PDF Version

April 13, 2016

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVIII No. 12

The

House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Osborne):

Order, please!

Admit

strangers.

understand we have a group in the gallery, which I'm about to read out. We'd

like to welcome to the gallery today a group of students from Keyin College, the

business and human resource program. The instructor is Paulette Sampson.

Welcome.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

MR. SPEAKER:

Today we have Members'

statements from the Members for the District of Conception Bay East Bell

Island, Placentia West Bellevue, Virginia Waters Pleasantville, Cape St.

Francis, Exploits and Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

recognize the Member for the District of Conception Bay East Bell Island.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

today to acknowledge and congratulate a new organization in my district. I speak

of the Paradise Minor Hockey Association. In 2004, Paradise was granted a minor

hockey association contingent on a number of conditions being met. It took 11

years for all conditions to be met, which included the building of the Paradise

Double Ice Complex.

With

this facility open, the next

chapter in the establishment of the Paradise Minor

Hockey Association was to have an executive put in place to organize the

2015-2016 hockey season. Under the leadership of President Chris Griffiths, the

entire executive and a number of volunteers, the first season of the Paradise

Minor Hockey Association was very entertaining and successful. The association

had nearly 500 registered players in their first year, competing in all

categories of the minor system.

February, after calling for the public's input into the name of the

association's teams, it was decided that the association name would be Warrior.

In typical Paradise fanfare, the logo and name was unveiled by the president in

front of hundreds of supporters.

I ask

all Members to join me in congratulating the Paradise Minor Hockey Association

on a successful first season.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Placentia West Bellevue.

MR. BROWNE:

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in

this hon. House, not in celebration of a happy event, but in recognition and

appreciation of the work volunteer firefighters do across Newfoundland and

Labrador.

On March

22, a vehicle crash on the Trans-Canada Highway near the Long Harbour-Chapel Arm

intersection claimed the lives of five people one of the worse highway

tragedies our province has seen in recent memory. Twelve first responders of the

Norman's Cove-Long Cove Volunteer Fire Department rushed to the scene from their

home and from their jobs.

accident of this magnitude would be difficult to witness even for experienced,

career emergency responders. As we mark Volunteer Week, I ask all Members of

this House to join with me in recognizing the invaluable and difficult role

played by volunteer firefighters in our communities who step up to the plate in

the face of challenge and adversity.

especially ask Members to join me in saluting members of the Norman's Cove-Long

Cove Volunteer Fire Department. For their selfless efforts, they deserve our

sincere recognition, gratitude and respect.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Virginia Waters Pleasantville.

MR. B. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House to recognize a pioneer in the fight for better health care in

the developing world. Dr. Robert Walley is an emeritus professor of Obstetrics

and Gynecology at Memorial University, and is founder and executive director of

MaterCare International. MaterCare is a charitable organization headquartered in

St. John's, operating with the mission to bring obstetric care to some of the

poorest regions of the world.

Dr.

Walley's expertise in the field of maternal health care in the developing

regions of Africa has earned him international recognition, including a papal

medal. On March 17, Dr. Walley was selected as a panellist for a side event at

the United Nations during its 60th session of the Commission on the Status of

Women. He delivered a presentation that advocated on behalf of mothers who are

suffering due to inadequate obstetric care in their home regions. This

presentation, aimed at bringing greater awareness to the Western world of this

vital issue, was the latest in an outreach effort that he's championed for

decades.

I ask

hon. Members in this House to join me in recognizing Dr. Walley for his

humanitarian advocacy and his long-standing effort to bring accessible maternal

health care to the developing world.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Member for the District

of Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House today to congratulate the organizers of the 2016 Snowfest

celebrations in the Towns of Flatrock and Pouch Cove. The time and dedication of

many volunteers have made this event a success again this year.

I had

the pleasure of bringing greetings at the opening ceremonies, during which

marvelous talent and incredible community spirit was shared. It was fantastic to

see the joy and excitement from the children and the families in attendance.

Snowfest

is filled with fun activities for all ages, which includes a kid's pajama movie

party, craft fair, ice fishing derby, community skate and a delicious hot roast

beef dinner hosted by the Pouch Cove Lions Club. There was also a kids' bingo,

card games, a scavenger hunt, youth musical showcase, heritage society contest,

tea and bake sale and an adult dance.

Our

seniors also had special activities to attend, like bowling and the seniors'

food celebration, which offered a healthy living workshop. Organizers, with the

assistance of the Volunteer Fire Department, hosted a bonfire night at the beach

in Flatrock with storytelling and refreshments.

Please

join with me in congratulating the organizers and volunteers for this fantastic

Snowfest celebration.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Member for the District

of Exploits.

MR. DEAN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

today in this hon. House, midway through Volunteer Week, to acknowledge the past

and ongoing efforts of the thousands of volunteers in the District of Exploits

and throughout our province. Day in and day out, without pay or fanfare, devoted

volunteers bring their talents, compassion and time to our tables.

For

communities across the province, volunteerism is an essential component of

society. Volunteers enrich communities and make them safer and more welcoming

places for us all to call home. It helps to strengthen trust and solidarity

amongst participants and recipients and it encourages greater community

participation.

An aging

population, smaller families and outmigration are all contributing to declining

numbers in our volunteer ranks. In spite of this, and to the benefit of

communities across the District of Exploits, and the rest of the province, there

is a firm resolve by those remaining. They show a continued willingness to forge

ahead in their unselfish pursuit of making things better for others. Their

continued efforts greatly enhance our quality of life and add to the moral

fabric of our society.

I ask

all hon. Members to join with me in thanking our faithful volunteers for their

profound benefit to all of our communities.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Member for District of

Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

MS. DEMPSTER:

Thank you.

Mr.

Speaker, today I rise to recognize an outstanding citizen of Labrador, nurse

Isabel Rumbolt of Mary's Harbour.

A young

nurse from Glasgow, Scotland, Isabel came to Mary's Harbour in 1973 to provide

health care. She extended her service to include the north and south coast.

In 1975,

when a medical clinic opened in Charlottetown, my hometown, she was our first

nurse, and a phenomenal one at that, I might add.

In 1976

she married school teacher Reg Rumbolt. She not only married the love of her

life, she also in many respects married Labrador.

In 1998,

Isabel set out to do something special. Along with Barb Rumbolt, they came up

with the idea of building a senior's home in the region. In 2004 that dream

became a reality. Today nurse Rumbolt serves as chair of the board of Harborview

Manor, and she is tireless in her commitments to the residents.

She is

also an amazing volunteer in many areas. She works hard for her church, for

seniors' groups like the knitting club, and for many years has taught guitar

lessons to the youth of the region.

Nurse

Isabel is a true Labrador treasure, and I ask all hon. Members to join me in

offering our heartfelt thanks to Isi for her outstanding contribution to her

adopted homeland, Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

The Commemoration

of the First World War and the Battle of Beaumont-Hamel

MR. SPEAKER:

Today for Honour 100 we have

the Member for the District of Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

I will now read into the

record the following 43 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: John Thomas Ellsworth, Walter Emberley, George Emberly, Hugh S. England,

Gordon Etheridge, Richard Etheridge, Henry Evans, Hubert Evans, John Evans,

Joseph Wellington Evans, Leonard Evans, Nicholas Evans , Francis Evoy,

Joseph Ezekiel, Stephen Fallon, Joseph Farewell, Martin Patrick Farrell, Patrick

Joseph Farrell, John Roy Ferguson, Stewart Small Ferguson, James Joseph Fever,

Lawrence Joseph Fewer, John Field, Charles Fields, Frederick Fifield, Frank

Fillier, Ernest Fisher, John Fitzgerald, Thomas Joseph Fitzgerald, Alphonsus

Fitzpatrick, David Flannigan, Richard Fleming, Richard Fleming, Dominic Foaley,

Albert Folks, Albert Follett, Elias Ford, Gerald Ford, James Ford, Stephen

Fortune, William Fortune, Norman Forward and William Fowler.

(Moment of silence.)

MR. SPEAKER:

Please be seated.

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The

hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday a fire destroyed the Quinlan

Brothers' shrimp and crab processing plant in Bay de Verde. This afternoon, the

Premier, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and I will visit the town to witness

first-hand the impact of this devastating fire.

I would like to begin by recognizing the incredible work of

the volunteers and communities who came together during this time of need. I was

in Bay be Verde on Monday and was overwhelmed by the support. The first

responders were on the scene, working tirelessly to extinguish the flames,

including neighbouring fire departments. Town councils, community groups,

schools and residents assisted in any way they could to help those affected.

During our visit, Mr. Speaker, we hope to speak with the

residents of Bay de Verde and hear their concerns. We are also meeting with

Quinlan Brothers to discuss arrangements to process their crab purchases and

redeploy plant workers to nearby plants.

Mr. Speaker, we will continue to engage with those involved

including residents, plant workers and Quinlan Brothers. We are committed to

working with the company as they move forward with short-term options and as

they make long-term decisions about the future of their operation. This is truly

a terrible loss for the region and, during this very difficult time, we will

remain committed to doing everything we can to help the workers, the company and

the communities.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The

hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for an advance

copy of his statement. We, too, join with the people of the province and realize

what happened on Monday was very devastating to the people of Bay de Verde, the

Quinlan company, family and anyone in the surrounding areas that worked in the

plant. We realize that there are 700 workers out there and it is one of the

major industries in the area. As a matter of fact, one of the largest processing

plants in the province and the huge effect it has on the people in the area.

We, too,

want to thank all the volunteers. It is something that we are as people in

Newfoundland and Labrador, whenever devastation comes to our communities it

always seems that we get together and do our best. There is no sweat to get

volunteers to come out. I believe there were nine different volunteer fire

departments that responded. They even came from 100 kilometres away.

Any time

that we see something like this, it's important that we all work together to

make sure that the people that need our help are there. We understand the crab

fishery started just recently and this has a devastating effect on a lot of

people in the area because unemployment is running out and it is a source of

income for these families.

It is

very important that both sides and everyone in this province work together to

help these people in their time of need.

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. The people of the community of Bay de Verde and the workers who lost

their jobs with Monday's devastating fire are in all our thoughts of course.

It's a miracle that no one, including first responders, was physically hurt. The

truth, however, is that many will be hurting financially.

I was really pleased to see the minister say that he will

remain committed, he and his government, to doing everything they can to help

the workers, which I point out was a bit of a change from the original draft we

got and I'm glad to see the change. We are going to need to find tangible

financial solutions to ensure workers are properly looked after until the new

plant opens.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

MS. COADY: Mr.

Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to provide details on two recent Call

for Bids issued by the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum

Board.

The calls include 13 parcels in the eastern Newfoundland

region and three parcels in the Jeanne d'Arc region. Under the new Scheduled

Land Tenure System, four of the 13 parcels are being reintroduced and have been

made available in the 2016 call.

This province's offshore offers some the best prospects of

any frontier regions in the world, and our government is actively engaged in

creating conditions for increased exploration and development that ensures we

maximize value to benefit Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

The previous Call for Bids in November 2015 resulted in a

total value of $1.2 billion in work commitments for seven of the 11 parcels

offshore. This was the largest total bid ever in the Newfoundland and Labrador

offshore area, and demonstrates that we have a great opportunity for further

exploration and development.

The November 2015 bid has already resulted in drilling. As

one of the successful bidders, Statoil was issued an exploration licence in

January 2016 and, by March, had already begun drilling a well.

Our government looks forward to a positive 2016 Call for

Bids as we create an environment that captures the full potential of

Newfoundland and Labrador's offshore petroleum industry.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The

hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly want to thank the minister for an advance copy

of her statement. Despite some of the volatile oil prices we see today and some

of the challenges we have, the offshore industry in Newfoundland and Labrador is

certainly well positioned for the future when we look at the reserves we have

offshore and the seismic work we have done and what that is indicating.

As mentioned by the minister as well, in 2015 there were

record-breaking bids. About $1.2 billion in work commitments for seven of the 11

offshore parcels was received at that time. I'm certainly optimistic that this

year's bids, as well, will be equally as significant.

The minister mentioned Statoil. In the near future, we

would certainly look to have an update on negotiations with Statoil and how

those are progressing. As well, I wanted to point out in reference to the

(inaudible) Law of the Sea, as we expand our oil explorations and productions,

there is a 7 per cent growing royalty there that we believe is rested with the

and certainly hope the minister follows up and adheres to that as well.

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 her

statement. This announcement is exciting news for government and our offshore

industry, and for the people of the province. I hope we see as good, if not

better, results from this round of land sales. Despite the current slump in oil

prices, I believe our offshore industry will continue to be of great benefit to

our province down the road.

Also, it is good to hear hopeful news from government today

instead of the endless doom and gloom they have been manufacturing.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to highlight an important

partnership between Child, Youth and Family Services and the Dave Thomas

Foundation for Adoption.

This foundation is a national American non-profit public

charity with the mission of dramatically increasing the adoptions of children

from North America's foster care systems. Through the foundation's Wendy's

Wonderful Kids Program, grants are awarded to public and private adoption

agencies to hire child-specific recruiters. These recruiters implement

proactive, child-focused recruitment programs targeted exclusively at moving the

longest-waiting children from foster care

into adoptive families.

In June

2014, the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services obtained a grant to

contribute towards hiring its own child-specific recruiter. Our recruiter

receives ongoing training from the foundation to help employ practices and

proven tactics focused on finding the best home for a child through the starting

points of familiar circles of family, friends and neighbours, and then reaching

out to the communities in which they live.

The

department is now in its second grant year and, to date, almost 10 children have

been successfully matched and are in various stages of the adoption process as

they move towards having a permanent and forever home. As Dave Thomas once said,

These children are not someone else's responsibility. They are our

responsibility. And it's time to take action.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like

to thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement. We join with Members

opposite in recognizing this important relationship between the Newfoundland and

Labrador government and the Dave Thomas Foundation.

Mr.

Speaker, we know that there are more than 30,000 children in Canada who are

waiting in foster care for, as their website says, their forever families. Every

child deserves a loving, stable home, a home that provides a safe environment

that allows them thrive. The service offered by the Dave Thomas Foundation does

a fantastic job of ensuring that happens for so many, but it is only a single

piece of a much larger puzzle.

We all

too aware that much more work remains and there are numerous challenges we face.

We have so many children in this province alone who are in foster care. Let's

continue with every effort to have those children and youth find a loving,

adoptive family. They deserve nothing less.

I'd like

to thank the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services for acknowledging an

important partnership facilitated by our administration. We are all very glad to

see that they are continuing to support it. I would be remiss if I never took

this opportunity to also acknowledge the fantastic work of those in the field of

adoptions, many of whom work with the Department of Child, Youth and Family

Services.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MS. PERRY:

The job you do is so

important and we cannot thank you enough.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Member for the District

of St. John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too,

thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement. It is good to hear that

the hiring of a social worker as a child-specific recruiter is producing results

results on behalf of the children.

Three

years ago the new Adoption Act

expanded the definition of family members who can adopt and changes were made to

speed up the process. It is also crucial that government continue to support the

Poverty Reduction Strategy to ensure that no child grows up or lives in poverty

and that no family is broken up due to poverty or the lack of supports for

families.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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, along with other oil-producing provinces like Alberta and Saskatchewan,

our province faces significant financial challenges. We are by no means in a

unique situation.

I ask

the Premier today if he is confident that he has made every available effort to

lobby the federal government for additional funding and additional assistance,

and will extra funding and support from the federal government be identified in

tomorrow's budget?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well,

there are obviously ongoing negotiations with our federal colleagues, and we've

talked about that quite a bit in this House of Assembly. We, and all our

ministers, are engaged in whatever opportunities are available to us to bring

more benefit to Newfoundland and Labrador. This is what we are engaged in.

I find

it, again, ironic that the Leader of the Opposition continues to raise this when

they were virtually shut out of and had a number of opportunities that they

themselves even with the Small Communities Fund, as an example, just last

year, which they did not even go after, nearly $35 million that was available to

them. The CETA fund is another example, which they could not close those deals.

We've

been there now about four months and we've made significant advancements with

the federal government, and we will continue to do that because we know that

Ottawa will be and can be a part of the solution; but the bigger part of the

solution for our problems is to actually proper plan and proper manage the

affairs of this province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We well

know that the communities fund is a 10-year fund. It's not going to expire

anytime in the near future. The government's going to have lots of time to

anticipate and to involve themselves in that fund. I suppose the next part of

the blame game will be them saying that we're also responsible for Alberta and

Saskatchewan's circumstances.

Mr.

Speaker, the Premier claimed only just a few short months ago that his Liberal

government would make a one-time investment of $8 million in 2016, and that

would create a return of $78.9 million this year.

I ask

the Premier: Will this plan be laid out in budget 2016, and will the revenue

they claimed they could deliver on be included in the budget, the expected

revenue for 2016?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

noticed yesterday you made comment to the House of Assembly about being concise

in our questions and answers, and I'm going to try and do that. So within a 45

second time frame, unless you give me more time, I would like to remind the

leader opposite that back in 2009 and 2014 they missed two opportunities to

actually renegotiate and talk more with their federal colleagues about

equalization. Guess what, Mr. Speaker? They did not. They did not even get

involved in any of those discussions. Yet, when they talk about the blame game,

they come to us today and talk about things and actions that we should be doing.

They refused to get involved in that.

I also

want to remind the leader opposite that Saskatchewan is actually not in that bad

a position. They planned for the position they're in. They are nearing a

balanced budget right now, even with the volatility they have in their own

economy, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

He may

have made an effort to be more specific to answering the question, but he wasn't

very specific in answering the question. I will give him another chance to do

that I'll give you another chance. You made a claim a few months ago that an

$8 million investment would create a return this year of $78.9 million.

The

question is very simple: Will we see that revenue in this year's budget?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There

are a number of different things that we're going to see in tomorrow's budget

when it comes to how we create some economic diversification in our province. I

just mentioned Saskatchewan. It was actually just a few months ago they were

mentioned because of the great work that they had done in terms of economic

diversification within their own province. That was a government that had

realized you cannot focus all your attention on commodities like oil. They took

the advantage, in some ways, to actually create investment in other areas.

You can

see this government will take an approach to look at all the industries, all the

opportunities that we have available to us. We will make the necessary

investments where we see we will get the return for Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I really

believe and truly believe that the people expect and deserve more than the

inaccurate history lessons and blame games that are going on opposite, Mr.

Speaker. So I'll try this one because the Premier is also on the record that his

one-time investment of $8 million would return $360 million over four years, a

10,000 per cent return on investment.

Just to

remind him in case he's forgotten, a MUN professor who has a Ph.D. in

mathematics, Tom Baird, called the Liberal promise gibberish and magical

thinking. An editorial said, It is in the realm of flying reindeer and dancing

broomsticks.

I ask

the Premier once again: Will the revenue that he's projected resulting from the

$8 million investment be in this year's budget? If he wants to give the answer,

it is very simple. Yes or no, will we see that in this year's budget?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When we

stand in this House of Assembly, when we talk about inaccurate history lessons

that's the professor now that we need to be taking lessons from about the

economy in our province? Actually, I would say that based on the experience of

the previous administration with the financial affairs of this province, they

are the ones that probably needed a history lesson on how actually to properly

manage the affairs of our province.

Also, I

would say it was in this very chair right here that the past, former minister of

Finance said that math wasn't his forte. I can tell you what; if there was

anything that proven right, it was that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER BALL:

I say, Mr. Speaker, we will

bring a budget to this House tomorrow afternoon, to the people of our province.

Based on the lessons that we have learned from their experience, we will do

what's right for Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

sounds like another no from the Premier, that it won't be included this year. I

guess it's another promise they won't be keeping and that the people won't have

to look forward to in tomorrow's budget, or even in budget number two this fall

for that matter.

Mr.

Speaker, in last year's budget our administration included a list of priority

infrastructure projects. People that we're hearing from are expressing their

concern about this year's budget in many ways, but also very concerned about the

status of projects and projects that they believe and fear may be cancelled or

delayed in this year's budget including, we already know, the Springdale health

centre is being delayed. We're hearing concerns about Coley's Point school. We

know there are concerns about the development of long-term care, also the

Trans-Labrador Highway needs investment.

So I ask

the Premier: Can you advise or confirm for us if a list of infrastructure

projects and timelines will be included in this year's budget?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There

will be major infrastructure investments into the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador. So when the Member opposite speaks about delays in infrastructure, I'm

just surprised that he raises some of those because they were the very projects

that they delayed for many years.

The

budget tomorrow will outline infrastructure investments that we will make into

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and information about where those

investments are, what will be jointly shared with our federal colleagues.

So we

recognize an investment in infrastructure in our province is important. Number

one, it's important to keep the economy moving. Therefore, tomorrow's budget

will outline many not just about infrastructure of the things that we plan

to do in the future for our province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, before Easter we asked the Minister of Finance if she would be keeping

her election promise to achieve $50 million in revenue from the sale of unused

assets. The minister said these decisions could not be rushed but her election

plan promised $50 million in revenue in this fiscal year.

I ask

the minister: In the budget tomorrow, have you determined which assets your

government will be selling this year, and will your plan and list be laid out in

budget one on Thursday, or budget two in this fall?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

I thank the Member opposite

for the question. I look forward to answering all the questions on the details

of the budget when the budget is released to the people of the province, which

will happen tomorrow.

When it

comes to decisions about the sale of assets that the government currently owns,

those decisions will be made when we review the assets that we have available.

We make decisions in the best interests of the people of the province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I remind

the minister that the commitment was made for this fiscal year, for the $50

million of assets to be disposed and it would be a revenue generator for this

fiscal year.

Are you

saying that's not the case, they won't be shown this year as $50 million in

revenues as you indicated you could do and would do in this fiscal year?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, the Member

opposite is certainly aware of the budget process. Tomorrow as we unveil the

budget and we take the other actions that we're going to take over the course of

the next number of months to correct the fiscal situation that the province

finds itself in today, based on the actions of former administrations, we'll

certainly be making the information public to the people of the province when we

make those decisions.

Our

intention is to make sure that any assets that are not generating cash or have

cash stranded in them are made available to use for the people of the province

so we can lower the amount of borrowing that we're doing. Nobody in this House

I'm sure, the people of the province don't want us to be investing and spending

money when we don't need to borrow. Certainly if there are opportunities to sell

assets to get money, we will do that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

So I guess the answer is no,

Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, a December 22 directive spoke about the reduction of consultants used

by government.

I ask

the Minister of Finance: How many consultant contracts have been eliminated

since your December 22 directive?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, that one's a

relatively easy one. Every consultant contract that we didn't need was the ones

that we eliminated.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Mr. Speaker, the question was

how many. So you know the ones that were eliminated, how many were eliminated?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, every minister

and every deputy minister and leader of an agency, board and commission was

directed to take a look at consultants that they might be using and, in all

cases, those decisions were left to and encouraged and followed up on by

Finance. We certainly encourage those departments, agencies, boards and

commissions to continue to take very clear analysis of whether or not they are

going to use consultants.

To the

Member opposite if he would like to get a detailed list of all the consultants

that we use or we don't use, he can certainly drop by my office and we'll have

that chat.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

So she doesn't know. She said

there was ones that were cancelled but she can't give us the numbers of which

ones they were.

Mr.

Speaker, the Ernst & Young report yesterday on Muskrat Falls, the Minister of

Natural Resources indicated that she would accept all of Ernst & Young's

recommendations.

I ask

the minister: Has she lost faith in the oversight committee chaired by the

Clerk, as well the Nalcor leadership team, as she indicated she would

automatically accept all the recommendations?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

Ernst & Young did an incredibly important piece of work for the province. It was

very important to have this independent review of the Muskrat Falls Project, and

of course, as I indicated yesterday, the cost

schedule is being re-baselined and

we hope some components of it will be available by the end of May.

Regarding the oversight committee and the project governance, we are

strengthening project governance and we will be expanding the oversight

committee. As Ernst & Young cited in its report, its recommendation was that we

have independence on the oversight committee, and that is something we will be

doing.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I remind the minister that Ernst & Young was involved in the prior

quarter oversight committee report. So they were already involved in oversight

in regard to Muskrat Falls and involved with it through the oversight committee.

Again, I

ask her: Based on your suggestions yesterday that all recommendations after the

$1.7 million you spent or maybe more, you'd automatically accept those

recommendations. Are you going to do those in isolation of the oversight

committee now, Nalcor management team, and do you have that confidence still in

the management team and the oversight committee that now exists?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

As I said, Mr. Speaker, we

will be adopting all recommendations that are in the interim EY report that was

released yesterday. That specifically does mention project governance, and we

will be working on expanding and improving upon project governance. We will be

adding independence and expanding the oversight committee, as was requested in

the EY report.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Mr. Speaker, my understanding

is Ernst & Young had access to the information with Nalcor.

I'm just

wondering if the minister could identify what information her and her officials

couldn't get access to that Ernst & Young was needed to get access to that

information?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you for the question. It wasn't a matter of access to information. The former

government had access to information. It was very important for this new

government in its earliest days to have an independent review of the Muskrat

Falls Project. EY brought in experts that had been involved in massive projects,

public sector projects. They have a depth of expertise. They reviewed and

compared and reviewed the costs and

schedule from September, 2015. They will be

reviewing the re-baseline. They had some excellent recommendations to Nalcor, as

well as to this government, and we will be 'actioning' all those

recommendations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Mr. Speaker, only a couple of

weeks ago government released the What We

Are Hearing document. This document notes: shutting down rural health

clinics, forced amalgamation and centralization of services. The Minister

Responsible for the Office of Public Engagement stated that the ideas would be

made into actions that will be reflected into the budget this Thursday, this

fall and in the budget next year.

I ask

the minister: How much of this document will be acted upon in budget number one

on Thursday versus budget number two this fall? Which budget will be an attack

on rural Newfoundland?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Thank

you for your question. Yes, we did, indeed, release a

What We Are Hearing document. It was exactly what we were hearing.

Over a

thousand people took time from their busy lives to come share with this new

government some of the things they thought were important, changes that they

think should be enacted. It was a discussion document. It was, as it was titled,

what we are hearing. It did not necessarily mean that it will all show up in a

budget document or that it would all show up in terms of what we are going to be

able to implement.

It was

what we were hearing. It was a reflection of those ideas.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Member for Fortune Bay

Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Mr. Speaker, in reading the

document there's a reoccurring theme that singles out rural Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians; items such as forced amalgamations, sharing or eliminating of

local services and reductions in health care.

Given

that rural Newfoundland and Labrador represents 51 per cent of our population, I

ask the minister: If these suggestions are turned into actions, how hard will

rural Newfoundland and Labrador be hit when you finally make some decisions?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you very much for the

question. I appreciate it, Mr. Speaker.

The

people of this province, over a thousand people in this province came out to a

number of sessions we held around the province. Some 30,000 people went on the

app that we had available to them so they could have a dialogue.

This was

raw data that we were able to reflect in the

What We Are Hearing . It is exactly what we were hearing from the

people of this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. It was their suggestions,

their ideas. We committed to ensuring that we produced a document of what we

were hearing and we've done just that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, Monday when I asked, the Minister of Transportation was quick to boast

about the new process adopted by this government. He promised to take the

politics out of roadwork. All was going well until the minister admitted he sent

a list to the Premier for approval before sign-off.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask the minister: How is sending a list to the Premier for sign-off

taking the politics out of anything?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

MR. HAWKINS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like

to thank the Member opposite for his question and let him understand that it

went to the Premier's Office and the Premier did not make any changes.

As a

matter of fact, contrary to what the Member was saying, the last question that

he asked in the House was the fact that he had some idea that we weren't giving

the information. I want to point out, Mr. Speaker, that we indeed gave that

information. Not only did we give the information of the number of roads that

we're doing, we also printed the format and the criteria that we use to

determine what roads were going to be used and what needed repairs.

The

Member opposite should really start looking and doing his homework and seeing

what's going on and what we're doing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have

another question. I'm going to come back to that, minister, but I wanted another

go at this politics question.

promise to taking politics out of the process is reminiscent of the Liberals

flawed signature piece of legislation currently before the House in Bill 1. You

promised a process of merit-based, non-political decision making but in reality

offered nothing but window dressing.

I ask

the Minister of Transportation and Works once more: Who directed you to send the

list for the 40 district to the Premier for sign-off?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

MR. HAWKINS:

Mr. Speaker, I can fully

understand why the Members opposite have a real problem in understanding how you

take politics out of this, what we are doing. I really have a real problem with

that.

It went

to the minister because we have the courtesy when we are Cabinet ministers, we

have the courtesy of informing the Premier of what we're doing. We don't leave

the Premier in the dark. So part of the process is that when the roads came to

me, I signed off on them without making any changes. They went to the Premier's

Office so that he would be well aware of what we were going to be announcing.

Let me

tell you something, the Premier did not change anything there. We announced the

roads without political interference for the first time in the history of this

province, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for his response. I'm not sure if politics was taken out of

anything but I'll stick to that.

I'm

going to ask another question that will probably tie it all together again.

AN HON. MEMBER:

That will be helpful.

MR. PETTEN:

Yes, it will be helpful.

Why an

ATIPP request provided a short list of approved roadwork projects? It was almost

a little bit bigger than a postage stamp. It completely failed to provide a

complete list of all the projects. I do have experience in that department. I do

know what the priority list is like, it's pretty extensive. Why wasn't the list

with all the projects (inaudible) an entire priority list shown? No.

I ask

the Minister of Transportation and Works: In the spirit of openness and

transparency, will you now table the entire I don't care which ones were

approved the entire list with the scores attached?

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

MR. HAWKINS:

Mr. Speaker, thank you to the

Member opposite for his question.

Again,

I'll state that I know the way in which we are doing things is being open and

transparent. I know it's very difficult for the Members opposite to understand

that process, but what we are doing is we are not doing it piecemeal. We are

looking at a broader picture when we look at infrastructure.

Part of

what we did, we are actually doing $18 million of work that this particular

government failed when they put tenders out in September knowing quite well that

the work wasn't going to be done in 2015. As a result of that, Mr. Speaker, we

now have to pick up the work that they didn't complete last time. We're working

with that and we will also work on the infrastructure piece that we have going

forward that we have put to the new Building Canada Fund and also to the federal

government to try to look for funding. That's what we are going to be doing, Mr.

Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

So I guess the minister is

not going to supply the list. That's what all that just meant.

Mr.

Speaker, the minister's statement today talked about the devastation in Bay de

Verde. I understand, and I think it's great that the minister, the Minister of

Municipal Affairs and the Premier will be out in that community this evening. As

I stated in my comments, a lot of people, 700 people were employed in this

plant. This is the time of year when the crab season starts, unemployment is

over and people are really in desperate need.

I'd like

to ask the minister: What programs are you going to be offering the people of

Bay de Verde and the people who work in these communities to assist them,

because this is a real serious time of need for these people?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the Member for his question. I would like to take a moment, Mr. Speaker, to

thank all Members of the House on both sides

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CROCKER:

for the genuine concern

they have shown for the people affected in Monday's fire.

I say to

the Member opposite, like he reiterated, the Premier, Minister Joyce and myself

will be in Bay de Verde this afternoon and we will be meeting with the company,

the town and other stakeholders involved to get a better grasp on the numbers of

people that are going to need assistance. If the Member wishes, we will

certainly update him as soon as the information becomes available on those

numbers.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis for a very quick question.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Oh, a very quick question.

Mr.

Speaker, 700 people were really affected. Harvesters are also really affected.

The crab fishery started I know in my own area fishermen only went to the

water on Monday for the first time.

I am

wondering if the minister knows the contingency plans that are in place with

Quinlan Brothers. And can he show the House that none of the crab will be sent

off to another province or anywhere else to be processed?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, to the question of the raw material, Quinlan Brothers has been very

active in the past two or three days making sure their buy of raw material is

allocated to plants throughout the province. That's one of their main concerns.

In a release yesterday to the media, they've reassured their harvesters they

will continue to purchase their product and ensure their product is processed to

the best interests of the people that were already employees of their

facilities.

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.

Nalcor

CEO Ed Martin has said Muskrat Falls construction contracts were unit priced and

that those prices were fixed, helping to provide some cost certainty for the

project budget. EY reports that, in reality, the MFG concrete contract is based

on person hours of labour expended, rather than the amount of concrete poured.

I ask

the Premier: Is Mr. Martin right and EY wrong, or are EY right and Mr. Martin

wrong?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

Muskrat Falls Project, there are a number of different components to it. There

would be, essentially, about eight major contractors when you look at the

project in a general sense. The one that the Member opposite is referring to,

which would be around the powerhouse and the work that's done by a major

contractor, that actual budget or that tender package is actually divided into a

couple of different components. One would be around person-hours, and the second

one would be around materials, or essentially the concrete that's provided for

the project. So I think that's what the Member is talking about.

The

particular contract that she's referring to, I believe, is the one that refers

to the pouring of concrete that has two separate components one on person

labour hours, and the second one on materials.

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.

Before I

ask my next question, I invite the Premier to table the documentation to back up

what he has just said.

Mr.

Speaker, the province's Public Utilities Board was never given a true

opportunity to review the Muskrat Falls Project. The Nova Scotia government

ensured their board, the UARB, was given full oversight of the Maritime Link

Project to ensure Nova Scotian ratepayers were protected.

I ask

the Premier: Given the revelations in EY's interim report, will the Premier now

ask the PUB to assume oversight of the project?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well,

proper oversight is something we had called for many times during the Muskrat

Falls debate we had in the House of Assembly. I'm sure the Member opposite can

remember those long evenings and those days we had here.

Right

now, this project is essentially well underway. In your scenario, the PUB would

have been in involved earlier, like it was in Nova Scotia. It was UARB that

actually went in. They reviewed the Emera piece of the project. It was on behalf

of the work they had done with Nova Scotia that there was actually an

intervention, if you remember, and there were some amendments made to this

project.

In this

particular case right here, what we have is a project, as I said, well underway.

We're well into the budget of this. So to delay right now, to cause much

disruption in terms of a massive review by the PUB in this particular case, what

we will do is look at the recommendations of EY and the recommendations that are

there to provide more oversight. These are the actions we will take based on the

recommendations we have.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

I ask the Premier: Will he

tell us what action he is going to take? He has to know by now what action he is

going to take to strengthen the governance.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The EY

recommendations are out there, so we have a number of options that are available

to us. This is a megaproject where we see many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

right now who are currently employed on the project. We will look at the

individuals, the people who are available to us that could actually beef up and

strengthen the oversight on this particular project right now. These are the

actions we will take.

We've

been working very closely with the minister here who has accepted responsibility

for this. The EY report, as you have seen, you have that, the action that we

will take will stem from the recommendations from the EY report.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of

Natural Resources has again said that the Muskrat Falls Project is too far along

to stop.

I ask

the minister: If her government believes in evidence-based decision making, will

she table the specific evidence and decision-making process she used on which

she based her decisions?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

appreciate the question. As the Premier just mentioned, the project is far

along. We did review the entire project itself. We looked at our commitments. We

looked at our contracts. We looked at the loan guarantee. We looked at our

commitments to the Province of Nova Scotia through Emera. We looked at all of

these aspects and it has been determined in the best interest of this province

that we must continue on with the project. We will be ensuring we will be

diligent in our efforts to ensure that this project is on track from here on in.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period

has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling

of Documents.

Notices

of Motion.

Answers

to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to

Standing Order 27, I'd like to call Orders of the Day.

MR. SPEAKER:

I understand there's been

co-operation of all sides of the House.

We now

call Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would

like to say, before I move forward, that I appreciate the consent of both

parties as we move forward and get consent to do third reading of these two

bills, Bills 7 and 8.

Mr.

Speaker, I call Order 2, third reading of Bill 7.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Government House Leader, that Bill 7,

An Act To Amend The Vital

Statistics Act, 2009, be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

this bill be now read a third time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that the bill be read a third

time?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

Those against?

Carried.

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Vital Statistics Act, 2009. (Bill 7)

MR. SPEAKER:

Bill 7,

An Act To Amend The

Vital Statistics Act, 2009, 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 Vital Statistics Act, 2009, read a third

time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 7)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd now

like to call from the Order Paper, Order 3, third reading of Bill 8.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Government House Leader, that Bill 8,

An Act To Amend The Change of Name

Act, 2009, be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the said bill be now read a third time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that the bill be read

The hon.

the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, I'm just going

to have one word on this. I want to thank all Members in the House of Assembly.

Mr.

Speaker, this was a bill that was brought forth, it was put in the House of

Assembly yesterday, went through the three readings and will receive royal

assent today. With the Day of Pink, it shows that all Members in this House of

Assembly, the Members opposite and the Members of the NDP, are all concerned

about this bill. I just want to thank everybody in the House of Assembly who

spoke to the bill. I thank all the Members for speaking so well on the bill.

They expressed their views, and now, like I said yesterday, this is a proud bill

for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that people could have pride. People can

now have dignity.

I just

wanted to thank all Members, because this is a bill that went through this House

very, very quickly. I mentioned yesterday, the Opposition had the bill ready to

go in the House. We brought the bill in, the NDP supported it. So I thank all

Members of the House of Assembly for recognizing this and what better day.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Is it the pleasure of the

House to adopt the motion that Bill 8 be now read a third time?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Change Of Name Act, 2009. (Bill 8)

MR. SPEAKER:

Bill 8,

An Act To Amend The

Change Of Name Act, 2009, 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 Change Of Name Act, 2009, read a third

time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 8)

Private Members'

Day

MR. SPEAKER:

It being Private Members'

Day, I now call on the Member to present the private Member's resolution.

The hon.

the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's

certainly a great honour for me here today to bring forward this very important

private Member's motion to the hon. House of Assembly of Newfoundland and

Labrador here assembled.

I will

be moving today, Mr. Speaker, the following motion:

WHEREAS

the remains of a Beothuk woman named Demasduit, and her husband, a chief named

Nonosbawsut, have for many years been in storage in Edinburgh at the National

Museum of Scotland; and

WHEREAS

the remains of these Aboriginal people of Newfoundland and Labrador should be

repatriated to Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada, and laid to rest in the place

where the Beothuk people lived;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House call upon the Government of the

United Kingdom to facilitate the repatriation of the remains of Demasduit and

Nonosbawsut to Canada so that they may be laid to rest with dignity.

Mr.

Speaker, this is, as I started out in my opening, such an important and historic

day for us here in Newfoundland and Labrador, because we are officially

advancing the process of repatriation of Demasduit and Nonosbawsut. We want to

bring them home to their native homeland. We want to bring them home to

Newfoundland and Labrador.

It has been a great pleasure for me over the last year

or so to work with Saqamaw Mi'sel Joe and the Miawpukek Band Council on this

very important initiative. Many of you may know Saqamaw Joe, and I certainly

attest and those of you who know him can attest that he is very committed and

very passionate about returning Demasduit and Nonosbawsut to their native land

where they can be laid to rest with their ancestors.

He has been pursuing this aggressively and has

personally travelled to Scotland twice so far in his quest. The first trip

occurred from October 3 to 9 in 2014 where he established some contacts and

initiated discussion. He then made a second trip in late April of 2015 where he

had the honour and privilege of being in the same room as the remains of

Demasduit and Nonosbawsut. There he conducted a traditional smudge sweetgrass

ceremony, which is the purification ritual, Mr. Speaker. He relayed to me that

it was an incredibly powerful experience and one he will cherish forever.

Since his return back from Scotland, he has been

ramping up his efforts and he has enlisted the assistance of myself, as his MHA,

and his federal MP for parliamentary support at both provincial and national

levels in Canada. He has spoken several times with media on programs such as CBC

CrossTalk and on the

Central Morning Show to increase

awareness of his efforts and garner further support, Mr. Speaker.

He has indeed already received a significant amount

of support with letters of support from the national chief of the Assembly of

First Nations, Qualipu, the Atlantic Policy Congress of the First Nations and

the Innu Nation.

I first brought this motion

to the floor, Mr. Speaker, last spring, on June 11, 2015, and the House closed

before we were able to debate the motion. I am absolutely elated to be back here

and completing this very important step in the repatriation process.

AN HON. MEMBER:

An important thing to

do.

MS. PERRY:

A very important thing to

do.

I am very pleased to report

to this hon. House that last year, after the motion was brought forward but,

like I said, we never had the chance to debate it, the former minister of

Aboriginal Affairs, and an Aboriginal person himself, Keith Russell, took the

initiative to write the director of National Museums in Scotland, Edinburgh, and

that letter was sent officially on June 15. It has started the official request

for repatriation. So the process is underway and we certainly thank the former

minister of Aboriginal Affairs for being very quick to get that addressed, Mr.

Speaker.

The return of their remains

is important to all of us in this Nation we call Canada. The Beothuk are an

integral p art of our history here in this province and they deserve the highest

respect. While we certainly do trust that the remains are being stored properly,

these remains are of particular importance to the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador. In fact, under Newfoundland and Labrador's law, the

Historic Resources Act holds that The

property in all archeological objects, whether or not those objects are in the

possession of the Crown, is vested in the Crown.

There is no doubt in any of our minds, as people who

reside in this province, that Demasduit and Nonosbawsut are of significant

historical importance, Mr. Speaker. All Aboriginal communities in our province

have a very important historical significance and the Beothuk, some may say,

particularly so. Indeed, Demasduit and Nonosbawsut can be considered famous.

They are well known and their story is well known, Mr. Speaker.

this. On July 26, 2007, the hon. Loyola Hearn, who was then minister responsible

for Newfoundland and Labrador, held a ceremony at Botwood to erect a Historic

Sites and Monuments Board of Canada plaque commemorating Demasduit for the

contribution she made in preserving the language of the Beothuk. As such, Mr.

Speaker, she is officially recognized as a person of National Historical

Significance for an entire country.

Despite the great adversity she faced, she helped to

keep the legacy of her people alive and provided a remarkable record of the

Beothuk language with over 180 words, including the word Beothuk. Madam Speaker,

we have that knowledge because of Demasduit and the knowledge she shared with

Europeans before she passed. In honour of her memory and significance, today I

want to enter into the record of Assembly some of the history of these

incredible people who once roamed our coastline and our interior as a way of

life.

Beothuk lived a semi-nomadic lifestyle living around

the lakeshores of the interior during the winter, where they hunted caribou and

other game, then travelling to the coast during the summers for food, mainly

salmon and seal. Nonosbawsut, a chief, and his wife Demasduit, were among the

last of their tribe. Their story is indeed tragic. Nonosbawsut was killed in a

conflict while trying to protect his wife from capture. Two days later, their

young son, whom she was nursing, also passed away.

Upon her capture, Demasduit was brought to Twillingate.

Many may know Demasduit as Mary March, the Christian name she was given while

living there with a Church of England priest, Reverend John Leigh and his

family. He named her Mary after the Virgin Mother Mary and March for the month

of her capture.

Eventually, she was taken to St. John's where she made

quite a favourable impression with those who were fortunate enough to meet her.

In fact, they were so taken with her and so upset about her capture that a group

of influential, high-society residents set out to raise the funds to return her

to her home in the interior. Sadly, she died on route of the dreaded

tuberculosis. They did bring her body back to the Beothuk campsite where her

people placed her body with that of her husband, Nonosbawsut, in a sepulchre.

During her time in the capital, she was a frequent

visitor to the governor and Lady Hamilton painted her portrait. Her beautiful

image hangs proudly in the corridor of this Chamber.

Demasduit and Nonosbawsut were kin to another famous

Beothuk, Shanawdithit. They were her aunt and uncle. According to the limited

knowledge we do have, nearly a decade after their death, their skulls were

removed from their burial site and transferred to the University of Edinburgh by

William Cormack in 1828 and, later, they were transferred to the National Museum

of Scotland. Cormack was born in Newfoundland, but educated in Scotland and held

a very close relationship with the university. Their remains have been stored in

Scotland ever since. Nearly 200 years now, Madam Speaker.

During my research for today's bill, I was pleasantly

surprised to learn that members of the Scottish Parliament have also brought a

motion to the floor of their House for the repatriation of the Beothuk back to

Canada, back to Newfoundland and Labrador. There motion acknowledges that

remains are of cultural and ethnic significance to us and commends the work of

Chief Mi'sel Joe and the Miawpukek First Nation to achieve this.

Madam Speaker, we all certainly acknowledge the good

work done by the Scottish Museum and other Scottish institutions in respecting

the bodies of our Beothuk, but we feel very strongly that they deserve to be

brought back home. We will accept nothing less because they deserve nothing

less. Their remains are sacred and they should be returned home. It is the right

thing to do. We must not stop our efforts until we reach success.

I'm absolutely honoured that we are debating this

motion here today. I look forward to the full support of this hon. House, Madam

Speaker. Many of us, those of us who are fortunate enough in particular to study

Newfoundland culture and heritage during our high school curriculum, learned a

lot about the Beothuk. I find myself enthralled with every piece of literature

that I do write. I thoroughly enjoy my

discussions I have with Chief Mi'sel Joe regarding their way of life and

regarding the significance and just how important it is to the Aboriginal people

of this province and to all of us living here in Newfoundland and Labrador that

they have returned to their rightful home to be laid to rest where they died

with their ancestors.

I truly

hope that this important step, this is the second step the official letter has

been made. As I said, the letter of request has been done by Minister Russell

and will continue I'm sure to be followed up by the present day government. I

trust that some of my hon. colleagues across the way will champion and see that

this does indeed get done, Madam Speaker. I certainly hope we are all around

when the day comes that they are actually brought back home so they can be laid

to rest.

Thank

you very much. I look forward to hearing what the other speakers have to say. I

am confident we will have full support.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER (Dempster):

The hon. the

Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS:

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I thank

my hon. colleague. I remember it was just last spring that she had proposed to

bring this statement forward but the House of Assembly adjourned before it could

be done.

It is in

reference to a very dark time in our history. Samuel G. Morton, a renowned

scientist in the 19th century, once stated: Races are not varieties of human

kind but rather separate inferior species. Madam Speaker, that's the attitude

that justified slavery and extermination of Aboriginal people. That was over 100

years ago.

Madam

Speaker, one of those peoples that are no longer with us, probably the first

people of this Island, is the Beothuks. They were hunters and gathers that lived

on the coast and actually travelled inland with the arrival of the Europeans to

get away from sickness and extermination or war. In the end, the whole tribe

perished.

Like my

hon. colleague said, Shanawdithit was the last remaining Beothuk and she passed

away in 1829. The repatriation case that we're talking about now is her uncle

and her aunt, Demasduit and Nonosbawsut. Her husband was killed in an

altercation. I won't get into detail because my hon. colleague had made

reference to it already.

When we

looked at the research, there were a lot of conflicting stories I'm sure my

hon. colleagues saw the same thing in terms of the names, the dates and the

then another page said Demasduit was Mary March. There is a lot of conflict, but

I suppose when there's no one left out of people to explain it, these questions

will arise. Demasduit was taken back, she was captured. She eventually died of

tuberculosis and was taken back to her place of capture and buried.

My hon.

colleague referenced Mr. Cormack who somewhat stood up for the Beothuks, but

actually was the same person who removed the bodies, removed the skulls and

transported them to England. Craniology was a big study in the 19th century and

probably hence the reason for bringing the skulls to England. They eventually

ended up in Scotland, which brings us to where we are today.

This is

not just an isolated incident. About eight or 10 years ago we went through the

same process and brought back 180 of our ancestors from museums in Europe. We

laid them to their final resting place on Rose Island in Saglek Fjord. A little

while after we brought back 18 more and laid them to rest in Zoar, which is

about 30 miles south of Nain.

It's not

an easy process to just go over and say we want our ancestors back. In the case

of the Beothuks, you have to prove relations. Madam Speaker, if there's no one

left of your people, it's hard to prove relations. In some of the cases with the

Inuit repatriation, some of the family names that exist today, like Nochasak,

were actually the first names of some of the ancestors that were taken to

Europe. So there was a connection.

I talked

to a lady named France Rivet who did a lot of groundwork in the Abraham Ulrikab

story, where there are still eight Inuit ancestors at the national French

museum. She gave me a lot of insight into the process of getting your ancestors

back from foreign countries. It's a lot of work by a lot of people.

In the

case of getting our ancestors back, it went through the department of foreign

possession of our ancestors at the time. It's a back and forth process; it's not

an easy process.

Coming

back to the Beothuk remains; we went out, myself and the Premier, to Conne River

last July and attended the powwow. We actually took some time to sit down with

the Miawpukek First Nation. One of the items on the agenda was the plan to

repatriate the remains of Demasduit and Nonosbawsut.

I've

talked to Chief Mi'sel Joe several times, and actually quite recently. He talked

a little bit of the frustration of the process. I think he's been to Scotland

twice; he's been over to Europe three times. He's met with the federal member,

MP Scott Simms, on due process and I was glad to hear of the work that was done

by the previous government. I just want to say, quite plainly, we will continue

that work. I'd like to be able to stand here and say the work will stop when

Nonosbawsut and Demasduit are returned to their resting place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. EDMUNDS:

I won't go on too long

because my hon. colleague has given a lot of depth and detail, but I'd just like

to talk about another family that were invited to Europe in 1880. At the time in

Europe disease was running rampant, and unless you were immune to it or

immunized, then you were subject to it. These eight people included Abraham

Ulrikab and his family, wife and two daughters; Tigianniak and his family, wife

and daughter; and a young fellow name Tobias.

Now,

Madam Speaker, they weren't immunized when they got to Europe. As a consequence,

they all died from disease in Europe, and their remains are in a museum in

France .

I guess the current incoming president from Nunatsiavut, Mr. Johannes Lampe, did

travel over to Europe and went through that process. I talked to him afterwards

and he said it was very moving, it was very emotional and I know Chief Mi'sel

Joe said the same thing that it just strengthens your mandate to get your

ancestors back.

One thing that our government outlined in the Five

Point Plan for A Stronger Tomorrow was to work with all parties involved on all

levels of government, including international, to repatriate Nonosbawsut and

Demasduit and all of our ancestors, hopefully, that we can find outside of our

province and bring them home to their resting place.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

It is a great pleasure to rise on this private

Member's motion today and support the call for the repatriation of the remains

of two of the last Beothuks. You might have to pardon me for pronunciations,

because I try, of the Chief Nonosbawsut and his wife Demasduit.

I first of all want to congratulate my

colleague, the MHA for Fortune Bay Cape la Hune, for educating us and being

passionate and supporting Chief Mi'sel Joe on this private Member's motion for

repatriation. She is very passionate about it. I just want to commend her for

keeping it alive and educating all of us. She has been very vocal on the issue

and I just want to acknowledge her for that.

Madam Speaker, children in our school system are

taught about the history of the Beothuk people in our province. I lived in

Newfoundland all my life and one time or another the Beothuks are a part of our

culture and it is part of who we are. They go back hundreds of years. I believe

right now it is part of the grade five, grade eight curriculums. I believe

repatriating these remains of these two individuals will bring the classroom to

life for these students.

It will help the students with their studies and

also serve as an educational tool for all of us because we should never forget

our past. As they say, you have to know where you come from before you know

where you are going. The Beothuks are deeply rooted in our culture, and it is

something that we should be aware of. I'm sure everyone in this hon. House is.

The discussion that we are having here today

should pique the interest of some members of the public. Through that, they will

remember the contributions the Beothuks have made to the province. But by

bringing the remains back to the province where they belong, they could serve as

a constant reminder to adults and children alike of the history of the Beothuks.

Madam Speaker, students in our province will be

familiar with the stories of Nonosbawsut and Demasduit. Nonosbawsut was a

Beothuk chief who died in March of 1819 in a conflict with the Europeans, as

we've already heard. He died protecting his wife and young infant son, which is

kind of a sad tale actually. When you look back, it's pretty basic we look now

and see wars happening around the world and people getting repatriated. We've

seen it in Afghanistan on a weekly basis. Unfortunately, bodies were brought

back home. There's a very solemn, somber ceremony held every time they come

back. It was almost a televised event. There are not many here who did not watch

a body after a war being returned to the country. It's a very solemn

reminder what was happening around.

When we ask about the Beothuks and repatriating these

remains, it's no different. It's only we're looking at something that happened

over 200 years ago. They should be brought back to their rightful place and

repatriated here. It's great to see the Scottish museum has done a great job

in preserving these remains, but they should be returned home. It's only the

right thing to do. I sure hope that our provincial government will lobby, in

conjunction with the federal government, and make representation to the

Government of Scotland to, in fact, have those remains repatriated.

As I said, the chief died in conflict and his wife,

Demasduit, was captured. There were among the last Beothuk people in our

province, which is another sad statement. After the capture, Demasduit was taken

to Twillingate, as we have all heard, and she lived with the priest. It's kind

of sad her remains never stayed in Newfoundland and they ended up in Scotland.

But, I guess, that's a history lesson in itself. It's part of the reason we're

stood here today, like I just said, debating, trying to get the federal

government to come on board and get these remains repatriated.

When you consider it, we're not really asking for a

lot. Chief Mi'sel Joe went there and did the sweetgrass ceremony which was very

touching for them. We seem to be asking a pretty basic question, though bring

them home where they belong. Repatriation may not necessarily mean Newfoundland.

We don't know, but I think they belong in Canada, Newfoundland preferably, but

somewhere they can be preserved for years to come and people can respect and

visit and do what's required.

During the summer of 1819, as I said, there were a

number of attempts made to return her to her people. As we heard, she

subsequently died of tuberculous which, again, is a sad story. The Beothuk, I

think, is a sad

chapter in our history which we can't reverse, but doing

something right is never a bad thing. It happened. It's in the past and as we

all learn through schools and we all know any time anyone talked about the

Beothuks, it was pretty unfortunate what happened to a small tribe. I think

anything you can do now it is 200 years later, but I still think it's never

too late to do the right thing.

As I said, those remains are held in a National Museum

in Scotland. They've done a good job respecting these to date, but they do

belong in Canada and preferably in Newfoundland.

The application process has to have the support of the

local provincial government in conjunction with the federal government. From

what I gather, there seems to be a joint feeling. Everyone is on the same page

with that to get it done. I guess highlighting it through a private Member's

motion is to spur the conversation because sometimes things like these can get

lost in the shuffle of bigger things, like tomorrow brings, and every other day

in government.

It's good for my colleague to keep it to the front

burner because stuff like this unfortunately can get lost in the cracks. I

really do hope that both governments come together and do what's right.

As I said, Madam Speaker, Beothuks once were very

populous in our province and at the time of John Cabot's arrival we had upwards

to 1,000 individuals. As I said, disease ended up getting them and other causes,

as we all know. There's been a lot of study done on even the remains they have

now. We've discovered what their diet was, what water they drank and where they

lived. It is pretty incredible actually and I think some of those studies were

done on just two teeth from individuals, which is incredible when you look at

what you can learn from DNA.

Bringing the remains back I will say it again is

the right thing to do because they should be brought back where they belong.

I'll be honest, I didn't know all there was to know about this particular case

but after speaking to my colleague, I put a common sense light to it. Why aren't

they here? It's pretty common statement. Why are they over in Scotland when they

are native to Newfoundland, or at least to Canada? At the time it was

Newfoundland because we were our own country. I do hope that there will be

closure for the Beothuk and for these people, and for the people who are

lobbying on their behalf.

As I said, from the DNA we determined they were

semi-Nomadic people who went around the shores and beautiful lakes. We know

about their diet . They

built the mamateeks. I guess now I know where the Mamateek Inn name came from. I

wasn't really familiar at first. I didn't realize it at first but now I've

educating myself on that.

I do

hope that all Members of the House will support this resolution, and the

provincial government works with the federal government and the Scottish

government, the National Museum of Scotland to have these remains repatriated.

In the

past several years, as I mentioned just briefly, Chief Mi'sel Joe has been a

great advocate for this. He should be recognized because he has done a lot of

work. Like I said, he travelled to Scotland. He's done the sawgrass ceremony and

he has been a very vocal advocate to get these remains repatriated. He's close

to my colleague and he has lobbied her as well. He should be commended for that.

The

Assembly of First Nations, all chief assemblies of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick,

Prince Edward Island and Quebec, the Innu and other groups, they all support

this. It's pretty unanimous support across the board, Madam Speaker. He has led

the efforts to bring these remains home for some time now and he has worked

tirelessly on this.

As we

all know, he is Chief of the Conne River Reserve. He started this because there

was no one around to speak up for the Beothuk people. If we don't all come

together and speak and try to fix do what's right now, even though it's 200

years later. I commend Mi'sel Joe for taking the cause and speaking up because

it's very important. Like I said, it may get lost in the cracks sometimes but I

don't think we should ever lose sight of the importance of our past.

closing, I just want to acknowledge Chief Mi'sel Joe and I encourage all Members

of this hon. House to commend him on his efforts too. I just want to say I

really wish; I really hope that we lobby the federal government to get the

support and join together to lobby the Scottish government and the national

museum of Scotland to bring these remains back home where they belong.

Thank

you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia West Bellevue.

MR. BROWNE:

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

We are

here today to bear witness to a tragedy, which is the passing of the Beothuk

people. Madam Speaker, I would ask the consent of all Members for a moment of

silence to reflect upon the passing of the Beothuk before I begin my remarks in

this hon. House of Assembly this afternoon on this private Member's motion.

(Moment

of silence.)

MR. BROWNE:

I thank all Members for their

consent for that moment of solemn reflection, Madam Speaker. I want to thank the

Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune for bringing this motion forward.

Who were

these people, Madam Speaker, who once made use of the rivers, plants, birds,

fish and animals of this land to raise their families, live their lives, and

practice their customs and immerse themselves in their spirituality?

Ingeborg

Marshall, at the launch of her book entitled,

A History and Ethnography of the Beothuk , said: they were a

heroic people who valued their independence and traditions above all and were

prepared to face hostilities rather than be subjugated.

Before

the arrival of Europeans to this Island, Madam Speaker, the Beothuk lived here

as coastal people, organized in small bands throughout the various bays to fish

and hunt seals, other sea mammals, and birds. They visited interior locations to

take caribou at river crossings.

The

Beothuk lived in bark or skin-covered tents in the summer and in

semi-subterranean houses during the colder months. Bows and arrows, harpoons and

spears were used in hunting, which often took place from sea-worthy bark canoes

with a high prow and stern.

Beothuk

artifacts include carved bone, antler, and ivory pendants intricately decorated

with incised patterns. Their use of red ochre, with which they painted their

canoes, other artifacts, and even their bodies, was responsible for the term

'Red Indians', which later applied to all First Nations peoples. However, the

arrival of Europeans altered the natural rhythms of Beothuk life.

The

Beothuk camped at Red Indian Lake where caribou crossed the Exploits River. This

location also gave the Beothuk access to Notre Dame Bay during the summer, when

they harvested seals, birds and fish. However, Notre Dame Bay also became a

favoured location for settlement by Europeans during the 1700s and animosity

developed between the Beothuk and Europeans.

Firearms, which the Beothuk lacked, made it clear to the Newfoundland

authorities at the time that the Beothuk had to be protected. A proclamation was

issued in 1769 making it a capital crime to murder any Beothuk. For example, the

following excerpt is from the proclamation issued by His Excellency, the Hon.

John Byron in 1769: it is His Majesty's royal will and pleasure that I do

strictly enjoin and require all His Majesty's subjects to live in amity and

brotherly kindness with the native Beothuk of the said island of

Newfoundland.

Unfortunately, Madam Speaker, this increased concern about the welfare of the

Beothuk would have little real effect. In 1792, Captain George Pulling surveyed

against the Beothuk and submitted this report to a parliamentary committee,

although nothing came of his efforts. governors, beginning with William

Waldegrave in 1797, issued proclamations forbidding attacks on the Beothuk and

offered rewards for making contact with the beleaguered people, but again with

little positive result.

Hostilities continued and in the late winter of 1819, a group of settlers

attacked a Beothuk village on Red Indian Lake and captured Demasduit, after

killing her husband Nonosbawsut. Demasduit, or Mary March, as her captors

would call her, was sent to Twillingate and then to St. John's to meet the

governor, who ordered her returned to her people. After a futile attempt to

reunite her with the remaining Beothuk, she died aboard Buchan's vessel in

January of 1820. Her body was returned to Red Indian Lake.

Seven

years later, William Cormack's expedition found the burial hut on Red Indian

Lake containing the remains of Demasduit and Nonosbawsut and their child. Later

he had the two adult skulls transported to Scotland where they remain today.

Madam

Speaker, repatriation and reconciliation are now long overdue. These remains

must be returned to their Island home for a respectful and solemn re-interment.

These spirits cannot be at rest in a foreign land. We must bring an end to this

torment and reunite Demasduit and Nonosbawsut with the spirit of the Beothuk

people. We must consecrate the memory of the Beothuk and allow that memory to

take place and a reconciliation in our hearts, and in all that we do as a

government in our relationships with Aboriginal people, and to ensure all

Aboriginal people may achieve their visions.

Much has

been done on reconciliation, but much more remains to be done. I would be remiss

at this point if I did not pay homage as the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La

Hune and the Member for Torngat Mountains did to Chief Mi'sel Joe for

crusading for the repatriation of the remains of Demasduit and Nonosbawsut. He's

been to Scotland twice for this purpose and performed a ceremony with the

remains.

Chief

Mi'sel Joe, I thank you for inspiring all of us to bring those spirits back to

this Island that we share. I wish to assure you, Sir, that we will continue to

work with you in this great and noble cause.

It is,

indeed, inspiring that Aboriginal culture in Newfoundland and Labrador is

expanding. We see the Innu taking control of their education and income support.

The Inuit have established their own government. The Miawpukek First Nation is a

model First Nation in Canada, the Qalipu are experiencing a cultural revival of

epic proportion and the members of NunatuKavut are showing their traditions to

the world.

With

this expansion of Aboriginal culture, it is fortunate that we will still have

the traditions of the Beothuks as told to us by Demasduit, Shanawdithit and

others, and scholars like Ingeborg Marshall to work on these traditions.

We must

honour our Aboriginal heritage and those traditions which is why the Premier

asked the National Museum of Scotland for the return of the remains, which was

outlined as a commitment in his mandate letter. I am very fortunate, Madam

Speaker, to work with him in his capacity as the Minister for Labrador and

Aboriginal Affairs to realize these goals.

Our

government recognized that it is time to lay them to rest with dignity in the

home of the Beothuk. The Museum of Scotland has replied that three conditions

will have to be met. First, the federal government must support the return;

secondly, a national museum must support the return as well. And we will be

working with federal ministers Carolyn Bennett and Joly, as well as the

parliamentary secretary, the Member for Labrador, Yvonne Jones, to see that we

can meet these first two conditions.

We hope

to work with Chief Mi'sel Joe and others to meet the third condition on

Aboriginal participation in the return. Sadly, there is no longer any Beothuk

community to support the return.

As well,

we must continue to reconcile on all fronts. We must bring the Innu Land Claims

to a conclusion. We must effectively work with the federal government and the

Nunatsiavut Government to implement the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement,

and we must build stronger relationships with NunatuKavut, the Qalipu and the

Miawpukek First Nation.

At the

second National Roundtable on Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women and Girls in

Winnipeg in February we committed to participate in and fully co-operate with

the National Inquiry into Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women and Girls. We

must heed the calls to action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that is

a responsibility of this government to address.

We must

ensure provincial programs and services are delivered in culturally appropriate

ways, and we must advance Aboriginal autonomy and aspirations at every

opportunity. We are very pleased that our new prime minister desires a new

relationship with Aboriginal people, especially given the federal government's

exclusive constitution's grant of jurisdiction for Aboriginal people to the

federal government.

We are

also pleased that there is an increased federal funding for Aboriginal people,

including funding for Aboriginal people in this province, like the new federal

$15 million for housing in Nunatsiavut. We want to work in partnership with the

federal government and Aboriginal governments and organizations to create a more

inclusive province where all hopes may be realized.

Madam

Speaker, I want to reiterate again, to say thank you to the Member opposite for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune for bringing this forward, not only here today but

last year. This is something that she's long worked on and I hope that all

Members of this House will join with she and I to make sure this becomes a

reality moving forward.

I agree

also with the Truth and Reconciliation Commissioner, Justice Sinclair, when he

said: Words are not enough. Reconciliation is not an aboriginal problem it is

a Canadian problem. It involves all of us. Therefore I look forward to that day

when we bring Demasduit and Nonosbawsut back home and that the consecration of

our efforts to the legacy of the Beothuk will cause all of us to live in a

shared province of hope, pride, diversity and happiness, freedom from want and

fear and to never again have a people disappear. That we will feel on our quiet

lakes, ponds and rivers, and barrens and woods the spirit of the Beothuk always

moving in us.

Thank

you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

It's

indeed a pleasure to stand and speak to this private Member's bill today for a

number of reasons. We've had a very high level of education here when we talk

about an understanding of the Beothuk Indians and the tribe and the historic

significance here and what this repatriation of the two members of the tribe

mean to this province, mean to us historically.

parliamentarians we get an opportunity every week, as backbenchers or

Opposition, to present private Members' bills around what we feel are

significant issues, significant pieces of policy or issues that we feel should

be brought out to the public domain for discussion. I want to thank my colleague

the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune for putting this forward. I know my

history with her going back prior to my political days dictated knowing when she

worked on the Connaigre Peninsula and particularly around the work she did in

Conne River and those areas that this was on her agenda for many years. This is

not just a political issue right now. It's an important issue because it's

significant, not only to the region but to this whole province.

support this for a number of reasons, but particularly because this is an

important resolution from a historical point of view and a cultural point of

view, but from a moral point of view. It's the right thing to do. It's the right

place for this to take place. It's the next step, particularly around the

political next step, in moving this forward and making sure that the

repatriation is done in the right manner and expedited as quick as possible.

It's a great opportunity for us to bring back our native sons and daughters back

to their homeland.

experience with the native community has come about in the last 30 years from

some direct experiences and working relationships. I have an unbelievable

appreciation now for the cultural significance and the importance around the

spiritual needs, when people need to be repatriated back to the land that they

were the forefathers of. They're the ones who made this province an important

part of our history. It's unfortunate that history didn't deal them the right

set of cards, and history in the previous centuries was cruel and very

devastating to our Aboriginal friends here.

I do

remember, as a young man, my first encounter with various cultures, particularly

around Aboriginal challenges or Aboriginal-unique cultures was when I had the

privilege, with the Leader of the Third Party, of working in Labrador, in

Sheshatshiu, and doing some work with the band council for a period of time and

getting a real understanding, as a young man, not really realizing the cultural

differences and the particular challenges. And particularly, maybe some of the

misunderstandings we have, as a European society, around the cultural needs and

where the Aboriginal and our first settlers here, particularly the Aboriginal

community, about the significance of the land and what it means to them. I got a

great understanding and a great appreciation for what that meant.

When I

was asked to speak to this, I said, of course, I would. I think it's a very

important resolution. I know everybody in this House will support it because, as

I mentioned at the beginning, it's the right thing to do. When you have

champions like Chief Mi'sel Joe who, for the last number of decades, has been

beating the drum around making sure the right thing was done. He has made every

effort through the federal politics, to international politics, to ensure this

wasn't forgotten.

Now

we're at a stage where we have an opportunity to move this to the next level.

I'm glad we're here in the House and we're hearing some very articulate,

committed movers and discussions around exactly how we put this forward.

I did

have the privilege, in a previous life, of doing some work on the Connaigre

Peninsula and getting to go to Conne River, and being part of an Aboriginal

ceremony and getting a better understanding of the cultural needs there; but

getting an understanding, particularly, around the spiritual needs when it comes

to repatriating these two tribes people who, unfortunately, were taken away at a

young age but also were taken away from their homeland.

The

significance of the Beothuks as we all know, historically, and it's been noted

here before, is one of the cornerstones of this great province. It's perhaps one

of the scorns we also have to live with, of how our forefathers came here and

mistreated our Aboriginal friends.

Mr.

Speaker, as was mentioned before, this is about righting a wrong. It's about

doing the right thing. It's about expediting that, so that community can heal

and these individuals, from a spiritual point of view, can get back to their

land.

We talk

a lot about what's gone on in the past, and we talk a lot about historically

what our Aboriginal people mean to us. Mr. Speaker, we have an opportunity now

to make this a very important issue here. I know the discussion here in this

House of Assembly is all about doing the right thing and moving that forward.

It's

important we look at not only this part of our Aboriginal needs, but how we also

improve the Aboriginal stake for our other Aboriginal communities that we have

in this province it's an important part of it. This brings to light injustice

done in the past, but we want to ensure we continue to move things forward in

the present. It's very important to all of our cultural needs here.

I do

want to go back to my time in Conne River and an understanding that the people

there have a unique connection to the land. Again, from a spiritual point of

view, and I don't consider myself overly spiritual at times, but it was moving,

because of their respect for the land itself, their understanding of the land

and what it means for them.

So as we

go back and we reflect on exactly what this bill is about and what this member's

statement is about, it's particularly around doing what's right, bringing two

native citizens back to their homeland. It's about now taking this and moving to

the next level.

This

also gives us an opportunity to fully move forward to all parts of our society

here, the history of the Beothuk tribes in Newfoundland and Labrador,

particularly around what impact it had on our culture hundreds of years ago.

Maybe it gives us a better understanding of our own forefathers, some of the

challenges they faced, some of the mistakes that were made. We need to reflect

on those things so that future generations understand it and have a better

appreciation for what's gone on.

Mr.

Speaker, I know there are a number of other people here who want to speak to

this member's motion. I know it's very important to a number of people here

because they have significant connection to the Aboriginal communities, and I do

again want to thank my colleague, the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune, for

bringing this forward. Again, it's been a testament to her desire and the people

she's worked with in that particular area for the last number of years. It's

been a testament of the dedication from Chief Joe over the last number of

decades. It's a testament to the people of this province, because it hasn't gone

away.

People

wanted us to bring it forward. Now it's brought forward. Now it's us as the

elected legislators in this province, it's for us to bring it to the next level

and to ensure that we do correct the wrong in the past.

Mr.

Speaker, I want to make it known that I will be, and I would think along with

all my colleagues here, supporting this member's motion.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Lane):

The Speaker recognizes

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

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I'm very

pleased to be able to stand and speak to this private Member's motion here on

our floor today:

BE IT RESOLVED that this Honourable House call on the

Government of the United Kingdom to facilitate the repatriation of the remains

of Demasduit and Nonosbawsut to Canada so that they may be laid to rest with

dignity.

I think

it's a terrible shame that we have to be standing in 2016 asking for this to

happen. One would have thought by now in our civilization, as we like to call

it, that we would understand these bones should not be resting outside of where

these people lived. These bones should be back here.

I think

one of the things that have been said by one of our Aboriginal leaders in this

province is something that's worth quoting here today. Miawpukek First Nation

Chief Mi'sel Joe got it right when he asked, as a matter of comparison, what

would happen if we went over and dug up the bones of one of Scotland's most

beloved poets. Here's how he put it: Maybe what I need to do is go and dig up

[Robert] Burns, maybe that'll open somebody's eyes I mean, what's the

difference in me going to dig up [Robby] Burns and bringing him back to study in

Newfoundland than them taking the remains of our people to study for all these

years?

That's

the shame of it. That's why we should make sure as a provincial Parliament, that

our federal Parliament takes action on this. I would suggest to our colleagues

in government that we make sure it happens quickly because I feel certain that

we're all going to vote for this motion here today. Then I'll be urging the

Premier to make sure that action is taken. We can't let this go on.

There

are two parts to this; one, the bones should physically be brought back. They

should be buried here where they belong. The other is that this is symbolic.

It's symbolic of what happened to Aboriginal peoples in this province when we

became part of Canada in 1949. The repatriation of the bones might be a

repatriation of the rights of Aboriginal people, a symbol of the repatriation of

the rights of the people in this province. I think that's what makes it so

important.

I want

to go to that history a bit because probably some of our older and younger

generations aren't aware of what actually happened in 1949 when negotiations

were taking place with regard to the Terms of Union of Newfoundland, as we were

called then, joining Canada. I guess Labrador the way it happened at the time,

and I think this is symbolic too was sort of dragged along. It took us a long

time to recognize Newfoundland and Labrador ourselves and the importance of

Labrador as being part of the province.

When the

Terms of Union were being done, the original Terms of Union had reference in

them to the Aboriginal people on the Island. What happened was that the

reference to Aboriginal people on the Island and in Labrador was literally

pencilled out in the Terms of Union.

Aboriginal people were pencilled out and what that did is it created an

atmosphere in Newfoundland and Labrador that Aboriginal people didn't count.

Aboriginal peoples were not free to even see themselves as Aboriginal. Name

changes happened, a denial of who they were.

Not only

was it that they didn't benefit from what existed in 1949 on a federal level

with regard to the Indian Act , not

only did they not benefit and the benefits weren't as good as they are now.

Even now, we know we are far below what they should be. Because of not having

that recognition, they were wiped out on the very land in which they lived. I

have brothers and sisters in this room who have Aboriginal blood. I think we

need to apologize to them. One of our brothers stood today. We need to apologize

to them for the way in which they were literally wiped out.

It's

been a struggle for our Aboriginal people in Newfoundland and Labrador. I'd like

to remind ourselves of some of those struggles. I have to say that I've been

privileged to be able to have been in solidarity with some of the things that

happened over the years.

When the

Labrador Inuit Association, the LIA, was first formed in the 1970s, I was

already involved in social justice work, mainly on an international development

level. The LIA made contact with some of us here in St. John's at that time when

they were first formed. I have this connection for almost 40 years with the

Inuit of Labrador because of that, in different stages of their negotiations

with government, both provincially and federally, being involved and being in

solidarity with them.

For 30

years, they worked as the LIA to get to the point of having land claims

recognized. It wasn't until 2005 that Nunatsiavut was formed as a government.

Finally the Inuit people of Labrador were self-governing. The struggle, the time

it took, the energy it took for them to prove who they were as a people and to

become recognized to get to where they are today we don't understand how much

it took.

Let's

look at Miawpukek and Conne River as it's commonly known, and what happened

there. Some reference has been made to Chief Mi'sel Joe, but I want to go more

specific to what happened in 1983 when they came in from Conne River and in

total desperation took over I forget what it was called then the department

of northern and aboriginal affairs, I think, down at Atlantic Place.

They

came in and took over the offices to say we can't take it anymore. Their money

for the housing was being withheld by the premier of the day. Being withheld,

taking the federal government money and not giving it to them in Conne River,

which they deserved to have.

They

were imprisoned for it. They went on a hunger strike. I was part of a group that

supported them here in St. John's through all of those days. It was horrendous

what they fought for and what they had to go through.

Then we

had the Innu Nation when they formed in the 1980s as well. What were the first

issues they were dealing with? They were dealing with the fact that nobody

respected the impact on them and on the land they used, of the low-level flying

that was going on; those low-level flights which were the military jets from

European countries flying over their land with medical proof their children were

suffering from those flights. Eardrums breaking, blood coming from their ears

I'm not exaggerating, this is a fact.

They ended up being imprisoned. Elizabeth Penashue herself

was imprisoned in Stephenville with other women because they dared to protest,

because they dared to stand up and say, you can't do this to us and to our

children. This is our land.

This is our history. We're not talking 100 years ago when

we're talking about Chief Mi'sel Joe leading his people in here to St. John's,

and Elizabeth Penashue and the other women elders leading their people. May I

add, Elizabeth Penashue's son, Peter Penashue, should remember that as well,

what his mother and his

people went through to get to where they are today. They're still fighting. They

still don't have the final settlement of their land claims.

Then we

have NunatuKavut. The whole dimension of being Metis is another issue, an issue

that had to be dealt with in other parts of Canada. For us, it was like a shame

for them to have to start saying: but we are different, we are a separate group,

Metis are recognized by Canada as a different group and we need to be

recognized. Finally, they now know, after struggling, that at least they have

the right to be identified as an Aboriginal group, but the fight is still on.

We still

have land claims that aren't settled in Labrador. The Innu Nation is not

finalized. NunatuKavut hasn't even been recognized, whether or not they're going

to be able to go ahead and go through the process. They're at the very early

stages.

Then

finally we had the Qalipu Nation, a Mi'kmaq First Nation Band formed, a landless

band. The federal government messed that one up and that's not finalized. It's

an ongoing struggle and we have to acknowledge that struggle. We have to start

getting active as a provincial government to make sure the struggles end and

actions are taken to make life better, and to treat our Aboriginal peoples in

this province with respect. We have to acknowledge that.

So it's

wonderful that we have the motion on the floor today, but bringing back these

bones means nothing if we're not also dealing with the issues of our Aboriginal

people in this province today. You take, for example I can't go through

everything that's here on my sheets, and I thank our great researchers for

everything they've given me. I wanted to speak from my own personal experience.

I was on

the Voisey's Bay Environmental Assessment Panel. I was honoured because the Innu

Nation asked me to be their nominee. The reason they asked me to be their

nominee on the panel was because they didn't have elders who were fluent enough

leaders, were needed to be part of the negotiations. They really couldn't spare

one of their young leaders who could have taken his or her place on the panel.

They asked me would I be their nominee and I was honoured.

One of

the things well, there are all kinds of things I remember from when I was on

the panel. One of the issues that were an issue when I was on the panel and it

is still ongoing right now there are many, but the one that really is a very

serious one is the whole issue of methylmercury downstream.

Methylmercury now is an issue with regard to Muskrat Falls, but it was an issue

also when we were on the Voisey's Bay panel. Now it's an ongoing issue when it

comes to Muskrat Falls. We know methylmercury has been an issue with the Upper

Churchill, but it was never recognized. So we have to look at something as

serious as this issue and say: Why haven't governments taken it seriously? Why

aren't we dealing with it?

remember the first time I brought it up in this House as an issue with regard to

the Lower Churchill. I was mocked by the minister on the opposite side when I

brought up the issue. I was just raising a fuss over nothing. Well, it wasn't a

fuss over nothing. The work we did on the Voisey's Bay panel was intense work.

That was a high point, by the way. This is something we should be talking to the

federal government about. We should be looking at as a government.

That

panel was unique because you had the provincial government, you had the federal

government, you had Innu Nation and, at that time, the LIA, Labrador Inuit

Association, all for an equal partnership in charge of the panel. It was a high

point of environmental assessment in this country. I'm sad to say there hasn't

been one like it since because it worked so well. All the decisions about how

the panel functioned were made together. The federal government or the

provincial government had no more rights in making decisions about how the panel

worked than did Innu Nation and LIA. It was actually a high point.

I invite

the current government and ministers involved to go back and look at that. We've

got to start looking at how we start working together respecting. The same way

when it comes to the whole issue of the missing and murdered Aboriginal women,

we're saying that we agree with the resolution that has been passed. A

resolution that we brought up there I brought into the House, as a matter of

national inquiry. We have a government that is now saying it is going to do it.

I encourage us to work with them.

MR. SPEAKER:

The Speaker reminds the hon.

Member that her time for speaking has expired.

MS. MICHAEL:

Leave, just to clue up

please, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Does the Member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER:

Leave.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you.

Just to

say there's so much that we have to do. We have to do it ourselves, but we also

have to work with the federal government. The motion is one issue and we have so

many more. I invite us to continue looking at how we do that as a Legislature.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Speaker recognizes the

hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MS. DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A lot of

times, Mr. Speaker, when we stand to speak we say it's a pleasure and an honour

to speak to the motion or in debate. Of sorts, I guess, it is always an honour

and a privilege any time you get to stand and represent your district and speak

in the provincial Legislature. However, it's somewhat with sadness and mixed

emotion that I stand today and share a few words on this topic. I thank the

Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune for bringing this very important private

Member's resolution to the floor today.

wasn't so long ago, I think it was February, maybe, that I met Chief Mi'sel Joe

for the first time. He is a quiet man, but a wise man much wisdom. When you

sit at a table he doesn't say a lot, but when he speaks, you listen. I have some

very good friends, as the Member would know, from Conne River. I am looking

forward to attending my first powwow coming up this summer in Conne River.

Mr.

Speaker, today we're talking about a very dark point in our province's

colonization, the loss of a native people and their way of life, as well as the

immense loss of the long-term contribution the Beothuk First Nation could have

made to our province, our culture and our society. While we're a fairly small

province, just 527,000 people, we're very rich in history and culture. We have a

number of Aboriginal groups that have been mentioned here today. They contribute

significantly to our rich culture and heritage.

I stand

today, Mr. Speaker, not only as a proud daughter of Labrador no stranger to

anyone in this Chamber but also as a very proud member of NunatuKavut

Community Council. Somebody here who has southern Inuit roots, the mother of a

daughter who has southern Inuit roots and is also a member of NunatuKavut

Community Council, a very proud member.

NunatuKavut, like Nunatsiavut, is in the process of trying to settle a land

claim agreement. They have, as some would know here, put forth a document

unveiling NunatuKavut.

Mr.

Speaker, last night I read through I wanted to see who was Demasduit and

Nonosbawsut and Shanawdithit, the niece. I did some reading after I went home; a

tragic story, a very, very tragic story of a man and a wife; a man who lost his

life because he stood to protect his partner. Then we see she lost her life to

tuberculosis. Then they were taken away to a foreign land, taken away to be

studied, for some people to do some learning in a university.

In my

notes was a picture of the young lady, their niece, Shanawdithit. I looked at

her, a beautiful young lady. I read a little bit about what it said about her, a

lady who didn't smile very much. I reflected on that. What it must have been for

her, the weight that she carried on her shoulders, knowing that she was the last

of the Beothuk people. What a sad, sad story.

Mr.

Speaker, we heard it said many times, we cannot change the past. That's the life

we live. I have an uncle up in Labrador who always talks about how we are on a

journey. That's true because every day, once the day has passed, we can't have

it back. We can't change the past, but we can certainly learn from it.

today, Mr. Speaker, we're talking about doing the right thing, not just spend an

afternoon here in the Legislature today talking about we need to have the bodies

of this man and woman repatriated back and reconciled but we must ensure that

after today action is taken.

I'm very

proud to be a part of a government where our Premier, who carries the portfolio

for Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs, right in his mandate mentioned those two

Beothuk individuals. He said: In this role, I will support efforts to

repatriate the remains of Demasduit and Nonosbawsut from the National Museum of

Scotland and lay them to rest with dignity in the home of the Beothuk, and work

with the governments of Canada and the United Kingdom to ensure there is no

further injustice to their memory.

Mr.

Speaker, I reflected on I'm sure all of us in the House have lost people

belonging to us. In that process when you lose someone, from when you lose them

to when you lay them to rest there is a period of time and you begin to pick up

pieces and move on to a new normal after you lay them to rest. But there is

something very spiritual and sacred about that laying to rest.

Mr.

Speaker, what we're talking about today with this man and woman should not only

be important to the Aboriginal people of the province but it should be

important, and I'm sure it is, to all people of the province. That we bring

these individuals home and we lay them to rest.

When I

was looking through this and I was thinking about inadequacies and injustices,

many of us will agree there is nowhere that is more prominent than among

Aboriginal people. I represent a district where I have some people from my

colleague's district, Nunatsiavut, and I have many who are members of Nunavut

community council.

Mr.

Speaker, as I was campaigning last fall you knock on doors, you hear lots of sad

stories. I'm someone who always determines that I'm able to do it because I'm

very big geographically, I don't have big numbers, but I work long days because

it's so important to me to get to every single door myself, to talk to the

people that I am wanting to represent.

remember