PDF Version

April 4, 2022

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. L No. 39

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

SPEAKER (Bennett):

Order, please

In the

public gallery joining us today is the Poker family and friends from Natuashish

and Sheshatshiu.

Welcome

to the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

SPEAKER:

Today we will hear statements

by the hon. Members for the Districts of Humber - Bay of Islands, Mount Pearl -

Southlands, Ferryland, Exploits and Terra Nova.

The hon.

the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, the measure of

any group is how they treat the less vulnerable and the Sunshine Kitty Rescue in

Corner Brook is a true example of true compassion.

This

group of dedicated volunteers, which operates out of the home of Janet Bennett,

rescues feral cats, obtains medical attention and finds homes for the kittens

and adult cats. These cats, which are fighting for survival, would be destined

to die from starvation and disease without this group's loving care.

This

group of volunteers raises funds through yard sales, seeks donations, ticket

draws and currently an Easter ticket sale organized by Janice Wells, a

volunteer. All monies raised go towards veterinarian bills, food and other

essentials needed to care for these animals.

visited Janet's home and her compassion and love for the animals is to be

admired. The group works hand in hand with the local SPCA to track, catch and

give these poor animals a chance to live a healthy life.

I ask

all Members to join me in recognizing these true volunteers, like many other

volunteer groups across this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador who save so

many poor and vulnerable animals and provide them with care and a loving place,

which they will thrive in.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, just recently

myself, my hon. colleague from the District of Mount Pearl North and members of

the Mount Pearl city council had the privilege to attend a celebration to kick

off the 50th anniversary of the Mount Pearl Soccer Association.

This

amazing organization has a deep history in Mount Pearl, which actually took root

in our community in the fall of 1969 when another great community organization,

the Mount Pearl Kinsmen, began running programs after school and on Saturdays

for our community. Subsequent to that, in 1973, with the help of two of our

long-time community volunteers, Mr. Ed Moyst and Mr. Charlie Chaytor, the Mount

Pearl Soccer Association was formed and, as they say, the rest is history.

Over the

years, there have been endless milestones, achievements, championships and, most

importantly, thousands of the community's youth who have been positively

impacted by this amazing organization. Currently, the Mount Pearl Soccer

Association is providing programming for over 1,500 athletes at various levels

within the sport.

I ask

all hon. Members to join me in congratulating the staff, coaches and volunteers

of the Mount Pearl Soccer Association on achieving this significant milestone

and thank them for their ongoing contribution to the community.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Mr. Speaker, I want to

recognize the late Nevaeh Denine and her mom, Holly Denine, who have been

recognized with the Governor General of Canada's Meritorious Service Medal for

civilians. This outstanding award recognizes great Canadians for exceptional

deeds accomplished over a limited period of time that bring honour to our

country.

There is

no doubt that Nevaeh did exactly this during her time on earth. Nevaeh passed

August 6, 2018, at the young age of nine.

Nevaeh's

Angel Foundation started as a

lemonade stand. With the help of Holly, her mom, and others, the project turned

into an annual event and became a foundation, a registered charity and a variety

of family-friendly projects throughout the year to raise money for Newfoundland

and Labrador children living with cancer and their families.

So far, Nevaeh's Angel Foundation has raised a half a million dollars and has

helped many families.

Speaker, I ask all Members in this House to join me in recognizing the late

Nevaeh Denine and her mom, Holly, on their outstanding work and recipient of the

Governor General of Canada's Meritorious Service Medal for civilians.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Exploits.

P. FORSEY:

Thank you, Speaker.

I would

like to congratulate the Town of Peterview and the Peterview Recreation Board on

receiving the Recreation NL Active Communities Award in 2021.

This

award is the recognition of the outstanding contribution in creating an active

and engaged community. In 2021, the town invested a 40,000 square foot green

space for people to use for recreational activities and also renovated its

walking trail through the park.

The

Peterview Recreation Board operates a free Wheels on Fire for mountain bike and

adventure club. Since its inception, this club has grown to over 60 children.

This club has also introduced the aspect of canoeing.

Speaker,

I would like for all Members of the House of Assembly to congratulate the Town

of Peterview on being awarded the Active Community Award.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra

Nova.

L. PARROTT:

Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker,

Janice Davidson was the toughest and most inspirational person I ever had the

privilege to call a friend. She embodied grace, love and hope. It was the power

of her hope that helped inspire an entire movement by sharing her 14-year cancer

journey. She impacted thousands of cancer patients and their families across

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Sometimes in life we are fortunate, as individuals, to be one piece of another's

intricately woven quilt, to be a piece of their fabric and rare are the

individuals who can bring community and friends together to weave such a

beautiful, warming and uncompromising quilt. Not any ordinary piece of fabric,

this one that for many years has warmed and inspired all of her friends, family

and countless other individuals, most of whom didn't even know Janice was the

reason that they had hope.

Hope was

always Janice's gift. It was unconditional. She embraced everyone who had the

privilege of knowing here and many that never met her.

Michael

J. Fox once said: We are the heroes of our own stories. Well, Janice was not

only the hero of her story; she was the hero for many other stories.

Please

join me in honouring the life and journey of Janice Davidson. Not all heroes

wear capes.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture.

D. BRAGG:

Speaker, this is National

Wildlife Week and I would like to take this opportunity to invite residents to

learn about the many benefits provided by our province's wildlife and encourage

everyone to take time and enjoy all that our wonderful outdoors has to offer.

We will

be celebrating all week and will conclude by hosting a National Wildlife Week

Expo to promote awareness of the province's wildlife. This unique event will

take place this Sunday, April 10, at the St. John's Farmers' Market from 10:30

a.m. to 4 p.m. Admission is free and we are inviting everyone to take

part in

the fun.

The Expo

will include representation from local science education organizations, local

artists engaged in wildlife-minded works, as well as other organizations that

support wildlife conservation, biodiversity and the sustainable use of wildlife.

There

will be prize giveaways and a wide array of activities to educate and entertain

the public, including environmental and wildlife-themed booths, activities and

games, hands-on demonstrations and eco-science vendors.

For more

information and interesting facts about National Wildlife Week, check out the

Friends of Salmonier Nature Park Facebook page.

Finally,

I would like to thank staff in the department for their dedicated efforts

planning this event and their ongoing work to manage, highlight and promote the

wildlife resources of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Exploits.

P. FORSEY:

Thank you, Speaker, and I

would like to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

Over the

years people have actively participated in National Wildlife Week to bring

awareness to all those who are involved in wildlife conservation, biodiversity

and sustainable use of our wildlife.

Speaker,

although this week talks about the many benefits that both nature and wildlife

provide to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, there are many in our province who

are still struggling to complete their own moose licence applications. We need

to ensure that the access to the big game licenses is both fair and accessible

for people who come from all walks of life so that everyone in our province has

an equal opportunity to spend time in the great outdoors.

encourage all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to take

part in the various

events that are taking place over the course of this week so that they can learn

more about our natural environment and the benefits that this provides to all of

us.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I, too,

thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. Our wildlife is

something that we must steward and protect for generations to come. If the

province wishes to do its part, it should recognize the devastating impacts of

climate change and extreme weather on biodiversity in this province. Inaction on

climate change destroys habitats and moves species closer to the brink of

collapse.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

Oral

Questions.

Oral Questions

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

Last

week, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador were informed that an additional

200,000 health care records were taken by malicious actors. The provincial

government sat on this information for over a month.

I ask

the Premier: Does withholding this information from the public meet

duty-to-disclosure standards as set out in the Cameron inquiry?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the

hon. Member knows we did a broad disclosure as soon as we knew about it back in

the fall, telling people that there was potential that their records could have

been accessed. We did a broad and full disclosure as soon as it became known to

us what the implications were. Over that time, Eastern Health learned that there

were other issues that arose and they did a targeted disclosure, and will

continue to disclose as information is available, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

But I

need to remind the Premier that for over a month people's personal information

was out there, being used, potentially, by adverse people who should not have

had access to that. Yet, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador did not know

about what was happening with that information.

This

inquiry defined an adverse health event as – and I quote: “An event which

results in unintended harm to the patient, and is related to the care and/or

service provided to the patient ….”

I ask

the Premier: How are you ensuring the duty-to-disclose adverse events are being

met in response to this cyberattack?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker

Eastern

Health has been doing a good job, I think, in informing the public and informing

patients. We have done a full disclosure, as I said, that patients' information

could have been accessed.

As the

information becomes more available and there's a deeper dive, there will be

further disclosures along the way, targeted to the people who have been

specifically impacted.

So broad

disclosure at first; targeted disclosure along the way. We're not trying to hide

anything here, Mr. Speaker, and as we've done in the past to protect the credit

ratings, we'll be there in the future for years to come.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

We could

have used the example or followed the example of Ireland where they were open

and transparent with people from the start of this whole process.

When

news broke that the federal Liberal Cabinet was split over support for Bay du

Nord, it was suggested the province could negotiate a give-and-take agreement

whereby Bay du Nord would be exchanged for other assets in the oil and gas

industry. In fact, the federal minister also said that discussions were under

way with the Premier.

I ask

the Premier to be open with the people of this province: What is being

negotiated with the federal government?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Mr. Speaker, what is being

said to the federal government is the strength and merit of Bay du Nord Project.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER A. FUREY:

I fought hard to make sure

that message gets through that it stands not just on its economic merits, it

stands on its environmental merits and it stands now, more than ever before, on

its geopolitical merits, Mr. Speaker. That is the message that I have delivered

strongly, firmly to my federal counterparts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We need

to be reassured that all are fighting to ensure the Bay du Nord Project goes

ahead, and that our oil and gas industry is a fluent industry for the people of

this province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL:

Speaker, our Premier often

likes to boast about his strong relationship with Ottawa, yet his government

have no say over the Bay du Nord Project, nor our fishery. Just last week, we

learned the federal Fisheries minister announced a moratorium on the mackerel

fishery in our province. Both the provincial Fisheries Minister and the Premier

claims that they knew nothing about it, just like Bay du Nord.

I ask

the Premier: Who is in charge of our future, Prime Minister Trudeau or the

Premier and the Cabinet of Newfoundland and Labrador?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I've

said, I've fought hard and will continue to fight hard on behalf of the people

of Newfoundland and Labrador, including people in the fishery, including people

in the offshore oil industry, Mr. Speaker, and everyone else in Newfoundland and

Labrador. I've made my position very firmly known to everybody in Ottawa where

we stand on Bay du Nord and the future of our offshore. It's low carbon

emitting. It is the product that the world needs right now during this time of

transition.

As the

Member opposite should fully know, we don't control the science at DFO. That is

exclusively a federal jurisdiction, Mr. Speaker, and frankly would be wrong for

us to meddle in the science of DFO decision-making. We have seen what happens

before when you meddle and it doesn't go well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

Let's

hope the people in Ottawa listen to the people in Newfoundland and Labrador who

know better and know what's meant to the future of this province here, Mr.

Speaker.

Speaker,

Rothschild has lined their pockets with $5 million of taxpayers' money, yet the

Minister of Finance is refusing to release details of the report to the people

of the province.

I ask

the Premier: Will you commit that the sale of any public assets considered in

this review would be debated here in the people's House, in the House of

Assembly by all Members of the House?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

course Rothschild has just delivered the report; we're doing analysis of it now,

Mr. Speaker. This is a new kind of decision-making that we need. We need to

understand what assets are worth, where they're positioned in the portfolio, for

the future of our province, just as you would manage your own personal

portfolio. So now we need to understand what the value is; we need to make sure

that they're well positioned into the future for a sustainable future for

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Speaker, the Premier likes to

comment that he's an agent of change. I would suggest that his government and

him are simply secret agents.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

T. WAKEHAM:

They do not want to release

the findings of the Rothschild report.

The

Minister of Finance has received the Rothschild report; it cost the taxpayers of

this province over $5 million.

Will the

Minister of Finance do the right thing and release the Rothschild report to the

people of the province who actually own the report?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you very much, Speaker,

and I thank the Member opposite for the question.

This is

the first time in Newfoundland and Labrador's history that a thorough review of

our assets have been undertaken. It's been undertaken by this government to make

sure that we're managing the assets of this province, of the people of this

province very, very well.

We've

just received the report from Rothschild. Mr. Speaker, we're going to be very

sensible and very responsible. We don't want to have unintended consequences. We

want to make sure that the commercial and sensitive information does not impact

– I'm going to say – or diminish the potential value of any of those assets.

So we're

going to be responsible and we're going to be sensible about what we do with the

Rothschild report and we're going to do a thorough analysis, which is now under

way.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Speaker, I remind the

minister, where there is no transparency, there is no accountability.

I ask

the minister: Maybe she can tell us how many pages are actually in the

Rothschild report or what the colour of the front cover is. But people of the

province absolutely need to know what is in the report and it needs to be

released.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Speaker, that was a pretty

flippant question. I will say to the people of the province that they would want

us to be sensible and responsible, unlike some of the decisions of the former

Progressive Conservative government. I will say to the people of the province,

this is a very important report in that it's the first time in the province's

history that we're doing a thorough review of the assets.

We want

to maximize those assets; we want to make sure that we don't have any

diminishment of the possibility of those assets. We want to make sure that we

are responsible with that report and will continue to be responsible, unlike

Members opposite.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Speaker, it's an

embarrassment. The minister stands up and says they want to be accountable to

the people of the province, yet, at the same time, they refuse to release this

report to the people of the province.

Where is

the accountability? Where is the transparency? These are public assets. If you

can't trust the people with the public assets, how do you expect the people to

trust you?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

I will say to the Member

opposite that we don't want to diminish or provide information that would be

commercially sensitive to any outside parties. We don't want to do that. We want

to make sure we're valuing those assets for the potential of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Speaker,

we're going to continue to be responsible. We're going to continue to be

sensible. We're going to continue to be very smart on this side of the House.

We're going to review that report. We're going to determine if there's anything

that we need to do to advance anything in that report and then I'm sure the

people of the province will hold us to account.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

So, potentially, you could

have paid somebody $5 million to keep it here and pay someone here.

Last

November when this House was debating off-road vehicle legislation, the minister

said not once, not twice, but three times that we are seriously considering

exceptions for helmets on Side By Sides. But last week in the media, the

minister said – quote – I think it is something people just need to get used to.

Minister, can you please clarify – will people have to wear helmets in

factory-sealed Side By Sides with seat belts or harnesses and roll bars?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you Speaker.

I just

want to thank the Member for the question and thank members of the public that

I've heard from lately. We are still tweaking the regulations but, until that,

we wanted to give the public ample time to make sure that they had their

helmets. So helmets will be mandatory on all off-road vehicles as of May 19 of

this year. The only exemption will be for hunting and trapping activities if

your speed is under 20 kilometres an hour.

Also,

we're very pleased with the safety improvements that we've made. We're trying to

save lives, Mr. Speaker. So we want to give everyone enough time to make sure

that they have their helmets.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

I agree; it is about safety.

And we listened to the people over here on this side and that's what the people

wanted that have Side By Sides. They want to have no helmets on when they've got

the harness. It's not just a Side By Side that's open; it's a Side By Side for

safety.

I ask

the minister: When she stated in November that such helmets would not be

required on factory-sealed Side By Sides, was that misinforming or misleading?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you Speaker.

I'd just

like to clarify that we never ever committed to doing that. We committed to

reviewing it and we committed to seriously considering enclosed Side By Sides

because we did hear from many members of the public about that specifically.

Speaker, we did seriously consider it. We've reviewed a range of research. We

spoke with our safety partners.

I'd

encourage all people who own an enclosed Side By Side to look at the manual. All

the manuals of all the major manufacturers indicate that you should wear helmets

in your enclosed Side By Sides. There's a flashing light on many of them that

says wear a helmet, wear a helmet. They're designed to be driven with helmets

and you can buy helmets specifically to be worn in enclosed Side By Sides.

We also

did a range of research I'd be happy to chat about further.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Minister, back in November,

you led the people to believe otherwise, and we debated that. So where is that

going – what happened to that all of a sudden? We had agreed in this House when

we made this legislation that it would be dealt with in regulations and we

haven't heard from anybody.

So can

you please answer the question?

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Speaker.

safety is most important for us in coming up with the ATV regulations and the

legislation for off-road vehicles, Speaker. When you look at a Side By Side

versus other – a lot of people raise, what about a convertible, what about a

Jeep, you can go on a highway. These off-road vehicles are very different from

roadworthy vehicles, Speaker. Transport Canada has a range of very high

standards for roadworthy vehicles that are not in place for Side By Sides.

Convertible have hidden roll bars. I understand BMWs have special things that

kind of pop up as soon as you're going to roll over.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order!

S. STOODLEY:

Roadworthy vehicles have very

sophisticated safety systems, Speaker, that off-road vehicles don't have, and I

can go on and on about why we decided to ensure the safety of the people of the

province and make helmets mandatory in all Side By Sides.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

The minister is bringing

legislation into this House to bring NL911 into the Department of Justice and

Public Safety.

Why is

the minister proceeding full-steam ahead with this, ignoring the unanimous

opposition from the current NL911 board?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Yes,

that's correct; we are bringing NL911 into the government from an arm's-length

separate corporation as it exists right now. The reason we're doing that is we

want to ensure that the public safety in this province that comes through the

department is as fulsome as it can be. There's no need to have one facet of this

entity outside of government.

We have

things like the province-wide radio system for safety throughout the province.

We have things like the Provincial Emergency Operations Centre. We're

implementing recommendations from the ground search and rescue report, from the

inquiry that came out of that. We want to make sure that the Emergency Services

branch within the department is fulsome, and to leave a gap in that could be a

risk. As the Member opposite should know, every second matters in an emergency

and I want to make sure that we have every second available to us. And that's

why we're bringing 911 into the department.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Mr. Speaker, fulsome

safety has been addressed by the current existing system, so that does not

respond to the question.

NL911

has about $20 million saved up for the implementation of Next Generation 911.

Instead of keeping this money in the dedicated separate fund, as it is now, the

money will be added to general revenue where it can be used for any purposes.

I ask

the minister for a commitment that this money will be used for future service

enhancements, like Next Generation 911.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you, Speaker.

There is

money in the fund right now that's outside of government, which has been sitting

there for quite some time and will sit there for at least another three years,

because we cannot proceed – no one can proceed, whether it's a board outside of

government or a group within government, can proceed with Next Generation 911

until CRTC makes that decision, and my understanding is that decision will not

be made for at least three years, until 2025. To have those funds sit outside of

government for another three years seems like a bit of waste to me.

We will

bring that money into consolidated revenue when 911 is brought in, and we have

committed to Next Generation 911. I'd also like everyone in the House to know

that we are not the first to do this in this country. Eight other jurisdictions

in this country have 911 within their department of justice and public safety.

So rather than be different and do things on the outside, where we might create

risk to the public safety, we'd rather do things right like the rest of the

country and make sure the public is safe.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Sometimes it's good to be different. You have to look at the unique settings in

our province. Sometimes it's good to be different. We don't want to be

followers; we want to be leaders.

Speaker,

other provinces have taken steps to attract and retain front-line health care

workers. For example, Quebec will train 1,000 foreign nurses and integrate them

into their health care system. A win-win for both the health care system and

attracting immigrants.

I ask

the minister: Will a similar program be implemented here in Newfoundland and

Labrador?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker, for the

opportunity to talk about some of our recruitment and retention initiatives.

advance of what we saw as a coming crunch, we increased the number of LPN seats

in the province by 90 per cent. We increased the number of PCA seats in the

province by 70 per cent. We have had a graduating class of LPNs in December and

two graduating classes of PCAs to help deal with our staffing shortages within

the health care system.

We have

repatriated the advanced care paramedic course from Qatar; there are 24 seats

for homegrown graduates. We have increased the number of seats on the PCP

program through CNA by 12 seats. We had added rural satellites to the Bachelor

of Nursing program across the province and they will be ready for this coming

September to increase the number of nurse graduates.

I have

an extensive list, Speaker, but I see you're winding me down.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

I'm glad someone could wind

him down.

Speaker,

recently the Government of Nova Scotia announced a program. I thought it was

pretty innovative. It guarantees every nursing school graduate a job.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

P. DINN:

This is an example, but it is

innovative. I mean, we're different; we can be innovative, too.

So here

is the question, I ask the minister: Will a similar program, not exact, but will

a similar program be implemented in our province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

continue, we had a $30-million program aimed at bolstering health care

recruitment and retention. We are in the final stages, I hope, of hiring an

assistant deputy minister who will head a recruitment secretariat. Once that

individual is in place, we will have a formal office within the department,

which will help coordinate regional health authority activities.

In the

meantime, the regional health authorities have their own plans. I am aware of

very robust activities, for example, in Central Health who hired an entire class

of LPNs – sight unseen – on the spot. All 30 of them in December for their

long-term care facilities, which I am pleased to say the Premier and I cut the

ribbon on last week; 60 more beds for long-term care patients in Central.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

We all

know a bed is just a bed unless you have someone next to that bed to care for

the person in it. It is great to open 100 beds or 500 beds. You just have to

listen to our nurses who will tell you how understaffed we are. So a bed is just

a bed.

Speaker,

the Government of Alberta has implemented their RESIDE Program providing $2

million to 20 new rural family physicians in each of the next three years.

I ask

the minister: Will a similar program be implemented in our province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Part of

our $30-million program for recruitment and retention involved every single new

primary care physician in this province getting a $100,000 non-repayable loan in

the event they stay for five years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

J. HAGGIE:

Every new primary care

physician who sets up a practice in a collaborative team environment will be

guaranteed their income for the first two years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

J. HAGGIE:

In addition to that, we have

a bursary program for health care providers, not just physicians and not just

medical students and residents, which has had an extremely good success rate. In

actual fact, the physician bursary program has not had a single dropout in the

last 10 years; all of them have completed their returns in service.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The minister's time has

expired.

The hon.

the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If you

listen to – of course, you have to be at the meeting and stay – your recent

graduates, they'll tell you that the bursary program here is not sufficient

enough, but you have to be at the meeting to hear that.

In June

2020, the province signed a six-year deal with the US-based Change Healthcare.

We are now almost a third of the way through this contract, which includes a

$5-million penalty for the province if it does not reach the adoption rate of 95

per cent. Because we've got money to throw away.

I ask

the minister: What is the status of this agreement, its implementation and the

potential $5-million penalty?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

I think

it's worth, for the record, correcting the

preamble from the Member opposite's

question. He is referring to a meeting of new residents in primary care, which I

was invited to attend, bring greetings and there was no expectation of anything

beyond that. I actually asked if they wanted me to attend. They simply said it

would be great, just bring greetings and that's fine. So that is exactly what I

did.

The

contract that the Member opposite refers to is one that is performance based and

it is under the understanding that over the course of the contract there will be

significant savings realized over the course of the 10-year program. This is not

yet fully implemented and, therefore, nothing has been triggered one way or

another as yet, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra

Nova.

L. PARROTT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, under this Liberal government a plan was released to double oil

production called Advance 2030 . Yet,

this Premier has taken

part in the cancelled seismic program, the delay for our

offshore bids and is allowing the federal government to hold Bay du Nord

hostage.

Can he

explain why the Liberals have thrown out their very own plan for our oil and gas

development?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

appreciate the question and an opportunity to discuss our oil and gas sector. In

fact, when we talk about any of our resources it's a great opportunity to

discuss it.

I guess

I would begin by saying that we certainly haven't thrown out any plan here. The

reality is that in the last couple of years, certainly when I came into the

role, we faced perhaps one of the most difficult times in the industry worldwide

that we had ever seen. We had prices that had collapsed; we had projects that

were falling apart.

So what

I can say is since that time and since we've had the new government here, I will

say that we've actually gone out and leveraged $320 million to spend on the

offshore.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

A. PARSONS:

We spent $35 million to talk

about the supply and service side. In fact, the Premier and I were down to visit

one of the operations today. We've done the Offshore Exploration Initiative and

we worked together to make sure Terra Nova happened. So we're going to continue

to do those things, including projects like Bay du Nord.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra

Nova.

L. PARROTT:

Perhaps they should visit

Guyana and see how quickly they're advancing.

Advance 2030

reads: “To sustain oil and gas industry growth and development through 2030,

increased exploration drilling is an immediate priority.”

Considering that this Premier has allowed the cancellation of our seismic

program and the deferral of our offshore land sale, is exploration still a

priority?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

I just want to go back to the

preamble there about Guyana; I will point out two things. It's difficult to

consider a province in a federation the same as Norway or Guyana, but I will say

that we're very proud of the work that our jurisdiction, our province has done

in Guyana. We continue to lead the way there and to help them.

What I

will say is we have certainly not tossed out offshore exploration. In fact, we

just renewed the second round of that to work with companies. It was just last

year we were talking about all the negative things that were happening; there

were rigs being towed away.

Well,

Mr. Speaker, what I'm happy to point out is that right now there are rigs being

towed here and there is more to come.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

The hon.

the Member for Terra Nova.

L. PARROTT:

One rig, West Hercules, two

wells; first time in the history of this province that we haven't had rigs in

the water since 1979.

Right

now, our offshore oil and gas industry is being used as a political bargaining

chip by a federal alliance, your cousins. As we speak, Ottawa, not Newfoundland

and Labrador, is deciding the future of our offshore oil and gas industry.

I ask

the Premier: Are you willing to preside over the dismantling of our offshore oil

and gas and the displacement of the families in this province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There's

just a tad bit of hyperbole there in that question when you talk about the

dismantling of the offshore oil sector here. The reality is that's simply not

the case. The reality is that a lot of things have changed over a period of

time. There's something they didn't deal with a whole lot in 1979, that was

climate change. That's something that we deal with here.

What I

will point out – and I've said in numerous interviews over the last number of

weeks and months – is that we are at the forefront here in terms of renewable

and non-renewable resources in this province. We have the luxury of both. We

continue to invest in both, we continue to work with operations in both and we

will continue to lead the way. I'm absolutely excited to look towards what is

bound to come for this province as it relates to our resource industry.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker,

the MHA for Torngat Mountains reached out to the Minister of Health on behalf of

Simeon Poker. For almost two years, Mr. Poker has been waiting for the surgery

to get his kidney from his donor brother. Simeon's family and supporters were on

the steps today and are here in the gallery in solidarity with him.

Will the

Minister of Health intervene and address the barriers that have seen him wait

almost two years for the operation and restore the lost faith of the Poker

family and the Innu people in the province's health care system?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

certainly wish the Poker family and the individual concerned well in their

journey to recovery. What I can say to the Member opposite and have said,

through copied emails, to the Member for Torngat Mountains is that decisions

about clinical treatment, who administers it, what that kind of treatment is and

where it is delivered are solely – solely – the decisions of doctors, clinicians

in this province. They are not the decisions of politicians or civil servants.

What I

can also say, as I have checked with Eastern Health, the appropriate members of

Eastern Health leadership are in communication directly with the family on these

matters as well as the clinicians concerned.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would

argue that from the Poker family's point of view such is not the case. A kidney

has been found; it's been approved. Two years waiting for this – unacceptable,

and I think that something is going to have to be done to make sure that Simeon

gets the kidney that he already has, that he needs.

Speaker,

the federal climate action plan falls short on climate action but outlines

opportunities for workers and the economy. It speaks of job creation and

investment in infrastructure.

I ask

the Premier: When will this province start seeing the green stimulus from

Ottawa's plan?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too,

was one of many people in this province and elsewhere that were interested to

see what the federal government had put out in terms of emissions reduction, and

I was happy to see them put out significant investment in that plan as well.

Whether we're talking about zero-emission vehicles, whether we're talking about

retraining, transition, we're happy to be a part of that.

What I

will say is that we just released our own Renewable Energy Plan that we're

seeing a significant amount of work on, and I anticipate more positive

announcements along those lines to come in the number of months. I will say that

we're going to continue to do what we can as it relates to our

emissions-reduction work as it relates to the oil and gas sector. We see a

future in this province for workers in both sectors and, in fact, I'd like to

see us have the biggest issue being getting enough people for the workforce

demands that we will have.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

The cost

of living only continues to increase in this province. Government boasted about

increasing the province's food security and reduce the dependence on foods being

shipped into the province.

While

this is admirable, people have only seen prices in grocery stores going up. So

what is this government going to do to address the cost of living for people of

this province in this upcoming budget?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Indeed

the people of the province are experiencing cost-of-living challenges. In fact,

I'd say everyone in the world is finding that right now because of what's

happening with post-COVID and with what's happening in the Ukraine – very, very,

very difficult times.

That is

why, a number of weeks ago, we did announce an increase in the Income Supplement

– a special stipend going to those on income support: $200 for single people and

$400 for families. It's already been mailed to them, as well as an increase in

the Seniors' Benefit.

Speaker,

I will say that it is challenging times; we recognize that. We'll look to the

budget on Thursday to see if there's anything else that we can possibly do for

the people of the province.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I ask:

Will the Minister of Education confirm that the 30 additional teacher units that

he said were added as a result of Afghan students have been assigned to schools

where Afghan and other children of refugee families attend?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What I

can confirm for the Member is that we have seen an increase in student enrolment

this year, Mr. Speaker – the first time in 50 years – and that is absolutely

something to be celebrated.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

T. OSBORNE:

Based on the increased

enrolment, we have added additional resources at the request of the NLESD and

the NLESD has determined where those resources are needed.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period

has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling

of Documents.

Notices

of Motion.

Notices of Motion

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you Speaker.

Speaker,

I give notice that I will on tomorrow introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend

The Judicature Act, Bill 53.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

give notice that I will on tomorrow move, in accordance with Standing Order

11(1), that this House do not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 5, 2022.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Speaker,

give notice that I will ask leave to move the following resolution – resolution

respecting the reappointment of members of the Independent Appointments

Commission.

BE IT RESOLVED by the House of Assembly as follows:

WHEREAS subsection 6(3) of the

Independent Appointments Commission Act provides that five members

are to be appointed to an Independent Appointments Commission by the

Lieutenant-Governor in Council on a resolution of the House of Assembly; and

WHEREAS subsection 6(4) of the act provides that the

Lieutenant-Governor in Council designate one of the members of the commission to

be chairperson; and

WHEREAS subsection 7(1) of the act states that a

commissioner may be reappointed for one

additional three-year term to

be served consecutively; and

WHEREAS

the terms of the following members have expired: Earl Ludlow, chairperson; Cathy

Duke.

NOW

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the following persons be reappointed members of

the Independent Appointments Commission for a term of three years: Earl Ludlow,

chairperson; and Cathy Duke.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Speaker, I move that the

Standing Orders Committee comprise the following Members: Member for Carbonear -

Trinity - Bay de Verde; Member for Mount Scio; Member for Windsor Lake; Member

for Harbour Main; Member for –

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

That is

for the Orders of the Day.

L. DEMPSTER:

Sorry, my apologies. Day one,

Speaker.

SPEAKER:

That's okay. You're doing a

great job.

L. DEMPSTER:

Thank you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Speaker, as the MHA for

Stephenville - Port au Port, I would like to move the following private Member's

resolution to be debated on Wednesday, April 6:

WHEREAS

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are urging the government to provide some

relief from escalating high prices which are leaving many people in dire

straits; and

WHEREAS

government decisions such as lowering certain tax rates or offering home heating

rebates would provide relief that many people urgently need; and

WHEREAS

the Health Accord says the social determinants of health such as income for

food, medicine and housing have an even greater impact on health outcomes than

the health system;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House urge the government to consider

providing some much needed relief from escalating high prices in the 2022

budget.

It is

seconded by the Member for Harbour Main.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Mr. Speaker, the private

Member's resolution introduced by the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port

will be debated in this hon. House on Wednesday.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

Any further notices of

motion?

Answers

to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Humber - Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will

stand again and the petition is concerning cataract surgeries on the West Coast.

It is very interesting. I just made a note – the Minister of Health and

Community Services just made a statement to a Member when talking about

surgeries; he said it is up to clinicians to decide where the surgery is going

to be. Now, all of a sudden, to hear we have an Apex centre, three professionals

and the government is not allowing them to do the surgeries. Now they are trying

to force them to go to a place – I'll just give you an example, Mr. Speaker, and

I put that in writing so I gave everybody a heads-up.

The

Minister of Health and Community Services – this is very dear to me – made a

statement in the media, The Telegram ,

and here's what the minister said: They can go to Corner Brook or Stephenville

and start right now.

I wrote

Stephenville, I wrote Western Health and I asked. Here's what they said in

writing: There has not been a cataract surgery completed at Sir Thomas Roddick

Hospital since January 2021 because of the equipment – they had some code

probably because of COVID, which would have been done in the Apex building – and

because of supplies.

So when

the Minister of Health and Community Services – I don't mean to be picking on

him, but I'm using his own words – gave the people in Western Newfoundland the

impression that they can go to Stephenville and get it done when it's just not

true.

I'll

just you an example. So just say Western Health opened up their surgical ward

for these three professionals for two months and said: Go do your surgery; Sir

Thomas Roddick Hospital: Open up your surgery for two months, go do it. They'll

go in and get paid 23 per cent higher than they would at the Apex. So money is

not the issue. They could do it at the hospital if it was available.

The

minister also stated that there are times at Western Memorial. Just to give you

an example: there are two days there. One of the specialists – and I'm not sure

if the minister is aware of it, but I will make him aware – does glaucoma for

the whole Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. So if you want to stop doing

glaucoma for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador to create a backlog on

this very important surgery so you could do cataracts, which could be done at

another building at a cheaper price, so that's what the impression is the

minister is saying.

There

are 700 or 800 people in this province right now in Western Newfoundland who

half of them can't see me speaking because of cataracts, and we can get it

started tomorrow. For God's sake, Government, there's no need; money is not the

issue. For God's sake, get this done.

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The

Member's time is expired.

The hon.

the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY:

Thank you, Speaker.

In 2016,

the government cut the number of home care hours for seniors and increased the

contribution they would have to pay to obtain and maintain home care hours.

We, the

undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to increase the amount of hours for seniors' care at

the previous or lower rate so as to ensure seniors remain in their homes for

longer periods of time.

Speaker,

this is a continuing story all across the province. In 2016, the Liberals cut

the home care hours to seniors to live in their own homes. They increased the

contribution that the clients had to pay. Health care for seniors is very

important especially when they stay in their own homes. It's been proven that

they're healthier and their outcomes are a lot better. It's a lot less stress.

But the seniors are forced to pay for those extra hours.

Actually, it's harder to get home care hours because of COVID. In the last

couple of years, Speaker, receiving home care hours, getting the assessments and

everything done, it's been a real challenge for them and they feel the stress of

it. Now, with the high cost of living, especially with the high cost of living

right now, the contribution would mean a great deal to the seniors, to have that

back or reduced – the contribution to help them pay for oil.

I had

one senior phone me on Friday, actually, wondering what to do with regard to

oil. Some time in December she had it, it was $560 for a tank of fuel. It cost

her $987 Friday morning. That's why she called. She was moved by it, she was

upset by. This is not fair to seniors. We need to do more to contribute to the

seniors with regard to the home care hours that they need to stay in their own

homes. This just doesn't cut it.

The 10

per cent subsidy they're going to receive in July, don't cut it for now,

Speaker, when they're cold and need food. They need warmth and to see an oil

bill double in three months to a senior who has to pay more for their home care

hours, it doesn't make sense.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Grand

Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

C. TIBBS:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

Newfoundland and Labrador Snowmobile Federation work hard each year so

snowmobilers can enjoy a very safe ride. Unfortunately, their work gets hampered

by individuals plowing licence-to-occupy roadways, in turn taking away essential

routes for snowmobilers.

We, the

undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to change legislation or to add a regulation that

would address this issue and help our snowmobiling season be successful.

Speaker,

throughout the winter, of course, in Central Newfoundland and Labrador,

snowmobiling is great. We have many, many trails. We try to get as many people

in there as we possibly can for tourism. We attract so many people.

Unfortunately, these trails are being hampered once again by people who want to

plow a road for a cabin that might be a little bit further.

Some

suggestions that I would have for the government, possibly, is to try to put

something into a regulation that says you can probably plow half the road for an

emergency access or whatnot, but something else needs to be done because these

vital trails are being cut off, these roadways are being cut off.

When a

snowmobiler comes up to a freshly plowed road by somebody who can do it right

now, because there's nothing there to stop them, it's just dirt and gravel and

they can't get their snowmobile through. Unfortunately, it pretty much ruins

their ride and it ruins their experience.

So I'm

just asking if somebody from government could take a look at this, ensure

something is put in place so we have a mechanism that would stop people from

plowing kilometre-long roads, which once again is taking away vital trailways

from snowmobilers.

I know

that the Newfoundland and Labrador Snowmobile Federation have been quite

vigilant on this for some time now. I just want to help them as much as I can. I

hope we can all pull together and help them out and come up with a solution for

this.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

background to this petition is as follows: Eastern Health has recently

repositioned one of the ambulances from the Trepassey area to the Cape Broyle

area. This has left one ambulance in the Trepassey area. Residents of Trepassey

and the surrounding area are at least two hours from the nearest hospital.

Therefore we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: We, the

undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to ensure the residents of Trepassey area have

ambulance back in the Trepassey area to ensure the safety and well-being of

local residents, and to meet the national standard for response times.

Speaker,

I've spoken on this on many occasions in the House of Assembly and it's

certainly a big issue in the Trepassey area. We've had people that have been

involved in fender-benders, or moose accidents, deciding if they're going to

take an ambulance or not. That shouldn't be the case.

I'm

going to say the last session we were in the House, I asked the minister a

question about the ambulances and he said it was based on the number of calls.

Well, this is not based on the number of calls, where they live. This is based

on geography and where you live. They are two hours from the nearest hospital.

It can't be based on the number of calls. They've got to use their head – just

listen to the minister speak – they've got to use their head in where they're

putting some of these ambulances and whatever else they're trying to do in the

health care to improve it.

That's

not improving it. It's making it worse. The people in the area have everything –

taken so much from them, they're so poisoned with the government it's

unbelievable. They lose their ambulance; they're looking at doctors, the fishery

collapse. I mean, how much more can this community take? They've got to be

looking at this for the people of the area's safety. It's nothing more than

safety. It's not the number of calls, it's not how much the ambulance operator

is going to make, it's about the people in the Trepassey and surrounding area –

Portugal Cove, St. Shotts, down as far as Renews.

They've

got to be looking at this. They've got to be looking at it and make some changes

to it. I mean, when that ambulance leave Trepassey, it's in a red alert as soon

as it leaves. It's two hours away. They're in a red alert. You know, God forbid

that something happens. A stroke victim only got about three or four hours to be

able to get a response, to get into the hospital to have something done, or a

pill received that they can hopefully reverse what happened to them.

But if

you are living in Cape Broyle, one gentleman, by the time they got into the

hospital, it is 3½ hours. That's only Cape Broyle; they're an hour away. These

are two hours away at the minimum. Just driving straight from Trepassey to St.

John's is a minimum of two hours. It should be looked at. It is not about

numbers; it is about geography.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I call

from the Order Paper, Motion 6.

Speaker,

I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice and Public Safety, that under

Standing Order 11(1) this House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, April 4.

SPEAKER:

Is it the pleasure of the

House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Motion

carried.

The hon.

the Deputy Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I call

from the Order Paper, Motion 5.

Speaker,

I move, seconded by the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology, that the

Standing Orders Committee comprise the following Members: MHA for Carbonear -

Trinity - Bay de Verde; MHA for Mount Scio; MHA for Windsor Lake; MHA for

Harbour Main; MHA for Torngat Mountains;

And that

the Government Services Committee comprise the following Members: MHA for St.

George's - Humber; MHA for Mount Pearl North; MHA for Burin - Grand Bank; MHA

for Baie Verte - Green Bay; MHA for Ferryland; MHA for Grand Falls-Windsor -

Buchans; MHA for Labrador West.

SPEAKER:

Is the House ready for the

question?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Motion

carried.

The hon.

the Deputy Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I call

from the Order Paper third reading of a bill, Bill 28,

An Act To Amend Various

Acts Of The Province Respecting The Publication Of A

Summary Of A Decision Or

Order Of An Adjudication Tribunal.

SPEAKER:

We need a mover and a

seconder, please.

L. DEMPSTER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Finance and President of the Treasury Board, that Bill 28 be now

read a third time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

said bill be now read a third time.

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

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

'Aye.'

SPEAKER:

All those against,

'nay.'

Motion carried.

CLERK (Barnes):

A bill,

An Act To Amend

Various Acts Of The Province Respecting The Publication Of A

Summary Of A

Decision Or Order Of An Adjudication Tribunal. (Bill 28)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

third time

and

it is ordered that the bill do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, “ An

Act To Amend Various Acts Of The Province Respecting The Publication Of A

Summary Of A Decision Or Order Of An Adjudication Tribunal,” read a third time,

ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 28)

SPEAKER: The hon.

the Deputy Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I call

from the Order Paper, Bill 46, to move that the House resolve itself into

Committee of the Whole to consider a resolution relating to the advancing or

guaranteeing of certain loans made under the Loan and Guarantee Act.

SPEAKER:

Deputy Government House Leader, we need a

seconder to that motion.

DEMPSTER:

Seconded by the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

SPEAKER:

has been moved and seconded that I do now leave the Chair for the House to

resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole.

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

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Motion carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a

Committee of the Whole, the Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Warr):

Order, please!

We are

now considering Bill 46,

An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957.

Resolution

it resolved by the House of Assembly in Legislative Session convened, as

follows:

“That it

is expedient to bring in a measure further to amend

The Loan and Guarantee Act, 1957 , to provide for the advance of

loans to and the guarantee of the repayment of bonds or debentures issued by or

loans advanced to certain corporations.”

CHAIR:

Shall the resolution carry?

The

Chair recognizes the hon. Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm

happy to be able to speak today to Bill 46, which is

An Act to Amend the Loan

and Guarantee Act, 1957. This is certainly something we would call an evergreen

piece of legislation in that it's one that comes back before this House

generally every single year. Just looking at the wording of it alone, basically

what you're doing is striking out certain parts, talking about expiry dates of

2022 and substituting expiry dates of 2023.

Maybe

what I can do – and I don't plan on taking too much time, but I can talk about a

little bit of the history behind this Loan and Guarantee Act amendment, which is

specific to the Stephenville Airport Corporation. So what we are doing is

amending the act, and this in turn is allowing for the extension of a provincial

guarantee of a bank line of credit for the Stephenville Airport Corporation.

To go

back in time, 2005 the provincial government of the day provided a financial

guarantee for an operating line of credit for the Stephenville Airport

Corporation, and the guarantee at that time was $350,000 initially approved.

What you see over the next number of years is that every so often, it comes back

and that operating line of credit grows. In 2010, it was increased to $600,000,

and then in 2016 increased again to $900,000. The last approval in this House

was again at the $900,000 level, which guaranteed it up to March 31 of 2022,

just a few days ago. So today, we talk about extending the expiry date until

The

airport in Stephenville, as many people would know, and I'm one of the people in

this room and out there who has had the benefit of living in proximity to that

area, of travelling using that airport and being in that community. And it's

certainly been an integral part of that community for years and years now,

decades. For many years, between the Airport Corporation, the town itself, other

partners and other communities, they've been trying their best to work on some

of the sustainability and viability issues that the airport faces. There's no

surprise or no secret to anyone that the airport has had struggles in recent

years.

Certainly, when you look at the infrastructure itself, it has infrastructure

that you don't see in many airports of that size, when you look at that

fantastic runway, when you look at the building itself. I think one of the words

that we use for it is potential.

Back in

2005, the provincial government, at that time, saw the need to come on with

support and I'd like to say that the House, as far as I know, every year since

that, regardless of government, regardless of Opposition, it's been supported

and I'm almost – if it wasn't unanimous, I would be surprised. I'm not sure if

I've ever seen a vote against that in this House.

I will

point out, this being a money bill sometimes the debate does veer into other

territories and areas that may not be related to the Stephenville Airport

Corporation. I think some of what that says is that people aren't questioning

the area, people are not questioning the facility nor the need to do this; we

think this is the right thing to do.

Now I'll

point out that the viability issues that they have faced over the last number of

years, they did exist pre-COVID, obviously. The fact that the government has had

to come in and be basically a partner was there pre-COVID, but, obviously, the

pandemic, like every airport, certainly, in this province, nationally and

internationally, has been deeply, deeply affected.

Just

looking at the passenger movements, the disruption that you seen there, every

airport and airport corporation and the members, they've all had to take

different operational and planning approaches. They've all had to try to come up

with new means to stay viable.

I'm

proud of the fact that I think the department – I give a lot of credit to the

staff, perhaps, in my department; a lot of it goes to the Minister of Tourism.

His department has worked extremely hard to try to work with and partner with

airports to keep them going, because it's not just about the routes in and out,

there's a lot more to it than that. It's about branding experience. It's about

marketing.

Again,

the credit, I think, goes mainly to Tourism and their minister. Although, I will

point out, I'm lucky that the team in my department, many used to be in that

department prior to, they work really well together. So I have a lot of great

people in the department who've worked tremendously and through difficult times.

Again, I would point out, a lot of this has been difficult due to the fact that

some of the conditions we face are outside our own jurisdiction. When we talk

about federal travel bans, when we talk about other countries, everybody was

going through this struggle.

So,

again, we need to continue to work with them. Now is not the time to take away

support from Stephenville Airport Corporation. When I talk about transportation,

whether it's Marine Atlantic, whether it's our airports, everybody is trying to

basically factor in what we hope is going to be a great year of renewed travel

and opportunity. We need to get back to pre-travel levels.

This is

why this loan guarantee is necessary and I think it also demonstrates the

governments support, especially to a rural airport. It's just with their ongoing

efforts. I will point out that we've worked with them and they've recently had a

contract with a – I think it's called the Winnipeg Airport group who've come in

and done – they've got a lot of experience in rural airport management.

So,

again, what I would say is that we'll continue to work with the Airport

Corporation, the town and partners. I think there's a vested, I would say,

bi-partisan effort here.

I see

I'm getting some heckles from the other side there but I will say it's coming

from the independent Members there. But I'm pretty sure they're supportive of

this operation as well.

I do

think this is a bi-partisan effort, because I look around, and just looking at

the West Coast, we've got Members of the independent, of PC, of Liberal – this

is not a political issue. This is a viability issue that affects us all.

So what

I will say is we need to continue to work together to support the airport; we're

happy today to bring this in to support that.

On that

note, I will continue to listen to the Members opposite in their commentary on

this. Hopefully, we can look forward to what is a better year, not just for

Stephenville but for all airports in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The

Chair recognizes the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Thank you, Chair.

It's

great to be able to stand and support this resolution. It's one thing to point

out that this loan guarantee doesn't actually mean that the province is

providing the airport in Stephenville or the airport authority with $900,000 on

an annual basis. It's simply a loan guarantee. The airport authority has a line

of credit with the bank and it is that line of credit that is secured by the

government.

unlike other places, this is not direct funding to the Stephenville Airport. The

Stephenville Airport, like other airports in this province, has struggled

especially in the last two years in relation to COVID with it just maintaining

its operation and keeping the doors open. It has not had the benefit of the

funding that was recently announced by government for other airports. I know

that the airport authority has written the Premier looking for some additional

supports for that.

The

minister is absolutely right, government did step up and help the airport

authority when it came to securing a contract with the Winnipeg Airport

corporation who have been quite successful in the revitalization of other

airports in the country and have been working hard on the Stephenville Airport.

One of

the other things that people need to understand, not only is this a critical

piece of infrastructure but it's critical for a lot of major airlines. Yes, they

do not land at Stephenville, but Stephenville is often designated as an

alternate route, as an alternate landing site. And if you do not have that

alternate landing site available, it has the potential to impact on the routes

that planes will fly out of. So that's an important piece.

It's

also critically important from the air ambulance program. We're in Stephenville,

centrally located on the west side of Corner Brook. It takes in a large area.

There are over 16,000 people in our geographic region. When they have a

requirement to travel by air ambulance, the fact that if that airport is not

there and not maintained – it's not just about being there, it has to be

maintained, because if that air ambulance can't land in Stephenville, then the

alternate is Deer Lake. That means another significant ride in the back of a

road ambulance for people on the West Coast. So it's critically important that

that airport be maintained.

The

other piece that needs to be looked at is – and I urge government to take a real

hard look at this – as our airports try to recover from COVID, start looking at

how much money does the government spend on air travel now. Whether it's members

of core government, members of government agencies, members of Crown

corporations or other corporations, how much is that bill? Also, in doing that,

start to look at the idea of maybe it's time – and it'll come out in the Health

Accord recommendations about how we address medical transportation.

It is

one of the big issues that the Health Accord has identified: medical

transportation. It's not only about the emergency transportation. It should also

be about routine transportation or the potential for routine air transportation.

There is an opportunity, an investment to look at the potential to have routine

air ambulance available in different airports, whether it's St. Anthony, whether

it's Stephenville, whether it's Gander, whether it's Deer Lake, landing, picking

up people who have to travel because we do not have the access to the speciality

services that may only be available in the City of St. John's.

So there

is a potential, I would argue, that if you were to look at the cost of

government and the number of seats they currently buy on commercial aircraft in

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, maybe there's a plan for a standing

offer agreement that would see regularly scheduled flight once a day from

strategic airports, including Stephenville, that would transport, not only

government employees or people travelling on a government dime but also people

who may need to travel because of medical appointments. I think that's something

that we have to start looking at. Stephenville will play an integral part of

that, but it comes down to the ability to maintain their operations, to be able

to turn around and say that the airport is open for business.

Don't

get me wrong, the airport is open for business. As a matter of fact, there's

currently a negotiation between a private buyer and the Airport Corporation on

the airport in Stephenville. But it's going to be critical that that airport be

maintained and be part of the solution, because there are so many people, as I

have suggested, that travel for different reasons.

I had an

incident where a young man who had significant burns on his body but he wasn't

considered life threatening. Because he wasn't considered life threatening, he

wasn't able to access the air ambulance emergency plane, but he needed to come

to St. John's.

They put

that individual on a road ambulance for nine hours with a nurse providing

morphine along the way for the pain. Understandably, they didn't meet the

criteria of an emergency, but that in itself is just one example of what routine

air ambulance might look like or what regularly scheduled services might be.

I know

that for all of us that live in rural Newfoundland, we get lots of calls around

medical transportation. In Labrador, it's a constant issue. The cost of

transportation from Labrador, down to the city. The cost of transportation from

Deer Lake – when I fly from Deer Lake to St. John's on government's dime to

attend the House of Assembly, I'm looking at a $1,000 bill. Most people do not

have that option. They cannot afford that.

I think

it's clear that as we look and talk about the Health Accord and talk about

transportation that the Stephenville Airport becomes a critical part of

transportation to serve the entire West Coast. There is absolutely no reason for

anyone west of Corner Brook to have to travel to Deer Lake to catch a medical

flight to St. John's. I think there's an opportunity for government to take a

look at it, to take a review and to talk about how we can service that airport

and others.

I would

also like government to make sure that as this potential sale unfolds that

government is there to offer the assistance to the Airport Corporation, to help

them right now. It is the taxpayers of Stephenville who have kept the airport

open for the last number of years. It has been their tax dollars, contributed by

the town council of Stephenville that have actually kept that airport running.

Right now, that airport needs help in the short term. They have flights booked

for the summer with one carrier but they need help. They need to have those

funds.

This

bill today guarantees that line of credit, but it doesn't provide the operation

dollars that they could use help with right now. So I ask government, again, to

reconsider the monies that you have already allocated to other airports – good

that was done, but I think Stephenville could also use a little bit of help

right now. Of course, as we move, hopefully, to a sale and a sale that will

eventually result in more jobs at the airport would always be welcome.

But,

right now, I think part of the government's strategy has to be about routine air

ambulance. In doing that, there is a potential to have daily flights from

Stephenville, Deer Lake, St. Anthony and Gander into St. John's. You could

structure that any way you want. You could do standing offer agreements with any

of the existing airlines or open it up to others but there is a way to make it

happen.

It is

not about all new dollars to make it happen. They are spending the money right

now. The number of people, as I said, who travel on the government dime is

significant. So let's see if we can't find a way to make it work a little

better, a little more efficient.

I thank

you for the opportunity to speak here today. Obviously, I'm going to support

this resolution, but I look forward to further discussions and hope that, at the

end of the day, government can meet with the airport authority and come up with

a short-term solution to help them out as they negotiate and finalize a deal for

the airport.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The

Chair recognizes the hon. Member for St. George's - Humber.

S. REID:

Thank you, Chair.

It's

great to have an opportunity to speak on this motion, Bill 46, related to the

extension of the loan guarantee for the Stephenville Airport.

The

Stephenville Airport is not located in my district, of course. It's in the

Member for Stephenville - Port au Port's district. But it's very close on the

border and a lot of people in my district, particularly in the southern part of

my district, use that airport. It is a very important facility for the whole

West Coast and especially the Southwest Coast. So I wanted to say a few words in

support of this motion as well.

I just

want to talk about a few things here. I want to talk a little bit about the

history of the airport. Some people may not be aware of the history of the

airport. I want to talk about the current situation at the airport and I want to

talk a little bit about the future of the airport and my hopes for the future

and my expectations of what might happen.

The

Stephenville Airport is a former American base, Ernest Harmon base. It had its

origin during the Second World War when there was an agreement between the

United States and Britain. Of course, Newfoundland was governed by Commission of

Government at that time and there was an agreement between Britain and the US in

exchange for a certain number of destroyers being given to Britain, that Britain

would allow the United States to have a number of bases here in Newfoundland and

Labrador. One of those was the Ernest Harmon Air Force Base in Stephenville,

which started in 1941.

operated as a base, one of the biggest in the world at the time. Just to give

you a sense of how large this base is, it used to be an alternative site for the

landing of the space shuttle; one of the largest air force bases in the world.

It had substantial importance as a military base before it became a commercial

airport.

The base

closed in 1966. By then, we had become a part of Canada and the base was

reverted to the Canadian government and then to the Newfoundland government. The

base reverted to the provincial government and operated as a commercial airport

since then.

It's had

a bit of trouble in terms of keeping going and keeping the place operating. Over

this last period of time, the government and, particularly, the Town of

Stephenville and others in the area have intervened to support the airport, to

keep it going and to look for other opportunities.

The

provincial government has done some things to support the airport as well. For

example, they rent some space at the airport. The Marine Institute rents some

space there where they have the SERT Centre. Some of these things are designed

to support the Stephenville Airport and to keep it operating at this time.

This

loan guarantee is another thing that is being done by the provincial government

to help the airport to bridge it to a time when it can be more self-sustaining.

I think the airport, over the last few years, has been a commercial airport;

some traffic coming in. It's been a training site. It's been a fuelling station.

As the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port says, it's been an important part

of the medical transportation in the province for the past number of years.

More

recently, we've seen some potential purchasers of the airport come forward and I

think this is a very positive development. I'm still hopeful. I've seen some of

the coverage in the media and things like that, but I'm still very hopeful that

this memorandum of understanding will result in a more positive future for the

airport.

I am a

big believer in the private sector and what they can do to unlock opportunities

that exist in a facility like the Stephenville Airport, especially where it's in

conjunction with the port there and the possibility of industrial activity that

could be generated from such a combination of assets in the same area.

So I am

very enthused about this. I'm still hopeful, still optimistic about the

Stephenville Airport. I think there's a lot of potential here in terms of

training, search and rescue, industrial developments, tourism, as well, in the

area. I think some people in the area have very good ideas about developing the

tourism potential in the area and I think it's not a situation where we have to

compete. I think there's a complementary aspect of having other airports and the

Stephenville Airport, in terms of alternative landing sites, but also in terms

of if people want to fly into one airport, travel, do some hiking in Bay St.

George area and then exit through the Stephenville Airport, for example, I think

that's a very good benefit that might be present there.

conclusion, I want to encourage everyone to support this motion. It's very

important, it's very warranted and I think it's a motion that will allow us to

continue to get to a brighter future for the Stephenville Airport. That's my

hope. That's my optimistic view of where we should be going in the future.

Thank

you, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The

Chair recognizes the Member for Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Chair.

It is

certainly a pleasure to stand in this House and represent the District of

Ferryland. I'll start off by saying we will be supporting the resolution for

sure. This bill will amend the

Schedule to the act as it relates to the loan

guarantee in place supporting Stephenville Airport. This bill also ratifies the

decision by Cabinet to extend the guarantee to March 31, 2023.

Now,

this legislation also allows Stephenville Airport to continue to be operational,

as good as can possibly be in these times. So it's something that should be

noted, that the government is not loaning the money to the airport, but is

guaranteeing their loans, which they have on the books. Should the guarantee be

called, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador would have the expenditures

on their behalf. So it's something that's certainly needed right now and to

continue with it.

I'd like

to touch on a couple of other issues in my district. First of all, I'd like to

start off – I'm sure the Member for Bonavista is listening now – and I'll speak

on the seal issue in Newfoundland and Labrador.

CHAIR:

Order, please!

I remind

the hon. Member to stay relevant to the bill. I mean, there are recommendations

that came in here from the Standing Orders Committee that unanimously agreed to

us staying relevant to the bill. I will give as much leeway as I can, but I ask

you to stay relevant to the bill.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Well, this is about costs and

the cost of living and this is what I'm getting at. So it's costs for businesses

and it's something that relates to all people. Loans certainly relate to people,

and this is where it's tied to. It's tied to the people and the loans in this

province. We have people here that are struggling, really struggling to survive

and we really have to look at this from a perspective of we are looking at

backing these loans, we've got people out here that really need help. We really

need help.

You're

talking about we're going to back up this loan – and we certainly support it –

but the people in the province, for the cost of living, they need help. We're

out here backing this, and we certainly support it, like I said, but we need to

be able to help the people in this province.

I got a

text the other day from a gentleman that ordered 500 litres of fuel – $1100

dollars. And there was $350 worth of taxes on it. Yes, I know we can't take it

off, but we've got to start looking at it at some point in time to help the

people in this province. We can't just let that go. That just can't happen. It's

tied to the cost of living. People are going to lose their businesses. We hope

they don't. I mean, this is what we're here to represent are to the people in

this province, and we're passing a resolution on this today, to support it.

But we

need to support the people in the province. We really do. That's what we're

tying it to here now, and that's certainly relevant as far as I'm concerned,

Chair. That's why we're elected here, to represent the people in the province.

We take calls and everybody here – no one's (inaudible) – no one's messaging

from that.

There

are 40 MHAs here and everybody gets calls on this. We're not just over on this

side getting calls. We know you're getting calls as well, and it's relevant. I

mean, people are struggling to pay their fuel bills. They really are struggling

to pay their fuel bills. And little do they know in September – we passed a bill

in September that there's going to be a sugar tax come out. I'm going to say it

could be, on a two-litre of drink, 40 cents or 50 cents.

That's

not even hit the people yet. I know that we voted on it last year; we didn't

forget about it. We sat here and debated it, and now it's going to go ahead. And

now when you talk about the cost of living and signed loan guarantees, these

people won't have loans to sign, soon, if they don't get some help and reduce

some taxes for the people in this province. People really need the help.

So we've

got it passed. It's going to come in, the sugar tax. The government should be

looking at that and (inaudible) – so now, we're making these people go back and

buy stuff that's not healthy for them. You know, that's what you're trying to

stop, but they can't afford the other side of it. So now, you're forcing them

into a spot that they're even worse off than they were when they started.

This was

forced right down to the retailers that are doing it. You hear it on the radio,

POS systems; they've got big upgrades that have to happen. When that upgrade

comes up for $10,000 that affects the person on the other side. They've got to

pay more. Look at fuel costs, if it's $1,500 – I heard somebody say, and I don't

know if it's exact, but I heard somebody say $1,500 for fuel to go across the

Island or go wherever they're going. Now it's $3,000. So that three, you think

they're going to take that off their bottom line? That's coming to us, and

everybody around us. That's where we've got to be looking, and that's what we've

got to get at.

People

put us here to represent them and this is what we should be doing to fight for

them. It should not be missed. You've got to listen to the people. We've all

gotten calls – no one can sit across this House or on this side and say that we

haven't gotten a call on this because we have. So to tie it into that, that is

loan guarantees. These people need the help. They really need the help.

I get so

many stories and so many calls and they spoke on driving to the hospital from

Trepassey. I'm going to say that's $40. So just for three months that's doubled

to $80. Now, they're going to wait home, they're going to be too sick, they can

go on an ambulance, if there's one there. So it's a cost of living.

When I

ran last year – we started in January and finished in March – a lady gave me a

sheet of paper with all of her expenses and when she finished – that was last

year in March when we finished, I'm going to say I got that in February when I

knocked on her door. So she had $34 left last year in February and she's on, I'm

going to say, old age pension, what has she got this year? If she had $34 left

last year, what have she got now that's going to help her pay her bills? What

have she got?

She

didn't get an increase, she certainly didn't. So we look at all of this, there

are people that I don't know how they're going to survive. I get that. We're

over here and we all got stressful jobs, there's no doubt, and to hear those

calls, you hate to hear those calls, but we've got to do something to help them.

Let's do something to help them. Let's reduce some tax of some sort; come up

with the ideas. We'll sit down and help you. There's got to be something we can

do to help the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to be able to afford this.

AN HON. MEMBER:

Relevance.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

This is relative. Yes, it is

relative. It's the cost of living. We signed a loan guarantee. We got people

that can't afford to live. So to me it is, I don't know about you guys but to me

it is.

Anyway,

I'll leave it at that. I had my session on that.

Thank

you so much.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Chair, always

a pleasure to have an opportunity to speak in the House.

Mr.

Chair, first of all, just for the record and for

Hansard , I'll support Bill 46. Of

course, we know that's a loan guarantee for the Stephenville Airport. I've been

in the House of Assembly – this is my 11th year and this is important,

obviously, to the airport, to the people of Stephenville, important to the West

Coast, but I almost view it as routine business now because it's sort of

something that we do every year and we do so for good reason, Mr. Chair.

I've got

to say it's not something I hear a lot about here on this end of her, but I've

had a couple of people in the past from around here who said why are we

supporting the Stephenville Airport and so on, if they can't make it on their

own then let them falter and so on. But I always come back to the fact that, for

me, it's very much all about the Mount Pearl area and stuff, that's kind of what

I live for and whatever, but we're all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, it's

not just about St. John's. It's not just about the metro area. It's not just

about the Avalon Peninsula, albeit we do have probably half the population on

this end of the province. But we also have to be mindful that there are other

people in this province, other districts, other taxpayers and we all have to do

our part to look out for each other as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

I do

want to say that as – I'll say – an east coast MHA, that while this does not

have any impact on my district and my region, I think it's important we all see

the bigger picture that we're all in this together. I support it from that

perspective.

Mr.

Chair, I also realize that this airport has had its struggles over the years and

certainly, it's been perhaps that much worse because of what happened with

COVID-19, which is not something unique to Stephenville. It certainly impacted

the entire province, but I'm also very positive, I guess, on the prospects.

I don't

have any details on this proposal that was put forward about building drones and

so on in Stephenville. It sounds very exciting. I don't know how realistic it

is, how close we are to it happening. The Members from the area, I'm sure, are

better versed in it than I, but it certainly sounds like a very exciting

opportunity to provide a lot of opportunity, a lot of jobs and benefit the

region.

If it

benefits the West Coast, it benefits the entire province. That's something we

also must be very cognizant of. It's not just about economic development in our

own backyards, because revenues derived from whether it be the West Coast or

Central Newfoundland or Labrador, as we know, look at the benefits we reap from

Labrador in terms of the mining and so on, we all enjoy those benefits here on

the Island. Conversely, Labrador benefits from our oil industry and so on that's

primarily here on the East Coast. So it all ties together.

Mr.

Chair, also, I think it's important, I just want to make this tie here that

we're talking about assets. We're talking about the Stephenville Airport being

an asset to the province. I think one thing that we have had here, as it relates

to this particular asset, as it relates to Stephenville Airport, is I think we

have had openness and we have had transparency and, generally speaking, we see

the financials or we can see the financials. Certainly, it's available to us

about what is occurring with the Stephenville Airport, what the plans are and so

on.

But,

unfortunately, I'm going to make this connection here, we have the report that

just came out that the government received, the Rothschild's, also talking about

our assets, just like the Stephenville Airport being an asset. The NLC is an

asset to Newfoundland and Labrador; our oil shares are assets to Newfoundland

and Labrador. We have registries, we have other landholdings, we have government

facilities and so on, which are all assets. No different than the Stephenville

Airport is an asset.

But now

we have this report that we paid $5 million for. Apparently, there is nobody in

Newfoundland and Labrador smart enough at Memorial University or in the

Confederation Building smart enough to do it. But we paid the Rothschild's $5

million, US I believe, and now government has the report, but are we going to

see the details like we're seeing with the Stephenville Airport? Are we going to

be open and transparent with those assets like we are with the Stephenville

Airport?

No,

we're not. The governments going to keep all that information to themselves and

for some reason we're not going to have the opportunity to see the report,

understand the numbers, like we do with the Stephenville Airport, make informed

decisions in the House, like we do for the Stephenville Airport. We're not going

to have the ability to do that because government is going to hide all that

information.

I would

say to the government that I certainly hope, unlike what has happened with the

Stephenville Airport where everything is before the House and we are having an

opportunity to debate, we are having an opportunity to hear all this

information, I certainly hope that we're going to get that same opportunity when

it come to those other assets. Because I can tell you what, I will not, as one

Member, be supporting the sale of any provincial assets unless we know what all

the numbers are, until there is public input and until we have an opportunity to

debate it here in this House of Assembly.

The just

trust me thing doesn't work. I have been down that road; I've been down that

road with the $6-million man. I've been down that road with Nalcor: Trust me,

everything is under control, b'ys, trust the numbers, trust everything. We know

where everything went; we know what happened. We had an inquiry that we paid

quite a lot of money for to get to the bottom of that one and it is something

that I have to wear for the rest of my life which I'm not proud of, I would say,

although I did it in good faith. I'm not going down this road when it comes to

our provincial assets – not doing it.

So I

certainly hope that if the government thinks – if that's your plan is to take

this report, keep all the information to yourself and start selling stuff off,

don't go looking for my support. Now, you might not need it; you're the

government and I guess you can do what you want. I guess there are going to be

some legislative changes required for some of it, and I won't be voting for it;

I'll vote against it on principle. You still have your majority; you'll get your

way. But I won't be supporting it.

I would

hope in the spirit of openness, transparency, collegiality, working together

that just in the same way that we are being open and transparent about the

Stephenville Airport, an asset of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, that

we will apply that same standard when it comes to all of our provincial assets,

and that we will have an open and free debate in this House of Assembly on each

and every asset individually. Not just one general debate on the sale of assets

– individually. A debate on the NLC, a debate on our oil shares, a debate on our

registries and anything else that you're planning or potentially planning on

selling. We'll have an open debate in the House of Assembly, the same as we're

having right here on the Stephenville Airport. We will have all the data, all

the facts and figures, all the numbers.

couldn't care less about your commercial sensitivity excuse, because that's all

it is; it is an excuse. We need to have the information, the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador need to have the information so we can all make an

informed decision. The days of “trust me” are over – and that's got nothing

against anyone on that side. But as I said, I've been there, been burnt. Never,

ever again, it will never happen – not to me, I can tell you that.

So I

certainly hope that that will be the plan. If it's not, you can count me out. I

can tell you that.

Thank

you, Mr. Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

The Chair recognizes the hon.

the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Chair.

appreciate the opportunity to speak to this important legislation. I will be

relevant to the legislation itself; I think that that's what's required in the

House.

I will

say that Bill 46 – this is the bill we're debating today – is again an extension

of a loan guarantee that has been in place with the provincial government since

2005. For the interest of the House, it's the only airport in the province that

the province actually has a loan guarantee with. It started in 2005. In 2016, it

was increased to $900,000. I think it was a $350,000 start and now it's up to

$900,000. It's basically a provincial guarantee of a bank line of credit for the

Stephenville Airport Corporation, and we're looking now in this legislation to

extend it to March 31, 2023.

you're hearing in the House, acceptance of the bill as is put forward to extend

that loan guarantee, I think it's going to be important. The provincial

government is demonstrating its commitment to a rural airport, an important

rural airport by assisting with ongoing efforts to ensure its financial

sustainability. I think we've all heard in the media and extensive media

coverage that the Stephenville Airport Authority is negotiating with a private

enterprise to see the acquisition of the airport for the business opportunities

that the company may be able to bring to the Stephenville Airport. It's

including the manufacturing of drones, I think, I read in the newspaper or in

the news media.

I think

that process is still ongoing. I understand the government has no real role in

that. It's between the Stephenville Airport Authority and this corporation, but

I understand that they are still looking at the business proposal.

I will

say, Chair, that this is an integral part of the Stephenville-Bay St. George

region for decades. It's an important part of access to service, and we all know

how impacted the industry was. The tourism industry, the airline industry, the

airports itself have been tremendously impacted by COVID. We're looking at,

hopefully, with the Come Home Year celebrations that are coming up, a resurgence

in visitation to the province and extended use, of course, of airports because

of that. As I said, the Stephenville Airport Corporation is looking at and

identifying new opportunities.

I'll

also say that last year I know that the Stephenville Airport Authority did

contract, I think it was the Winnipeg Airport Services and the provincial

government assisted them in those endeavours and contributed about $215,000 or

$214,000 that was approved through the Industry, Energy and Technology

Department for the town and for the Stephenville Airport Corporation project

that they were looking to do to help with their operations. So I think

government has proven and shown its commitment to the airport and commitment to

the airport and commitment to the growth and development of the Stephenville

Airport.

With

that, Mr. Chair, I will say that I am hopeful that the Legislature approves this

legislation so that the Stephenville Airport Authority can continue its work and

can continue toward sustainability and their endeavours with a private

corporation on the acquisition of the airport assets.

If that

does occur, Chair, I will say that we fully expect that the loan guarantee will

be no longer required and that that would be paid in full. So thank you very

much for this opportunity to support this legislation, important as it is, and

wishing Stephenville Airport Corporation and the volunteers that are giving so

much time and attention to this activity, the very best, as government continues

to support its operations.

Thank

you.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The

Chair recognizes the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm

going to stand and, of course, I'm going to support this bill that's here today.

I heard a lot of speakers speaking about it today. I heard the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port speaking. I think it's the longest runway in the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador; it's used for a lot of international

flights – 4,200 feet? I think it's the longest runway in the province. It has a

long history as the –

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

E. JOYCE:

Gander? Gander is longer,

okay.

But it

has it and it used to be used for a lot of flights that couldn't make it to

other flights and was diverted to Stephenville. And this is something that

started in 2005, I was mentioning earlier. Stephenville is always trying to push

ahead, with the airport.

forget some of the fish hatcheries that are in Stephenville. We forget about the

big port that's in Stephenville; that's a big asset. We forget about the

limestone. There are a lot of businesses in Stephenville; people coming back and

forth from around the world in Stephenville. So now, we have to find some way to

incorporate that with the airport itself.

Stephenville is trying. I've been knocking around Stephenville now for the last

50 years. Worked out there for a number of years. If anybody ever thinks that

Mayor Tom Rosand and the council is just going to roll over and say we'll let

Stephenville just dwindle away, they just don't know the Stephenville people,

the Port au Port people, and the Bay St. George area also.

They

have a lot of major files that they're working on right now. The airport is one

of those major files that they are working on. I fully support the Town of

Stephenville. I fully support this loan guarantee with the extension. It is a

great idea to have it extended to 2023; every year having to come back wondering

are we going to get it.

As it

was mentioned earlier, Mr. Chair, this is no money given to Stephenville. This

is just a loan guarantee for a line of credit that they will be using to keep

the airport. The airport in Stephenville has done a great service to the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador over the years. We've got to remember that

also. Kudos to the town council and Mayor Rose for all the work that they're

doing trying to make Stephenville prosperous.

I will

be supporting this, Mr. Chair, and I will be supporting the Town of

Stephenville. I know I was speaking to the Member for Stephenville - Port au

Port on some initiatives that are happening out there. He's very much active in

a lot of the files that are in the Stephenville area. There is a bright future

for Stephenville and the whole Port au Port area, the whole Bay St. George area.

Mr.

Chair, I'm just going to bring something up that was brought up earlier so I am

assuming I can have it out, as this is a money bill. You talk about how

disclosure needs to be when talking about the Rothschild, that was brought up

earlier about disclosure and this is a prime example of disclosure. I heard the

Minister of Finance and President of the Treasury Board talk today – we know

that Muskrat Falls – what happened before disclosure.

I just

want to say to the minister, I was the one who led the filibuster for five days

in this House. So please just don't take it and say because something happened

10 years ago – nine or10 years ago – that all of a sudden all these Members who

weren't even here are just tarred with a brush, including myself.

To me

that's disrespectful. For all of a sudden to look over and say you know what

happened before. There might have been one or two that was here – might have

been. I know I was the one that helped lead the filibuster; five days, night and

day; eight-hour shifts in this House.

So I say

to the minister, when you say look what happened before, I'll just say to the

minister – and I'll say it very openly – you've seen what happened before when

most of those Members weren't even here, so are you going to go down the same

path? Are you going to go down the same path if there was a mistake that's going

to be detrimental to the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador,

the workers in Newfoundland and Labrador and say we did what you guys did? If

you really mean what you're saying look at what happened; you should produce the

report so it don't happen again.

I'll say

to the minister, every time you want to tarnish everybody over on this side with

a brush about making a bad deal for Muskrat Falls, because this is a money bill,

Mr. Chair, and I'm allowed to speak about the money bill.

CHAIR:

I'm going to ask the Member

to stay relevant to the bill.

E. JOYCE:

I will, Mr. Chair, I'll close

on this part. If you're going to do what other people did that weren't in this

House of Assembly, you're going to make the same mistakes and who is going to

suffer is the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. So please stop tarnishing

myself and, I would say, 99 per cent of the people. I think probably only one,

maybe two, were here that voted on that and keep saying: look what you did,

you're not responsible enough to look at the report is false. It's just false.

So let's start, it's a provincial asset, the same as the Stephenville Airport.

I say to

Mayor Tom Rose and I say to the whole town council and all the economic groups

in Stephenville: Keep up the good work, keep fighting. I know you have a lot of

files behind you. I know there's a lot of support in government for

Stephenville. I know there's a lot of support on this side also for Stephenville

and the area.

I say to

the minister, it's great to have it until 2023 so that we don't have to come

back in the House every year and they'll be wondering if it's going to happen

again, if it's going to move on again. Now we know up to 2023 that it's done,

that if we need to change this again for some reason, it's a great move.

I will

be supporting this motion.

Thank

you, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The

Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER:

Thank you, Chair.

I just

want to clarify, I guess, and probably bring it down a shade for our listeners.

There is no money being spent here. This is a loan guarantee, no different, like

I said, from a line of credit or anything like that. It's no different than

being a co-signer on a car or anything like that. We're the co-signer and if the

principal that owns the loan doesn't pay, then we take responsibility to help

get to the next level.

Just so

that our viewers understand, this bill is not about giving any money. It's about

helping the airport authority have the ability to continue with their business

and to have that service available in the Stephenville area, which is very

important to the area, there's no doubt about that, as my esteemed colleague

from Stephenville - Port au Port has alluded to.

With a

sale pending, the thing is, this might be the last time – hopefully, maybe it is

– that we have to pass this legislation because once there's a sale in place,

there will be no need for that loan guarantee to the airport authority because

it's a private sale and it will be a private company.

Like I

said, from what I've heard a lot of exciting things are going to happen there

with producing drones and producing other technologies for the aerospace

engineering ability.

Like I

said, this is like us being a co-signer on a loan. We are in difficult times,

but the airport authority has been able to keep up with their payments so we

haven't had to step in at any point really in the many years that this has been

going on to make payments for them.

There

are no arrears; therefore, we haven't taken any money out of our provincial

coffers to help out the airport or anything like that. But the good news on the

horizon I think is the sale and, hopefully, Mr. Dymond and his group find solace

in the fact that we want to support them once the sale goes through. But, right

now, we want to help the airport authority to keep operations in the

Stephenville area, that is very important to our province and keep this great

asset going.

Thank

you, Chair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

CHAIR:

Thank you.

Shall

the resolution carry?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, resolution carried.

A bill,

“An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957.” (Bill 46)

CLERK:

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Shall clause 1 carry?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, clause 1 carried.

CLERK:

Be it enacted by the

Lieutenant-Governor and House of Assembly in Legislative Session convened, as

follows.

CHAIR:

Shall the enacted clause

carry?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK:

An Act To Amend The Loan And

Guarantee Act, 1957.

CHAIR:

Shall the

long title carry?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, title carried.

CHAIR:

Shall I report Bill 46

carried without amendment?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion,

that the Committee report having passed the resolution and a bill consequent

thereto, carried.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Mr. Chair, I move that the

Committee rise and report Bill 46 carried.

CHAIR:

The motion is that the

Committee rise and report the resolution and Bill 46.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, the

Speaker returned to the Chair.

SPEAKER (Bennett):

Order, please!

The hon.

the Member for Baie Verte - Green Bay and Chair of the Committee of the Whole.

B. WARR:

Mr. Speaker, the Committee of

Ways and Means have considered the matters to them referred and have directed me

to report that they have adopted a certain resolution and recommend that a bill

be introduced to give effect to the same.

SPEAKER:

The Chair of the Committee of

Ways and Means reports that the Committee have considered the matters to them

referred and have adopted a certain resolution and recommend that a bill be

introduced to give effect to the same.

When

shall the report be received?

L. DEMPSTER:

Now.

SPEAKER:

Now.

motion, report received and adopted.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Health and Community Services, that the resolution be now read a

first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the resolution be now read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Motion

carried.

CLERK:

“Be it resolved by

the House of Assembly in Legislative Session convened, as follows:

“That it

is expedient to bring in a measure further to amend

The Loan and Guarantee Act, 1957 , to provide for the advance of

loans to and the guarantee of the repayment of bonds or debentures issued by or

loans advanced to certain corporations.”

motion, resolution read a first time.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology, that the resolution be now read

a second time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the resolution be now read a second time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Motion

carried.

CLERK:

it resolved by the House of Assembly in Legislative Session convened, as

follows:

“That it

is expedient to bring in a measure further to amend

The Loan and Guarantee Act, 1957 , to provide for the advance of

loans to and the guarantee of the repayment of bonds or debentures issued by or

loans advanced to certain corporations.”

motion, resolution read a second time.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Health and Community Services, for leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957, Bill 46, and I

further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the hon. Deputy Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957, Bill 46, and the

said bill be now be read a first time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

The

motion is carried.

Motion,

that the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to

introduce a bill, “An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957,” carried.

(Bill 46)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957. (Bill 46)

motion, Bill 46 read a first time.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology, that Bill 46 now be read a

second time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

said bill be now read a second time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

The

motion is carried.

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957. (Bill 46)

motion, Bill 46 read a second time.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Minister of Health and Community Services, that Bill 46 be now read a third

time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

Bill 46 be now read a third time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

The

motion is carried.

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957. (Bill 46)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and its title be as on the

Order Paper.

motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957,” read a third

time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 46)

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

L. DEMPSTER:

Thank you for your patience

with me, Speaker, on the resolution.

I call

from the Order Paper, Order 12, second reading of a bill, Bill 48,

An Act To

Amend The Financial Administration Act.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Member for Mount Pearl North, that Bill 48,

An Act To Amend The

Financial Administration Act, be now read a second time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

Bill 48,

An Act To Amend The Financial Administration Act, be now read a second

time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill, “An Act To Amend The Financial Administration Act.”

(Bill 48)

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Speaker.

Today in

this hon. House I want to bring forward amendments to the

Financial Administration Act to allow diversification of investments

made in Newfoundland and Labrador Government Sinking Fund and, in that same

amendments, to incorporate some gender-neutral language.

Allow me

first to say that a sinking fund is basically a fund set up for the purposes of

retiring public debt of the province at maturity. The sinking funds are managed

by the Department of Finance and is overseen by a board of trustees.

The

intention of the amendment is to strengthen Treasury management capacity and

increase the long-term rate of return. This is important, Speaker, as we move

towards lowering our cost of borrowing and strengthening overall our financial

management.

The goal

here is to have a positive impact on the province's financial position through

increased income from investments. This bill supports the implementation of a

modern Treasury management framework. The

Financial Administration Act governs all public debt of the province,

including the Newfoundland and Labrador Government Sinking Fund.

Now, as

I said, the sinking fund is basically a fund established for the purpose of

retiring public debt in the province at maturity. The fund is managed by, as I

said, the Department of Finance and is overseen by its board of trustees. This

amendment permits the Newfoundland and Labrador Government Sinking Fund to

evaluate a number of investment opportunities.

These

include Canada Mortgage Bonds. Now, these are fully guaranteed by Can