Government Services Committee — Department of Transportation and Works, and responsible for Aboriginal Affairs — 4 May 2021

2021-05-04

Newfoundland and Labrador — Committees

April 21, 2005 GOVERNMENT SERVICES

COMMITTEE

Pursuant to Standing Order 68, Kevin O'Brien, MHA for

Gander, replaces Fabian Manning, MHA for Placentia & St. Mary's; Yvonne

Jones, MHA for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, replaces George Sweeney, MHA for

Carbonear-Harbour Grace; Gerry Reid, MHA for Twillingate & Fogo, replaces

Wally Andersen, MHA for Torngat Mountains; and Wallace Young, MHA for St. Barbe,

replaces Shawn Skinner, MHA for St. John's Centre.

The Committee met at 7:00 p.m. in the House of Assembly.

CHAIR (O'Brien): Good evening, everyone.

I would like to welcome everyone to the Estimates Committee for Government

Services. Tonight we have the minister and staff responsible for the Department

of Transportation and Works, and Aboriginal Affairs.

First of all, I would like to get a piece of housekeeping out of the way in

regards to adopting the minutes of the last meeting. It happened at 7:00 p.m. on

April 19. I would like to call for a motion to adopt the minutes. They have been

distributed.

MR. LANGDON: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: So moved by Oliver Langdon.

Seconded?

MR. RIDGLEY: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Seconded by Bob Ridgley.

All those in favour, aye'.

OFFICIALS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

CHAIR: Also, to just get another couple of housekeeping items out of the

way, the minister will have fifteen minutes, starting, to introduce his

Estimates, and then the vice-chair will have fifteen minutes to respond. Then,

each other member will have ten minutes to ask any questions if they so wish.

Also, I might say that we have a few people representing other members who

were on the previous Committee. Yvonne Jones is going to be substituting for

George Sweeney from the District of Carbonear-Harbour Grace. Gerry Reid will

replace Wally Andersen from Torngat Mountains. Wally Young from St. Barbe is

representing Shawn Skinner from St. John's Centre, and I will be representing

Fabian Manning, the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

At this particular time, I would like to ask the Committee to introduce

themselves.

MS JONES: Yvonne Jones, MHA for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MR. REID: Gerry Reid, MHA for Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. LANGDON: Oliver Langdon, MHA for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

MR. RIDGLEY: Boy Ridgley, MHA for St. John's North.

MS JOHNSON: Charlene Johnson, MHA for Trinity-Bay de Verde.

MR. YOUNG: Wally Young, MHA for St. Barbe.

CHAIR: Thank you, and I welcome everybody here tonight.

We will be dealing, as I said before, with Transportation and Works, starting

with subhead 1.1.01. Also, under Aboriginal Affairs, we will be dealing with

subheadings 2.1.01. and 2.1.03., because the other subheadings have already been

dealt with by the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

At this particular time I would like to have the minister give his opening

remarks and also to introduce his staff.

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to say good evening to members of the Committee. It is a pleasure to

be here again to defend the Estimates of Transportation and Works, and

Aboriginal Affairs. I will look forward to some direction from the Committee in

how you want to handle this. Whether you want to do Aboriginal Affairs first or

Transportation first, or whatever, that is a mechanic household item, I guess,

that the Committee can decide.

CHAIR: We will do all at once, or do you want to do Transportation first?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible) call them separately.

CHAIR: We will be calling the heads separately. We will do Transportation

first.

MR. RIDEOUT: I am going to ask the staff to introduce themselves now,

starting with the Deputy Minister of Transportation and Works.

MR. SMART: Bob Smart, Deputy Minister.

MR. MOORES: Weldon Moores, Assistant Deputy Minister of Works.

MR. MERCER: Cluney Mercer, Assistant Deputy Minister of Transportation.

MR. HEALEY: Keith Healey, Assistant Deputy Minister of Strategic and

Corporate Services.

MS OATES: Lori Lee Oates, Director of Communications, Department of

Transportation and Works, and responsible for Aboriginal Affairs.

MR. DUTTON: Sean Dutton, Acting Deputy Minister, Department of Labrador

and Aboriginal Affairs.

CHAIR: Before the minister starts, it was brought to my attention that

there may be a member here who might be here only for Aboriginal Affairs and

might want to leave, and it might be beneficial to go with Aboriginal first

or...?

OFFICIAL: Who would that be?

CHAIR: I don't know.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: No?

We will go with Transportation first.

Thank you. I am just giving the option.

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I certainly do not intend to use the fifteen minutes that is allocated under

the rules to introduce the Estimates, but I do want to take a few minutes. I

want to make a few brief comments regarding the recent Budget and how it relates

to the departments that I am responsible for. I know that we will go into many

of the items in line by line and detail as we go through, but I just want to

reference some of the items that I believe are maybe of particular interest.

The budget for the Department of Transportation and Works has increased by

$30.4 million this year over the previous year. This represents an increased

commitment to transportation and other public infrastructure in the Province.

In Budget 2005, our government will be spending significant monies on our

provincial road network. There will be a continuation of the commitment of $30

million for the Provincial Roads Improvement Program. This represents an ongoing

increase of $7 million over the 2003-2004 budget. As well, it has been customary

in the past that when there was a carry-over of projects that did not get

completed in a particular construction season that those funds would have to

come off the next year's budget, but we have not done that. We have increased

the carry-over of $3.7 million and we have added that to the budget so that our

accumulated provincial roads construction program for this year will be a total

of $33.7 million, meaning that we will have an additional new allocation of $30

million from which to draw.

As part of government's plan to continue working with our partners in the

federal government, Budget 2005 provides $13.65 million for highway improvements

under the Strategic Highways Infrastructure Program. This program is cost-shared

with the federal government, with the Province contributing $7.5 million to it.

An additional $18 million has been allocated so that government can leverage

additional monies from the federal government under other potential cost-shared

programs. Government has entered into discussions with the federal government

regarding cost-sharing of projects under those programs.

Government has an ongoing commitment to improving transportation links in

Labrador. The completion of the Trans-Labrador Highway is one of the highest

transportation priorities of our government. Budget 2005 provides $40 million in

total for continued work on Phase Three of the Trans-Labrador Highway, including

a carry-over from the 2004-2005 construction season.

In keeping with the Labrador transportation initiatives, our government plans

to build a $750,000 depot on the

section of road between the communities of Red

Bay and Lodge Bay. The difficulties with maintaining this

section of highway are

well documented. We believe that the construction of this depot will assist

government greatly in keeping the road open year-round. This depot will allow

the appropriate snow clearing equipment in the area to work from the centre of

the road outwards.

In order to replace the aging fleet of heavy equipment that is currently in

place as a result of years of underfunding, government is providing an

additional $3.5 million in new funding for heavy equipment purchases in Budget

2005. A total, therefore, of $6.5 million will be budgeted for our heavy

equipment replacement in this year's budget. This will facilitate improvements

in our provincial snow clearing operations and enable us to provide a more

reliable service to the public.

Government is also making strategic investments in our ferries and marine

infrastructure. Those investments include $2.97 million for refits to the motor

vessel Sir Robert Bond and the motor vessel the Northern Ranger ,

and another $4 million for annual and mid-life refits for our ferries that

service the Island. There is also $1 million in new funding for capital

improvements to the Province's ferry terminals, and $500,000 for planning work

toward the implementation of a provincial vessel replacement strategy. These

represent strategic investments that will enable government to provide for a

stable ferry service over the long term.

Budget 2005 allocated $5.4 million for the demolition of government

buildings. The buildings involved include the Grace Hospital in St. John's,

the former College of the North Atlantic Campus on Topsail Road, the Old Mill

building near Come By Chance, and the former Cottage Hospital in Harbour Breton.

These buildings, or portions of these buildings, that will be demolished are not

economically viable for reuse. In demolishing these structures, the safety of

the general public and the protection of our environment is of utmost priority

for the government.

On the Aboriginal Affairs side, there has been a lot of activity over the

past year on a number of falls. The Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement was

completed, including the passage of the ratification legislation here in the

House of Assembly and the signing of the agreement in Nain in January. The

department continues to look forward to the passage of federal ratification

legislation and the implementation of the agreement.

Aboriginal Affairs continues to work with the Innu Nation on their land

claim. We are also actively involved in working with the Innu and the federal

government on the Innu Healing Strategy, including improvements to the delivery

of education in Innu communities. We are also making great progress on the Land

Transfer Agreement for the expansion of the Conne River Reserve. The framework

agreement for the self-government for the Miawpukek First Nation is also

progressing well, and we are hopeful of announcements being made in those areas

in the very near future. We are also looking forward to this year's First

Ministers' Meeting with national Aboriginal leaders on Aboriginal Affairs. Our

department will be consulting with the Innu, the Labrador Inuit Metis Nation and

the Mi'kmaq as we prepare for this meeting to be held in late fall.

To conclude, I would like to thank members for making themselves available

this evening and I look forward to dealing with any questions that you might

have.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Ms Jones.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Minister, for your

update on the budget this year.

I have a few questions. We won't try and keep it too long. I just told my

colleagues that the Prime Minister is addressing the Nation at 8:30 tonight.

MR. RIDEOUT: Oh, that is when it is, is it?

MS JONES: I don't think I can get it postponed, but we will see what we

can do.

MR. RIDEOUT: You can try.

Is that when it is, 8:30?

OFFICIAL: A quarter to nine.

MS JONES: A quarter to nine, I think.

MR. RIDEOUT: Oh, a quarter to nine.

MS JONES: Yes, 8:45.

You already indicated that there was $30.4 million going to be spent this

year in the budget. Is that all in new road construction and improvements, or is

that overall?

MR. RIDEOUT: No, there is an additional $30.4 million over and above our

budget of last year, and I maybe did not say it clearly, in our total A Base.

MS JONES: In the total budget?

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, our total A Base.

MS JONES: Is that all provincial money?

MR. RIDEOUT: Some of it may well end up in round one infrastructure money

proposals before them.

MS JONES: There was an agreement, the Canadian strategic Newfoundland

agreement, I think it was called. There was money used out of that agreement

originally to do some work in St. John's Harbour with the cleanup, I think,

and also on the West Coast of the Island. It was my understanding that there was

$30 million, or almost $30 million, left in that fund, and that government had

asked that it be earmarked for transportation. Was that money ever received from

the federal government?

MR. RIDEOUT: There was $24 million left in round one money that we

inherited when we inherited the responsibility for - when we became the

government in November, 2003. Since that time we have deliberately, I guess,

held to our guns, that we wanted to spend $18 million of that $24 million on the

Trans-Labrador Highway, and $6 million of it on (inaudible) roads that qualify.

Now, as the hon. member probably knows, in present circumstances, under the

national highway - what is the right word?

OFFICIAL: System.

MR. RIDEOUT: National highway system, the only roads that presently

qualify in our Province for funding under the national highway system is the

Trans-Canada Highway and the Argentia Access Road.

Transport Canada has, like a dog with a bone, held to its strategy that they

are not going to permit any further inclusions of any highways anywhere else in

the Province, including the Trans-Labrador Highway, in that program. We have

been beating this back now for a year or more. I remember meeting with Tony

Valeri when he was the federal Transport Minister. I have met with John Efford.

I put it in writing, at John's request, asking that we consider putting the

Trans-Labrador Highway into this and it has been a stonewall all the way

through.

At last year's federal-provincial ministers' meeting in Quebec City,

ministers agreed that we would task our officials to develop criteria for a Tier

2 national highway system and that if we could reach agreement, the Tier 2

highways would be eligible for some form of federal funding. Maybe not 50-50, it

might be 60-40, but it would be one-off agreements with the provinces anyway in

that regard.

We have now reached agreements at the officials level and the agreement had

been that this would go before the ministers by the end of the fiscal year. To

give the federal minister his credit, he tried to do that but I guess he ran

into difficulties with provincial ministers in availability. The last meeting

that they were trying to arrange was in June. I now hear that is in jeopardy and

they are probably looking at September. So, we are still working towards the

objective of achieving a Tier 2 national highway system that will include the

Trans-Labrador Highway, include major trunk roads, like the Northern Peninsula,

maybe the Baie Verte Peninsula, Bonavista Peninsula, those areas in terms of

qualifying. So, that is where it is.

MS JONES: Two-tier roads, is that a national concept or is it -

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, that will include roads in every province.

MS JONES: Okay.

MR. RIDEOUT: And Northern development roads, under which of course the

Trans-Labrador Highway could be included.

MS JONES: Yes. So, how is that defined? I have never heard that reference

before.

MR. RIDEOUT: No, it is a new concept that came up, I guess, during

discussions, first of all at the officials level last year and then got approved

by ministers in Quebec City last fall. Ever since last fall now our officials,

and ADM Mercer heads up the group for us, officials from all jurisdictions - all

thirteen jurisdictions, I think, right? - have been meeting pretty well

constantly all winter and they have now - federal-provincial officials. At the

officials level they have now agreed on a criteria for certain Tier 2 roads. I

believe the deputies approved that just within days.

OFFICIAL: Yes, on Tuesday.

MR. RIDEOUT: Okay. So, that has been approved by the deputies now and

recommended to the Council of Ministers for approval. I do not know, I say to my

friend, I am not sure when the ministers are going to get together to approve it

but the officials work has been completed.

MS JONES: So, basically, it is roads that the feds will fund but not

adopt as part of their own highway system?

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, they do not own the national highway system anyway. It

is owned by the Province, but it is roads that they would fund but at a

different level than the national highway system, the Tier 1 system.

MS JONES: Okay.

MR. RIDEOUT: Like, right now, they will fund Trans-Canada Highway

improvements on a 50-50 basis. Tier 2, they have made it clear, will not be

50-50. There will be some other one-off agreement with each individual problems.

Like I said, it might 60-40, it might 70-30, it might be God knows what.

MS JONES: There is still $18 million under that agreement that has not

been drawn down on.

MR. RIDEOUT: Twenty-four million, which is a total of $48 million.

MS JONES: So you did not use the other $6 million either?

MR. RIDEOUT: No, none of it has been used. Now, we do have proposals in

front of the federal government now to fund a $48 million program over the next

two years, generally on the Trans-Canada Highway.

MS JONES: Okay. The money that was announced for the Labrador Highway,

the $40 million, is all of that money coming out of the Labrador Transportation

Fund?

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, it is, and at the end of this year the Labrador

Transportation Initiative Fund will have been depleted.

MS JONES: Okay. Now last year the report from the Minister of Finance

showed - I am trying to recall, but I think it was $103 million left in the

Labrador Transportation Fund.

MR. RIDEOUT: I think that is about right.

MS JONES: So, by the end of this year, that whole $103 million -

MR. RIDEOUT: Assuming we spend the whole $40 million, and that is an

assumption because it depends on the construction season, and I think the

Labrador ferry service is costing approximately $20 million a year. So you will

be pretty well towards the end of the fund. If we do not get an agreement with

the federal government on Tier 2, then the remaining completion of Phase III

will be, obviously, at the Province's expense if we do not get an agreement.

MS JONES: The Province is committed though to carry on with that

infrastructure?

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, we are. Yes, absolutely.

MS JONES: What is your time frame for the completion of Phase III of the

highway?

MR. RIDEOUT: Six years?

OFFICIAL: 2009.

MR. RIDEOUT: 2009.

MS JONES: 2009.

MR. RIDEOUT: Again, that is barring construction seasons. I cannot see

that there would be any further environmental delays. I think we are pretty well

out of the woods on that.

MS JONES: The bridge across the Churchill River -

MR. RIDEOUT: The bridge across the Churchill River?

MS JONES: Or the Grand River as it is called?

MR. RIDEOUT: Next fall.

MS JONES: Well, it started this year, didn't it?

MR. RIDEOUT: Is it next fall?

OFFICIAL: Probably the following summer.

MR. RIDEOUT: Probably the following summer. Okay. But construction has

actually started. Part of the causeway was built last summer. I know, I saw it.

I flew over it the other day.

MS JONES: Are there still objections being filed to that infrastructure?

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, the Friends of the Grand River have been active, but I

am not aware that they have taken any legal action. I cannot predict what they

may or may not do, I say to my friend, but we are carrying on - like the old

fellow would say - as if we were normal until we are ordered to stop.

MS JONES: There was a full environmental assessment done on that bridge,

was there?

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, there was, and it got released after the assessment was

done.

MS JONES: Okay.

I want to talk a little bit about the highway now between Red Bay and Lodge

Bay. As you know, that highway is in my district and one that is of grave

concern to people in that area. Last year it was my understanding that

government would move in this current year to address the problem that exists

there. I would like to ask if there is any work scheduled for this year to

address some of the problems with the rock cuts that we have there?

MR. RIDEOUT: I think I said to the hon. member on previous occasions, Mr.

Chairman, that the first arrow in our attack on that problem is to build a depot

in the center of the problem area to house our workers and equipment so that the

people and equipment are in the center of the problem and can begin working out

towards both ends, Red Bay and Lodge Bay.

The department's experience in previous years, shortly after the Burgeo

road was built there used to be, many, many times when the Burgeo road was

closed for days at a time, not unlike Southern Labrador actually. The

department, at the time, made a conscious decision to build a depot at a

location called Peter Strides Pond and since that has been done, there has not

been significant problems with keeping the Burgeo road opened. So the first line

of attack in Red Bay-Lodge Bay is to build a depot, and we are going to build

that this year. Tenders will be called for that - I guess the tender documents

are in preparation now. We are going to build that depot which will allow the

contractor to station his equipment and his crews in the center of the area. We

will see what that does once the depot is in operation.

The second plan we have is that if this does not do what we want to do and

alleviate the problem - hopefully in its totality, but certainly go a long way

to doing it - then the engineering advice is that we should look at widening the

rock cuts at the top so that you get a better blow through at the bottom and you

do not have as much snow hang up in drift form.

The third piece of engineering advice is that if that does not work, we

should consider building up the grade of the road in the rock cut so that you

have a wider cut at the top now, you have a steeper grade, so you have the road

closer to that wider top and not buried as much in the bottom of the rock cut.

So, that is the engineering approach and the engineering recommendations that

we are taking, but the first kick, I suppose, as it were, at the cat will be the

building of the depot and the stationing of the crews and equipment.

MS JONES: The depot will be completed for this fall?

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, that will depend on construction, but it is certainly

going to be tendered as soon as we can get the tender documents ready.

MS JONES: So, is it the intention to put equipment in that depot this

winter?

MR. RIDEOUT: Oh, yes. Well if it is built the intention is to put the

equipment there, yes.

MS JONES: Then you guys are looking at having equipment there and

operators there to try and keep the road open out there?

MR. RIDEOUT: If the depot is operational, that is our plan, yes.

MS JONES: Okay. Is there a requirement in the tender that it be

constructed this year?

MR. RIDEOUT: We have announced we are going to call tenders for its

construction this year. The tender document is not done yet, I do not think - is

it?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: We are working on it.

MS JONES: Well, I would like to ask that there be some priority on having

it completed for this year so that we can hopefully have some more effort there

this year than we had this past year in trying to keep the road open.

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, we were fortunate this past winter, as the hon. member

knows. We made a commitment that we would keep the road open as long as our

equipment could do it using conventional equipment. We were able to keep the

road open rather than have it closed in November or December like happens in

most years, or happened in previous years. We were able to keep it open, in

fact, until March 2. So Mother Nature was a help this year.

MS JONES: Well the road is never closed there until the end of January or

February.

MR. RIDEOUT: Sometimes in January, but when it is closed it is closed for

significant periods of time, as the hon. member knows; sixty-eight days last

year, I think, and seventy-two the year before.

MS JONES: Yes.

MR. RIDEOUT: But that is the intention and that is the strategy that we

have embarked upon in an effort to turn it around.

MS JONES: The contract that has been let for that

section of road now

does not include snow clearing, is my understanding.

MR. RIDEOUT: No, it does not. The snow clearing that we have done this

winter we did it on a negotiated basis with the contractor on a per diem basis.

MS JONES: Their contract is for five years with an option for renewal, I

think?

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, but that -

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: Four years with an option for three. So they have three more

to go before the option period.

MS JONES: So, I guess you would re-tender or renegotiate?

MR. RIDEOUT: No, I do not think it would be necessary to re-tender. I

think what we would end up doing is negotiating an arrangement with the

contractor, similar to what we did this year would be the most practical. It

would be pretty unfair if the contractor has a contract for four years and he

amortizes his equipment over four years and all of that kind of thing. I think

the more user-friendly approach would be to negotiate a per diem break with him

to clear it during the winter period.

MS JONES: Yes.

I wanted to talk a little about the ferry service on The Strait of Belle

Isle. As you know, this year the ice has been cleared out of The Straits for

quite some time - both sides of The Straits. We have had the Quebec ferry

actually dock in port twice this year already. We have had the local people

using small boats crossing back and forth The Straits for almost three weeks

now. I am wondering if government is prepared to put that ferry on early? It is

my understanding that the operators are ready to go and that the ferry is indeed

ready to go. She is docked down in St. John's Harbour here and just waiting

for the word from the Department of Transportation and Works.

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, the hon. member is pretty well correct in her

assessment. I mean the ice conditions are much more favourable this year than

they have been in recent years. There is no doubt that the ferry could operate.

The present contract as it exists, as the hon. member knows, is for x number of

days a year and the specification start date is May 1. Now government, by

negotiation -

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: The specified start date, according to the contract, is May

1 and the end date I think is somewhere around January 3 or January 4, or

something like that. Obviously, you can negotiate with the contractor variations

to that. At the present time, with the budget that we have been provided, is to

operate during that period of time. What I have asked my officials to do is to -

we are hoping that we are going to have the road open by Saturday. That is the

latest estimate.

By the way, those people who told us that there was fifteen centimetres of

snow on that road ought to see some of the pictures that we are now into seventy

kilometres in. It looks like it is going to probably take up to Saturday to get

the road open safely, so it can be safely used by the public. I have asked my

officials to have discussions with the contractor and see if we can perhaps

co-ordinate the beginning of the ferry service with the opening of the road.

So, we are working on that. I cannot commit to it totally tonight but it is

something we are pursuing and I am hopeful that we may be in a position next

week to announce that we are going to start the service a bit early, not as

early as people would have liked I am sure, but at least a bit earlier than in

normal years.

MS JONES: It is only a week-and-a-half now and the ferry is due to come

on anyway, but I mean for the purposes of people in the area, any day earlier

than that is of benefit to them. There is no doubt about that.

MR. RIDEOUT: Of course, we extended it by four or five days on the end

last year again, as the hon. member knows.

MS JONES: Yes.

MR. RIDEOUT: Generally, we have done that, I think, each year that I have

been there now.

MS JONES: Minister, I would like to see some flexibility given around

that contract. In the last five or six years, for example, there were two

occasions when the ferry went on much earlier in the year and stayed much later.

There have been other years during that time - I remember one year we couldn't

even get the ferry until June because of the ice conditions in that region.

People there are not - I do not think they are being unreasonable. They do not

expect the ferry when she cannot operate but they do expect the service when she

can. So, if there could be some flexibility around that service in the

department so that every year we do not have to go back and forth for weeks and

weeks with the department trying to make an argument to have a service in place.

I think if the conditions permit it, it should automatically be done.

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, the problem with it, of course, is you have to budget

for it. I mean it costs approximately - with fuel costs and crew costs now -

about $20,000 a day to operate that service. So if you are going to start a

month early, you are, basically, looking at a $600,000 addition to your contract

price. You know, at the moment we are not funded for that. We are funded for

what the contract calls for. Now I am prepared to take a risk, and a reasonable

risk, that we might be able to pick up some of the funding on savings in other

areas of marine as we go throughout the year. I am also prepared to recommend to

government that we be as flexible as we can, keeping in mind that I just cannot

authorize the spending of something over $500,000 just on my own whim. But I am

prepared to be as flexible as I can in making that service as flexible as we can

over the duration of this contract, and then I think the sensible thing to do is

when we call contract again - and, by the way, this contract has three more

operating seasons left in it yet because the previous government, as the member

knows, extended it a couple of years before it was up. So, this contract has

three more operating seasons to go and the sensible thing to do then, I think,

is when we call for a new tender, is to put this in place on a permanent basis,

based on whenever the safe operational time arrives; whether that is April or

whether that is May 15, or whether, God forbid, some years it might June. But I

think that is the real long-term approach to it.

MS JONES: How much revenue did the government generate on that service

last year?

MR. RIDEOUT: Can you answer that question? If we can't, we will have to

get it. I do not have it at my fingertips.

OFFICIAL: Ten percent.

MR. RIDEOUT: Ten percent of the operating costs, generally, is what we

have been getting from our services.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: More than 10 per cent? Okay. Well, we will not fool around

with not knowing the number. We will get the number.

MS JONES: Yes, I would like to have - maybe the Clerk can take a note of

this so I can make sure I get the information.

I would like to have what the revenue generation was, actually, on the Strait

of Belle Isle ferry service for last year and the previous year? I would also

like to have the revenue generation on the other Labrador Marine service, which

would include the Northern Ranger , the Sir Robert Bond and the

freight vessel for the past three years.

MR. RIDEOUT: We will have to break that out because the numbers that are

in the budget would be global to our total marine operation in terms of revenue

and expenditures.

ADM Healey, will you make a note of that?

MS JONES: Did you get that, Elizabeth?

When your department commissioned Memorial University to look at a

configuration of marine services for Labrador there was some discussion at the

time about looking at ferry rates and transportation rates. Was there anything

further done on the rate assessment piece?

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes. The public policy - whatever they are called - group at

Memorial University have just completed the second part of that study, which was

the rate information piece. I believe it has been just submitted to the

department within days. I have not seen it yet, myself. It is being analyzed by

the officials and I will see it sometime soon I expect. It will have to go to

Cabinet because that study was commissioned for the government by Cabinet

(inaudible). So, we will undertake to do the analysis, get it to Cabinet and

make it public as soon as we practically can.

MS JONES: Did the Terms of Reference of the study require that they make

recommendations on appropriate rate structures?

MR. RIDEOUT: I cannot remember. Do you Cluney?

MR. MERCER: They were commissioned to look at different alternatives in

terms of rate structuring, whether it be cost based or whether it be purely

arbitrary. They looked at some other marine services throughout the country to

make that assessment.

MS JONES: Did you just say they did rate comparisons with other areas in

the country?

MR. MERCER: No. What they looked at was the models that were used in

other jurisdictions.

MS JONES: Do you know if there was a rate comparison done with other

ferry services in the Province?

MR. RIDEOUT: I do not know because I have not seen the study yet.

MR. MERCER: No, there was no comparison done because a lot of the

transportation in Labrador is bulk or containerized freight. We do not have that

kind of situation anywhere else on the Island, so there was no direct

comparisons done, no.

MS JONES: Well, the Strait of Belle Isle ferry is no different than the

ferry that goes to Fogo Island.

MR. MERCER: In terms of -

MS JONES: Change Islands.

MR. MERCER: No.

MS JONES: Only in size.

MR. MERCER: Yes, that is correct. The study that was done was looking at

the freight rates that are applied -

MS JONES: Did you look at the ferry rates too, or just the freight rates?

MR. MERCER: No, we did not look at the ferry rates for the Apollo .

That is something that we will be doing in conjunction with evaluation of ferry

rates throughout the Province. This was a freight rate study.

MS JONES: Okay. So the study just addressed the freight rates and

passenger rates too, did it, out of Lewisporte, Goose Bay and Cartwright?

MR. MERCER: In looking at a cost-based approach - because some of the

vessels are a combination of passenger and freight service - they did, in a way,

look at passenger rates, but the primary analysis was looking at the old freight

rate structure that was developed by Marine Atlantic about three decades or so

ago. So it is primarily freight focused.

MS JONES: Minister, will that study be released to the public?

MR. RIDEOUT: That is certainly our full intention once the analysis has

been done. I have pursued it and we have sent it to Cabinet. After Cabinet has

been apprized of it, then it is our full intention to release it, yes.

MS JONES: Do you have any idea what the time frame might be?

MR. RIDEOUT: No, I do not at the moment, because we only got it within

the last few days I think.

OFFICIAL: Yes, within days.

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes. So we are just beginning the analysis now, and then we

will - well, the hon. member knows the system. We have to prepare a Cabinet

submission. I do not think it will be an inordinate delay or anything of that

nature.

MS JONES: Do government pay for the Apollo to dock in Blanc-Sablon?

MR. RIDEOUT: To what?

MS JONES: Do you pay a fee to dock the ferry in Blanc-Sablon?

MR. RIDEOUT: I can't hear the latter part.

MS JONES: Does government pay a fee to dock the ferry in Blanc-Sablon?

MR. RIDEOUT: In Blanc-Sablon?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: According to the assistant deputy minister, we do not.

MS JONES: Okay.

Just a couple of questions now on the marine transportation system. Will

there be any changes in the scheduling this year of the vessels: the Bond ,

the Nada , and the Northern Ranger ?

MR. RIDEOUT: It is not anticipated that there will be any. We have

released the schedules based on demands from the public to try to do it as early

as possible. We have released the schedules - I think it was just before

Christmas, sometime in December. So the schedules are now being released. People

have been making reservations. We are going to be taking tour buses I think, one

trip a week, between Cartwright and Happy Valley-Goose Bay this year. That kind

of thing.

So the schedule, I would think, unless something happens to make this

impossible, is probably clearly well set.

MS JONES: The court case with regard to the -

MR. RIDEOUT: Canships?

MS JONES: Yes, Astron was it?

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes.

MS JONES: I am trying to think of the name of the boat, the Astron .

Now, my understanding is that government had to pay out a settlement to the

Canship corporation, was it?

MR. RIDEOUT: No, that is not the case. The court decision, the decision

by Mr. Justice Leo Barry, was he found in favour of Canships, but the law on

damages puts an onus on you, if I do you harm, to try to mitigate that harm as

much as possible. Therefore, Canships had to attempt to mitigate any harm that

the Province did to them by finding work for the Astron . In fact, for the

last two years the Astron has been leased out to Voisey's Bay. So,

therefore, there are no damages due to the company for the two years that have

passed. If Canship cannot lease the Astron this coming season, then

Canship has the ability to go back to the court and seek damages for this third

year of the contract.

As the member probably recollects, the Trans Gulf contract is for

three years with an option to renew, and the option to renew is solely at the

discretion of the minister. So, we have not made any decision regarding renewal

at this stage of the game. The most liability, if we do not renew, that we could

incur would be the remaining third year of the contract.

MS JONES: This year though is the third year of the contract, right?

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, it is.

MS JONES: So nothing would change this year anyway.

MR. RIDEOUT: No.

MS JONES: But, if there was - I guess if they did not find work with the Astron

they would have the ability to come back and then the department would have to

make a decision - would they? - on whether or not -

MR. RIDEOUT: They would have the ability to go back to the court and seek

damages for the third year of the contract, which is this coming season. I can

say to the hon. member, that nothing has been filed so far with the department

or the court by Canships.

MS JONES: Okay. What was the cost of running the Sir Robert Bond

into Lewisporte last year?

MR. RIDEOUT: Exactly what we said in the Budget, despite the 15 per cent

in fuel. I think we had said that it would cost an additional six hundred and

something thousand to operate the additional trip into Lewisporte. We came and

that was smack on the nose. That is exactly what it cost, despite the fact, as I

said earlier, that there was a 15 per cent cost in fuel as well. Again, those

numbers are reflected -

MS JONES: That was the direct cost of running the ship itself?

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes.

MS JONES: What was the cost of maintaining the terminal facility at

Lewisporte?

MR. RIDEOUT: I am very pleased to be able to tell the hon. member that

when the previous government were forced to go back into Lewisporte to provide a

freight service to the North Coast, that Woodwards demanded, and was given by

that government, $720,000 to operate the Lewisporte terminal. When we looked at

that after we became the government, we concluded that that was nothing short of

crazy. So we went back to Woodwards and told them we had no intention of paying

them that kind of money to operate out of Lewisporte this past year, whether it

was the Bond or whether it was just the Trans Gulf . We were able

to negotiate - I am very pleased to tell the hon. member - a fee for Woodwards

to operate the terminal in Lewisporte of just over $400,000 for the whole year.

So we saved the taxpayer something over $300,000 from the previous year, to this

year, in terms of the operations of the Lewisporte facility.

MS JONES: Why were there such substantial savings?

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, there was a management fee, so we said: We are just

not going to pay you that kind of management fee. We think it is in the

stratosphere. We do not think it can be justified but we are prepared to

negotiate with you what we think is a reasonable fee. By being hard-nosed and

sticking to our guns, I guess, we negotiated a substantial decrease in the

operational cost for the Lewisporte terminal.

MS JONES: Is the same operator still there?

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, it is still Mr. Woodward and Company.

MS JONES: Does the Department of Transportation have any employees who

work out of the Lewisporte facility?

MR. RIDEOUT: Our Director of Ferry Operations, a gentlemen by the name of

Walter Pumphrey, was stationed in Grand Falls, and we have moved his operation

or his office into the terminal building, or what used to be the office

building, the ticket office in Lewisporte, for two reasons - it is for the same

reason that we moved Harry Pardy, I guess his name is, into Cartwright. We have

moved him there for two reasons. One, we want somebody from our department to

determine how the Bond is loaded, to make sure that the freight is

containerized properly and do not have to picked apart somewhere along the North

Coast or in Cartwright, that that is supervised and done. We want to make sure

that the contractor does not discourage passenger and vehicle travel at the

expense of freight, or vice versa. We want some control over that, so we have

Mr. Pumphrey stationed in Lewisporte primarily for those reasons, and these are

the same reasons that we put Harry Pardy in Cartwright on a full-time basis this

year, so that we did not have freight thrown off at the dock and then broken

open or damaged before it got transferred to the Trans Gulf to go up the

North Coast. We want it properly containerized, properly shipped, the control of

the dock. We did not want situations like happened the summer before, where all

tankers belonging to certain private operators were given preference to dock

while the Trans Gulf or the Sir Robert Bond was out anchored off

in the stream. We wanted to control the situation, and we did by putting those

two gentlemen in place, and I think, from a freight perspective, delivery

perspective to the North Coast, it is fair to say that we have made some

significant improvements.

MS JONES: So, you just have one employee in Lewisporte?

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes. That is not a new employee. It is the same person who

used to work out of the Grand Falls office.

MS JONES: The ferry contract for Norman Bay and Williams Harbour, I haven't

had a chance to talk to anyone in the department about this, but they are

looking for scheduling changes in that ferry operation. Is there any flexibility

in that contract to make changes?

MR. RIDEOUT: Have we heard anything about any scheduled upgrades?

MR. MERCER: No, (inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: Sure, go ahead and answer.

MR. MERCER: We had made an attempt last season and did offer some

flexibility in modifying the schedule, and we would certainly be willing to do

that again. Last year, when we asked if there were any modifications they were

looking for, they indicated that there were not, but we have not received a

request up to this point in time for this year's service.

MR. RIDEOUT: Do we have to integrate those schedules with the Northern

Ranger , as well, in terms of...?

MS JONES: No.

MR. RIDEOUT: No. It has nothing to do with it at all, okay. I was

thinking about fresh produce going up the North Coast.

The bottom line is, if the communities are looking for some changes that are

manageable, we are certainly willing to have a look at it.

MS JONES: Okay, because one of the problems that we have with that

service now is that the ferry itself overnights in Port Hope Simpson and

Charlottetown, and I think they are looking to have the ferry overnight in their

communities where there are sufficient docking facilities. I mean, the dock in

Norman Bay was only built three or four years ago. It is a new dock. That is one

of the concerns that they expressed. I can get you all the information on it, if

you want to have a look at it and see if you can accommodate them.

MR. RIDEOUT: Sure.

It really would not make much difference to us, from an operational

perspective, I don't think, where the ferry overnighted, would it?

OFFICIAL: I would have to check all the details with respect to the

facilities, but it is certainly something we can look at.

MS JONES: Okay.

Just a request for other information. I would like to have a copy of the

amount of freight and passengers carried on the Sir Robert Bond last year

out of Lewisporte to Cartwright and Goose Bay, and also the freight and

passenger traffic between Cartwright and Goose Bay as well.

MR. RIDEOUT: We have made a note of that. We will break that out.

MS JONES: Just some questions on the air transportation services for

Southern Labrador. Is it still government's intention to look at a regional

airport for the Southeast Coast of Labrador?

MR. RIDEOUT: We have received, finally, the consultant's report.

MS JONES: I didn't know you had the report.

MR. RIDEOUT: We just received it, again, within days, and a committee of

officials are now looking at it. I have not seen it myself yet. The analysis has

not been done. What the bottom line recommendations are, I do not really know at

this point in time, but we have received it. We will be doing the analysis. Once

that is done, we will obviously make it available.

In terms of the air transportation network in Southern Labrador, I assume the

hon. member is aware that Air Labrador have confirmed that they are not going to

pull out, as announced last fall. In fact, they have confirmed to us that they

are going to continue, and not only continue to service but they are going to

enhance it, I believe, on a three-day-a-week schedule. Some things have

happened. I think they have picked up the medevac service, the mail contract,

and that kind of thing, so from a perspective of a downgrade or acquitting a

substantial change in the air service, that is not going to happen, or that is

not in their plans to happen right now. We are going to want to, obviously,

further get the views of Lab Air and anybody else who might want to talk to us

in terms of what this report has to say as well.

I can confirm, like I said, we just got it within days and we are now

starting work on it.

CHAIR: Excuse me for just a second. I would like to cut in on the debate.

If I could have the staff identify themselves, before they speak, for the

purpose of Hansard. I forgot to do that at the beginning.

MR. RIDEOUT: Sure.

We apologize, Mr. Chair.

CHAIR: Thank you.

MS JONES: I have no idea what this report is going to tell you. Of

course, I have not talked to the consultant. I know it has been over two years

with a consultant, trying to have it completed, but I can tell you, from my

experience in representing that area, we really desperately need to change the

infrastructure to provide a better air service.

Air Labrador, this is not the first time we have had a commercial airline

threatening to pull out of the region. As you know, numbers fluctuate with the

connection of more communities by road. Obviously, there are peak periods in the

year and then there are periods where there is extreme downtime, a decline in

service for the airline business, but it is my understanding, in talking to the

two airlines that have had a history in operating there, both Air Labrador and

Provincial Airlines, that the only real feasible way into the future to service

that area would be having one regional airport instead of landing on four or

five airstrips and operating that size of an aircraft that can be accommodate on

those kinds of airstrips and so on.

I guess my

part in it, I just want to, I guess, encourage the government, in

their assessment of these recommendations, in considering this, to give priority

to what the region will require in the next five to ten years in terms of an

airline service. I think that is going to be the most important thing right now.

I would also like to ask that the report be released once the department has had

an opportunity to look at it.

MR. RIDEOUT: Once we have had the opportunity to do the analysis and get

briefed and see what the implications are, then certainly it is our intention to

release it, yes.

I do not disagree with the assessment that the hon. member has made. I have

heard other groups make it, in the time that I have been Minister of

Transportation. There have been calls for a new site development. There have

been some calls for a redevelopment of the present site and so on, so all of

these - we will be looking to the report to provide us with some advice.

MS JONES: Okay.

I just have one other question and then I will turn it over to one of my

colleagues.

With regard to the Williams Harbour road, obviously this is still an

important road connection for that community, and I do realize that government

did an economic analysis of whether it was feasible to do a road connection

there or not. I think your numbers showed you that it would be around $6 million

to build that, and that it was not economically viable. In my opinion, Minister,

there are very few pieces of road connecting rural communities in this Province

that were probably economically viable to build, but, having said that, they

were still done and they were done for obvious reasons: to allow these

communities to have access to the adjacent communities and services in those

adjacent regions, and this community is no different.

This past year, I guess, has been even more difficult because of, I do not

know if it is globing warming or if it is some other factor that is affecting

the environment, but our freeze-up period is much later and, as you know, to get

to that community, you have to travel over ice and have to travel over bodies of

water that have heavy tides so they do not always freeze very well. This past

winter, we have had people who have gone through the ice and, very lucky and

fortunate for them, there was no life lost, but it is proving to be even more of

a dangerous route to travel because we do not get the below temperature freezing

temperatures that we normally get and we do not have the length of season to

operate in and out of there.

I guess I just want to appeal to the government, again, if they would have

another look at this piece of infrastructure. While it may not be economically

viable, there are, I think, some benefits to government here in terms of having

children access schools and other communities, being able to close the airport,

for one thing, in that community, so that they can access a larger airport in

another area. Also, I think there are opportunities there for people to look at

different transportation services. They would not required marine service any

more. They would not require to have subsidies on their flights and their food

that is going in there right now, so there are some savings, I think, that could

be achieved for the government if they did want to consider it. While they may

not combine to be $6 million over the next five years, I think it would, over a

period of time, prove to be substantial.

I do not know if you would be open to having another look at that access road

or not.

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, I am certainly not closed-minded to having a look at

it. I suppose if you want to take the argument of cost-effectiveness, the

Trans-Labrador Highway would never be anything more than a dream. Perhaps the

Trans-Canada Highway would not be on the Island. You know, a lot of those things

never make total economic sense but they make economic development sense. Six

million dollars is a lot of money; nevertheless, we have never said, as a

government, that the project would never be reconsidered. I think all we said is

that, at this point in time, where we have so many pressing economic

transportation infrastructure requirements, it would just have to take - for

now, at least - a lower priority on the totem pole. That is not to say that it

could not be considered again and looked at again.

MS JONES: Minister, I would like to extend to you an invitation to go to

that community this summer and meet with people there, just to get an

understanding of the challenges that they face with transportation. There are

very few communities left in our Province, actually, I would think, that are in

the situation that they are in, where they can be accessed by road with an

amount of money that is reasonable. We would certainly ask, if you are in that

area this year, to go there and meet with the people. I would certainly be happy

to accommodate it for you in any way that I can.

MR. RIDEOUT: I appreciate the invitation. In my first year, I have

managed to get into the North Coast communities, and Central and Western

Labrador. This year, it is my intention to do a significant tour of the South

Coast. Some time, perhaps in the early part of the summer, I intend to drive as

far as I can myself, and then to - I say myself, drive the road -

MS JONES: You are not having a driver, you mean.

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes.

- and then, by boat or helicopter, whatever is most appropriate to the

schedule, to visit those communities that are not yet connected.

I am looking forward to doing that some time the early part of the summer. I

will let the hon. member know when the logistics are worked out.

MS JONES: All right, I appreciate that. We will look forward to your

visit. I think it is important that you certainly make time to do that this

year. People would certainly appreciate it, I know that.

MR. RIDEOUT: Okay, we will do it.

MS JONES: I am going to turn it over to my colleague, Mr. Chairman, for a

few minutes.

CHAIR: Mr. Langdon.

MR. LANGDON: Just a couple of questions.

My ears were perked very quickly when the minister said he was going to

travel along the South Coast. He did not say if it was Labrador or across the

Island.

MR. RIDEOUT: We will do your South Coast, too. How about that?

MR. LANGDON: Okay, we will do ours some time, because we do have, along

the South Coast, the isolated communities. There are many, many, challenges

there, and I am sure the minister is familiar with it.

One of the ideas that has been talked about from the Burin Peninsula side and

the Connaigre Peninsula side, by the development associations, the REDBs or

whatever, is the idea of a roll-on roll-off ferry service between the Burin

Peninsula and the Connaigre so that tourists could come down, take the boat and

go across.

We are not looking to government for extra money. There might be some

thoughts that have been talked about, some innovative ideas; like, government

has to put on a boat and certain money is allocated, say, for Rencontre East to

Bay L'Argent, Bay L'Argent to Pool's Cove. If there might be a creative

way of saying to the operator, we will give you that particular subsidy, but if

you were to put on a car ferry service that could take five or ten cars, or

whatever the case might be, and allow the person who would be the operator to

keep those extra dollars for the cars and so on, as a part of the contract that

could be written in, so that he could keep it to help offset the extra boat they

would have to buy or so on, would that be worth pursuing from both peninsulas? I

am telling you, we think - and every organization from the Burin Peninsula and

over on our side thinks - it would really be great for tourism.

One of the big drawbacks down our way - Conne River would be an attraction,

and all of the other coastal bay areas, but no one wants to come down a highway

of about 200 kilometres and then have to turn around and drive back up again. It

is a deterrent for them. So, if you were to drive down the peninsula, take the

boat and go to the Burin Peninsula, or the other way around, and come back, then

it would be an advantageous situation for people coming to the area. They are

still exploring on that, so you might hear something about that in the future.

MR. RIDEOUT: I wonder, could my friend tell me when those ferry contracts

are up? Are they any time soon?

MR. LANGDON: I have no idea.

MR. RIDEOUT: Which one? There are two, right?

MR. LANGDON: We are looking at the one from Pool's Cove to Bay L'Argent.

It is for Rencontre East, really. Rencontre East is one of the lucky

communities. They have a boat going both ways: Bay L'Argent on the peninsula,

and Pool's Cove on the Connaigre. have no idea when that contract would be up.

MR. RIDEOUT: We could certainly look at the possibility of when it comes

up, of trying to incorporate that kind of an idea.

MR. LANGDON: Yes.

MR. RIDEOUT: I like what you are saying. I can see that it could lead to

some economic development and stimulation, especially from the tourist industry

and so on. On the surface of it, it makes a lot of sense.

MR. LANGDON: Bill Matthews and myself have talked about it a lot. I think

there is some possibility of being able to derive some funds from the feds to

build a dock in each place so it would not cost the provincial government any

money either.

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, that would be certainly an important boost if we were

to - in terms of capital requirements.

MR. LANGDON: Absolutely, and it would be a boost for both regions from a

tourism point of view. You certainly might hear something about it in the near -

MR. RIDEOUT: We would certainly be prepared to entertain any

representation that you or your constituents feel like making on it.

MR. LANGDON: Okay.

One of the other things - a couple of questions that I have - a class 4 road.

I am sure that Cluney is probably familiar with the one that I am talking about

MR. RIDEOUT: (Inaudible) in your district, is it?

MR. LANGDON: - from Seal Cove up to Pass Island. It is not cleared during

the winter. We don't look for snow being cleared, or anything of that nature.

In the spring of the year -

MR. RIDEOUT: Is that a fisheries access road?

MR. LANGDON: Pardon?

MR. RIDEOUT: Is that a fisheries access road?

MR. LANGDON: No.

That particular road, twice a year, Minister, in the spring - like around the

last of April or May - it is graded by the Works and Services people. Then, in

September or October it is the same thing again. That has been done for, I

think, back since 1969 when Pass Island was resettled and the people moved to

Harbour Breton, Marystown and so on. It is used quite a bit by fishermen and

there are very few cabins on the road. It is a road that leads out to Pass

Island itself. Over the last probably decade or so there has been some work done

with some new culverts and things put in it, but it would not be an astronomical

type of funding to be able to cure that.

Also, on the same road, it is where Seal Cove has its landfill site, and when

the first snow comes and it is cut off with snow then they go to Hermitage with

their waste and so on. So, it is not something that you would have to worry

about with snowclearing and things like that, because people use it with

all-terrain vehicles in the summertime - in the wintertime, I should say - and

Ski-Doos. What is happening, like when rain comes, you have big ruts in it and

you cannot get over it even with a four-wheel drive.

There are other roads in the area that could probably classify as class 4 or

whatever, but they are not the same. The one going into Furby's Cove, Cluney,

I would not categorize that one like the one going to Pass Island; they are a

different road all together. There is a lighthouse on the end of Pass Island, as

Cluney is aware, and there are people using it all the time.

I do not expect a decision - they will probably never - but, if by the end of

the year or whatever the case might be, or next year, I think it is worth taking

a note to have a look at that. There is not a lot of work involved. You do not

have to do year-round with it - so in a day in the spring, or less than that. It

is only about four kilometres, I think, four or five kilometres, but it means a

lot to the people who live in the Seal Cove area and that end of the district.

MR. RIDEOUT: I am sure the hon. member, as he said, really, in his

comments, understands that I cannot make a commitment on that now, but I will

certainly undertake to have a look at it.

MR. LANGDON: Just have a look at it. If, at the end of the day, nothing

happens, then at least - the guys have been after me to bring it up and I have

not done it in the House. I have waited until this time and situation to do it

here, to bring it up.

MR. RIDEOUT: Fair enough, not a problem.

MR. LANGDON: One of the other things, I had representation from a person

recently and was talking about doing some contract work on the school in

Carmanville. I think what he was saying - if I got it correct or not, I am

pretty sure I do - was that government was very prompt in making its payments up

to the point that the deductible was paid, whatever that particular amount might

be, but the fact is that now, once the deductible was paid and the bills go to

the insurance company rather than coming back to the government to be paid

directly, some of these particular invoices, if you wish, are forty-seven days

over, eighty-seven days over, and the people are carrying it and some of them

are small contractors. Probably the deputy knows more about it than I do.

I just thought - he asked me if I would bring it up - rather than doing it in

the House as a question or whatever, where we were having these Estimates, I

thought I would just bring it to your attention.

The other representation made was saying that the contract that is about to

be called now on the Carmanville school, which is the fifth contract, the days

normally for a contract to be paid is either thirty or forty-five days - thirty

days, I thought he said, if I understand correctly - but in the new contract it

has been extended to 120 days, and many of the smaller contractors cannot get

the money from the bank for that long period of time. Really, in a sense, I

think what is happening is that smaller contractor see themselves as being

frozen out and going to the larger group.

I thought he said that the latest contract that came in, contract number

five, I do not know the initials for it, at the end of the day government will

probably pay $1 million more than it should pay because of this particular

situation.

These are some of the things that I just wanted to bring up. It might not be

as clear as mud, but I just wanted to bring it up anyway.

MR. RIDEOUT: I am going to ask ADM Moores if he has anything to add to

what the hon. member has raised.

MR. MOORES: What you are saying is correct. Both the Department of

Transportation and Works and the Department of Education and Treasury Board

officials have met with the insurance adjuster who represents the insurance

company. We have gone back to the insurance company and pointed out that this is

unacceptable on Carmanville school. The adjuster did what they could at their

end, in getting reports in. We improved the payments by, say, a week, as opposed

to the month that we were looking for. I am not sure of the exact number of

days. We had other contracts coming out, and said: When these new tenders go

out, we want assurances that they will be paid quicker than the 120 days.

We had a very intense meeting with the adjuster. They went back to the

insurance company. They could not give us, would not give us, assurances that it

could be done faster. They said they would attempt to speed it up, but there

were no guarantees. Consequently, when we issued the tender documents, we put in

the tender documents for the, I guess, latest contracts for Postville school,

Eastport and Carmanville, that this is a condition. The construction association

were not happy, because they said the same thing, that it is favouring the

larger contractors, but we said it is really beyond government's control and

this is a condition that our insurance company has put in place, that we do not

have control over.

MR. LANGDON: Okay, I just wanted to raise it, no more than that.

The other thing, Minister, you were saying just now that there is a

possibility of getting an agreement with the federal government on Tier 2 roads.

You didn't mention the Bay d'Espoir Highway, but I would just assume that

might be added into that, as well, just the same as the Baie Vert Highway would

be, or some other one.

MR. RIDEOUT: It would be a similar category (inaudible).

MR. LANGDON: They would be a part of the Tier 2?

MR. RIDEOUT: We would have to make the case for it, but there is a Tier 2

criteria that has now been developed and has been approved by the deputies. It

will next have to be approved by the Council of Ministers.

MR. LANGDON: I understand that.

MR. RIDEOUT: It would be our responsibility to go forward and make the

case for Bay d'Espoir, or make the case for the Northern Peninsula, or make

the case for the Bonavista Peninsula, that it fits those criteria.

MR. LANGDON: My questions to you would be, I would think, in my own mind,

that the Bay d'Espoir Highway, the Baie Verte Highway, the Northern Peninsula

Highway and so on, would be somewhat similar, and if two or three of them

qualified then the Bay d'Espoir Highway would qualify as well.

MR. RIDEOUT: I do not disagree with that assessment.

MR. LANGDON: Okay.

I have a couple of questions on Aboriginal Affairs, but I will leave that

until after.

CHAIR: Gerry?

MR. REID: Sorry about that, Mr. Minister. I was discussing the affairs of

state.

I have been asked to ask you some questions with regard to the closure of the

thirteen depots, because there is some confusion, at least in my area and the

other one that I have talked about. Have you gone ahead and done this now? Have

they been notified?

MR. RIDEOUT: No, it hasn't been finalized yet. We have indicated that

we are looking at winterizing thirteen sites, and we have talked to the union

and we have told them we will get back to them again when we have the final

document ready, but it is not yet ready.

MR. REID: So, it is not much good for me to ask you some of these

questions, because I talked to the union as well, actually, last week. I do not

know if anything has changed since then.

MR. RIDEOUT: Nothing has changed since we last spoke to the union. What

we did, I can say to my hon. friend, when we - this was put forward by the

department, by the way, as a reorganization. It was not something that was

imposed on us as a cost reduction measure, or anything of that nature. It was a

departmental approach. When we announced that we were going to do this, we went

out to the regional directors before we did anything and said: Look, here is

what we have in mind. We don't want to get partway through this process and

find that we are kind of barking up the wrong tree and not doing things

properly, and creating more difficulties for ourselves. Have a look at it and

tell us what you thing is doable and what you think can be the net results for

improving our summer maintenance program.

The regional directors engaged in that process and they have gotten back to

us recently. I can say that when this whole process started we were looking at

the possibility of net job impacts in over 100 positions. That has been

significantly reduced. What the final number will be, I really do not know

tonight but I expect - and we have committed - when we know the final number, to

have further discussions with the union. When the final number is arrived at,

and the streamlining is - when we are satisfied with it, then we intend to go

back to the union, inform them, and inform them what the net impact on their

members is.

I just say to my hon. friend, that is where it is at this moment.

MR. REID: Because, besides the numbers going, there was a number of

concerns like, for example, in Victoria Cove. Normally you would keep some of

the winter people on during the summer. Am I right?

MR. RIDEOUT: Do we keep winter people on during the summer?

MR. MERCER: (Inaudible) layoffs.

MR. REID: Some of them.

MR. RIDEOUT: Maybe, Mr. Mercer, you might want to say to the Committee

what you said to me.

MR. MERCER: In some cases, at some of the depots, there are some winter

staff who are offered what is called an alternate to layoff, so they may be

operators in the winter and they become labourers in the summer.

MR. REID: Yes.

What they were concerned about is, I do not think any of these people have

been notified whether or not they are going to be kept on the summer. That is

one of the issues.

MR. MERCER: At the thirty-one depots, the permanent depots that are

staying, all of those will be notified, if they have not all been notified at

this point in time, of alternate to layoffs. That is the intention, that they

would, as in previous years. The only areas where that is not taking effect at

this point in time is at the thirteen depots that will become winterized. As you

can imagine, you would not want to extend someone today and we make final

decisions tomorrow and then give them a layoff notice.

MR. REID: Yes, because last week they had not been told, I know. The

other thing about that, is it true that - for example, if you layoff, for the

summer months, an individual from the New World Island depot, he is eligible

then to bump somewhere in his region, is it? In his region first -

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes.

MR. REID: - which is a fairly large region, I take it. It is not just New

World Island or anywhere. But he has to bump the lowest member on the seniority

pool who is going to be kept on. So, it could mean that he might have to bump as

far away as Stephenville somewhere. No, within his region, I mean.

MR. RIDEOUT: No, Stephenville would not be within in region.

MR. REID: Yes, that is a different region, I am sorry. But he could -

MR. RIDEOUT: It could be Grand Falls or somewhere.

MR. REID: Yes, and then the person that he bumps there might end up - so,

I mean, this could take months before all the bumping would be completed, I

would take it, wouldn't it? What you would end up with, or you could possibly

end up with, is all of these depots that are going to remain open in the region

with completely different staffs in all of them than you have today, or it is a

possibility quite a number of them could change. Am I correct?

MR. RIDEOUT: The deputy minister is going to speak to that.

MR. SMART: All of that is governed by the collective agreement. We do not

make those rules.

MR. REID: Yes, I know.

MR. SMART: That was a negotiated arrangement as to how people would move

in the event of any job realignment. The agreement also specifies not only where

you can bump within your region, but also lays out the time line that you must

do it within, and you must exercise that right to bump within your notice

period, so no. I mean, there could be a great deal of activity within a short

period but it does not get dragged out for months because you would be required,

once you receive notice, to exercise your option to bump within a very confined

period of time, ten days, and then once you exercise it, the next person must

exercise it within a defined period as well. So, no, it will happen fairly

quickly and it will happen in accordance with, not the rules that we made, but

the ones that are negotiated with the union.

MR. REID: Yes, but what I am saying is that an existing depot, one that

is going to remain, you could have, you know, not a completely different crew

but a somewhat different crew than there is there today.

MR. SMART: I think at the lower part of the seniority list, the junior

employees is where you could see movement. Yes, in terms of your senior people

and your senior operators and so on, the ones with a lot of experience and a lot

of seniority, you will not see much change at that level, but certainly -

MR. REID: Yes, but it depends though, because if the people on New World

Island and the people in Victoria Cove - I would hazard to guess that they are

probably equal on the seniority list. They have been around -

MR. SMART: Vaguely, yes.

MR. REID: What I am saying is that New World Island is closed, so

Victoria Cove now is responsible for, not only the area in Gander Bay, which

basically, minister, as you know, probably has some of the worst roads in the

Province right now, along with the one on Fogo Island that I have, and part of

the one on Route 340.

Seriously, Gander Bay Road, from Wings Point over, is atrocious. It is better

if you took the pavement off it. Anyway, the crew that is going to look after

that now is going to also have to look after Twillingate and New World Island.

You are going to have a small crew over in Victoria Cove - some of whom probably

never even worked out of the depot in Victoria Cove - who are going to be

responsible for, not only what used to be the purview of their depot, but all of

New World Island and Twillingate Island. They will not even know where the roads

are. I am not exaggerating either, minister.

I can remember about five years ago, on June 2, there was a woman killed on

New World Island in a snowstorm. If you have a crew over in Victoria Cove trying

to handle that major distance - now I know that is fearmongering, you might want

to call it, but it happened. All I am trying to do is make a point. I do not

know how you could ever manage with one crew over in Gander Bay, not knowing the

roads, in a completely different region, trying to cleanup a snowstorm or even

just do the regular maintenance in grading on the roads in my district this

summer. There is still a fair bit of dirt road in my district. I do not know how

a crew from Gander Bay, trying to manage some of the worst roads in the

Province, if not the worst, would be able to jump aboard a grader in the morning

and get to parts of Twillingate and New World Island. Do they have to be on the

job? Have you given any thought on how you are going to do that? Are you going

to tell these individuals that they have to be in Twillingate on a grader at

8:00 o'clock in the morning, or do they report to work at the depot and drive

to Twillingate? Because if that's the case, if you are going to haul a grader

out of Victoria Cove and try to get to Crow Head on Twillingate Island, it is

definitely taking you two hours in a grader.

MR. RIDEOUT: That is not the way it is anticipated that it is going to

work. I am going to ask ADM Mercer to address that now in a second, but before

he does, I just want to say to the hon. member, that the bumping rights are

confined to the region. The region is the subdivision, in this case, of

Lewisporte depot, which is: Lewisporte, Fogo, Victoria Cove, New World Island

and Lumsden. That is the area that the bumping is confined to. You cannot bump

into Grand Falls or you cannot bump up to Clarenville or anything. It is that

subdivision, or subregion.

In terms of the organization of work crews for summer maintenance - now if

there is a snow storm June 2, then we would have to deal with that differently.

Our own vehicles would have the wings off by that time and the blades off by

that time. We would have to gear up as best we can or get private contractors.

We do whatever we have to do under those circumstances, and funding is not the

issue.

In terms of summer maintenance and the organization of the crews for summer

maintenance, I am going to ask the Assistant Deputy Minister of Transportation,

Mr. Mercer, to make some comment on that.

MR. MERCER: What we will be doing is that we would have a work crew, or

work crews, that would be responsible for a unit area that would include

Victoria Cove and the former unit area of New World Island. The summer work

program would be a planned program. It would be priorities identified and if

there are certain parts of that unit area where grading is an ongoing

requirement, than the grader would be stationed at our facility that is closest

to that area requiring the service in terms of New World Island depot. We would

have our operator for that grader pick that grader up at 8:00 in the morning

there and go to his assignment.

The idea is that it is a planned summer maintenance program. When you are

doing work on New World Island then, predominantly, the crew would work out of

the New World Island unit, and they may do that for two months during the summer

period. It is going to depend on where the maintenance needs are or what your

budgets can accommodate and those sorts of things. So, it is going to be a

planned approach and your crews will move around. At times I would suspect that

the entire work crew may very well work out of the New World Island facilities

under that new boundary for periods of time, as they will work out of Victoria

Cove.

MR. REID: Yes. I don't want to be confrontational. This is an opinion,

all right. I cannot see, for the life of me, how - if you took the New World

Island depots - there are twenty-nine communities, I think, on New World Island

and Twillingate Island. I cannot see how you can take - I think there were five

people, maybe six, working in that depot last summer - that you can take these

out and have six or seven people in Victoria Cove and hope to do the maintenance

that was carried out in the past, unless you are saying there was no maintenance

carried out by the summer crew in the past on New World Island and Twillingate

Island. I think that the number of kilometres in that region now combined -

Victoria Cove, New World Island and Twillingate - is going from 300 to

approximately 625 or 725, which that one crew would have to handle. Kilometres I

am talking about, for those two - if my figures are correct, the ones that I was

provided with from the union.

MR. RIDEOUT: One of the things that came out of the further consultations

with the regional directors was an equitable formula per kilometre per employee

for maintenance purposes. One of the things that has happened here, since we

have been looking at this, is we will be adding back some people in some areas.

That is why I can say tonight that the net impact - it is not a

hundred-and-something like it was when we started to look at this first. It is

significantly less than that.

Something else that ought to be said here as well, Mr. Chairman, is this. We

found ourselves in a situation, as a result of cutbacks year over year, year

after year in the summer maintenance program, where we had all kinds of salary

dollars but precious little material dollars. As a matter of fact, the industry

norm is $1 for salary and $3 for material. We were the reverse. When we took

over and had a good look at this, we were spending $3 on salary and $1 on

materials for our crews to work with. Not only were we the reverse of the

industry - and I should say that if we proceed to do this reorganization, we

will only be one on one. We will not be anywhere close to the industry norm but

we will be one to one, dollar for dollar. Not only were we the reverse of the

industry norm, our skill mix was wrong. In some units we had too many operators

and not enough labourers. In some units we had too many labourers and not enough

operators. So, what we are trying to do here is correct an historic imbalance

that has developed over the last several years. This did not develop over the

last eighteen months. This is a result of year after year, year after year

cutback in summer maintenance.

The only other thing I want to add is, like I said, we are going to do this

in a formula that is a provincial-wide formula, so that the number of kilometres

per employee for summer maintenance in the Twillingate area will be the same as

the number of kilometres per employee on the Northern Peninsula. It will be a

provincial formula and that is what we have been working at developing. Look, it

is a different approach. It is a new process. Give it a chance. Maybe we will

have to come to the conclusion that this cannot work and it is not going to

improve the situation. This is not a dollar saving figure. Treasury Board has

agreed to transfer to our supplies budget any funds that we can save from salary

dollars as a result of this operation so that I can hopefully get more money to

buy material, to grade shoulders of roads and do more patching and do that kind

of thing. That is the intent. Now if that does not work, then we have to revisit

the whole thing again, but that is the strategy behind it. That is the strategic

thinking behind it. If it causes a bad situation to get worse, then I will be

the first to say we made a mistake and we have to go back to the drawing board

again.

MR. REID: Minister, to lay off five employees at New World Island depot,

that is responsible for New World Island and Twillingate Island for six months

of the year, what is the average salary for an employee there, $30,000, $20,000?

Somewhere between $20,000 and $30,000 a year, I would say, isn't it?

Basically, for six months you are probably going to save $10,000 per employee,

so $60,000. Say $80,000, or even say $100,000. According to the cost of

materials, as you know, you are not doing much maintenance with $100,000 that

you are going to save on New World Island and Twillingate Island for twenty-nine

communities when you consider that a kilometre of pavement will cost you

$100,000.

MR. RIDEOUT: It will cost you more than that now.

MR. REID: Yes, it will cost you more than that. I know that the cost of

gravel and everything else, to say that you are doing it to save money to put

into materials, I think the hardships that you are going to impose on the

employees and their families, not to mention - I think, personally, that the

service we received last year will not be the same as we are going to receive

this year. I think that -

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, all I can say to that allegation, we will just have to

wait and see. But in terms of the savings that will go back into material

supplies, at the present time, is budgeted to be $1.2 million. So in the overall

scheme of things, I have to say to my friend, that is not insignificant.

MR. REID: Yes, but what I am saying though, minister, it is $100,000 per

highway depot region.

MR. RIDEOUT: I am saying it is $1.2 million for the Province.

MR. REID: Yes, but what I am saying, it is $100,000 for twenty-nine

communities in my district, and what you are going to get for that $100,000 is

not going to be worth the decrease in service. I am not going to say anymore

about it tonight because it is two different opinions, obviously. It might sound

like big savings on the overall, $1.2 million for the Province.

MR. RIDEOUT: It is not a savings.

MR. REID: No, okay, but -

MR. RIDEOUT: It is $1.2 million that I can take and put into gravel and

cold patch and all the kinds of other stuff that members are calling for

everyday, rather than having it in salaries and the people not productively

employed.

MR. REID: Well, all right. I will just finish up and I will be finished

with it. One hundred thousand dollars per district for twenty-nine communities

and, probably 200 or 300 kilometres, $100,000 is not going to do a lot of

maintenance.

MR. RIDEOUT: It might be $350,000 in your district and none in some

others.

MR. REID: Minister, I travel the roads of this Province as much as anyone

else.

MR. RIDEOUT: And so do I.

MR. REID: Believe me. I do not know of any district in this Province

where you are going to be able to take the $100,000 that you are saving on a

depot closure and put into my district, I can guarantee you that.

MR. RIDEOUT: We are going to do a planned approach for some (inaudible).

MR. REID: It is not going to happen in Fabian Manning's district, I

guarantee you, because his roads are as bad as mine.

MR. RIDEOUT: I know exactly what they are like. I travelled everyone of

them with him last year.

MR. REID: So, I do not think that we will be holding our breath for

$300,000 for summer maintenance in my district, increase over last year.

MR. RIDEOUT: I hate to call the hon. member a naysayer and a doom sayer

but that is exactly what he is.

MR. REID: No, I do not think so, Mr. Minister. Actually, I am quite

positive, very positive, but we will see.

The other thing, minister, besides the Gander Bay road - that is in the

Member of Bonavista North's riding, by the way.

MR. RIDEOUT: Some of it is.

MR. REID: I am putting a plug in for him.

MR. RIDEOUT: Some of it is.

MR. REID: Well, none of it is in mine.

MR. RIDEOUT: Some of it is in Gander District.

MR. REID: Yes. That is paved, by the way, that section, I think.

MR. RIDEOUT: No, not all of it, I do not think.

MR. REID: Pretty close. Where do you go, out to the park?

MR. RIDEOUT: Up the park.

MR. REID: Why would your district extend outward beyond where there isn't

any people?

MR. RIDEOUT: All our districts extend where there are no people.

MR. REID: No, no, no. What I am talking about, though, is that the only

thing east of Gander, until you hit Gander Bay, is the park. There are no

livyers out there, and when you hit Gander Bay -

MR. RIDEOUT: That is a provincial park, is it?

MR. REID: Yes. When you hit Gander Bay, it is in the Member for Bonavista

North - anyway, that is beside the point. Most of the road in the Member for

Gander's District is done on the Gander Bay road, but I am talking about down

in Gander Bay as well. The road is atrocious, but I am not here to ask for money

for that tonight. I am looking for some for Fogo Island, where the road from Joe

Batt's Arm to the center of the Island was put down in 1970 or 1972, somewhere

around there, and basically, there has been nothing done with it. We started to

recap it - Tilting and we are back to Joe Batts. There are a few kilometres

there that would rank, according to your own officials, if not the worst in the

Province, certainly in the top three or four.

The other

section is Change Islands. It has four or five - well, maybe six,

seven or eight kilometres of dirt road from the town heading back to the ferry

that we have been trying to do over the last three or four years. There is a

section of Route 340 that you started on the bridge area last year in toward

Twillingate, and I appreciate what you did there. I would appreciate - if there

is anything you can do to help the people of that district they would certainly

appreciate it. Especially in light of the fact, as you know, minister, because

you joined the district, there is one heck of a lot of tourism that goes on in

Twillingate and there is a lot of people hauling very expensive rigs down there

all summer long. So, that is that one.

MR. RIDEOUT: We have not finalized our capital program for this year yet,

but we are in the process of doing that now. There is some carryover on the

Walter B. Elliott Causeway work, and working towards Twillingate from last year.

It is all under tender and ready to go. That will be starting up again now as

soon as construction conditions permit.

The other couple of projects that the hon. member mentioned, I certainly have

no quarrel with their necessity. His district will be given due consideration as

we are finalizing the provincial capital roads program over the next number of

days. If there is anything left over after I take care of Oliver, you can have

it.

MR. REID: I can take care of Oliver.

MR. LANGDON: No, you can't, but he can.

MR. REID: I cannot let you go without talking about the ferry rates. I

cannot blame you for all of the rate that we are paying for ferries in Fogo

Island and Change Islands, obviously, because a lot of it was there before you

came there.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. REID: I am going to blame you for the increase, is right. Who said

that?

Minister, in the Blue Book during the election campaign, and it was discussed

on Fogo Island, at least, I think when the Premier was out there. He made a

commitment that he was going to reduce the cost of ferry travel to that of road

transportation, and we have seen a 15 per cent increase now in two years. It is

getting to be pretty expensive, especially for people who are operating trucking

businesses out there, because I have one individual who has eight transport

trucks. It is costing him, for most of them, $152 every time he leaves the

Island; that is a round trip. So, a 15 per cent increase in the last two years

is certainly having an affect on him, especially during the fishing season when

all eight are in operation on a daily basis. It is certainly not - that is

money, Minister, as you know, under different circumstances he could be putting

in his ass pocket that people in Gander Bay and Lewisporte and those areas who

are doing the same type of business but not going to Fogo Island can actually

put in their ass pocket.

I had a discussion with one of your officials the other day and he told me

that the cost of transportation on the ferries is close to being in line with

road transportation, but I am not aware that - this twenty-six kilometre round

trip to Fogo Island, if it is costing you $152 to do that, I cannot imagine what

it would cost them to travel to St. John's and back if that is equivalent to

road transportation. So, I would certainly appreciate -

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, I hear what the hon. member is saying. I mean, the

commitment that was made in the Blue Book was road equivalency, as I recall it.

MR. REID: Yes, that is right.

MR. RIDEOUT: I have instructed my officials to do - you know, for some

reason or other I am told this was never done for the Province in any recent

times. That is a formula which incorporates the principle of road equivalency so

that those areas which should be revenue neutral from a government perspective,

if it is done properly, that those areas which are above the road equivalency

come down and those areas that are below the road equivalency come up. We are

operating services in this Province today below the road equivalency;

significantly below. We are operating some - there was never any formula. I

think it was whatever anybody pulled out of their skull or had a dream about

some night before in the past. Now, I am not saying the past Administration, all

Administrations, when we were there before, too.

I have asked my officials at the senior executive level to put together for

me a formula that reflects road equivalency and look at every service - except

the Labrador service because that one was looked at recently by the Public

Policy Institute from a freight perspective - look at every service in the

Province and tell me what the road equivalency is; who is down needs to go up

and who is up needs to go down. That is a process, and I know that -

MR. REID: What do you mean, in terms of the ferries? So what you are

saying -

MR. RIDEOUT: In terms of the rates.

MR. REID: Okay. But, minister, in road equivalency though, I think -

MR. RIDEOUT: There is a Canadian formula for road equivalency. We use it

to make our arguments on the Gulf service all the time, right.

MR. REID: But, obviously, for a 26 kilometre run it would not cost a

transport truck $152.

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, I do not know. I mean, I am not prepared to argue that

thing at the moment. I do not know what it costs to operate a transport truck

and put it in the garage (inaudible).

MR. REID: And you are right, minister. Believe me, that is why, when I

started to talk about the ferry rates, I said I am not blaming you for the cost

of the ferry rates. I am blaming you for the increases.

MR. RIDEOUT: I mean, one of the cruelest we have is Long Island. Long

Island, you can jump across there, and it is what? Nine dollars and some odd

cents, ten bucks for a vehicle, and you can jump across there if you are a good

sprinter, you know.

MR. REID: Yes, right.

I tell you, look at the distance between Portugal Cove and Bell Island and

what they are paying and compare it to Change Islands and Farewell, the same

distance, and look at -

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, and that has not gone unnoticed, let me tell you.

MR. REID: - double the rates. Then look at Fogo Island, where today or

tomorrow, if I go out to my district with my wife, it is going to cost me $27.50

or something -

MR. RIDEOUT: That has not gone unnoticed.

MR. REID: - depending on what the rate increase is, and you know -

MR. RIDEOUT: Maybe it is because you are close enough to Confederation

Building to drag 1,000 people in here.

MR. REID: You are right on. Do you know what? That is what I tell my

constituents. The reason the rates are different is because whenever there is a

rate increase (inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: Anyway, there is one commitment I can make to you, that we

are looking at addressing that inequity.

MR. REID: When will that be, minister?

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, our officials are working -

MR. REID: Is it possible, now that the government seems to be becoming

very magnanimous as of late, do you think that those rates could be rolled back

in the very near future?

MR. RIDEOUT: I do not know. All I can tell you at the moment is that we

are looking at the whole of our system and our rates.

MR. REID: Well, even if you would look at the road equivalency -

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, that is what we are looking at.

MR. REID: - and put that into effect, because I guarantee you, my

constituents would benefit over that.

MR. RIDEOUT: I have tasked the officials to do the work on it and give me

some advice on it.

MR. REID: Because if it is going to cost me more than $27 to go

twenty-six kilometres in the car, I do not know but I will go out and buy a

ferry and drive it around rather than use my car.

Anyway, that is it for me, I think. I got the Trans-Canada, Fogo Island,

Route 340, yes, the depots and the ferry rates.

MR. RIDEOUT: All covered.

MR. REID: What else do you run into (inaudible)? Change Islands -

CHAIR: Yvonne Jones.

MS JONES: I just have a couple of other questions.

MR. REID: (Inaudible) I am not finished.

MS JONES: Oh, I thought you were finished.

CHAIR: I am sorry.

MR. REID: Thirty million, you said there was $33.7 million in the roads

program for this year.

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, that includes $3.7 million of carryover from last year.

MR. REID: What did you have last year? Thirty million?

MR. RIDEOUT: Thirty million, yes. Normally, in the past what happened,

carryover comes off this year's allocation but we have added it on so that we

have a new $30 million to work with.

MR. REID: I am finished. Thank you.

So, I can tell my constituents that you are seriously going to look at those

ferry rates.

MR. RIDEOUT: We are going to look at them, yes, and anything we look at,

we look at seriously. So if you want to put that word in.

MR. REID: Well, that is not much of a commitment. I am not as pleased as

I was a few minutes ago. I should not have commented on it.

MS JONES: Are you finished now?

MR. REID: Yes, I think.

MS JONES: On the road money for this year - this might have been asked, I

stepped out for a minute - are the commitments already made?

MR. RIDEOUT: No, none of them are done yet, but I am in the process of

working it up now.

MS JONES: I do not know if anybody asked about the Vessel Replacement

program. I have a question on it.

MR. RIDEOUT: No, they have not, but I think I mentioned in my opening

remarks that there is $500,000 earmarked in the Budget this year to develop the

Vessel Replacement Strategy. We are going to crew the Nonia this year.

That was Hull 100 , as the hon. member knows. That will be available for

swing purposes as we are refitting our fleet and so on. So, we have been funded

for that. That is all new money.

We have also been funded, to the tune of $500,000, to develop a Vessel

Replacement Strategy. It would be my expectation that if we are going down that

road, it will hopefully be in conjunction with the shipyard in Marystown, but

that is the kinds of things we have to look at: Where do we need to start taking

vessels out and where do we need to start putting them in?

MS JONES: So you guys have not identified yet any of that stuff, what

vessels will be replaced or anything like that?

MR. RIDEOUT: No. That is what we are going to use that $500,000 for.

MS JONES: Okay. On the study that you said you were going to do on the

ferry rates, could I ask that the Strait of Belle Isle ferry service be included

in that rate?

MR. RIDEOUT: Oh, it would be. It would be, yes.

MS JONES: Okay.

I have a couple of questions here from my colleague, the Member for

Carbonear-Harbour Grace. His handwriting is absolutely deplorable, but I will

try my best to get them across to you.

One is with regard to the Conception Bay North Access Road - or the access

road now bypasses Harbour Grace. He wanted to know what the status of the

upgrading of Harvey Street in Harbour Grace was. Apparently there was supposed

to be a committee in place of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, Transportation

and Works, and the Harbour Grace council. The commitment was that Harvey Street

would have been upgraded and then turned over to the town council.

MR. RIDEOUT: I am not aware of that commitment. Are you aware? Would that

have been made before my time?

MR. MERCER: I can speak to that.

A couple of years ago there was a committee struck including a representative

from Transportation, a representative from Municipal and Provincial Affairs, the

town's consultant and some town officials. They were looking at a lot of the

underground infrastructure in Harbour Grace under Water Street. It is quite old

and needs a lot of work, so their consultant was going to go away and develop a

comprehensive long-term plan that would involve replacing that infrastructure,

and then include the refurbishment of the highway at the same time.

I am not aware of anything coming back from the town's consultant on that

particular issue. I know that I was involved from the Department of

Transportation and Works side. I have not seen anything back from the town in

that regard. They may have submitted it directly to Municipal and Provincial

Affairs.

MR. RIDEOUT: If I could just add to that one other comment, I have a

request to meet with the Town of Harbour Grace. I had offered them a time

tomorrow, actually, but I think the notice was too short and they cannot make

it. I think Harvey Street is one of the items that they want to talk to me

about, isn't it?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: I do not know what they are coming to say, I say to my hon.

friend, but I do know that they are looking to come in to follow up on it.

MS JONES: Okay.

The other question is with regard to some road in Victoria.

MR. RIDEOUT: The what? Dump road?

OFFICIAL: Some road.

MR. RIDEOUT: Some road, oh.

MS JONES: No.

Gerry - excuse me for a second - what is the name of this road here? What is

that?

MR. REID: I know where everything is.

MS JONES: Yes, it is a road in Victoria.

MR. REID: She is talking about the neck road in Victoria.

MR. RIDEOUT: The neck road.

MR. REID: It is the main road going down over the hill. The young lady

here behind me, I am sure, has travelled it many times.

MR. RIDEOUT: Could you advise your colleague, if my friend doesn't

mind, to raise that with me and I will find out? I do not know off the top of my

head right now.

MS JONES: Okay.

What he wanted to know is what plans are there to address that situation this

year, and if it will be upgraded. I think the request is in to the department.

MR. RIDEOUT: I will ask ADM Mercer to give me some information on that so

that I can talk to him about it out behind the curtain or something.

MS JONES: Okay, I will certainly ask him to do that.

The other question pertains to a light that is not at the intersection of

Harbour Grace and Incinerator Road near Victoria Memorial Drive. It is a

dangerous intersection. They have been asking to have a light put there.

MR. RIDEOUT: That is on the agenda for the meeting with Harbour Grace as

well, I understand.

MS JONES: I apologize for my delayed attempts to try and have those

questions posed to you. Anyway, those are all the questions that I have for the

Transportation Estimates.

CHAIR: Thank you.

I would ask if any other members on the Committee have any questions for the

minister and his staff, or any statements.

Mr. Ridgley.

MR. RIDGLEY: It is not a question, just a comment.

I suppose it is fairly self-evident that there is nobody who spends money as

willingly as the person who is spending somebody else's. I have often said

that if governments, no matter which government, were to spend money as if they

were spending their own, we would save a fair dollar.

I think that the minister and his staff are to be commended. I was struck by

the savings that were negotiated with the operation of the terminal in

Lewisporte, just on an amount of approximately, I think, $720,000 that they

saved approximately $300,000 by a judicious and wise expenditure of money, and

adopting a stance that they were not simply willing to write out the cheque, and

I think they are to be commended for that.

MR. RIDEOUT: I would like to thank my colleague, Mr. Chairman.

MR. REID: Can I make a comment on that?

I would like to say to the Member for St. John's North, that was spoken

like a member who has never sat in Opposition.

MR. RIDEOUT: I will make no comment on that.

CHAIR: We welcome all comments.

Any more questions from the Committee?

MR. RIDEOUT: Are we going to vote on two of them together at the end, or

what?

CHAIR: We can vote on two at the end.

We will move to Aboriginal Affairs.

MR. RIDEOUT: Aboriginal Affairs now, then?

CHAIR: Mr. Langdon.

MR. LANGDON: I just have one question for you, Minister, on Conne River.

I guess what you are now working with them was the work that we had already -

we had already done some preliminary with them before, so the expansion of the

reserve would be exactly as it was in the initial work that we had done with it.

Would that be correct?

MR. RIDEOUT: I think it is even a bit beyond that, to be honest with you,

because I do not know if, in the original concept, the land relating to the

landfill and stuff like that had been included.

MR. LANGDON: Does it go as far as the Harbour Breton highway?

MR. RIDEOUT: Sean?

MR. DUTTON: Not quite to the highway, no.

MR. LANGDON: So that would be about the same as it was before.

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, it would be about the same.

MR. LANGDON: Okay.

MR. RIDEOUT: Anyway, it is by what we have agreed mutually with the Conne

MR. LANGDON: Right.

MR. RIDEOUT: It is by agreement.

MR. LANGDON: Part B of it, and that will be the end of it. When do you

foresee that will be done, some time in 2005?

MR. RIDEOUT: Oh, yes. As a matter of fact, I think tentatively I can say

to my friend that we are expected to be in Conne River next Thursday to sign off

on the reservation expansion. We are anticipating to be able to sign an

agreement in principle on a self-government for the Miawpukek First Nation, and

we are also anticipating being able to sign a policing agreement with the

Miawpukek First Nation. We have made, I think, tremendous progress with the

federal government and the Conne River Band Council in negotiating those

agreements over the last several months.

Of course, I hasten to add that there is tremendously great leadership in

that community to work with. I think it is a model Aboriginal community in many

respects. It is a great band council to make progress with.

MR. LANGDON: This is just a comment.

I have said many, many times that, for some of the band councils and some of

the people who would be in the Aboriginal communities in Labrador, it would be

beneficial to them if they were to visit Conne River and see what happens, and

be able to learn, I think, from them. There is great leadership, there is no

doubt about that.

I will just ask the minister one thing, when it is confirmed, if his

officials could probably let me know because I might want to go down as well.

MR. RIDEOUT: Sure.

I understand that Mr. Matthews and maybe Minister Efford - I do not know who

else might be coming from the federal government. I do not know if it is

confirmed yet or not.

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. RIDEOUT: They are not available? Okay, but they were aware of it?

OFFICIAL: Yes.

MR. RIDEOUT: Okay?

MR. LANGDON: I will hear from you?

MR. RIDEOUT: Once we have a final, I will ask the acting deputy to let

your office know.

CHAIR: Ms Jones.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Just a couple of questions.

First of all, has your department made any representation with the federal

government on behalf of the Metis in terms of land claim acceptance?

MR. RIDEOUT: Not in terms of land claim acceptance, because that is a

totally federal responsibility. The initial application for a land claim is made

whether the claim has a valid basis in law or not.

What we have done is, we have encouraged the federal government to do the

analysis and make a decision, and that, to this date, has not been done. I

believe they have agreed to have an independent assessor assess the claim, and

that is about where it stands right now.

The initial decision on whether there is a basis for a claim or not has to be

Province, of course, who, generally speaking, own the land, and say: Can we

begin negotiations with this Aboriginal group on land quantum and

self-government rights, and all of the other things that flow from that? But,

the first decision that has to be made has to be taken by the Government of

Canada.

MS JONES: Okay.

Minister, maybe you can tell me, to your knowledge, or if you are aware of

any offer that may have been made by the federal government to the Metis Nation

that would be offering them non-insured health benefits, offering them a

community development fund, in lieu of a land claim, if they would agree to drop

their case for a land claim settlement?

MR. RIDEOUT: I am not aware that has happened in the way that the hon.

member puts it. What I am aware is that we, as a Province, said to the LMN

leadership that, while we did have a disagreement on an Aboriginal claim, we

were prepared to put that disagreement aside and support them in their

the other benefits for post-secondary education, non-insured health benefits.

All of the other benefits that any Aboriginal group in the country had access

to, they should have access to as well.

We have, in fact, done that on several occasions in writing, and verbally

with Minister Scott when I met with him in Happy-Valley-Goose Bay back in

January, I guess, so we have followed through on our commitment to support the

LMN in that request, but to date I am not aware that the federal government have

gone back to the LMN and said, well, if you drop your land claim, we will do

this. Nobody has ever told us that, that I am aware of.

MS JONES: Would the LMN be prepared to accept the benefit agreements as

opposed to a land claim agreement, do you know?

MR. RIDEOUT: I don't know. I think what they would be prepared to do,

as I understood - I guess he is the past president now, Mr. Russell or taking a

leave of absence or whatever while he pursues his political career - what I

understood they were prepared to do was not to drop their land claim, but they

were prepared to accept the other benefits in the interim until a decision was

made on their land claim. That is a fair statement, isn't it? If the decision

was positive on their land claim then the whole regular negotiation would ensue;

but in that interim period - because God knows how much longer it is going to

take - the Labrador Metis Nation would be entitled to all the other benefits

that any other Aboriginal group in the country would be entitled to, but the

quid pro quo was never that they would drop their land claim, that I am aware

of.

MS JONES: Back a little over a year ago, government reneged on a

commitment they made to the Labrador Metis people as it related to the Powley

decision ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada. I am just wondering: at the

time, the Labrador Metis Nation threatened charges, I think, against the

provincial government, or that they would pursue the case in court for further

clarity. Did anything ever happen with regard to that?

MR. RIDEOUT: First of all, Mr. Chairman, let me say I certainly disagree

with the language used by the hon. member.

There was a commitment made by the then - the present Premier, as leader of

the party, that we would look at the implications of the Powley decision for the

Labrador Metis Nation, and if we were to conclude that the LMN fit the

definition of Metis as outlined in the Powley decision then we would be prepared

to live up to that.

Of course, when we made that comment to the LMN we had no access at the time

to the in-depth legal analysis that had been provided to government. It was only

after we became government that we had access to that. It is our conclusion, and

I so informed Mr. Russell some months after, having had the best advice

available from a legal perspective that the Province can provide to us, is that

the criteria set out in the Powley decision, in our view, the NLM does not meet,

and the honest thing to do is to tell them that.

Having said that - I lost my train of thought. What was really the question?

MS JONES: We may differ on the -

MR. RIDEOUT: Oh, the court action, yes.

MS JONES: - degree and the process, but I think after the government

appointed legal counsel the Metis appointed legal counsel, or a consultant.

MR. RIDEOUT: We asked them to get together and share, both sides. They

would eventually have to do this anyway, disclosure. We asked them to get

together and disclose to each other what our research was, and all that kind of

stuff.

My understanding is that the legal counsel for the LMN have requested some

information which we have provided. My understanding is that they have provided

us with some, but not all, of their research. I think it is still a piece of

work. It is still a live piece of work, I understand.

Sean, do you want to add to that?

MR. DUTTON: Legal counsel for the parties had at least two separate

meetings. In addition to that, there was information provided under the Freedom

of Information Act to the LMN on our research respecting their land claim. Since

that time, a group of members of the LMN have initiated statement of claim

against the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement, and that is likely to be the

venue at which the court may provide some further clarity on whether or not the

members of the LMN enjoy Aboriginal rights.

I believe we have advised the LMN that we are aware of that and we anticipate

that would be the forum to resolve any outstanding questions about their status

or non-status as Aboriginal under

section 35.

MS JONES: The statement of claim with regard the LIA agreement, would

that be filed toward the Inuit people or toward the Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador?

MR. DUTTON: The statement of claim names all three parties to the Land

Claims Agreement.

MS JONES: Okay.

So they did not go back to the courts for clarity with regard to the Powley

decision and the Metis Nation?

MR. RIDEOUT: Not directly, no.

MS JONES: Okay.

MR. RIDEOUT: But it could happen through this process if this, in fact,

proceeds.

MS JONES: What financial or policy contracts are in place between the

government and the Labrador Metis Nation?

MR. RIDEOUT: With the Labrador Metis Nation, there is an agreement with

forestry. There is an agreement, I think, on wildlife and conservation issues.

MR. DUTTON: I think that is it.

MR. RIDEOUT: That is it, just forestry?

MR. DUTTON: Yes.

MR. RIDEOUT: Okay.

The acting deputy tells me that the only formal agreement is the forestry.

MS JONES: Didn't you do one on wildlife, though, where you forfeited

the charges for licences?

MR. RIDEOUT: What we did on wildlife was, we set up a protocol and said,

we will just leave everything as it is. We are not going to lay any additional

new charges. We are not going to press those charges unless we are getting

flagrant and blatant abuse of wildlife for conservation purposes, and then we

would have to move, but in the interim we will leave things as they are. That is

basically what we did.

MR. DUTTON: It is not a formal agreement per se, but the position of the

government has been communicated by letter to the LMN, and that was consistent

with the position that the previous Administration had taken.

We have reconfirmed that this interim enforcement policy continues to be in

effect, that it is just basically a no seizure policy. Members of the LMN are

still subject to laws of general application of wildlife enforcement, but it was

agreed that evidence would be gathered through photographs, and things of that

nature, rather than seizing game or weapons or things used for hunting and

fishing purposes. So, that remains to be in effect while we try to resolve these

outstanding legal questions that are going before the courts.

MS JONES: Since the new policy was in place, have there been any charges

against any of the LMN membership?

MR. DUTTON: Yes. I am not certain of the number, but there do continue to

be charges laid.

MS JONES: Okay.

MR. RIDEOUT: But they are not going to trial. They haven't gone to

trial up to this point in time.

MR. DUTTON: Well, that is a decision of the Director of Public

Prosecutions. There were a number of charges that were stayed last year, which

probably is what you are referring to.

MS JONES: Yes.

MR. DUTTON: Since that time there have been other charges laid, and those

are to go before the court unless the Director of Public Prosecutions decides

otherwise.

MS JONES: Government has called proposals for development of the Lower

Churchill project. Has there been any correspondence involved with the

Aboriginal groups in Labrador as it relates to that development - either

supportive, opposed - laying claim to any of the area that is proposed to be

developed?

MR. RIDEOUT: I do not know if there would be correspondence. That is

basically a Natural Resources issue, on which we would have an interest as an

Aboriginal Affairs Department. I am certain that there have been discussions

with the Innu. I do not know if there have been with the LMN.

I think the policy that we inherited from the previous Administration that we

continued to follow is that we involve those Aboriginal groups that, in our

view, have Aboriginal title.

MS JONES: I cannot hear you.

MR. RIDEOUT: That, in our view, have claim to Aboriginal title. Of

course, we have accepted the fact that the Innu have claim for Aboriginal title

so we keep them informed on a regular basis.

I do not know if there has been any formal correspondence with the LMN or

not. Do you want to elaborate on that?

MR. DUTTON: Yes.

Not recently. It is still at a very parliamentary stage because we have only

just received the proposals under stage one of the Expressions of Interest, so

there is not even a defined project to talk about in detail with anyone at this

point. The Innu have been generally kept apprised but there are no active

negotiations going on with them with respect to the project at this time.

MS JONES: The Innu have acknowledged to government that they claim title

in that land area where the project would be developed.

MR. RIDEOUT: The Innu?

MS JONES: Yes.

MR. RIDEOUT: Oh, yes.

MS JONES: I am just wondering, if you were to go - and this is

hypothetical, I guess, at this point, but if you were to accept one of those

proposals for development of that project, the negotiation with Aboriginal

groups, would it be done as a government-to-government negotiation or would it

be done through the intervener or the proponent?

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, that remains to be determined. The experience from the

Voisey's Bay development, I guess, in terms of the impact and benefits, was

done - I believe I am right when I say it was done from the company and the

particular Aboriginal group. Then the government agreed that these agreements

would form parts of the component agreement. Like, in a case of the LIA, it

becomes a part of their Land Claims Agreement. At some point, hopefully, please

God, there will be an agreement with the Innu and it will be a

chapter in their

agreement.

Whether we handle it the same way in a Lower Churchill development, I guess,

really is, as the hon. member said, a bit hypothetical at this point in time.

MS JONES: I do not have any other questions, Mr. Chairman, but I would

like to thank the minister for his co-operation this evening, and his time, and

to thank the officials in his department for the information they provided to

us, and to congratulate Mr. Smart on his new appointment as the Deputy Minister

of Transportation and Works. I look forward to seeing the minister and his

officials in my district over the summer.

Thank you very much.

CHAIR: Thank you, Yvonne.

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Chairman, if I could, on behalf of my officials from

both departments, I want to thank hon. members for their co-operation on both

sides. As His Honour would say, I also thank you for your benevolence.

CHAIR: If there are no more comments or questions by any of the Committee

people, for the purpose of voting, I would propose that the Committee would deal

with Transportation and Works first, and then Aboriginal Affairs.

At this time I would ask the Clerk to call the subheads for Transportation

and Works.

CLERK: Subheads 1.1.01. to 4.3.02. inclusive.

CHAIR: Shall 1.1.01. to 4.3.02. carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

OFFICIALS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01. through 4.3.02 carried.

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

OFFICIALS: Aye.

CHAIR: Shall I report the heads of Transportation and Works carried,

without amendment?

All those in favour, aye'.

OFFICIALS: Aye.

CHAIR: Carried.

On motion, Department of Transportation and Works, total heads, carried

without amendment.

MR. REID: You are supposed to say all those against, too, by the way, Mr.

Chairman.

CHAIR: I forgot that Mr. Reid was here.

Now I would ask the Clerk to call the subheads in regard to Aboriginal

Affairs.

CLERK: Subheads 2.1.01. and 2.1.03.

CHAIR: Shall 2.1.01. and 2.1.03. carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

OFFICIALS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

On motion, subheads 2.1.01. and 2.1.03. carried.

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

OFFICIALS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Shall I report the heads of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs carried without

amendment?

All those in favour, aye'.

OFFICIALS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, Department of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs, total heads,

carried without amendment.

CHAIR: At this particular time I, too, would lik

Document details

Collection	Newfoundland and Labrador — Committees
Citation	2021-05-04
Type	committee
Volume / chapter	committees_standingcommittees_govservices_ga45_gs05-04-21.htm
Language	en
Format	html
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	810c09466f9ed3815078a86a2b7ff75bd1785699

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (html).