December

15, 2009

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVI No. 40

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today the Chair welcomes the following members' statements:

the hon. the Member for the District of Bonavista North; the hon. the Member for

the District of Port de Grave; the hon. the Member for the District of Grand

Falls-Windsor-Green Bay South; the hon. the Member for the District of Bay of

Islands; and the hon. the Member for the District of Cape St. Francis.

The hon. the Member for the District of Bonavista North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I recently had the opportunity to attend celebrations commemorating the 200

birthday of Benjamin Barbour and the eightieth anniversary of the voyage of the

Neptune II , a voyage made famous by Captain Joe Barbour in his book,

48 Days Adrift . The Barbour family of Newtown hold a very special place in

the history of our Province and these celebrations, and their contributions and

achievements, continue to be kept alive by the dedicated efforts of the Cape

Freels Heritage Trust. The Trust operates the Barbour Site in Newtown and their

commitment to maintain and develop our unique heritage infrastructure helps

ensure that our culture remains alive and vibrant.

These particular festivities involved descendents of the Barbour family,

descendants of crew members from the Neptune II , and numerous individuals

from the local community. A tremendous performance was offered by the Singing

Legionnaires under the musical direction of Mr. Bill Green and one of the first

theatrical productions ever staged in Newtown, Lester's Letters was

remounted for the event. The performance featured two original cast members,

Greg Blummer and Beverly Fifield. Our region's only professional theatre

company, Beyond The Overpass Theatre Company, was represented through the

direction provided by Jamie Harding, my son actually, and the technical

direction provided by Steven Perry. The play, written by Reverend Roberta

Bungay, featured actual letters written by Lester Barbour to his family in

Newtown during World War I and the story provides wonderful insight into the

life of a soldier serving overseas during that very important period of our

history.

At this time I would ask all members of this hon. House to join with me to

thank and to show appreciation to Mr. Frank Blackwood, President of the Cape

Freels Heritage Trust, and all board members and staff for their continued

efforts to maintain and preserve the invaluable cultural heritage of our

Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Each year leading up to Remembrance Day, the Grade 9 students of Holy

Redeemer Elementary in Spaniard's Bay, take

part in an essay writing contest.

This program is sponsored by Branch #9 of the Royal Canadian Legion,

Spaniard's Bay, and the Churchill Family. Each student competes for the Gary D.

Churchill Memorial Plaque. It began back in 1980 in memory of Gary D. Churchill

who passed away from natural causes while serving with the Canadian Armed

Forces.

The winner of this competition is invited to be guest speaker at their annual

dinner held following Remembrance Day. This year, being the thirtieth

anniversary for this award, two winners were selected. Victoria Smith and Anna

Kearley held the audience captive as they delivered exceptional speeches

provoking all in attendance to contemplate the horrors of war.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join me in extending congratulations

to Victoria and Anna, as well as those who organized this outstanding event.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Falls-Windsor-Green Bay South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to congratulate three youth, Jessica

Cave, Cayley Linehan and Megan Reeves from Exploits Valley High for winning the

recent 2009 Electoral School Scholarships. Their accomplishments show their

commitment to their futures. I wish them all the best.

Mr. Speaker, and all hon. members of this House, please join with me in

congratulating Jessica, Cayley and Megan in their hard work in receiving the

Electoral District Scholarship Awards.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LODER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize a gymnastic teacher

at St. Peter's Academy in Benoit's Cove, Bay of Islands.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Gord Casey recently won the Canada Physical Education

Teaching Excellence Award. This award honours up to thirteen exceptional

teachers, one in each Province and territory. It is the only national award that

recognizes physical education teachers for their hard work and dedication in

helping build strong, healthy and physically active children.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Casey does this on a daily basis at the school from

kindergarten to Grade 9. He adds many activities to attract students and keep

them interested, such as cross country running, skiing, kayaking, canoeing,

snowshoeing, winter outings and GPS instruction. The list goes on and on.

Recently, Mr. Casey was given a surprise assembly and personally recognized by

his students and co-workers for the hard work he is putting into the school and

the community.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask all hon. members in this House today to recognize

this gentleman for the great example he is giving to all the students attending

St. Peter's Academy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KEVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize an outstanding

individual who exemplifies the meaning of volunteerism. This lady was a school

teacher for thirty-one years. While a teacher, she organized concerts, plays.

She was involved in every aspect of schooling and after school activities.

This lady has been a volunteer in the community of Flatrock since she could

be involved. She was involved in many different community events, such as garden

parties, fall fairs, New Year's Eve celebration, recreation committees, heritage

committees, grotto committees. Any committee involving the Town of Flatrock, she

is involved in it. Not only is she on committees, she also provides

entertainment by singing and playing her accordion at senior's parties,

Christmas socials, all church functions.

Mr. Speaker, herself, her sister Anita Dyer, and Bun Hawco run the Flatrock

Community Center. They volunteer numerous hours a week, setting up and cleaning

before and after events. They were once seen on the side of the building in the

middle of a wind storm fixing a sign.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members in this House today to congratulate Ms

Madonna Wilkinson who was selected as volunteer of the year for the Town of

Flatrock. She is the heart and soul of this community. I am honoured to call her

my friend, and I am even more honoured to stand in this House today to recognize

her for the job she has done in our community.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House to provide an update

for members on the new Occupational Health and Safety Regulations. On September

1, these new regulations came into force. For many employees and employers, the

regulations reinforce the safety culture already in place in these workplaces.

For others, they provide clear direction on how safer work practices can be

adopted.

We have committed to a period of soft enforcement so that employees and

employers could become better familiar with the regulations. As of January 1,

2010, this period will end and we expect all workplaces to have procedures and

practices in place that are in accordance with the new regulations.

Mr. Speaker, I am encouraged that many workplaces will be ready for January

1, given the high volume of interest we have had from employees and employers.

Personally, I have received a great number of calls, and I know that the

Occupational Health and Safety Branch have also had a number of inquiries and

requests for briefings on the expectations of the regulations.

I have said time and time again that this Province is a leader in

occupational health and safety. We have produced a first-rate set of regulations

and they are an example of how we are leading the country in this sector.

Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Government Services, I am responsible for

over 150 pieces of legislation and related regulation standards and codes of

practice. That is roughly 15 per cent of the total for the provincial

government. One of our objectives was to review and update our regulatory

regime. The Occupational Health and Safety Regulations certainly fit within this

mandate.

We are also reviewing our Mines Safety of Workers Regulations, which has not

changed significantly since 1957. Although there have been amendments made to

the regulations over the years, we are in the process of developing a new

version which we hope will be able to circulate to the interested stakeholders

in the very near future. Given the importance of the mining industry in this

Province, we need to ensure that we adopt current practices and protocols.

We know that updates to these types of legislation and regulations can be

difficult for some employers. However, Mr. Speaker, when you add increased

communication, co-ordination and awareness with clear expectations for the

regulator, guidance for prevention of injury and greater accountability, we will

all have safer and more protective workplaces. In the end, that should be our

common goal.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for an advance copy of the statement with regard

to Occupational Health and Safety Regulations which were on the table before and

now they are coming into force as of January 2010.

I have to say, the minister noted that in his department there are 150 pieces

of various legislation, and I know they are all important, but I do not think

there is anything any more important than what it is to regulate the safety of

all workers regardless whether you are in the construction industry or whether

you work in a supermarket or wherever. So it is very important.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say from first-hand experience being involved in the

construction industry prior to entering this place, the hon. House of Assembly,

and since then being here dealing with constituents on a regular basis those

who, unfortunately, become injured and find themselves in a position where they

have to go before Workers' Compensation to appeal various cases. So it is very

important, Mr. Speaker, that we do make sure - and I know it is difficult for

employers probably to comply with all the regulations, but there is nothing more

important than making sure that our workplaces here in this Province are the

safest they can be for all individuals. Hopefully, by doing this, the day will

come when injured workers will not have to encounter the difficulties they have

sometimes now.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement.

While our Province has achieved much over twenty-five years to improve

workplace, health and safety, including a 7 per cent decline in reported

workplace injuries in 2008, we still have much work to do, as the minister

acknowledges. We still had 7,400 workplace injuries and twenty-three deaths

contributed to occupational hazards in 2008.

I urge government, the public and workplaces across the Province to work for

accident-free workplaces. Zero tolerance is what we want, but a lot has to be

done before we get to that. The shocking and tragic crash of Cougar Flight 491

earlier this year resulting in the loss of seventeen lives has shone the light

on workplace health and safety reminding all of us how dangerous workplaces can

be despite all our best efforts.

I am encouraged that government is looking at the mine safety regulations, as

we have many people working in mines in this Province and we have the

possibility of new ones opening such as the fluorspar mine on the Burin

Peninsula. We can never again let happen the kind of destruction that happened

in the community of St. Lawrence. I really urge the minister - I know he is not

the environmental minister, but I speak to the environmental minister as well -

with the possibility of that mine opening, we should do everything in our power

to make sure that is as safe a place as possible for the potential workers.

Thank you, very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this fall government released information pertaining to

the deficits of the regional health authorities which were reported to be in the

millions of dollars at that time. Government had originally asked the health

boards to find these service cut, and I think we remember all too well the cuts

to lab and X-ray services that occurred in the Province at that time but has

since been reversed.

I ask the minister today: Do you still expect these health boards and our

health authorities throughout the Province to have balanced budgets this year or

are you allowing them now to run a deficit in the current year?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We are currently involved in the budget process. As it now stands, Eastern

Health will definitely have a deficit this year. It is my understanding that the

Western Region will appear to have a balanced budget. Labrador-Grenfell and

Central are not totally clear, but they are certainly not in the situation that

Eastern is in.

We will not, at this stage, Mr. Speaker, be seeking to reduce any services to

save money. We are working with Eastern to deal with the deficit over a period

of years.

Essentially, Mr. Speaker, the deficits with Eastern, for example, comes about

as a cumulative deficit arising over a number of years. We will, over the next

couple of years, work on that. The best I can say at this point, Mr. Speaker, is

that we are working closely with the authorities in the budget process.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If these boards are not cutting services, I ask the minister: How are they

finding the money to cover off the deficits? Is this money being granted through

the provincial government?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, last year in the budget process it became

clear that the regional health authorities were running significant deficits in

that they were going over their budget. However there were budget pressures, Mr.

Speaker, that, for example, would be unusual.

I will tell the member opposite that I said to the regional health

authorities on the H1N1: We do not expect you to find money to deal with H1N1;

that is money that the Department of Health will come up with. We are going to

work with the authorities and assist the authorities.

I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that the health budget that is currently at $2.6

billion will rise automatically 8 per cent without any new spending. There is an

increase in the budget without any new spending.

We are working closely with the authorities, Mr. Speaker. I have met with the

authorities; we are having good discussions with them. I expect to be in a

position where we will be able to provide them the money they need to provide

the services that they are providing. It is one of great co-operation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Both the Premier and the Minister of Finance have recently stated that

current health care spending is unsustainable and changes must be made.

I ask the minister today: Can you clarify these statements and outline to the

House and to the people of the Province what agenda government has to move

forward with reforming some of these services, or making cuts in the system,

based on those comments?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, what we are trying to do with our health care

system is to provide a quality of care that is accessible to the residents of

this Province, that is of a quality equal or better than that in the rest of the

country and that is one that we can look at in terms of the future.

So sustainable, Mr. Speaker, can simply be looked at in terms of money. The

sustainability I, for one, do not think that there is that problem with the

sustaining the level of service. The long-term sustainability of the system

based on the inherent growth

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MR. KENNEDY: Excuse me, Mr. Speaker, if I could finish?

The inherent growth in the system certainly requires more money. I met with a

number of officials, hospital officials, in Toronto on Friday past, and the

issue that we discussed was the sustainability of the health care system and how

we could save money. If I had more time, Mr. Speaker, I could outline, for

example, that by changing our purchasing program, and we can save millions of

dollars and put into the quality of care.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We know that the Province spends more per capita than any other Province on

health care, yet we continue to fluctuate between last place in the country and

third last place in the country in terms of performance.

So I ask the minister: If our spending is unsustainable, like the Premier and

the Minister of Finance has said, our performance remains very poor in relation

to every other province in the country, will you finally commit to a review of

the entire health care system in Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I am not quite sure where the Leader of

the Opposition gets those statistics. The report that was released in the last

couple of days shows that essentially, although we are lower than we would like

to be, we are there with Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Quebec. We are all within

the provision of health care that can certainly be improved, but that is a

quality health care.

I can assure the member opposite that I am reviewing all aspects of the

health care system. What we did in Flower's Cove and Lewisporte is an example of

how this government continues to respond to the needs of the people. When we

made a decision, Mr. Speaker, that was not in the best interests of the people,

we changed it. Now, that is what I would suggest to you a government must do.

The review process is ongoing, and we are committed, Mr. Speaker, to

providing the best quality of care to the people of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister knows the real changes and reversals in that service came

because of a by-election and the outcry of people. It was your minister who

stood in this House everyday and said that decision was final for a number of

weeks. Mr. Speaker, being equally as bad off as other provinces in the country

is unacceptable. I say to the minister, you know the report I am referencing,

the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, and that report has Newfoundland and

Labrador, in the last few months, either in last place or third last place of

every province in the country in terms of our performance in health care.

I ask you today minister, based on their statistics, based on the

recommendations they make, because they make four or five recommendations in

that report, I ask you: Have you reviewed the report and are you prepared to

implement any of the recommendations that they have suggested?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In terms of the way that we approach health care and how I am approaching it

as the minister; I am taking a very proactive approach. I am conversing with the

people of our Province.

For example, Mr. Speaker, while in Toronto on Friday I met with experts at

the University of Health Network where we talked about things like telemedicine

and tele-pathology in terms of offering and improving on quality of cancer care.

We are looking at hiring a consultant to deal with the issue of wait times so

that we can reduce the waiting times, which is a concern, Mr. Speaker, I hear,

and I am sure all of the MHAs in this hon. House hear. I met with experts, Mr.

Speaker, in terms of the composition and role of health boards who we are

looking at doing further work with. I met with individuals, Mr. Speaker, who

look at saving money within the system by purchasing, increasing your purchasing

power.

So there is no question, Mr. Speaker, that our health care system, we are

spending 40 per cent of our budget, but more than that, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his response.

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We are responding to the needs of the people of this Province and we will

continue to do so, Mr. Speaker. It is not simply a matter of spending money; it

is a matter of increasing efficiency in the system and improving quality of

care.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This afternoon I will present a petition on behalf of the residents of

Labrador who are looking for improved air ambulance service, especially in

response times. The minister recently met with a number of these concerned

citizens and I know that he did have an opportunity to speak with them about

those particular issues.

I ask the minister today: What will be the scope of the review that you have

committed to, and when can we see this particular review completed?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, when I had the privilege of attending in

Lab West and announcing the - providing a picture of the new health care centre

up there and announcing the tendering process. I met with a family, Mr. Speaker,

a very unfortunate circumstance, one that would just tear anyone's heart out. I

also met with a family in Happy Valley-Goose Bay who had concerns about the way

the air ambulance system had worked for them.

We have two air ambulances in this Province, Mr. Speaker. One of which is

stationed in St. John's because that is where it is near the neo-natal unit, the

second which is stationed in St. Anthony. Now, if the hon. member opposite is

suggesting that we move the one from St. Anthony to Happy Valley-Goose Bay or to

Lab West, I am certainly willing to consider that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am absolutely appalled at the fact that the minister would choose to play

politics with such an important issue.

Mr. Speaker, in the last number of months there are people in Labrador whose

lives have been under threat because of the access to that service. My question

to you today, minister, was asking you what the scope of your review is and

asking you if you are prepared to investigate the four particular cases of

patients who were impacted by these delays to determine what the deficiencies

were? Maybe you should be more keen on doing that than playing politics with

people's lives who depend on this service.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the statistics that I am aware of indicate

there are approximately 153 transfers from St. Anthony, but I understand that

can relate to other parts of the Province. In terms of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, I

think there are 240; in Lab West there are 130 or 140, but significantly more

transfers from the Labrador region of the Province.

I met with these two families. In fact, one of the families made it very

clear to me that they were very pleased I had met with them considering that the

Leader of the Opposition refused to meet with them when she was told of the

same.

Mr. Speaker, again, I say to the Leader of the Opposition: Is she suggesting

that the air ambulance be

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer.

MR. KENNEDY: I say to the Leader of the Opposition: Is she suggesting

that the air ambulance be moved from St. Anthony to Happy Valley-Goose Bay or

Lab West? If she is, please state it and I will take it into consideration?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I hope the minister takes this issue much more seriously than he is

demonstrating here today. If he was so moved by the stories of these people that

he met with he would be more inclined to find a solution instead of giving smart

answers here.

Mr. Speaker, one of the suggestions that was actually made was to establish a

trauma team at St. Anthony to improve the response times out of that particular

region to dealing with some of these cases.

I ask the minister today: Is he prepared to ensure that that happens in the

very near future?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, when I met with these families I actually met

with the Joint Councils of Lab City, Wabush. They requested that the air

ambulance system be put in Lab West. I met with the town council in Happy

Valley-Goose Bay; they requested that the air ambulance be moved to Happy

Valley-Goose Bay. Both of these families requested that it be moved to Labrador.

A medical flight services team is a budgetary issue that we would have to look

at but it would be wherever the air ambulance is. So, again, I am just asking

the member opposite if she can help me out here. Is she suggesting that the air

ambulance be moved from St. Anthony to Labrador? If so, Mr. Speaker, we can

certainly look at whether or not the medical flight services team would go there

with them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is unfortunate that the only solution the minister sees here is eroding

services further and not improving them.

Minister, maybe you could stand today and tell me: Are you prepared to

enhance the two services we have in the Province, the one in St. John's, the one

in St. Anthony, by adding a third air ambulance to this Province and basing it

in Happy Valley-Goose Bay?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my understanding that the cost of a new air ambulance being, I think it

is the King Air 350, it is approximately $8 million. It is something that we

would look at in the future. What I am indicating, Mr. Speaker, that the

residents of Labrador, for whom the member opposite apparently is speaking

today, have requested that the air ambulance be moved from St. Anthony to

Labrador.

Now, what I am saying, Mr. Speaker, that we are committed to the improvement

of the quality of air ambulance in this Province. However, we have two King Airs

at this point in time, Mr. Speaker, and one is situated in St. John's, one is

situated in St. Anthony. We use helicopters, Mr. Speaker, we use Air Labrador,

and there is a smaller plane that is used in Labrador also. All I can say, Mr.

Speaker, is that when I met with the residents of Labrador, they expressed their

concerns clearly that they wish to have an air ambulance in Labrador.

Now, Mr. Speaker, there is only so much that we can do here. We are committed

to all of the residents of this Province, but I heard the comments loud and

clear of the people in Lab West and I heard the comments loud and clear of the

people in Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There are concerns as well in Port Saunders that the acute care unit of the

Rufus Guinchard Health care facility could be shutdown in the near future due to

a lack of nurses.

I ask the minister: How did this health care centre get to be so understaffed

to the point that they have to invoke closure of their acute care services?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, I think it was October 9 I became the Minister

of Health and Community Services. My first step was to fly to meet with the

people of Flower's Cove and then to meet with the people of Lewisporte. I have

demonstrated, and this government has demonstrated, Mr. Speaker, a commitment to

rural health care.

In Port Saunders, Mr. Speaker, there are currently five registered nurse

vacancies at the facility. Mr. Speaker, they are looking at the closure of some

acute care beds from December 20, I think it is, until January 4. I can indicate

to this hon. House that I directed, through my officials yesterday, that Western

Health take all steps necessary to ensure that there is no closure of these

acute care beds, and I said: Do whatever it is you have to do to keep those beds

open.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We all know in this Province that it was that same minister who sat at the

Cabinet table and presided over the original cuts to rural health care in this

Province. So you can cut it however you like, we know you were there.

Mr. Speaker, we also know this, that this facility has been going through

some real difficulty in the past few months. I ask you, Minister: Prior to

yesterday, what efforts were made by you and your government to ensure that

these vacancies were filled and that rural health care was provided to people in

this community, instead of having them travel hundreds of kilometres to access

essential services?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, thank you.

As I am sure the Leader of the Opposition is aware, the role of the minister

in the Department of Health and Community Services is to set policy and to

provide guidelines for the regional health authorities to implement or

operationalize that policy. So, Mr. Speaker, every decision that takes place on

the regional health authority is not one that I am aware of. However, once I

become aware that there is any possibility of cutting health care services, Mr.

Speaker, I act.

I can say to the member opposite that the by-election did not influence what

I was doing when I came into this portfolio. What I am looking at, Mr. Speaker,

is the provision of a quality of care to the residents of our Province.

Mr. Speaker, during the H1N1, the regional health authorities all worked well

together, and what I say to the member opposite, a situation has been

identified, I will do my best to resolve it and I have directed the authority to

take whatever steps are necessary, Mr. Speaker, to keep these beds open.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister can keep saying it, he is trying to convince everyone, but we

all know he was at the Cabinet table when you made all the cuts in rural health

care in this Province, Mr. Speaker. Gutting services all over Newfoundland and

Labrador until the heat came on. The heat came on and they had to get out of the

kitchen, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is hard to believe

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is having difficulty hearing the hon. Leader of the Opposition. I

ask members

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask hon. members to my left to hear the question.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, we know the Member for St. Barbe did not bring forward his issues to

the minister on health, we will see if the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde

brought forward hers.

Earlier today it was announced that X-ray services at Dr. A.A. Wilkinson

Memorial Health Centre in Old Perlican may not be offered after regular clinic

hours or weekends due to a shortage of technologists.

I ask the minister: Is this part of the $1.8 million cuts that was originally

proposed for the Old Perlican hospital?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can assure the member opposite that there will be no cuts, as she puts it,

in Old Perlican. This is a result of a vacancy, Mr. Speaker, where there was a

recent retirement. The X-ray services will now result in no coverage during a

period of time, every third weekend and every third night.

Mr. Speaker, however, the member opposite talks about us gutting rural health

care; $2.6 billion, the second most money spent in this country, Mr. Speaker,

double the budget of a decade ago - and who was in power then? Spending per

capita, Mr. Speaker, second only to Alberta. One hundred and seventy-three

million dollars over the last five years for new medical equipment, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Seventy-six million dollars, Mr. Speaker, this year alone on

health care infrastructure.

When it comes to filling vacancies we will offer whatever bonuses are

necessary, whatever signing bonuses, bursaries, the same types of things we are

doing with nurses, we will do it in Old Perlican, we will do it in Port

Saunders, we will do it in Labrador and we will do it all over this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister also should know that because of all the great Liberal

initiatives in this Province, their budget has doubled in four years in its

entirety throughout the Province, Mr. Speaker. There is more money to spend.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, let me just ask the minister this -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: Let me ask the minister this question. Under

section E in the

service delivery model changes that were proposed for the Old Perlican area this

is what it said under

section E.(1): A review of service delivery options for

twenty-four hour on-site emergency services including implications for lab

services and diagnostics at Old Perlican, $1.8 million in savings.

So, Minister, is this on the way to taking the service out of that area or

when is it going to be fully restored?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the letters that the member opposite

refers to were written in response to the budget requests last year when we were

in the middle of the worst recession that this country had seen since the Great

Depression.

Mr. Speaker, I have indicated to the members in this House of Assembly that

there will be no cuts as outlined in those letters. What we have here, Mr.

Speaker, and what is happening in Port Saunders, but more specifically what is

happening in Old Perlican is that there is a vacancy -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, Eastern Health has recruited a lab

technologist. We will try to find the combined X-ray service, lab technologist

that is necessary.

Mr. Speaker, I come back to, however, the amount of money that this

government is spending on rural health care. The commitment we have made to the

people of Lewisporte, the commitment we have made to the people of Flowers Cove,

Mr. Speaker, and we continue to fulfil these commitments. What we will do, Mr.

Speaker, we will improve the quality of health care in this Province so that all

of our people receive efficient, quality and excessive

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair hates to interrupt during Question Period, but members cannot ask

questions and then shout at the person who is giving the answers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I ask other members to be respectful of the person who is

providing the answer because the Chair cannot hear the answers being provided as

well.

I ask members for their co-operation and understanding that this is Question

Period not a shouting match.

The hon. the Member for The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This Province offers three classes of diplomas to graduating high school

students: honours, academic and general. While these diplomas generally

recognize the various levels of student achievements, in practice they also

indicate the academic opportunities available to the students and they reflect

local social conditions.

In the 2007-2008 academic years, two out of five students were awarded

general diplomas. My question to the minister would be: What plan does

government have to target those students to raise the achievement level of more

students to at least an academic level?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the question. I am sure the member opposite is fully aware that

every single problem that happens in the communities of this Province cannot be

attributed to the education system.

I can also say that we have implemented a number of plans, many initiatives

through the Poverty Reduction Strategy, which I will not speak for because we

have a hon. minister here who could speak to that. We have, by way of a number

of initiatives to support a family, we have eliminated school fees, to put money

back into hands of parents; we provide free textbooks. We also, Mr. Speaker,

work with local communities and local school staffs on school development plans,

which are intended to take the assessment results, take how students are doing,

the academic achievement levels they have, I say to the member opposite, and

assess how we can move forward and put a plan in place that will remediate any

potential problems and help students improve. Our focus, Mr. Speaker, is always

on doing everything we can for every single individual student in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would just say that the reality is a reality. Of the Province's twenty

economic zones, nine have seen increases in the proportion of students given

general diplomas. All, but one of these, are rural zones. Eight zones, which are

all in rural areas, have a general diploma rate of more than 50 per cent and the

education gap is getting wider. So unless these students are provided targeted

assistance, we will have another generation of young people where too many will

be limited in their opportunities for the future.

My question, again, is: What actions are being contemplated to ensure that

everyone has access to the same educational opportunities?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I must say, I am really disappointed to hear the member opposite make the

kind of insinuations and accusations that paint a very, very negative classist

attitude toward people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, I say.

That is not what this government stands for and it is not what we represent. I

say to the member opposite, it is also equally distasteful that you would take a

very small piece of information and put it out in this House of Assembly, Mr.

Speaker, to suggest that students in this Province are not achieving, and

achieving well. I say to the member opposite, if he would like information that

can substantiate what I am saying here, I can provide the member opposite with

all kinds of data on criterion reference tests, on public exam results, on

student attendance rates, and student pass rates that will suggest that what the

member opposite is saying is factually not correct.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, diabetes is a terrible disease which affects almost 38,000

people in the Province. In the report Diabetes Care Gaps and Disparities in

Canada, released this month, it was found that out of the four major tests that

diabetics need to maintain good health only 21 per cent of Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians receive them.

Mr. Speaker, with diabetes being so prevalent in the Province, I ask the

Minister of Health and Community Services: Does he know if his department is

involved with the health authorities in dealing with these gaps in care, and

what type of prevention measures are they developing?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

During the H1N1 situation, Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity we saw

statistics on the chronic disease in this Province, and diabetes is certainly a

major problem in the Province. Our wellness strategy, Mr. Speaker, which was

released a couple of years ago looks at the issue of wellness in total but also

addressing diabetes. There has to be issues, Mr. Speaker, of not only

medication, there are issues of lifestyle, including diet and exercise.

I can assure the Leader of the NDP that anything that relates to diabetes in

this budgetary process is something I am looking at very closely, Mr. Speaker.

Chronic disease management is something that we really have to come to grasp

with as a department and as a society.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the report also revealed that while the prevalence of diabetes

is on the rise in the whole country; Newfoundland and Labrador's rate was

significantly higher than the Canadian rate. If the minister has done the

homework that he said, and I am sure he has, he is aware of that.

Mr. Speaker, government has made some enhancements to the diabetic pump

program to include coverage for all persons living with Type 1 Diabetes who are

medically prescribed the insulin pump therapy. However, these enhancements need

to include coverage for glucose monitoring strips for the pumps as well as

better access to rapid acting insulin which currently requires special

authorization under our medical care plan.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Will government increase access to fast

acting insulin and cover the insulin pump strips under the Newfoundland and

Labrador Drug Prescription Program?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker. One of the areas for which our government

has received extreme thanks from the public has been the issue of the insulin

pump. That has been very well-received, Mr. Speaker, and has been a great

initiative.

Mr. Speaker, we are aware of the issues facing diabetics in our Province.

Again, as I can indicate, I saw the statistics during the H1N1 and they were

certainly of grave concern. Anything that we can do to enhance the lifestyle of

the people of this Province, including those who suffer from diabetics, Mr.

Speaker, is something that we will continue to look at. If there are any new

medications that can come under the Drug Prescription Program, we are certainly

willing to look at them.

I say to the member opposite, Mr. Speaker, that we are willing to take

whatever steps are necessary. Any suggestions she has, Mr. Speaker, I am

certainly more than willing to consider in the budget process.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for questions and answers has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board will table some documents.

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

Board.

MR. T. MARSHALL: I was engaged in a serious conversation with the

Minister of Justice, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to table this binder of documents which was

distributed to all members of the Cabinet and all members of the House. It is

entitled, Child and Youth Advocate Document Inventory and Chronology, dated

December 14, 2009.

MR. SPEAKER: Further tabling of documents?

In compliance with the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and

Administration Act, I hereby table the minutes of the House of Assembly

Management Commission meeting for November 18, 2009.

Further tabling of documents?

Notices of Motions.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand today to present a petition on behalf of

thousands of people in Labrador, who unfortunately had to take matters into

their own hands in order to get the attention of government by circulating

petitions asking that some attention be given to the issues of air ambulance

medevac out of Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I have in front of me correspondence that I have been sending

back and forth to government departments for well over a year. In fact, Mr.

Speaker, correspondence dating back nearly two years involving particular cases

in Labrador where the response times were delayed on air ambulance.

In fact, Mr. Speaker, this past summer, in August month in particular, I

dealt with three particular cases of delays in air ambulance services out of

Labrador air medevac. At that time, I was asking for a review into those cases

that did not occur by the department because they did not take the issue

seriously enough, just like the minister is not taking it serious today. Mr.

Speaker, in all three of those cases there were extreme delays, and I realized

afterwards that the delays were because the air ambulance aircraft in St. John's

had been broken down for a number of weeks and we had only one air ambulance in

the Province based out of St. Anthony that was trying to cover off all of

Labrador and all of the Island portion of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, to me, that is negligence on behalf of the Department of Health

to allow that to happen. Any time one of these aircraft is down, there should be

another one to back it up and to replace it.

Mr. Speaker, right now, today, the majority of air medevacs or air ambulance

services are being provided through or the major number of them is coming out

of St. Anthony or the Northern Peninsula area and out of Labrador. If you look

at the entire Labrador-Grenfell region, they themselves have more air medevacs

than anywhere else in the Province. I think it warrants, Mr. Speaker, not moving

a service from one end of the Labrador-Grenfell area to the other end, because

that is not the solution and the minister knows that is not the solution.

The real solution, Mr. Speaker, is ensuring that there is an adequate amount

of service, whether that comes in a third air ambulance being based in Goose

Bay, in this part of the Province, or whether it comes in providing for the

service through another form of aircraft ambulance, whether that is through

contracted services or some other form.

Mr. Speaker, the minister stood today, after telling me that he was so

concerned with the cases in Labrador, and the people he met with, he stood and

got on with a lot of political rhetoric, because no one is suggesting in any way

that an air ambulance service needs to be moved out of St. John's or moved out

of St. Anthony. What we are suggesting is that there needs to be an adequate

service based in Labrador.

If today the gap in that service happened to be in Port aux Basques, or in

Marystown, or in Gander, we would be standing here doing the same thing; because

people need to be assured that they have good access to air medevac services

when they need it, Mr. Speaker.

I am suggesting to the government that they put some real effort into

providing that service; that they put some real effort into ensuring that next

August we do not end up with three more cases in Labrador where there are

extreme delays.

Mr. Speaker, as long as the government chooses to ignore the real issue here,

it is not going to get fixed, and that is what is unfortunate. The unfortunate

part is that this is people's lives; you are playing with people's lives. People

need to have that kind of insurance.

Minister, what we are saying to you is not cut the services we have, or gut

the services we have.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to conclude her remarks.

MS JONES: We are saying to you: Strengthen those services, build on them,

so that people in all areas of our Province have good, reasonable access to air

medevac.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today with another petition on behalf of residents who have concerns

with regard to what is known as gravel pit camping. Mr. Speaker, the residents

who signed this petition are from Long Pond, Foxtrap, CBS, Green Island,

Flower's Cove and Corner Brook, so it is a provincial issue, Mr. Speaker. All

those people are asking for is that government's heavy-handed approach be

re-evaluated, and they would like for someone to sit down with them and discuss

this issue. It can be done, Mr. Speaker, because it already has been done. I

mentioned it before, with regard to the Wolf Pond, Fox Marsh area, where an

issue had been ongoing for some time; however, the campers and the cabin owners

came together, they had meetings for about two, two-and-a-half years with

officials, but finally that problem was resolved.

I am not standing here today saying some of the concerns that government had

with regard to the environmental issues that were ongoing, but that can be

addressed as well. What happened in the Fox Marsh area was addressed.

It was only this past weekend I spoke to a gentleman in Bay Roberts who said

he is in a particular area there for thirty-five years. His children grew up

and enjoyed the summers there, and now his grandchildren are there. He said,

there is not one thing environmentally friendly. The inspectors came by and more

or less told him, look, you just have to get out.

There is more to it than just putting stickers and nailing signs on people's

cabins and saying move out. It is best to sit down and consult with them. My

suggestion to those people is that maybe they can put an association together in

different areas of the Province, and ask government to sit down and consult with

them the way the group that I referenced earlier did, because that issue came to

a successful conclusion - and there are probably other areas in the Province.

So, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of those people, I am just calling upon government

that they will reconsider what they are doing to those people who enjoy the

great outdoors in our Province, and have been doing it for many, many years. I

am just calling upon government and the department to reconsider what they are

doing, and sit down and discuss the issue with those people.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move Motion 2, pursuant to Standing Order 11,

that the House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, December 15, 2009.

Further, Mr. Speaker, I move Motion 3, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that

the House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. on Tuesday, December 15, 2009.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that this House do not adjourn at 5:30 o'clock

p.m. on today, Tuesday, December 15, 2009.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion carried.

MR. SPEAKER: The second motion is that this House do not adjourn at 10:00

o'clock p.m. on today, Tuesday, December 15, 2009.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion carried.

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, on the Order Paper, I will do third reading of

bills.

I move, Mr. Speaker, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs,

that Bill 51,

An Act To Amend The

City Of Corner Brook Act, The City Of Mount Pearl Act And The City Of St. John's

Act , be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that

Bill 51,

An Act To Amend The City Of Corner Brook Act, The City Of Mount Pearl

Act And The City Of St. John's Act, be now read a third time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The City Of Corner Brook Act, The City Of

Mount Pearl Act And The City Of St. John's Act. (Bill 51)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 51 has now been read a third time and it is ordered

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

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The City Of Corner Brook Act, The City Of

Mount Pearl Act And The City Of St. John's Act", read a third time, ordered

passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 51)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs, that Bill 52,

An Act To Amend The City Of Corner Brook Act,

The City Of Mount Pearl Act, The City of St. John's Act, The City of St. John's

Municipal Taxation Act And The Municipalities Act, 1999, be now read a third

time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that

Bill 52 be now read a third time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The City Of Corner Brook Act, The City Of

Mount Pearl Act, The City of St. John's Act, The City of St. John's Municipal

Taxation Act And The Municipalities Act, 1999. (Bill 52)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 52 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.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The City Of Corner Brook Act, The City Of

Mount Pearl Act, The City of St. John's Act, The City of St. John's Municipal

Taxation Act And The Municipalities Act, 1999", read a third time, ordered

passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 52)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Finance

and President of Treasury Board, that Bill 53,

An Act To Amend The Members Of The House Of Assembly

Retiring Allowances Act , be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded that Bill 53,

An Act To

Amend The Members Of The House Of Assembly Retiring Allowances Act, be now read

a third time.

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Members Of The House Of Assembly

Retiring Allowances Act. (Bill 53)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 53 has now been read a third time and it is ordered

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

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Members Of The House Of Assembly

Retiring Allowances Act", read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as

on the Order Paper. (Bill 53)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services, that Bill 59,

An Act To Amend The Occupational

Therapists Act, 2005, be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded that Bill 59 be now read a

third time.

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Occupational Therapists Act, 2005.

(Bill 59)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 59 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.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Occupational Therapists Act, 2005",

read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill

59)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker we will move into second reading of bills from the

Order Paper, and with that I call Order 7, second reading of Bill 49.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 49,

An Act Respecting

Public Accountants, be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act Respecting Public Accountants".

(Bill 49)

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

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Certainly, I take great pride in standing in this House today to move, and

seconded by the fine Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, Bill 49,

An Act Respecting

Public Accountants be now read a second time.

This bill addresses an issue in regard to the public accountants and their

association in Newfoundland and Labrador. Again, it is the result of the White

Paper of 1998, I believe, in regard to establishing self-regulated bodies and

actually having some uniform criteria in order for them to actually do their

work. Those kinds of things that was included in that White Paper was the

ability to include governance structures; the reporting and establishment of

conducts and complaints, and the appointment of laypersons to the boards, annual

processes and disciplinary procedures as well. Certainly, this is not unlike

actually, somewhat of a mirror image to all the other professions that I have

done in the past. I have done some this session and I did a few in the last

session. I think I did some in the previous session last fall, too, as well.

As we move through this process - I also have to say, that as I went through

as the Minister of Government Services, I have to commend the professions for

working with us in regard to addressing their issues. There are a couple of

concerns in regard to the Public Accountants Act which I will address in the

January 21 meeting with the various people who sit on their executive currently.

So I wanted to have that in the record, that that meeting will take place to

address some of those issues that they have.

I am not a minister who tries to drive things down people's throats or

profession's throats. I always try to work with the profession itself to see if

we can work it to everyone's advantage or everyone's comfortably in regard to

the act and what they are trying to do. I believe that the public accountants

themselves certainly welcome the ability to self-govern, as all the other

professions have in the past. As well, we have to address some of the issues

that they may have in regard to this act itself because they are a little bit

different. If people do not understand in regard to what a public accountant is,

is that they have to be first either a CA, or they have to be a CGA, or they

have to be a CMA, I believe are the right ones. Each one of them is a type of an

accountant and each one of them has to be a part of their own association before

they become a public accountant. That is where they are with it. So this is

actually a layer above their own designation in the first place in regard to

their own profession.

With that, Mr. Speaker, like I said before, under this act each of the three

accounting associations will elect two members to the board and government will

appoint three public members. It will then be a self-regulatory organization.

Like all the other regulatory organizations public accountants represent, we

will be sure that the public interest is protected. That what this White Paper

is all about, in regard to protecting the public interest and bring in

accountability and transparency in regard to how they conduct their affairs. The

discipline process is enhanced with required public representation in regard to

having a layperson having to serve on their board. In addition, there will be an

annual reporting piece requirement to government as well.

Lastly, the new act also provides public accountants with the option of

operating incorporated form or as a limited liability partnership. Consumer

protection will not be negatively impacted in this regard. Other professions

such as lawyers, physicians and dentists already have that ability to

incorporate.

I also would like to say that the department conducted extensive

consultations with the accounting professions in developing the act. We went

through that process and even though it was extensive, I just want again to put

on the record that in the last few days or so or whatever, I became aware of a

couple of issues that I think I need to address before I actually proclaim the

act. I have been talking with them; they have no problem with that in regard to

going through with the act. I gave them my word as the minister that we will

meet early in January to address those types of issues.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I would hope that I will get concurrence and support

from my colleagues across the House because, again, this is not unlike any of

the other professions that we have done under the White Paper direction of 1998.

I think I see it as a good thing, not only for the profession but also the

general public at large as well.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will take my seat and welcome the thoughts and

comments of my colleagues across the House.

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to be able to

make a few comments with regard to Bill 49,

An Act Respecting Public

Accountants.

As the minister has already stated, in the last session of the House there

were several other pieces of legislation similar to this, housekeeping, with

regard to the Certified General Accountants, chiropractors, embalmers and

funeral directors, engineers and geoscientists. So, as he said, this was brought

forward through the White Paper with regard to regulations for those various

occupations.

Mr. Speaker, the minister noted - and I am glad that he did say it here

publicly today - he did inform me last week that there were a couple of issues

that the association had some concern about, and he agreed to make sure that

this piece of legislation was not proclaimed until their concerns were

addressed. It is my understanding I think, maybe they can be addressed more so

in favour of what they are putting forward, the association. He can correct me

later. I thought he said it had something to do with the fees, probably a double

fee when they joined, and another one had to do with reviews. That it would be

done within the organization.

So, Mr. Speaker, this piece of legislation, as all the others, is very

important. As he stated, there are quite a few public accountants here in this

Province. I believe there is somewhere between 200 and 250 of them. The benefits

of this act, the purpose of the regulation is to create consistency of standards

and applications in licensing. This is very important, but more important I

guess, it protects the public and enhances transparency. Something that this

government stands by, we hear from time to time, is transparency. It allows PAs

to become incorporated and to have limited liability partnerships. This is

something that they put forward and is encompassed in this act. It will also

make this occupation a self-governing body as opposed to a government entity,

which it currently is.

Mr. Speaker, through this piece of legislation, it outlines the structure and

the role of the board with regard to the chair and how they are put in place.

There are three non-members who are appointed by the minister, plus six elected

members from within the organization. It goes through the corporation options.

Individual PAs can operate as a corporation rather than as individuals. This is

a new option and it is currently a tax advantage for them, and Newfoundland is

one of the latest provinces to do this. So it is good to see this in the

legislation as well.

It also talks about a discipline process and where anything is brought

forward, complaints, an authorization committee is put in place. This can

continue on then to another disciplinary panel that is appointed consisting of

seven non-members. So the interest of the public if anything should go wrong,

they know that there is a process in place.

Mr. Speaker, with regard to some of those hearings, the public can be

excluded from the hearings to protect the party to the complaint or to protect

any witnesses brought forward. We also know that with regard to the respondent's

plea, whether they plead guilty or do not plead guilty, there is a process in

place for deregistration and suspensions as well as a failure of the PA to

comply. There is a process in place where the board -

section 37 empowers the

board to even go to the Supreme Court to collect fees that have been imposed.

So, Mr. Speaker, currently PAs have no regulation, just policy and

procedures. They are now compelled under

section 40 to put together a set of

regulations to govern their profession and this is very important. It is done by

the board and has to be approved by the minister. This will ensure a more

effective process from a legal standpoint.

Mr. Speaker, a person who is not licensed under this act cannot practice or

take the name of a public accountant and they can be fined up to a maximum of

$5,000.

So, Mr. Speaker, as the minister has stated Bill 49,

An Act Respecting Public

Accountants is a follow up and a carry through of other pieces of legislation

that were put forward through the White Paper. Mr. Speaker, knowing that there

are two issues that the association has - I will not call them minor issues, but

they are two concerns that they have and the minister has committed and they

have agreed to meet and discuss this before this bill is proclaimed.

So, Mr. Speaker, those are the only comments I have to make. As long as the

assurance from the association is here that all their concerns are met, we have

no problem in supporting Bill 49.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am glad to have a chance to speak to Bill 49 as well which is

An Act

Respecting Public Accountants.

I thank the minister for outlining the main points that are in the act. I

thank him too for having taken the time, over the last couple of days, to talk

with me concerning the act. We became aware as we read it and spoke with people

from the bodies involved that there were some problems and some, I suppose,

kinks that need to be worked out, if you want to put it that way. The minister

has already indicated, as he did to me last week, that he is aware and they have

been in consultation with the three groups. Of course, the three groups that I

am talking about are the chartered general accountants, the general accountants

and certified management accountants and that they are aware of the concerns

that the groups have with regard to a couple of points in the legislation.

I am prepared to vote for the bill based on the commitment by the minister to

meet with the groups. It would seem to me that if the minister is going to be

open to what the groups have to say there is the potential for maybe some small

amendments to the legislation. I know the minister says that the act and the

regulations will be proclaimed together once the regulations are completed, and

he has said that he will not proclaim the act until everything is ironed out.

So, potentially, we could be back here in the spring doing an amendment, but

that would be fairly minor, I would imagine, based on the discussions that I

have had. It would seem, from that perspective, alright to go ahead, pass this

legislation and if the discussions lead to a small amendment then that amendment

could be made and the proclamation then happen in the spring of 2010.

I see the minister nodding his head over there. I think there is an agreement

that is potentially what could happen.

There are a couple of points that I am aware of that the groups affected do

have a concern about. I had them myself when I was reading them. One of the

things that is being called for in the legislation is that review engagements

that happen that businesses and groups have to do to be accountable, that these

review engagements should always happen under the Public Accounts Act. There are

some small businesses, not-for-profits, and people in groups in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador, in particular, where there are few public

accountants. They are concerned about having the review for engagement under

this act because it would mean that everybody would have to use a public

accountant. You may not have one in the area in which you are. It is more

expensive then to go out to get a public accountant to do the review. So, there

is a concern about having that under the act.

It is important to point out that Revenue Canada accepts review engagements

without having to go through the hands of a public accountant. So, if that is

the case, if Revenue Canada thinks that review engagements can be done without

having to go through a public accountant, why would we put into our provincial

legislation a demand? So I am sure this is one of the issues that are going to

be discussed between the minister and the groups when he meets with them on

January 21.

I think the other issue is that the groups themselves, the three groups that

I have made reference to: the chartered general accountants, general accountants

and certified management accountants, do have a concern with regard to

disciplinary action because with the act as it is, disciplinary action would

come under the Public Accountants Licensing Board and the groups believe that

they should do their own disciplinary action. I think that makes great sense,

because even though they are all accountants, in the sense they are part of a

general profession, each one has a specific profession under that umbrella. It

is one of the issues of an umbrella legislation, that it could be that you have

to allow for a breaking out from that being under that umbrella. I know that the

government is looking at a type of umbrella legislation for some disciplines in

the medical profession, and it is one of the concerns I have that each

discipline that is being looked at does have slight differences. It is the same

way with the three groups under this act. They do have slight differences. So

the desire to do their own discipline process and to be able to hold their

hearings makes great sense to me. My understanding is that the licensing board

itself does not necessarily want to do it either. I am sure that this will be

part of the discussions that the minister will be having.

I am willing to vote for this piece of legislation, knowing that we are

probably going to see it back with a few amendments back into the House in the

spring, and that is fine - or who knows, maybe they will all come to total

agreement and this piece of legislation will stand. As the minister said, and as

my colleague from the Official Opposition said, this is part of a whole move of

professionalism that is going on in the government. I think it is extremely

important. A lot of the template that was there for the other professions that

we have legislated is the same in this document. I am not going to take time to

go through the various pieces. We have done it a number of times in the House

and I do not think we need to do it again.

I thank the minister for his openness and having the discussion with me. I

also thank his deputy minister who spoke with my staff to make sure we had a

full understanding of what was going on. I also thank him for the indulgence of

the House Leader for holding this bill for a number of days until we felt we

were ready to vote for it.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

If the hon. the Minister of Government Services speaks now he will close the

debate on second reading of

an Act Respecting Public Accountants. (Bill 49)

The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I am ever so happy to get up and close

second reading in regard to Bill 49.

I certainly recognize the hon. members across the House and their comments. I

have the same concerns, I guess, on review and engagement in regard to

not-for-profit small businesses out in rural Newfoundland and Labrador where

there are public accountants that are not available. Anyway, I have to go into

this meeting in January with an open mind to see that we can work out those

issues because if the issue is there, well then that is an important issue for

that particular group, for that particular profession.

I am not really sure in regard to the disciplinary comments made by the hon.

the Leader of the NDP in that, as I understand it anyway, is that if a person is

say a CA, well first and foremost if they have some type of an action against

them, a disciplinary action against them, than they would then lose their

licence under that CA association and then in turn they can no longer be a

public accountant. So that may very well take care of it.

Anyway, we are not here to debate those issues today. That is certainly left

to me to sit down with an open mind and work this through in regard to the

profession itself. I wanted to have on the record here today for my own record,

your record, and also for the profession's record as well, that I am willing to

go forward and see can we work it out.

Mr. Speaker, I think this is certainly an important piece of legislation as

well. It might not have commanded much time in the House of Assembly in regard

to the clock but this enables another profession to self-regulate and

self-govern themselves to become fully accountable and transparent to the people

of Newfoundland and Labrador.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I take my seat and if there are any other questions

with regard to this act, I would be willing to take my place in the House of

Assembly and answer any questions in Committee stage.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 49 has now been read a second time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 49 be now read a second time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act Respecting Public Accountants. (Bill 49)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a second time.

When shall the said bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?

MS BURKE: Today, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Today.

On motion, a bill, "An Act Respecting Public Accountants", read a second

time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, by leave.

(Bill 49)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to call Order 8, second reading of

Bill 50.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 50,

An Act To Amend The

Petroleum Products Act be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Petroleum Products

Act". (Bill 50)

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

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Aboriginal

Affairs, that Bill 50,

An Act To Amend The Petroleum Products Act be now read a

second time.

Just to give you a quick history with regard to the Public Utilities Board.

The Public Utilities Board sets the maximum price for motor and heating fuels

through the Petroleum Products Act which was enacted in 2001. The key piece

there, which I want people to understand, is that they set the maximum price.

They do not set the lowest price. It is up to the suppliers, it is up to the

retailers in regard to what they want to set the price at. Now nine chances out

of ten it is going to be set at the maximum price, but that is the only way we

can actually have a piece of legislation because we would not be able to

determine their margins et cetera, in regard to the Public Utilities Board to

enable the retailers or the suppliers, wholesalers to stay in business. So we

set a maximum price based on the market, based on the indicators, the New York

Exchange, et cetera and then they set the price. I think the price is being set

now biweekly. That is the way we regulate it. It has been very, very effective

over the years and I have seen the numbers that supports that. This act is a

very, very important act when it comes to the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

We also more recently, through a consultation process and also my interaction

with the Public Utilities Board as well, we saw the price freeze on the South

Coast of Labrador being lifted for this year as well because it just did not

make sense. The roads now are open. Things have changed since this act was

enacted back in 2001. So they do not rely as heavily on fuel transported by

tanker as they do now delivered mostly by truck over the roads.

The Public Utilities Board brought these amendments to my attention as a

result of their review of the legislation itself. These amendments that I have

in front of the House today reflect the current practices or give them the

ability to address new products and blends. Really, to highlight them for you,

what we are doing here is to add three amendments. One, in particular, changes

the definition of motor fuel and heating fuel to ensure that new products,

components and blends from a petroleum based product are included.

To explain that for you a little bit, is sometimes, especially heating fuels,

are not really one product. They are made up of a blend of products. One of the

particular ones that we address in this legislation, or can be addressed in the

legislation and be regulated - under the current act, if we leave it as it is,

because of the new blend they cannot actually regulate it. One of it is heating

fuel. In Central Newfoundland, and I think on the East Coast, too, home heating

fuel has a blend of aviation fuel. The reason they blend it with aviation fuel

is because under cold weather conditions if you left it as just the one product,

the viscosity or the flow rate of that particular fuel is certainly hampered by

the cold weather. By adding a blend of aviation fuel, it gives it more viscosity

and also allows it to run more freely and give a better supply rate, I guess, to

the furnace itself. That is why they blend it, but under the current act we

cannot actually benchmark. We cannot actually regulate that particular type of

blend, and we cannot address it as well because it is not enabled under the act.

That is what that amendment does and it certainly gives the opportunity to

include those new components and new blends in regard to our pricing regime and

our regulation regime.

The other piece, it allows the Public Utilities Board, which they do under

some of the other utilities that they regulate. It allows the Public Utilities

Board to recover their costs. When I say that, is that when a wholesaler or

retailer makes an application, for whatever reason, to have a review done under

the current act, well then they the Public Utilities Board, right now the way

it is set up, is that regardless of who makes the application they have to

spread the cost of that over the entire industry. That is fine if the actual

review has some benefit to the entire industry. Sometimes they might be asked to

do a review that may not be actually beneficial to the full industry but only

beneficial to the particular company that is asking for the review. In that

case, under the old act, they could not actually center that cost to that

particular wholesaler. They had to spread it out over the entire industry, which

is really unfair because it was not of benefit to the entire industry at all. It

was only to the benefit of that particular wholesaler or that particular

supplier. This amendment will allow them to recover that cost one way or the

other. They will make a determination - the PUB will make a determination if it

is a benefit of the entire industry or just the wholesaler itself. It also

provides the authority to the board to conduct a review on its own or on the

direction of the minister, in this case me, being the minister responsible and

the Minister of Government Services.

What I found when I became the Minister of Government Services, when I used

to contact the PUB in regard to the regulatory reform that we had in place and

the act itself in place, was that I found that really they were relying on the

suppliers, and relying on any of the industry out there in Newfoundland and

Labrador to provide any information that was requested on their own merit and

also on their own time. That is not so in regard to the other utilities that

they regulate. The act that governs other utilities such as the utilities act,

they are very, very specific in regard to the PUB being able to request certain

information. There are timeframes set around in regard to the response time and

that is very, very important to the PUB in regard to being able to attain and

achieve their mandate that this legislation sets them out.

If we do not do this then we just rely, really, on the whim of the

wholesalers, on the whim of the actual suppliers in regard to providing

important information where the Public Utilities Board can make informed

decisions, right decisions. Without that, they would not be able to do that.

Really, those are the only three amendments there. There might be a piece too

in regard to the piece of legislation itself that I will bring to your

attention. In regard to

section 1.(1)(c), heating fuel, the definition given

means furnace oil, stove oil or propane of a type used primarily for generating

of heat and includes a liquid product distilled from petroleum used as a

component of it.

If you go down to

section 1.(3), you will see that the following petroleum

products are exempt from the provisions of this act: motor fuel used for

aviation purposes; and motor fuel used for marine purposes except where the

motor fuel is purchased from a retailer who sells that type of motor fuel for

other purposes. Most of the fuel, motor fuel and aviation fuel are specifically

sold by retailers in specific areas such as marinas or at airports or whatever.

We do not regulate that type of fuel. It is not beneficial for us to regulate

that type of fuel. I believe, correct me if I am wrong, but I think most of any

of the other jurisdictions do not regulate that type of fuel as well.

So they are excluded from the act. I just wanted to highlight that for you -

I am just flipping through here, Mr. Speaker, just to make sure that I covered

off everything including the cost recovery and that kind of stuff.

I think this might be considered by some to be housekeeping-type amendments,

but I think it is actually more important than housekeeping-type amendments. It

enables the PUB to fulfil their mandate, which is to set the maximum price and

set it fairly, set it based on proper information that they need to have. If it

is not within the act, and they are not enabled within the act to gather that

information well then they will not be able to set the correct and fair price.

When I mean fair price, in regard to maximum price, is a fair price not only

to the wholesaler and the retailer but to the consumer as well, because you have

to have the balance of them all. We would all like to be able to set the price

of fuel taking, for instance, gasoline down to 20 cents a litre. That would be

great when we all fill up, but there would be nobody in business, there would be

nobody supplying gasoline in Newfoundland and Labrador because they would all be

out of business.

We all understand how business works, that it has to have a margin and the

retailers are certainly not making the margins of the big oil companies and that

kind of stuff, but that is the way it is. The retailers, they are provided and

can only achieve a certain margin. They have certain overheads and that kind of

stuff, so we have to have the balance between it all. The same applies to

heating fuel as well. We know that we are all concerned in regard to the price

of heating our homes in Newfoundland and Labrador because we do live out in the

North Atlantic, pretty close to Greenland, just south of that, so we have

certain challenges. That is why we bring in such important programs as the home

heating rebates and that kind of stuff to try to offset some of the costs to the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I think this is a very important piece of work and

important amendments to the Petroleum Products Act.

I will take my seat in the House now, and I welcome the thoughts and some

comments from my hon. colleagues across the House. I hope that they will

actually see the benefit and actually the importance of this act and give me

full support in regard to these amendments as well.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure again to be able to stand and make a few comments with

regard to Bill 50,

An Act To Amend The Petroleum Products Act.

Mr. Speaker, this act, as the minister stated, has been put forward with

regard to cleaning up some of the things that are not in the old act, and also

adding some clarification on other issues. I think the Petroleum Products Act

was introduced back in 2001 when the government of the day responded to consumer

concerns with respect to prices charged for automotive fuels. It was proclaimed

back in May of that year. We know the act was amended in 2004 to remove

reference to commissioner and transfers duties and responsibilities and

functions to the board and thus from there on the Petroleum Products Pricing

Commissioner, which is located in Grand Falls-Windsor, became the petroleum

pricing officer for the PUB.

Mr. Speaker, some issues with regard to Bill 50, from the understanding that

we have received that these amendments are viewed as very straight forward,

harmless and just an administrative housekeeping process as the minister stated.

They were requested by the PUB to help clarify matters that they have already

been dealing with. We know, Mr. Speaker, this came about after the PUB completed

a review of their own act and practice in the regulation of petroleum products.

For example, Mr. Speaker, the PUB already does blend pricing based on blended

products, but this just gives them the clear legislative authority to do so.

We know that the minister gave various examples, and one is fairly close to

the area that I represent is with respect to the marine fuel exemption. Just to

clarify, you would never as a boat owner, either as a fisherman or as a

recreation boat owner, go to a gas station and obtain the unregulated price. You

have to pay the regulated price at the station and this was always the case, but

this amendment now clearly spells this out and this is what is being done with a

lot of the legislation that the minister is bringing forward.

Section 4 of the act provides clear authority for the board to conduct

reviews upon a request either by the retailer, the wholesaler or by the minister

him or herself, and will review the suitability of the pricing mechanisms for

benchmark prices and from there can provide the minister with its

recommendations. These amendments thus fully empower the PUB to basically do

what they have intended to but they were uncertain legislative authority

outlined in the previous act.

Mr. Speaker, there are two or three issues I would like to bring forward to

the minister, and I am sure he will clarify them if I incorrect. I will put them

more or less probably in question form. We know with regard to pricing changes,

and with pricing changes some include what we call the refining costs where it

is more or less a benchmark or a formula, and I think it is being used by the

PUB, where an allowable markup is also including a cost for refining and

marketing. I am wondering, are we being charged twice for the refined component

when it comes to that particular area?

The other one is: Is the retailer getting charged for marketing a product? If

so, why is the company charging for the marketing component if it is being

collected by the retailer agent at the pump, and the retailer being charged

twice when it comes to that? I do not think that is the case, but the minister

can clarify that.

The other thing, Mr. Speaker, I was wondering, does all the product supplied

to all stations or home heating retailers in the Province come from the North

Atlantic refinery now, here on the main portion of the Island? I see the

minister shaking his no', so that clarifies that part for me, Mr. Speaker.

The other comment I was going to make is with regard to the pricing mechanism

that we use here in the Province versus in Nova Scotia. Someone said the formula

that they use, that our prices here could probably be a few cents cheaper if

they were followed. My understanding is that we do an average of what the market

has done, based on a two-week period, and we take the average of the fourteen

days. I think I am correct in saying that in Nova Scotia they go from Tuesday to

Tuesday. It is still a two-week period, but what they do, it is the pricing that

is charged in the difference on those two days. I was just wondering if that had

been considered here. Maybe it is not a formula that brings in any cheaper

prices for the consumers of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, apart from that, those are the only few comments I had to make

with regard to Bill 50. I think, as the minister stated, it is straightforward.

The PUB, when they reviewed their act, needed clarification on some issues so

that they can carry out the legislation properly. It also allows for, whether it

is the wholesaler, retailer, or the minister, to be able to get involved when it

comes to a review.

Mr. Speaker, with that, I will take my place and give some other hon. members

an opportunity to speak to Bill 50,

An Act To Amend The Petroleum Products Act.

MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. The Minister of Government Services speaks now,

he will close debate in second reading of Bill 50,

An Act To Amend The Petroleum

Products Act.

The hon. the Minister of Government Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I take great pride in rising in this House this

afternoon and closing debate in regard to Bill 50 in second reading.

I listened intently to the hon. member across the House. I took note of his

questions, and I will try to get him some answers to those. I think I know the

answers, but I just want to confirm them. I have to go, actually, to the PUB to

get confirmation on them which, you know, they are not within this House - so

I may not get them for Committee stage, but I will make this commitment:

certainly, we see each other pretty well on a daily basis so I will fill him in

with regard to those questions as well. So they are well noted and quite

interesting, actually, as well.

With that, Mr. Speaker, yes, I might say that it might be considered really a

housekeeping piece of legislation in regard to the amendments, but it cannot be

forgotten - and I have to reiterate and highlight - that it enables the PUB to

carry out their mandate. Under the old act they could not carry out their

mandate in regard to the definition of heating fuels, et cetera, and this

enables them. They could not do their reviews. They could not gather information

under the old act, which is important in regard to setting the right price, a

fair price, so this is actually more important than it seems. It is very

important not only to the Public Utilities Board but also to the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will take my seat in the House and I look forward

to Committee stage in regard to Bill 50.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 50 be now read a

second time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Petroleum Products Act. (Bill 50)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 50 has now been read a second time.

When shall this bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?

MS BURKE: Today, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Today.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Petroleum Products Act", read a

second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, by

leave. (Bill 50)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to call Order 9, second reading of

Bill 54.

MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded that Bill 54,

An Act To

Amend The House Of Assembly Accountability, Integrity And Administration Act, be

now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The House Of Assembly

Accountability, Integrity And Administration Act". (Bill 54)

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

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Natural Resources, that Bill 54, An

Act To Amend The House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity And Administration

Act, be now read a second time.

Mr. Speaker, as the Government House Leader, it is certainly a role that I

take to sit on the Management Commission which oversees the functions and the

duties of the House of Assembly. People who watch the House of Assembly will

also be interested to know, or probably do watch the meetings of the Management

Commission of the House of Assembly which are televised as well.

The Management Commission replaced what was previously known as the Internal

Economy Commission, which ran the affairs of the House of Assembly. When we

brought in the Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act, as recommended

by Chief Justice Green when he reviewed the affairs of the House of Assembly, at

that time the IEC, the Internal Economy Commission, was replaced by the

Management Commission, and the positions on the Management Commission were

outlined, and they would include the Government House Leader; so, by virtue of

holding this position, I sit on the Management Commission. As well, we also

have, from the governing side of the House, two other individuals. In this case

it is the MHA for Topsail and it is also the MHA for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

Then, also on the Management Commission, we have the Opposition House Leader as

well as two other members. With that we have the Leader of the Opposition, who

sits on this commission as well, and the Leader for the Third Party which would

be the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

Bill 54 is

An Act To Amend The House Of Assembly Accountability, Integrity

And Administration Act. The amendments we are dealing with today come from the

recommendations that came from the Members' Compensation Review Committee. The

Members' Compensation Review Committee was struck to be able to review the

salaries, allowances, severance payments and pensions paid to Members of the

House of Assembly.

You may ask: Well, why did we bring in this act and then strike a committee

to review the act? Mr. Speaker, the Accountability, Integrity And Administration

Act requires us during each session - which would be each mandate, each

four-year period - that we strike this committee to review those four areas.

Mr. Speaker, we struck that committee on May 28, 2009, by a resolution in the

House of Assembly. Once the committee started their work, they had until October

30, 2009, to report their findings and recommendations back to the Speaker, who

in turn referred it to the Management Commission for a review and, I guess,

acceptance or change or whatever as to how we move forward. Mr. Speaker, we did

accept the recommendations and that is what I will be addressing here today.

The independent committee that was struck to look at the areas of salaries,

allowances, severance payments and pensions included Mr. Joe O'Neill, who has

been a person who has done work in the area of public service for more than

thirty-five years. He is currently retired, and has been for the last probably

two years. On that committee also were: Cathy Bennett, who is a businesswoman in

the St. John's area, and also Brian Barry, who is an individual from Grand

Falls-Windsor who certainly works in the area of finances. Those people together

were able to provide their analysis back to us along with their recommendations.

The committee just did not get together and decide on recommendations; nor

did they just specifically listen to MHAs. It was an open process. There were

public consultations, and it is my understanding that the consultations were

held on July 29 in Clarenville; on August 5 in Grand Falls-Windsor; in Corner

Brook on August 6; in St. John's on August 18; in Happy Valley-Goose Bay on

August 31; and in St. John's again on September 17. They also, at that time,

received ten public presentations and nine written submissions. So the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador certainly had the opportunity to provide input into

this process.

Despite the fact that they reviewed the four areas, as I have outlined, the

two areas that need to be addressed in this amendment would include salaries and

allowances, and I will speak to that. Although there are some allowances, that

do not necessarily mean a legislative amendment, also the area of severance,

which is not being dealt with by means of a legislative amendment. So we are

dealing today with the recommendations that need to be brought before the

Legislature. As we have already seen during this week in the House of Assembly,

a motion regarding the pensions was brought forward by the hon. Minister of

Finance, and certainly we have dealt with that in the House as well.

The Compensation Review Committee was struck by a resolution of the House in

May, 2009. They started their work with the intent of, and which they did, to

report in October, 2009. What is interesting is that on July 1, 2009, the MHAs

received a pay increase of 8 per cent, and that pay increase was a result of the

initial act that we passed in 2007 done by Chief Justice Green. Wherein Chief

Justice Green said that the salary increases for an MHA would be the same as

what is given to the public service; however, delayed by one year.

Now, Mr. Speaker, it seemed to be a fact that we struck the review commission

because we knew we were getting an increase and we wanted that to be dealt with

first and then they could come back with their recommendations. I want to assure

people that that certainly was not the case. That we struck the review committee

at that time because we are required in legislation to do it and we certainly

respect that law and want to make sure that we follow the procedure as set out.

It was coincidental that two happened the same time.

In the meantime, the review commissioners recommended that the 8 per cent

that was given to the MHAs on July 1, 2009, as a result of the original act,

should revert so that at this time the 8 per cent increase of July 1, 2009 would

no longer apply. So as we move through this legislation we have accepted that

recommendation of the review commission, and the 8 per cent increase certainly

will not proceed once this bill receives Royal Assent. Basically, what we have

said is at the end of this month, December 31, the 8 per cent will no longer be

applied and the salaries for MHAs will revert to the level that was in on June

30, 2009.

Mr. Speaker, it is not just the fact that there is 8 per cent on the MHAs

salary. I want to address that as well. An MHA's basic salary at this time is

$95,357; 8 per cent was applied to that. So, the 8 per cent will now come off

and that will be the salary. In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, there are many

salaried officer holders within the House of Assembly. That means the Speaker

and the Leader of the Opposition, in addition to their MHA salary, receives the

amount of $54,072. The Deputy Speaker of the House and the Opposition House

Leader receive an additional $27,033 onto their salary. The Deputy Chair of

Committees, the Deputy Opposition Leader, the Leader of the Third Party, the

Whip for each party and the caucus chair each receive an additional $13,517. So,

the 8 per cent that comes off the basic MHA salary will also come off the

additional salaries that are paid to the Members of the House of Assembly who

hold any of these positions.

Mr. Speaker, it is also worthy to note that ministers receive an additional

salary on top of what they receive as the basic MHA salary, which would be the

same as what is paid to the Speaker and the Leader of the Opposition. However,

the pay that is made to ministers is not tied to this Legislature nor is it tied

to the recommendations that the compensation review committee had come forward

with.

Mr. Speaker, in case people question whether or not we have taken that into

consideration, and we want to be open and transparent, and we certainly did not

want it to be seen that now there is another parallel system and somebody has to

question that. We felt that the decisions of the review commissioners were meant

to apply to all Members of the House of Assembly, and we also felt it would be

appropriate that at this time we would also indicate that the salaries that

ministers receive will also no longer include the 8 per cent and that they will

be put back to the level that they were prior to the 8 per cent going on. Which

means it is consistent that we have always had the same salaries between a

minister, the Leader of the Opposition, and the Speaker. Although the

commissioners of the review committee did not necessarily recommend on

ministers, we will still keep that balance there so that the Speaker and the

Leader of the Opposition and the ministers receive the same pay once we pass

this amendment. I just want to make that point for clarity, so everyone

understands what is happening at that level.

The review commissioners also recommended that the next review be struck; so,

the next commission to review salaries, allowances, severance and pensions of

MHAs be struck, within six months of the next general election. We have also

accepted that recommendation and we are including that in our legislation today

as well, Mr. Speaker. So that is certainly important to note. In order for these

recommendations, for the next review as indicated and for the salaries to remove

the 8 per cent, we had to bring this into the Legislature. Certainly, Bill 54

addresses these.

We have the basic salary plus the additional salaries for the MHAs and the

ministers to reflect what was in the Management Commission review commission

report. These salaries will stay in effect until they are reviewed again after

the next general election and that review committee will be struck within the

first six months. Now, Mr. Speaker, I cannot say that at that time there will be

changes. Of course, it will depend on what recommendations come forward. I know

in the Management Commission meetings, and it was televised, there were some

concerns about the fact that this review commission did not put in place a

formula that would indicate how salaries would be handled or there would be

increases or decreases into the future.

Mr. Speaker, when you take time to think about it, at no point in time would

it be prudent to say this is the formula from now on. If we were dealing with

the public service, there is a time frame for the contract; it is a two, a

three, a four-year period. I think when we look at it, anytime we look at the

salaries that we can only look at it in the time frame of that mandate.

Otherwise, we could be off on a road where they recommend 2 per cent a year and

then we are way ahead of what the public service would get or there could be

financial issues within the Province that need to be addressed or whatever.

I think that after reflection to see that they did not come forward with a

formula, I think that is probably the best suggestion that they could have made

because otherwise we could be tied into a formula that really does not reflect

the financial situation of the Province. It is probably something in the long

run that was a very good decision on behalf of the review commissioners.

Mr. Speaker, there is a further recommendation of the Members' Compensation

Review Committee, and it says, "The necessary steps should be undertaken to

confirm the automobile allowance that was in place for the Office of the Speaker

of the House of Assembly, the Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the

Third Party before 2007."

That policy reflects the same policy that is available for ministers

regarding an automobile allowance. That is an $8,000 taxable allowance, so it is

about $5,800 a year and if somebody receives the automobile allowance, they are

not entitled to claim mileage. So that means they can claim fuel, but not

mileage. The ministers have an option of whether or not they take the automobile

allowance or they decide to claim mileage.

Mr. Speaker, whether you are an MHA, or a minister, or the Leader of the

Opposition, or the Third Party, or the Speaker, once you accept a car allowance,

there is no line drawn between your duties of office and your district or your

MHA duties. It is a blanket policy that you accept that automobile allowance.

Whether you are out doing district business or the business of your office or

ministerial business, you claim the fuel, not mileage. So you do not set up a

two-tier system for yourself.

Mr. Speaker,

section 4 of the bill addresses this recommendation in that it

confirms an allowance or expense amount for the automobile use of the individual

or the positions that I had mentioned. Mr. Speaker, I previously stated that

these recommendations were accepted by the Management Commission, as they were

given to us by the commissioners who reviewed the four areas as they were

directed. It is also important to note that we received the report on time, and

that it is important that we deal with it at this time in the Legislature,

because we have accepted the recommendations, and if we do not, it certainly

could be perceived that we are dragging it out, because we did not necessarily

like the 8 per cent coming off our salary. So it is important that we bring it

forward at this time.

Mr. Speaker, this is all part of a series of changes that have taken place

with respect to MHA accountability and transparency in recent years. This is a

very important process to boost public trust and confidence in our political

system.

Mr. Speaker, I do not think there is an action any more important that this

government ever took than to put the Auditor General back into the House of

Assembly. That was a very necessary move. Mr. Speaker, I hope there is no future

Administration that repeats the actions of a former Administration when the

Auditor General was no longer allowed to audit the affairs of the House of

Assembly. Mr. Speaker, when that happened, unfortunately, all politicians are

left to deal with what happened. It is certainly something that has shaken

public confidence and we have to be very prudent that we try and do our best to

restore public confidence in this institution in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, we have to rebuild the confidence. We have accepted

the recommendations put forth by Chief Justice Green. It was recommended that we

have this review. We did the review, we struck the committee, we have accepted

their report, we are following through with the recommendations and that we need

to do it in the Legislature.

Mr. Speaker, there is another aspect that I would like to bring to everyone's

attention. It is not just the fact that the AG came out of the House of Assembly

and that caused, certainly, concerns for everyone in the Province, but also the

fact that Chief Justice Green has indicated that as we do legislation that

affects the compensation to Members of the House of Assembly, that we take our

time and we do it day by day in the House of Assembly.

For people who probably do not necessarily understand what I am talking

about, we enter a Notice of Motion here to say that we are going to amend this

legislation and then we do the first reading of the bill. Then, on another day

we do second reading of the bill, which we are doing today, and refer it to the

Committee of the Whole; we will do that today as well. Then on another day we do

third reading. So technically, there should be four days that this bill is

announced into the House of Assembly. There have been times in the past when

salaries or compensation to members of the Assembly have not necessarily gone

day by day into these stages. With leave, you can go from one stage to another

in any given day, so we could go from first reading, second reading, committee

and third reading today, by leave. Chief Justice Green said that is not

appropriate, that we need to make sure that it is given ample time, the public

know it is being debated and we certainly do what is expected by the public to

be open and transparent in this process.

Mr. Speaker, just in conclusion, I certainly would like to again speak to the

amendments that are coming forth. They address the salaries paid to MHAs and the

salaries that are paid to that basic MHA salary for additional duties that

somebody may be assigned in the House of Assembly. Although this legislation

does not address it, for those who follow the process and understand it,

ministers who also receive the additional salary on top of the MHA salary, that

will also be affected the same way as the Speaker or the Leader of the

Opposition.

Mr. Speaker, certainly the striking of the next review commission within six

months of the next general election and dealing with the automobile allowance is

all contained in the recommendations from the review commissioners, we have

accepted them and the amendments to this legislation certainly reflect that.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I hope this puts us one step closer to restoring

public confidence. It certainly was shaken. It was very necessary when this

government decided to bring back the Auditor General into the House of Assembly,

and unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, we are going to live with the fallout of what

happened while the Auditor General was not allowed in the House of Assembly for

many years to come.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER (T. Osborne): The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate an opportunity to have a few words with respect to Bill 54.

I am sure there are some people out in the public who are going to think it

is rather unusual that someone would stand up and speak to a bill that, in

essence, is going to take 8 per cent of your salary away. That is exactly what

we are doing here today based upon the Members' Compensation Review Committee

recommendations. We dealt yesterday with one piece.

That committee by the way was struck by way of a motion of this House back in

May - I believe it was May 28 of this year. It is a process that Chief Justice

Green said we, on a go-forward basis, should live with because these issues of

pensions and these issues of severance pay and salary that we make as MHAs most

often, in the past, they were dealt with, as I call it, under the cover of

darkness. There would be a motion or a resolution brought into the House,

whereas normally you had notice of, a first reading, a second reading, a

committee stage and a third reading, which takes place over a number of days.

Quite often, in the past, when you had these money type issues being dealt

with in salaries and pensions, there would be a resolution or a motion in the

House and it was all dealt with in one day, and the Chief Justice said that is

not good enough. That does not provide any accountability, it does not provide

transparency and openness and if you are going to do this, particularly because

we, in essence, are a body of people deciding what our salary should have been,

that you should do it openly and fairly.

He recommended that there would be a committee that would be struck once

every session to deal with all of these issues, and they went off this time and

they dealt with them. The four principle recommendations they dealt with were:

pensions - particularly pensions for new MHAs who might be elected in the

future. What should their pension scheme be? Should it be what always existed or

should it be something else? We dealt with that yesterday here in this House in

Bill 53. So now the template has been established for MHA pensions on a

go-forward basis, as was recommended by that committee.

Another one they dealt with was salaries, which again requires that it come

back to the House of Assembly for legislative changes. In other words, the

management committee which normally deals with the operational type issues and

management issues of MHAs and officers of the House, that process was not good

enough. Even though that is all publicized too now, by the way, all meetings of

the management committee are dealt with publicly - televised. In this case, when

it came to salaries and pensions they actually must come back to the House of

Assembly and go through a process over a number of days so that the public are

aware of what is happening and can have some input into it.

The committee was struck on May 28. I believe they actually started their

work in July. Again, they must have had it done within four months. That was not

our requirement. We did not rush them and say you only have four months to do

this. I think it was 120 days actually was the wording. That was all decided

again by Chief Justice Green as to how long that committee would have to decide

these issues: pensions, salaries, allowances and so on.

They did, in fact, report back - I think it was in October - two of the

things: the pensions and salaries, requires legislative amendments. The

Management Commission met with the Members' Compensation Review Committee, it

was a televised meeting. Everybody in the public watched it; they sat here in

this House and had their table here. There was an interaction between the

Management Commission and the Members' Compensation Review Committee. Any

questions that anyone had, there was a chat back and forth as to what do you

mean by this? What do you mean by that? Where did you come up with that? How do

you justify that? Why didn't you do this? Very open, and the public saw it.

Their process, by the way, was public. Their process was always advertised.

They went all around the Province and met with people. They did not get a lot of

turnout. They did not get much turnout at all first. Some people claimed that

was because of the time of year you did it; you did it in the summer. Some

people even suggested that: Oh, that is why you did it in the summer, because

you knew everybody was on vacation. Who is going to come out to a public hearing

dealing with stuff? So you figure if you take it out of the limelight, do it at

a time of year when there is nobody around, that you might get it done.

It was not the members who were deciding these things; it was these

independent people. I do not think anybody, by the way, questions the integrity

of the persons who were on this Members' Compensation Review Committee. It was

headed up by Mr. Joe O'Neill who was the chair, a very well-respected public

servant who has thirty-plus years in the public sector of this Province, known

for his fairness and his equitable decision-making and his administrative

capabilities, a very professional gentleman.

Ms Cathy Bennett, who runs several McDonald's companies here in the City, a

very capable business person. There is no question here about the due diligence

process, shall we say, and the absolute independence and viability of these

people and their desire to do it properly, to do it openly and to do it

properly.

Albeit, I am going to make some comments here that some people might think as

slamming the committee'. That is not so, but I do have some concerns, I raised

them at the public meeting we had at the Management Commission and I will raise

them here again today because, notwithstanding that they did a job, I had some

concerns about certain issues and how they dealt with them. I think if we are

going to have a process, as Chief Justice Green said we ought to have, if we are

going to do it let's not leave any stones unturned. I do not think you should