PDF Version

May 12,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVIII No. 27

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Osborne):

Order, please!

Admit

strangers.

I'd like

to welcome to the public galleries today John and Brenda Wheeler and Noel and

Anne Lilly. John and Anne are the great-nephew and great-niece of Stephen Norris

whose name will be read out today as part of Honour 100.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Just to provide some

background on Stephen Norris. He was the son of James Norris, a merchant who had

extensive business in Three Arms, Green Bay. Stephen enlisted in the Royal

Newfoundland Regiment against the wishes of his parents. He was not at the front

on July 1, but was subsequently killed in Gueudecourt in October of 1916.

His body

was never recovered, despite an extensive search by his parents and it is

believed that Stephen's death led to the demise of the community of Three Arms

as his father never recovered from Stephen's death and there was no one to carry

on the family business.

The

story of Stephen Norris was the subject of a 2005 stage production

A Call to Arms , presented by the

students of Gonzaga High School in St. John's. Stephen's story was also told by

Joan Sullivan, in her book titled In the

Field .

Statements by

Members

MR. SPEAKER:

Today's Members' statements

are the Member for the District of Terra Nova, Torngat Mountains, Cartwright

L'Anse au Clair, Burin Grand Bank, Ferryland and Mount Pearl North.

The hon.

the Member for Terra Nova.

MR. HOLLOWAY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, it gives me a great pleasure to rise in this hon. House and acknowledge

the selfless efforts of six-year-old Sydney Sparkes, a grade one student from

Little Heart's Ease.

When I

first learned about Sydney and her interest in Shave for the Brave, I started to

follow her story.

Mr.

Speaker, each night Sydney prays for three people who are fighting cancer or who

have lost the battle with this deadly disease: Pauline Seward, a young mother

who lost her battle in 2015, as well as two family friends, Bruce Whalen and

Bill Finn, who are going through treatments now.

During

the past two weeks, Sydney's fundraising efforts have resulted in her moving

from ninth place on the Young Adult Cancer Canada Leader Board to an impressive

fourth place, raising $3,944 and she isn't stopping there.

Sydney's

mom, Stephanie, remarks that Sydney feels she is now famous. When asked why,

Sydney says: Because the government is going to talk about me.

Sydney

will be taking

part in Shave for the Brave at Southwest Arm Academy on May 20.

I ask

all hon. Members to join me in applauding the deep understanding and kindness to

others shown by this remarkable little girl.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

We should all say hello to

Sydney, as well. I understand that her class is tuned in live from Southwest Arm

today to hear the Member's statement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House today to recognize Mr. Johannes Lampe. Mr. Lampe was sworn in

on May 4 as the newest President of Nunatsiavut.

Last

week the Premier pointed out in his Ministerial Statement that President Lampe

brings a wealth of public service experience with him to the office of

president. Before assuming office, he served on the town council of Nain and as

a minister in the Nunatsiavut government.

I've

known President Lampe for over 30 years, and I have on more than one occasion

hunted and fished with him over the years. He's a well-respected elder and has a

long connection with the Moravian Church in Nain, serving as a lay pastor and

chapel servant.

As an

Inuk from Nunatsiavut, I look forward to working with my new president. I look

forward to sitting down with him to discuss mutual issues of concern and

establishing a relationship of working together on issues that affect Inuit.

I ask

all hon. Members to join me in congratulating President Johannes Lampe on his

acclamation, and wish him all the success as he begins his term.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

MS. DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House to celebrate Agnes Pike of West St. Modeste, for her more

than four decades of community service and leadership in Labrador.

Mayor

Pike is in her 35th year serving the town council of West St. Modeste. In

addition to her roles as a civic leader, Agnes has served in over 20 other

community sector leadership positions in the region since the early '70s.

Just to

name a few, she has served as the Chair of the Labrador Straits Family Resource

Centre; an executive member of the Labrador Straits Development Corporation; a

Director of the Labrador Resources Advisory Council; an executive member of the

Combined Councils of Labrador; and Chair of the Community Youth Network.

It's the

hard work, outspoken support, and advocacy and commitment of people like Agnes

Pike that make rural communities like West St. Modeste sustainable and viable

places to live.

I ask

all hon. Members to join me in celebrating Agnes for her long and distinguished

track record of community leadership and volunteerism.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Burin

Grand Bank.

MS. HALEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, in the early 1900s, Newfoundland and Labrador were a sovereign country

made up primarily of small and often isolated communities where people worked

hard just to survive. It was into this world that Hilda Pardy was born on May 7,

1913 in Harbour Mille; 20 years later, she married Oliver Barnes who went to sea

to earn a living.

As a

young girl, Mrs. Barnes worked in her father's lobster factory by day and helped

her mother with chores in the evening, without any of today's modern

conveniences. But interspersed among the hard work was the joy of family and

friends, Mr. Speaker.

This

past Saturday, I visited Mrs. Barnes at the Blue Crest Nursing Home in Grand

Bank to help celebrate her 103rd birthday, Mr. Speaker. Her age has not taken

the twinkle from her eye, nor the smile from her lips.

I ask

all Members to join me in recognizing Mrs. Hilda Barnes on the occasion of her

recent 103rd birthday, and in wishing her continued happiness with family and

friends.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I rise today in the hon. House to recognize the Bay Bulls to Bauline

Athletic Association on the vital role they play in the region. This group of

volunteers has assisted in bringing many important recreation activities to our

area, engaging people from youth to our seniors. Many of our kids avail of many

different recreation activities such as the summer soccer, softball and many

other activities.

I would

also like to congratulate the association on their Annual Regional Winter

Carnival, which had something for all ages. I attended some of these events

myself and, as always, very impressed with the variety of events. Many of these

events were organized and sponsored by various businesses, community groups and

organizations throughout the area and the Bay Bulls to Bauline Athletic

Association played a huge role.

The

association holds an annual auction which raises funds for recreation

infrastructure for the region, which has been very successful in past years.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all Members of this House to join me in congratulating the Bay

Bulls to Bauline Athletic Association in organizing recreation programs and

revenue generation for the Bay Bulls to Bauline region.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House today to recognize the young people honoured earlier this

week at Mount Pearl's Annual Focus on Youth Awards.

The

Focus on Youth Awards program recognizes youth in several categories. I would

like to congratulate all of the nominees and winners of these awards. In

particular: Female Athlete of the Year, Sarah Hiscock; Male Athlete of the Year,

Liam Hickey; Team of the Year, the Mount Pearl Senior High Male Huskies Soccer

Team; Adult Volunteer of the Year, working with youth in sports, Gerald

Costigan; Youth Volunteer of the Year, Megan Glover; Official of the Year,

Ashley Hammond; Female Youth of the Year, Victoria Jackman; Male Youth of the

Year, Michael Howse; RNC Youth in Service Award winner, Ryan Linstead; Youth

Group of the Year, the O'Donel High School Robotics Team; Visual Arts Award,

Shea O'Keefe; Performing Arts Award, Joseph Coffin; Adult Volunteer working with

youth, the Mount Pearl Senior High Breakfast Club Teacher Volunteers.

For the

Performing Arts Group Award: we had a tie between the Mount Pearl Show Choir,

the O'Donel Jazz Band, the cast of Etcetera 29, the Mount Pearl Senior High Jazz

Band, the Mount Pearl Senior High Transitional Band and the cast of Mount Pearl

Senior's Musical: You're a Good Man Charlie Brown.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all Members of this House to join me in congratulating the

winners and nominees on this well-deserved recognition. It was a fantastic

night.

Thank

you.

The Commemoration of the

First World War and the Battle of Beaumont-Hamel

MR.

SPEAKER: For

Honour 100 today, we have the Member for the District of Labrador West.

MR. LETTO: I will

now read into the record the following 40 names of those who lost their lives in

the First World War in the Royal Newfoundland Regiment, the Royal Newfoundland

Naval Reserve, or the Newfoundland Mercantile Marine. This will be followed by a

moment of silence.

Lest we forget: Laurence Murphy, Lawrence Murphy, Martin

Murphy, Thomas Murphy, Walter Leonard Murphy, William John Murphy, Archibald

Murray, James Murray, Samuel Murray, William Henry Murrin, Albert John Mutford,

Hiram G. Mutford, Albert John Myer, John Myrick, Ralph Neil, Charles Joseph

Nelson, Gregory Neville, Richard J. Neville, William John Neville, Clement

Leslie Newell, Kenneth S. Newell, Victor Perrin

Newell, E. Newhook, George Frederick Newhook, Archibald Mark Newman,

James Newman, James Newton, Edward H. Nicholle, Levi Mason Nicholls, Campbell

Whithycombe Nichols, George Duncan Nichols, Edward George Noftall, John Noftall,

Patrick Alexander Noftell, Henry Colton Noonan, Robert Anthony Noonan, Walter H.

Norman, William H. Norman, Levi Normore and Stephen Casimir Norris.

(Moment of silence.)

MR. SPEAKER:

Please be seated.

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House today to welcome our esteemed guests, 23 European Union

Ambassadors to Newfoundland and Labrador. We are delighted to welcome our

delegation and proud to share our innovative business community, our world-class

research institutions and our rich culture. Last December my office reached out

to the Ambassadors to reconfirm their attendance and welcome them to our

province.

Canada's second-largest trade and investment partner, we look forward to

strengthening our respective economies for our mutual benefit. We welcome

companies in the European Union to explore opportunities to do business with

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians with the dynamic and resourceful organizations,

and I am confident this mission will further solidify our historic connections

with our colleagues from the European Union.

As one

of the province's largest trading partners, participating in the European

marketplace provides tremendous opportunities for local companies to improve

their competitiveness and access lucrative international markets. This will be

especially true when the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement CETA comes

into force.

CETA

will position our province to take advantage of the largest consumer market in

the world by creating an investment environment that reduces regulations and

streamlines the flow of goods, services and investments, providing unprecedented

access to the European marketplace.

Mr.

Speaker, this week we look forward to sharing the best of Newfoundland and

Labrador with the EU Ambassadors. We also look forward to working with the EU

counterparts to grow our respective economies through strong collaboration and

strategic co-operation. On behalf of Newfoundland and Labrador, we extend a

heartfelt welcome.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you to the Premier for an advance copy of his statement. We, too, certainly

welcome the 23 European Union Ambassadors to Newfoundland and Labrador. It was

in 2015 when some of the ministers of the prior administration visited Ottawa,

met with the EU Ambassador, as well as other ambassadors from the EU. At that

time, he extended an invitation to them to come to Newfoundland and Labrador and

to experience economically and socially what we have to offer.

Today,

it would be good to get an update from the Premier and from government on where

they are with the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement. In the past, when

we've asked questions they've referenced that there are negotiations still

ongoing, especially related to the fisheries fund. Our understanding is the deal

in principle is being worked through in regard to wording and the legal text has

been done.

The

agreement, as far as we're concerned, is completed, yet we hear from the other

side there are negotiations continuing. So it is due time that we get an update

from the government on where they actually stand on the agreement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I thank

the Premier for the advance copy of his statement. I'm very pleased to see the

EU Ambassadors here in our province, and I'm pleased also to join with my

colleagues in welcoming them to our beautiful province.

I hope

while they are here, they will get a good sense of who we are as a people who

are founded in the fishery and what we offer to the world. I hope, too, they

have some fun and enjoy the wonderful generosity and friendliness of our people,

for which we are rightly famous.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

The hon.

the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the

hon. House today to congratulate St. James Regional High in Port aux Basques, on

receiving this year's Inclusive Education Award.

Inclusive education is a philosophy that serves as the foundation for everything

we do in education. It considers the diversity of every learner and helps guide

decision making regarding curriculum, instructional methodology and physical

environment.

Students

come to our schools with various experiences, abilities, family situations,

interests, learning styles and cultural backgrounds. Each student needs to feel

that they belong, are valued and can contribute.

Through

Budget 2016 , our government committed

$118.8 million to support inclusive education in schools throughout the

province, including an additional 27 teachers to provide support for inclusive

learning.

Mr.

Speaker, the Inclusive Education Award presented by the Newfoundland and

Labrador Association for Community Living, is awarded annually to a K-12 school

in Newfoundland and Labrador that has shown an exceptional spirit in creating a

school that is welcoming and inclusive for students with an intellectual

disability.

St.

James Regional High School was presented this award for their dedicated and

committed effort to ensuing that every student is a valued and important member

of the school community, and that all students receive a high-quality education,

in a caring and inclusive environment.

Students

at the school are provided many opportunities to promote inclusion, including a

Best Buddies program which promotes friendship and acceptance by pairing

students with intellectual disabilities with student mentors; Mental Health

Matters, which focuses on ways to remove the stigma associated with mental

illness, as well as maintaining a strong support system for LGBTQ students

through its Gender Sexuality Alliance.

St.

James Regional High school has worked very hard to ensure that all students feel

welcome, safe and accepted. I invite my colleagues in this House to join me in

congratulating St. James Regional High for their outstanding achievements.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for an advance copy of his statement. The Official Opposition also

extends congratulations to St. James Regional High school on them being awarded

the Inclusive Education Award for 2016, a prestigious award that the students,

their parents, teachers and administrators should be very proud of.

We all

recognize the importance of our society to be inclusive to value diversity.

Through promoting and recognizing inclusion in our school system, we are

reaching entire generations and instilling in them the value of openness and

acceptance, as well as providing all students with a safe and caring learning

environment.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I, too,

thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. Congratulations to the

students, teachers and other staff of St. James Regional High school for winning

the award this year.

It is

wonderful that schools in our system, in spite of the lack of adequate support

from government, are making strides in inclusive education. I urge government to

listen to those who are telling them we don't have the resources that are needed

so that all schools can achieve the same level of inclusion as has St. James

Regional High school.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, the recent tragedy in Fort McMurray has impacted thousands of

Canadians, including many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. With the forest fire

no longer appearing to threaten the town, the work of reintegrating people back

into the community and rebuilding now begins.

I am

pleased to advise that 30 officers and one civilian member of the RCMP in

Newfoundland and Labrador have been deployed to Fort McMurray to assist in that

work. They will join RCMP members from British Columbia, Saskatchewan and

Manitoba who have been posted in Alberta on an emergency basis.

Mr.

Speaker, the request for RCMP members from our province came due to this

province's unique connection to Fort McMurray and the people who live there.

Throughout the deployments, our officers will be wearing a provincial pin on

their uniforms to identify them as coming from Newfoundland and Labrador.

understand that when the call for officers to volunteer went out, the response

was overwhelming.

Mr.

Speaker, I would like to thank our members of the RCMP that are temporarily

working in Alberta and also recognize the often dangerous, yet critical work of

all first responders who make our country safer. Newfoundland and Labrador is

proud of the sacrifices you are making which lead to stronger communities.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for an advance copy of his statement on this matter today. I know

we're all proud that we live in a province and a country where we reach out and

provide assistance and support to others, especially in a time of need. We all

know the deep-rooted connection that we have to Fort McMurray and the people who

live there, and this makes sense in so many ways. I'm not surprised, but I'm

also proud of the response, as referenced by the minister.

residents return to Fort McMurray, we know that it's going to be a difficult and

challenging time for them. We know there are going to be many stressors in their

lives and challenges that they'll face in communities and neighbourhoods. So to

ensure that all assistance can be provided, peace, order, safety and security,

we thank them and we also thank the officers left here in Newfoundland and

Labrador who will pick up the slack for those that are away.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for an advance copy of his statement. Along with all

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, I thank our RCMP members and all first

responders for their incredible, courageous and loving efforts in Fort McMurray.

Our RCMP members who have been deployed to help the people of Alberta represent

our culture of support, generosity and solidarity present in our own province.

I thank

them for their passion and compassion. We are proud of them. Bravo!

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, a story in The Western Star

today indicates the Premier had stated the budget was created so municipalities

won't have to pass budget burdens on to residents.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, municipalities have a different story to tell and have expressed that.

The Liberal budget will cost the Town of Conception Bay South an additional

$350,000; Grand Falls-Windsor, $250,000; Corner Brook, about $200,000 just to

name a few.

Mr.

Speaker, the truth is that the budget choices they made do place a heavier

burden on the municipalities who are going to cost them hundreds of thousands of

dollars.

So I ask

the Premier: How are you expecting municipalities to maintain the services

they've promised, the level of taxation they promised, without having to be

gutted and decimated by these budget choices you've made?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Once

again I hear the Member talking (inaudible). In this budget a sustainable plan

was put in place. The sustainable plan will ensure there are more funds going to

every municipality in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

On top

of that, Mr. Speaker, there will be over $350 million in capital works for each

town. The first phase of that, some projects that were reprofiled last year, Mr.

Speaker, is just going to be announced soon.

So, Mr.

Speaker, our government has committed we kept the cost ratio in place. We

ensured the sustainable plan for all municipalities in the province is still in

place. Also, we partnered with our federal partners in Ottawa and we're going to

have over $350 million in capital works for all municipalities in Newfoundland

and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We know

they've maintained funding levels that assist and help support operations. We're

grateful there's capital funding being invested in municipalities. We support

that, but capital funding cannot be used for day-to-day operations. This is

millions of dollars of operations that councils are now going to have to bear

the burden of.

I'll ask

the Premier again: Now that you've burdened them with millions of dollars more

in operating costs that they can't keep up, how do you expect them to make ends

meet?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

I just find it kind of

ironic, Mr. Speaker, that the critic is standing up saying what a great budget

because the Municipal Operating Grants are still in place, the sustainable plan

is in place, the gas tax is in place. The critic is standing up saying what a

great budget for all the municipalities and he's so pleased that we kept all

these options in. Now we've got the leader up saying that it's not a good

budget.

So I ask

the leader: When he stands up and says that it's going to cost them millions, is

he talking about the sustainable plan that is carried forward for the next three

years that his government was so proud to bring in, which we supported and we

continued?

When he

stands in his place, Mr. Speaker, we have to remember there was $34.9 million

that they wouldn't even sign to put into municipalities in Newfoundland and

Labrador. All the capital works for the three years, they had it spent in two

years. That's the commitment they had to municipalities.

When you

want to stand and talk about municipalities, Mr. Speaker, I'm proud to stand on

the record that this government made through the budget for all municipalities.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So the

Premier won't answer and the minister doesn't have an answer. This is putting a

burden on municipalities, and they don't have an answer to how they're going to

consume and how they're going to absorb all these additional costs.

Their

own Finance Minister said this was going to be a bad budget for everyone. We

agree that there were some good things in the budget. Members opposite wouldn't

say that for weeks, Mr. Speaker they wouldn't say it. Municipalities are

pointing out two main concerns they have with this budget: increases to

insurance costs and increases to fuel taxes.

I ask

the Premier: How are you going to address their concerns?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, once again I say

to the leader, I attended the rally in Corner Brook, as also the Member for

Corner Brook. At no time did I ever say that this budget was not a tough budget

because of what we are left with from the previous government. At no time did I

say that these people on this side, this government, want to bring in such a

budget from what we were left with from this previous government.

Also,

the Member opposite forgets about the sustainable plan that they were touting,

which we continued on for the next three years, Mr. Speaker. There are

additional funds going to all municipalities in this province for the next three

years under the sustainable plan. He touted that. The critic even stood up and

said it's a good budget for municipalities in Newfoundland and Labrador. So, Mr.

Speaker, they can't have it both ways in this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If the

Premier won't answer to concerns expressed by municipalities, maybe he'll answer

concerns expressed by parents. Because, Mr. Speaker, we know that names are

being drawn by a random draw to determine which children can participate in

intensive core French in September, which parents are very concerned about.

I'll ask

the Premier: What message are you sending to families who are generally

interested in their children obtaining a bilingual education and they're told,

well, if you're luck of the draw you're in, if you don't get the luck of the

draw you're out. What do you say to those families, Premier?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, intensive core

French is a program that has been done on an optional basis for a number of

years by students in grade six. I guess the intention is to give them some

experience with French before deciding whether or not to go into late French

Immersion. There are about 20 classes that are impacted in the change the way

teaching units are being deployed this year. There simply aren't enough extra

units, if you will, in the system because of the difficulty we have trying to

meet our budget challenges today.

I want

to stress again, this is an optional program. It's not part of the core

curriculum. We continue to try and direct as much of the public resources that

we have to classroom teaching and learning priorities.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I'll try this with the Premier, because he's not answering any

questions today.

I'll ask

him this. We know there's a growing interest and benefit for students to receive

a bilingual education. Do you consider participation in the intensive core

French program a luxury, as your minister portrays it and says, well, it's only

an optional program, some do it some don't. Well, we know that lots won't even

have to get it. Or, do you agree with all these decisions of bringing all

education standards to the bare minimum?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, no one said it

was a luxury. I said it was an optional program.

Unfortunately, the previous administration, by driving us off the fiscal cliff

in the way that it did, leaving us with a massive deficit that we have never

seen in the history of the province

MR. K. PARSONS:

(Inaudible).

MR. KIRBY:

I say yes, to the Member for

Cape St. Francis who continues to yell across the way. We're spending more on

debt servicing this year than we are on all of the $900-odd million we're

spending on education. That's shameful, and we're basically left without options

ourselves.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to

the Minister of Education, you haven't seen the Member for Cape St. Francis yell

yet.

Mr.

Speaker, the minister is saying it's an optional program. It's an optional

program now for fewer students than ever before because they're gutting the

program. Bilingual education is more important for young families and young

students than ever before.

I'll ask

the Premier one more time: Are you okay with this reduction in a very important

program? Bilingual education is important and beneficial to so many. Are you

okay with this reduction, Premier?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We've

said on many occasions in this House of Assembly there were a lot of decisions

that have been made in this budget that we are not okay with. There is nothing,

as we said, in this budget that we can all be proud of. We've said that, but

there's a very good reason for that, Mr. Speaker.

We've

been left with a situation that has been unprecedented in the history of our

province. Today, we are spending more in debt servicing, as the minister just

said, than we are on education.

I would

ask the former premier of this province: Is he proud of his legacy that he has

left for our young children? Because it seems to me that what he wants to do is

pass on the burden of debt that his administration and previous administrations

prior to him have left squarely on the shoulders of the young students that he

is talking about here today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Before I

recognize the hon. the Opposition Leader, I would ask Members to co-operate.

Blurting out and heckling is not acceptable.

The hon.

the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can

tell you what I can do; I can stand here in my place and say we made every

effort possible to advance our education system in Newfoundland and Labrador,

Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

I won't apologize to the

Member opposite for that, I can assure you.

He's

going to have to speak for the choices that he made. He's going to have to speak

for the choices that his government made. He's going to have to speak for taking

education values and systems and options and reducing them to the bare minimum.

It's the Premier of today who will have to answer for those decisions.

I ask

him: Before you make all of these education systems which are going to wipe out

opportunities for young Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, you promised to

consult, you promised to do your Premier's task force in education. Will you get

on with the task force on education? Get that done now before our education

system is wiped out.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In the

budget we announced on April 14, the task force on education is part of the

budget process. It will deal with outcomes. It will include people across our

province. There will be opportunities for people to engage. As a matter of fact,

we would encourage you to engage yourself. I would say to the former premier and

your colleagues: get involved. Let's work together to deal with the mess that

we've been left on your behalf.

If you

were so concerned about the future of our province, you would have done better

planning and better management in preparing for this. It seems to me right now,

you talk about choices. One choice you didn't do is plan for the future of the

very young people that you are talking about here today.

It is

about choices, but it is also about accepting responsibility. It seems not

something the former premier would want to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I've

constantly asked questions about training for teachers to the minister without a

response. The lack of response seems to be common from this minister. School

councils and parents are not happy about the minister's silence.

I ask

the minister: What training will teachers of combined classes be provided so

they can be prepared to teach combined classes before school begins in

September?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, I just want to

comment quickly on what the former premier said over there about them supporting

education. I don't know how they supported education by cutting almost 240

teaching positions over the course of two budgets. That's not supporting

education in my view.

Mr.

Speaker, we will be providing a comprehensive training program in professional

development for teachers on combined grades. Just this week, we had some

educational leaders in the area of research here in the province from BC,

Ontario and Nova Scotia meeting with educational administrators and educators

from across the province on full-day kindergarten and on the issue of

multigrading.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Mr. Speaker, teachers and

administrators are telling me it's a little too late to be implementing this

right now and have teachers prepared and feel comfortable in being able to

upgrade our education system.

Mr.

Speaker, the minister has suggested that there would be no teacher layoffs. On

Monday, there were numerous layoff notices.

I ask

the minister: Can you provide a real number on how many teachers will lose their

jobs as a result of your budget choices?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, the Department

of Education and Early Childhood Development provides an initial allocation to

the school districts. The school districts then deploy those resources to the

system. There's a process in place where principals advise the district about

enrolment or programming changes.

There

are currently about 164 notifications that teachers are going to be retiring,

there are about 500 teachers eligible to retire and I'm pleased to say that the

200 teaching positions will be advertised and people will be able to apply for

those jobs, should they chose.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Mr. Speaker, the minister

reluctantly doesn't outline the fact that 140 will go into the education system

for all-day kindergarten but nearly 200 will come out of the system from one to

12, which is going to be devastating to our one to 12 system.

Mr.

Speaker, changes in school busing will mean some buses will serve more than one

school and kids will have an earlier start to their day.

I ask

the minister: What is the cost savings projected on busing? How can you justify

the savings when so many children and families will be negatively impacted by

these changes?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, just to correct

what the Member just said it's a net reduction of 73 units this year. I didn't

hear the Member complaining last year when there was a net reduction of 78 units

in the budget. They're reductions that reflect reductions in enrolment, but we

have put 27 new positions back in this year for inclusive education.

With

respect to busing, there are double bus runs being put in, in some instances, in

order to find cost efficiencies. Currently, we're spending over $50 million a

year on busing. That's going closer to $60 million for next year. We're putting

millions of dollars of additional monies in. We know the change in schedules is

disruptive to the routines for parents, students and teachers, but we're doing

the best that we can, considering the fiscal mess we have to deal with.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, with the addition of upwards of 1,400 kindergarten children into the

education system this September, the School Lunch Association is very concerned

that they will be unable to meet the needs they require. They require additional

funding for infrastructure requirements.

I ask

the minister: Why are you delaying meeting with the School Lunch Association and

not having a meeting until July?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Child, Youth and Family Services.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, funding to

community-based organizations will remain the same for this fiscal year. They

will receive $100,000 from the Department of Seniors, Wellness and Social

Development. We've had numerous conversations, phone calls, emails and meetings

and we will meet again.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Mr. Speaker, a July meeting,

just weeks before schools will reopen, will not provide adequate time for the

School Lunch Association to strengthen their infrastructure for running the

program.

Why the

delay? Isn't this important enough to meet with them now?

I ask

the minister: Will you meet with them this month?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Child, Youth and Family Services.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, a June meeting

will happen. The organization receives funding from numerous other organizations

such as the City of St. John's. They fundraise. They receive funding from

parents. They receive $100,000 from the province. We will meet in June.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

I ask the minister: Did you

budget any additional funding for the School Lunch Program in light of the fact

that you decided to proceed with full-day kindergarten?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Child, Youth and Family Services.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, the Department

of Seniors, Wellness and Social Development will meet with the School Lunch

Association, unlike the previous administration.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Mr. Speaker, she won't tell

us if she has any additional funding.

So I'll

ask again: Why are you proceeding with no plan and no consideration of all the

impacts for full-day kindergarten?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Child, Youth and Family Services.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, we are committed

to working with the School Lunch Association.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

answers and likely no funding.

Due to

the Liberal budget, residents of Newfoundland and Labrador most notably,

seniors will now see cuts to diabetic strips, changes to the drug plan and

reduced hours in home care support, just to name a few of the devastating

impacts your budget will have.

I ask

the minister responsible for seniors: Do you have any concerns that these

changes will bring a lower standard of living for our seniors?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

issue of the diabetic test strips and the changes to that program will align us

completely with Canadian national standards and follows the recommendations of

the Canadian Diabetes Association. It aligns the number of strips allocated for

a patient with their management, whether it be short-, medium- or long-term

medications, and is best practice and good value for money.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Mr. Speaker, I'm asking the

minister responsible for seniors, their advocate, what her position is on this.

Why won't she answer?

So, I'll

try again. I say to the Minister of Seniors, Wellness and Social Development,

programs like the Adult Dental Program give seniors confidence and dignity.

As the

minister responsible for seniors: Do you have concerns about how this cut to

Adult Dental will negatively impact our seniors?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

changes to the Adult Dental Program were made after considerable thought. They

now align us with five other jurisdictions in Canada, and our program is better

than three other jurisdictions on top of that. We will look after the dental

needs of 44,000 of this province's most vulnerable citizens, and we're doing the

best that we can with the money that we were left, courtesy of the gentlemen and

ladies opposite.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Mr. Speaker, it's absolutely

terrible that the minister responsible for seniors won't stand up and speak on

their behalf.

Mr.

Speaker, the Liberals have cut millions from the Prescription Drug Program,

including cuts to over-the-counter medications, especially for seniors.

I ask

the minister responsible for seniors: Are you concerned that seniors will no

longer be able to afford the medications they require and that doctors may now

be forced to prescribe alternatives which may, in fact, cost the system even

more?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

category of over-the-counter drugs includes all sorts of things from basically

snake oil and folk remedies all the way through to what you might call vital

over-the-counter drugs.

Any

patient who has a prescriber in whose opinion an over-the-counter preparation is

medically necessary can submit that to the department and it will be assessed.

No one is being cut off from anything they need.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, the Liberal budget's discontinued the amount they paid on Coyote

carcasses that takes upwards of 1,200 coyotes out of the population annually and

it has helped manage the population.

I ask

the minister: What is the impact on removing this bounty? With the elimination

of this program, what is the plan for coyote management in the province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Environment and Conservation.

MR. TRIMPER:

Thank you very much for the

question.

In terms

of our plan on collecting carcasses and so on, actually what we're doing is

shifting to a new model. There are better ways to do things. We're copying other

jurisdictions. We feel it is more appropriate to work with the animals

themselves as opposed to carcasses that have been piling up in a storage shed.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Mr. Speaker, I want to

caution the minister too it is not part of my question, but I want to point

out the public has a lot of concerns about coyotes in their neighbourhoods, my

neighbourhood a couple of weeks ago, everyone's neighbourhood. That is a big

issue. Just forgetting about coyotes is not going to have a good impact on our

wildlife.

I ask

the minister: What will be the impact on the caribou calving grounds because we

do know that they are one of the main predators on caribou calving grounds?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Environment and Conservation.

MR. TRIMPER:

Actually we have a great

understanding of predation by coyotes, by black bears, by hunting and so on. The

key point is that the collection of carcasses was for a research technique which

provided some insight into how we make our management. The ability for hunters,

trappers to still collect and hunt coyote is still out there, so there's really

no change in terms of our ability to control this predator.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I also

want to remind again I do have an understanding of what you're saying there,

Mr. Minister, but they do have a devastating impact the caribou. Just forgetting

about science, that was the only incentive to get coyotes out of our wildlife.

There is no other reason to hunt coyotes other than for the bounty, for what

they do for protecting the wildlife. So you just threw away an incentive.

Outfitters generate upwards of $45 million annually to rural Newfoundland and

Labrador economy.

I ask

the minister: What was the plan for the preservation of caribou and moose

population? What is your plan for oversight protection of these and other

species threatened by coyotes?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Environment and Conservation.

MR. TRIMPER:

It's interesting, Mr.

Speaker, the history of the coyote and myself actually are in parallel tracks.

This species showed up here about 1987. It is unfortunately here to stay. It is

shaking up our ecosystem. I can assure the Member opposite that coyotes are a

very resilient type of predator. There have been a variety of strategies that

have been deployed to try to control them. They were quite ineffective; it's a

very successful animal.

What we

need to do is work with the science, work with groups like the Outfitters

Association. I'm also very pleased to say I've had two lengthy meetings with

those people. We're going to continue to collaborate. We will work with other

jurisdictions, and we'll come up with a solution.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Mr. Speaker, the previous

administration had advised EU that if Canada did not meet all obligations agreed

to in bilateral negotiations between Newfoundland and Labrador and Ottawa,

including the fisheries fund, that Newfoundland would not be relinquishing areas

of provincial jurisdiction such as MPRs.

I ask

the Premier: Has the position of your government changed, and have you updated

the EU Ambassadors of any such change?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What the

former minister is talking about today is really two different things. One is

the CETA agreement that we just mentioned about, and that is an agreement that

is done with Canada and the EU. That agreement obviously is moving through the

process now and waiting for ratification.

Then,

secondary to that, which has a significant impact on Newfoundland and Labrador

of course, is the fisheries fund. That fund right now we're certainly into

discussions with our federal colleagues on how that would happen in Newfoundland

and Labrador. We have the support of our MPs, support of the Prime Minister, but

what we will not do is we will not rent space to sign an agreement that has not

been announced and not ready to be announced by both parties; but there are

significant advancements made on that particular file.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader has about 20 seconds for a question.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Mr. Speaker, the Premier says

they're not related. They're related in the agreement they are. We didn't sign

on for CETA unless we got the fisheries fund.

Why is

the Premier now saying he doesn't care about the fisheries fund? He's got

support in Ottawa, we haven't seen the cash, where's it to, it's all

interrelated. Will you please give us an update on the CETA agreement? Because

it appears you don't understand what you're actually saying.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What's

apparent, to the former minister, is that you never should sign an agreement in

a place where you don't have the other party ready to sign on with you. That

would be an apparent fault of the previous administration.

The CETA

negotiation right now, the agreement with the EU is now being through the

federal government in negotiation with the EU. The fisheries fund is a different

fund, a different negotiation.

We have

maintained the position about minimum processing requirements, and as we work

with our federal government we're hopeful that in the future we can actually get

an agreement in place for the benefit of all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

All

decisions have a ripple effect, or in the case of the School Lunch Program it

could be a tsunami. Starting all-day kindergarten in September means 700 more

mouths to feed on a daily basis, which, according to the chair of the School

Lunch Association, means $400,000 more a year. That means a lot of planning. All

attempts by the association to meet with the Minister of Education so far have

failed.

I ask

the minister: Why is he showing such disregard for an organization that for

almost 30 years has been serving the school children on the Eastern Avalon?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Thanks for the question.

Mr.

Speaker, we've had many, many, many communications with the School Lunch Program

folks since we took office and since this Cabinet was appointed. I haven't met

with the School Lunch Program myself, although officials in my department have

been speaking with them and I've exchanged correspondence. It's actually the

Minister of Seniors, Wellness and Social Development's department that provides

funding for that program.

Our

department does provide over a million dollars a year for the Kids Eat Smart

breakfast program, but the Department of Education and Early Childhood

Development does not provide funding for that program. That's another

department. So the School Lunch Program was referred to contact that department

should they want to ask for an increase.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

chair of the association says it will take months of preparation to plan

renovations, buy new equipment and make changes to accommodate full-day

kindergarten, costing up to an extra $100,000 more upfront. As the chair has

said, you can't snap your fingers and expect food to be on the table come

September.

I ask

the minister if he even thought about the impact on this program when he made

the decision to put all-day kindergarten in place in September.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, as I said, it's

the Department of Seniors, Wellness and Social Development that provide $100,000

a year for the School Lunch Program. There was never any mention of any impact

of full-day kindergarten that I'm aware of in the Department of Education and

Early Childhood Development prior to sometime, say, late winter that folks

contacted our department and asked if there was any additional funding coming

from the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.

advised our officials and I corresponded with the School Lunch Program myself

and said that it's not the Department of Education and Early Childhood

Development that provides that funding. Should they wish to request an increase,

they should go to the other department that provides the funding already for

them. That's basically what happened.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thanks, Mr. Speaker.

The

Premier split his budget in two, waiting for six months before telling people

what other brutal cuts and job losses they're facing, causing fear and anxiety.

People are understandably sitting on their wallets, further slowing down and

choking the economy.

I ask

the Premier: Why would he stifle our economy in this way at a time when our

economy actually needs stimulus?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

here because I listened to the debate the other night about stifling the

economy in Municipal Affairs when the co-leader of the Third Party got up and

said there's $20 million put in for Municipal Affairs. The same $20 million the

Member for St. John's Centre said was a slush fund.

That $20

million, Mr. Speaker, helped leverage over $350 million in municipal funding. On

infrastructure funding, $575 million in total in the province. If you call that

$20 million stifling the economy thousands of jobs for Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians. That's what's helping the economy, supporting rural Newfoundland

and Labrador.

I say to

the Members of the Third Party, when you stand in this House and make statements

like that, please have the facts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, that's

astounding, and has absolutely nothing to do with the question I asked.

Yesterday, the minister said, Certainly, as we worked through the budget the

important women's lens, gender lens was certainly used.

I ask

the minister: Will she table the specific gender-analysis tool she used and the

results of the analysis of how her budget will affect women?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, as part of the

Government Renewal Initiative, the officials who reviewed the recommendations

that came in from departments that were ultimately provided to Cabinet for a

decision-making process, were undertaken to be reviewed through all different

lens including women.

We have

82 per cent of single homes in this province led by women. That was a very

important lens that we put on this budget. It was one of the reasons, quite

frankly, as I've mentioned in debate in this House, that we thought it was very

important to bring in the Newfoundland Income Supplement so that we could offset

some of those costs to those low-income moms who are raising their kids.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period

has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling

of Documents.

Tabling of

Documents

MR. SPEAKER:

I hereby table the Report of

the Auditor General entitled, the 2016 Update on Recommendations from the 2012

Annual Report.

Notices

of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give

notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The

Pensions Funding Act And The Teachers' Pension Act. (Bill 28)

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

The hon.

the Government House Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I give notice

that I will ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Law

Respecting Statutory Offices Of The House of Assembly. (Bill 27)

Further,

I give notice under Standing Order 11 that this House do not adjourn at 5:30

p.m. on Monday, May 16; and further, pursuant to Standing Order 11 I give notice

that this House do not adjourn at 10 p.m. on Monday, May 16.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

Answers

to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Answers to

Questions for which Notice has been Given

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just

stand to answer the questions yesterday on the debate, the changes to the

Highway Act. The Leader of the Opposition asked about the demerit points for the

vehicle. That if the owner of the vehicle, even if they couldn't be identified,

in consultation with Justice they said it would be more appropriate to not give

demerit points against someone who passed a school bus or speeding in a school

zone because they wouldn't be able to identify the person. That is the reason of

what they said, because it would be harder if you didn't and they advised that

we should ticket the car but not take away demerit points on that issue.

The

issue on the school bus, it is 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. The intent behind the department

and in discussions is that it is almost like I think the critic, the Member

for Cape St. Francis brought up, is if you're in a construction zone and the

signs are up on the weekend and there is no one there, you have no intention to

slow down because people just see the signs.

The

intent is that you keep it for when the children will be there from 7 a.m. to 5

p.m. and then you will be more focused from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. That was on the

advice of why we kept it at that, so it would be concentrated instead of just

speeding through all the time; that you know from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. That's the

answer to that.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further answers to questions

for which notice has been given?

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

To the

hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

a Deficit Reduction Levy is an extremely regressive surtax placing a higher tax

burden on low- and middle-income taxpayers; and

WHEREAS

surtaxes are typically leveled on the highest income earners only as currently

demonstrated in other provinces as well as Australia, Norway and other

countries; and

WHEREAS

government states in the 2016 provincial budget that the personal income tax

schedule needs to be revised and promises to do so;

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

of Assembly to urge government to ensure the Deficit Reduction Levy be

eliminated and any replacement measure be based on progressive taxation

principles, and that an independent review of the Newfoundland and Labrador

provincial income tax system begin immediately to make it fairer to

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, I think every MHA in this House of Assembly has heard from their

constituents. We've all heard how people know it's not just people's opinions;

it's clear that the levy is an unfair flat regressive tax.

Again,

as I have a said a number of times in this House, when you look at its

application we know that it's attached to specific earners; it's not attached to

a household. You cannot combine your household income to identify who's paying

what for the levy. It's not like that kind of tax.

So if

you have a household where there are two earners, each earning $50,000 a year,

then each of those earners will be taxed about $600 for the levy. So out of that

one household the levy will be $1,200; $600 each, separately. So you have a

young family paying a mortgage payment, paying car payments, paying child care,

who are just scrimping by, just making it. Although it might seem like a lot of

money, two $50,000 income earners, with the kids and mortgage and car payments

and all that, that's quite significant. That's $1,200 out of that household.

Whereas if your next-door neighbour is making $250,000 and there's only one

earner in that household, they're going to pay $900.

So it's

so clear, it's so easy to see how inequitable this levy tax is, and it doesn't

work. It's not progressive; it's very regressive. People know that, people can

see that, because a lot of people, as we know, particularly with the downturn in

the economy and we have seen, any of us who go to the grocery store, how

expensive food is. None of us are exempt. People are really aware of how much

money they're going to have to put out and what this budget means to them.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the

hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

the current 2016 provincial budget impacts adversely and directly the education

program at Beachy Cove Elementary in Portugal Cove-St. Philip's; and

WHEREAS

the parents request a delay in the implementation of full-day kindergarten at

our school until September 2017, when at such time the new five-to-nine middle

school in Portugal Cove-St. Philip's will open; and

WHEREAS

the student population at Beachy Cove Elementary is growing exponentially and

this growth is sustainable into the future; and

WHEREAS

the parents request the reinstatement of the previous teacher-allocation formula

for Beachy Cove Elementary for this year and subsequent school years to service

the growth in enrolment and to be able to provide all students with equal

opportunities to enroll in the French immersion program;

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

of Assembly to urge government to reinstate the previous teacher allocation and

delay the implementation of full-day kindergarten in order to provide the

children of Beachy Cove Elementary the right to a quality education.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, we've heard in the media and I've noted it here in the House of

Assembly through questions I've asked and presenting this petition in the past,

there's a real upheaval when it comes to offering proper education to the people

of Beachy Cove Elementary.

There

has been a backlash by parents, by administrators, by teachers, by the students,

by the general population in that community and other communities about what's

happening to our education system with the cuts in this budget.

The

parents have particularly looked at the impacts it's going to have. There are

four key areas where they're going to be regressive in their education process,

particularly at Beachy Cove, and that's around intensive core French ability.

Students

who would have jumped into the French immersion but want to go the mainstream

decision that grade six they would be into the core French program, but now that

has been taken away. We're having things like a lottery, picking names out of a

hat. There's no justification around those kids who really want to move to it,

their previous background in it, any potential they had for what they want to do

with the French program itself. None of that has been taken into account.

They've backed the administrators into a corner.

Administrators sometimes are being seen as being callous in their decision

making, but they have no other choice. They've been forced by the Department of

Education who, in turn, forced the school board to make these choices based on

simple issues around cutting teacher allocation to save money without having any

vision about where the education system needs to go, or how you invest money or

keep it at the level it is.

We've

had a pretty good education system. No doubt, there's room for improvement.

There's no doubt that every day we talk about how we can better encourage our

education system to be more inclusive, how we can look at better training

teachers, how teachers themselves take a better role in their communities and

how the communities partner with them also.

Mr.

Speaker, I present this on behalf of the people of Portugal Cove-St. Philip's

and the school council itself.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker,

present this petition: To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the

undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

Budget 2016 introduces over 50 new

fees and increases over 300 fees; and

WHEREAS

Budget 2016 asks people of this

province to pay more for a decrease in government services; and

WHEREAS

these fee increases negatively impact the financial well-being of seniors,

youth, families, students and individuals;

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

of Assembly to urge government to immediately reverse these fee increases as

introduced through Budget 2016 .

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, as we hear every day in the House, in the media and whatnot about the

levy, that it is no doubt a huge issue. I hear it on a constant basis.

You take

everything else into but if you take it in silos, it's different. You take it

in all total context and you add the levy, the insurance tax, the gas tax,

income tax increase most budgets in past years you'd get a couple of increases

and you'd get some fee increases traditionally to generate some more revenue.

You'd zero in on a specific sector. This budget, if you said fee increases and

everything else remained the same, it'd be kind of tolerable. When you throw the

fee increase on top of everything else, it's a huge burden.

Mr.

Speaker, I have a lot of seniors in my district who I hear from a lot actually,

quite often. They just don't know how they're going to make ends meet with any

of this budget. Then you're throwing fees from every service you require now

it's an increase in the fees. Again, I say people are crying out. I've never

seen anything like it in my life and a lot of others have said the same thing.

It's unheard of; it's astounding. They're not getting answers from the

government. The ministers are it seems like everyone is just put everything on

mute. People are looking for answers.

I say

this every time I get up in the House and I'll say it again here today that

everything in separation don't look so bad. You put it all together and it's

crippling on the economy, it's crippling on seniors, low-income, middle-income

earners. I really, really, really would wish the hon. Members opposite would

start paying attention to the public. Forget about us, they need to start

listening to the people.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Grace Port de Grave.

MS. P. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the

hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

a decision has been made to close the Provincial Court at Harbour Grace; and

WHEREAS

this Provincial Court services a large geographical area, covering from Bay de

Verde to Marysvale and Bellevue down to St. Bride's in Placentia Bay and all

communities in between; and

WHEREAS

a population of 50,000-plus citizens are served by this Provincial Court; and

WHEREAS

four RCMP detachments use this court including Harbour Grace, Bay Roberts,

Whitbourne and Placentia, with court checks for the Holyrood detachment; and

WHEREAS

many related services will still be located in the area such as legal aid, crown

prosecutor, probation officers, addictions residences and other related services

and professionals from these offices will spend a large amount of time commuting

to an alternate location; and

WHEREAS

services such as the seeking of child support, civil action against another and

victim services will also be adversely affected;

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

of Assembly to urge government to reverse the decision to close the Provincial

Court at Harbour Grace.

Mr.

Speaker, since the budget has been announced, I continue hearing about this

particular issue pretty much on a daily basis. I continue to meet with members

of the town council in Harbour Grace and constituents. As a matter of fact,

we've met with the Justice Minister and the Mayor for the Town of Harbour Grace

which is the first name here on this petition was in just this morning to

meet with the Justice Minister to work toward a resolution.

But

there are concerns with regard to public safety, should this service be

relocated to Atlantic Place in St. John's, that RCMP officers in the

jurisdiction will be taxiing people back and forth to an alternate location,

which could have an effect, obviously, on public safety. This is a concern of

constituents.

This

region is a large region. It's larger than a district issue. This Provincial

Court has been in service since the 1800s in the Town of Harbour Grace,

servicing Harbour Grace Port de Grave District, and the Harbour Main District,

Placentia St. Mary's District, and Trinity Bay de Verde.

Again, I

am committed to working with constituents, working with the town council,

working with the Justice Minister, to do everything we can to provide a solution

to reverse this decision. I will stand with constituents and again, we will work

towards finding a solution.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

To the

hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

government has one again cut the libraries budget, forcing the closure of 54

libraries; and

WHEREAS

libraries are often the backbone of their communities, especially for those with

little access to government services

(Disturbance in the gallery.)

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Member for St. John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I'll

continue the WHEREASes.

WHEREAS

libraries are often the backbone of their communities, especially for those with

little access to government services where they offer learning opportunities and

computer access; and

WHEREAS

libraries and librarians are critical in efforts to improve the province's

literacy levels which are among the lowest in Canada; and

WHEREAS

already strapped municipalities are not in a position to take over the operation

and cost of libraries;

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

of Assembly to urge government to keep these libraries open and work on a

long-term plan to strengthen the library system.

And as

in duty bound you petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, once again these petitions have come in to us and, in responsibility as

Members of the House of Assembly, we bring them into the House.

It's

interesting to note that while some of the signatures today are from some areas

where libraries will close, especially the Port au Port Peninsula, the majority

of the signatures that I have in my hand today are from the St. John's area. So

it is showing solidarity with people, that everybody in the province is upset

over the closing of these 54 libraries.

I also

have a letter from an educator who has joined his voice in this concern as well:

A week or so after the budget came down I was made aware of the book tax. It

was then announced that more than half of the libraries will be shuttered, some

of which are located in schools, along side deep cuts to Memorial University of

Newfoundland. That led me to wonder as to whether or not this Liberal government

was waging a Stephen Harper-style war against education and higher learning. I

do not think it is too far fetched to characterize this budget as anti-education

and pro-illiteracy. Rates of illiteracy are already high in Newfoundland and

Labrador and these measures will undoubtedly exacerbate this issue.

It's a

very serious issue, Mr. Speaker, and I really implore the government to take it

seriously. They seem to be sloughing off the petitions that are coming in,

sloughing off the opinion of people in the province who are absolutely concerned

about the loss of the libraries from two or three different perspectives.

Literacy being one; being centres of community being another, and the government

just seems to be ignoring these. I beg them to listen.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Orders of the Day, Mr.

Speaker.

Orders of the Day

MR. A. PARSONS:

I call from the Order Paper,

Order 4, Third Reading of Bill 12.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador, that Bill 12, An

Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act, be now read the third time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

Bill 12 be now read a third time.

All

those in favour?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

Those against?

The hon.

the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

thought you read the bill before you'd take a question. I appreciate the

minister getting back to us and giving us that information.

Will the

bill reflect the fact that is it done through regulation or is it done through

the bill that the demerit point reduction won't happen when an owner of a

vehicle is charged with an offence?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you for the question. The act will reflect that the demerit points will not be

included, only the fine for the vehicle itself. It will just reflect the fine

for the vehicle if the driver cannot be identified.

MR. SPEAKER:

Are there any other speakers

to the bill?

It is

moved and seconded that Bill 12 be now read a third time.

All

those in favour?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

Those against?

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Highway Traffic Act. (Bill 12)

MR. SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and its title be as on the

Order Paper.

motion, a bill,

An Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act, read a third time,

ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 12)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I call from

the Order Paper, Motion 14.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Minister of Municipal Affairs, the following resolution:

WHEREAS

subsection 16(1) of the House of Assembly

Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act requires that an

independent committee, called a Members' Compensation Review Committee, be

appointed at least once during each General Assembly; and

WHEREAS

in accordance with subsection 16(2) of the

House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act , the

Speaker has consulted with the Government House Leader, the Opposition House

Leader and the Third Party on the appointments to the said Committee; and

WHEREAS

the Government House Leader, Opposition House Leader and the Third Party have

agreed with the introduction of this resolution; and

WHEREAS

under subsection 16(4) of the House of

Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act , a Members'

Compensation Review Committee appointed under this resolution must report to the

Speaker on its recommendations within 120 days of its appointment;

BE IT

RESOLVED that Sandra Burke, Kathy LeGrow and Jeffrey Pardy are appointed to the

Members' Compensation Review Committee, with the appointment to be effective on

July 7, 2016; and

BE IT

FURTHER RESOLVED that in accordance with

section 16 of the

House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act ,

the Members' Compensation Review Committee shall inquire into and prepare a

report respecting the salaries, allowances, severance payments and pensions to

be paid to Members of the House of Assembly, and in particular, the Committee

shall 1. recommend the annual salary for Members of the House of Assembly; 2.

review and make recommendations regarding the additional salary provisions for

positions identified in subsection 12(1) of the

House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act ;

3. recommend a formula or means for making annual salary adjustments for salary

amounts referenced in clauses 2 and 3 above; 4. review and make recommendations

regarding the current severance pay policy for Members of the House of Assembly;

5. review the current provisions for Members' pensions and provide

recommendations for adjustments; 6. review and make recommendations regarding

the Intra-Constituency Allowance for each District established in the

Schedule

to Members' Resources and Allowances Rules .

This review should take into account the provision of services by Members as a

result of the increase in the size of some districts, as a result of Electoral

Boundary reform in 2015; and

BE IT

FURTHER RESOLVED that the Members' Compensation Review Committee, as part of its

inquiries, consult with appropriate persons who can assist the Committee with

respect to its required duties and shall 7. consult with Members of the House of

Assembly, review and make recommendations with respect to the

Members' Resources and Allowances Rules ,

including but not limited to:

a) current accommodation provisions for Members

and whether other alternatives are available from a cost-benefit perspective;

b) travel and living costs for training and orientation of Members following

general elections and by-elections;

c) clarification of the parameters regarding

usage of the constituency allowance; and

d) clarification of the parameters for

the use of rental cars; 8. consult with the House of Assembly Service regarding

issues in administering the current regime as well as impacts, legislative and

otherwise, of proposed recommendations; and

BE IT

FURTHER RESOLVED that research and administrative support to the Members'

Compensation Review Committee will be provided by or arranged by the House of

Assembly Service; and

BE IT

FURTHER RESOLVED that the Members' Compensation Review Committee deliver its

report to the Speaker on or before November 4, 2016; and

BE IT

FURTHER RESOLVED that the House of Assembly Service shall conclude the

contractual arrangements required to carry out the intent of this Resolution.

MR. SPEAKER:

Is the House ready for the

question or are there further speakers?

The hon.

the Government House Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

sorry about that; I thought there was one more procedural step in between, but

learning as I go here, as I think we all are sometimes.

I just

want a few moments to speak to this very important committee and the work that

they're going to do, and the work that former committees have done in this House

of Assembly. In doing so, I actually took a look back at speeches by former

House Leaders on both sides to see their remarks towards the work of this

committee.

In fact,

I know that the Member for I keep calling it Signal Hill Quidi Vidi; I know

it's St. John's East Quidi Vidi. I'll get it someday. But I know she's

probably, in terms of people sitting right here now, with the exception of the

Speaker, maybe one of the longest-serving Members, along with the Member for

Humber Bay of Islands, the Minister of Municipal Affairs. I looked at the

comments that the Members has made.

I looked

at what the former House Leader, actually, Mr. Kennedy, had to say and the

former member for Burgeo La Poile, whoever that person was, I looked at what

that individual had to say as well. It's changed.

I don't

think there's a need to belabour why we are making this submission here, why

this resolution is here. It goes back to a very, I guess, unfortunate time in

the history of both this province and especially this Legislature where there

was a time where due to the actions and lack of controls and accountability that

this House and that all Members of the House before, during and after, there was

a lack of faith, a lack of confidence. And that's something that nobody in this

province should have.

Out of

that came what was known as the Green report. Again, there's a longer title to

it. I think it was restoring confidence, and there was a longer title, but

everybody refers to it as the Green report. There were a number of issues and

items were brought up in this report but the main one, one of the things that

were born from this report was the Members' Compensation Review Committee, MCRC.

That's what I'll refer to it from here on in. I apologize to people from Hansard

by using the acronym, but it's probably easier rather than me fooling up the

name continuously.

I look

back to some of the comments actually that the former Government House Leader

made. He obviously took some time to speak to this. He put some thought into

what he had to say. I was actually sitting across when he made those comments,

listening to what he said and actually the former Opposition House Leader,

Yvonne Jones, who is now in Ottawa, spoke to it. As I mentioned, the Member

opposite for the NDP also spoke to this as well.

What it

comes down to, I think if you break it down to its most basic, the fact is that

by being elected here there's a cost to doing this. There's the salary that goes

with it. There's the cost of getting to and from your districts to here. There

the cost of staff. There's a whole contingent of costs that are a part of this.

I like

the comment that the former Government House Leader said: I think MHAs are

entitled to fair treatment, but we do not want MHAs determining what is fair.

That's how he put it out there. I think that says it very clear.

Now,

also one of the things that came out, there's a Management Commission. A

Management Commission is a number of Members from this House who sit down and

discuss matters affecting the House of Assembly. I think one of the big things

with that committee, as well as with anything going on here and what people

need to know is everything really is now open and transparent. The meetings are

televised. Everything that's done is put online. Any expense by any Member in

this House is online right down to the nickel, whether it's the cost of a meal,

whether it's the cost of a rental car, whether it's the cost of your loggings.

Everything, as it should be, is online for scrutiny by the individuals who put

us in this House.

The

other thing I would note that's changed I'm sure from 2007 to now is that

there's a very rigorous process in doing each one of these claims when it comes

to the money that is spent by Members. There are a number of highly skilled

individuals, very hard-working individuals who go through it to make sure this

is public money that's being spent and we need to make sure that it's spent

properly and according to the rules.

That

being said, what we've also learned since that time is that the Green report

came out and things change over time. There are maybe things we didn't account

for. There are changes in circumstances, certainly in this House since that

time. There are eight less Members since that time, which one of the things is

that a number of Members have changed districts, have larger districts. So we

had to take into account the allowances that are necessary for a Member to get

around their district and speak to their constituents.

We also

look at the fact that through time we learn: Are there things we can do

differently? What I was going to do was actually go through some of the

provisions here. One of the things I'll note that's mentioned there I guess

what I will actually do first is speak about the three individual and Members

opposite in fact, I only know one individual and that's Ms. Sandra Burke,

who's a member of the legal community of this province. She has a very good

reputation in the legal community. I think her reputation speaks for itself.

The

other two individuals, Ms. LeGrow and Mr. Pardy, I actually don't know them but

I understand they have very solid reputations in the community.

The last

time we actually had a judge that led the committee. This time there are three

individuals who will be leading the committee. Again, this was something that

was done upon consultation with Members opposite.

I don't

think anybody will say anything negative about the three individuals who have

been appointed. They have the skillset, the expertise, and thankfully they have

the time to put into a venture like this. It will take some time. Their

commission begins on July 7 and it will be reported back to the Speaker by

November 4.

When you

go through this, here are the things that this commission is going to look at.

It is going to look at the salary. There's a base salary for every MHA. That is

posted online, and I think it's been the same for some time now. Some Members

may know better than me. I think it was frozen at one point. It was rolled back

at one point.

Again,

I'm not quite sure. That's all out there. It has been done. All I know is the

salary has been the same and that but they should look at it. Should it be

lower? Should it be higher? Should it be the same? What are the factors? I don't

know. That is what this committee their job is to look at.

They

have to look at the additional salary provisions. They have to look at, what is

the formula we use to come up with these things? What is the severance pay?

Should we be looking at severance? Severance is an issue that is quite a hot

topic. Should we be looking at doing that differently? That's something that

does generate discussion in the public, as it should, because all of this

every time you do one of these commissions it's done in the perspective of the

time in which it's being held; 2011 was a very different time than 2016. There's

no doubt about that.

Right

now it's done in the context of the fiscal circumstance that we find it in, and

it's hard not to keep that in consideration obviously as we go through this.

This is all done in light of a I can't remember if the last one was actually

started before the budget for that year. In this case, we're doing it after

Budget 2016 .

I think these things have to be considered when this

committee does their work. They have to keep in mind the fiscal circumstances of

the province, but at the same time recognizing and I don't think any Member

will disagree, and I don't think anybody who has any familiarity with the

position of a Member of the House of Assembly will say it's an extremely tough

job. No matter if you're a Member from here in St. John's or I live in Port

aux Basques. We have Members from up in Labrador. We have Members from

the South Coast. We have

Members from all over this province.

Some

districts have different travel requirements. Some are right here, but I tell

you the workload is extremely high for every Member in this House, whether

you're a Member in the Opposition, whether you're a Member in the government.

It's an extremely difficult position.

I think

in many ways it has gotten with the advent now, I'm willing to bet that even

when this first commission was done the Member for St. John's East Quidi

the expectation on the Member was probably different then than it is different

now. You have so many more responsibilities to respond to your constituents, to

people of the public that were not there in 2007, or were not as widely used.

She's certainly more equipped to speak to that than I am because she is one of

the longer serving Members here.

Certainly, Mr. Speaker, you would have the ability to speak to this, but I can

even say I've seen a difference in it since 2011. More of your constituents no

matter their demographic, no matter of their age have the ability now to

contact you. That's a good thing. That's what we want, but it speaks to the

greater point I'm making.

I think

the workload has always been high but it's certainly not decreasing any. That's

good, the fact that people have the opportunity and find it successful. That's

what we're here for; that's what we're supposed to do. That's something that is

always taken into consideration.

One

thing here that is going to be considered, I'm happy to see it, is the

provisions for Members' pensions. That's something that also garners significant

public attention. You can look back to former Members and what they have had to

say. They perhaps speak a little more eloquently than I have, but we have to

look at Members' pensions as well to figure out: Are there changes that need to

be made to the pension plans for Members of the House of Assembly?

That's

why we have these individuals with the skillsets they do. They'll have the

ability to get the expertise they need, and that's something that is going to be

considered by this committee.

Finally,

looking at the Intra-Constituency Allowance; just so people know, every Member

has a budget that's spent on travel and expenses within their district.

Obviously, that changes, depending on the Member. I'd probably have a larger

budget than say a more urban Member because I have a number of rural

constituencies. I have three very remote communities that you can only access by

ferry or by chopper. In many cases, when I go now I actually try to get down via

speedboat. So that's something that needs to be considered as well. With the

change, many Members had changes in their districts where they accumulated new

territory and new communities. These need to be factored in.

I'd be

remiss if I didn't mention the Member for Torngat Mountains. One of the things

that I don't think was actually considered in the original Green report was: How

do you calculate expenses for travel over Ski-Doo? I can say that with a smile

on my face. It's funny, we talk about travel: I have to catch a plane and then

drive 250 kilometres. That's a lot of travel. The Member travels by plane and

then gets on a Ski-Doo in the dark of night and travels through very, very rough

terrain. The fact is I don't think the provisions were actually geared to take

into account that kind of travel, and how do you pay for that. Again, it's only

about paying for that actual travel, but that's an interesting set of

circumstances.

I know

the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune also has a very remote district. It's

adjacent to mine. A number of communities you have to get to by ferry. Sometimes

it's difficult to get those ferries; sometimes you have to take alternate means

to get there.

always have to reconsider those and say: Are we giving Members the ability to do

their job the best they can? Do we have to change the allowances to allow for

that? Do we have to change the means by which we quantify that? That's why we

have these committees every four years with the election of a new House of

Assembly.

Now, the

other thing I think is interesting here, and number 7 says talking about

consulting with Members of the House of Assembly. I think that's of the utmost

importance. Obviously, the last time I had an opportunity to speak with Judge

Brazil, who headed up the last commission. At that point I had obviously a more

limited perspective or view than I would have now. I was fairly new into it.

I could only give you what I gathered in that short period of time. I

could only talk about what I knew then.

Obviously, it's been almost four years since that time. You

gather more knowledge, you see how it goes. I had the perspective, I've been on

that side, I've been on this side, to see the requirements and the toll it

takes, the work that you do. There are some Members who have been here a lot

longer. There are some Members who have had both perspectives. There are a

number of things.

That's why I think it's important that every Member is

going to get an opportunity or should take the time to speak to this commission

to pass on their experiences and what they've seen, because while this committee

is obviously very experienced and very knowledgeable and very intelligent,

there's nothing like the perspective of the person that's going through the

position.

So whether you're brand new elected in this most recent

election of November, or somebody that's been here for a significant number of

years three terms we all have a perspective that we should provide to allow

this committee to do the best job they can, which is to allow us to do the job

we were elected to do and make sure it's done in the best interests of

taxpayers, because everything we do is with the money of taxpayers .

We have to make sure that we can do the job but it has be economically feasible

and spent properly. I encourage all Members to take that opportunity to talk

about their perspectives, their experiences thus far.

We talk

about the different things, some of these I would say to an urban Member who

probably lives in the district and lives here in the area, it's a different

perspective than when we look at under number seven, the accommodations or

travel or living costs. Someone like myself goes through a different experience:

hotel living. That's a whole different way of doing things. I have some opinions

on that. I think there are ways that can allow us to do the job and spend

taxpayers' money better. I think it can be done.

I've

seen that where in many cases the cost this is something actually that Yvonne

Jones when she was here as the Opposition House Leader she spoke about four

years ago and said you are living in a hotel all those nights. Maybe there's a

way that we can have you here but not spend the cost of a hotel. Is that

something we have to find a way. But that's only done by talking to all of us,

collectively, to figure what's the best way to do it.

MR. KENT:

(Inaudible).

MR. A. PARSONS:

The Member for Mount Pearl

North has invited me to share his accommodations. I'm going to take a rain check

on that one, Mr. Speaker, for right now, but I appreciate that.

The

other thing too is we have to look at: How do they do it in the House of

Commons? How do they do it in the other Legislatures? We have to look at it and

see: What are the other perspectives that are taken? Someone like myself, I am

willing and looking forward to passing on my perspective on this. It is

something that I've done for five years now, packing up and going back and

forth. I have a perspective on that that I will pass forward.

There

are a whole range of things here. It doesn't happen now; we've changed this. But

one example is that previously, before our time again, I'll use the former

member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair, Ms. Yvonne Jones. She'd be driving

home, might get caught in a snowstorm. She actually had to call the Speaker of

the time and ask if she was allowed permission to get a hotel because she was

stuck in a snowstorm. That wasn't accommodated, that wasn't allowed in the

rules, and that's obviously not a common sense application. Maybe it wasn't

considered, so that was something brought here, brought in, changed and we have

that.

Now

certainly I've had that myself I think a lot of Members have been stuck going

back and forth. The Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune has a long distance to

travel for her, so she has some experiences as well.

These

are things where, over time, we can change these rules. We don't change the fact

that it's not about doing anything to be less accountable. It's about making it

more of a common sense application, something they may not have considered. It's

no different in many cases than legislation which we sit here in this House and

we debate, and say the legislation was drafted at a particular time for a

particular reason, but over the passage of time things may change. How do we

change it to make it better? In this case, this is what this committee is going

to do.

It goes

on here, Mr. Speaker. What it comes down to is that this committee is going to

do the work to make sure that taxpayers' money is spent. It's one thing for us

to sit here and determine what's the best way to approach this? What's the best

way? How should we be paid? That's an awkward situation for us to be in.

I don't

think anybody in this House wants to do that, nor should we. That's why this

commission is going to come in and do this. It's independent and it's something

that there's a lot of stuff that happens in this House that's partisan by

nature or adversarial in many ways, but in this case there are 40 Members who

are equal. It has to be treated equally. That's why an independent committee

will look at it as a whole.

Mr.

Speaker, I don't think I have any other points to make on this. I think the

Members opposite are going to speak to this now. Certainly, both Members have

been here longer than I and will have an opportunity to add insight that I don't

have. I look forward to that.

What I

would suggest to members of the public that may be listening or may be watching,

if you do have questions on this process or if you do have concerns or queries,

that's what we're here for. You can ask those questions. I've had people ask me

that question and we can refer them to the proper documentation online.

That's

why this House is televised. That's why everything is done televised so people

can see it and it's documented. You can go online and get it. So if people do

have questions, I think you should ask those questions and we'll certainly try

our best to answer.

On that

note, Mr. Speaker, it's a pleasure to be able to stand here and speak to this. I

look forward to the comments of my colleagues across the way and hopefully the

passage of this resolution so this committee can begin their work, which will be

done in the best interests of people of this province.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

It's a

pleasure to get up and speak to this resolution. I'm not going to repeat all of

the

summary that the Government House Leader had referred to; however, all his

points I think are, for the most part, valid to the motion and the reasons for

doing this.

We do

remember and I'm sure most everyone in the province does remember the days of

the Green report, the reason for the Green report and the work that Justice

Green had done to change how business was done in the House and the

administrative backroom operations in many respects of the House, and how MHAs

are compensated and how their costs are reimbursed, and how that works and what

the rules are about that. It was a signification change through Justice Green.

I got

elected in 2010 and even to this day, my office and I quite regularly will

reference the manuals, or from time to time will contact you or your staff and

seek clarification on a matter if it be someone had called us looking for an

opportunity to advertise or support, through public advertising in a newspaper

or a bulletin or program, which we can do under the legislation, but sometimes

we look for clarification to make sure: Is this within the rules? How do we make

sure we're following the rules and we stay within those rules?

So the

interpretation and I think the Member opposite referenced this as times

change, technology changes, opportunities change as well that the rules have to

change to be flexible with them. Sometimes I know that has been a challenge for

Members as well, especially from the advertising point of view.

The goal

of it is so people know who their MHA is, who their elected Member is, how they

can contact and reach out and get a hold for their elected Member when they need

to and how they can contact that elected Member when they need to. There are

provisions for that in the legislation.

The last

report was done in 2012 by Judge Jackie Brazil, who acted independently. She

references salaries the Member asked about salaries and she had highlighted

the fact that they were rolled back in 2009. In 2009, there was a rollback to, I

think, around 2007 and prior levels, and that's much were they stay today.

She

referenced in her report of how she travelled around the province. She did

public consultations in St. John's and Happy Valley-Goose Bay, in Corner Brook,

in Grand Falls-Windsor and Clarenville. She travelled the province and she had

very little uptake from the general public.

She also

referenced that was a similar response to what other provinces had experienced.

Other provinces as well said that while people quite often express an opinion on

the salaries or benefits received by elected members, she said that as other

provinces did similar kinds of processes, there was very little uptake to that.

So I

would encourage the public who have an interest in this when this process gets

underway, that they do take the time to write the commission, the MCRC, express

their views and give rationale for that because they're looking for not just

someone who says they're good for nothing or they're really good or on this

side of the House, you generally hear they're really good, but you don't

generally hear that on the other side too much these days.

The

salaries are all the same for all Members, no matter what side of the House

you're on. I encourage the public to do that. I encourage the public to have

thought-out and meaningful dialogue or input into the process and those who are

considering it. I mean that in all sincerity.

The

Member opposite mentioned that he participated in the process last time in 2012.

Most of our Members who are sitting in our caucus today, we did as well. I

remember meeting with Judge Brazil and discussing many areas of our roles, our

lives, the impact, salaries and benefits and so on.

If you

look in the House here, there's such a diversity of backgrounds from people

elected. Quite often, the work that the commission does will reflect well, what

do we need to do to make sure that we have good people who are interested in

politics, to get good women and good men throughout the province to run for

politics? It is tough to do that. I know the Members opposite, I'm sure they

would agree that seeking candidates, good candidates to run and stand for their

party is a lot of work. It's a lot of work to do that to entice people because

many people say today why would I want to do that because of the public scrutiny

that quite often happens, because of the criticism, your life becomes an open

book, I've said before.

So we

have to make sure that we have a process in place and an opportunity in place

that people can come in here, they can effect change, they can represent their

constituents, they can speak on behalf of their constituents, they can do so

while still having a private life, or somewhat of a private life, but also so

that we have those quality people that we attract to come here to do that.

That's

what it's about and you get compensated for your expenses. There are a lot of

expenses in the work that we do and that there's fair compensation for those

expenses. That's what this does. That's what this review commission does. It

looks at a number of areas in salaries, allowances, severance payments, pensions

as well to be part of the review and laid out specifically in this one as well,

that be reviewed.

But

also, as the Member referred to under number seven, that it look at

accommodations for Members and travel, living allowances and so on. As a Member

was saying, one time a member had to contact I think he said he had to contact

the Speaker's office to say I'm stuck in a snow storm, why do I do? The Member

here behind me who travels long distances on a weekly basis, I think it's about

an eight-hour drive on a Friday to get home and an eight-hour drive on Sunday to

get back, quite often needs to go back to her district, has meetings arranged

while she's there. That's part of the job that rural MHAs quite often have.

You're here in the House during the week. When you get back to your districts on

the weekends while the House is open, you work throughout the weekend, you meet

with constituents, it uses up a lot of your time on the weekend, quite often it

impacts that time, the little bit of amount of time you have with your families

and so on, and come back again.

Members

who live in the greater St. John's area or the capital region, as its referred

under the House of Assembly, I think it's easier for us to do a bit of both. We

can do district events and so on during the week and in the evenings and also on

the weekends, and there's a big difference. I would say, Mr. Speaker, that I

have the opportunity to go home every night unless we're here for a

filibuster. I get to go home in the nighttime to my own home and my own family,

where rural Members quite often, they don't get to do that. Many of them spend

hundreds of nights in hotels during a term of office.

Mr.

Speaker, I don't know if the Government House Leader will get a chance to speak

again or not I'm not sure if he does or not but if does, I would ask him,

maybe, if he can explain to the House I didn't hear him reference it in his

comments that the appointment we're doing today requires that the compensation

review commission, appointed under this resolution, must report to the Speaker

on its recommendations within 120 days of appointment.

Now,

while we're doing the appointment today, the resolution also indicates that the

appointment won't be effective until July. Maybe the Government House Leader

could comment on that, if he gets a chance, and I'll remind him again before I

finish up to see if he can reference that.

One of

the problems is, come July, I would anticipate the House will no longer be

sitting and probably the group that that will be consulted more than any other

segment of our population will be Members of the House. If they don't become

effective or start their work until July, I think it's quite conceivable to

expect that Members will be gone back to their districts by July, people will be

back in their own districts by July, and it will be much more difficult and

challenging for the Members' Compensation Review Committee to actually meet with

elected Members of the House.

Then

they have 120 days to report, and the motion goes on to say that they'll report

by November 4, which is, generally speaking, before the House reconvenes in the

fall. So I'll ask the Government House Leader, maybe he can comment on that. So

just outline for him to make sure that he understands what I'm asking if he gets

a chance to get up again, the appointment is not effective until July 7,

effectively after the House no longer will be sitting. It will make it much more

challenging for members of the committee to meet with Members of the House of

Assembly. They'll have 120 days to report by November 4, and likely before the

House of Assembly sits again. So maybe the Member opposite can explain to the

House why the delay in the effectiveness of the appointment.

Mr.

Speaker, I mentioned, and I'll mention again, the importance for all Members to

participate in this process, because we all have different circumstances that

brought us here. As we considered and thought about running for public office,

some people here have considered it and thought about it it has been on their

mines their entire lives, about running for public office.

remember when the Minister of Transportation spoke in his maiden speech, and he

talked about it. He talked about where he was and the point of his life. He

talked about the years where he thought about it. He talked about where he is in

his life today, and his family and his grandchildren, and the impacts on him

giving up what he had going on in his life at the time to come here to the House

is different from other Members of the House. We are all different.

I think

it's important for Members to participate in a process, to have a discussion

with the committee and sit down and I remember when I met with Judge Brazil.

When I sat with her, one of the first things she said to me was: Paul, what I'm

going to do is I'm going to make everybody's comments to be independent but also

I'm not disclosing your personal circumstances to anybody.

remember reading through her report in 2012-2013. I think it was November or

December of 2012 that she actually tabled her report November it was. I

remember reading through the report, and she was very careful not to identify

Members' individual circumstances. She did it in a way whereby people could

appreciate the point that was being made without being able to identify who the

particular MHA was or what their particular circumstance was, but I was quite

comfortable in discussing my own circumstances in some detail. As a matter of

fact, she asked a lot of questions about it. She was quite interested to know.

I'm glad she did it that way, and I'm sure this new commission will do the same.

support the nominees: Sandra Burke, Kathy LeGrow and Jeffrey Pardy. Our caucus

will be fully there to assist them and do what we can to accommodate them as

they go through the role.

The

Government House Leader as well, he was talking about the timing. The last

report timing was very similar. It was appointed in April, and the report was

submitted by Judge Brazil in November of 2012 appointed in late April. She

started her work very quickly, if I remember correctly. I could stand to be

corrected on that, but she started her work, did her work and submitted her

report in November. So the timeline for this one would be similar, only that

there's a delay in why the appointment would become effective.

I'm not

sure if the act requires that, other than the motion requires it. That they

report within 120 days but it not start effectively until July 7. There may be a

benefit to starting now, where the committee could meet with MHAs and so on that

may not be available during July or August to come back into the House of

Assembly for the purpose of meeting with the commission, or travelling to one of

the areas where I'm sure they will do public meetings and public consultation

sessions.

Mr.

Speaker, that's my conclusion. We'll be supporting the motion. We support the

process and the reason for it.

We know

this is done every General Assembly. Every time there's an election I think

it's six months after the election it's required that we do this.

In this

case, we're doing it within six months after the election; however, the delay in

the appointment is the only question I have. I'm not sure that was the intent of

the process to just bring the motion before the House within six months, but

also to enact and have the committee working within six months. This resolution

is to delay that. I'm sure the Government House Leader will explain that to us.

Thank

you very much for the time, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I'm

happy to stand and speak today to this resolution. As has been pointed out by

the Government House Leader, I'm one of the longer standing or sitting Members

in the House not the longest, I defer to the Speaker but I am one. So this

is my third time speaking to this similar resolution.

I was in

the House when the House of Assembly

Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act was put in place. As a

matter of fact, my very first summer as leader of my party, which was the summer

of 2006, I was not yet elected as an MHA. That didn't happen until November 2006

for the first time in a by-election.

The

summer of 2006, I was the leader of my party and working as the leader of my

party. In actual fact, I got in on the consultations with Judge Green. He

respected my position as leader of the party, though I wasn't elected, and was

able to sit and have a chat with him about the work that he was doing. That was

great that I was able to do that. I was part then, of the legislation when we

took the act that he actually wrote with the staff that worked with him, and

brought and approved that here in the House of Assembly.

This is

extremely important. One of the things that a lot of people, even in our own

province, and especially in Canada, don't realize is because of the act that

came in after the work done by Chief Justice Green, we have one of the most open

and accountable Legislatures in the country.

As was

pointed out by the Government House Leader, everything we do is open. The money

we spend is all accounted for publicly. People can get the information they need

to get to know how we are spending the public money, how we are spending for the

good of the people of the province and how we operate. The decisions that we

make in the House Management Commission are public decisions. We are accountable

on a level that is not seen in many of the Legislatures in this country. I think

we should be proud of that and I think we should let it be known more widely and

more openly.

Sometimes we'll hear of something happening in another Legislature and I sit and

I think, they should be reading our legislation. They need to do the kind of

cleaning up of the house that we did. Obviously, we did it under duress in the

sense that we had a major issue here in our House of Assembly that forced us to

recognize that we needed to look at how things were run and we needed to clean

up that House and that's what happened. We will continue to do that.

So this

thing of having an external body, an external group it could be an individual

as it was the last time in 2011. An external look at who we are as Members and

at our compensation, whether we're talking about our salaries, whether we're

talking about our pensions, whether we're talking about our accommodations when

Members of the House of Assembly are in the St. John's region for when the

Legislature is open, whether we're talking about getting compensation for travel

that we do as MHAs, having to go to other parts of the province and sometimes

outside of the province to do the work that we've been elected to do, that all

of that is looked at by this committee.

I think

it is extremely important that, again, we let the people of the province know

that this is not done everywhere else in the country. In actual fact, before

2011 well, before the act was put in place we didn't do it either. It was an

internal committee. It wasn't called the House management committee then. It had

a different name, the internal economy committee, which was an in-house

committee of MHAs who made all those decisions privately. Now we do it

completely openly. We are out there for people to see and we have this external

committee, and I'm really glad that we're back to a committee. Judge Brazil did

a great job, but I feel like it's much better to have more than one head looking

at stuff when we're talking about this kind of thing. So having a committee of

three, I think, is a really good way to go.

It's a

sharing of wisdom, a sharing of observations and I thank the government for

consulting with us, letting us know who they were proposing to be on this

committee. I think we do have three people who have the expertise that we need.

Now one

other thing I'd like to talk about before I go on to talking to the role of the

people of the province. One of the things that's in the review this time that I

think is very important is that the committee is asked to review and make

recommendations regarding the additional salary provisions for positions

identified in subsection 12(1) of the

House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act .

There

was a point in time earlier this year, some months ago, when there was public

debate about these positions, positions like the party Whip or the Chair of the

caucus. The legislation allows for a number of positions. I think it's extremely

important that this committee is asked to review and make recommendations

regarding the additional provisions for positions identified in the

section in

the House that refers to th