December 12, 2005 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV

No. 45

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have members' statements as follows: the

hon. the Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair; the hon. the

Member for the District of Ferryland, with leave; the hon. the Member for the

District of Burgeo & LaPoile; the hon. the Member for the District of Humber

Valley; the hon. the Member for the District of Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune; the

hon. the Member for the District of Labrador West; the hon. the Member for the

District of Bay of Islands and the hon. the Member for the District of Gander.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse

au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to rise today to congratulate Bishop David Torraville, a

Cartwright native, who was ordained on November 30 at St. Martin's Cathedral

in Gander.

Bishop Torraville was a teacher in Labrador before he was ordained a deacon

in 1985 and a priest in 1986. From 1985 to 1989 he served as rector of the

parish of Twillingate. In 1989 he was assigned to the parish of Gander as an

assistant priest until 1992. He then served as rector of the parish of Gander

and the Cathedral of St. Martin until 2000.

Mr. Speaker, Bishop Torraville received a bachelor's degree from Memorial

University in 1978 and a master of divinity degree in 1985 from Queen's

College. In 1994 he completed his course work and qualifying exams for a doctor

of ministry at Princeton Theological Seminary in New Jersey. He became a fellow

in pastoral leadership and development at the same university in 1999.

Prior to the election, Bishop Torraville was a member of the diocesan joint

committee, chair of the health and community regional pastoral board and a

member of the diocesan executive committee. He is married to Karen Flemming of

Brookfield, Nova Scotia and they have two children, Paul and Catherine. Also, he

is the son of retired Anglican priest, Cannon Arnold Torraville and Mrs. Nita

Mesher Torraville.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all my hon. colleagues today to join with me in

congratulating Bishop David Torraville on his ordination at St. Michael's

Cathedral in Gander on November 30.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Ferryland, with

leave.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to take this opportunity, on behalf of my district, to publicly

pay my respect to the memory of the recently departed Mr. William Patrick O'Brien

of Ferryland.

Mr. O'Brien was eighty-five years old. He was a committed family man who

cared greatly for his family, friends and community. Pad O'Brien, as he is

better known, was a World War II veteran of the British Navy. Pad and his close

friend, Al Devereaux, enlisted together and hoped to serve on the same vessel.

Upon approaching the commanding officer, they were informed that they could not

serve on the same ship as they were related. As a result, Pad was posted to

serve on the HMS Revenge while Al got posted to the ill-fated HMS Hood. It was

this decision of the commanding officer that luckily allowed us to have Pad for

many years after the war.

Pad was a consummate storyteller and commanded the attention of young and old

alike, regaling all with stories of the Southern Shore and of his many sailing

adventures. Padt will be missed by friends and family and will be remembered

with a smile by all, especially his son, our MHA for the District of Gander,

Kevin O'Brien.

I am sure this House, Mr. Speaker, will join me in sending our condolences to

Mr. Kevin O'Brien and the O'Brien family on their great loss.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to rise today to congratulate Mr. Don Crewe, a Port aux Basques

resident, who has been awarded the Outstanding Professional Achievement Award as

part of the 2005 Memorial University of Newfoundland Alumni Tribute Awards.

This Outstanding Professional Achievement Award acknowledges alumni who have

given of themselves to improve the lives of people and their communities.

Recipients of this award will have demonstrated exceptional community and

volunteer service that has made a difference to the well-being of others.

Mr. Speaker, a retired educator, Don Crewe's volunteer work expands more

than thirty-six years. Since 1969 he has served in a wide range of leadership

roles, including: Secretary of the Port aux Basques Minor Hockey Association;

Vice-Chair of the Dr. Charles L. LeGrow Health Centre; local Chair of the Rick

Hansen Wheels in Motion fundraising event and local area Chair of the Cabot

Soiree and Viking Celebrations.

Mr. Crewe also serves as a member of St. Paul's Anglican Church Vestry, the

Winter Carnival Committee, the Port aux Basques Anniversary Come Home Year Event

and the local

chapter of Toastmasters International. He has been a Royal

Canadian Army Cadet leader and trainer, as well he preforms with a popular local

folk singing group that donates its revenue to local charities.

I ask all members of this House to join with me in congratulating Mr. Don

Crewe on receiving the Outstanding Professional Achievement Award.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MS GOUDIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It gives me great pleasure to rise in this House today to congratulate Humber

Valley Resort on winning the Best International Development Award at the 2005

Bentley International Property Awards this past November.

It is truly a delight to see Humber Valley Resort being honoured in such a

prestigious international competition with entries from top resorts in over

twenty-five countries from around the world. It should be no surprise to the

people of Humber Valley that our beautiful backyard is now receiving the

recognition it has always deserved.

In addition to the Best International Development Award, Humber Valley Resort

also received awards for Best Canadian Development, Best Sports Development,

Best Golf Development and Best Water Front Development.

I would like to thank Chairman Brian Dobbin of Newfound Developers for having

the foresight to grasp this dream and make it a reality. This world-class resort

is a true Newfoundland and Labrador success story, and I ask all hon. members to

join with me in extending congratulations to all those involved in helping

Humber Valley Resort win this remarkable international award.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, December 10, I had the privilege of attending the

Annual Firemen's Dinner in Harbour Breton. The dinner is held on an annual

basis to express appreciation for the dedicated service provided by the

volunteer members of the fire department.

The Harbour Breton Fire Department has always been a group to show leadership

and guidance to their community. The residents have always supported the fire

department and in turn they have committed their time to provide a very

professional service to the residents.

In a community where residents are facing incredible challenges, the

volunteer members of the fire department continue to give what they can to this

organization.

Mr. Speaker, the members ensure that they are well trained and equipped to

answer the emergency calls when they are needed. In fact, they were called out

earlier this morning to assist in a tragic accident near my hometown in Seal

Cove, Fortune Bay. This department also put significant time and effort into

fire protection and prevention. Statistics for the community prove that they are

making much progress in their efforts.

Mr. Speaker, it was a pleasure for me to share the evening with Fire Chief

Reg Bennett, Mayor Don Stewart and members of the Fire Department in Harbour

Breton. Long-term service awards of twenty-five years were presented to

firefighters Ernie Drake, Kevin Ashford and Raymond Hynes Jr. I have enjoyed

sharing their many accomplishments and look forward to continued co-operation

with the Harbour Breton Fire Department in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of the House to join me in congratulating the

Harbour Breton Fire Department for another successful year and good luck as they

continue their volunteer effort for the community.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to inform the House that, on December 3, I had the opportunity

to attend the Toys for Joys event in Labrador West. This event raises money for

children of less fortunate families in Labrador West to ensure that their

Christmas is more enjoyable than it might otherwise be.

Mr. Speaker, Toys for Joys is an evening of entertainment where local

musicians volunteer their talents to this worthwhile event. This year saw eight

bands take part, providing a full night of entertainment.

The first Toys for Joys was held thirteen years ago, an idea originated by a

local musician, Roger Lyons, who passed away suddenly in July, 2002. It is now

called the Roger Lyons Memorial Toys of Joys and is an annual event. I am

pleased to say, Mr. Speaker, thanks to the generosity of the citizens of

Labrador West, this year's event raised more than $13,000.

I would like to thank organizers Fred Fewer and Nick Kennedy, and everyone

else who helped out to make this year's event an astounding success. At the

same time, Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that, whenever there is a need

in our communities for needy causes, it is generally local musicians who are

most often the first in line to help out. I would like to recognize them today,

whatever community they may live in, for making our society a better place to

live.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to extend

congratulations to the members of the Meadows Volunteer Fire Department and

Meadows Firettes.

On Saturday, November 19, I had the pleasure of attending the thirty-third

Annual Firefighters Ball. The eighteen members who make up the Meadows Volunteer

Fire Department are an active and committed group of volunteers dedicated to

ensuring the safety of their own town and its residents. The members are

continuously training and enhancing their skills to provide the best service to

their town.

There were a number of awards presented at the dinner, including the twenty

year Fire Service Long Service Medals to Spencer Brake and Shawn McAuley, as

well as a Ten Year Bar to Derek Hann, who has been with the department since

1973. Firefighter of the Year was Ted Taylor, and the MHA award was presented to

Michael Brake.

In addition to the dedicated firefighters, there is an active Firettes groups

continually supporting the fire department through fundraising and other

initiatives. Over the years, this group has raised thousands of dollars to

ensure the firefighters have the necessary equipment available when needed.

Again, on Saturday night, the Firettes presented a cheque to the fire department

for $4,200.

One of the major projects for the fire department over the past four or five

years was to raise funds for a new fire hall. I was very pleased to be able to

attend the official opening of the new fire hall on October 12, and join with

the firefighters and the residents as they celebrated the opening of the new

facility.

I ask all members to join with me in congratulating the Meadows Firefighters

and Firettes for their continued commitment and dedication to theirs towns and

residents.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Gander.

MR. O'BRIEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today in this hon. House to mark the twentieth anniversary of the

Arrow Air disaster in Gander on December 12, 1985. There were 256 people on

board at the time of the crash, including eight civilian crew members and 248

soldiers from the U.S. 101 st Airborne Division. The soldiers had been

part of a peacekeeping mission in the Sinai desert and were on their way home to

the U.S. for Christmas. After a refuelling stop at Gander International Airport,

the Arrow Air plane lifted off for the troops home base of Fort Campbell,

Kentucky, and crashed less than a minute later, killing all 256 people on board.

Somber ceremonies are being held in Gander today in recognition of this

terrible tragedy. Similar ceremonies are also being held today in Fort Campbell,

Kentucky, and at Arlington National Cemetery in Washington.

In recognition of this horrible tragedy, and in honour of the 256 lives lost

in Gander twenty years ago this very day, I ask all hon. members to join with me

in a moment of silence.

MR. SPEAKER: If hon. members would join us, we will observe a moment of

silence in memory of the 256 people who died in the air crash twenty years ago.

[Members observe a moment of silence]

MR. SPEAKER: Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in the House today to perform the very pleasant duty of offering

congratulations to a team of young men from this Province who are now Olympic

athletes and role models to us all.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Yesterday afternoon in Halifax, the curling team of

Brad Gushue out of the St. John's Curling Club won the Tim Horton's Canadian

Curling Trials. With this win, they also earned the privilege of representing

Canada at the 2006 Olympic Winter Games in Torino, Italy.

Mr. Speaker, this is truly an extraordinary feat by this young team

consisting of: Skip Brad Gushue of St. John's; First Jamie Korab from Harbour

Grace; Third Mark Nichols of Labrador City; of course, along with Russ Howard, a

native of New Brunswick and a Canadian curling legend, who actually threw second

stones; coach Toby MacDonald of St. John's; spare Mike Adam of Wabush, and the

team's sports psychologist Bas Kavanagh from the Goulds.

These young men have accomplished something truly awesome. They are the very

first team from our Province to compete at the Olympics in any sport. We have

had Newfoundland and Labrador athletes perform at the Olympic Games before,

however, this is truly a first for sport in our Province.

The Gushue Rink had a remarkable run in this tournament losing only one match

while competing against the best curlers in the country. It culminated with an

eight to seven win over Jeff Stoughton of Winnipeg in a match that I know had

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, myself included, on the edge of our seats

yesterday afternoon.

When I referred to this team as role models, Mr. Speaker, I did not do so

lightly. I have no doubt that their success with do wonders to increase

Newfoundland and Labrador's reputation, not just in curling circles, but in

the sporting world generally.

Our recent accomplishments, including the Gushue Rink's own triumphs as

Canadian and World Junior Champions and Corner Brook's Bas Buckle Rink winning

the Senior Men's World Curling Championships, have proven that our Province

can compete with the best in the world.

This is a true testament to the desire, dedication and raw talent of athletes

in Newfoundland and Labrador and from a talent pool of only a half million

people and a team sport that is something quite phenomenal.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all Members of this House of Assembly to join with me in

congratulating the Gushue Rink on their world-class performance and I know that

all of us will follow them on their exciting journey to Italy as they make a run

for Olympic gold.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the Premier for an advanced copy of his statement. Members on this

side would also like to congratulate the Gushue Rink on a job well done.

Mr. Speaker, I had the privilege, going back to when they won the World

Juniors and they were travelling around. They went to Labrador City, the team

wanted to go. I had the privilege of travelling with the team up to the Carol

Curling Club in Labrador West and accompanying the team and attending the

festivities with the World Juniors, that group. At that time I made a statement

at the curling club, I said this group is going to do well. Not because of their

curling skills, but because of their desire and their attitude towards the sport

and towards the people in general. These were fine, upstanding, young

individuals. What I noticed about the group, at that time when they won the

juniors, they sat there and signed everybody's autograph, everybody's

T-shirt. They stayed there until every kid who was there, that wanted to be a

part of them, they did. Their character is what was going to bring them to this

level.

I congratulate the team. There is one person in particular - and the Member

for Baie Verte would recognize this more because we played sports together -

Mike Adam of Labrador City -

AN HON. MEMBER: Wabush.

MS JONES: Wabush? Well, Wabush. For a person to be on the team for so

long, from a junior level, to bring up and realizing that they need someone with

experience and in comes this person they needed with experience, they bring him

in, and for this person to step aside for Russ Howard, it is just amazing. It is

just absolutely amazing the character of this young fellow, who would take his

own personal - whatever he wanted to do and step aside -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I say congratulations to the whole team, but for

this young athlete - and I know the Member for Baie Verte, when we are into a

championship game or into any tournament, when we are sitting on that bench we

are almost chewing the bench to pieces to get out there. But for a young fellow

to take himself aside, it was a true testimony for himself and to the dedication

that this team has. I congratulate all the team members. I know we will all be

watching them, we will all be cheering for them. The best part of this here, not

only will they represent Newfoundland and Labrador and Canada at the World's

Curling, they will also be representing Newfoundland and Labrador's true

ambassadors and I congratulate them on their athletic skills but also on their

skills as people because I know they are just great, fine individuals.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the Premier for his statement. Today is, indeed, a proud day in this

Province, and certainly a proud day in Labrador West, because it does have a

great Labrador West connection, as was pointed out, with Mark Nichols being from

Labrador City and Mike Adam being from Wabush, from the Carol Curling Club; but,

in addition to that, Brad Gushue's uncle is a long-time resident of Labrador

West as well, so it is a big day there.

I want to congratulate them as well, Mr. Speaker, and say that they have

elevated the game of curling in this Province to an all-time high. As previous

speakers have mentioned, their conduct on the ice is impressive, but the one

thing that is probably more impressive than that is their conduct and their

attitude off the ice, and the way that they are proud to represent our Province.

Mr. Speaker, we all join in wishing them the best when they go to Torino,

Italy, and I am sure we will all be watching, on the edge of our seats, as the

Premier said, while they are there participating as well. We wish them the best

of luck.

Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I cannot sit down without saying that it also

gives me a bit of satisfaction at the win yesterday, the significant win, and

their play throughout the past week, when I think about all the comments that

have been written by reporters from upalong who sort of discounted them and did

not pay them any serious attention at all, in spite of all the facts that were

there for them to see. I think they showed the country, and in particular this

Province, how intelligent they are, how dedicated they are to the game, and the

high level of skill that they demonstrate.

Again, we certainly wish them the best of success in Torino.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, last week I had the privilege to participate in the United

Nations' Conference on Climate Change, commonly known as COP 11. It marked the

eleventh meeting of the parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on

Climate Change, and was held in conjunction with the first meeting of the

parties who signed the Kyoto Protocol.

During my time at COP 11, I participated in a number of meetings and events

including the Climate Leaders Summit. I also had the opportunity to tour a

number of exhibitions of equipment and services related to climate change, which

gave me a greater understanding of the latest climate change technologies.

Mr Speaker, our government understands the seriousness and importance of

addressing climate change, and that is why we have developed our provincial

Climate Change Action Plan. During the COP 11 meetings, it was encouraging to

learn that much of the science of climate change upon which our own provincial

plan is based has now been confirmed with a greater level of certainty. This

information affirmed for me that our action plan is the right plan and we must

continue with its implementation.

One topic referenced in our provincial plan, climate change adaptation and

preparing for the negative effects of climate change, was also a topic of

discussion at COP 11. Countries now realize that it will take considerable time

and resources to reverse the effects of climate change. In our Province,

adaptation to flooding and extreme weather events is of particular concern,

especially at the municipal level. In this regard, I am pleased to inform hon.

members that my department, in conjunction with the Department of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs and the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of

Municipalities, will host a workshop for municipalities on December 19 of this

year. The purpose of the workshop is to educate municipal leaders about adapting

to climate change and the importance of planning now for potential adverse

events.

This is just one of the many actions that we have already taken to address

climate change. In taking action to address climate change, government is taking

action towards the development of a more sustainable society and economy, which

will benefit our Province today and for generations to come.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, would like to echo the comments of the hon. minister. This is a very,

very important topic in our world today. We know all the serious weather

conditions, and flooding that we have had over the last number of years.

Research indicates that it is related to climate change.

I think our federal government is on the right track in this particular area.

It is too bad the United States of America will not join us in this major

initiative, because they are one of the biggest polluters in the world. I am

sure that, if the Prime Minister keeps up the battle, we will win this battle

and get the Americans onside in terms of making sure that we do not have a

disaster in our world.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First, I would like to take the opportunity to publicly congratulate the

minister and his wife, Yvonne, on their new baby girl -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARRIS: - and welcome them to the joys of parenthood.

Mr. Speaker, on the issue, I am very glad to hear that this government and

this minister are finally taking climate change and the Kyoto Protocol

seriously. They did not really do so when they were in Opposition, but I think

this is a good thing. The fact that the minister is holding meetings with

municipalities, to help them learn to adapt, to plan for potential adverse

effects, is obviously an indication of how seriously this issue is, and the fact

that the government is treating it seriously.

I hope they do make some effort to convince their federal counterparts of the

same thing, Mr. Speaker. We do have problems with the Americans coming to grips

with this, and I would have been a lot happier if, in their approach to

conservation and energy renewal, they would take a much more aggressive approach

in energy conservation -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave is granted.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, in the Catholic Church they have something

called general absolution, and perhaps we could work something out before we

start, so that whenever I get up to speak I don't get half the time while we

are here. Maybe the House Leaders should talk about that.

In any event, Mr. Speaker -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: We will give you general absolution.

MR. HARRIS: I think I have general absolution from the other side, I don't

know about my friends over here.

Mr. Speaker, I would have been a lot happier if, in their approach to climate

change, they had been much more aggressive in adopting a conservation strategy,

doing greater things to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from the Seal Cove

Generating Station, something far more comprehensive in helping people

contribute less in their own homes to greenhouse gases. That, I hope, will be

the next step we hear from this minister.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further Statements by Ministers.

The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to inform this House that government is today prepared to

pledge an additional $50 million over five years for the Trans-Labrador Highway

to reach a cost-sharing agreement that will see the federal government match

this contribution.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: The total cost, Mr. Speaker, of surfacing the Trans-Labrador

Highway from Happy Valley-Goose Bay to Labrador City is estimated at about $100

million. We have written the federal government, today, requesting a commitment

for a 50-50 cost-sharing agreement to have this work completed over five years.

Mr. Speaker, key to the economic progress of Labrador is the completion of

the Trans-Labrador Highway. The Premier has written each of the federal leaders

seeking their position on a number of issues important to Newfoundland and

Labrador in this election campaign, including whether they would support a

federal-provincial cost-shared agreement to complete the Trans-Labrador Highway.

The Council of the Federation, Mr. Speaker, recently released the national

transportation strategy, Looking to the Future; A Plan for Investing in Canada's

Transportation System. The strategy proposes a new transportation funding

partnership between provinces, territories and the federal government.

Mr. Speaker, we believe an early commitment to cost-share surfacing the

Trans-Labrador Highway would be a firm indication of the federal government's

endorsement of the national strategy. This is an ideal opportunity for the

federal government to signal its support for the completion of this vital

transportation link in Labrador.

The provincial government was recently successful in having the

Trans-Labrador Highway and several other roads in the Province added to the

National Highway System. As a result, this Province now has 2,469 kilometres of

road designated as part of the National Highway System, up from the previous 955

kilometres.

Mr. Speaker, a new funding arrangement with the federal government is

essential if this expanded road network is to be upgraded and maintained at

national standards. Federal concurrence to add more roads to the National

Highway System is just talk unless it is accompanied by a renewed commitment to

funding. This Province will be calling upon whichever party forms the next

government to make this commitment to Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister asked me if I had received a copy of his statement when I came

in the House. I said: Yes, I did about a minute ago, but the cheque was not

there. So, I do not know if that was an oversight or not.

Mr. Speaker, anytime that there is new money to be spent on highways in

Labrador it is a welcomed announcement for the people of Labrador, I can tell

you that. In 1997, I sat in this Legislature representing a district that had

next to no road connections, and it was through a deal of the government of that

day that $340 million was signed off to be invested in road infrastructure

throughout Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I support the initiative that is taking place here today, but I

want to say to the minister, you have not taken it far enough because there is a

highway in Southern Labrador, from Red Bay to Cartwright, right now that has to

be resurfaced and paved as well. I would have liked to have seen an agreement

going forward from the Province to be able to do all the highway that has been

built in Labrador to date and to bring it up to a national highway standard. So

I would like to encourage him to add that to his proposal or his initiative that

he is bringing forward to the federal government at this particular time.

Mr. Speaker, I can honestly say that it is a good announcement by the

minister but also a sad occasion in Labrador, when all of these years later we

are still standing as a part of this Province fighting to have roads brought to

a highway standard that most people in our Province have enjoyed for decades and

decades.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MS JONES: So, I wish the minister well. I will support it 100 per cent. I

will lobby my colleagues in Ottawa, I say to the minister, to ensure that they

can ante up and put the money in that is needed to bring those highways up to

standard.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I say it is a great day for Labrador in the House of Assembly, talking about

the curling club, half of which comes from Labrador.

This statement - I have risen and addressed I guess a good many ministerial

statements over the years, but I think this one gives me more pleasure to

respond to than many of the others.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. COLLINS: I think now, Mr. Speaker, we have to press the federal

government to come onboard with this because this initiative is long overdue.

The $100 million that would be allocated should see that road completed in a

five-year period, something that people of Labrador have been telling me that

they would like to see it done in.

I say to the minister, this initiative will go a long way towards improving

the economic activities that take place in Labrador. If you talk to the truckers

and what they have to subject themselves and their expensive vehicles to today

compared to the ease that they would have if we had a hard surface on that road.

So, I welcome the news from the minister and take this opportunity to inform him

that anything that we can do from our side during this federal election with our

political party, the New Democrats, then we will certainly be doing to encourage

them to come onboard, make an issue of this, support it and let's get on and

get the road done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Fisheries.

Mr. Speaker, government has recently been given a Cashin Report on raw

material sharing in the crab industry. This is a very important report and will

affect a very important sector of our economy, the fishery. The release of the

report is necessary to ensure the crab fishery will open in a timely manner.

I ask the minister: When will the report be released publicly?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture and

Minister Responsible for Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question. The Cashin Report was

delivered to government, I believe it was a week today. So we are still in the

process of completing our due diligence and analysis of that report. We intend

to make it public as quickly as possible, Mr. Speaker. I do believe that I made

a commitment on the Fisheries Broadcast one day last week, that certainly

as quickly as possible means before Christmas. That is certainly our timetable

and we want to get it out there, in the general public, as quickly as we can,

keeping in mind that it is incumbent upon us to do it right, to do it properly

and to do a proper analysis of the report.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr Speaker, government is trying to close the House of Assembly early so that

they will not have to answer questions from the Opposition pertaining to the

Cashin Report.

I ask the minister: Why not keep the House open until the report is released,

so that any legislative changes that may be required are facilitated before we

close for Christmas?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, if the House, in fact, closes - and I do not

know whether it will or whether it will not today. I assume it will be, because

all of the parties in the House agree that we have publicly finished the

business that is in front of us and we can proceed.

In terms of legislation, Mr. Speaker, if the report were released today,

released tomorrow, released next week, it will not be physically possible to

have legislation drafted in time for this particular session of the House. The

commitment of the government is that if legislation is required and if the

government determines, as a result of the analysis of the report that

legislation is required, this House, if necessary, will be brought back early

enough to deal with the legislation so that its impact will be felt for the next

fishing season. That is the commitment of the government and I can assure you,

on behalf of the government, that commitment will be kept if it is necessary for

it to be kept.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly hope that he does not wait until March, like they did last year,

to bring in the raw material sharing. We saw what happened then, so I certainly

hope that if there is legislation required, that you get the House open early in

the new year to avoid the catastrophe we had last year.

Mr. Speaker, my next question is for the Premier. It is over a year ago the

residents of Harbour Breton received the devastating news that FPI was closing

its plant and throwing 350 people out of work in that town. At the time the

Premier said he was all over the file and stated publicly on many occasions that

he would not let the people of Harbour Breton down. We have watched what has

expired here in the past year and with the exception of a few make-work

programs, nothing has been done by your government and FPI to assist the people

of Harbour Breton.

I ask the Premier: What did you mean when you stated you were all over the

file and you would not let the people of Harbour Breton down?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

All of the people who work in the plant who have been affected and not in

receipt of income have been employed in the community through projects

administered through the town and through this government. We continue to work

with the FFAW and with FPI to conclude the terms of the contract and at that

time we will be able to offer an enhanced wage benefit to the workers of Harbour

Breton.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: I would say, that is all over the file: We are not going to let

you down. A couple of make-work programs this year. Absolutely nothing

happening! People leaving the town every day to seek employment in other parts

of this country. You should be ashamed to get up and answer that.

Mr. Speaker, FPI is currently deciding the future of its operation in several

communities in this Province. I ask the Premier: What conversations have you had

with FPI regarding your operational review and can the people in communities

such as Marystown, Burin and Fortune rest a little easier this Christmas knowing

that the Premier is all over the file?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I thank the hon. gentleman for his question. Leaving the political

rhetoric and innuendo aside for the moment, because of the importance of the

question, let me say this, Mr. Speaker: I have met, on several occasions, in the

few weeks that I have been Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, with senior

officials of FPI, and I mean senior, top officials of the company. We are

allowing them, of course, to continue with their internal review. When that is

completed, we will be briefed on that and we will have more to say. As a matter

of fact, Mr. Speaker, I believe the Premier and I are meeting with senior

officials of FPI and a subcommittee of the FPI board tomorrow.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, we are very much aware of what is happening internally with

FPI. We are in close contact with them. Both the Premier, as leader of the

government, and myself, as Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, will be

following up further with the company on that tomorrow.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say, you can meet all you like, FPI has not even honoured the commitments

that they made to the people of Harbour Breton. It is time that you forced them

to do so.

Mr. Speaker, my final question is for the Minister of Education. Mr. Speaker,

now that the Minister of Education has stated publicly that the Eastern School

Board should shred the multi-year plan for the Eastern School District, will

government commit the necessary funds and resources to ensure that all children

in the Eastern School District get the same quality education, or will the

minister cherry-pick which schools will close, as was done in the Central Region

during a by-election?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, the report that was made

public last week was done by an independent consultant. Mr. Speaker, I have been

assured by the Eastern School Board that there will be a consultation process,

the stakeholders will have a say in the process, and that the school board and

the trustees will be able to provide a full analysis to the information that

they receive.

Mr. Speaker, as a result of that, they will put forward a proposal that they

feel is appropriate for the long-term facilities needs for that district.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Abitibi in Stephenville is another file that the Premier has been all over.

We now have passed the company-imposed deadline of last Friday, and no

resolution. The mayor and the Chamber of Commerce in Stephenville have both been

asking for help with this issue.

What is your government doing, Premier, to help resolve this most important

and serious situation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we will continue to do everything we can, whenever requested.

That is what we have done right from the start. As the hon. member opposite

knows, we have made a significant contribution to make this work. We announced

our proposal some considerable time ago, a proposal that the company, at the

time, was certainly satisfied with.

Recently, in recent days, of course, over the last week, the Minister of

Education, the Minister of Natural Resources, the Member for Port au Port and

myself have had several communications and contacts with the people in the

community, officials of council, members of the corporation and members of the

union.

I was requested, and my understanding is that it came from the mayor and from

the council, that a request be put in for a mediation in this particular -

because it was their understanding that both parties wanted to have a mediation.

I contacted the company and I did contact the union over the weekend and spoke

with senior officials, Mr. Planet in the company, and the head of the union as

well, and asked if they wanted a mediation. The company flatly rejected a

mediation, and that was contrary to the indications that were given by the

company to the town and people on the ground in the community. So, the company

flatly rejected any offer for mediation by this government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Premier, as much as the government has tried to present this

issue in the last couple of months as being between Abitibi and the union

executive, it is much more than that. Government made it a regional and a

provincial issue this past summer and fall and then became a spectator. Making

an announcement that a deal has been done, but not seeing the deal carried

through, still amounts to failure.

I say to the Premier: What are you actively doing yourself to see that this

matter is positively resolved in the interests of the people in the Bay St.

George area; and, in particular, is there a Plan B to ensure that this company

will not remove assets if they do not make a deal, or that you might even

consider expropriation of the assets so that we can still protect the people in

that region?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, we are very clearly on the record where we

stand on expropriation, but our goal is to have that mill up and operating and

that is why we made the significant contribution that we did, and that is why we

have attempted to make a deal. We also made it very clear that we are not going

to stand by and allow this company to strip that union contract. That is

something that we have made very, very clear.

When it comes to the union dealing with the company, we are not going to try

and impose our will on the union. The union has to deal with the corporation.

The union executive are not satisfied with what has been offered by the company.

This company is an extremely difficult - and that is the nicest way I can put

it to this House of Assembly - an extremely difficult company to deal with. They

shift, they move. What they say at the highest levels, their people on the

ground are saying something else. They are trying to manipulate that community,

they are trying to divide that community, and we are not going to stand by and

allow that to happen under any circumstances.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My next question is for the Minister of Justice.

Minister, notwithstanding the comments of the Minister of Transportation in

the past couple of weeks, the family of the victim involved in the fatal

accident on the Argentia Access Road a few weeks ago are calling for a public

inquiry into this incident.

Minister, are you prepared to see that a public inquiry is, in fact,

conducted into this incident?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the accidents that have taken place over the past number of

weeks on our highways have been as a result of black ice buildup on the roads.

There have been some difficulties associated with that. Unfortunately, Mr.

Speaker, these things happen from time to time at this time of year.

We have had discussions internally about the way salt is applied on our

roads. We have been endeavouring to try and upgrade our equipment, something

that has not been done over the past number of years, to make sure that the

department is in a better position to be able to deal with the environmental

conditions and the road conditions that we have in this Province.

As for a public inquiry, Mr. Speaker, I am not in a position to speak to

that; however, many days, accidents take place on the highway and we endeavour

to ascertain what the problems were. We look at the police reports and see where

improvements can be made from a departmental perspective, and we will continue

to do that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has

a long-term objective of ensuring that all schools in the Province, and the

communities in which they reside, have access to affordable broadband Internet

services. We support this objective and we encourage government to move in this

direction, an initiative of the previous Liberal government.

Proposals were called earlier this year for the expansion of this service. We

asked for the proposals under the Access to Information legislation to determine

if there was indeed a level playing field in the issuing of the contract;

however, much of the document was blacked out.

When a close business and personal connection to government, such as Mr. Dean

MacDonald's company, Persona, received $10 million in taxpayers' money, then

there should be scrutiny to ensure the taxpayers' money is well spent.

I ask the minister if the entire document can be released for scrutiny to

show that this company was not given special treatment?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There was over $5 million invested by this government in CDLI, giving

broadband services to schools and communities right across this Province in this

past year.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, I can assure all members of this House that

all protocols were followed and everything was done fairly, transparently, and

in the way that it ought to be done by this government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, I say it is not very transparent when the

documentation was blacked out.

I ask the minister: Will the company be required to disclose to the public,

financial statements related to the profitability of this venture? Also, was the

information gathered in the Request for Proposals used to determine the

potential possibility of this venture for the company? If so, will the minister

release that information?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member raises some very important

questions. I am unable to answer them at this time. I will take it under

advisement and I will report back.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Labrador West, who understands

he is sharing the four minutes with the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi today.

The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Education.

I want to ask the minister, given the fact that the College of the North

Atlantic in Labrador West is paying excessive rent to the tune of $1 million a

year that is going outside this Province when they could deliver more effective

programs if they had their own facility. So, I want to ask the minister: How

long does her department intend to allow this to continue instead of putting a

proper campus in Labrador West?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I want to assure the hon. member that we take

education and post-secondary education very seriously, and we certainly have

completed the White Paper because we want to put emphasis on post-secondary and

make sure we are meeting the needs of our young people in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I am aware of the exorbitant prices that we are paying for the

space in Labrador City or in the Labrador City area. We do want to improve the

service. I cannot say right now when we will be building a new facility or how

we will be looking for alternate accommodations. I am very aware of the problem.

We are very committed to post-secondary education and we will certainly be

working with that issue.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Also, for the Minister of Education. Given the minister's comments on the

Eastern School District report last week and her comments today, recognizing

that the five-year plan is still going forward and the board plans to have their

five-year plan approved before the House meets again: Will the minister commit

that no school closure or school downgrade that does not meet the community

consensus in a particular area will go ahead without a full consultation and

perhaps a one year delay?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, as I had said before, the report that came forward

was done by an independent consultant without the full consultation of the

stakeholders who would have a vested interest in the education and how we

proceed in this Province. I have been assured there will be a consultation

process. There will be a full consultation process to allow the stakeholders to

have their say. Based on the information that goes back to the school board and

the trustees, I understand that they will be doing a full analysis of the

information before the board puts together what is the report of the board and

their proposal for their facilities.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, the arrogance of this government was evident last

Thursday when the Minister of Education was unaware of any details of her

so-called consultant to the White Paper, Ms Nada Borden, who happens to be the

Vice-President of the PC Party and was the Chief Financial Officer for the

Premier during the last election.

Will the minister tell the House what her duties are, the length of this

blatant, political appointment, the cost to the taxpayers, and confirm that Ms

Borden's office is located on the tenth floor of the Sir Richard Squires

Building, which happens to be the Premier's office?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, these questions were asked the last day we sat in

the House and I did indicate at that time that I would get the information.

There are a number of secondments to the Department of Education. I believe

there are actually thirty-eight, but I will speak to this particular one. You

asked for the information. I will provide the information.

The information indicates that Ms Borden was seconded to the Department of

Education from the College of the North Atlantic on August 25, 2005, and she

will remain in that position until the end of the month, at which time she will

be retiring. Ms Borden is reviewing how colleges across Canada do strategic

planning to determine the best practice we will be using here in this Province,

which is part of the White Paper.

As for the cost of Ms Borden's appointment, she is presently being paid at

a Class VI, Level E, Step 12 on a Technical and Vocational Instructor's scale

of the Faculty Collective Agreement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: You left out where her office is at, which happens to be on

the tenth floor of the Premier's office in Corner Brook.

Mr. Speaker, from the information received on the Access to Information Act,

it states that all other expenses, including travel, vacation, will be the

responsibility of the Department of Education, and the College of the North

Atlantic is being reimbursed for her salary from the Department of Education.

This makes Ms Borden an employee of the Department of Education. Ms Borden was

elected to the school board under these guidelines. Any employee of the

Department of Education must have written prior approval from the minister to

seek a seat on the school board.

Will the minister table this letter, if it was provided to Ms Borden? If not,

will the minister follow her own guidelines and have Ms Borden removed from the

school board?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I will look into that matter and I will report

back to the House. I do not have a letter available right now. Mr. Speaker, I

will note that she was hired in August, 2005.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, last week I asked a question about the Housing Corporation,

headed by a former PC Party Leader, Len Simms, paving a road to a golf course

owned by the Premier. The Minister of Education said the road was paved because

there were complaints by the residents who have very, very expensive homes in

the area.

I ask the minister: Will she come to my district to see if the houses located

along the dirt roads are expensive enough to warrant proper road repair and

paving, and can she tell the people of this Province how expensive their houses

have to be before they get road repairs?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I can tell the member I have a number of those roads in my

district also, so he doesn't have to explain that to me.

I understand the member asked this question last week, Mr. Speaker, and from

what I understand, just being a few weeks in this portfolio, this is a

development that came under the development for the Southlands. The fact of the

matter is, it was your administration that built that road, it was your

administration that allowed the money to be in that fund to finish the road, and

it was a complaint that came from the City of St. John's through a petition.

We just fulfilled our duties with the money that was in the fund and completed

the road, as it should be, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, in addition to showing her arrogance and

elitist streak in the House last week with her comments about expensive homes

being more deserving of paving, the acting minister also said that the City of

St. John's approached Newfoundland and Labrador Housing to have the road

paved. Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that while the city has been

receiving a number of complaints about this road, this project was not high on

their priority list.

I ask the minister: Will she stop trying to justify this blatant abuse of

political power, and tell the House that the only reason this road was paved was

because it goes to a golf course owned by the Premier, and will she finally tell

us, or will the minister finally tell us, how much it cost to pave this

particular road, once and for all, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, first of all, right off the top I can tell the

member how much it was; $29,000. I can tell the member also, that we don't

have favorites when it comes to paving roads. As was seen in my district last

year, Mr. Speaker, the most roads (inaudible) in this Province were in the

District of Bay Verte, and we make no apologies for that.

I can tell the member this, he is one of the members, I understand from my

briefings, from across the way who knows full-well that this whole development

for the Southlands was put in place, the road was built, and the money was

allocated, from your administration, to finish that particular road. That is why

it was done, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Education.

Parents should be able to send their children to school knowing they are in a

safe and secure environment. The stories of two mothers in recent months, and

again in the past few days, of how their children are being bullied and abused

by other children in school is absolutely heartbreaking. The issues that are

being expressed by these parents have obviously fell on deaf ears and with no

action. I am sure the minister will agree, that this is probably not an only

incident that are occurring in our school system and I ask if she will

intervene, as the minister, to protect these children and to stop the known

abuse that is happening in these schools?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I want to assure the hon. member that we do take

incidences of bullying, harassment and intimidation in the schools, in the

schoolyards and the classroom very seriously. We certainly work with those

issues. We certainly have staff trained to be able to work with those issues. We

also recognize that sometimes issues escalate. Early prevention and intervention

may not necessarily work, or some incidences may go undetected until they have

escalated. But, Mr. Speaker, I do want to say that the school officials, the

school boards and other related professionals, which sometimes may need to be

used when situations escalate, are certainly out there. It is certainly a

process we follow, and at no point, Mr. Speaker, do I ever want to indicate that

we do not take these incidences seriously.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the conservative hired director of education for

the Eastern School board was on the radio this morning and, in my mind,

absolutely shirking his responsibility. Mr. Speaker, he talked about protocols

being in place, he talked about policies and procedures were followed, but I

would say to the minister, that these are all words until your child is a

victim. These are parents who have expressed a sincere and very important issue

here that needs to be addressed.

I want to say to the minister, that I think she and her government - and I

want to ask her to look at this, implementing a mechanism that would be

province-wide in our school system that deals with cases like this and that it

is not left to one school, one principal or one director of a school board.

Minister, will you commit to do that today?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I have heard the news reports as well with regard

to some of the issues that have been brought forward by some parents.

Mr. Speaker, some issues that we have to deal with are extremely serious and

they do need intervention, and parents are very concerned about the health and

safety of their children. Mr. Speaker, each and every child in Newfoundland and

Labrador and beyond, certainly need to have a very safe environment when they go

to school. They need protection. They need to be in a caring environment and

they need to be able to learn in an environment that fosters learning as opposed

to making them feel that, in any way, they are intimidated or afraid, or unable

to go to school.

Mr. Speaker, we do recognize how serious these issues are. We do work with

these issues. We do ensure that we have staff trained to be able to deal with

it. We are also able to access other professionals who may be needed at times to

deal with some of these issues. Mr. Speaker, in no way do I ever want it to be

said or to be believed that we do not take the health and safety and the

learning environment very serious for our children.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I do not believe what I am hearing because

latitude is not the answer here. This is a situation where parents, who have

children in the schools, were not informed. Teachers were not informed that this

abuse was occurring.

Minister, I feel you have to intervene. You have to put your own standard

policy in place in this Province that allows for parents and teachers to know

what is happening in these schools so they can make those decisions and make

them wisely.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, as I have said, it is very important that we do

have a very safe environment for our children, one that fosters their education

and learning. When there are incidents that arise, that means that somebody

feels the effects of harassment, intimidation or bullying, that we are able to

intervene and we are able to deal with the issues and we are able to ensure that

other students, or victims of any particular incident, are able to be maintained

in the school, in their classrooms, within the boundaries of their learning

environment. Mr. Speaker, we have to work with all these factors. We have to

deal with the individual circumstances of what is going on and we also have to

deal with the parents who are involved in the situation.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Town of Clarenville and other thirteen larger urban

municipalities have been targeted for another MOG cut this year and councils

have learned there will be no review for 2006. These mayors are incensed about

the latest cut, calling it a deterrent to economic development.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister if he had any communications with these

mayors to assist their economic conditions before the decrease was made?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, the MOG has had a reduction and there have been

fourteen municipalities that had growth and can absorb the MOG reductions in

grants. We are working with municipalities in order to have economic

development.

MR. REID: For what? To take the money?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS WHALEN: The municipalities that have been targeted can absorb those

reductions.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

MR. LANGDON: Mr. Speaker, the Town of CBS and the City of St. John's

brought down their budgets recently and have raised taxes to their residents,

which is very unfortunate because it is a direct result of MOG reductions to

these municipalities.

I ask the minister if he will revisit the decision and give back the MOGs due

to these towns?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As one of the four ministers - with my colleague, the Minister of Municipal

and Provincial Affairs, and the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture - who was

at the Federation of Municipalities Convention as a Ministerial Panel, that

question was asked by the Mayor of Goose Bay, I believe, who was one of the

municipalities that were targeted. I can only reiterate and respond the way that

my colleague did. He said that, if a town feels that they have a case to make to

me, in terms of to the government, then, by all means, make it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: I say to the Leader of the Opposition, you can yap all you

want. If you want to hear the answer to the question, I will give it to you.

Whether you accept it or not, then let me provide it to you and you decide for

yourself.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, the fact is this: The minister said -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: Would you like to have an answer?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

We have only about twenty seconds left in Question Period.

The Chair recognizes the Government House Leader.

MR. JOYCE: (Inaudible) two minutes.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, two minutes of being interrupted, I say to the

Member for Bay of Islands.

The fact of the matter is this: The minister said that if a town wishes to

make a case, be aware that they can do so. Having said that, he said to all of

those municipalities that government had made a determination that they could

absorb the reductions within the MOGs.

Mr. Speaker, that is the case. That is what the minister said. That is

government's position. There it is. It is up to you to accept it or not.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allocated for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table today the 2004-2005 Annual

Report for the Department of Education.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, I table the Department of Finance Annual Report for the fiscal year

ended March 31, 2005.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the 2004-2005 Annual

Report of the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to provide the House with the Annual Report for 2004-2005 for

the Department of Environment and Conservation.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In keeping with government's commitment to accountability, I hereby submit

the 2004-2005 Annual Performance Report for the Department of Natural Resources.

This report addresses the department's activities and outcomes from April 1,

2004 to March 31, 2005.

MR. SPEAKER: Further tabling of documents?

The Speaker wishes to table the Report of Public Tender Act Exceptions for

May, June, July, August, September and October, 2005.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Before the Speaker calls Petitions, the Chair would like to recognize the

former Member for Placentia, Mr. Nick Careen, who is in the Speaker's gallery

this afternoon.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the residents of the Burin

Peninsula. It says:

WHEREAS there is a desperate need on the Burin Peninsula for a kidney

dialysis machine; and

WHEREAS this need was identified and brought forward to government by medical

professionals and residents of the Burin Peninsula; and

WHEREAS government has an opportunity with additional health care money from

the federal government and a cash surplus to address this need to improve health

care on the Burin Peninsula;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the

House of Assembly to implore the government to install a kidney dialysis machine

at the Burin Health Care Centre in response to the demonstrated need.

Mr. Speaker, we have been asking for this particular piece of equipment on

the Burin Peninsula now for months; in fact, for a couple of years, I guess,

because if you look back at the need there, and the demonstrated need - and, we

are always being told that you have to have a certain number of individuals. I

can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that number has grown.

To give credit to the people on the Burin Peninsula, they are not just asking

the government to come up with the machine on their own. They have also raised a

considerable amount of money for, in fact, two kidney dialysis units for the

Burin Peninsular, to be put at the Regional Health Care Centre in Burin.

Mr. Speaker, this is long overdue. We have people who are in serious,

serious, condition down there, very serious health issues. Of course, apart from

the fact that they need dialysis, what happens to families when people who

require dialysis are forced to leave home, forced to come to St. John's to

receive the treatment they need? Sometimes it means that the entire family has

to be uprooted, that a spouse, a partner, another family member, has to give up

their employment and move with that family member. We have seen this happen on a

number of occasions, where wives have had to go with their husbands, or husbands

have had to go with their wives, to St. John's and take up residence here, in

fact, because of the length of time they would be required to receive this

treatment. It is difficult to explain, I guess, to someone who really has not

had to go through it, the hardships that are incurred as a result of having to

do this.

It is not just the equipment itself, of course, that is needed at the

regional hospital in Burin. We also need the human resources down there, in

fact, to carry out the treatment that needs to be done; because, to have a piece

of equipment and not have the manpower or the person power to make sure that the

treatment is given to the individuals affected, that is pointless as well, Mr.

Speaker.

What we are asking the government to do is to acknowledge the need, the

demonstrated need on the Burin Peninsula, for a kidney dialysis machine. Two

would be great; one we will take for the time being, but we really need to have

that equipment. We need to have the human resources that go along with that

equipment to make sure that people do not have to continue to travel to St. John's

to receive this most vital care. We all know how difficult it is. I am sure we

have all become aware of people who need this particular treatment.

Again, we are calling upon the government to acknowledge that there is a

serious need here. I am not sure of the status of the health care review for the

Burin Peninsula that the government undertook. I do know that they have moved

forward with a couple of initiatives without that review being completed. I do

not know if it has or not; but, if it has, I would hope to think that they have

also recognized the need for a dialysis machine on the Burin Peninsula.

As the prayer of the petition says, we call upon the government to do that

right way.

Thank you so much.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS GOUDIE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition, and the

petition reads:

The petition of the undersigned residents of Bonne Bay;

WHEREAS there has been no permanent doctor over the past few months.

We, the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of

Assembly to provide a permanent doctor in Bonne Bay.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to mention that I have been working with the

residents of Bonne Bay and the area, and have also met with Western Health Care

Corporation and members of the Western Health Authority. I would just like to

inform you that, following several meetings with the Western Health Care

Corporation, I am very pleased to say that we do have a permanent doctor for the

residents of Bonne Bay, and I will continue to work with the residents of Bonne

Bay to make sure that we provide access to quality health care.

Mr. Speaker, I have grappled with this issue, as the Member for Bay of

Islands mentioned, for quite some time now, long before I was a Member of the

House of Assembly and since I have been a Member of the House of Assembly.

Recruitment and retention of health care providers in rural Newfoundland is a

very difficult issue to deal with, and it is one that we deal with all of the

time. I am going to deal with it the same now, as a Member of the House of

Assembly, as I did with it before I was a Member of the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS GOUDIE: Mr. Speaker, I am working with the Department of Health and

Community Services, the Western Health Care Corporation - actually, I have been

speaking with the CEO at Western Health Care Corporation and officials at

Western Health Care Corporation on several occasions. We are certainly going out

now to do a needs assessment to determine how we can improve the recruitment and

retention of health care providers in rural Newfoundland. I am sure all Members

of the House of Assembly, including the Member for Bay of Islands and other

members here, will benefit from such a process.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Motion 2, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 2 has been called.

The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I thank you for the opportunity to be able to stand for a few moments and say

a few words in reference to Motion 2 that was put forward by the hon. Government

House Leader.

As we look at that motion, Mr. Speaker, we look through the whereases, and

where Mr. Fraser March, the Office of Citizens' Representative, was placed in

his position on December 14, back in 2001;

AND

WHEREAS the Citizens' Representative, Fraser March, has, in accordance

with subsection 7(1) of the Citizens' Representative Act been suspended as the

Citizens' Representative.

Mr. Speaker, when you go to

section 7.(1) - I just want to read that for the

record - it references suspension when the House of Assembly is not sitting.

Section 7.(1) says, "Where the House of Assembly is not in session, the

Lieutenant-Governor in Council on the recommendation of the Internal Economy

Commission may suspend the Citizens' Representative for incapacity, neglect of

duty or misconduct...".

Mr. Speaker, I guess that is where some of my comments will be made today, in

that reference. That is what brought us to the point where we are, where we are

now speaking to the amendment that was put forward by the Member for Grand Bank.

Her motion states that Fraser March be given an opportunity to state his case to

the House of Assembly before a vote is taken regarding his removal from the

Office of the Citizens' Representative.

Mr. Speaker, over the last number of days I have read the report that was

tabled by Your Honour as Chair of the Commission, of the Internal Economy

Commission, presented to this hon. House. I have read the numbers of letters

that have been sent to Your Honour by Mr. March over a period of time. I have

read the letters in response to his correspondence, and one cannot help but

listen, I guess, to the debate that has been carried out in the media over the

last number of weeks and months. I have listened intently to our representatives

who serve on the IEC. Then, after having read the motion - I have to be honest

and up front - I have some concerns, I guess, with what I am reading. Then, as

my other hon. colleagues stated from time to time in their remarks, we did meet

with the lawyer who was involved, and we listened to his presentation. We

questioned and so on.

Mr. Speaker, I believe each and every one of us - I know how I feel - we have

to be totally satisfied before we vote on this motion, but I believe that we are

being asked to be the judge and jury in this situation; because, back in

December, 2001, forty-seven of us here in this hon. House of Assembly stood and

hired this gentleman unanimously.

The part that, I think, is missing when I tried to make up my mind on it, is

that I am missing the part where Mr. March is not being given the opportunity to

appear before the people who did the hiring. I know he was invited on several

occasions to appear before the IEC, and I am only surmising this, but here we

are; we had probably six or seven members from the hon. House who would have

been there at that time on the IEC, and probably what he is saying to us is: I

would like to appear before all the people, rather than just the committee or

the commission that would have looked after that.

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently the other day to the hon. Member for the Bay

of Islands, when he used other scenarios maybe not totally in relation to what

we are dealing with here because we are the employer in this case, but I guess

it brought a lot of things to our minds of how we should look at different

issues. I know for a fact - and I can relate two or three different scenarios -

I know it is not totally 100 per cent the same but we have to give everybody the

opportunity to be heard and state their case.

I refer to Workers' Compensation, how often each and every one of us in

this hon House of Assembly are being asked by our constituents to go and

represent them. When they call upon us, they are to the point where they have

been told that their benefits are discontinued, or some other scenario, a final

decision has been made. But each and every one of them are given the opportunity

to go before the chief review commissioner or the assistant commission to have

their case heard. Many times cases are overturned; many cases stand, but they

are given that opportunity to speak what they have to say.

Take the unemployment insurance rulings, people who are told they are not

eligible for benefits. However, they are given the opportunity to appear before

the Board of Referees and to state their case. Many times it is overturned; many

times it proceeds as it previously was, but they are still given an opportunity

to go to the next level, to go to the umpire.

Canada Pension, again, Mr. Speaker. For many people it takes months

sometimes, from the time they apply for a disability benefit, and at the end of

the day, whether it is for the incorrect medical documentation to be there,

whether there was an improper procedure followed and they are told that they do

not qualify for disability benefits, but Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day,

each and every person, if it is their choice, they can appear before the review

tribunal to have their case heard.

When I look at the information, Mr. Speaker, that has been placed before us,

I think that the opportunity should be given to Mr. March. I want to make it

very clear that I find myself in a difficult position and I want to state it for

the record that I am not here today defending Mr. March, because I can assure

you there are questions there that I would love to be able to ask this gentleman

in the proper setting, and neither am I accusing the government or the IEC of

doing something wrong because I think they have followed through the procedures

that they believe to be the correct procedure to follow, but, at the end of the

day, Mr. Speaker, I think there is one thing missing and that is the opportunity

for this gentleman to appear before us.

When I look at the report that was tabled to us, and the letter came from the

lawyer who was involved, I just want to quote, Mr. Speaker, "While the

conduct of the Citizens' Representative with respect to the investigation of

the home care sector coincidental with the NAPE organizing drive may not fit

squarely within the legislated

definitions of conflict of interests...".

Mr. Speaker, I guess that is why I am questioning it. If it does not fit

squarely into the confines, then it is open for questioning.

It goes on to say, "...it is our opinion that Mr. March's conduct was

arguably in conflict with the fundamental interests and expectations of the

House of Assembly...". Here we go again, when we look at the word arguably,

and I guess that is what makes us, on this side - I cannot speak for everybody

on this side but I will speak for myself - that I find myself in a difficult

position when it comes to this situation.

Mr. Speaker, I guess it comes down to the point - and I do not want to

reference other scenarios to tie into play here, but I think everything is open

for a second opinion. I think back to when we had that wonderful debate on the

FPI issue, and we all came here, each and every person stood in this hon. House

and stated their opinions on what they thought of that legislation. I mean the

Premier, himself, I am sure he must have known what was there or thought was

there because it was brought in by one of his ministers. I am sure it probably

went before Cabinet and discussed in their Caucus, but at the end of the day,

the Premier himself stood in his place and said: Having considered all the facts

that were presented to us, all of the comments that were made by hon. members on

both sides of the House, he felt that - he stood in his place and he stated very

clearly, I believe that there were loopholes in that legislation and he did not

think that he could stand and support it.

So, Mr. Speaker, there is always room when you hear the other side. You may

have an opinion made but there is always room for, I guess, misunderstandings or

what have you. I just want to say in closing, from my perspective, having seen

the motion that is put forward and having looked at the information that is

before us, that I will be supporting the amendment put forward by the Member for

Grand Bank. I am not saying that I am totally in favour of what Mr. March did or

did not do, not saying that I am against the procedures followed by the hon.

House to the IEC or the government, but to say that I believe this gentleman

should be given the opportunity. At the end of the day, when he appears before

us, whether it is in the setting of the House of Assembly or in some other venue

- it does not matter - I do not mind standing here and saying, yes, what was

done was wrong or what was done is okay, but I believe that we should have

everything placed before us, and no disrespect for all the work that has been

compiled and placed before us in this hon. House of Assembly.

Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank you for the opportunity and to

say that I will be supporting the amendment put forth by the hon. Member for

Grand Bank.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to have a few comments, a few brief comments, on this particular issue

here. I am a member of the Internal Economy Commission. I sit on it, along with

Your Honour, the Speaker, Deputy Speaker, three members representing government,

three members of Cabinet, and two members from the Official Opposition who sit

on the Internal Economy Commission. In total, that is seven members.

I will repeat it for the Leader of the Opposition, who probably was not

listening at the time, I said His Honour, the Speaker, the Deputy Speaker, three

Members of Cabinet, and two from the Official Opposition. That is seven. Seven

members sit on the Internal Economy Commission.

When this issue arose, Mr. Speaker, we discussed this and we wanted to make

sure that the Internal Economy Commission was doing the right thing and being

fair and giving every opportunity. When the Auditor General released his report,

I think it was back in January at the time, there was subsequent follow-up and

discussion on this for a lengthy period of time. I will say, unequivocally, that

every member of that committee who was there agreed with the process we took by

getting independent legal advice and following through on that - every single

member. When he asked to have an opportunity to be heard, that committee,

unanimously - including the representation from the Liberals on that committee -

unanimously agreed to allow him to appear before the IEC, and they unanimously

agreed to move this resolution forward to have him temporarily, I guess,

suspended from the job until it gets dealt with here. They agreed with that

process.

What I find a little hypo critical is that -

MR. REID: Hypocritical, not hypo critical.

MR. SULLIVAN: Hypocritical, I say to the Leader of the Opposition.

He should know what it is. He should know what it is, because his party sat

in that meeting when I was there and voted to follow this exact process we are

going with now, and supported it. Then they come around -

MR. REID: That is not true.

MR. SULLIVAN: That is absolutely true.

MR. REID: That is not true.

MR. SULLIVAN: Unanimous support.

MR. REID: That is not true.

MR. SULLIVAN: Unanimous support in that committee.

The Member for Bellevue supported this process.

MR. REID: (Inaudible) stretch the truth!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: The Member for Bellevue, Mr. Speaker, supported this

process, and the very party he represents on that committee comes back with

something entirely different than what was put forward.

Absolutely, Mr. Speaker, you were there. The Deputy Speaker, the Member for

Bonavista South, was there. I was there. The Government House Leader was there.

The Minister of Justice was there. The Member for Bellevue was there. The Member

for Bellevue supported it. Every single step of the way, it was unanimous in

each decision.

What I find wrong about this, Mr. Speaker, is that it had unanimous support,

and the party that supported it comes to this House now and puts a resolution to

take a different action than they agreed on the unanimous recommendation of that

committee.

That is what I find appalling. That is what I find very difficult to accept.

MR. REID: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A point of order has been called by the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, the Member for Bellevue represents our side on the

IEC committee. It is my understanding that the member did agree with taking it

to Cabinet and looking for a suspension with pay. Nobody, I say, on this side of

the floor, said to bring this before the House of Assembly and have Mr. March

fired.

I ask the hon. member to withdraw that statement.

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition is using a point of order to

engage in debate. While there might be differences of opinion, there isn't a

point of order.

The Chair recognizes the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I was at that meeting, not the Leader of the Opposition, along with you, Mr.

Speaker, along with the Government House Leader, the Member for Bonavista South

and the Minister of Justice who were at that meeting. The reason it was sent to

Cabinet for recommendations is because the House was not sitting and we could

not deal with it in the House. They supported that action, but in the interim

they were going to move it to Cabinet. That is what they did.

I attended those meetings. Absolutely, unequivocally, the Member for Bellevue

supported the action that is happening here, and in committee, because I heard

it with my own ears in the presence of other members of that committee. Now they

are doing a full 180 degree turn on an issue. To me -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: I will have my say. The members have their say when they

get up. I will tell you what I heard by sitting on the committee, what happened.

If anybody has a different version, I have not heard it from the Member for

Bonavista South, or the Government House Leader, or the Minister of Justice. The

only one who has a different version - I have not even heard the Member for

Bellevue get up and say it. Maybe he said it. Maybe he should get up and say it,

because he is doing a complete turnaround from what he said in the committee

there, attended by staff of this House in that meeting who were also present.

There was no dissenting opinion, no dissenting comment on anything there,

because there was no dissenting opinion. I am saying it was unanimous in

committee. You can look at what is in the minutes, whether it is said the word

unanimous or not. I am telling you, from sitting inside that room in which the

Speaker, the Deputy Speaker, and all of the others attended, he agreed with the

action.

I will say, Mr. March asked to appear before the Internal Economy Commission.

We agreed to hear him. I believe it was three times there was an opportunity. We

all agreed to hear it, and then he did not want to meet. Now, all of a sudden,

he wants to appear before the House of Assembly. That is like something happens

over in the department, a problem - let's not talk to the department; let's

go to the Premier's office with it. If something happens there, we don't

want to deal with it; let's go to the Supreme Court. Let's not go through

the lower courts; let's go right to the Supreme Court. There is a process.

This House is represented by the Internal Economy Commission, represented by

members from that side of the House, and a member supported this action we took

every single step of the way, and I know some comments that were made there - I

will not say in this House - pertaining to it, because it is not the place to

say it, but I know what words came out of the mouths of members who sat there.

It is absolutely false, if they say anything different, because I attended just

about every meeting leading up to that point. I do not think I missed either

one. The minutes will show who was there at each meeting. I know what members

said.

To have to stand here in this House and see a resolution presented that is

completely opposite from what we were told - if he did not represent his caucus

and the Liberals on this issue, if he did not represent them there

appropriately, fine, I can accept that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: No, you do not. If he is the member who is appointed by the

Leader of the Opposition to represent your interests and did not do it, you have

a problem with him not with us on this side of the House. That is what the

Member for Bellevue said, and he supported this every single step of the way,

never a dissenting vote. In fact, some very strong comments over the last year

or two were made. Lots of strong comments were made, but it does not serve

anyone well to repeat them in this Assembly here today.

I know, in my mind, I attended those meetings. I know what went on. I know

what happened. I heard what was said. To say any different from that side in

this House would be absolutely false, because we wanted to have Mr. March an

opportunity to come before the Internal Economy Commission to hear what he had

to say.

MR. FITZGERALD: We offered to pay his legal fees as well.

MR. SULLIVAN: We offered to pay his legal fees. We scheduled - was it

three times, I believe?

MR. E. BYRNE: Three times (inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Three times we scheduled it. He did not appear and did not

want to come. All of a sudden, he wants to skip the whole process now, walk in

on the floor of the House of Assembly - twice in the history of this Province.

If the AG wants to come in, on the floor of the House of Assembly, the Chief

Electoral Officer wants to come in, the Child and Youth Advocate wants to come

in - yes, we will have everybody who wants to come in, on the floor of the House

of Assembly. A person might get dismissed in the department and want to come in,

on the floor of the House of Assembly - anyone.

MR. REID: That is different and you know it, totally different.

MR. SULLIVAN: Okay, if they want to go to the Premier's office instead

of going through the proper process, that analogy I referred to earlier -

MR. REID: These people are invited to the House of Assembly, not

(inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: The AG is an employee of the House, the Chief Electoral

Officer is an employee of the House, the Child and Youth Advocate is an employee

of the House, and the Commissioner of Members' Interests is an employee of the

House. All of these things are very similar, Mr. Speaker.

What is so distasteful about this whole process is that it was endorsed - and

I say it again before I finish - every single step of the way in very strong

terms by the representative from that side there, who now has the gall to stand

up and say he didn't. Well, absolutely! Here is what they are trying to twist,

that he agreed with only sending it to Cabinet. That person knew that we could

not talk action for the resolution when the House was not sitting. The only

avenue to move someone of a position, in the meantime, was to do it by a

recommendation to the Cabinet. He knew that it would then have to come back here

to this House. That was known the full step of the way, that was absolutely

known, absolutely discussed at those meetings there, and that is why we are here

today dealing with this.

Need I say anymore on this issue, Mr. Speaker? I won't say anymore on this

issue. I was there for the entire process, and I am really disappointed that

someone has taken a 180 degree turn. When it gets into the public forum, gets on

the floor of this House, they want to take a different side on that argument,

when everybody heard it and everybody knows what went on.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to say to the Minister of Finance, who has just spoken, as a duly

elected member of the House of Assembly, regardless of what my representative

says in the IEC or anywhere else, I have a right to express my views, and I am

going to do it over the next little while, whether I agree with what is

happening in the IEC with my representative or with the Minister of Finance.

Me, personally, the way that I see it, I am not taking issue with John

Noseworthy, the Auditor General. I am not taking issue with the lawyer who did

the independent study here and gave us some reference to look at. I am not

taking exception to the IEC. What I am asking for is to make provision to make

the process fair, to make it complete, to make it equitable, and to allow him to

make his case before the House of Assembly. If, at the end of the day, people

don't accept my views that is perfectly alright. I have a chance to express it

and that is what I am going to do.

The thing, again, that I look at here is, in this particular case a person

has been accused, is before the judge, the police have given their report, the

lawyer has given a report, and the judge says: Okay, I want to hear from the

defendant to see what he has to say for himself. In this particular case he

says: Where is the defendant? He is not here. He cannot speak for himself, and

that is why I think it is wrong. You know, if, at the end of the day, when Mr.

March could come before the House - and it is not like everybody in the House is

an officer of this House that was appointed. I say to the Minister of Finance,

the IEC did not appoint Mr. March and they are not going to fire him. It is the

duty of the House of Assembly to do that.

I remember when he was appointed and it came here. The Premier, who was the

Leader of the Opposition, and the Leader for the NDP approved it, and it was

unanimous. So, therefore we are going to get rid of him for, supposedly, some of

the thing that he did. I am not questioning that. All I would like is to be able

to ask him some questions in the House. If we are going to get rid of him, I

think he has the right to appear before the House, this tribunal to ask him some

questions. That is what I would seek.

The Government House leader says: You know, if Mr. March wanted to appear

before the IEC he could have done it. But why didn't the IEC say to Mr. March:

Why don't you appear before the House of Assembly? They have the right to do

it. They represent us - so that every member in the House of Assembly, from one

part of this Province to the other, can have an opportunity for him to be

questioned. If, at the end of the day, the information that is given is such

that his contract is to be terminated, then let's do it. But at least give the

man an opportunity to respond to the House of Assembly, which is really, in a

sense I guess, the Bar here, and let's make informed decisions. As I said

earlier, it is not my role here. I am not questioning the IEC and I am not

questioning the Auditor General. I make that absolutely clear, but I do not

think that the process is complete. Give that man an opportunity to appear

before the House.

In a sense, when we look at it here - if the House, as I said earlier, did

the hiring, than the House itself should have to do the firing, and I guess that

is what is going to happen in this particular situation before the day is out.

But, what I am asking is, before that happens then why not have the individual,

who is about to be terminated, appear before the House so that there can be

questions asked? I guess, in this particular case, his reputation is at stake,

his job is at stake. I think that the Members of the House of Assembly who did

the hiring should, in fact, hear what he has to say. That is my point all along,

Mr. Speaker. I think it is a matter of process and he should be given an

opportunity to come before the House and speak.

I think what is important for me is the fact that here - to follow due

process. Now - and people can argue. I would think that somebody would get up on

the other side of the House and would argue for me or to me to the House, as the

Minister of Finance has just done, that due process was followed. Well, a

certain amount of it has been followed, but why not go the ultimate? Because at

the end of the day, all of us, in a sense, can be vindicated for following the

prudent process to its conclusion. I guess for all of us, we will have the level

of comfort in knowing that we did everything that we should have done to make

sure that the right decision was made. For me, there is nothing more than that.

There are no ulterior motives. Like I said, I am not here to prop up Mr. March

or to say that what he did was right or wrong. That is not where I am going

from. All I am asking is for us to do due diligence, follow through the process,

have him appear before the House so that he can be questioned and to, in a

sense, I guess, have a chance to defend himself as to the allegations that are

in front of him.

That is all I have to say, Mr. Speaker. I do not want to take up more time by

repeating some of the other things that people have already said. My particular

point is, have the person here, follow the due process so that it can be

transparent, so that it can be carried through in its totality and, at the end

then, when we have made the decision that ultimately has to be done, we will

know in our heart of hearts that we followed through everything that is possible

to do.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDGLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As some of my colleagues have said in discussing this motion, it is normally

a pleasure to rise before this House to debate any matter before the House but

given the circumstances and the matter of this motion, it is not particularly a

matter, I do not think, that any of us relish discussing. Nonetheless, that is

the responsibility that we have been charged with and therefore it is our duty,

I think, and I look forward to having a couple of remarks on the motion.

I understand, Mr. Speaker, that before the House at this moment there is an

amendment. Some of my remarks will address the amendment and some will address

the motion in general, and I understand, from having listened to previous

speakers, that is kind of the general tenor of this discussion at the moment.

We have been, as members of the House, charged with a very, very difficult

decision, Mr. Speaker, because we have, in fact, one Officer of the House who

has, namely the Auditor General, adopted a position that the Citizens'

Representative has stepped outside his boundaries. On the other hand, another

Officer of the House, the Citizens' Representative, has vociferously and

vehemently denied what the Auditor General has stated. What were we to do, Mr.

Speaker, as Members of the House of Assembly? We have two divergent opinions by

two different members, two different Officers of the House. Naturally, what we

have done, I think, is the right course of action in order to keep the process

clean. In order to keep it unbiased we have employed independent legal council.

We have employed, basically, a referee to give us a third opinion in the matter,

having evaluated the remarks of the Auditor General and the remarks of the

Citizens' Representative. Anybody who has seen the report given by the

independent council will understand that Mr. Harrington has given us a detailed

report. He has obviously taken considerable time and gone to considerable detail

to analyze what was before him.

In essence, Mr. Speaker, there were three questions that Mr. Harrington, the

legal council, addressed. I will briefly give my own comments. I have read

through the report, as I am sure all members of the House have done. What it was

that swayed my opinion - because, unfortunately, I think the decision here seems

to be falling down on political lines, on party lines. I do not want to be seen

as one that is following strictly the party line on this. I pride myself

sometimes, Mr. Speaker, as being capable of independent thought. So I took the

report of the independent council, read through it and made up my own mind.

In the first question that came before Mr. Harrington, he was asked: Did Mr.

March, as Citizens' Representative, improperly claim reimbursement for travel

expense? In that matter, Mr. Speaker, I focused on three different items in Mr.

Harrington's report. Number one was the fact that the Citizens'

Representative himself, on page 9 and 10 in the report, indicated that, on his

own investigation, he had undertaken or done what he described as a grievous and

significant error related to travel in one claim. This is the Citizens'

Representative's own statement, Mr. Speaker. In his letter he says: the

Citizens' Representative - talking about himself - believes this to be an

error of such magnitude as to warrant the attention of the House of Assembly.

These are the remarks, Mr. Speaker, of the Citizens' Representative

himself. He further goes on in that

section regarding travel claims, Mr. Speaker

- there is considerable discussion about travelling back and forth to a

residence in Blaketown, and whether or not this was the principal residence of

the Citizens' Representative. In that matter, there are any number of examples

of this number of kilometres being travelled on a given day and this number of

clients having been spoken to by the Citizens' Representative. If you want to

sit down and consider all of those different examples, you might say that some

of these travel claims were very difficult to substantiate, but it is not

impossible in all instances.

However, Mr. Speaker, in this matter I focused on, in pages seven and eight,

the comments of again a third party which was the former manager of operations

in the Office of the Citizens' Representative. On page seven it is indicated

there that the inquiries of the Manager of Office Operations for the Office of

the Citizens' Representative from February 1, 2002 to September 2, indicates

that she had raised with Mr. March the fact that he had made reimbursement for

claims for private vehicle usage from Blaketown to St. John's and return. Upon

the advice of his own Manager of Operations he withdrew those claims; however,

upon the departure of that same Manger of Operations, the claims had been

withdrawn.

Further, it goes on the say, "... it appears that after the departure of

the Manager of Operations, Mr. March resumed submission of vehicle usage

reimbursement claims in 2003 and for the period April 1, 2003 to June 30,

2004..."

That, to me, is again a third party, an independent person, offering, if you

will, evidence in this matter and, having advised the Citizens' Representative

this cannot be done, but upon departure of that person the Citizens'

Representative, having previously withdrawn those travel claims, resubmitted

them.

That, to me, is not the evidence of the Auditor General or the evidence of

the second party, namely, the Citizens' Representative; this is concrete

documented evidence, if you will, from a third party.

The third one in terms of the travel claim question - on Thursday, in the

debate, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition allowed for the question: Shouldn't

we all be allowed one error in judgement? Some time ago, a professor quoted

something that stuck with me over the years in that he said at the time: Any

person is capable of the utmost folly at any given moment. Taking that wise

advice into account, Mr. Speaker, we allow for the fact that, was there, in

fact, an error in judgement?

Again, I refer to the comments of our independent legal counsel in this

matter. He has said in his report that he was asked to examine whether or not

there was systematic abuse or whether it was, in fact, a one-time occurrence or,

as the Leader of the Opposition would have said, an error in judgement. I will

quote from Mr. Harrington's remarks. He says, "In all the circumstances,

it is difficult to come to the conclusion that the findings of the Auditor

General and responses of the Citizens' Representative are indicative of a

single incident of poor judgement or sloppy bookkeeping'. The findings tend

to support a conclusion that serious impropriety occurred." These, Mr.

Speaker, are the words of the third party that we have employed for opinion.

In the second question, Mr. Speaker, we have asked Mr. Harrington to examine,

"Did Mr. March in his leadership of an investigation' by the Office of

the Citizens' Representative into the operations of personal care homes...

contravene the Conflict of Interest Act..."?

In that matter, again, I read through diligently, as best I could, and

focused on a couple of words from Mr. Harrington, where he states that some

eleven months after, in fact, the Citizens' Representative had taken office -

this is November 3, 2002 - the Citizens' Representative issued an memorandum

from his office, under his signature, that addressed the plans of his office

respecting the proposed investigation into the working conditions of home care

workers in the Province.

Now, at these meetings, at these investigative meetings that the Citizens'

Representative was undertaking, these were not open meetings or public meetings.

These were, in fact, meetings where only home care workers were entitled to

attend. Representatives of employers were not permitted, so it was obvious what

the intentions were - or, it would seem obvious what the intentions of those

meetings were.

Further - and, again, I take my advice from the report of our independent

counsel - he speaks here, and the hon. Member for Port de Grave referred to this

section but I will just go back a sentence before what was referenced by that

hon. member. Mr. Harrington has, in fact, said, "...his course of

conduct..." - his being the Citizens' Representative - "...his

course of conduct would appear to be fundamentally in conflict with the mandate

of the Citizens' Representative to be objective, impartial, independent and

avoiding any sense of self-interest."

He goes on to say, "...it is our opinion that Mr. March's conduct was

arguably in conflict with the fundamental interests and expectations of the

House of Assembly as his employer which were articulated in the Legislature with

Mr. March present in person on December 13, 2001." So, the Citizens'

Representative clearly understood the mandate of his job and according to Mr.

Harrington, he clearly violated his mandate, Mr. Speaker.

On the third question, Mr. Speaker, perhaps the most critical, is if, in

fact, Mr. March violated

section 4.2 of the Citizens' Representative Act which

prohibited him from holding any other office or carrying on trade or business or

another profession while engaged as the Citizens' Representative. On that

matter, Mr. Speaker, I refer to Page 6 of the independent legal counsel's

report to us, and he states, "...that invoices dated as late as January 6,

2003 were submitted to NAPE for "Pre-arbitration work/set-up fees"

with no specific date as to when Mr. March actually performed the work."

So, Mr. Speaker, this is some eleven months after the Citizens' Representative

took his job as Citizens' Representative. After Mr. March assumed that

position, eleven months later he was still issuing invoices.

Mr. Harrington goes on to state - and, Mr. Speaker, this is not open to

question and I am not sure how listening to Mr. March or listening to anybody

else could change the tenor of this statement. This is our legal council, says:

"The incontrovertible fact is that Mr. March was still billing NAPE for

professional services more than 11 months after the commencement date of his

appointment which is wholly inconsistent with his own indication to the

interview committee that he ought to have been able to disengage himself from

other work activities within a couple of months after being offered the position

in mid-December, 2001." So, there was some discussion, Mr. Speaker, that he

needed a couple of months to clear up some overlapping activities. Mr. Speaker,

in any man's language, whether they be on that side of the House or on this

side of the House, eleven months is more than a couple.

The independent legal council goes on to say, Mr. Speaker, that the precedent

of a decision made in a previous case would support a conclusion that Mr. March's

work for NAPE as described in the Auditor General's Report would constitute

just cause for dismissal. Mr. Speaker, that is fairly clear.

So, those are the three points that the independent council was asked to

examine, Mr. Speaker, and I think from any man's judgement, putting party

alliance aside, I do not think that there is any other way that we could come

down in making our own decision on this. I have done my own analysis and I do

not see any other possible conclusion that you could come to. What puzzles me in

this is why there would be a demand right now or a request through this

amendment to have the Citizens' Representative appear before this hon. House.

What is to be gained by listening to Mr. March once again? We are in fact the

employer and any employer has the opportunity to discuss with and to listen to

the opinions of any employee who is being considered for dismissal. However, Mr.

Speaker, in this case, the Citizens' Representative - and we all agree in the

House - was given the opportunity to appear before the IEC.

Why haven't those who are saying that Mr. March should be listened to - why

didn't they invite Mr. March, if they were in doubt about some of the aspects

that Mr. Harrington brought forward in his report, why didn't they phone Mr.

March or have him come to a committee meeting or a caucus meeting and say: Mr.

March, I am a little puzzled about what Mr. Harrington says right here, that

your own manager of operations advised you not to do this and then when she was

gone, you, in fact, resumed that behaviour? I am a bit puzzled by that Mr.

March. Why wouldn't those people have called him on the phone and said: Can

you explain that to me? He was given the opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to come

before the IEC. He was given that opportunity in the Speaker's letter of April

14 and he was offered a date even of April 20 and he did not avail of that

opportunity.

If the Citizens' Representative - let's assume that he was to come before

this House. We have here a gentleman who obviously has a vested interest in

protecting his own job. We already have his opinion. As one officer of the

House, we have the opinion of the Auditor General. Obviously and logically, what

we have to do then is go to the third party and put our weight in the advice of

a third party. So, in this case we have legal counsel in Mr. Harrington. We have

the manager of operations who has passed an opinion and, Mr. Speaker,

furthermore there were letters written by employers and employees, not verbal

opinions, but letters written by employers and employees who stated that they

were concerned that Mr. March was going about organizing on behalf of home-care

workers. These, Mr. Speaker, have been documented by our independent legal

counsel.

So, Mr. Speaker, I cannot emphasis enough the importance that both these

offices, the office of the Auditor General and the office of the Citizens'

Representative, the integrity of those offices be maintained. Both of those

offices are charged with representing people. The Auditor General, in terms of

auditing all operations of government and, of course, the Citizens'

Representative in terms of representing individual people through the Province

who come to him with complaints. The integrity of both those offices, Mr.

Speaker, must be maintained, so we here in the House of Assembly, if we are to

say that: I'm sorry, Auditor General, we do not place any credence in what you

have reported to us, then, by inference, what we are doing - if we are to place

our credence in the arguments and the protestations of the Citizens'

Representative, we are inferring that the Auditor General, his reports do not

deserve any credence from us, Mr. Speaker.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, I think the process has been clear. The process has

been open. The process has been independent. I have referred to the three

third-party opinions that I am basing my decision on, Mr. Speaker. Even though

this is a distasteful task, I do not see how we, as members of the House - if we

are putting aside our party lines - can come to any other decision, other than

the fact that this motion must be passed. If we are to maintain the integrity of

the office of the Auditor General, if we are to maintain the office of the

Citizens' Representative, or maintain the integrity of both of those, I think

that the rights of the people, above and beyond all, must be protected and

therefore, we must pass this motion, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to say a few words on the amendment to the motion that is before

the House today. There is a lot that has been said over the past couple of days,

Mr. Speaker, and I will try not to rehash all of what other people have said,

but I do want to be on the record as having the opportunity to voice my concerns

over how this whole process took place.

Mr. Speaker, most of my life has been spent representing employees who have

been accused of doing various things, some which they were terminated from

employment for, others which they were suspended for, others which were written

warnings, depending on the gravity and seriousness that the situation called

for. Regardless, Mr. Speaker, of what the form of discipline was meted out, the

person always had an opportunity to appear before a group of people, the

employer or some other independent person who would judge what the appropriate

discipline, if any, would be issued and what the level would be.

One of the things that concerns me here is the fact that Mr. March is accused

of breaking the law. Mr. Speaker, if we go back to when Mr. March was hired, he

was hired by the members who sit here in the House of Assembly. Any change in

that, Mr. Speaker, if his employment is to be terminated, it should be done by

the same group of people, members of the House of Assembly who hired him. That

puts us in a very difficult position, Mr. Speaker, because we are asked to take

part in that process without really having the opportunity to have Mr. March

appear before us and to be able to question him.

Mr. Speaker, the IEC is not the avenue that should be pursued to rectify a

problem of this nature. There is nowhere in their mandate where they are

responsible for that. What this reminds me of is that somebody is accused of

doing something in society, the police conduct an investigation, they take what

they find in their investigation and give it to the Crown Prosecutor, the Crown

Prosecutor writes up a nice

summary of everything he has been given by the

police during their investigation, and takes that

summary and goes to the court

in front of a judge, asking that that person be condemned without that person

having the right to appear before the judge and without any legal counsel of

their own. I cannot support a situation, Mr. Speaker, that conducts its business

along that line. I believe that everybody, no matter who they are, no matter

what type of job they have, if that job is threatened or taken away they should

have an unconditional right to appear before the people who are making that

decision and put their case forward and be questioned and cross examined by the

people who are ultimately going to make a decision. That hasn't happened in

this case, Mr. Speaker, and that is why I believe the system to be flawed.

Mr. Speaker, some of the things that hav