the type of assurance the minister is saying is in the best interest
of the public?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.
MR. DICKS: Yes it is, Mr. Speaker. The Newfoundland Liquor Corporation
operates on a commercial basis. It maintains -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, the Newfoundland Liquor Corporation's mandate
from government is to operate on a commercial basis. One of the things it does
is choose its locations. The tendering question is for, I believe, the Churchill
Park premises. It writes a tender to provide a certain amount of commercial
space necessary to its operation in a reasonable commercial location. They would
not do the same business if it were warehoused in some other part of town which
is non-commercial. So it will necessarily be the fact that the Corporation's
premises in virtually every place in the Province, including agency stores, are
located for commercial purposes. They will not take locations simply on the
basis of the cheapest square footage available, nor should they.
The Auditor General may say it is a departure from the Public Tender Act,
which it is. Is it advisable in the Corporation's interests to earn money for
government and taxpayers? Yes, it is.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, a supplementary.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, this is the same sort of argument that we
heard on Trans City, the three hospitals, that it was in the public interest;
exactly the same argument, that it was in the public interest to do it.
MR. SULLIVAN: Millions of dollars later.
MR. E. BYRNE: The reality is, Mr. Speaker, that the Public Tender Act was
set up for one purpose, to provide a level playing field. If - and this is a big
if, I say to the minister - in the final analysis, that site had to be chosen as
a result of commercial viability, fair enough, but at least it would have gone
through the public tendering process. I am not convinced, and I don't believe
the minister is either, that is the case.
Let's talk about the Department of Education. School boards in the Province
paid out in excess of $160,000 in terms of termination of salaries for
superintendents and assistant superintendents, in the face of the minister
writing the school boards and telling them what the approved levels were.
Is there any explanation for that, I say to either the Minister of Finance or
the Minister of Education?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I understand from the news coverage last evening of the Leader
of the Opposition's first day on the job, and how busy he is, now that he has
become the leader he does not have time, only occasionally, to drop into caucus
meetings after somebody else plans their strategy sessions and so on.
I expect as well, Mr. Speaker, that he probably missed all the news coverage
certainly on the radio and otherwise, on several stations, where that issue was
fully explained yesterday. I was pleasantly surprised, as the minister, that
they used so much of the interview in the explanation, because usually there is
a short clip taken of what was said; but there was a full explanation given with
respect to the $160,000. I was so excited about it that today I went out and got
a new haircut, and I am hoping that -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. minister to get to his answer quickly.
MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
I am hoping that the questions will be of such a nature that I might get on
the scum so other people can see me on the news tonight with my new hairdo and
so on.
In any event, Mr. Speaker, the $160,000 was explained to the Auditor General,
and it was explained to the public of the Province yesterday. Those who were
listening to the media heard it yesterday afternoon and this morning. Mr.
Speaker, it is not as the Leader of the Opposition describes at all.
The $160,000 was paid out by the boards with the full authority of the
legislation and the full authority of the government. The fact of the matter is
that there is a difference of opinion between the Auditor General and the
government as to whether or not, if she were in the position of Minister of
Education, she would have given a certain authority to pay funds that were not
salary funds.
What the school boards did, Mr. Speaker, was use an authority from the
Minister of Education to pay - if they saw fit and if they deemed it as a
priority - salaries above and beyond those approved by the Cabinet for those
positions, from other funds that were provided to the school board for other
purposes.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the minister to conclude his answer quickly.
MR. GRIMES: The boards, Mr. Speaker, debated the issue and agreed to pay
slightly higher levels of remuneration to those positions.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, there is no way. I heard the minister's
explanation. I am glad to hear it again here today because there is no way. It
only shows what the minister is made of. There is no way to justify that
$160,000 being spent on termination, absolutely no way to justify it. How many
more School Lunch Programs could have been purchased for that, Minister? If you
can stand up and say in all honesty that you support that decision -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary, I ask him to get to his question.
MR. E. BYRNE: Seriously, how many more programs could have been provided
for that $160,000, within the school system?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Again, one of us, obviously, myself or the Leader of the Opposition, is
reading a very different
section of the Auditor General's Report. The $160,000 -
and I would ask the hon. member and the Leader of the Opposition to read it and
check again further and maybe go to some more briefing sessions and so on with
his Caucus - is in no way a reference to termination benefits. That is a
completely different issue in the report and a completely different amount of
money. The $160,000 - and maybe he might read it, check with his Education
critic, who is not here today, who has probably read it in detail, and he might
stand up and admit that he just made a mistake in that the $160,000 that he is
talking about has nothing whatsoever to do with termination benefits. It has to
do with current salaries being paid to the current ten directors and the current
thirty assistant directors in the ten new school boards.
Maybe I will give him an opportunity to check again and see that he has made
a mistake. I know he is busy; I know he is new to the job; I know he does not
have a lot of time like he used to before; I know he does not personally
research the issues; but I think he can have a look and check and see that he
did make a mistake.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Auditor General, in her report yesterday, with respect to the St. John's
Health Care Corporation, the report was a minor submission compared to what the
Public Accounts Committee tabled some eight months ago.
I would like to ask the minister if she can clarify her statements yesterday
with respect to that. Is she convinced that the savings that the Health Care
Corporation and she, as minister, have indicated would be realized, will not be
realized? In the Auditor General's Report it says specifically - clearly and
categorically - that the financial analysis of the St. John's Health Care
Corporation in the last three years by the Department of Health has been minimal
to non-existent. Can the minister clarify her statements of yesterday?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to say that I was a little bit disappointed that the Auditor
General did not update her final report before she submitted it because back in
August, as you will know, we submitted $20 million into the health care system
which certainly changed the results to which she referred in her report, citing,
for example, a $10 million deficit for the Health Care Corporation and a $6.8
million deficit for this year when, in fact, we injected $6.7 million into the
Health Care Corporation this year; and that does not even preclude or include
anything that may or may not be included in the upcoming Budget. I think that
certainly is important to state because it is not reflected in the Auditor
General's Report.
With respect to the savings, I think it is important to note that the $20
million that has been identified as savings will be seen over the long term.
Surely my colleague across the way would acknowledge that the restructuring is
not yet completed, and the full extent of that will not be completed until some
time around the year 2000. The ongoing savings is on target and we have every
confidence in the Health Care Corporation. They have done a fine job. They have
brought together six major organizations and we are very proud of the work they
are doing, particularly their staff.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposite House Leader.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are to the
Minister of Health.
In 1993, the Minister of Health announced the reorganization of health care
boards in this Province as a result of the Dobbin Report. At that time, as
Health critic, I stated that we could support that reorganization if it improves
the quality of health care and it improves the efficiency in the administration
and delivery of health care services. The minister assured us that would happen.
But today, Minister, our health care system is in worst shape than it ever was,
and there is nothing but chaos in the management of our system today.
Now the Western Health Care Board recently had their accreditation survey
suspended until administration there gets a better handle on operations. Now
that board, Minister, has gone through four different CEO's in just over a year,
three since you have been minister in the last ten months.
I ask the minister: Is she concerned that the suspension of that
accreditation survey will put in jeopardy a teaching hospital like Western
Memorial, and will make it even more difficult to be able to recruit because of
this management fiasco?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
First, I would like to respond to the
preamble that the member spoke to at
the beginning.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MS J.M. AYLWARD: No, I have an opportunity to respond to the
preamble, if
I understand the speaker, previously.
In response to that
preamble, I have to say that our health care system is
not worse than ever. I have to say, if you speak to people who have availed of
the services of our health care system at a time when they needed the services,
prominent figures in our society, people who have gone to the Mainland and have
had to come back here to have it done properly, you would have to agree that our
health care system is not in chaos. It is delivering quality care. Our staff is
working extremely hard, and I take offence to insinuations of anything other
than that, as I am sure our staff would.
In response to the question, we have been working with the Health Care
Corporation of the Western region to try to stabilize health services. In
response to the question, there has been an acting CEO. We have been working
very closely with the acting CEO, with my department, to put in place a
management team. The new CEO started two weeks ago and he is in the final
process of putting together the management team consisting of the chief
operating officer and chief financial officer.
I do believe as well that the recent decision, as was reported in the media -
similar to the comments made by my colleague, the Minister of Finance - was
covered very clearly in the media recently. That has absolutely no impact on the
teaching capacity of Western, or on the region, or on Port aux Basques, and on
the community health centre model. In fact, if the member was to think about
what he said, we have been through a year and a half of turnover with respect to
financial officers, with respect to administration. Wouldn't it make sense to
put a new management team in place, to allow the Atkinson report to be in place,
before decisions are made in this direction? It is not in any way impacting on
the operation of those facilities in that region.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Apparently the minister has not been consulting with the real people in the
system, the people who are using the system. Maybe she should ask the Premier
for a copy of his poll to let her know exactly people's concerns in health care
in this Province.
Minister, you have been there almost one year and only now you are talking
about putting in place a management team - after one year? They are your
appointed boards and you, as minister, are responsible for the operation of
those boards, and health care in this Province.
Your department hired a consultant - you just made reference to it, the
Atkinson group - and they are supposed to do an operational review. The board
chairman just recently, Mr. Bruce LeGrow - I heard him on radio when he was
interviewed -, said there are identified management problems. He said he expects
this report to confirm what he already knows.
I ask you, Minister: Why is your consultant's report that was due in July not
ready? Could you tell us who is holding up that process?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We are waiting for the results of the Atkinson report for all the reasons to
which I previously spoke. We have had difficulty getting the audited statements.
We have publicly acknowledged, as has the CEO and the board chair, the
difficulty in getting the financial information because of a manual system,
because of a period where we went six months without a financial officer. We had
other financial officers who came, went off due to various personal reasons. We
now do have someone stabilized in that position and they have been working with
the auditors to try to finalize.
The board received a draft audited statement two weeks ago. They are
expecting last year's audited statement to be submitted in the next few weeks,
and that will, in culmination with the Atkinson report, bring together the
information the new management structure, as well as the board, will need to
make the type of decisions you need to make when you do an operational review.
It will not only look at the financial and administrative components. In an
operational review you also have to look at the facilities, the services, and
the types of services that are being offered in that area.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The minister is presiding over a department in which a health care
corporation hasn't submitted a financial statement since March 1995, Minister,
and you are responsible. You are the one in charge, I say to you. Doctor Parsons
is concerned, he said, in not having financial statements, and is having great
difficulty in recruiting, even more difficulty than getting a financial
statement, he stated publicly.
Accreditation promotes excellence in the provision of quality health care and
efficient use of resources in health organizations. That is what the Canadian
Council on Health Services Accreditation states. That is what reorganization,
Minister, was supposed to do; that is what it was all about.
Your department has been delinquent in allowing the Western Health Care
Corporation to operate without a full-time CEO for over a year.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I remind the hon. member he is on a supplementary.
MR. SULLIVAN: In the process, I say to the minister, you have compromised
efficient use of resources and health care to the people in Western
Newfoundland. I want to ask the minister: When are you going to start doing the
job you were appointed to do?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I would like to thank the
member across for telling me what my responsibilities were, because up to this
point I didn't know, right? I didn't know, and I want to thank you for telling
me. Thank you so much.
I think it is only fair, in a health care system that will soon be over $1.2
billion, that nobody would ever fault us for doing ongoing evaluation. We are
the first to admit we need to do better financial monitoring. We have admitted
it. Last year we put in place a monitoring system; we have done internal audits,
and we will be working very closely with our boards.
We believe that since the board has been put in place we felt a need to do an
ongoing evaluation system to make the type of changes - and let me say, we
haven't only done it in Western. We have done in Central and we have done it
Eastern. We have also looked at it in St. John's. It is not unique to Western
when you do ongoing evaluation and try to make decisions based on evidence and
information that you have on a current basis.
So, Mr. Speaker, I believe that when we get the Ackinson Report, in
conjunction with the new management team, this government will move forward to
do types of things that it needs to do and we are very conscious and aware of
what needs to be done. We take it very seriously and we compliment the people in
the Western for their contribution.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.
MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. Minister,
yesterday, we received a House of Commons Standing Committee report on the East
Coast Fishery. This Committee was chaired, Mr. Speaker, by Mr. George Baker, the
Liberal MP serving in Ottawa as a Member of Parliament. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Baker
has stated in the report, as well as in the news media many times, that if
foreign fishing inside the 200-mile limit and on the Nose and Tail of the Grand
Bank were stopped, there would be enough fish supplied to our own plants to have
many of the people now on TAGS return to work. Minister, you have stated that
this statement is not true. I ask the minister if he is accusing Mr. George
Baker of lying to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I have been around the House of Assembly since 1985, on the
Opposition, and since 1989, on this side of The House of Assembly. I have heard
and read, I will not say thousands of statements by Mr. Baker, in Ottawa, but I
have certainly read and heard quite a number - hundreds of statements by Mr.
Baker in Ottawa on Foreign overfishing, on fishery-related issues in
Newfoundland and many other issues.
Some I agree with, some I do not agreed with. The one statement he made on
foreign fishing allocation today, taking place on the Grand Banks, in particular
inside the 200-mile limit, would replace the needs of all of the people who need
to get back to work in the harvesting and in the fish plants in the Province. It
is not true, Mr. Speaker, it is not correct. It could not. It would certainly
help some but certainly would not replace the needs of all of those people who
need to be put back to work.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon, the Member for Bonavista South, a supplementary.
MR. FITZGERALD: I say to the Minister, if it helped one person, Minister,
if it helped just one person get back to work, it would be something certainly
worthwhile.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FITZGERALD: Minister, when you were an MHA, sitting in the back
benches of this Legislature, you, too, introduced a private member's resolution
into this House dealing with foreign fishing.
I will read one little part of that: How can you allow them to rob the fish
outside and rake the fish inside the 200-mile limit -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. FITZGERALD: - and reward them by giving them quotas inside the
200-mile limit?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I remind the hon. member he is on a supplementary and there should be no
preambles, particulary there should be no
reading of excerpts from newspapers, extracts of any kind.
MR. FITZGERALD: Minister, those are your direct words and I must say I
have many more here. I have the whole debate here which I will be bringing
forward, Mr. Speaker, to show.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FITZGERALD: Minister, why have you now wrapped yourself in the flag
of convenience? Why have you wrapped yourself in the flag of convenience, Mr.
Minister, and why are you not speaking out to the fish plant workers in
Newfoundland and Labrador?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member were to put on his desk a
copy of every question that I asked in The House of Assembly from 1985 to 1989
he would need one of Moffat Brothers tandem trucks to get them in here -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. EFFORD: - on fisheries alone, Mr. Speaker - and I am going to tell
the hon. member, much more direct than he is putting across The House of
Assembly. When Minister Crosbie, Fisheries and Oceans for Canada, was in Ottawa,
I said to the minister at the time that he should extend jurisdiction over the
Nose and Tail of the Grand Banks of Canada to control all fishing.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. EFFORD: And I have not changed my views on that to this day. I have
also said that foreign fishing wherever possible, inside the 200-mile limit,
should go to Canadians, where they have the ability to harvest, but do not make
a misrepresentation to the people of this Province and say if the foreign
fishing was stopped inside the 200-mile limit it would help 27,000 people - who
are displaced because of the careless management of the former minister, John
Crosbie!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The time for Oral Questions has elapsed.
Presenting Reports by
Standing and Special Committees
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.
MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, the 1996-1997 annual report from the
Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Labour.
MR LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
A report from the Labour Relations Board - Newfoundland and Labrador 1997
annual report.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As per statutory requirement, I would like to present the annual report of
the Pippy Park Commission for 1996-1997, and also I would like to present to the
House reports of Public Tender Act exemptions for the months of November and
December and the month of January, 1998, significantly within the time frame of
six months.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.
MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present a petition on behalf of 800-plus people living in the
community of Lethbridge. It reads:
To the hon. House of Assembly of Newfoundland in legislative session
convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland:
WHEREAS the road through the community of Lethbridge has not been upgraded
since it was paved approximately thirty years ago; and
WHEREAS the road is in such terrible condition that vehicles are being
damaged, including school buses serving the three schools in the area and
schoolchildren are finding their daily trips over the road very difficult;
WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador
to upgrade and pave the road through Lethbridge, and as in duty bound, your
petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, this is another petition. I say to the member opposite, I can
name the other members who have been there for the last thirty years. This
particular community has been in my district, Mr. Speaker, for the past two
years, but that is beside the point, it is a road that was put through the
community of Lethbridge where approximately 600 people live. The road was paved
- not upgraded, just paved - back thirty years ago, about 1965-1966, and there
has been very little, if any, road work done on this particular road since that,
other than patching potholes and attending to emergency situations as they have
arisen.
Mr. Speaker, this particular road is travelled over by five or six buses
every day, buses taking students to the elementary school and to the high
school. The road measures approximately five or six kilometres when you take
into consideration the three approaches to Route 230 as well as the main road.
Mr. Speaker, what people are asking for, the 800-plus people who signed this
petition, is to have this roadway recapped. They are not asking to have all the
hills taken away or all the turns cut out. All they are asking for, Mr. Speaker,
is to be provided with a decent road leading through their community. Those
people, Mr. Speaker, pay the same price for gasoline, pay the same price to
register their vehicles, the same price for their driver's license as everybody
else in this Province.
We all know, with the weather conditions in this Province, that the life of a
roadway, especially in rural areas, Mr. Speaker, close to the salt water, is
probably a maximum of twenty to twenty-two years. This particular roadway has
been paved over thirty years ago with very little work done on it since that
time. Mr. Speaker, this needs to be done - the road needs to be done this year.
In one particular location of this road where the train track once went
parallel to it, you drive down there today and you do not know if you are
driving on the old railway bed or if you are driving on the roadway. There is
absolutely no ditching done there. There has been absolutely no repairs. Even
the Department of Works, Services and Transportation has been complaining about
it. The minister knows what I am talking about, he was out there and drove over
that road. I know that as well. Mr. Speaker, here again he only paid lip service
to it; went out and made some promises, but there was never anything done about
it.
Mr. Speaker, what those residents are asking for is nothing out of the
ordinary. They are not coming looking for water and sewer, I say to the
minister. They are not saying: We need street lights. They are not saying: We
need a water supply. All they are asking for is to have their road ditched and
recapped. I think that is all that needs to be done with that particular road.
They are concerned now that there is going to be some paving done by the Road
for Rails agreement in the general area there, and they are saying this is an
opportune time. If we are ever going to get a good price to get this piece of
roadwork looked after, then maybe now is the time to do it.
I have received many, many calls, Mr. Speaker, both in the summer and in the
winter, from people in the general area there complaining about the condition of
this road. I relay the calls to the Department of Works, Services and
Transportation, and I am told, Mr. Speaker, by those people, that this is one of
their priorities as well, to see this particular roadway upgraded and recapped
to an acceptable level.
Mr. Speaker, there is no point in it being a priority, there is no point in
it being number one on the list, unless something is done to correct it. We are
not asking the department to come out and pave and recap all the roads in the
district. We are not asking them to come out and spend millions and millions of
dollars. What we are asking for, Mr. Speaker, is the maintenance of a road that
has not been maintained for the past thirty years.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. FITZGERALD: I ask the minister, if he would be kind enough to pay
particular attention to this situation. I have made him aware of it in private
conversation that I have had with him. So he is aware and we look forward to the
budget being brought down and maybe this piece of roadway being recognized and
the need being fulfilled this year.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to support the petition presented by the Member for Bonavista
South on behalf of his constituents in Lethbridge. Mr. Speaker, he is a very
conscientious member, a hard working member who is always speaking up on behalf
of the constituents in his district, unlike some other members here. For
example, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture just a few minutes ago said
to me that he had no problem going on record saying that the community of Port
de Grave should be incorporated as a municipality. Mr. Speaker, he said that
outright. I do not know what the people in that community feel, but I am not
sure that they would support that, although there are all kinds of arguments
that can be made one way or the other with respect to the incorporation of any
municipality within the Province.
With respect to the community of Lethbridge wanting some work done on their
roads out there this year, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Works, Services and
Transportation has a responsibility to represent all the people in this
Province, regardless of what district these people live in or what party
representation they have in the House of Assembly. Government has the
responsibility to represent all the people in this Province, and all the people
in this Province should be treated equally.
The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture quite blatantly in the House of
Assembly was being very biased, Mr. Speaker, with respect to making a comment
when the Member for Bonavista South was up, saying: He is on the wrong side of
the House. In other words, to get anything in this Province today you have to be
a person living in a community represented by a member on the government side of
the House. That is morally wrong, I say to you, Mr. Speaker, morally wrong. To
not only think it, but to utter it is ridiculous.
Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I wanted to stand in my place today to support the
petition, as the critic for Works, Services and Transportation, to see that the
people in this Province are treated fairly, that every community in this
Province is treated fairly, and that when the monies are allotted through the
Minister of Works, Services and Transportation that the concerns and needs of
the people in each community are taken into consideration; before the monies are
allotted.
While I am on my feet, Mr. Speaker, I might as well make a comment with
respect to the roads in my district of Cape St. Francis. Mr. Speaker, I have
been negotiating with every Minister of Works, Services and Transportation since
I came here to try to get some money spent in the District of Cape St. Francis.
AN HON. MEMBER: Are they all paved?
MR. J. BYRNE: No, all the roads in my district are not paved, and what
roads are paved have been paved for thirty years, so it is time for some
upgrading to be done, Mr. Speaker, in the District of Cape St. Francis.
Hopefully the minister will see fit this year to put some money into the
district, long overdue. The scenic Marine Drive down through Logy Bay and Middle
Cove and Outer Cove, the Outer Cove Road, that road down to Cape St. Francis,
there are about five or six kilometres not paved. The scenic route where people
come from all over the country, nationally and internationally, to visit Cape
St. Francis, and they cannot get out there because the road is so bad, five
kilometres of dirt road down there. The WindGap in Flatrock needs to be done. It
is in dire condition. I have been talking to the minister and the deputy
minister on that, and hopefully this year we will see some work done in that
community.
Back to the original petition, presented by the Member for Bonavista South,
that the minister hopefully will see fit this year to put some money into that
area, as is requested by the people of Lethbridge.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to make a few comments with respect to the petition that was
presented by my colleague, the Member for Bonavista South.
I might say to him that he would be more endearing to any minister if he
recognized, even in his
preamble, the level of support that his district has
already gotten over the past few years with respect to road work. The fact of
the matter is that last year we spent a fair bit of money down in that area on
paving. The fact of the matter is that about a month ago we called a contract
with seeds of $2 million under the federal-provincial program, the Roads for
Rail program, being spent in his district. So the hon. member is receiving some
attention in his district to the extent of $2 million on a contract that was
called just the other day.
What I do want to point out, for the benefit of the House, not only the hon.
member who raised the petition, is that I have in front of me at the moment in
the department requests to do road work, outside of the Trans-Canada Highway,
outside of the trunk roads agreement, that would cost us $200 million if we were
to address all the needs this year. Those are the facts. We have roads that need
to be resurfaced, we have roads that need to be recapped, and we have roads that
have never been paved. I have to say to the hon. member that in identifying the
programs for this year, one of the things I felt it was appropriate to consider
was to consider roads in districts that have never seen a bit of blacktop, to
consider roads that have never seen a bit of pavement, to consider roads over
which people have driven for years and they have been eating dust all their
lives.
I would ask the hon. member to bear that in mind when the allocations are
done for this year, as they will be in short order, obviously. I would ask him
also to understand that out of the rather small budget we have, compared to the
$200 million needs that are out there, that we are attempting to spread the
capital program money-wise around as fairly and as equitably as we can to ensure
that people who do not have pavement get a bit of pavement, and also to ensure
that where we have the worst deteriorating roads that we make our best efforts
to bring them up to standard.
We will continue to apply the principle as best I can, in my judgement, that
would recognize fairness and balance in the allocation of our roads resources
for this year.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present a petition from residents in the neighbourhood of St.
Joseph's School to the House of Assembly, expressing the concerns about the
proposed closing of the St. Joseph's School, and to demand that government take
all measures to stop all school closures until the newly-elected board have had
a full opportunity to consider the needs and circumstances of students and
schools within their jurisdiction.
Now, Mr. Speaker, this petition is one of a number of petitions before the
House concerning the issue of school closures this year. I think I can tell the
House a few things that were presented to the school board itself last night by
the local school council.
This is the second time that a presentation has been made to the Avalon East
School Board by the school council. They made one last year and this was prior
to the referendum, Mr. Speaker, that was passed in September of last year. At
that time the issue as to what schools might be designated as denominational
schools, uni-denominational schools or interdenominational schools was before
that board. What the parents, through their school council, told the board - and
they did that as a Catholic school and for the most
part Catholic parents of a
Catholic school - they made a presentation which said they believed that their
school ought to remain open because it was a neighbourhood school; that it met
the expectations of the government, parents and the community and those who
supported reform of the education process in this Province. It met the criteria
for a neighbourhood school, a school that was responding to the needs of the
neighbourhood.
They wanted it to be available to all children in the neighbourhood. In fact,
over the years the school population of St. Joseph's has been in fact not uni-denominational,
although it was a Catholic school, children from all denominations attended that
school. It was a school that responded and does respond to the needs of the
children of that neighbourhood, the special needs of the children of that
neighbourhood, in relation to the development of a School Lunch Program which
has a 100 per cent take-up rate or approximately 100 per cent take-up rate,
which is very important to the those students.
It is a school, Mr. Speaker, I have heard parents say at school council
meetings and at public meetings to discuss the school, that recognizes that many
children in that area are not able to keep up with the latest requirements of
schoolchildren in terms of the fanciest and most expensive sneakers. Some of the
heavily advertised brands of sneakers that are made, in many cases, in Third
World countries cheaply and sold in North America very expensively - children
want to have those. There is a lot of pressure on children to have them. Well
that pressure does not exist in St. Joseph's School, Mr. Speaker, and that is
very important to the self-esteem of those children, many of whom cannot afford
to have it.
Mr. Speaker, a number of students from this school have written letters. I
will just read out one of them from a student named April Blackwood, who is in a
Grade 5 class. She says: My name is April Blackwood. I am in Grade 5 at St.
Joseph's School. I have a lot of friends here I have known since Kindergarten
and I do not want to be separated from them. Our school is small. We do a lot of
activities and everyone gets a turn to be involved. Some people say our school
is not in good condition. It is not true. We have a huge gym. It is in good
condition. Our school is clean and bright. We have a computer lab, science lab,
resource centre and a lot of equipment and resources. It has a lot of tradition.
We go to the most historic neighbourhood in all of North America.
Mr. Speaker, that school is a stone's throw, literally, from Signal Hill.
These children walk to the Battery and walk to Signal Hill for public events and
historic events. They are able to walk to the museum, where they have gone on
many occasions for field trips. They do not have to go hire buses, Mr. Speaker.
In other words, this school is ideally located, not only for the students
themselves, many of whom can walk to school, but also for the school itself in
having access to the historic parts of downtown St. John's and to Signal Hill.
They use the Battery pool almost as if it were their own school swimming pool.
There are many advantages to that school for the children who go there, Mr.
Speaker, and it is a school -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. HARRIS: - a neighbourhood school which should be saved.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would just like to present a petition this afternoon from parents, many of
whom live in the district of St. John's East, but whose children are under the
jurisdiction of the Avalon East School District. I would like to read just a
portion of it: We, the parents and friends of schools in the Avalon East School
District, assembled at Confederation Building on Sunday, March 22, 1998, request
the provincial government to assess, with respect to the reduction of teaching
units, its position for the school year of 1998-1999.
The petition goes on to say, Mr. Speaker: We stress that we are not opposed
to school closures and changes in school configuration. In the context of
declining enrolment and the implementation of neighbourhood schools, such
changes must and will come.
These parents, Mr. Speaker, realize that we are going through a period of
transition and they realize that school closure is something that not only this
school board but indeed many school boards in the Province will have to deal
with. This is an issue which, of course, will have to be addressed seriously by
all ten school boards. However, what the parents in Avalon East are asking is
that a proper assessment be carried out and that this information be made
available to the now duly elected school board members, Mr. Speaker.
The parents who have been speaking out, who have been demonstrating and
protesting in one form or another, and in addition to that who have been meeting
in public meetings in their various schools - as recently as last night and
again this evening, I am told, and again tomorrow night, school councils will be
making their concerns and representations known to the various members of the
Avalon East School Board. There are a variety of ways that parents have come
forward, but their message has been the same. That message, Mr. Speaker, is that
the board ensure, that the board members, that staff ensure, that all members
have up-to-date information, that the assessments and the reviews which are
being carried out are all-inclusive, that they take into account all data with
respect to programs, curriculum at large, the facility itself, the number of
teachers, the number of schoolchildren, the proposed enrolment and future
enrolment for Septembers to come. All of these issues have to be taken into
account, Mr. Speaker.
It is most important that the parents of the various schools within the
jurisdiction of the Avalon East School District have confidence in the decisions
which are being made. Because what I am hearing, Mr. Speaker, is that in some
cases these studies have been done well in advance, that these decisions have
been made well in advance to the actual timing of the election of the new school
board. These now school board members are confronted with information and
decisions that they have to make and they have had no real direct impact, as to
how these decisions ought to be made. It is a confidence issue, Mr. Speaker, it
is a credibility issue.
I would like to just again read one part of this petition where it states: We
are convinced that changes should only be made on the basis of a comprehensive
plan that has been thoroughly developed, vetted by extensive consultation with
parent groups and schools concerned, and implemented with sensitivity to the
children and families that will be affected.
That is all these parents are asking. There is no blanket statement, Mr.
Speaker, with respect to: We oppose this or we oppose that. They just want
fairness. They want to ensure that the decisions that are put in place at the
end of the day are done after a proper assessment, appraisal and review of all
of the information, so that any parent of any school can feel that they have
been treated with fairness and with equity. They ask nothing more, Mr. Speaker,
and nothing less.
Thank you very much.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.
MS S. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to support the remarks of my
colleague, the Member for St. John's East.
Here we have a group of parents asking this government to take their petition
into consideration. They are concerned for the future of their children. Some of
these children, Mr. Speaker, have already been disrupted. The ones that come to
mind are the children at St. Bon's, some of whom were pupils at Presentation.
That closed and they went to St. Bon's and now there is talk that St. Bon's is
going to close and these children stand to be disrupted once more. How much more
of this will go on with the closing of schools? How many more times in the
school lives of these children will they be disrupted?
These parents are asking this government not to say there will be no
reduction in teachers. They know with a declining enrolment there must be a
reduction in teachers. They are not asking this government to say that there
will be no school closures. They know with a declining enrolment that there must
be school closures.
What they are asking this government to do is ensure there is a plan in place
that will take into consideration all the issues and the impact that such
closure will have on the children and the families who will be affected.
Yesterday, here in the House of Assembly, the Minister of Education, the
minister who is ultimately responsible for schools, for the organizing of
schools, for the closing of schools if they need to be closed and the
consolidation of schools if they need to be consolidated, said, and I quote,
"...the responsibility of organizing schools, closing schools if they need
to be, consolidating schools, [is] in the hands of the school boards." I
shall call him `Minister Pontius Grimes,' for his statement reminds me of that
of another leader who 2,000 years ago washed his hands of a situation he did not
want to be blamed for.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
While I am here, standing, I would like to present a petition against Sunday
shopping.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!
MS S. OSBORNE: This government will undoubtedly recall -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!
I ask the hon. member to take her seat.
The hon. the Member for St. John's West.
MS S. OSBORNE: I would like to present a petition against Sunday
shopping. This government will recall the bill to amend the Shops' Closing Act,
when for several days in December the members of this Opposition brought the
views and the pleas of the residents of this Province to the government against
Sunday shopping.
This bill was opposed by parents, single parents, and families, and
consumers, many of the families who are involved in the retail sector. They
asked this government, who proposed it would consult with its people, to listen
to them, and the government invoked closure. These are the people who were not
consulted, and they tried to be heard via this Opposition. They were denied. The
government had introduced this bill on two previous occasions, in December 1995,
for whatever their reasons, and in May 1997 to deflect when they were performing
so poorly on health care and school reform. Both times the bill died on the
Order Paper.
This time, against the wishes of the people, and without hearing them, this
government forced passage of this bill, a bill that has seen the erosion of
family life, a bill that was presumably passed because it was too difficult to
enforce no shopping on Sundays. I can think of many other laws that are hard to
enforce. Take, for instance, speeding down a highway where there are no
policemen patrolling, or smoking marijuana among young people. Both these laws
are hard to enforce. I do not see the government lifting those laws.
The government said when they passed this Act that nobody would be forced by
government to be open, and they are not forced by government to be open. They
are forced by the competition. Since the inception of Sunday shopping I have
been following it closely, and the grocers - Sobeys, Dominion, and the other
large grocers who remain closed - now are forced to buy into Sunday shopping. I
have to say, since this bill was put on the Order Paper I have had more calls on
this subject even than on school reform. I have been asked if this law was
passed for convenience, why is Motor Registration not open on Sunday? Why are
the liquor stores not open on Sunday?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MS S. OSBORNE: Probably they should, but do it. Open Motor Registration
for the convenience of people. That is open now thirty-five hours a week, and
the stores are open in excess of seventy-two hours a week.
I have had letters from people telling of the disruption of their lives. This
government has thrown a monkey wrench into the lives of retail workers. People
are unable to attend church, and they are unable to have Sunday dinner with
their families. They have asked me about such things as Victoria Day, the long
weekend, Labour Day, Easter Sunday; what is to happen then?
The most touching thing of all that I have received is from a little
ten-year-old girl who made a project for school. She says: The person behind the
counter is real. Put faces on these people because two of my parents are behind
that counter. Put a face on the person who is selling you the washer or TV. It
seems some people think the person behind the counter has no life; they are
there to serve. I beg to differ. These people do have lives, and they are not
just there to serve. Please do not shop on Sunday.
She shows a mother behind the counter, thinking of church. She has barbecues
there, and she is thinking of spending Sunday with her children. She has drawn
that, and illustrated very graphically. In the bubble there it says: I wish I
could go home to my family.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am happy to stand and second this petition by my hon. colleague from St.
John's West. We spent many hours debating the Sunday shopping issue here in the
House before government finally invoked closure and forced us to vote on it. And
the vote on Sunday shopping was quite obvious; it was twelve on this side to
thirty- six on that side.
It wasn't only the people on the Opposition side of the House who were
against Sunday shopping. The retailer workers themselves, their families, many
of the clergy throughout the Province, were against the issue of Sunday
shopping. Yet, government invoked closure in any event.
It is the families that are most affected, the retailer workers and the
families of the retailer workers who are most affected by Sunday shopping. The
children, especially those who have two parents working in the retail sector,
are the real people here who suffer. The children of the families of single
parents who work in the retail sector are the people who are suffering as a
result of Sunday shopping. In families where there is a single parent and a
number of children, that parent is forced to work on Sunday and forced to
subsidize the babysitting costs and so on. When the children, during the week
days, are in school, that is not a factor. It is the entire family that will
suffer, Mr. Speaker.
The small retail outlets are going to be jeopardized here because the larger
retail outlets who buy on mass quantity can outsell at a lower price the smaller
retail outlets even in the malls; the smaller outlets that now have to bear the
cost of extra overhead, extra wages, and extra utilities to keep the lights on,
the registers working, and so on.
While this will create more employment in the short term by having people
work on Sunday, it may work to the disadvantage of the people who are working in
the retail trade in the smaller shops, because those people may eventually be
laid off as a result of less profits, or the same profits spread over seven
days, and those smaller outlets unable to compete with the larger outlets.
The corner-store owners in most of our neighbourhoods are the people who are
going to suffer, because now the supermarkets which had no intention of opening
on Sundays were forced to open because of the competition. The small corner
stores may become a thing of the past, putting people out of work.
Mr. Speaker, most of the larger stores themselves did not want to open on
Sundays. We can name a vast number of those stores. Canadian Tire, Sears, and
even Wal-Mart, voiced their objection to opening on Sundays. Yet, they had to
open on Sunday because of competition. If one store opened, they all had to
open. Canadian Tire boycotted Sunday shopping for almost a month, but because of
their competition being open they had to open.
Mr. Speaker, we still have no idea why Sunday shopping was implemented. The
families of the retail workers, the retail workers themselves, the owners of the
small retail outlets, the corner-store owners, are still asking that question
and it has not been answered. It has not been answered, and we can see why it
has not been answered. I can look across this House today at what seats are not
vacant on the other side. The rest of the people sitting in their chairs are not
even paying attention. This is why that question has not been answered.
This government has become complacent. They are no longer listening to the
people. They have their own mandate. They are going to do what they want to do
without lending an ear to the retail workers, without lending an ear to the
anglers on rivers that are being dammed or privatized, without lending an ear to
a number of concerns in this Province. It is that complacency, Mr. Speaker, that
hopefully the retail workers and the rest of the population in this Province
will remember when that government tries to pull a fast one on the Lower
Churchill deal by calling an election on that issue.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.
MR. DICKS: Order 1, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order 1.
On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of the Whole on
Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.
Committee of the Whole
CHAIR (Penney): Order, please!
The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to speak to Bill 2,
Interim Supply.
I notice, in looking through Bill 2, that under Industry, Trade and
Technology there is $6,612,800 allotted. I hope that some of that money will be
invested in trying to find ways to help local manufacturers, local industry and
local businesses, to better themselves, to do business in this Province, and to
compete on an equal ground with the businesses in other provinces. It is an
issue that I have raised in the last session here in the House, and it is an
issue that I will continue to raise.
Mr. Chairman, I have gone throughout the Province and consulted with local
manufacturers, and in the very near future we are going to present the results
of our recommendations to government on what we have heard through our
consultation process. We will be happy to do that, and we hope that our
recommendations will be taken seriously by not only the Minister of Industry,
Trade and Technology but the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation and
indeed the Premier because, when it boils down to it, the out-migration in this
Province, the lack of employment in this Province, a lot of that has to do with
the fact that we are sending our raw resources out of this Province as raw
resources, when we can be doing the secondary processing here.
We are allowing our local manufacturers and producers to fend for themselves,
to compete with Mainland companies. We are talking about lowering the
international trade barriers, and probably doing away with the provincial
preference policy, which will take away some of the advantage of the local
manufacturers here. Hopefully some of that money in Bill 2 allotted to industry
will go for finding more ways of helping our local manufacturers and producers.
In a book I have just obtained from the Department of Industry, Trade and
Technology, the Newfoundland and Labrador Business Fact Book of 1997, it
states:
"The economy of Newfoundland and Labrador has traditionally been
dependent on resource-based industries, especially the fishery... Applying
innovative technologies to solve problems, thinking locally, and acting globally
are three characteristics of the new economic development in Newfoundland and
Labrador."
That is a key phrase there, `thinking locally'. That is something this
government has not been doing, and it has been proven time and time again. The
Opposition has been successful in lobbying to have some local products put into
our own cafeteria, after years of bringing it up in the House, myself and the
Industry critic before me. I remember reading in Hansard - he brought it up as
well - the fact that there were not local products being served in our
cafeterias when they are available. We were successful in lobbying to get some
of them put in, and we are going to continue to do that.
Mr. Chairman, after the Throne Speech, out in the lobby - and I brought this
up yesterday during Question Period -, the government hosted a reception in the
lobby. They served a beverage product that was manufactured on the Mainland.
That is a slap in the face to the local manufacturer of that product, because
after we lobbied to have that product put into the cafeteria here, and it is now
available to the caterers at our cafeterias in both buildings, it could have
been requested if government wanted to think locally, but it obviously wasn't
requested. It was left up to the discretion of the caterer.
Unfortunately, I guess, because they have been dealing with that product that
has been brought in from the Mainland for so long, or maybe it was closest in
the stockroom, God knows, but they chose the product that is imported from
Ontario as opposed to using our local product. That shows that while government
themselves are now doing a consultation process throughout the Province and
trying to find ways to use local products and promote local products, and help
local manufacturers, that they completely turned a blind eye to the fact that
that local product is now available right here in our building and they used a
product... Whether it was government's fault directly or not, indirectly it is
government's fault that an imported product was used over a local product.
I am familiar with both products. Sobeys stores are now using the local
product as their own brand, Our Best. They are selling it in all of their stores
they have in Canada as their own product, which shows that it is a quality
product, it is available here, yet it wasn't used. So while this books preaches
they are going to think locally, or they are thinking locally, I would beg to
differ. I would say this government is not thinking locally. They had a choice.
They had a product available right here at their fingertips and chose not to use
it, chose to use an imported product instead.
How many jobs does that create on the Mainland? How many jobs could it create
here? That is a good question. That is also outlined in this booklet. Government
was very careful to lay out the facts here and to inform us of how many jobs
that would create on the Mainland. Interprovincial Trade at a Glance:
"Newfoundland and Labrador had a trade deficit of $2.7 billion with the
rest of Canada." For the lay person who does not know, a trade deficit
means that we are bringing in, in imports, $2.7 billion more than we are
exporting with the rest of Canada. $1.5 billion of that is with Ontario.
The next line in this book is the most shocking of all: "Trade between
Newfoundland and Ontario accounted for 4,000 jobs in Newfoundland and 25,000 in
Ontario."
One would have to ask, what is government doing here by continuing and
insisting on dealing with Ontario products? Are they trying to give all of the
Newfoundlanders who moved to Ontario jobs? Because they are certainly not trying
to give jobs to the Newfoundlanders who are thinking about moving out of
Newfoundland, or they would be dealing with products right here in Newfoundland.
They would be purchasing our own products, helping our own manufacturers,
promoting Newfoundland manufacturers; but quite evidently that is not happening.
A very simple thing like having juice available, served by government, at a
government reception, they would have taken the Newfoundland-produced juice
which is available to them. Not only is it available in the Province; it is now
handled by the caterer in this building.
Mr. Chairman, they go on to say that Newfoundland and Labrador has a trade
surplus of over $650 million with the rest of the world. Again, that means that
we are sending out $650 million more in products than we are taking in with the
rest of the world. Yet, with Canada, we insist on bringing more of their product
in than we are sending out.
Mr. Chairman, 75 per cent of Newfoundland's exports go to international
markets as opposed to Canadian markets - to international markets. Only 25 per
cent of our exports go to other provinces in Canada; 75 per cent of our exports
go to other countries. Yet the same number, over two-thirds -
CHAIR: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. T. OSBORNE: By leave, Mr. Chairman?
CHAIR: Does the hon. member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
CHAIR: By leave.
MR. T. OSBORNE: Over two-thirds of the imports brought into Newfoundland
come from within Canada. So it ironic that 75 per cent of our exports go to
other countries, that Canada does not have the same commitment in buying our
product that we have in buying theirs, but we purchase almost the same amount.
Almost 70 per cent of our imports come from Canada.
Newfoundland and Labrador is a key supplier of raw materials used in
manufacturing operations in Central Canada, and they give an example such as
minerals, iron ore pellets, and so on. Mr. Chairman, what that is telling me is
that of the exports that are going out of Newfoundland, that are bought within
Canada - the meagre 25 per cent that is bought within Canada - of those exports,
most of it is raw material. Now if we are sending out raw material and the
majority of that is going to Central Canada, and that raw material is creating
25,000 jobs in Ontario alone, one would have to ask, why are we not doing the
secondary processing on our raw materials right here in Newfoundland and
Labrador?
Yet, the Province insists on examining water proposals on Gisborne Lake, on
sending water out as a raw resource, something that does not take a whole lot of
industry to run it through a filter and put it into a bottle and stick a label
on it. Yet, we are probably going to create another 10,000 or 15,000 jobs over
the next decade or two by sending our water out as a raw resource, by sending
our copper out as a raw resource, and God only knows what else.
So, Mr. Chairman, the money that is put aside within Industry, Trade and
Technology, I don't know yet. We have not received the estimates because the
Budget has not been brought down, but I would certainly hope that a portion of
that - at least a portion of that - will go towards finding out ways we can
produce our own raw materials here, do the secondary processing.
It certainly doesn't take a genius to figure out that if we are going to send
water out as a raw resource, that if there is a market for bottled water in the
global economy, we can do the secondary processing on our water here. Put it
into a bottle, put a label on it, stick it in a box, and send it out as a
secondary product, and get far more money for it and create jobs here. It
doesn't take a genius to figure out that concept; yet, government continues to
look at those proposals to allow water to be exported as a raw resource.
I remember, during questions I brought up in the last session regarding the
same issue in the House, the Premier obliged by responding and agreeing with me,
and challenging me to go out and try to find some of the answers. In his
response he pointed out Quebec as an example, and said that Quebec is one of the
major obstacles; they will sell us their products but they will not buy ours.
Contrary to that belief, not quite half but almost half of what we sent out
of here to Quebec... We took in $940,240,000 worth of imports from Quebec, and
we sent into Quebec, as exports, $382,774,000 worth of products. Again,
unfortunately, a lot of that was raw material.
The point is that somewhere between one-third and one-half of what we
imported from Quebec we also exported to Quebec. The dismal figures here are in
Ontario. We brought in $1.8 billion worth of products from Ontario, yet we only
sent into Ontario $258 million worth of products; again, most of that in raw
resources. So you have $1.8 billion worth of product coming to Newfoundland from
Ontario, and only $258 million worth of products going into Ontario.
Mr. Chairman, there is something wrong when we can send our raw resources to
Ontario and they can create 25,000 jobs because of our resources going there,
and we are in such desperate need of employment here in this Province. Yet we
continue to send out our raw resources and allow Ontario to reap the benefits,
not only from employment but the secondary processing and creating a profit on
our raw resource.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I will sit down and allow somebody else the
opportunity to speak. Thank you.
CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.
MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise today to say a few words
on Bill 2, interim funding.
I can tell the Minister of Education where he can get $500,000 of that money
very fast. It is right from the gentleman's house that brought it here
(inaudible). That is the first move I would make if I was going to be looking
for funding, or looking to save money and get extra dollars.
AN HON. MEMBER: Government House?
MR. FITZGERALD: Government House. That is where I would get my first
$500,000 in trying to solve some of the problems with the Budget. I can tell you
a lot of different ways that we could spend money, that would be much more
beneficial to the taxpayers of this Province than spending $500,000 to hire four
or five people to look after the big house down there on Military Road.
It was only the other day I was talking to somebody who worked down at
Government House. They were telling me how they worked there during the summer
as a student, and whenever there was a function on the go they were hid away.
They were told to go into a building and hide away. They were not allowed to be
seen. They were plebs right here in this Province, in their own Province. They
had to go and hide away. When anything official was on the go at Government
House, you were to go into this building and shut the door, and not come out
until the function was over.
That is what happened, Mr. Chairman, and it is something that we should
seriously look at. No disrespect for the Lieutenant-Governor - he is a fine man
- but I do not think we should have to put our Lieutenant-Governors, if we need
them, up in a house paid for by the taxpayers of this Province.
When you look at what is being done in Alberta, you look at what is being
done in Ontario, provinces which are far, far richer than ours, that expect
their Lieutenant-Governor to live in his own house, and provide him with an
office - right here at Confederation Building. What is so wrong with that? What
is so wrong with the Lieutenant-Governor coming here and occupying offices the
same as we people do - elected members, Cabinet ministers? What is wrong with
that? What is degrading about that?
I think if were looking for a place to establish an archives or a new art
gallery, maybe that is place we should start looking instead of trying to build
other places.
Mr. Chairman, out in my District of Bonavista South today I would venture to
say there has never been a time before when so many people have been unemployed.
I would venture to say there is not 30 per cent of the people in the district
working; there is not 30 per cent of the people gainfully employed.
We had a job creation project a few months ago which helped. I give the
Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs credit; it did help. We qualified a
fair number of people, not a lot but a fair number, probably 40 or 50 people
that we could help in making the transition from the Department of Social
Services, from Government hand-outs to a job.
As temporary as it was, it gave those people self-esteem. It built on their
self-esteem. It gave them a good feeling about themselves, to be able get up in
the morning and go out and access a job and get a pay cheque, and be able to go
and... I know it is another form of government funding, it is probably another
handout, but it is something people pay into and they feel a little better when
they qualify to receive it, and that is EI, rather than going to the Department
of Social Services.
It is certainly not the end-all but it was a help, and I am glad that the
minister recognized that need in rural Newfoundland and responded to it. Even
though a lot of people were disappointed, it helped a lot of people as well, and
we should continue to do that and help those who are less fortunate.
Mr. Chairman, in the Catalina - Port Union area of my district there have
been something like 54 or 55 businesses that have closed their doors this past
four years, unable to carry on. I went into a business last Friday night on my
way up from Bonavista. I stopped at a business in Port Union. The Port Union -
Catalina fire department were having a TV auction. They go out and raise money
to help buy a length of hose, or to help buy a pump, or to help buy some
breathing apparatus, whatever it is they need in order to carry out their
duties; one of the best groups of volunteers in Newfoundland and Labrador.
I went into this business and said, I think what I will do is donate some
gasoline for them to have a draw on. That way I can spend a few dollars in the
district and the people who win the prize will be able to go the local gas
station and make the purchase.
There are three gasoline stations there, and I went into one and asked if I
could get a gift certificate for $25 worth of gas; not a problem. I paid it, and
I moved up to the next one. I asked if I could do the same thing; not a problem.
When I went into the third one, I asked if I could purchase $25 worth of gas in
order to be used for the TV auction which was going to happen probably three
weeks down the road. The owner of the business looked at me and he looked down
at his desk, and he looked up again and he looked down. He said, "No, I
can't do it." I said, "What do you mean? Is my money no good
here?" He said, "No, it is not that. I have been in business since
1967, and my doors are closing at six o'clock this afternoon." Another
business gone!
MR. J. BYRNE: Why?
MR. FITZGERALD: It has to do with the economic situation in that
particular area since the fish plants have closed and the fishermen have stopped
fishing. Mr. Chairman, another business went out of business.
MS S. OSBORNE: That sounds like a better tomorrow!
MR. FITZGERALD: That sounds like a better tomorrow! I tell you, it is not
a better tomorrow for this gentleman, in business since 1967, didn't know
another occupation. He said: I don't know what I am going to do. I don't know
where life is going to take me, but I know that I am not coming back here
tomorrow morning. That is what is happening out there in rural Newfoundland and
Labrador today, Mr. Chairman.
When I hear the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture get up and say that
foreign fishing is not a problem, saying that Mr. Baker and the Standing Report
of the House of Commons were wrong... We can't get all our fish plants open if
we take away the fish that foreigners are catching.
I say to the minister, and I say to people opposite: If we could get twenty
people back to work, if we could get ten people, one person, by taking this fish
from foreigners, then let's do it; because one job, every job, is very important
in rural Newfoundland and Labrador today, very important.
We may not get all our fish plants open, we may not get all our restaurants
open, and our gas stations, but I will tell you what: the one job that we save
is one person who will be going to the local grocery store, one person who will
be purchasing gasoline, and somebody else who will be paying taxes, and somebody
else, hopefully, who will be contributing to the economy of this Province.
When you see the young people leaving this Province today, our brightest, our
youngest, our future, leaving this Province today and having to go to Alberta
and British Columbia, and many times out of the country altogether, in order to
access a job, I fear what is going to happen to our rural communities.
I have been struck with it. I have not been any different from somebody else.
My daughter graduated from university the middle of December, and on December 26
she was on a plane. On Boxing Day I took my daughter into Gander to catch a
plane to go to Northern Alberta to go to work on a native reservation. I am just
one of the many. So don't think, because we are alright here ourselves, our
families are not being affected as well. It is happening. It is happening in
rural Newfoundland and Labrador today in greater numbers than it has ever
happened before.
CHAIR: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
CHAIR: Does the hon. member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Chairman, I won't abuse leave. I will just take a
moment to clue up.
This is what is happening to our young people. I said it here before. One
time when you would go to a funeral or when you would go to a wedding, it was a
prime place where you would get a touch of reality as to what is happening. One
time when you would go to those functions you would get air messages being read
out, and the messages would come from the work centres of Newfoundland and
Labrador. It would be Buchans and Millertown, St. John's and Corner Brook. Now
you go, Mr. Chairman, and the messages are coming from Korea, they are coming
from Japan, they are coming from Fort McMurray, they are coming from British
Columbia, all over the world. That is what we are being faced with here.
It is nothing new, as I said before, for Newfoundlanders to have to leave
this Province in order to get a job. I have done it myself. It was almost like
part of growing up. If you were a Newfoundlander, you had to go to Toronto or
you were not mature. I would venture to say that there is probably not one
person in this Legislature today who has not made the pilgrimage to Toronto to
look for work.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, I say to the minister, he probably has. I am sure
that he has.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. FITZGERALD: You haven't? You were fortunate, I say. I spent nine
years there. I spent nine years, and every day I was there I wanted to come
home. It is not where I wanted to be, and I don't think I am much different than
anyone else. But in those days, for the most part, people went because they
wanted to go. They went with the intentions of coming home. It was a situation
where you went in order to get a few dollars together to go and pursue a higher
education, or else you wanted to come back and build a house, or else you just
wanted the adventure of going away.
That has been going on in this Province for years. First it was Boston and
then it was Toronto. Now it is Alberta, British Columbia and on, but the reasons
for going now have changed. The reason for going now is that the younger people,
the educated people, the people who normally would be able to stay here in this
Province and access a job, provide an opportunity, now are going because they do
not have a choice. They don't have a choice to same home or go away. They have
to go now, and I fear many of them are not coming back. I fear that many of our
young people now, once they go, are not coming back; because they are leaving
knowing there is no opportunity here in this Province.
Mr. Chairman, I don't think anybody in this Province today expects government
to be magicians, to work magic and create economic wealth, to employ everybody
overnight, but they do expect government to go out and listen and consult and
respond to a need.
If you have a problem in health care, go out and talk to the front-line
workers. If you have a problem in education, go out and talk to the educators.
If you have a problem with industry, mines, and technology, go out and talk to
the players. Don't go up in your own office here, don't go up in your ivory
tower and sit and make decisions and say: Here is the way it is and you must
live by it because we say it is right. Because it is not right.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. FITZGERALD: Sure you agree. You have a bit of common sense, I say to
the minister.
It was only yesterday I had a call from my district, from one of the
employees down there who works with the health care facility, and they did away
with a job in the maintenance department. The gentleman called me and said:
Look, the savings here, from what we are told, is $20,000. We can tell
government how to save $20,000 and still maintain that job.
But nobody asked him. Nobody came and said: Look, this is what we have to
save. This is the shortfall this year, and we want you to work with us and help
us keep our costs down, to help us live within our budget, so let's work
together at that. Nobody explained to them that this job - and the reason for
saving the money is going to be as beneficial to him as it is to the person who
is going there to try to balance the books.
That doesn't be done. Even though this fellow said he could show the
government where to save $20,000, he was not asked. Nobody said: Well, come
forward and let's talk. We invite you in to share your opinion, to share your
concerns and show us how we can save this money. It is not done.
We say we are out today actively trying to seek industry to move into rural
Newfoundland and Labrador. We are saying that we would like to promote tourism,
but still we never go the extra step in trying to bring our tourists here and
make them leave with a good impression. We do not go the extra step in saying
that in order to have a tourist industry we must have good roads.
We are saying we want to close schools; part of the school reform is closing
schools. We are going to bus people from point A to point B. If you are going to
close schools, and if you are going to be busing people, and if you believe in
school reform, and if you believe in challenging the students, and if you
believe in having them being able to compete with the best in urban areas and in
other provinces, it goes much, much farther than the church involvement, I say
to people opposite. It goes much, much further than the curriculum offered, I
say to members opposite.
Mr. Chairman, we have to look at the overall picture. We have to make sure,
Mr. Chairman, if we are going to bring about school reform, that we offer our
schools an equal opportunity as they do in urban areas and as they do in other
provinces in this country.
Mr. Chairman, with those few words, I will sit down and refer debate to
another member here, I guess, on this side of the House.
CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again today, I rise in my place to say a few words with respect to this
Interim Supply bill, Bill 2 as it is referred to, Mr. Chairman.
The government is asking this House of Assembly basically to have confidence
in this Administration to allow them to spend $1,010,089,200 in the next few
months, without any restrictions, I would imagine - I suppose I could say that,
Mr. Chairman; over a billion dollars in the next few months, when only yesterday
in the House of Assembly, the Auditor General's report came down and she had a
lot of concerns with respect to the running of this Administration; the spending
of the taxpayers' dollars in the past year.
As a matter of fact, she went back a couple of years with respect to certain
issues and the amounts of money that are being spent and certain deals that were
made with this Administration to privatize certain corporations that had
normally been run by the government, and made money and presented money to the
coffers of this Administration, to the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.
We had them privatized, and this Administration really does not know what is
happening or what is going on in the Province today.
We had the Leader of the Opposition stand in his place today and ask
questions with respect to certain issues; we had the Member for Ferryland asking
questions with respect to the Western Memorial Health Care Corporation but the
answers were not forthcoming; very general, skating responses, Mr. Chairman, to
the questions and yet, this Administration want us, on this side of the House to
say `yes' to the spending of over a billion dollars, over 30 per cent of the
upcoming Budget, I would say. The Administration want us to say `yes' to that. I
do not know if I would be able to say `yes' to it, Mr. Chairman. There is only
one way that I could be persuaded, I suppose, and that is if there is a shotgun
being put to my head again as it was before Christmas in the sitting of the
House of Assembly when certain bills had to be passed through this House of
Assembly before Christmas.
We had again, all-night sittings, sitting late in the evenings, thirty-six
hours one sitting; we kept going and going and going on this side of the House
and now, we have a situation where, in a few days, this Administration want us,
the House of Assembly, to pass an Interim Supply bill to spend over a billion
bucks - big dollars, Mr. Chairman, and I do not know if I would be able to do
it.
If this House of Assembly had been opened two weeks ago, three weeks ago, a
month ago -
AN HON. MEMBER: People still would be (inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Well, I cannot comment on people not sitting in their
chairs. I cannot mention that certain individuals are not here; certain
ministers and certain first ministers are not sitting in their chairs. I cannot
say that, Mr. Chairman, so I will not say it - certain premier people, first
minister people. But these people want us, the workers, on this side of the
House, Mr. Chairman, to approve this Interim Supply bill, and as I said, I have
some problems with it.
As I was mentioning, again we are put in a situation where, within a few
days, this Interim Supply bill has to be approved by this House of Assembly or
certain people will suffer; and who will suffer, Mr. Chairman? The civil
servants, the people working for the Crown corporations, people working for the
health care corporations if this Interim Supply bill is not approved. If we had
a Budget presented two or three weeks ago, we could give proper scrutiny, proper
debate to the Budget and maybe pass it in due course, as Budgets normally are
passed because, of course, the government has the ultimate power - we can only
go so long anyway.
But the later the opening of the House of Assembly, towards the end of March,
gives the Opposition less time to scrutinize the facts and figures. The
Administration are so often good at manipulating figures, hiding numbers or
whatever the case may be, Mr. Chairman, but we do have to look at what we have
before us today, $1 billion to be approved.
A few concerns that I have, Mr. Chairman, with the Auditor General's report -
there were many, many points made - a lot of concerns of the Auditor General. I
am sure that once the Public Accounts Committee meet they will look at the
Auditor General's report and see if there are any areas within the report that
the PAC should have a public hearing on, have some debate on or to investigate
or ask the Auditor General to go even further in certain areas that can be done
by the Auditor General.
One area, for example, the Auditor General has been trying for a number of
years now to be able to review MUN - Memorial University of Newfoundland, to get
in there. I think any institution that spends the taxpayers' dollars, and
certainly up in the millions and millions of dollars, they should be held
accountable to this House of Assembly. I know the previous Premier had some
problems with that. I am not sure if the present Premier has a concern that the
Auditor General should not be permitted to go into Memorial University, but I am
sure, in due course, members on this side of the House will be forthcoming with
our concerns with respect to MUN not being audited by the Auditor General. If it
takes a private member's resolution, maybe someone on this side of the House
may, in due course, decide to present a private member's resolution and see
where all members in this House of Assembly, representing all people in this
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador - see where they stand. The people who
represent the various government members' districts, Mr. Chairman, maybe we
should be having a private members' resolution put forward just to see where
they stand and where the Premier stands. Maybe I will bring that forward in due
course, as an individual private member, Mr. Chairman.
Now, this Administration want to spend various amounts of monies in various
departments to get them over the hump until the Budget is approved. One of the
departments that I am interested in, of course, Mr. Chairman, is the Department
of Works, Services and Transportation. I am the critic for that department and
Government Services and Lands, by the way, Mr. Chairman. I have a personal
interest this year in this Budget, as we all do, I suppose, depending on what we
are trying to get for our districts. I have had numerous conversations now with
the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, with the deputy minister and
with other representatives of the Department of Works, Services and
Transportation.
I seem to have a sore throat. I must be catching the flu, Mr. Chairman, from
some of the members who have it on this side of the House.
The Department of Works, Services and Transportation, Mr. Chairman, as I was
referring to, have a plan now to basically download a lot of the connector roads
between municipalities in the Province to the municipalities. It seems to have
been accelerated over the past couple of years. I have had some discussions with
municipalities in my district to see if they would be interested in getting some
work done in taking over the responsibility for the roads, only because I know
that this Administration, in due course, is planning on forcing the
municipalities to take them over anyway. So I saw the opportunity to have some
money spent in the district, monies that would be, I expect, in due course,
fought over by various municipalities across the Province, especially when it
comes to light that the department is planning on forcing the municipalities to
take it over anyway.
By the way, Mr. Chairman, I made a prediction a few years ago that Works,
Services and Transportation would try to download these roads to the
municipalities without having them upgraded to a class A standard before the
towns take the responsibility for them. Only last year there were two towns in
my district approached by Works, Services and Transportation to take over these
roads without the work being done. Of course, I spoke to the municipalities, I
spoke to the Department of Works, Services and Transportation, and I put on as
much pressure as I could, as the MHA for the area, to talk to the towns, saying
they should refuse to take over the roads without the work being done. I spoke
to the Department of Works, Services and Transportation and told them the towns
would refuse to take over the roads.
Then the other tactic they tried, Mr. Chairman, was to get the towns to take
over the roads without the work being done, if they gave them a lump sum of
money. I was opposed to that. Because if the towns took over the roads and were
given a lump sum of money, the towns would then be automatically responsible to
have the engineering work done, the inspection done, putting out the tenders and
what have you. I felt that the Department of Works, Services and Transportation
should be responsible for all that before the towns agreed to take them over.
The towns did work out a deal with the Department of Works, Services and
Transportation, and hopefully we will see some money being spent this year in
the district.
CHAIR: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: Hopefully, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIR: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. J. BYRNE: By leave, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIR: Does the hon. member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave!
CHAIR: By leave.
MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Chairman, I am hoping to see some work done in the
district on the roads. By the way, over the past twenty-five years I am sure
there has been very little work done. There was some work done on the Marine
Drive down in Outer Cove when the Pope came in 1979 or 1980, and there was a bit
of work done, I think, on the WindGap in Flatrock, but not nearly what needs to
be done. the maintenance on these roads has not been up to par, in my belief,
and from what I have seen. Go to some districts in this Province and make the
comparisons and you will understand where I am coming from.
As a matter of fact, there were bus tours down on the scenic Marine Drive
that used to go down through Logy Bay and Outer Cove and over through Torbay and
Flatrock, and the bus tours actually gave up going down there because the roads
were so bad. They gave up going down there because of the hazard, dangerous,
afraid they would go off the road, hit a bump, whatever the case may be, guard
rails gone, shoulders washed away, lumps, humps, bumps all over the place. It is
shocking, the state of the roads in my district.
I can speak about my district - and the Member for Bonavista South was up
today and presented a petition on behalf of constituents in a community in his
district, Lethbridge, trying to get some work done there. It is sad to say that
to get some road work done you have to come to the House of Assembly - a right
these days, and a necessity, a safety issue. Now, of course, there are
communities in this Province that still have gravel roads.
People will ask, where are you going to get the money to do all these roads?
MR. SHELLEY: The Premier's air miles.
MR. J. BYRNE: There are lots of ways to get the money to do these roads
and highways in this Province.
MR. SHELLEY: Air miles.
MR. J. BYRNE: Air Miles? Well, if you had the cash for the air miles
there would be no problem, I would say.
Where will we get the money? I said it before in the House of Assembly, and I
can say it again, and I am sure I will say it in the future. Take, for example,
the Trans City deal - $40 million over the life of that contract. We brought it
up in the House of Assembly and we were laughed at and ridiculed, we were wrong:
No way, that is not right. But it went to the Supreme Court, and what did the
Supreme Court say? Mr. Opposition, you are right, you were right all along, you
are right again.
That is $40 million; the privatization of Hydro, they spent $10 million that
- that is $50 million. A lot of roads can be done. How much a kilometre for a
road these days, about $500,000? That is about 100 miles done now. That is $50
million. What is the Murray Premises down there, how many is there? Seven
million dollars so far, and it could be another $10 million, go on from there.
That is $67 million that we could have if it had not been wasted or given away.
There are a number of others, but that is enough for now, I would assume,
with respect to coming up with some dollars. Here are some that we could come up
with, the Auditor General's Report. How many millions of dollars could we have
if the finances of this Province were properly administered, I say to the
Minister of Finance? How many more millions could we have, if he could answer
the questions that were put to him today? I am sure there will be a lot more
questions forthcoming to the Minister of Finance, with respect to the Auditor
General's Report.
Once the minister brings down his budget on Thursday, another good news
budget, I suppose, coming forth - that is about it; good news and nothing else,
as usual.
I see I have the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture upset again. It is so
easy to upset the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. I do not understand
what he is doing in the House of Assembly. I honestly do not know.
AN HON. MEMBER: After the going over he got today.
MR. J. BYRNE: After the smack, the going over that the Member for
Bonavista South gave him today, it is a wonder he is still here. No wonder his
blood pressure is up all the time. No wonder he is taking those seal oil
capsules. I thought seal oil would be bad for ulcers.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: No, not bad for ulcers. I thought greasy food would be bad
for ulcers. If anybody in this Province, Mr. Chairman, should have ulcers, it
would be the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture. With what is going on in
this Province today, with the report that came down yesterday from the fisheries
committee, from Mr. Baker and Mr. Matthews, the co-Chair or the deputy Chair,
whatever, and the comment and the recommendations that were made, that minister
should be - should he resign? Maybe he should resign really.
There is a man, Mr. Chairman, who fought tooth and nail, who when he was in
Opposition was the saviour of the Newfoundland fishermen, and yesterday he was
up in this House of Assembly defending foreign overfishing. Defending foreign
overfishing is what he was doing, Mr. Chairman, in this House of Assembly
yesterday, over ordinary Newfoundlanders. He has lost touch with reality. The
Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture has lost touch with reality; up defending
foreign overfishing, foreigners over Newfoundlanders. Shameful! Nothing less
than shameful, Mr. Chairman.
There are so many points, I do not know how long I can go on here today, Mr.
Chairman. I had a few notes here. I want to say a few words with respect to the
Minister of Finance and his counterpart, the Member for Conception Bay East
& Bell Island, supporting the Minister of Finance on his tactics with
respect to negotiation of the contracts for the civil servants of this Province;
getting out in the media and saying: This way or no way. My way or the highway.
The Minister of Finance, who is supposed to have a heart - I compare the
Minister of Finance to the Tin Man in the Wizard of Oz, Mr. Chairman, who does
not have a heart, who is going around looking for a heart. Do you remember that?
Did you ever watch the Wizard of Oz and the Tin Man. He was the guy who did not
have a heart, wasn't he? He was looking for a heart.
AN HON. MEMBER: That is him.
MR. J. BYRNE: That is what the Minister of Finance is like, does not have
a heart. Here he is going around telling civil servants, who have not had an
increase in salary since 1990 -
AN HON. MEMBER: The Tin Man.
MR. J. BYRNE: The Tin Man. They have not had an increase since 1990. Now,
what has gone up since 1990? The income tax has gone up, more deductions from
your cheques. Union dues have gone up, I suppose. I am not sure on that one, but
I would imagine. I know people with the Civil Service, Mr. Chairman, who are
taking home less today than they were eight, nine or ten years ago. Everything
else has gone up, heat and light. For example, your heat bill with the
implementation of the HST, eight or nine dollars on $100. So anybody with a $200
bill next year, sixteen dollars a month, Mr. Chairman; the HST.
The people on fixed income have been hit hard, Mr. Chairman, over the years.
We have seniors now trying to get their Civil Service retirement pensions. They
increased along the same rate as the negotiated increases for the unions. Again
we have the Minister of Finance telling the people: Listen, 7 per cent over
three years; take it or leave it. In actual fact, as they are saying now, it is
7 per cent over twelve years probably, and some people are saying as low as 5
per cent, depending on how you look at it in looking at the dates when you see
it implemented and if it is retroactive and what have you, Mr. Chairman.
So that is bargaining in poor faith, from my perspective. It is bargaining in
poor faith and it is not fair, and it is morally wrong, to do this to the civil
servants of this Province, who have been taking the cuts, who have been promised
year-in and year-out: Jus