PDF Version (Day)

PDF Version (Night)

April 24, 2024 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. L No. 67

The House met at 10 a.m.

SPEAKER (Bennett): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Government Business

SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

J. HOGAN: Speaker, I call from the Order Paper, Motion 1.

SPEAKER: We will now be debating the subamendment to Motion 1.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

J. WALL: Good morning.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that.

It's always a privilege to stand in this hon. House and represent the fine people of the District of Cape St. Francis. I'm happy this morning to speak to the subamendment to the main motion.

Speaker, the last time I had the opportunity to stand and speak, I discussed early childhood education and I touched on Education. This morning, I'd like to go back to that to speak to Education. I do know that the Estimates were last night and it was a very productive evening, no doubt, but I want to speak to Education this morning, Mr. Speaker, with respect to Budget 2024.

First of all, I want to go back to when the current Premier and this government came into office in 2021. I'm going to quote from the red book. At that time, Mr. Speaker, the red book promised “restorative justice practice as part of a holistic student and faculty approach to improving the school climate, developing meaningful relationships and enhancing the learning environment of the school.”

It went on, Mr. Speaker, to say that it promised to “work to further implement these principles into all of our Province's schools to nurture healthy relationships build on foundational respect for all members of the school community and support the development of the policies and practices that reinforce inclusive behaviours.”

Speaker, that is from the red book; that is what the Premier promised in 2021 before the last election.

Well, Mr. Speaker, I can say from my district and from my colleagues I've heard in this hon. House with respect to education, and it's been said here over the last number of days, that we have many schools that are unsafe, that feel unsafe: the teachers, the faculty, the staff, the students. I've witnessed that in my own district. I've had the opportunity to discuss it with the Minister of Education and that's the reality.

The reality is that many schools have become increasingly unsafe, teachers and students feel vulnerable to the various forms of violence and it's impacting on how teachers deliver the model of education in 2024 and how the students learn. It is impacting how our teachers teach and how our students learn. Teachers fell they're not being supported. I'm not sure if government realizes the realistic violence prevention strategy that works in many of the schools.

So we have many issues going on in the school, Mr. Speaker, the lack of mental health supports, colleagues here from the hon. House have mentioned that as well from different parts of the province and the lack of mental health supports are compounding the issue; of course, the general lack of options and the treatment options that are there; and, of course, the addictions that some young students, young people have, all plays a part of the lack of mental health supports.

The chronic absenteeism that's in our schools on a regular basis – that is alarming. The Child and Youth Advocate expressed concerns about the chronic absenteeism under this government, which is caused by many factors, multiple factors and one of them, Mr. Speaker, is violence in our schools. Schools must be safe and supportive spaces but, unfortunately, all too often that it not happening across our province. The teachers and the students here in Newfoundland and Labrador deserve better than what is going on currently, right now.

I feel that this budget was a missed opportunity for K-to-12 education in our province. It was missing key elements that the teachers have been saying that they desperately need. They need them to deliver the education to our youth. I know that the Minister of Education is aware of this, but teachers are upset and they're feeling that they're being disrespected and ignored by the decisions that are being made.

Mr. Speaker, when we look at Budget 2024 – and I stand to be corrected – I don't think violence was mentioned in that. But violence in our classrooms and around the schools is getting out of control. I've witnessed this is my district with the schools in my district. I've listened to the parents whose children are being bullied and impacted on a regular basis.

We wonder going forward, teachers and students are often at a grave risk of physical injury and, of course, cyberbullying, which is rampant, so I'll ask: Why was it not even mentioned in this year's budget as a measure for the government to address the issue? Again, Mr. Speaker, in my district, I've heard from parents, who, one mother had to quit her job because her child could not go to school because of issues of bullying, harassment and violence – physical threats of violence where the RNC have been called in our schools.

For a mother to have to quit her job to stay at home to look after her son, to provide at-home teaching to her son because of what's going on in the schools, Mr. Speaker, I can't fathom it – I can't. It's more than concerning when we have instances like this going on. I'll ask: What does this budget do for that? How is this budget going to curb what's going on in our schools with respect to violence?

Mr. Speaker, we all know the Think Tank that the minister spoke about many times here in the House that took place. On December 14, the Education Minister announced that the government and the NLTA would be hosting the Teachers Think Tank, saying: “Teachers are facing recruitment and retention challenges that need to be addressed in Newfoundland and Labrador. The Teachers Think Tank will provide a dedicated forum to hear directly from teachers and determine opportunities to address those challenges head on.”

Well, Speaker, in February, the government heard that loud and clear, no doubt, but what has been done going forward with this budget to address that? Teacher retention is one thing, but when you listen to the NLTA, well, the NLTA feels abandoned. I'll quote the post-budget news release from the president of the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association, he says: “Our association has long been shining a light on the hidden reality in our schools, a reality that is making teaching and learning in this province exceptionally difficult. To say I am disappointed in this budget and with this government is an understatement.”

These are not my words, Mr. Speaker, not the words of His Majesty's Official Opposition, these are the words from the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association, the men and women who are in the classrooms every day providing education to our students and this is how they feel. It's a heavy statement.

When I think back on the years I spent in school, and I can go back to my kindergarten teacher, Ms. Shea, who is still alive and well in the Town of Pouch Cove, I can think up through the years with respect to the teachers I had, Ms. Maynard, Ms. Kehoe, Ms. Connors, Ms. Slaney, and going through the years in school and the drive as a student to do your best. I still remember it. I am 50 years old now, but I still remember it. That has carried forward with me all my life to do my best, not just to get a passing grade, but to strive for an A. I've always had that with everything that I do.

Mr. Speaker, I'll go back to the NLTA again. They graded this budget and gave it an F. The NLTA issued the report card on this year's budget grading it an F for no plan of action; an F for no vision in education; an F for no improvements in teaching conditions – we have all heard about the teaching conditions here in this hon. House from around the districts – an F for no improvement in learning conditions. A failing grade from the teachers, whose boots are on the ground in the classrooms day after day, giving an F to this government on Budget 2024 .

How does government expect to retain our teachers in this difficult time when they feel that they're not being supported going forward?

It causes me to reflect back on my personal life and what you wanted to do and how you wanted to do it and you strive to do better. Well, obviously, I'll go back to my question that I've said in the first two times I spoke and I'll go back to the question I asked two years ago: Will the budget meet the collective needs of the people of our province? I always go back to that question when I'm thinking about and discussing and debating the budget.

The constituents in my district are first and foremost with respect to the collective needs and here, with education, it's a missed opportunity. It is a missed opportunity. Again, the NLTA president said: “Government has once again missed an opportunity with Budget 2024 to focus on the current challenges in our education system …” – a missed opportunity.

“The working conditions for our teachers ARE the learning conditions for our students …” How do we expect our students to get a first-rate education from teachers who say that they're being ignored or left out?

Speaker, the questionnaire that over 2,200 teachers and administrators took a little while back with respect to the Think Tank gives great insight to what these professionals are doing on a daily basis – a great insight. Many of the questionnaire issues were not addressed. So when we look at what was discussed in that questionnaire and how teachers and administrators are feeling in the education system, they're stressed and they're anxious.

The question I ask is: Why hasn't government used this budget process to address the survey findings? One is: 26 per cent say the morale in schools is low and they're more stressed and more anxious – 26 per cent. Of course, we have a Member from across the way who always quotes that facts matter and these are the facts.

I'm going to go down through some of the survey findings, Mr. Speaker. Almost 66 per cent of substitute teachers are not seeking permanent employment – 66 per cent of substitute teachers in our school system here in Newfoundland and Labrador are not seeking permanent employment because of reasons like dissatisfaction with the hiring process, stress, burnout and the lack of full-time support in their roles – almost 66 per cent.

Mr. Speaker, that has an impact on the mental health and well-being of teachers in our province. So I'll ask: What is this government doing in this year's budget to address the survey finding that 78 per cent of teachers indicated their demands of the workplace are negatively impacting their own mental health and well-being – 78 per cent? That number is astounding.

At the end of the day, when these teachers are going home to their families, their mental health and well-being is being affected.

I know, Mr. Speaker, that everyone has difficult jobs to do at times. In my former role, before I came to this House of Assembly, I had 28 years as a group home councillor with mentally delayed and autistic adults – I know stress. I know how it impacts your mental health and well-being and you do the best to mitigate that, but when we have this going day after day, with respect to their mental health and well-being, it's astounding.

Another percentage from that survey is on teacher burnout. Almost 87 per cent of teachers have experienced teacher burnout.

Speaker, the government opposite might not want to hear this today, but this is reality. This is what's coming from the teachers with respect to education. We all want a positive working environment, we all want that, it's stressed here many times, about a positive working environment, but 60 per cent of teachers indicated that their work environment has worsened over the last year – 60 per cent. Speaker, 17.5 per cent of teachers indicate that they are considering leaving the profession. Speaker, these numbers are troubling.

Of course, the workplace violence in schools, what's this budget doing to curb that when 37 per cent of teachers indicate they've experienced workplace violence; 15 per cent, emotional abuse; 22 per cent experience physical violence, threats of physical violence, verbal abuse. It's going on daily.

It's something that we need to be aware of. It's something that government needs to address. I understand and appreciate the stress that's on the minister with respect to the schools in the province and what teachers are going through, but this is what we're hearing from the NLTA. There are many faults identified by the teachers that are still not addressed when you're looking at the class composition, when you're looking at adequate resources. I know full well what teachers bring to the table on a daily basis with respect to providing resources for their students, I know.

This is spoke about many times in this House: class size. Large class sizes impact the quality of education, workload, preparation times. Of course, as I said, the impact on the mental health and violence and aggression in the workplace, Mr. Speaker, all very important, all needs to be addressed. I'll go back: Is it meeting the collective needs, what is in this budget for the education system from K-to-12? I don't think so. I don't think so.

Speaker, I'd like to continue on about Education, but after speaking to some residents in my district since I spoke last and listening to the debate here in the House of Assembly, I do want to touch on IVF.

I do know that my colleague from Topsail - Paradise, that I've heard over the last three years, has brought this forward many times, when he was in that role. Again, I'll go back to the red book from 2021 with respect to what was promised for in vitro fertilization here in the province.

It says, “The Furey Government will support people who want to have children and help reduce current obstacles. The Furey Government will increase access to fertility treatments in the Province, working with stakeholders to enable IVF services in Newfoundland and Labrador ” – enable services.

Now, I'm fully aware, with respect to what has been given out with respect to the $5,000 subsidy provided per cycle, I'm aware of that. That came out in a news release in March 16, 2022, from this government, $5,000 per IVF cycle available to applicants who meet the criteria up to a maximum of three cycles throughout their lifetime.

Mr. Speaker, I have constituents in my district who are faced with the cost of $30,000 per cycle; a family from my district travelling to Calgary who are dealing with the added costs of what comes with IVF and, of course, it's not covered by provincial health insurance and you have additional costs of travel, of lodging, of meals, of medications, whatever comes across that needs to be incurred when this family is trying to have a child.

When I go back to what was promised in 2021 by this government with respect to IVF services and what is not here for the people of this province, and it's not in this budget either, I go back to the question: Is it meeting the collective needs? No, it's not.

Newfoundland and Labrador is only one of two provinces that doesn't offer IVF – one of two in the country. Yet, families are struggling with the failed promises that were put there by this government. Speaker, it's simply not good enough. Yes, the $5,000 per cycle is welcomed, but that $15,000 over the course of three cycles doesn't come near to the $100,000-plus that's going to be required for a family who wants to have a child.

When I look at this, Mr. Speaker, it bothers me and I urge the government to look at this once again. It's not satisfactory to the people of the province when it comes to IVF.

Speaker, I have a minute and change left. The last time I spoke I said I wanted to speak on transportation and, of course, the paving in my district. I'll briefly touch on that with respect to Route 20.

Many areas throughout the district are deplorable. To the minister's credit, we've had many conversations with respect to the work that needs to be done in my district. I'm very hopeful that he will look at that, as he said he would. I thank his staff who have come to my district, the engineers and different officials have come to view the areas that are dangerous driving. We're at a point now where we have vehicles coming in different lanes to try to avoid the bad places in the road. Three times in two hours I had phone calls from near accidents in my district from people who are just trying to get to and from, especially from the Town of Flatrock into the Town of Pouch Cove.

I appreciate what he has done so far, but I ask the minister that he would give fair consideration when it comes to that in my district.

Mr. Speaker, I'll always end as I always do, I thank you for your attention, for the attention of the Members opposite and it's always a pleasure to represent the District of Cape St. Francis.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

T. WAKEHAM: Thank you, Speaker.

I want to take again an opportunity to stand up and speak today and, as always, start off by talking about what an honour and a privilege it is to represent the District of Stephenville - Port au Port.

As my colleague just finished talking about, roads and transportation issues are part of the ongoing concerns in my district, just like they are in, I suspect, districts of everybody on this side of the House. There seems to be a need for a significant amount of investment, whether you live in the Town of Port au Port West or Kippens or on the Port au Port Peninsula, even a small little road, Wheelers Road, the kilometre of road that hasn't had any resurfacing on it for years and years and years and needs to be touched up. Again, I've presented petitions in the House on that and will continue to do so in the hope that at some point these type of road repairs will be made.

This subamendment talks to many different failures of the Liberal government when it comes to issues in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, I'm going to touch on a couple of them this morning.

The subamendment that my colleague introduced yesterday talked about its failure, the Liberal government's failure in all its years to introduce a comprehensive poverty reduction plan like they one they cancelled. It is knowledge, it is proven, it is fact that this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, prior to the Liberal government taking over, had a Poverty Reduction Strategy that was recognized as one of the best in the country. When the Liberal government came to power, for whatever reason, they decided to scrap it. When they scrapped it, they have, almost 10 years later, not been able to come up with a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy to replace it.

That matters. Why does it matter? Let me tell you a little story that someone sent me in an email. It starts by saying: Hi Tony, I wanted to share a little story about what's happening in our community when it comes to seniors. We went to one senior's house where a single woman was living on a worn-out bed in the middle of her living room. She was hooked up to wires for what seemed to be COPD. Her home was in very bad shape, she was all alone. For us visiting her like this, it was absolutely heart wrenching.

Another senior living alone is very scared, terrified, thinking about how she's going to keep her home on her fixed income. Another couple who are both experiencing health issues are scared for one another, thinking about how one will be able to survive without the other. It's so sad. Seniors are really scared about the cost of living and barely making it.

These are real people, real people in Newfoundland and Labrador who are hurting and this Liberal government has failed to introduce a poverty reduction strategy. Even yesterday, we heard the minister talk about the fact that we're still working on it. We've heard announcement after announcement after announcement, but, again, that's all we're hearing is announcements, we're not seeing any plans. There has been no plan for the last years. There is currently no plan and, quite frankly, that's just not good enough.

That's not good enough for the people who are mentioned in this letter; not good enough for seniors all over Newfoundland and Labrador who are continuing to struggle. That's one of the failures that I've identified here.

We've also talked about the idea of failing to retain health care professionals, such as nurses and doctors, while wasting a fortune to replace those they have driven away. Again, we've all talked about the challenges with nursing and nurse recruitment and the shortage of nurses in our hospitals, in our long-term care facilities and the fact that we have continuously relied on all of these people for so long to do this.

So, again, let me tell you a little story. Let me read out another story that I've gotten. It says: As an RN for many years, I wonder have you considered that health care facilities are not meeting any kind of budget requirements. When you think about the fact that there's a $600 million line of credit that has been maxed out by the health authorities, you can see where they might be coming from.

The government is funding all the agency nurses; therefore, even new grads are not being hired. Here, everyone just goes along as if this is normal. I have worked casually in my retirement, only for the past 1½ years. There is less and less work available for me and other causal nurses. How is that even possible in a time when we have such a significant shortage and are using agency nurses?

She goes on to say more and more agency nurses are coming. Management shows no accountability for their budgets or for the staff retention. I know of full-time RNs taking six weeks leave from here in Newfoundland and Labrador to go to Nova Scotia where they will make substantial money for that time. A bit of a circus if you ask me, she says. What does the minister say about this?

Same happens the other way, an RN from Nova Scotia comes here for six weeks from her job over there. We are not solving anything.

The agency nurses are not bad people, but there is not the same sense of accountability since they are not here for long. They are not part of the community, nor are they here long enough to evaluate their performance. In my last place of employment, three months was the orientation period for an RN. These people have come and gone in that period of time. Where does that leave our standard of care? Not sure why, but lack of attention to detail here seems to be a pattern.

She says, I did get some work, I have shifts next week, but nothing booked for the summer yet.

Casual RN willing to go to work, lives in Newfoundland and Labrador, but has not been offered any work. Amazing to hear this.

I would love to see all graduating nurses have full-time positions with proper training and mentoring. Not sure there is any will to do this while government provides a blank cheque.

So, again, that's from a nurse who retired 1½ years ago, who is willing to go back and do causal shifts and work in our health care system, lives here in Newfoundland and Labrador, pays taxes here in Newfoundland and Labrador but, at the end of the day, is not getting the work that she's willing to do. But she sees a significant challenge in our health care system about how we're running things. That's just one example of that particular thing I just talked about.

There is another one here that I want to talk about briefly and that is a subject I brought up a little while ago in the House when it comes to the discrepancy in wages between the nurses that provide chemotherapy service in urban versus rural settings. This is a letter she sent me that she had sent to the Premier. I'll just take some quotes from it.

It said: Mr. Premier I submitted a PDQ for a JES job reclassification in June of 2020 – June of 2020 she submitted this reclassification – and today received a decision that my request was denied. This letter was written April 21, 2023, three years after submitting the request, the application came back and said it was denied. But this was written to the Premier in 2023.

Registered nurses throughout this province administering care for cancer patients in the same manner, requiring the same knowledge, skills and competency to do the same job, either in St. John's, Corner Brook, Gander or any other satellite site around the province, yet government has decided that RNs in rural parts of Newfoundland and Labrador deserve less pay than the RNs in St. John's.

In addition, we may have less patients in a day but no other supports are provided and there are only two RNs staffing a unit that administers chemotherapy, does video conferences with the oncologist, provides emotional support to the patients, as there is no social worker, no clerical staff to answer the phone, administers IV medications and IV fluids to outpatients from ER, do blood transfusions and run clinic, providing wound care debridement, suture and staple removal, all while providing chemotherapy administration in the oncology unit, just as RNs do elsewhere in larger centres with multiple supports.

I am appalled with almost 40 years of service as a registered nurse in this province that you feel – you being the Premier – the lowest salary scale is acceptable for us in rural Newfoundland. It's no wonder we all want to leave this profession. It is ridiculous that rural RNs administering chemo in this province are made to feel less worthy than their counterparts in the city.

Again, she goes on to say: Premier, I am calling on you to change this and explain the rationale why it's felt RNs in small communities, doing multiple RN and support staff duties, deserve less.

Again, that letter was written in April of 2023. I raised this matter in the House in this budget sitting and talked about the discrepancy and it still exists, so it's time that this discrepancy be eliminated.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

T. WAKEHAM: I am sure we'll get an update, hopefully – or better still, let's make sure that the people delivering the service, those RNs who are providing that chemotherapy service, that they get that update. Let's make sure that they get equal pay for equal work, which is what we've always talked about.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

T. WAKEHAM: Another thing that we talked about in this House, and we brought up in our subamendment, was the failure of this government to guarantee people access to a primary care provider.

We know whether you agree with the statistics or not statistics or we can argue back and forth about whether it's $100,000 or whether it's $150,000 or whether it's $125,000, the bottom line is, there are a significant number of people in Newfoundland and Labrador who do not have access to a primary care provider. That is a fact.

It was a little bit discouraging yesterday to hear the minister talk about nurse practitioners in the sense that he doesn't want to fund a private system and have nurse practitioners practice in their private clinics. I don't disagree with him that billing MCP is the solution, but I also don't agree that having seniors and others having to pay to see a nurse practitioner is the right thing either.

What government ought to be doing is finding a way. If you can't figure out a way to reimburse the nurse practitioners who are willing to provide this service, then figure out a way to reimburse the patients.

I also would disagree, I don't think nurse practitioners are part of the problem, I think they're part of the solution.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

T. WAKEHAM: I believe that they deserve to be looked at. When we talk about trying to recruit, the minister mentioned the fact that they're short of nurse practitioners in their Family Care Teams. Don't blame that on the nurse practitioners and say you must go to work for a Family Care Team. That's the fault of your failure to plan.

You've made an announcement of all these Family Care Teams and continue to make announcements. Yet, if we go and ask: What is the complement of staff in the Family Care Teams? How many are actually fully staffed? What does the skill mix look like? Are they full? How many vacancies do we have? That's not the fault of the nurse practitioners; that's the fault of government. That's where that one lies. But, yesterday, it seemed like nurse practitioners were being told: If you want a job in Newfoundland and Labrador, then you've got to go work in the public system; you've got to go work in our family care clinics.

Yet, we have students, right now, enroled in our nurse practitioner program who I have spoken with who have not been offered jobs.

Well, let's think about it. Are they really working in the private sector? When a physician bills MCP, is that not a private practice, billing MCP? Are the monies that we're paying out to US doctors to provide virtual care, not a private practice? When a doctor goes and works in an emergency department and he's paid an hourly rate to work in that emergency department, is that not a private practice? Isn't that a private individual with a corporation set up to bill.

As a matter of fact, I've been told that in some cases they continue to negotiate the rate because we have had situations where, even in our regional health centres, not just the small ones that are continuously being closed, but in major regional centres where they've struggled to find emergency room physicians and have been offered up to $500 an hour to provide that service.

Again, I go back to the point, let's not start looking and saying, this is private versus public. It's nothing like that. What we're talking about is people in Newfoundland and Labrador who deserve to be able to access a primary care provider and the nurse practitioner can fill that role. They fill it now. We have nurse practitioners who work in intensive care. We have nurse practitioners who work in cardiac care. We have nurse practitioners who work in the family care clinics. We have nurse practitioners who work in long-term care.

We have nurse practitioners who would like to set-up their own practice and provide service in their communities, where they are desperately needed. We should not be penalizing them for wanting to do that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

T. WAKEHAM: We should be working with them to find a way to make that happen because, ultimately, that is what government ought to be doing. It's about providing access to primary care providers and nurse practitioners are part of the solution.

Not every nurse practitioner will want to set-up private practice. Not every nurse practitioner wants to work for a Family Care Team, but that doesn't mean we should clump them in and say, no, your options are limited; that we're not going to give you any more options. That's the problem I've got. That's the problem I see here is that we're boxing them in. We ought not to be doing that. We ought to be going in and meeting with nurse practitioners and saying: How would you like to practice in Newfoundland and Labrador? Where would you like to work? How can we help accommodate that?

Let's do that as opposed to turning around and putting up roadblocks because that's exactly what we're doing right now. And it's not just a roadblock for that nurse practitioner, it's a roadblock for that senior citizen who can't afford to spend $35 to go see a nurse practitioner and then is forced to go to into emergency rooms and sit for 15 or 16 or 18 or 24 hours when they could have been seen by a nurse practitioner. That is a problem.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

T. WAKEHAM: What's our solution to blocked emergency rooms here in the City of St. John's? Build larger emergency departments. That's not the solution. The solution is not making more space available for people to go to, it's how do we keep people out of emergency departments. That's what we ought to be doing.

We recently heard an announcement about urgent care centres, a welcome announcement. How are we going to staff those? What's the staffing model look like? I believe nurse practitioners can play a critical role there. They could play a critical role but find different ways of compensating. It doesn't mean you have to be always in one box.

I could work as a nurse practitioner in the public system. That doesn't mean I wouldn't want to probably go out and do some shifts in emerg and be compensated in a different manner. That doesn't mean, if I work in a community, in an environment where I have set up my private practice, that I won't go back and work in emerg and do other shifts in emerg, just like our doctors do all the time.

But, again, let's not get caught up in the fact that we're saying it's MCP. It doesn't have to be MCP. It could be another way that we find compensation to be able to do this, but the key to all of this discussion is simply: How do we turn around and ensure that people of Newfoundland and Labrador have access to that primary care provider?

What nurse practitioners do in their communities, along with physicians, is provide that continuity of care, because that is so, so important. People like to be able to go in and have that continuity of care; that familiarity with someone. It's not always possible, but I think that when we talk about the nurse practitioners and the role they can play, I think there is something that can be done.

I also believe that primary care paramedics – I've talked about this before – have a role to play. I'm not sure what our new ambulance system is going to look like when it comes around or what's going to happen, we're going to have central dispatch and stuff, but imagine the fact that maybe someone like primary care paramedics can go to people's homes when they're called and maybe they can do things right there on the spot, that don't require that individual to have to be transported. They're services that they can provide with a skill set, with a set up that links them back to emergency departments, that the person may or may not have to be transported.

How do I know that? I know it from my own experience with my father when he was in his later years and my sister – I think I've told this story before – had no knowledge of health care so when dad coughed the wrong way at times, I think she'd called the ambulance, and I had the bills to prove it. But at the end of the day, many times these paramedics came to the house here in the city and evaluated dad, calmed him down and they left without him.

That was a good thing, because he didn't have to go and sit on a bed or in a chair in the emergency department for umpteen hours instead of being able to be treated and left. I think there's a real opportunity there for those type of services to be enhanced and keep people in their homes.

That's why we ought to be looking at all the options. We shouldn't be talking about a casual nurse who's retired who's talking about the fact that there are no shifts available. I shouldn't be talking and hearing about students who are currently enroled in our nursing programs who haven't been offered full-time jobs.

I kept saying this and I keep repeating it and I'll keep repeating it, that when somebody gets accepted into our nursing programs or any of the other programs, LPNs or areas of health care where we have an immediate need, we ought to be offering them full-time jobs on their way in, not on their way out.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

T. WAKEHAM: That's something I will continue to say.

People can argue about numbers and argue about this and say what happens if we get too many? I keep saying wouldn't that be a great problem to have.

Now it's not only about health care; it's about education. As I have said before, how many schools are closed, not because of storms or teacher workdays, but because of no staff here in Newfoundland and Labrador? That's not good enough. We ought to be doing the same thing now in the education system with the students who are enroled in our education program. How do we turn around and make sure that the people who are in the programs want to stay and work here in Newfoundland and Labrador?

That's where recruitment starts. It doesn't start when they graduate, it starts when they go in the program. That's how you recruit, that's how you retain and that's what we ought to be doing all along and continue to do that.

Again, those are just some of the subamendments that we talked about when we talked about all of this stuff. These strategies about failing to retain health professionals, failing to guarantee people access to a primary care provider, failure to have a poverty reduction strategy.

I don't know how we cannot have a poverty reduction strategy after eight, nine years in government, even after a promise last year that we were going to have one all ready and we still don't have it. We're seeing the results of that. We are seeing the result of that by these stories, and every single colleague here on this side of the House and I'm sure on that side of the House, have the same stories to tell and we will be telling them, people deserve it.

It's not about whether we bring it up or somebody else brings it up, it's the fact that these are real people in Newfoundland and Labrador who are looking to their government to help. That's the challenge we have. We have to find ways to do this. I don't want to stand up here and say what we ought to have done.

We ought to have done, but let's forget that; let's talk about what we're going to do. We need to be able to turn around and be able to offer comfort to people. We need to be able to offer solutions to people and that's exactly what we're going to do here in the PC Party of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

T. WAKEHAM: As I keep saying, we want this place to be a place where people can afford to live, where they can access health care, and we're going to continue to do that, where education is inclusive and is available. That's the type of Newfoundland and Labrador people want to afford to live.

I've said before and I'll say it again, it's not about where you come from, we want it to be a place where people come to. We want it to be a place, not where people leave, but actually where people live.

Thank you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Speaker.

It's, once again, a pleasure to get up. I think it's my third round on this budget and speaking on the subamendment.

I want to thank our leader, actually just then, for setting the bar to what we stand for as the PC Party of Newfoundland and Labrador and very important issues that mean a lot to everyone in this province, regardless of what political stripe you are. I want to commend him for bringing those issues out because that's what we all stand for and that's what the people of this province expect, nothing less, so I thank him for that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Speaker, when you start off, I guess we're speaking on the subamendment, now maybe I'll speak a few minutes on that. It was his motion, I seconded it, of course, my colleague from Terra Nova introduced it, but I counted up there are 25 – we have a list of 25 failings of this government.

We probably lowballed that number because we could have had a lot more. I mean, yesterday when he started speaking, he stopped at five minutes to introduce the amendment, and I didn't know why he was starting so early and he almost ran out of time. It just goes to show the issues that are out there.

Every one of those failings means something to – we talk about it here in the House every day, we hear it as MHAs in our offices with our constituents – it's failing to guarantee people access to primary care providers. It's for failing, in all it's years, to introduce a comprehensive Poverty Reduction Plans, something we were known in 2015, the PC Party of Newfoundland and Labrador was considered to be the best poverty reduction plan in the country and actually it was even outside the country.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: But they cancelled the poverty reduction plan because it wasn't a Liberal plan, it was a PC plan and they would never want to attach themselves. But that's something that I think is an inherent problem here in the province is not doing things for the right reasons. It's doing things for political reasons.

I've said this many times in the House, I stand by it and I'll follow this through the rest of my political career, you'll never go wrong by doing the right thing. You may look sometimes, you're doing it and you might say well, the Liberals came up with that or the NDP came up with that or whoever came up with it, but if you take that idea and you think that's a good idea and it's going to help someone, you'll never be faulted for taking someone else's idea, if it means the betterment of life of someone in this province and the people of this province, you'll never go wrong, ever.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: When I look through – and I'll keep going: failure to ensure women are paid equitable for work they do. Something my colleague from Harbour Main and the shadow minister for Women and Gender Equality is bringing up and it's something that we've made an issue. We brought that up in the last year or two, this government never hardly referenced it. It was on the paper for years and years and years and we revived that issue.

But why do we have to do things like that? We have a department now for Women and Gender Equality, why isn't that department speaking up? Why did we have to get our side of the House to make that an issue, to bring that up as an issue? And we're still not there. Government tends to say the right things, the nice things that they want to do, that they agree, but you don't do it. Again, it comes back to doing it for the right reason.

I've spoke about it in this House many times, when I look at making decisions for the right reasons, it's courageous. Sometimes you got to do courageous things and being courageous is not always the most popular thing. Again, I go back to doing the right things because that's somewhere where my theme, kind of, was thinking today and my last time speaking on this year's budget, which happens to be, I think, the ninth budget I've done now in the House and spoke on, but I talked about this previous times and when you go back through the years, it's being courageous.

Again, that's not always the easiest thing to do, it's not always the coolest thing to do and sometimes you're out in the wilderness when you do those things, but if you do those things, being courageous is doing it for the right reasons, doing it for the people that live in your province, doing it for the bigger picture, not for the small stuff.

I see now the carbon tax battle: the letters, the theatrics, Ottawa is a bad place to be, Justin Trudeau is a bad person, carbon tax is terrible, it's not the right tool for right now, we want it paused – all the key words – fighting with Ottawa, Ottawa is the bad person now, you never go wrong in this province – I've said this before and I said this last week, you can never go wrong fighting with Ottawa in Newfoundland. It's always a great card to play.

I'll say this now and I've said it before, three years ago – and it bears repeating and I keep repeating it – we stood in this House and this side of the House pleaded with government late into the night to stand up and oppose the implementation of the carbon tax, regardless of if the people could say it was a federal measure or whatever. Regardless, have the courage to stand your place and oppose the federal government on that issue, it would bode well for this government and the people of this province. That's what they want and that's called leadership.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: When instead, minister after minister got up in their place and they spewed the virtues of carbon tax: How wonderful it was. We couldn't even mention the word climate change and we were climate deniers. You mention the word carbon tax, it was outrageous where we're gone to, but we have a job to do and we have courage.

It comes back to the courage and leadership. We don't mind showing leadership on issues and when you speak up you get criticism from it. As recently as this past week and weekend, I think, people accused me of not caring about climate change because I think the people got bigger things on their mind.

Do we believe in climate change? Sure, we do. But do we think that the people here now, that's the number one issue you hear? You don't. I do not hear that from my constituents. I don't know if any of us hear that in this House from our constituents on a regular basis.

Do I not think that what happened in Port aux Basques wasn't a serious incident? Absolutely. Did it have something to do with climate change? Maybe. Maybe it was just a massive storm that would have hit regardless; we don't know that. People can make their own judgments.

We're not saying that, and I've never said that. Are we disbelievers in climate change? Absolutely not. But we're doing what we're put here to do and that's represent the people that put us here.

Now, the popular thing three years ago was everything was associated with climate change and we have to do something to combat it. But now their saying climate change is still important, but we have to find a better way. All we're saying is climate change is no less important, but our residents, the people of this province, have bigger issues in the forefront, here and now, facing them today – concerns, I should say, climate change will always be an issue – concerns facing them today. That's the issues that I'm going to speak on and issues we're going to fight for.

That's not the book I subscribe to, Speaker, and I don't know if that's the book that most of my colleagues subscribe to. The book we subscribe to is – what we're elected to do here – represent the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to the best of our abilities and deal with their issues that are affecting them here and now, right now, today and that's what we bring to this House of Assembly, day in, day out.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: I t's fine, I'll go back and reiterate a bit more about the courage piece of the leadership. Our Premier – there was a time he used to go around with his shirt collar undone, the sleeves rolled up, him and the prime minister, when the prime minister was popular, crowds used to follow him around for photos and what not.

Believe it or not, the man is so unpopular now, but there was a time that he would come here and people were lined up to get selfies with him – people were lined up to get selfies with the prime minister, it was a ritual. They were having parties on the hill. All the Newfoundland expats were up on the hill. There were celebrations galore. Anywhere you could get with the prime minister was good.

My colleague for Mount Pearl - Southlands brought it up, I think it was a few years back here, about that infamous picture on the red sofa up in the prime minister's office. It was a full house; you couldn't jam on it. The prime minister almost had to sit on the floor, everyone wanted to get on the sofa with the prime minister. It was the place to be and there are photos around. There are actually photos of this. I've said it before and when my colleague for Mount Pearl - Southlands brought it up, I laughed because I said I remember talking about that.

It reminded me that that's where things were, it was Trudeaumania phase 102, because his father was 101 and now we have 102. Everyone was emulating; he was the king of hill, there's no doubt about it. Our Premier was following him around and it was: My good friend, Justin; my good friend, the prime minister; my good friend, Justin Trudeau; my friend, my friend, my friend. Now, it's him – now, it's him. It's that prime minister. And we're fear mongering. It's unbelievable.

But the problem is, Speaker, people see through this. That's a common thing. People laugh about this now, they go, why, what happened? Again, I'll go back to my original commentary, it's about courage.

So when the prime minister is going around lining up for selfies and they were lined down the streets, it was really humorous: sleeves used to be rolled up the same and they'd have the top button undone and the tie would be twisted. It was like you had to look and only you knew who they both were. You didn't know who was who; it was the best of times; it was like, snap, snap, snap, flashcube bulbs flashing. What a time they were having.

That's when you should've shown the courage. That's when we look for courage from a Premier to say to the prime minister: Do you know what? I agree, the carbon tax will never help the people of the province. It's not cool because he was so popular and you have to ride the coattails of popularity. Everyone was hung on; everyone was holding on to Trudeau; he was bringing everyone around; he had the big cape.

The only one left on that cape now – but he just jumped off for political reasons – was our Premier. There's no one else around the country hung on to the cape. Because if I'm not mistaken – correct me if I'm wrong – is there any one Liberal government in the country, provincial government, that are Liberal? Isn't that the one that's here and they're not Liberal anymore now. No, they're not Liberal anymore now, they've changed. No, no, no, that's right, there's no Liberal government here anymore, no. We're not sure, it's a bit of an identity crisis. I spoke about this last week and it really bothers me.

Speaker, one of my biggest fears last week – and I said after – was I'm not much of a singer, but I almost broke out in song. I was fearful that my colleague from Cape St. Francis, who is by far the best singer we have here. The Member for Ferryland, he's not so bad, but the guy from Cape St. Francis, he's a good singer.

AN HON. MEMBER: He is good.

B. PETTEN: He's a great singer.

I was wondering with the new signage and everything, where they're not attached to the prime minister anymore, I said, where have all the Liberals gone? In the back of my mind the music was starting to clue in and I said, now, stop, get that one of your shoulder. Because I can be distracted and go down different paths that I don't want to go down. I was fearful at the time. When I left the House, I said to my colleague from Cape St. Francis, I was fearful that I was going to start singing. That would not do anyone any good.

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

B. PETTEN: Me, or no one in this House of Assembly or anyone watching, Speaker, but just to that point.

That's what you're dealing with. That's what we deal with. That's our current leadership in this province. Is that in the best interest of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador? Anywhere there's a camera, anywhere there's a flash, anywhere there's an opportunity for a photo op, anywhere where you're always on the right side of the argument.

I'm going to mention a couple of things here now. We all talk about it so why not say it? I'll say it, which I tend to do, we had an issue going on with Hockey NL. It was the handshake incident. I'm a big hockey person, a big hockey fan, I didn't agree with it. I don't think any of us agreed with it. I think it was a very unpopular decision.

Yet, we had the health care providers ready to go on strike. We had people, protesters, we had everything going on in the province, there were lots of bad issues and the Premier was avoiding all those issues. The Association of Allied Health Professionals, I think was the group that were near on strike. They were crying out for the Premier's ear – no response.

Then on Twitter, he condemned Hockey NL's move about the handshakes. That's fine, but he played it into: he was taking a leadership role, speaking out as Premier of the province that that was wrong.

That's fine, but everyone seen through that. People were laughing – that was laughable. So what direction do you get? He should have been to the table with the Allied Health Professionals trying to get them to negotiate a deal and get them back providing health to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Let Hockey NL, let the parents, let the user groups complain. They did and they won the battle, but it was a bit of dismay because we can't find the Premier, yet he's out on Twitter calling about the handshakes.

People see through this stuff. That's not leadership, Speaker, that's not courage. That's the easy way out. That's picking the most popular thing you can hang your hat on. That's populist politics is what it is. I've said that term before, my colleagues have heard me say it many times, populist politics.

Populist politics is not always making the right decision. That's making the most popular decision. It's not the hard decision. It's the easy decision. It's the lazy decision. It's not where people want you to be as leader of this province. It's not what we look for, not what our seniors look for when they're looking for dental care, when they're crying out for home care or just trying to get into long-term care or the affordability issues. They don't care about the Premier speaking about handshakes.

They want his ear on those issues. They don't care about seeing a snap of him down at the Uber announcement yesterday, which I find that a bit odd actually because that's direct competition. I'm not against Uber. I've used Uber outside of the province, but the big hullabaloo over Uber. We have other businesses here that there are some mixed views on it. People can have their own opinion on that. I can share some views on that, too, but is that where we need to be? Is that the most important thing that's happening to us?

You are travelling around the world on your speaking tour while the House of Assembly is open. I don't really know if that matters much to the people that are struggling in Newfoundland and Labrador. I would think not. We had the steps full of fishermen there a while ago and I've seen pictures served down around Boston, down at photo shoots with the processors while the harvesters are on the steps. It's just tone deaf. It's all about photo ops, but it's all about no courage. That's what this comes down to: no courage, no leadership.

The Premier can differ and people can differ and argue with me but when you really pull back the layers, that's what this is. That's not leadership. It's not. It's one of the biggest facades out there. Unfortunately, whether they like to hear it or not, the reality is we're living through this last number of years – almost five years – and that's what it's been.

It's more of a facade than anything. It's so thin. It's no depth there. We see through it and more and more and more people see through this, and this goes back to the carbon tax debate. Are you really serious about your debate? Again, if you were serious, you would have stood up long ago? When it wasn't popular and cool to go against the prime minister, that's when you should have stood up. That's where you missed the political point. That's where they don't get the point. That's where the public have tuned out a bit there, Speaker, because people see through that stuff. Too little, too late. People are frustrated. It's pure and simple.

I can take great humour and great poking fun but sometimes it's fair game and it should be highlighted and I think it needs to be spoken.

The last few minutes – roads. We've got the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure who he stood up the other day and he proudly talked about the paving of the Witless Bay Line to my colleague from Ferryland and they've got paving up in Trepassey. Nothing on Route 60 that I was quoted here a couple of years ago that you need the helmet on to drive the road. You couldn't drink a coffee. Nothing has changed. That's still as it is.

That bump up by Hickey's Building Supplies in Upper Gullies, you can take the front end out of your vehicle, that's still there. You got Witless Bay Line – he's looking after the Witless Bay Line. He's doing a bit of Trepassey, because he's good. He's spreading it out to all the PC and Liberal districts, but it's one point that we're missing there, Speaker. That's where he lives.

AN HON. MEMBER: What? No.

B. PETTEN: That's where he lives. Now, I don't think he votes for my colleague from Ferryland.

AN HON. MEMBER: He might.

B. PETTEN: You never know.

AN HON. MEMBER: He should.

B. PETTEN: He should. That's right. He speaks up for the right issues, but that's where the man lives. He's getting up in the House and he's telling – the general public don't get that. He's getting up in the House and he's talking about, b'y, I've been fair. I have Witless Bay Line, we're doing Trepassey, but that's where he lives.

My colleague from Harbour Main stood up in this House many times – I actually done a petition one time, too, and that's the one with the helmet and the coffee came into play. The Minister of Tourism, Culture, Arts and Recreation was the minister of the day, we're trying to get that

section of road paved from Kelligrews right up through Upper Gullies, Seal Cove and Holyrood. Years later, how many ministers have we had since then? It's still not done.

Why? Because there was a government that brought in a Roads Plan; they were taking the politics out of paving. But if anything, they've put more politics in paving than ever before and, ironically and sadly, there's more money into paving than ever before. So what does that amount to? More happy Liberal districts. That's all it is.

The only one gets black gold, as was referred to many times with asphalt, you got to be a Liberal. Don't matter if you're a resident of Newfoundland and Labrador. Don't matter if you pay taxes, because there are people in all our districts that pay taxes, too. Actually, there are a few Liberals around our districts and that's the reality.

But all you have to do, in my closing seconds, Speaker – I have realized we missed the boat for years, and I'll be there for years arguing this point. I come down to it. All you have to do is get the newly appointed Minister of Housing to call the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure, tell him what roads you need paved. So get the Minister of Housing to call the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure and your road will be done.

SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Member's time has expired.

B. PETTEN: Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Exploits.

P. FORSEY: Thank you, Speaker.

Getting up after my colleague from Conception Bay South is certainly a challenge, no doubt about it, the points that he's brought up there. Anyway, it's always nice to get up and represent the people who put me here, the District of Exploits and they've got challenges as well. Like some of the issues that the Member just brought up, they carry right into my district, and I will start with the roads. It seems to be a big topic. We got to be fair.

There are amounts of roads and paving in different districts that we're not getting in our district. I've seen it. We've all been there. We've all witnessed it. In the five years that I've been there – apparently there's a five-year plan. There is a five-year road plan, apparently.

I think it was last week I got up on a petition about roads. The minister got up behind me, answered the question and I thank him for that; but if I don't get anything this year, I can wait for year one, year two, year three. Now if there was a five-year road plan back five years ago, I'm not included in it yet. Now we're pushed down the road to eight years, nine years. What is it, a five-year road plan, one-year road plan or eight- or nine-year road plan? Because that's where I'm to.

I don't understand this five-year road plan. I really don't. I've got challenges with that, because I'm being told by four different ministers of a five-year road plan that every time I go to them well, it's going to be in the five-year road plan. But then again – and it was just said the other day – I've been here five years now, I have to wait another five years. Now I'm in a 10-year road plan. Then there's other districts that seems like they can get it done right away.

You have to be fair when it comes to the roadwork in the districts. You really do. I don't mind a five-year road plan. I don't mind waiting my turn. I really don't. There are 40 districts. There's only so much to go around. But you have to be fair.

Pushing a five-year road plan down to a 10-year road plan, I don't believe that's fair. I really don't. I don't believe that's fair and I think we should be getting more of our roads done in different districts than probably in some of the Liberal districts that are down there now. Because that's where it's going.

An example on roadwork: The former minister last year told me I was getting $4 million worth of roadwork in the Exploits District. Now, Route 360 comes off the highway in my district, which leads to his district. Now, part of my district goes about 30 kilometres down Route 360 to his area, so he gave me $4 million worth of roadwork, but guess what direction it went in? Route 360, down in his district.

Those are the kind of things you have to contend with. That's on the highway. Really, my main routes in my district, Route 350, that is the main route, but I have 351, 351A, 352 – those are the other off-routes there, but they're all important. Those are the main routes in my district and the attention that's given to those routes is deplorable. I've asked the minister for different routes to be looked at, some fairness put into those areas, some attention put into those troublesome areas that I need work with.

It wouldn't take a lot. It really wouldn't. It wouldn't take a lot of pavement or a lot of roadwork. I'm not looking for a 20-kilometre stretch by no means, but a couple of kilometres here, a couple of kilometres somewhere else just to keep the main traffic flowing good so you don't end up with those big damages and issues that are created by deplorable roads.

When it comes to roads, yeah, we got them, everybody got them, but if there's a five-year road plan, I'd like to have a five-year road plan. I'd certainly like to be included in the five-year road plan, not a 10-year road plan.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

P. FORSEY: The cost of living is something that's brought up time and time again. I hear it more and more every day in my district and I hear it more and more across the province.

If you stop to any restaurant, you stop to any gas station and you're talking to the next person, you're using separate pumps but you're talking to them, and each one is saying: B'y, how far is this going to go? When does this stop? I can't afford to go to St. John's. I can't afford to travel from here to there. Regardless of what the government across the way do think, carbon tax has a big influence on the cost of living, it really does.

I know the Premier is out: B'y, I don't agree with it. I don't like it. I don't want it. Yet, when it was introduced to come into Newfoundland and Labrador, every one of them across the way got up and voted for it. They got up and voted for the carbon tax. Now, we're paying the price of carbon tax, each individual in this province is paying the price of carbon tax in the cost of living when technology should be introduced for carbon tax, especially in the bigger industries.

The bigger industries can be more streamlined to address carbon tax and to address the carbon issues that we have, not to tax each individual person, each individual that got to go feed their families. They got to go to work and to even try to get to work today to feed those families is an issue.

Maybe the big businesses say they can't afford the carbon taxes, but they got to come up with technology. When it comes to technology, I remember years ago, automation became a big thing. They found ways to go into automation to streamline their businesses. It probably cut jobs at the time, but automation was a big thing for them. They found ways to do that. They got the cost to go into the automation. So those businesses need to be finding more technologies to streamline the carbon issues that they have, not a tax from the Liberal government in Ottawa and the Liberal government, right now, in Newfoundland and Labrador who introduced the carbon tax to us and we now have to pay.

It's too late when it's done because it's done now so we have to pay and those people with the cost of living today, it's very, very stressful. Like I said, they're trying to get to work. They're trying to feed their families. There are lots of things that they can't afford to do.

When I look at a single mom, you know, she calls me and says: Mr. Forsey, is there anything out there to help me because I need some things for my two children? I need some food, some groceries, probably toiletries, anything to help along the way. That's heartbreaking when you've got to hear those stories, it really, really is.

I know you fellows are hearing it, too, across the way, but the carbon tax is a big part of that issue. Carbon tax is applied to fuels and gases that comes into our Island.

Food security is another thing. Every piece of food, every time we go buy food, the food at the grocery stores right now are maxed – they're maxed all right but I'm afraid they're going to go further. People every day go to the grocery stores to buy those groceries and they tell me: I went to the grocery store and $500 in half a cart. They come out with 2 bags of groceries, probably $200 or $300 in those two bags of groceries. It's amazing what's happening with regard to the cost of living and carbon tax is a big cost of that.

Again, our food security: when we're trying to increase our food security for farmers, the farmers got to buy equipment. They've got to buy fuels. They got to buy fertilizers. I know diesel is different for them, but they've still got to buy the parts. They've still got to buy the equipment. They've still got to buy the fertilizers to work that farm to increase our food security for what we need to be doing in this province.

Now, I know the government touted a year or so ago that we were up to 20 per cent on food security or what we're using, but with the lack of farmland that we have and the efficiency to use that farmland, I don't know if we're really at that point at this moment.

Because to be able to utilize that farmland and what they've allocated for it and the red tape to get the farmland actually serviced and get it going, by the time the new famers, the new applicants get into those farms and by the time they go through all the red tape, by the time they go through all the requirements and cost, next thing they're up to something that they never even thought they were going to be involved in. So what do you see? I'm gone. I'm done, I'll walk away, I'll take my losses right now and I'm gone.

So if that's the way of increasing food security, then we have to look at other ways. Right now, the farmers are even having trouble to get their fields ready for this year, basically because of the cost of living, which what's part of the cost of living? The carbon tax which is a big part of their problem.

If we're going to increase our food security here on this Island, we're going to have to look at other ways and means of being able to support our farmers to be able to grow our crops so that we can have the crops grown in our province and shared to the stores and every Newfoundlander and Labradorian can have access to some food on their tables that we can supply here in Newfoundland and Labrador, rather than depending on other parts of Canada.

Right now, in other parts of Canada we're hearing it all the time with climate change, they're into droughts already in the western part of Canada, they're into droughts already and the dry climate conditions. So that is going to put pressure on the amount of food that's distributed across Canada, even to our province.

We have got to find better ways, we have to be able to treat our farmers more fair, we got to be able to come up with a more land plans to be able to address those problems of food security in our own province so that we can supply food to our seniors, to ourselves, to our young people, to all families throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. That's something we certainly need to address. That is all a part of the cost of living.

Another part of the cost of living right now is the sugar tax, another great tax they brought in. Let's do it, let's bring in the sugar tax now to make people be healthier. The healthy choices they're making are not healthy choices because of food security. They can't afford to buy the bananas. They can't afford to buy the oranges. They can't afford to buy those fruits and healthy foods that need to be. Why? Because of the cost it takes to get here.

Our sugar tax, all it is, is going back in towards government, because they can't afford to buy the milks, they can't afford to buy the fruits, they're not living healthier and they're still buying the cheaper drinks that's out there. That's the healthy choice they're making. That's where they're to; that's the choices that they're making, is buy those drinks because they're – of course, we all know it, we see it in the stores and we see those sugar drinks are on the shelves and price is there. The cheap prices and that kind of stuff for the drinks and they just pick it up and they have it there.

You put a litre of Pepsi compared to a two-litre milk, what's cheaper to take off the shelf? The litre of Pepsi. They're not going to take the milk and they can't afford to buy the fruits and vegetables.

So we certainly have to look at ways – and the taxes are government grabs. They're not a help to the individuals. It stalls the buying process of the province. So the cost of living right now are those two taxes that are being a great burden on Newfoundland and Labrador. It's the carbon tax and the sugar tax, so we need to certainly address those issues.

Housing is another issue that I've heard throughout the Central area. I've heard it across the province. We've seen it. We saw the tent cities and we saw the issues that are there now. But even in my own district, housing, in Central Newfoundland there is about 350 on a list for housing. That's a lot in Central Newfoundland. It really is. I got it in my district because they can't afford – again, it goes down the line. You take a single parent. They can't afford to go out and rent a place because the rents are even high. So you buy the food – everything is high on the cost of living.

So that parent that I talked about earlier, with two children, trying to get a place to rent, she can't afford to do all that. She really can't afford to do all that.

Housing has become a big issue in our area. That single mom that needed housing to support her children to be a little bit more affordable, that she can be able to get in there and support her children, be able to go to work and give them a good education, give them a good home, give them a good day-to-day living, that's where we're to. That's what we need to be doing.

The housing in Central Newfoundland, I've talked to people and they've been living in sheds. It's sad but they're living in sheds. Going through all winter, living in sheds. Families calling me saying: Mr. Forsey, is there a way that we can get so-and-so into a housing unit? Are there ways that we can get this done? He's cold. He can't get a place to rent, but the housing units are not there.

We did have some housing units in the Central area that needed to be refurbished and still needs to be refurbished. We certainly need to get those units up and running. That's the ones that's already there. They've been there a long time. Some of those have been there a long time in the district, but they can be refurbished and work done on them to at least get some families into those houses as soon as possible.

We have lots of relief. I just said there's about 350 on the list. So there are lots of people who we can certainly put in those houses. I know there are priorities for each one, but we certainly need the housing to go into it. That's one use and then we need some more affordable housing in there anyway, especially for those groups of individuals who are trying to find apartments for their families and to be able to have somewhere to live, to be comfortable and to be warm and all they want is just to live comfortable and have somewhere to live. That's something that we should be providing to the residents of Central Newfoundland and certainly throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

Seniors again, I'll just touch on the seniors. A lot of the seniors, again, because of the cost of living, because of the sugar tax, because of the carbon tax, they can't heat their homes. I hear it. I get the calls every fall. I'm still getting them now. We can't afford to heat our homes. If they do heat their homes, they buy a tank of oil, then they can't buy the groceries. They can't buy that healthy choice for groceries. They certainly can't do that. Either you stay warm or even their heat bill, it could be electric heat, whatever the fuel is, they can't afford to have it and now they can't eat comfortably.

The foods that they're buying are probably not the healthy foods that needs to be bought.

Home supports for seniors: I've talked to some seniors and just to avail of some of the home supports that are there is a struggle. They fall through the caps of where they are for home supports. Then they say they'd like to see more for their workers, because they have some good workers, but the workers sometimes don't stick around because of the supports that they are getting.

All these things just go down the line from one piece to another and it's all part of the cost of living. Basically, the sugar tax and carbon tax right now, Speaker, is causing a lot of grief to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and we certainly need to have those addressed.

Thank you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER (Trimper): Thank you.

I now call on the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN: Thank you, Speaker.

It's always a pleasure to rise in this House and speak on behalf of the residents of Topsail - Paradise and the province as a whole. It's actually a job – this role, I must say, is a role I enjoy. It's always nice to be out speaking with the people, always nice trying to help people, but it can be wearing on you. It's not the 24-7 piece, it's not the physical being in places, but it's trying to help individuals and trying to find them the answers and the help they need. Many times, successful; other times, not. That's what wears on me, I can guarantee you that, when there are people out there that are in desperate need and there's no way to find a solution for them.

When we talk about this subamendment to the budget, it mentions failure a lot. The government side of the House, I know in the past have said, oh, because you're not voting for the budget, you're not voting for this and this and this. I used the analogy a while back of going in a produce store and picking up a bag of apples to purchase. You go in any store, people pick up that bag of apples and they roll it around and they look to make sure they see how many are ripe, how many are bruised and how many are rotten. If it doesn't fit them, they lay it down and go to the next bag.

That's a lot of what you look at, at a budget. It's not looking at what's not good in it. There are some good apples in there, but you have to look at the overall picture and look at what's not in it. When I look at the different things that are happening around us, some of the things, I look at what's happening in our schools.

The Member for Cape St. Francis mentioned about the violence in the schools and we spoke about this last night at a very long Estimates on Education. The Teachers' Union talked about the violence in the schools and gave some examples. This is what's heart wrenching when it comes to this. You can talk about statistics. Twenty-nine incidents a day are happening. In the first 38 days of the school year, almost 1,000 reported incidents of violence happened – and, again, that's reported. That doesn't talk to what's actually happening.

The president of the NLTA was in the media just recently and talked about what does violence in a school look like in Newfoundland and Labrador. He said it looks like the girl with a concussion who is missing class this week because an aggressive student hurt her at school. It looks like a teacher who ended up in an emergency room and now needs facial reconstruction surgery after an eight-year-old student assaulted her. Those are just two examples of what's happening in our school system, an area where you expect to go and have a safe learning environment.

We also know what happened last March in front of PWC. A young student almost his life because of violence in our classrooms. The president of the NLTA spoke to the different issues around that. Spoke to the class sizes. We talked about this last night in Estimates. We have these hard and soft caps. I don't know why. There should be a hard cap and that cap should be adjusted downwards, depending on the complexities of the classroom. It's not rocket science. Something that needs to be done.

In this same

article I look at, the minister responsible said – this is her quote – so the commitment is there to take our time and look at that and to review teacher allocations. To take our time and look at that – we've had so many – so many – reports for education. We had the Premier's report that was done a number of years ago and the last line in that report was that now is the time to act. That's years ago now, and we're still here taking our time when teachers are dealing with facial reconstruction surgery, when children do not want to go to school, when kids are almost murdered on the steps of the school.

These are serious issues. There's a failure here to act. There has been plenty of opportunities to act, but we're still kicking that can down the road.

Now we're going to have an education accord that's going to come up with short-term, medium-term and long-term solutions. What I learned from last night, part of this accord will be to look at all these reports, bring them together and come up with some real actions – which makes me wonder, were any of those reports useful? I can guarantee you, I looked at a lot of them and I read through a lot of them and very, very good information in those reports and very good recommendations.

The one on absenteeism, the child advocate – that was in 2019 – talked about absenteeism and the many factors that lead to that. When you have 10 per cent of your student population chronically absent, that's huge. When the child advocate says we have enough reports now, it's time to act. That was 2019, and we're still acting on it.

So, you know, that's one piece. Our school system, our education system, the place where our kids, our most valuable resource are trained up and educated so that they can be successful as adults and we have huge absenteeism numbers. We have increasing – 40 per cent, I believe, was the year-over-year increase in violent acts in the classroom. I mean, that's unheard of. That's amazing.

I don't know how else to talk to that other than something needs to be done yesterday on this. I mean, imagine, when my youngest, first child went to school we were just concerned whether she could make that first step on the school bus because the step was probably half the height of her but when you have kids going to school now and you're worrying about being bullied and that, and then you can switch that to mental health and mental health will tell you that 70 per cent of mental health challenges and issues begin in childhood, early adolescence, school-aged children.

That's where it starts, and we need to make sure there's an environment that is conducive to a healthy growth, both physically and mentally, of our children, and that's not happening.

When I get the calls from a parent with three wonderful children – this particular instance, I think one was 12, 14 and 16 – and their 14-year-old was struggling at school dealing with mental illness and then addictions and in with the wrong crowd, so to speak, in with your much older wrong crowd and this parent cannot, for the life of her, get proper assistance because one department tells you, oh no, we can do this; the RNC tells you, we can do this but she doesn't seem to be in danger.

I won't call it passing the buck, but there's a juggling act here trying to find solutions that a parent has concern for their child, their 14-year-old child, and is in tears on the phone and cannot get any direction, cannot get any help to ensure their child is safe. This is what we deal with and it's on the other end of it, too, when you talk about seniors.

We're an aging population. Per capita, we're probably the oldest population, and I dealt with issues of seniors. We talked about there was one instance of two seniors married 73 years. Imagine, 73 years together. Seventy-three years and, in their final years, they're separated. In their final moments, they're separated, one in this home and one in that home.

Now, to me, that was a happy instance for me because in working with the proper departments and that we were able to get them together days before one of them passed. So that's one of the moments when you say I'm happy to be doing what I'm doing, but that doesn't happen all the time. There are many out there who die alone. Seniors, mothers and fathers, grandfathers and grandmothers of us who in their, what we call our golden years, but in our final years and our final moments, you're alone with no help.

We can build all the hospitals, all the long-term care facilities we want but we need the caring staff to look after them.

We talk about aging at home, my mother, God bless her, she's 92, she lives at home.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

P. DINN: She lives at home and I'll visit her on as many days as I can and have a game of Chinese checkers. She renewed her licence the other day, she's doing well.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who wins?

P. DINN: I don't. I haven't yet, I haven't won.

My mother-in-law is dealing with Parkinson's, early stages, she's doing well but requires some level of home care, but getting that care is so hard. We have some wonderful people now doing it but it's juggling schedules and that.

My point is, I've been lucky. My mother-in-law and my mother are lucky. I've been blessed with people who are being looked after. But there are so many of seniors out there who don't have those options available to them. They're out there and they don't know what the next day is going to be. They don't know. Worse than that is their children don't know. In many cases, the children are also retired and trying to find the resources, trying to find what's out there to help our seniors in their final years.

But one thing for sure, we should never be separating loved ones in their final years, it should never be happening. That is so cruel. It is so cruel. Speaking to different couples, it's just – I had another couple they're down at, I think, it's Agnes Pratt and the children, again, are retired as well, they would take this gentleman daily to visit his wife who is bedridden down there. They did it on a daily basis. The parent didn't have a car, didn't have his licence and we were able to – working with proper departments – get them together in the same room down there. I went and visited them and I tell you, so, so happy they were. That's what makes us able to do our jobs on a daily basis.

There are a lot of issues out there that sometimes they bring you up, sometimes they beat you down, but you continue to do it because it's those instances where you can truly help someone in need that recharges your battery, so to speak, to keep going. I know everyone in this House is driven by that as well and that's what makes this job so honourable and so pleasing to be doing it on a regular basis.

Yes, those are some real hardcore issues, but there is no issue out there that's too small. I always go by a quote and I use it a lot. I read it somewhere, it said: The smallest act is greater than the grandest intention. The smallest act is greater than the grandest intention. We can all be out there saying, we're going to do this, I'll do this, I'll do this, I'll do that. Now, for whatever reason, you might not be able to, but it's the person that steps up and acts, no matter how big or small. That's where the value really is and that's what we try to do. We try to get government to act. We try to get people to respond to help individuals.

I can't sit down without talking about – it's important to the other people and it's for safety – our roads. I'll shift gears to that. I've met with, I'm going to say, I think, four ministers in five years, four different Ministers of Transportation and Infrastructure and all with similar responses. I met with the current minister and I've written in response to their request for information on roads. I actually have a document here that I sent with multiple pictures of the roads, this is Route 60 through Topsail.

I understand that there are some discussions between the town and government to look at what can happen with the road, who will take it over. I understand it from the town's perspective, having sat in municipal government, you can't just take it over, you've got to know what you're getting into. You got to know what that infrastructure is below that. So I have no issue with them taking the time, along with the minister, to work through this and try and come up with an agreement.

But my point currently is, at the moment, it is still a provincial road that is maintained by the province. I'm talking about – if anyone knows the area – going down Topsail Hill around the bend where Topsail Beach is, there are no sidewalks there, but there's a lot of erosion on the shoulders, lots of potholes. I had a women there, a resident there about two or three years ago, broke her ankle walking along there. It's just not safe.

When you think about Route 60, it's the Conception Bay Highway. That's what Route 60 is, it's the Conception Bay Highway. It's a road that was a main thoroughfare, many years ago before my time, before the Trans-Canada was built. But it's still a main thoroughfare for many because you go as far on the Trans-Canada, then you pull down onto Route 60, the Conception Bay Highway. There are sections of that road that are in dire need.

Whenever we get a call on a pothole or something, we've reached out to the department and I will applaud them that as quick as – in fact, I'd say I don't hang up the phone and they're out there and they're getting that work done, which is fabulous. But at the end of the day, it's a temporary fix. It's a temporary fix because it's going to be a pothole again relatively soon, or another one somewhere else.

That has been an issue for a long time up in the district. It's a roadway that needs to have some attention, it needs to have some more permanent work done to it. I'm not talking a huge stretch; I'm talking under a two-kilometre stretch. It takes in a school zone; it takes in some crosswalks.

I had a brief little conversation with the minister in the House here last week or the week before, I'm confident – I hope he's listening – I'm confident – I'll say that again – that the minister and the department will come up with a more permanent solution in the very near future to ensure that that roadway is a safe roadway and people are not manoeuvring it to avoid the shoulder erosion, to avoid the potholes and to ensure that pedestrians and drivers alike can traverse that route knowing that it's safe and that they're not going to end up with damage to their car and on the shoulder.

Thank you for your time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: I now call the Member for Bonavista.

C. PARDY: Thank you very much, Speaker.

I'd like to spend my 20 minutes this morning talking on education. I know many viewers now in Bonavista may not say, well, you could have picked probably a little different topic. That may not be, but for a long time I wanted to stand and talk on education. I'll do that this morning.

I met a previous dean of the Memorial University at the Health Sciences complex. She's a frequent viewer of the House of Assembly and we introduced each other. We chatted and I'd be most interested with the feedback, if she's watching today, on my discussion and what we talk about: education. So if she's watching then at least a little bit of feedback, I would welcome.

The District of Bonavista – for a little bit of trivia and I've said it in the House – had the first school in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, according to Newfoundland Studies at Memorial University and by a gentleman, a researcher by the name of Garfield Fizzard is in Bonavista.

So it gives me a little bit of credence to stand here, knowing that the richest history of all districts, the 40 that would be here, is the District of Bonavista. Back in 1727, the Church of England, a gentleman by the name of Henry Jones was sent over from England, landed in Bonavista and that was the start of the school.

Just one little piece of trivia to inform you that Henry Jones summoned a school mistress to come to Bonavista to hold school. Here is what she was paid: eight pounds. Eight pounds is what the school mistress at that time was paid. What does that equate to in Canadian dollars? Speaker, $14.29 is what her pay was in 1727. If you look at back in 1727, that may not have been a very good wage at that time.

Before I get into the education piece, on Friday I attended the RISE awards. Most viewers watching now are going to say, what are the RISE awards? The RISE awards were held by the Department of IET; Industry, Energy and Technology at the Emera Centre up on the Battery between 12 p.m. and 2 p.m. on Friday. The minister of IET hosted it and what RISE stands for is Research Inspired Student Enrichment. You would take students who excel in math and science in the province and you give them placements in pretty prestigious universities in order to foster their path into science and math.

I just want to recognize two from my district who were recognized. Both of the students attend Discovery Collegiate, the same school that won the provincial female hockey that I spoke about yesterday, with some neighbouring schools that were assisting. Christopher Donovan from Melrose, parents Mike Donovan and Denise Mackey; Christopher wants to pursue computer science and Christopher is going to study for four weeks at the University of Toronto this summer.

We've got Noah Butt from Bonavista, who again, as stated, attends Discovery Collegiate. He is going to the Boston Leadership Institute for three weeks and his area, what he aspires to do, he's going to be a pediatrician. I thought that was very noble.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

C. PARDY: So I do applaud those two from – and all the other recipients.

One thing I did notice was that many of the recipients came from the metro schools in St. John's. When they talked about these metro students and what was available to them, like robotics clubs, math clubs, those from my district didn't have that and it was a distinct difference between urban and rural in delivery, but that's for another time.

I want to mention Education spending. I did this once in the House before and I know a minister had questioned it and said if that's right, that's pretty amazing. But I just want to repeat that and update it to the current year.

I go back to 1978-79. For many of us, it doesn't seem that long ago. I was born before that. Here is the budget at the time for Health; it was $218,490 for Health back in '78-'79. Education at that time was $277,920; in fact, $60,000 more than Health.

Well, that continued until 1989-90. That year saw Health at $644,340;

whereas Education at that year was $653,000. For now, an ever-small margin in Education's favour of $9,102. In 1991, it changed. Health became the top spender. I move from 1991, where that change occurred to today. Here are the figures today.

In Health today, this budget, $4,361,712,300. Keep in mind in 1990-91, Education was the largest expenditure in Newfoundland and Labrador. Education, now, here this budget is $1 billion – first time breaking $1 billion – $1,094,693,800 for now a difference, in advantage of Health, $3,267,018,500. Now, look at the historical spending. I've said many times in this House that fishery is our main industry and I stood here and I stand to it until just recently.

Just recently, I would put Education as being our primary. I know Industry might not fit but that's a debate. I would look at Education, as far as looking at where we're going in the future as being optimal, being very, very important.

My colleague at Estimates last night, he talked about, as far as the safety in schools, much of what he mentioned talked about teachers and so on. Back three months ago, I wrote the Department of Education and I asked what the sick leave was for teachers, because I looked at data and said, well, sometimes you can glean that if there's a big increase in sick leave for teachers, that's an indication that all is not well in schools. I don't know if people would agree with that, but it can be an indicator to say all is not well.

Let me give you the figures that I had, and I asked for them to be updated by the department and I'll get those, I'm sure, probably soon sometimes but I've been waiting for those. In 2014-15, teacher sick leave, the cost to the taxpayers in Newfoundland and Labrador was a little over $15 million. In '15-'16, it was $16.5 million. In '16-'17, it was $17,800,000 plus. In '18-'19, over $18 million.

So you can see I just wanted to know, through the pandemic and from '18-'19 on to current, what is the sick leave because it indicates that all may not be well in education? That's what the Member for Topsail - Paradise was talking last night and many of his questions asked, but that was one piece of data that I was interested in finding.

One other piece of information when I was back in the school system, and the hon. Member from Grand Bank I'm sure would be the same thing, we looked at, in the high school level, it was the PISA results. That's probably what a standard assessment now would be. The PISA is an assessment item and it stands for the Program for International Student Assessment.

It compares all the developed countries in the world and say: How do you fare in math? How do you fare in science? I know math and science, but I don't if technology is added; math and science, two big key areas, how do we fare? That's our benchmark. Well, let me show you some of the latest results from PISA in our system.

Keep in mind, a 20-point decline equates to one year. If you drop by 20 points in this PISA result in your math or your science, that equates to one year's learning loss – 20 points.

In the 2022 results, which are last, Canada showed substantial declines in reading and math, we did as a country. Most viewers are going to say now, and the past dean of Memorial University is going to say, well, we had the pandemic at that time, and she would be absolutely right, we did. We did, but here is what our scores were. In Canada, the 2022 results compared to the 2018 results, the average scores dropped by 10 points in reading in Canada – 10 points in reading, half a year of schooling. In math, 15 points in Canada, almost a year.

Now people are wondering, what about Newfoundland and Labrador, where do we fit in that. Well, this province had the worst declines of anybody in the country – Newfoundland and Labrador, our education system, the worst declines. Our reading dropped by 34 points.

L. O'DRISCOLL: A year and a half.

C. PARDY: The hon. Member for Ferryland, who's very quick with numbers, great with numbers. For all the viewers and those in Ferryland, he is the sharpest with numbers that I would put up there.

Math, a 29-point drop in this province. So I would say, looking at 15 year olds, which are the ones who write this PISA, what about the other grades that would be in our province, in our system? I didn't hear that last night. Is it something that our department, our schools are addressing because it is a significant decline? That is very significant.

I would say Lorne Wheeler who may be watching at home now who was deputy minister of Education, president of the NLTA, like the Member for St. John's Centre, he would say about now that that not ought to be our number one priority because the importance in education, moving forward, that ought to be our number one priority.

That subamendment here talks about the Fs. I would say that is one that we need to address.

We talked about class size. The Member for Topsail - Paradise brought up about class size yesterday or last night, he did. Well, this government increased class size in 2016, new into their term, they increased class size. In fact, I think in the budget at the time said it was going to save $8.8 million. Well, PISA results drop and add – increase our class sizes. This government, again, did in 2018, increased class sizes, when reports are saying they're too large now, we need to bring them down.

In my short time left, which is not enough time but I'm going to give it a try. When the Minister of Health and Community Services was Education Minister, he negotiated on behalf of the government with the NLTA a new collective agreement. I stand to be corrected, but maybe 2019, '18, '19, he negotiated it.

One thing the government brought to the NLTA table, not to say it wasn't, because they put the kitchen sink up there in negotiations, but one thing the government brought to the NLTA was province-wide seniority. That means that you've got one opening at Gonzaga, the teacher with the most seniority who has a science degree, if it's a science position, the one with the most seniority gets that position. No interview to see whether they're fit for the culture of that school or what else they're going to bring outside of that discipline are.

Are they going to be the one that's going to start the math club or the robotics club? Not a conversation, because the minister, when he was in Education, brought to the NLTA negotiations that we're going to have province-wide seniority.

In the short time left, let me try to elaborate further. The minister stated last night – and I hope I got it right – they had 97 per cent success in filling hard-to-fill areas in Newfoundland and Labrador, remote areas. Every one of us in this chamber are going say that if you compete for a job in St. John's, when you're competing, boy, the pool that you've got to pick from is huge. True? I think we all agree.

Before the minister brought this in and put it on the table for the NLTA, I would say to you, it was highly competitive. You picked who you thought to be best for your school population. The best who you thought was in Gonzaga. When you apply for these remote areas, which we still have 3 per cent that we had to get somebody, we couldn't fill them all, when they select, is the pool huge? No, the pool is not huge. The pool is not huge at all. In fact, there might be one; there might be two or three. The pool is small.

But once they get in and get their seniority into that area, their clock starts in order to say: I can pick what job that comes open in whatever school in this province, if I've got the seniority. I would say to you that it doesn't do a justice and service to us.

When I was principal of Clarenville Middle School and I'm sure other principals, the Minister of CSSD would say the same thing, we picked the top eight qualifications. It may be the most senior, it didn't matter. We had the top eight candidates. Then we went through an interview process to find out who we thought to be the best fit for our schools. Guess who we hired. We hired the one who had the best fit for our school.

Instead of taking the Member for Bonavista's suggestion to this, here is a report that was done. The report was done in 2022, one of the latest reports that the Member for Topsail - Paradise mentioned, a report on Teacher Allocation Review Committee. Three esteemed educators: Marian Fushell, David Brown and Ross Elliott, here's what they say about it, from the report that they presented to government: Recently the staffing of schools has become more complex due to the addition of seniority for teachers in the hiring process.

Most jurisdictions are hiring based on merit, not seniority. If we did a vote here in this House and say put your hand up, if you want the best person for a job, would it be on the merit-based or would it be on seniority? I think everyone in this House would agree, merit-based. Is seniority significant? Quite possibly.

Here is what they said: Hiring by seniority: (1) it can create questionable fits for our schools; (2) school principals have felt that they were thrown under the bus; (3) it removes any incentive for improvement amongst those who may not excel; and (4) many of the graduates, possibly some of our more promising ones, are leaving the province.

I would say we made a colossal mistake, government did, in 2019, by bringing that to the table. We would fight against that and that would not have been implemented on our watch. That I can assure you. Now, many people may disagree with that and that would be an interesting discussion going forward.

Thank you very much for your time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: Thank you, I say to the Member.

I'm now calling on the MHA for the District of Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

C. TIBBS: Thank you very much, Speaker.

I'm pleased to say that the good people in Bonavista are in very good hands, there's no doubt about that, as my esteemed colleague speaks again very, very well.

We're speaking today about the subamendment that we put into the current budget in 2024. I look back when the Minister of Finance stood in her place and delivered the budget, no doubt a lot of work goes into it by a lot of people. A lot of people don't see how much work goes into it. But when she stood and took her place, she boasted about this being one of the largest investments in Newfoundland and Labrador as a budget. They're very proud of that.

I asked myself, if you were making record investments and expenditures throughout this province and it is not getting any better than it's gotten the past year, two years, three years ago, because we're in tough, tough shape, that, to me, would signify an F grade, like we've talked about it so often here.

So to boast that we are spending more money than ever, we are seeing the worst results ever – if that was a company, t he company wouldn't be successful. The company wouldn't call themselves successful. They would look to see where else they could spend money. I'm not saying the money doesn't need to be spent, but of course the people of Newfoundland and Labrador want to see a yield back for the money that is being spent and I don't believe they are seeing it as much as they could be.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

C. TIBBS: Thank you.

We talk about the crises here in Newfoundland and Labrador and there are so many crises. I have not heard the word “crisis” so much in my entire life than I have the past couple years. The problem with hearing the word “crisis” over and over and over again is it takes the validation away from the word. So a crisis today – what we would call a crisis – it seems to be normalized at this point. It is a normal way of doing things.

We listen to the government on the opposite side talk about reimagining and looking down the road and stuff like that. I just think to myself, if this is our indicator of reimagining and where we are, my God – many of my own constituents have said to me in the past: Can we go back to the way it used to be? Because for some reason, 10 years ago, 15 years ago, it was better. It was a lot better.

I know a lot of factors come into that and government cannot be held responsible for everything, obviously, because not everything is their fault. We're not going to stand here and play politics and say that, but what they are responsible for is creating the environment within the province and having the guts to take those stands to ensure that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador can enjoy a successful, healthy lifestyle. If those needs are not being met through the environment, well, of course, then it has to come back to the government of the day and that's what we see.

I'll talk about a couple of the crises that we have in the province. Of course, our health care crisis, we see it every day. I see it more than most in Grand Falls-Windsor because we have the Central Newfoundland hospital in Grand Falls-Windsor, the regional health care and the diversions that we get – well, first of all, it's overrun anyway. It's absolutely overrun. I visit the hospital quite a bit. There are constantly beds in the hallway; there is constantly people waiting; there's no privacy.

Then when you have a diversion or shutdown from Buchans or down the peninsula or wherever else, unfortunately, that influx gets bigger and bigger and we get more and more and more people without family doctors – more and more people.

I went to make an appointment for my son at the Killick health care clinic last week. This is the walk-in clinic, the last step before an emergency room. A walk-in clinic told us that if they haven't been seen in the past year or two – I am not sure which one it was – they're not taking any new patients. So the walk-in clinic is not taking any new patients, that's it. Their roster is now full, so they told me to bring him down to emerg.

We have a nurse practitioner who's working out of a private practice in Grand Falls-Windsor. His name is Brandon. He is doing absolutely fantastic work, and I mean fantastic work. This young man takes on whatever he can. It's about a $50 bill to visit him, for my son, but we want to make sure that everything is okay and thank God, and God willing, I'm healthy enough to work, my wife is healthy enough to work to afford that $50.

A lot of people can't. So they end up down to emergency and whatnot, and they don't wait. After five, six hours, people can't be down there that long. Again, I've said it before, this is not a reflection on health care workers, especially the ones in Grand Falls-Windsor because I know the work that they do. I know how overrun they are. I talked to them quite often. I try to entrench myself within their lifestyle and I see what they go through. We're losing them.

I just want to say, right now, to those health care workers who have been offered to go places but have decided to stay in Newfoundland and Labrador, by God, thank you so very much. Thank you so very much for staying right here in this province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

C. TIBBS: Despite having so many communication breakdowns, the services that you asked are not there, some of the equipment that you asked is not there, you're overrun, you're tired – I get it. But do you know what? You stayed and you are heroes in Grand Falls-Windsor and throughout Central Newfoundland and Labrador. I can't thank you enough for doing that.

IVF – one of the reasons why we sometimes don't vote yes on budgets and whatnot and they want to know, constantly, why we don't vote yes on their budget, and there might be some good things in there, but to be quite honest after the two elections, and probably going to the third one here soon enough, it comes down to pretty simple – us, including my constituents – it's a trust issue.

There are some things that we don't trust you all because we were told, in the last election, that IVF procedures would be much more plentiful within the province and the government would make it work for so many people out there that need this. So we talked about IVF quite often, but a lot of us in here – and I'm not sure about anybody's personal circumstances but a lot of us may not know exactly what it looks like on face value.

It goes like this: “Hi my name is Brittany.

“As a child I always knew I wanted a family, I've even had a name picked for my future daughter since I was 7. Infertility isn't new to me, it has been with me for most of my life. At a very young age I was diagnosed with something similar to MRKH, which ultimately means I am unable to carry or have biological children. I was told at the age of 12 by my parents, at the time I didn't think much of it, but as I got older it started affecting my mental health.

“Every pregnancy announcement and baby shower invite hurts my heart and it's not because I'm unhappy for them, because I am very happy for them, but I'm also sad for me. Infertility for me is when you're stuck between people telling you 'I can't wait for you to have kids' or 'Don't have kids.' Both are heartbreaking to me.

“We have been in this fertility journey for about 3 years and it is mentally exhausting. I grieve for two things; the child I'll never get to meet, who I dreamt of being created by my partner and I, and for another child that might not come through for my adoption or IVF.

“As I am writing this down I am scared to tell my story because once it's out there people will know but at the same time I am relieved that I no longer have to hide this. It took me 3 years to be brave enough to tell my story. I hope this would inspire other people to tell their story too, as others who have shared their stories have inspired me.

“I am 1 in 6 ….”

Thank you.

That was from a very, very brave woman in Grand Falls-Windsor who decided to tell her story.

So when we hear things like, we're investing in IVF and whatnot, people vote on those. People hear that and that can change their decision to vote on certain things or certain Members or certain parties, but when they see, later on down the road, that commitment, that promise has not been fulfilled, well they get jaded and they get skeptical and you can't blame them. Unfortunately, like she said, she's one in six people here in Newfoundland and Labrador who have to deal with that. My heart goes out to her and all those other parents out there who are having trouble, but hopefully we do get some more IVF care here in the province.

The long-term care facility in Grand Falls-Windsor, I believe when it opened up, at the time, it was considered that eventually it was going to go to protective care. Protective care would mean that any people who need that protective care through dementia or Alzheimer's, they can be housed there next to their families. Right now, they're across the province, sort of thing, and they want to come home to Grand Falls-Windsor, to the brand new health care facility we have. So we're hoping that the minister does designate that protective care eventually.

The cost-of-living crisis: We see the cost-of-living crisis constantly, whether it be the carbon tax or whatnot, grocery store, trying to fix your vehicle, trying to fix your house, whatnot, it affects every single person in the province.

I would ask the government across the way, today, if you could vote on the carbon tax, whether it be –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER (Bennett): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

C. TIBBS: Thank you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask Members to take the conversation outside.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask Members from both sides if you can take your conversation outside, please.

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans.

C. TIBBS: Thank you, Speaker.

When we talk about the crisis throughout the province, we talk about ways of fixing it and some ideas to fix it and whatnot, there are other things that can be done.

We have a housing crisis throughout the province and there are people in tents, like I say, and they've been there all winter. There are people in Grand Falls-Windsor who have been in tents. There are people who are waiting to get housing. My hon. Member from Exploits also said about 350 people in Central. It's astonishing to see.

A couple of weeks ago, I was out here and I went down to Howley Estates Sobeys just to get something for supper or whatever, and I ran into a gentleman by the name of Donnie. He was outside, a larger gentleman, he asked me for some change, of course, and I tell you what. I have a pretty good judge of character and when I met this man, you can tell that he worked his whole life and tried to make a good life for himself, but due to some unforeseen circumstances down the road, he found himself here. I shook the man's hand, we chatted for about a half an hour. It was absolutely heartbreaking to see that could happen to a hard-working man like that.

You know, nobody would think that they would find themselves homeless, but it does happen. It does happen. It happens to successful people, unsuccessful people; it knows no race or creed or sexual orientation. Homelessness can affect anybody with a few circumstances that they could find themselves in, that way to get the ball rolling and, unfortunately, we are dealing with that here.

I mean, growing up we never knew about any homeless people in Newfoundland, for the most part. Today, of course, we see it all over and contrary to what the Housing Minister said, it's not a protest. This is not a protest. There are other ways of protesting, but to sit out in a tent in -15 in the wintertime, my God, that's not a protest. That's a circumstance that these people never thought they'd find themselves in and they're hoping that we can get them out of it pretty quickly as well.

When we talk about the crisis, it all leads down to one main crisis that is absolutely, in my view, the worst crisis of them all and that's the mental health crisis. It affects everybody – it affects everybody. When you tick off all these crises through here, it all comes down to a mental health crisis because if you have no place to live, if you have no money to do something, if you can't see a doctor and you're given a cancer diagnosis and you have to wait or you're waiting on a cancer diagnosis, all these things direct to mental health.

There's not one person in this province that is immune from any sort of mental health disorder. It can happen to anybody, at any given time. Unfortunately, we see more of it today than ever and that includes all of us in this House as well. Every one of us can go through something like this and, unfortunately, we see it. Unfortunately, we sit in silence with it or we bring it home to our family and a lot of people fall by the wayside.

One of those people that have fallen by the wayside is Michael Dalton. Michael Dalton was the son of Jim and Donna Dalton and last year, I believe, Michael committed suicide; a young man, handsome fellow, in his 20s; had a lot going for him; had amazing parents, absolutely fantastic parents. When I speak about this today, I speak about it from a dad's point of view, not as an MHA or a representative of the people. I speak from that point, as well, but in order for me to speak and give it the justice that it deserves, I truly need to speak from my own point of view as a dad.

I have two sons, they're 19 and 17. I think about one day they may go down this road of mental health supports that just are not there. They're not there. The first visit is fantastic. There's not one person in this province that can't reach out and can't get that first visit within an allotted time. But let's be honest about it, that first visit is for one reason only, to make sure that person in front of you is not going to kill themselves today. That's what that first visit is for. That's the main gesture of this first visit. The second visit, the third visit, all the follow-ups are far enough down the road, too far down the road.

How do I know they're too far down the road? Because I truly feel in my heart of hearts that if they were closer to where we are, Micheal would still be with us today. Unfortunately, he is not. My heard goes out to Jim and Donna. My heart goes out to anybody who has been touched by suicide.

I'll put it out there right now. I'm pretty entrenched within my own community, most people know where I live, it's not really any surprise, but I've said this before in the past and I'll say it again, anybody in this province, if you're thinking about committing suicide and you have nowhere to go, 10 Knight Street, Grand Falls-Windsor. Doesn't matter the time of day or night, you show up there and I'll take you in and I'll sit you down and we'll get you the help you need. If it's my office hours, it's my office hours.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

C. TIBBS: If it's 3 in the morning, before you commit this deed that affects so many other people, you show up at my door, I don't care what time it is, and myself and my wife and my two sons will take you in and we'll talk to you. Unfortunately, that's where we are right now.

I get it. There's not a lot of money. We are seeing deficits. We are seeing, this budget today, our debt continues to rise. Where can we get more money? It's been asked before. Myself and the Member for Exploits have talked about it many times as well. We can get this money; it's there.

Right now, we have, still, a Premier's office open in the Grand Falls-Windsor that cost this term over a million dollars. I mean, where can that million dollars go? The Premier's office in Grand Falls-Windsor has been there now for a couple of years. I'm not sure what they're doing. It's right above my office. It's pretty much empty more often than not. There's no paving out our way. What's it doing? There's no paving. The cancer care clinic was in danger of the doctors walking away from it. It was – it was. With the help of the minister, we have it there now.

My question is this: Why didn't the doctors feel comfortable enough to go to the Premier's office that's two streets away? Because they knew it would do nothing – absolutely nothing. I'll put something in context for you. Over the past couple of years since the Premier's office is there, with the staff and everything else that needs to go in with an office sort of thing, over those two years, we had a fundraising team for the Lionel Kelland Hospice literally across the road, day in and day out, working their guts out to ensure that the Lionel Kelland Hospice can open.

To come up with that million dollars so that the Lionel Kelland Hospice could open. We had to rely on citizens to do that while there was a more-empty-often-than-not Premier's office right there in Grand Falls-Windsor that would cost the exact same money.

We talked about the SCBAs. Right now, we're in panic mode. We need SCBAs for Newfoundland and Labrador. They will all become obsolete within the next year. One million dollars can buy 100 SCBAs. That's a hundred SCBAs for firefighters a