PDF Version

November 1, 2021

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. L No. 30

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

SPEAKER (Bennett):

Order, please!

Admit

strangers.

Statements by

Members

SPEAKER:

Today we will hear statements

by the hon. Members for the Districts of Mount Pearl - Southlands, Ferryland,

Bonavista, Exploits and Conception Bay South.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE:

Thank you, Speaker.

Approximately three years ago, Scott Hillyer, owner/operator of Coffee Matters,

had an idea to help those in need within the City of Mount Pearl. He approached

the city council, area MHAs and the various church leaders within the community,

and from those discussions the Community Supper Program was born.

This

program offered a hot meal for those in need at the Park Place Community Centre

on a weekly basis. Scott, through his business, provided the meals; the city

provided a venue; and the faith community provided the volunteers.

Unfortunately, the program had to be temporarily suspended with the onset of

COVID-19 in our province. Thankfully, a few short weeks ago, a modified weekly

take-out supper program was reinstated, utilizing the Salvation Army's mobile

food truck, with Scott resuming with the preparation of the meals and volunteers

from the various churches serving the food on a rotational basis.

This is

a true example of community, of generosity and of compassion for others. Please

join me in recognizing an amazing human being in Scott Hillyer, as well as the

many other volunteers within our local faith community who have and continue to

contribute to this amazing initiative.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Speaker.

I want

to recognize and congratulate Con Finlay on receiving a honourary award for his

50 years serving as a volunteer fireman.

During

his 50 years as a volunteer firefighter, Mr. Finlay served as fire chief for a

number of those years and, as well, held the title treasurer for a few years up

until he retired last year.

Mr.

Finlay donated many hours volunteering in his community of Trepassey, outside

his role as a firefighter. For years, he served on the parish finance committee,

the cemetery committee since 1985, Knights of Columbus, and as well served a

four-year term as mayor of the town.

During

the busy basketball years of Stella Maris Academy, Mr. Finlay was a great

supporter when it came to fundraising for tournaments and travel. He spent

relentless hours at the gym doing tournaments and ensured everything ran

smoothly.

Mr.

Finlay was also a great asset to the community centre; for many years, he

prepared and organized most of the functions in the centre.

Speaker,

I ask all my colleagues to join me in congratulating Mr. Con Finlay on his many

years of volunteerism within his hometown of Trepassey.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Bonavista.

C. PARDY:

Thank you, Speaker.

November 6, 1896, the schooner Maggie ,

originating from Lethbridge, was entering St. John's harbour with lights

properly lit when it was struck by a Norwegian steamer. On this fateful day, 13

people lost their lives while 10 survived, most of whom were from the Lethbridge

area. It was considered then the worst local marine disaster in our province,

with no fault associated to the crew of the schooner

Maggie.

A few

years ago, a group of 14 women from the Lethbridge area, mostly descendants of

those who perished or survived, committed to erecting a memorial and storyboard

to honour their descendants and recapture history. In 2022, Memorial United

Church, a church which was aptly named as a memorial to those lost, will display

the efforts of this committee.

This

Saturday, November 6, will be the 125th anniversary of this marine tragedy. The

descendants of the schooner Maggie

will gather to remember their lost and assure this tragedy is never forgotten.

I ask

the Members of the 50th House of Assembly to join me in congratulating the

effort of this Lethbridge committee in memorializing the tragedy of schooner

Maggie and ensuring its story

continues to be told.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Exploits.

P. FORSEY:

Thank you, Speaker.

It's

been one year since nine-year-old Brett Samson of Peterview was diagnosed with

Type 1 diabetes. As we all know, diabetes is a disease that can become costly on

families. Fortunately, Brett's family were able to absorb the high costs

associated with this disease.

With

that being said, Brett decided to take a stand for diabetes awareness to help

youth who suffer from diabetes by beginning a fundraiser program called Brett's

Stand for Diabetes.

Over the

last year, Brett and his family held numerous fundraisers, allowing them to

raise over $10,000 in support of Brett's Stand for Diabetes, which assists

families who are in financial need to treat diabetes. Speaker, this is a

fantastic accomplishment for a nine-year-old in our province.

Speaker,

I would like all hon. Members of this House of Assembly to join me in

congratulating nine-year-old Brett Samson by supporting his amazing cause.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

Bright Business Achievement Awards recognize businesses in Conception Bay South

that go above and beyond. This year the 10th Annual Bright Business Awards were

held on October 20 as part of Small Business Week.

This

annual event is hosted by the Town of Conception Bay South and it is a great

opportunity for local entrepreneurs to network and showcase their individual

businesses in our community.

The

Bight Business Achievement Awards help recognize the contributions of local

businesses that have gone above and beyond. This year's award winners are: New

Start Up of the Year: The Hangout; Downtown CBS Member of the Year: Brian's

Autobody; Established Business of the Year: The Music Corner; Glenda Noseworthy

Award: Krysta Slade, Musically Inclined; Community Pride and Partnership:

Taylor's Fish Fruit and Vegetable market; Beautiful Business of the Year,

multi-tenant award: Don Hennessey Limited, single-tenant award: Aurora Estates;

David Murphy Chamber Leadership: E-Raven Consulting.

I would

like to extend my congratulations to the award winners, nominees and sponsors.

The COVID-19 pandemic has been very challenging for local businesses and I wish

them well and encourage everyone to support locally.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Infrastructure.

E. LOVELESS:

Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker,

I'm proud to inform this hon. House about two electric vehicles being used by

public service employees that will help our environment and lead to savings for

taxpayers.

Earlier

this year, the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure purchased two

Chevy Bolts for its fleets of vehicles that are available to employees to

conduct their work in the provision of government services.

The

vehicles do not use gasoline and do not emit exhaust or greenhouse gases, which

is especially helpful for those of us who wait for our vehicles to warm in our

cold Newfoundland and Labrador winters.

There

are fewer maintenance costs, no fuel costs and costs associated with engines,

such as oil changes, are eliminated.

Speaker,

there are charging stations at the Department of Industry, Energy and Technology

building on Elizabeth Avenue and Confederation Building and more are being

installed.

There

are also five charging stations at the new parking garage for hospital staff

that was just completed at the Health Sciences Centre.

I had

the opportunity to drive one of the e-vehicles last week when we visited the

garage. The garage will be used by Eastern Health employees and result in more

available parking spaces close to the Health Sciences Centre for patients and

their families.

Speaker,

in Budget 2021 , our government announced an Electric Vehicle Adoption Accelerator

Program that will proved a $2,500 rebate to residents who purchase an electric

vehicle.

It is

encouraging to see more electric vehicles on the roads here in Newfoundland and

Labrador and we expect to see many more in the years to come.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I'd like

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

Speaker,

my colleagues on this side of the House join me in congratulating government on

the purchase of two electric vehicles. Hopefully, this will be the start of a

move to purchase more of these vehicles.

Speaker,

anything we can do to help the environment by reducing greenhouse gas is

celebrated. We all need to do our part to help the environment and government is

certainly no different.

Unfortunately, government has been slow to embrace electric vehicles and

charging stations as witnessed by Nova Scotia, which has over 100 charging

stations across the province. We have a handful, Speaker, and as more and more

citizens embrace the alternate-fuelled vehicles, government needs to lead by

example and provide the financial incentives and infrastructure to help this

industry foster and protect the environment.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I thank

the minister for the advance copy of his statement.

applaud the government for acquiring these two vehicles, although it is just a

drop in the bucket and I call upon them to go even further with this. I urge the

government to expand the EV Rebate Program beyond the current 6.5-month

application period. This program will be needed to go on if we want to assist

everyday people who can't just afford the purchase of an electric vehicle at the

drop of a hat and those who have the income to do so.

The

current program timeline is another example of how this government focuses on

announcements and not the intentions to make changes and positive changes in

this world.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

Oral

Questions.

Oral Questions

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Speaker, we understand that a

very serious situation is unfolding in our health care system involving what

appears to be a cyberattack on our province. This is difficult news and we thank

the people who have been working so hard to understand and resolve this issue.

I ask

the minister: Has there been a ransom request made to the regional health

authority, the service provider Bell, the Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for

Health Information or the provincial government?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

I, too,

would like to thank the Minister of Health and Community Services and the teams

in his –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

S. COADY:

– department, the health

authorities. They have made extraordinary efforts to keep us safe during COVID.

They're the same people now who are working very hard and very well, I think, on

their efforts to ensure we move through and do as best we can coming out of this

challenge that we have.

We're

working with our service provider, Bell, to move forward. We've invested a ton

of money, Mr. Speaker, in cybersecurity and we're going to continue to do so.

This is an important issue and I thank, again, the Minister of Health and

Community Services for all his efforts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

Unfortunately, we didn't get an answer to understand this serious situation, if

there has been a ransom request or not. I would ask that the minister answer in

one of the follow-up questions.

Eastern

Health's CEO suggests it would be Wednesday at the earliest before this

situation could be resolved.

I ask

the minister: What would be done for the thousands of people who will have

medical appointments and non-emergency surgery cancelled because of this

disruption?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

This

situation evolved over the weekend. It would appear from comments from our

outside provider that this may be a cyberattack. The nature of that attack is,

as yet, unclear.

We, from

our point of view within Health, have been concentrating on mitigating,

remediating and helping with any rebuild that might be necessary.

From the

point of view of cancelled appointments, there are numbers for each of the

regional health authorities and rescheduling will be done in the same way and

with the same prioritization that it was done with COVID and with Snowmageddon.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Speaker, we know wait-lists

for tests and backlog of appointments are already a problem within our health

care system.

I ask

the minister: What can be done to avoid putting thousands of patients back to

square one of their wait for a medical appointment?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

certainly is a regrettable situation. Eastern Health is the regional health

authority most impacted and Western and Labrador-Grenfell seem to be the least

with the possibility of near normal operations there.

From the

point of backlogs and wait times, Eastern Health have done a stellar job in

catching up with the effects of COVID and as Mr. Diamond said earlier on today

special arrangements will be made to look into providing extra resources to deal

with the backlog. None of that, however, can start until our IT systems are

working again properly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

During

this morning's news conference, the minister mentioned that the backup for

health information in the province has also been compromised.

How

could the backup information be vulnerable to attack?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

I'm

simply relaying information that was provided to me by the people who provided

the service to us. The analysis of the cause of this system failure will be

presented to us as soon as it is completed by Bell. That is a job, according to

information I have from national experts as well as them, that will take several

days yet. As soon as I have it, I will be delighted to share it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

I ask the minister: What

assurances has he been given that personal information has not been breached?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

We have

engaged the appropriate authorities, including the Privacy Commissioner. We

cannot, at this stage, say what, if any, privacy breach may or may not have

occurred. That will come out of the further analysis of the nature and extent of

the system failure.

I expect

further updates later on today. As soon as I have that information, I would be

happy to share it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Speaker, the minister

referenced that he became aware that Bell had other challenges recently. What is

the nature of these challenges and when did he become aware?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

Bell

provided us with information over the weekend that we appeared to be the only

system affected. I have, from informal sources, heard stories that they may have

had challenges on the Mainland. This is more the realm of speculation than fact.

I am waiting for further information from our service provider.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

There

were frequent references to Bell Canada and its data management during today's

press conference; reporters were passed over to the company for a number of

questions.

I ask

the minister: Will you direct Bell, the Centre for Health Information and retain

experts to hold a technical briefing to ensure the people of this province

understand the scale of the situation before us?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

This

situation is evolving. I presented what I know of the situation today. As that

changes, we will be happy to provide updates. If, at some future date, once the

analysis of this situation is complete, there is a need for a technical

briefing, we'll certainly be happy to look at that.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

In 2019,

the Government of Nunavut experienced what appeared to be a similar situation: a

ransomware attack targeting health information. Nunavut ended up spending $5

million and dealing with serious disruptions for over a month.

I ask

the minister: Were any policy changes regarding online security made within the

department in light of the Nunavut attack?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

I will

say that we have our technical and operational teams and our communications

teams already assembled, already dealing with this issue, as the Minister of

Health and Community Services already indicated. We're working with our service

supplier, Bell, on this very issue. We've invested in cybersecurity as a

government in protecting our IT infrastructure and we'll continue to do so.

We'll now understand what happened in this particular instance.

But I

will say to the Members opposite, I will say to the people of the province, the

Department of Health and Community Services, the regional health authorities and

Digital Government and Service NL are working to ensure that we move through

this as best we can.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

That's

not very reassuring to the people here to make sure that the health information

is secure and that we can get back to normality.

I ask

the minister: What time frame has been given regarding when the assessments will

be completed? And I ask again: Was there a ransom requested to either one of the

entities involved?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

information I have is that this is a possible cyberattack. We have our emergency

operations centre up and running, both at the provincial level and within

Eastern Health. The nature of this problem is, as yet, not characterized.

I have,

through officials, asked Bell for a timeline. They have said it will be days and

as short as they can manage. But until they start further analysis – they've

actually started rebuilding some equipment – but until they move through the

process, an accurate end will not be forthcoming from them. They would prefer to

deliver what they can promise rather than simply speak off the cuff. So we need

to wait until they come back with a timeline.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Speaker.

I ask

the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL: Have any other government

systems been compromised or accessed by malicious actors?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So our

teams at OCIO are monitoring all of the core government services very closely.

At this moment, there is nothing out of the ordinary to report. Cyberattacks are

very common. They happen across the globe and we are continuously diligent to

make sure that we protect systems for the people of the province.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Speaker.

I ask

the minister: What external security audits have been conducted for the

government and IT infrastructure since she became minister and have any

vulnerabilities or deficiencies been identified?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Cybersecurity is everyone's responsibility. I'd just like to highlight that I

read a Member's statement recently about Cyber Security Month, which was

October, and everyone needs to be diligent. There's lots of public service

training available for anyone to educate themselves and it's important that you

be mindful of your online activities.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

I ask the Minister of Digital

Government and Service NL: Does her department have any standing policies on

paying ransom in situations such as these? If so, will she table the policy here

in this House?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm not

aware of such policies, but from a security and IT perspective, even if we had

policies, I wouldn't recommend we table them in the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

S. STOODLEY:

Cybersecurity is a very, kind of tricky – so I guess, at the moment, Mr.

Speaker, I'm not aware of any policies.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Speaker.

We are

now aware that health IT backups have been compromised.

I ask

the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL: How are core government IT

systems backed up and are they just as vulnerable?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So our

OCIO teams have been working throughout the weekend. We are monitoring our

systems closely. At this moment, there is nothing out of the ordinary to report

on.

We have

a very robust backup system, but cybersecurity is always a threat to all

businesses and governments, and everybody needs to remain diligent.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Speaker.

It is a

concern for most citizens, and it's a very serious situation. So we want to make

sure we get all these questions asked.

Speaker,

I ask the minister: Do residents using MyGovNL need to take any additional

precautions to protect their personal information due to this situation?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Digital Government and Service NL.

S. STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I've

mentioned, our teams have been monitoring all the core government IT systems and

there's nothing out of the ordinary to report at this time.

I think

in terms of the Member's question about passwords; it's a good idea to have

different passwords for all systems, regardless of this or any other

cyberattack. I'd recommend that everyone have a unique password for all the

different systems they use. It's a good idea to use a password keeper. It's

general good IT practice.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

understand this is a widespread situation affecting many corners of our health

care system. The minister referenced Western and Labrador-Grenfell Health being

least affected by this situation so far.

Can the

minister confirm if cancer-related treatments and appointments are still

operational in Western and Labrador-Grenfell Health?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I think

one of the important things to realize is that with the advent of the beginning

of the working week – at least for the RHA clinics – we will likely find other

areas of the system that are impacted. So it is difficult to be categorical to

say we actually know the full extent of those impacts that the moment.

I am not

aware of any cancer-related issues in Western Health and I have not been advises

of any. But, certainly, we will be keeping an eye on that as well go forward.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

What

contingency plans do you have in place to ensure cancer patients resume

treatments as soon as possible?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

cancer care program is run by Eastern Health. That is the challenge here because

it is Eastern Health's systems that have been compromised most of all. Each

local cancer clinic has a record of patients under their care and there are

regular scheduled attendances. Their treatment may be a little bit slower simply

because the laboratory work has to be ordered on paper and the results conveyed

either by telephone or manually before treatment can start.

Again,

I'm not aware of any delayed. There are contingency plans in each RHA to deal

with IT failures and these are operational.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Speaker, we know lengthy

waits in the emergency room is already common in our province.

I ask

the minister: How is this situation impacting emergency rooms in Eastern and

Central Health?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker.

I don't

have detailed matrix but it will slow down treatment and assessment simply

because the backup system used over the weekend was handwritten paper forms for

radiology and bloodwork, which then had to be delivered to the lab or to X-ray.

The reports would then have to be provided locally, possibly by telephone rather

than in the electronic way they're done at the moment.

This is

something that Eastern Health is monitoring. I've not been made aware of any

particular issues in Central, but given the provincial radiology archiving

system is impacted, I would imagine they'd be similarly affected.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Speaker, we know an already

difficult situation is playing out at the Janeway where critically ill children

may be moved to IWK in Halifax due to a shortage of beds at the Janeway.

I ask

the minister: How has this cyberattack affected the already difficult situation

at the Janeway's pediatric intensive care unit?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker.

For the

information of the House, four out of the beds are still occupied at the

Janeway. The diversion is in effect but no one has been sent out. The effect of

the issues with IT at the weekend was to slow orientation of six staff returning

to the PICU who would then be able to deal with the capacity issue. There is a

meeting with clinical chiefs later on today or first thing tomorrow to see if

the diversion can be lifted and I expect further after that.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

It's

interesting that the Minister of Finance spoke to we've spent tons – her words –

tons of money on cyberattacks and the Minister of Digital Government said

cyberattacks are quite common, yet here we are in this situation.

Speaker,

our health care system has been facing a crisis now for months and this

situation risks compounding issues even further. The province's only children's

hospital is now facing multiple crises at the same time.

I ask

the minister: Are extra supports being offered to the Janeway to get through

this situation?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

Apart

from orientation of new staff, which may be delayed a day or two, there has been

no direct impact. The contingency plans that are in place for the PICU are

operating and they have not had any impact, as far as I've been made aware, on

clinical care. This is a capacity issue; it last occurred in 2019. Prudent

planning by Eastern Health was to arrange options with IWK. We have not had to

exercise those options and hopefully, within the next day or two, they won't be

necessary.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Speaker, the Carbonear

General Hospital provides services to many residents in the District of Harbour

Main. We are hearing reports that the number of physicians in the emergency room

will be reduced from two to one. Can the minister confirm?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

I have

not been advised of any changes in staffing in Carbonear, in general, let alone

the emergency room. I would direct them to Eastern Health because those are

operational issues. However, I can go back and ask the question if the Member

opposite would prefer for me to do it rather than her.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

We would prefer the minister to address this issue.

We are

also hearing reports that the number of interns in the emergency room could also

be reduced.

I ask

the minister: When is he going to address the possible shortage of physicians

and interns at the emergency room in Carbonear General Hospital if this appears

to be the case?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you.

Interns

are trainees, Speaker, and their numbers will fluctuate depending on Memorial

and the faculty of either family medicine or the specialty program concerned.

From the

point of view of recruitment and retention, I announced a couple of weeks ago

now a package totalling $30 million. The principal aim to the medium and long

term is to find out what our own grads want, to provide that for them and to

keep them in the province. We have $100,000 in forgivable loans for family

practitioners who set up a practice in a collaborative model with a five-year

return in service, and we also have a multitude of other bonuses. This is our

long-term strategy and we're working on it with our new provincial office.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Speaker, there are many

government-owned buildings that are in states of disrepair in the Stephenville -

Port au Port region.

I ask

the minister: Can he provide the House with an update on the replacement of the

Government Service Centre in Stephenville?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Infrastructure.

E. LOVELESS:

Thank you, Speaker, for the

question.

To the

hon. Member, I don't have that in front of me right now but I will go back to

the department to get the details for the Member.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Speaker, as reported last

week by The Appalachian , an

80-year-old gentleman fell at the Government Service Centre in Stephenville,

breaking his hip. As government is fully aware, this building is not wheelchair

accessible or accessible for people with mobility issues.

I ask

the Premier, the Minister of Justice and Public Safety, the Minister of

Transportation and Infrastructure, the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social

Development or the Minister of Finance: Will someone please immediately start

action to either replace this outdated building or call for tenders for a new

location?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Infrastructure.

E. LOVELESS:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

building in question, during the month of August, I was out in the area and I

did visit that building that is in question. Since that time, we're looking at

options and hopefully have some decisions in the near future on that. But in

terms of the gentleman that had the accident, I hope he is doing well.

Certainly, I wish him all the best.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I am

hearing from many constituents who have been told by their child care provider

that they must find new child care for their children, often on very short

notice. The reason why is that government is shutting down unregulated day

homes.

Can the

minister please explain what is happening?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

believe the Member is probably referring to a story that was broadcast on CBC a

week or so ago concerning Little Owl Land. Mr. Speaker, there were some

infractions at that particular early learning and child care centre. Government

had issued notices of infraction to the centre and to the Family and Child Care

Connections and subsequently took away the regulated status of the centre, which

means that they no longer operate with the Operating Grant Program.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Speaker.

No,

that's not what I'm referring to, actually. It has been emails that we have been

getting in our districts from people who are desperate looking for child care

spaces and they've been using, I guess, day homes who are not considered to be

regulated and officials have been coming in from your department and shutting

them down. Which is fine, we're not about unregulated, but we're looking at what

– which is going to be my next question.

What is

the plan to take some of these unregulated homes and make them more regulated –

bring them up to standard so we can eliminate or reduce the pressure for child

care spaces? Because, in my district and a lot of my colleagues' districts,

that's a big issue.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is an

important issue. There is a shortage of early learning and child care educators.

There's also a shortage of spaces in the province, Mr. Speaker, which is part of

the reason the provincial government signed on to an agreement with the federal

government just a couple of months ago, which will take a focus on increasing

the number of early learning and child care educators. It's putting in place a

wage grid which will increase the wages of our early learning and child care

educators. There's a plan in place, Mr. Speaker, to increase the number of

spaces in the province as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Exploits.

P. FORSEY:

Thank you, Speaker.

In the

District of Exploits, the RCMP is being asked to do more with less. I have been

receiving many calls from constituents in my district who are concerned about

shortages of police officers. People are worried that if they call for police,

the police won't be able to immediately respond.

Can the

minister tell me how many police officers are now serving the District of

Exploits?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you for the question,

Speaker.

This

question was asked in the House last week by the Member for Harbour Main, so I

do want to provide some information to the House.

I can

report that, under the provincial police service agreement, not including

support staff or civilians, there are 212 officer positions in Eastern, 149

officer positions in Western and 59 officer positions in Labrador for a total of

Also,

under the First Nations policing program, there's 16 officers assigned to the

communities of Hopedale, Nain, Rigolet and Makkovik.

As I've

said before, decisions about where these officers are located is a HR and

operational decision of the RCMP and it's in the public interest and public

safety not to give out exact numbers for detachments because, as you can

understand, if we were to say there was X number in one detachment and Y in

another, it would allow the public to know exactly where the officers are

located. It could put them at risk and could members of the public at risk.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Exploits.

P. FORSEY:

I can tell the Member there

are not enough officers in the Exploits District to cover the ground that is

needed, or in Central. So I am concerned about the long-term future of policing

and public safety in my district.

Will the

minister ensure that there are a full complement of officers to protect the

District of Exploits?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you for the question.

Again,

and, as I've asked this question a number of times in my short stint as Minister

of Justice and Public Safety, that the provincial government does provide

funding to the RCMP in this province and any decision about how many officers to

hire and where to put those officers in the detachments throughout the province

is a HR decision and an operational decision of the RCMP. For the interest of

public safety, we will not disclose, nor will the RCMP disclose, exactly how

many officers are in each detachment.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Friday, Public Health announced that cohorting will once again be required

indoors and, to the greatest extent possible, outdoors for Grades K to 6.

Would

the Minister of Education explain his understanding of cohorting, as it relates

to our public education system, and how it works to stop the spread of COVID-19?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Public

Health has asked for stronger cohorts in K to 6, Speaker. Currently, classrooms

in K to 6 are cohorts but they intermingle at times during the day and outdoors

on the playground, so Public Health has asked to ensure that the cohorts that

are the classroom intermingle less during the day and less in outdoor areas.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Would

the minister explain why cohorting is being used as a strategy in the school but

not on the busses taking the students to school?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Speaker.

I know

the Member has a fancy for questioning the protocols of Public Health, Speaker.

It happens on a regular basis. Public Health has set the guidelines. Sometimes

we wonder how they arrived at those guidelines, but they follow the

epidemiology, they follow the numbers of people that have been vaccinated in

certain areas, they follow other indicators in areas, Mr. Speaker, and they set

the guidelines. We follow the guidelines. They've lead us very well through the

pandemic.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Based on

my own experience as a teacher and from the many teachers who've spoken to me,

cohorting does not exist in any meaningful physical sense of the word. As

several teachers have stated to me, students are supposed to cohort while in

school, yet they ride the school bus in the morning and afternoon where no

cohorting exists at all.

I ask

the Minister of Education: If he will take the extra measure, provide the extra

school buses – at least for the primary grades – so students can physically

distance on their way to and from schools.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Speaker.

Again,

Public Health has lead us very well through this. Last year, Mr. Speaker, we

were the envy of most jurisdictions in the country and, certainly, most

jurisdictions globally, in terms of how the pandemic was dealt with in

Newfoundland and Labrador and in our school system. We had one of the least lost

educational times across the country.

Mr.

Speaker, I trust Public Health and I trust the guidelines that they put in

place. As the chief medical officer of Health said, we have to start to learn

with COVID. We are dealing with the guidelines that are put in place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Labrador's health is centred around appointments on the Island. Many would have

to be in transit right now when they found out that their appointments have been

cancelled as a result of the cyberattack on the Centre for Health Information.

I ask

the minister: What extra resources will be coming to avoid compounding the

already existing backlog with respect to Labradorians' fly-in appointments?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker.

Mr.

Diamond addressed this directly at a question about two hours ago. Essentially

he said that, wherever possible, people who had travelled for appointments would

be accommodated if it was safe to do so, given the constraints of our system

currently. Obviously, if that's not possible then they will be offered a

priority for rescheduling based on their clinical need, in the same way that we

managed COVID and Snowmageddon.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Speaker, we know that medical

travel often leaves Labradorians paying out of pocket for access to health care.

There are people in the city today who have been told that they'll have to come

back.

I ask

the minister: Will these individuals be reimbursed completely or will they be

out of pocket for two appointments coming down from Labrador?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you, Speaker.

It is

not my expectation that they would be disadvantaged because of the cancellation.

In terms of requests, we will certainly address those on a case-by-case basis,

but as of yet we've not had any. I certainly look at those sympathetically,

Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period

has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling

of Documents.

Notices

of Motion.

Notices of Motion

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I give

notice that I will on tomorrow move, in accordance with Standing Order 11(1),

that this House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, November 2, 2021.

SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

The hon.

the Leader of the Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I give

notice of the following private Member's resolution, which will be seconded by

the Member for Labrador West:

WHEREAS

the 2016 census showed that St. John's has the highest level of income

inequality in all of Atlantic Canada, with the top 1 per cent taking home nine

times more than the bottom 30 per cent and seven times more than the bottom 50

per cent; and

WHEREAS

Canadians from all parties and all walks of life, including CEOs, Senators,

doctors, community support workers and economists are now championing some form

of basic income program; and

WHEREAS

federal Finance Minister, Chrystia Freeland, has called for a new deal in light

of the vast transformation occurring in our economy due to automation and

information technology, which will see the bulk of the productivity gains going

to the wealthiest, while real wages stagnate and an insufficient number of jobs

are created to replace those lost to automation; and

WHEREAS

former governor of the Bank of Canada, Mark Carney, echoed Minister Freeland's

comments in 2018, explaining how technology has decimated the share of income

going to workers, increased poverty and underemployment, with the effect of

hollowing out the middle class and replacing the work with more low-skilled

jobs, and the vast majority of productivity gains going to the wealthiest as a

result; and

WHEREAS

the federal government is already pioneering in the provision of income support

to those who most need it through the Canada Emergency Response Benefit; and

WHEREAS

evidence from the Alaska Permanent Fund found that when low- and middle-income

families receive extra money every year they bought more education, clothing,

recreation and electronic purchases for their children, while giving more money

to high-income families did not result in increased investment in their

children; and

WHEREAS

the current income support system amounts to a poverty trap and still leaves

many to fall through the cracks; and

WHEREAS

Canadian data from basic income pilot projects has shown that such programs

increase public health, foster improvements in nutrition, improve mental health

and well-being, lower the immense public costs associated with poverty,

encourage entrepreneurship and allow people to pursue education and training;

and

WHEREAS

the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives has calculated that poverty costs

this province a total of $959 million annually in preventable health problems,

crime, lost productivity, foregone public revenue and intergenerational costs;

and

WHEREAS

a poll conducted by The Gandalf Group on behalf of the Maple Leaf Centre For

Action On Food Security (June 28-30, 2021) indicated that significant support

exists among Atlantic Canadians and among all demographics for a basic minimum

income floor that would provide a safety net for all Canadians; and

WHEREAS

a 2017 study by the Roosevelt Institute showed that even a $1,000 payment to all

adults once a year would expand the American economy by 12.56 per cent over the

baseline after eight years and permanently raise the level of national economic

output; and

WHEREAS

this House voted last year to set up a committee to study a pilot project on

basic income and create a timeline for its implementation;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House consider truly ending poverty in this

province by establishing an all-party Select Committee on basic income, with a

mandate to review and make recommendations on: eligibility and minimum income

amounts, interaction with existing income supports, additional poverty reduction

initiatives, cost-benefit analysis, potential models for such a program and a

timeline for implementation;

BE IT

FURTHER RESOLVED that the House ensure this Select Committee has the resources

it needs to conduct this work;

BE IT

FURTHER RESOLVED that the Select Committee engage federal Members of Parliament

from Newfoundland and Labrador to participate.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

This

will be the private Member's motion that will be debated on Wednesday.

SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

Answers

to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Humber - Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE:

Thank you, Speaker.

I'm

going to present a petition today:

WHEREAS

the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is introducing legislation making

helmets mandatory in factory-sealed Side By Sides; and

WHEREAS

a Side By Side is fully enclosed, equipped with seat belts and roll bars; and

WHEREAS

wearing helmets in a Side By Side can pose safety hazards due to limited or no

peripheral vision and other safety hazards; and

WHEREAS

the legislation changes also include children under 13 years of age are not

permitted to operate an off-road vehicle with an engine size greater than 125cc;

and

WHEREAS

every child is not of the same size and operating machines that are not suitable

to their size pose a greater danger when trying to steer the machine;

THEREFORE we, the undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to immediately amend legislation before

the House that make the mandatory use of helmets in Sides By Sides, which

potentially will cause more safety hazards to the occupants and also make

changes allowing children under 13 to operating machines greater than 125cc

based on the child's size, with guidelines and supervision.

Mr.

Speaker –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

It's

getting a bit loud.

E. JOYCE:

That's just the few petitions

I got today and it's to the minister.

On a

side note, Mr. Speaker, on this, I'll say to the minister that a lot of these

issues are what we brought up. I'll say on a positive note – very positive –

there were situations that arose with the minister, I know today, on a very

important issue for a person seeking employment. The minister and her staff were

very eager to step in to help out with that. I just want to recognize that these

are issues that were brought to our attention.

Mr.

Speaker, I'll have a lot of petitions like these. There are a lot of people and

the people from here: Cox's Cove, Corner Brook, Cox's Cove, Irishtown,

Summerside, Corner Brook, Corner Brook, Corner Brook, Corner Brook, Cox's Cove

and McIver's.

There

are a lot of people who have major concerns about this. They're hoping that the

minister will give a stronger indication that they will take out the Side By

Sides – take out the helmets for the Side By Sides and look at the legislation

to hopefully make an amendment for the people with the 125cc's. In that case

itself, it is not so much the power of the machine; it is the actual size of the

machine itself. People just outgrow their machines and you can't ride them

properly. You might be 11 but you've outgrown the machine.

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

E. JOYCE:

She might be doing it – yeah,

I think the government may be –

AN HON. MEMBER:

It's (inaudible) pretty

positive.

E. JOYCE:

Pretty positive on that part.

I took a

walk this weekend. People know I have a couple of dogs and I always walk the

dogs. I took a walk up where a lot of people ATV and I get stopped a lot of

times to ask the minister to reconsider –

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Time has

expired.

E. JOYCE:

Thank you, Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

reasons for this petition:

WHEREAS

there are many hopeful mothers and couples in this province dealing with

infertility issues and require medical assistance to conceive; and

WHEREAS

the cost associated with out-of-province fertility treatments, specifically in

vitro fertilization, is extremely cost prohibitive; and

WHEREAS

there are doctors in the province trained in in vitro fertilization and have the

desire to set up an in vitro fertilization clinic in the province; and

WHEREAS

the province is dealing with an aging population and serious population growth

challenges;

THEREFORE we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: We call upon the

House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to

establish a fertility treatment clinic within the province providing full

fertility services, including in vitro fertilization, for hopeful mothers and

families and in the interim, provide financial assistance to access

out-of-province fertility treatment and services.

Speaker,

I have talked to several families that are involved in trying to get some help

with respect to in vitro fertilization funding. I'll share with you a very

heart-wrenching story about one particular couple in my district who have had a

tough journey to parenthood.

They

struggled with infertility for about seven years, Speaker – seven years which

was full of physical, emotional and financial costs. In fact, it's my

understanding they spent up to $70,000 in terms of treatments and medication.

That doesn't even include the cost of having to travel to Calgary –

heartbreaking experience.

They

were referred to fertility clinics for testing and, after 18 months of trying to

conceive, then they spent six months – still no pregnancy. They had two

unsuccessful rounds of artificial insemination in Newfoundland and Labrador.

They were then referred to the clinic in Calgary for in vitro fertilization.

They

completed four rounds there as well as five frozen embryos. There were nine

separate times that they travelled to Alberta.

Speaker,

they went through a very, very difficult process. Fortunately for them it was a

very happy ending. They have a child. But what we need to be very mindful of is

the fact that there are many families that want to have children that cannot

afford the expense. This is extremely cost prohibitive.

We have

a province that's dealing with an aging population. We have serious problems,

population growth challenges. We have commitments but no action from the

Minister of Health and Minister Responsible for Women and Gender Equality. We

hear rhetoric and no action.

When can

these people, these people that are struggling to have families –

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

– expect action?

SPEAKER:

The Member's time has

expired.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Thank you, Speaker.

These

are the reasons for this petition: The long-term care facility in Bay St. George

and Stephenville Crossing is 45 years old. It is one of the older long-term care

facilities in our province. It was not designed for the level of care it is now

providing residents. The building has substandard bathrooms which cannot

accommodate lifts and rooms are antiquated and small in size in terms of length

and width. There is a need for a new long-term care facility for the people of

the Bay St. George region and its current residents.

Therefore we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: To urge the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to replace the Bay St. George long-term

care facility so our seniors can receive the care they deserve.

Speaker,

today earlier I asked a question about another building that has outlived its

useful life in my district. This particular building that houses the only

long-term care facility in our region is in desperate need of replacement. As I

just alluded to, it doesn't meet today's standards when it comes to size, width

and the inability to be able to get lifts in to move the residents around easy.

It's something that is of a large concern to a lot of people.

This

petition is signed by thousands in my region and in my colleague's region. The

planning needs to start so I'd urge the government to commit to the planning

phase of getting a new long-term care facility for our region.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

L. O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

background to this petition is as follows: Eastern Health has recently

repositioned one of the ambulances from the Trepassey area to the Cape Broyle

area. This has left only one ambulance in the Trepassey area. Residents of

Trepassey and the surrounding area, Portugal Cove, St. Shott's, Bisque Bay and

all those areas are at least two hours from the nearest hospital.

THEREFORE we petition the House of Assembly as follows: We, the undersigned,

call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and

ambulance in a time of emergency by repositioning a second ambulance back in the

Trepassey area to ensure the safety and well-being of local residents and to

meet the national standards for response time.

Speaker,

I spoke to a lady who happened to be the person who was looking for an ambulance

last week. She had some issues and called the ambulance. It was on a red alert

in the Trepassey area so her husband decided to put her in her vehicle and to

leave for St. John's to come out.

Upon

leaving there, the ambulance was dispatched from Cape Broyle to come back up the

shore to be able to respond to that call. Luckily, she got aboard that

ambulance; it got repositioned again after she got going to St. John's. That

happens regularly we hear.

It's a

dire need and the Trepassey area should definitely have that ambulance

reinstated in the area. It's too late when something happens. I wouldn't want to

be on the government's side for something to happen there. It's just unheard of

that they move it out of this area.

I had an

ambulance one time the summer – and this is before it was moved – we had an

ambulance situation in Cape Broyle that a person had a stroke in the area and

had to wait an hour and a half for an ambulance from Holyrood to be able to come

to the area to take care of that person. An hour and a half away with two

ambulances sitting in the area but not being manned. The issue is not moving an

ambulance, the issue is it being manned and why are they moving them?

Somebody

has got to have a deeper look at this and take care of the area and the region

in Trepassey and surrounding areas to make sure that they reinstate this

ambulance. It's totally, totally needed in the area and it's too late when

something happens.

I think

that they should have another look at this and be able to bring back that

ambulance to that region.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This

petition is for fair electricity rates for Labrador Indigenous communities.

We, the

undersigned, are concerned citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador who urge our

leaders to ensure that fairer electricity rates be provided to residents in the

Northern Labrador Innu and Inuit communities of Nain, Natuashish, Hopedale,

Makkovik, Postville and Rigolet.

The high

rates charged are cost prohibitive to using electric heat and, therefore, are

cost prohibitive to adequately heating their homes. The rationale for this

petition is to bring electricity rates more in line with what our neighbouring

residents in Lake Melville region pay.

For the

first 1,000-kilowatt hours, Torngat Mountains residents are charged the same

rate as their neighbouring residents in Lake Melville region. However, above

this ceiling, the rate jumps six fold; six times, to 18.968 cents a

kilowatt-hour; 18.968 cents a kilowatt-hour prevents most residents from being

able to afford to heat their homes with electric heat. It is the low-income

families and households that suffer the greatest from this financial barrier.

Poorly

heated houses also often results in damage, creating expensive repairs from

frozen pipes, moisture damage and mould. Poorly heated houses also create social

and mental health issues that can be long lasting. We strongly believe that

changes to electricity rates are need to be made to improve the quality of life

for Northern Labrador residents.

Therefore, we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: We, the

undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to increase the lifeline block to 3,500-kilowatt hours

when applying the Northern Strategic Plan subsidy to electricity bills of

Northern Labrador residents of the Torngat Mountains region.

Mr.

Speaker, I've read the petition several times in 2019, several times in 2020,

but I had to revise it this summer because the rates went up from 18.5 cents a

kilowatt-hour, which is the highest rate charged in the province to the people

on the North Coast. Now, it's gone up to 18.68 cents a kilowatt-hour.

But that

doesn't change the reality; it just makes our reality much harsher. Because who

does this impact? In the petitions I've read before when I was asking for a more

favourable or just, basically, a lower rate – we're paying the highest in the

province – who are impacted? The elders who have physical impairments that

prevent them from being able to haul wood to heat their houses; single families;

women. Who suffers the most? Children.

We just

have to look at our problems that we experienced with CSSD where a lot of our

families lose their children to government. In order for them to get their

children back, they have to be able to heat their homes.

Anyway,

I'll end there, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you very much.

SPEAKER:

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I call

Motion 2.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Deputy Government House Leader, that under Standing Order 11(1) this House

not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. today, Monday, November 1, 2021.

SPEAKER:

Is it the pleasure of the

House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

The hon.

the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I call

from the Order Paper second reading of Bill 34.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Speaker.

I move

second reading, seconded by the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

Bill 34,

An Act To Amend The Schools Act, 1997, be now read a second time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill, “An Act To Amend The Schools Act, 1997.” (Bill 34)

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Speaker.

Today,

we're bringing forward an amendment to the

Schools Act, 1997 . The amendments in the bill will effectively give the

provincial government the authority to appoint a smaller interim board of

trustees in place of the existing board and the smaller board will have a

mandate to oversee that transition.

Budget 2021 ,

brought forward by the Minister of Finance, informed – and I'll read a quote

from that budget: “With the goal of making better use of our considerable

investment in education and ensure that investments target the classroom, not

administration, we will be taking the appropriate steps to integrate the

Education.”

Speaker,

the change that we are making today, via this legislation, is the step that will

allow us to move forward with that transition. It is a very simple amendment. It

is appointing an interim board of trustees, replacing the existing board.

Currently, the NLESD has an elected board of trustees, I believe there are 17 of

them and those trustees were elected or appointed. Some were appointed by

government as they expired over the last three or so years. There hasn't been an

election of school trustees since November 2016. The terms expired some time

ago, Speaker. As Minister of Education, I had asked the existing trustees if

they would stay on for a period of time as the pandemic had started, to ensure

that the ongoing management of the district continued during the time of

significant turmoil. However, now that we are pursuing a change in the structure

of the NLESD, a new board is needed, a board that has the mandate of

transitioning the district into the department.

The

existing board was mandated to oversee the operations of the NLESD in its

current format. That mandate runs counter to the changes that we intend to make.

The smaller interim board of trustees will have a dual mandate to continue to

oversee the operations of the NLESD, but also to facilitate the integration of

the NLESD into government.

Speaker,

I will inform the House that these changes will officially occur once the act

receives Royal Assent. I did speak with the current board of trustees this

morning and informed them that these changes were taking place, and also thanked

them for their service. As I said, their terms expired some time ago. I did meet

with them several months ago and asked if they would stay on even though their

terms had expired, because we were going through the pandemic. They had agreed

to do that. So they did, in fact, agree to stay on and serve beyond the expiry

of their terms.

They've

operated, provided guidance and oversaw the operations of the NLESD during the

time of the pandemic. I have a great deal of respect for the work that they've

done. Obviously, with any board, Speaker, there's sometimes a healthy friction,

but we worked very well together. They worked well in terms of the NLESD and

serving the NLESD and the department. I have nothing but the greatest of respect

for the current trustees.

In fact,

I will say that the interim board, Mr. Speaker – the majority of those members

will come from the existing trustees. So we will be asking a number of the

existing trustees to make up the majority of the interim board. I also wish to

inform the House that while the appointments are not yet finalized for the board

chair, they will be finalized within a couple of weeks. We look forward to the

interim board providing the guidance on the transition.

I do

want to make it clear, Mr. Speaker, that this is certainly no reflection of the

existing board or a question of their dedication or their competency. I spoke,

as I said, with the current trustees this morning; I had a very good

conversation. In fact I encouraged the existing trustees to apply to the IAC, as

we will be putting a permanent board in place. As all Members of the Legislature

know, going through the IAC, getting recommendations and going through the

formal process of appointing those members take several months.

We will

be looking to the IAC, as we near the conclusion of the transition of the school

district into the department, to put in place a permanent board through the IAC.

I think they have a fine roster of candidates to choose from with the existing

board of trustees that are in place. This is certainly not about the performance

of the existing board; it's merely a shift in the direction that we laid out in

May during the budget, and putting in place the foundation for that transition.

closing, Speaker, I will reiterate that the decisions that we are making

regarding the NLESD transition are meant to put our K-to-12 system in the best

position to succeed and to see a closer coalition between our significant

investments in education and the resulting academic outcomes. We are moving

towards an approach that prioritizes centralized governance and school-based

decision-making, and a more flexible and responsive approach.

We'll

get into where we are in terms of the transition at a later time. I know that

does not meet the spirit and intent of the legislation. The spirit and intent of

the legislation is putting in place a transition board, Mr. Speaker, so I'll

keep my comments to that.

I know

that we have former educators in the Legislature, Mr. Speaker. We had talked

previously about the transition of the district into the department. I look

forward to their comments and debate on this issue.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's a

pleasure to speak on this legislation. I speak on most legislation that affects

our districts – or probably not all, I should say, but most. This one here

probably expects it more than most because each one of us have a fair amount of

schools in our district. Education issues are predominant right through the

province.

At first

glance, when you read the legislation it is pretty straightforward. The briefing

this morning was pretty quick and to the point. There's nothing too complicated

to read. I guess there are a lot of unanswered questions that come from my side

and my colleagues as well. Not that they're not answerable, but right now there

are a lot of questions out there with this merger of the school district within

the department.

I'm

looking forward to finding out, as that progresses, where we are. What savings

are going to involved? Where the savings are going to go? IAC is going to pick

them. What's going to be the makeup? How will the process work? IAC can make

recommendations we know. That gets to the Cabinet table and they don't have to

be accepted. There are a lot of areas out there. It's going to be made up by

current trustees. That, I think, is a good thing.

What

geographic areas? How will the geographic areas be allotted? More than likely

we're obviously going to be made up of the same people; it's going to be the

same individuals. Probably have bigger areas. That piles into some of the

questions that you want to ask.

The same

trustee who is looking after one area, is he or she going to take up double

their areas? I don't deal a lot per se with trustees, but you're always

available reaching out back and forth. It's a mutual open communication. During

these times, it's never a bad thing to have a good open dialogue with those

individuals. I think that needs to be in the coming weeks when this legislation

officially – or gets through, whatever happens to it, when and if passed, I

guess we'll find out all those things.

Being an

elected representative sitting here in the House of Assembly, the democratic

process is very important. If I were to throw any concern or any issue I have

with it, it's the democratic election process. I've always voted in school

trustees, school board elections. I know that the voter turnout is traditionally

really low and that's unfortunate, but I've never missed an opportunity to vote

no matter what the election is.

These

people have been elected to represent those areas, duly elected like us, like we

sit in here in the Legislature. It does cause me some concern. To say that that

doesn't bother me, that wouldn't be accurate. That was probably the biggest

thing that jumped out at me. We're taking away democratically elected people and

we're going to reappoint them based on, really, the mercy of the department.

Now, I

guess the question that comes up again – and the minister will have lots of time

to answer this stuff too – what process will be used to pick the new out of the

existing trustees? Will there be an interview process? Will their résumés be

reviewed? Will it be based on the area you're representing now? What backgrounds

are you going to be looking for?

Because

it's a different process for people who run for school board trustee to get

elected. Your résumé, that's up to the people who vote for them. Most times

you're voting for a person that you know and they want to step up and do the

right thing.

changes the dynamics a lot when the minister and his officials or Cabinet can

decide who they're going to put there in their place. So then does it turn into

credentials? Not that that's a bad thing. But does it pick up the ones who have

the best credentials out of the current 17 trustees? Is that an issue? Is that

what it's going to be based on?

Sometimes that's fine, but there are a lot of times there are people there that

got duly elected and they're probably putting more effort into doing a better

job than the people with all the credentials, so to speak. I throw it out there,

because I'm sure that the officials within the department and the district

probably think about these things: I hope those people are given fair

consideration as well. That it is a combination. Because there's a lot of good

people who step up to do those jobs. They're volunteering and you step up in the

best interests. And I have some good people that represent school councils that

I've dealt with over the years and trustees. They do it for the right reasons

and I commend them for it. I have a lot of respect for anyone that does that.

At the

end of the day, when you put your name on any ballot – and especially when you

put your name on a ballot and you don't really get anything in return other than

just pure service, there's a lot to be said for that. We have a lot of town

councils do the same. So these trustees definitely should be commended and I

hope they are given every opportunity when the process changes, comes around to

this new process.

I guess

more of my second reading is based on questions that maybe can come back in

Committee. Consultation – have they been consulted with? Are they given an

opportunity to step forward or is it being offered to come forward? Are some

being told their service is no longer required? I guess that's a lot of the

issues that need to be asked. Maybe it has to be someone like me or my colleague

from Bonavista who has a great background in education who would like to ask

those questions in Committee as well because, again, we're taking away a

democratic right. I'm sure out of 17 of those individuals, there are probably

some people who have a concern with that.

I know

that 17 is probably not a manageable number, but I have another question and

throw it out there: Why can't the current board of trustees do what's required?

I know that they are supposed to oversee the operations in the school district

and merging is a different issue altogether, but I hope that during Committee

and through debate we'll get some more clarity on that.

It's not

earth shattering and it probably makes a lot sense to do all this, but I think

sometimes in our roles, as legislators, just throw it out there. It's not

opposing this legislation. It's about making sure that all these questions are

asked. When I ask one question, someone else here in this House will probably

trigger another thought in their own mind. It's what we do in a lot of debates.

Maybe it has triggered someone else's thought process to think down a different

avenue, because I do that constantly.

We look

forward to more debate on it as we go on into Committee. We'll have some

questions. Like I said, I think my colleague from Bonavista is going to want to

have a few words on this as well. I look forward to further debate in Committee.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

In this

case I think – not I think, I know it's admirable if it comes down to making

better use of the investment and targeting that investment in the classrooms is

laudable and I applaud it. I think it's something that's been said certainly

when I was president, by the current president of the NLTA, by teachers in the

classroom, by parents and so on and so forth, I can tell you that much for

certain.

I would

say, too, I will not be mourning the passing of the NLESD. I will take the

minister at his word, too, that there's going to be an investment in the

classrooms.

For me,

of course, is going to be the question of the plan and how. How this is going to

roll out. I know from my own experience, Speaker, when I first started teaching

way back in 1981, I forget how many districts there were, but there were a

significant number. I started teaching my first year with the RC school board on

the Burin Peninsula and you had the integrated school board next door.

Basically, a duplication of services in many ways and sometimes even duplication

of buses.

I spent

most of my career though, a good half of it at least, on the Southern Shore

which became my second home and my last half of my career at Holy Heart high

school, where for the first time I got to teach entirely within my discipline.

Now, I

will say this, that I'm not always sure sometimes if amalgamation – what the

cost-benefit analysis is. I will say that depending on where you are or who you

are, which part of the province, you might very well be upset at the passing of

the school district transition or not. That much I can tell you. But, for me, I

can see benefits to it. I do know that when the four boards amalgamated into one

large one – not the Eastern School District, but the Newfoundland and Labrador

our Estimates to the minister. I think it was announced in the spring and it was

in place in September that year. To me, that's not how you do a transition.

What I

like about this, at least, is that there's an announcement here; we are being

forewarned along the way that this is where it's going to happen. Now, I have a

few thoughts on the process, but still I would argue that this is infinitely

better than what happened in 2013, which I think caused chaos at the ground

level for teachers. I remember speaking to administrators in Labrador where they

were thrown into confusion. But this is significantly better. At least there's a

plan here.

At that

time, too, I do remember in certain parts in Central where schools were closed

and facilities were closed that had perfectly good meeting spaces, the buildings

weren't being used and instead what the districts started doing was they were

renting spaces from hotels and that instead of using their own facilities to

carry out in-service and so on and so forth. I think better planning could have

avoided a lot of that.

I'm not

sure if it's ever been done, a cost-benefit analysis. If, indeed, simply

amalgamating the school district the way it was, in that manner, actually found

efficiencies, or saved money or redirected savings back into the school system.

I do know that the school district under went a transformation, but not

necessarily a transformation for the better and I'll give you an example.

On the

Southern Shore, there were 12 schools and now down to four. But I do remember,

on the Southern Shore, Frank Galgay, the superintendent at that time, would make

it his special project at the beginning of the school year to come around and

visit each class in each school and have that talk. Our program specialist, who

you could walk into –the bungalow at Mobile next to the high school, basically

you could walk in and you could see them right there. They were first among

equals. They came out to the school, they ate lunch with you, they talked and so

on and so forth.

The

larger the school district became the more it became like corporate

headquarters. Even the name changed from superintendent to CEO and it lost a lot

of the teacher or the collegiality of it. You couldn't get into the office down

there without going through a multitude of, I guess, security checks. You could

no longer see where the people were; you lost that connection.

I'll say

this, too, that when you had multiple school districts I think, in many ways,

there was a better chance of retaining teachers. For the most part, if I went

with the Ferryland school board – and maybe this is the reason I ended up

staying there – at the beginning it was very difficult to transfer from one

district to another school district. Your seniority wasn't portable at that time

unless you were actually hired on in another district. So there was an

incentive, Speaker, to stay where you were, but then you had the opportunity to

grow, as I did, and love the place I taught.

Once it

amalgamated and simply teachers could go to the smaller communities and then

transfer in, that's what happened –

SPEAKER:

I remind the Member to stay

relevant to the bill.

J. DINN:

And I will. That's what I'm saying, there's a disadvantage to this. I think

here, with regards to this, those are the pitfalls that we have to be aware of

as well.

I would

like to know – and I'll ask questions in the Committee stage – what is their

plan? I think if I understood, there was the comment that the minister said at

the time was that, when asked: Well, what are we hoping to gain? Is that we'll

have a better idea once we get into the process. Well, we're now into the

process and, as I understand it, there has been some sort of a transition plan

prepared by the former deputy minister – and I could be wrong on that. I guess

right now I'd like to see the vision as to where we're heading and how this is

going to work out. Why not maintain the current board? Understanding that it

does have a large number and I agree that maybe 17 is not the best approach to –

or a large board is not going to be the most nimble. But why not even mandate

the current board?

Also, I

was clearly looking for some idea of how they were going to be appointed.

Interim, I guess, I can appreciate it, if I understood it correctly. Interim,

it's going to be appointed. I'm assuming, then, that for the board that's

appointed next year it's going to go through the Independent Appointments

Commission, if that's correct.

I'll

have more questions, Speaker, at the time, but for the most part, with the

caveats, I think if indeed we are committed to reinvesting the savings and the

efficiencies into the school system – and one other thing, to make sure that

there's regional representation, that in any new structure that there is always

a regional office and that regional needs are taken into account. But, again,

reinvestment.

Secondly, I guess from my point of view, it would be to have a clear plan. I

think this has merit. I think it has potential to be beneficial to the education

system. As long as at all steps along the way we are keeping all those – whether

it's the NLTA, the current NLESD, the Federation of School Councils, any

stakeholders in this, that they're kept along the way, I think we have the

potential to come up with something that will benefit the school system. But, to

me, the key is to make sure, please, that at steps along the way that it's

transparent and that they're engaged.

All I

can promise, Speaker, is that I will support what I think is a good idea, but I

will be critical of things that need to change.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE:

Thank you, Speaker.

I, too,

will be supporting this bill. It's something that's been one of the many things

that have been talked about, I suppose, in the House of Assembly for a number of

years. Certainly a question that I had for a number of years when we're looking

at efficiencies and so on. Not that the people on the school board haven't

really put their heart in it and did a good job, based on the system that we've

had, because I really believe they do. I know a number of people who have been

involved and are involved, and quality individuals. I'm very glad to hear that

these individuals or least a number of these individuals will be invited back to

sit on the interim committee and, hopefully, in 2022 they will put their name

forward to the IAC for appointment on, I'll say, the new committee, for a lack

of a better term.

I am a

little curious about, and I guess this will come up again in Committee, how this

is going to work in the sense that I was of the understanding, when this had

been talked about a year ago or two years ago, that the idea is to get rid of

the school board and it would all be under the Department of Education. I kind

of get the fact that we're going to have an interim committee until September, I

think, 2022, but I'm wondering why, then, we're appointing another committee and

how long they're going to be there. Is the intention that this second committee

is going to be there in perpetuity or is this just for another one or two years?

At what point in time will there be no committee and will it be totally run by

the Department of Education? Or is the plan to still have it as an advisory

board to the department? That's what I'm just trying to understand. So I'll

certainly ask that in Committee stage if nobody else does.

The

concept of getting rid of another layer of bureaucracy and, arguably, red tape,

cost and everything else makes sense. Particularly when you look at the fiscal

state of our province it definitely makes sense. It makes sense on other levels

as well because one of the things I've noticed over the years – and that's not

about this administration or the last one; it has nothing to do with whether

it's Liberal, PC or whatever – I've always found, to my mind at least, that

school boards have kind of been used as a bit of a scapegoat.

When it

comes to any unpleasantries, shutting down schools, controversy over the 1.6

kilometre rule, whatever the case might be, it's all: Well, that's the school

board; let the school board deal with it. But when it comes to opening a new

school or renovating a new school the minister is going to be front and centre

cutting the ribbon and the Premier, and everybody else, and the Member and all

the communication staff to tout the wonderful job we're all doing because we're

opening a new school or renovating a new school, like I said. So politically

when it's good news, it's been the Department of Education and the minister.

When it's bad news, shutting down something: Oh, that's the school board. Slough

it off on them.

This

eliminates it. Actually, it's kind of a courageous move on behalf of this

government, in sense, really, because at least now they're going to take

responsibility for both sides. If they do something good, they can take the

glory and if they have to make tough decisions then they're going to have to

wear that. So, really, in a sense, I kind of admire them for actually taking

that stand and getting rid of that buffer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

P. LANE:

Oh, you can read

Hansard . Listen, I say to the minister over there, any time you're

doing something good I'll be the first one to acknowledge it. That's not always

the case, but most of the times I think it is – most of the times it is.

S. CROCKER:

More often than not.

P. LANE:

More often than not, that's

the case, yes.

So I

certainly support the move; I support the bill. As I said, I've got a couple of

questions that I will have in the Committee stage. But it does make sense, to me

at least.

The only

other point I'll make, and my colleague here from St. John's Centre kept

referencing the fact that it's going back into education, which is a great

thing, and I hope it does. I hope it does go back into education, if there are

savings. But I'm just going by my experience over the years. I can remember at

the time when we got rid of all the denominational school boards and we created

said at the time: All the money we're going to save is all going to go back into

the classroom. That didn't necessarily happen.

We talk

about all the money from the carbon tax is going to go into green initiatives.

I'm not saying that there are no green initiatives. There are some green –

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

P. LANE:

It's very relevant. It's very

relevant because we're talking about the savings from this move going back into

education. So I hope it does – I hope it does. But, as I say, in the past we

haven't necessarily seen it. We never saw it necessarily with the carbon tax.

We're told we're going to see it now with this sugar tax. The jury is out. If it

happens I'll be the first one to stand up and applaud. I really will, if it

happens. But it's the point –

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

P. LANE:

Here we go with the relevance

again.

Anyway,

my point is that regardless of where the money goes, we're up to our neck in

debt here in this province, so we need to try to find ways to be efficient

regardless. But with that said, I do hope that the efficiencies that hopefully

will be created here and the dollars that will hopefully be saved here, that

we're able to redirect at least some of those savings into much-needed issues.

particularly think about children with learning disabilities, special needs. I

think of the Churchill family when we talk about children who are deaf and hard

of hearing and so on. Children with autism and so on. I really hope that the

savings that hopefully will be created through this will be able to enhance

those programs for children of this province.

With

that said, Speaker, I'll conclude my remarks. As I said, I'll have a couple of

questions in Committee stage unless somebody else asks it before me, of course.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Bonavista.

C. PARDY:

Thank you, Speaker.

I was

looking forward to the bill from the Schools Act coming before us because I said

it's something that with my career I could at least speak to and so on. My mind

ran rampant. I was looking for changes that would be in the Schools Act but this

is probably the most logical one, even though the act cries out that it needs to

be updated. I know this is the most logical one, but I would hope, in short

course, we'll see some other amendments coming for the Schools Act.

It's

been said a couple of times about any savings that would be accrued going back

into the K-to-12 school system, the classrooms, I think the minister had stated,

which that's wonderful. It's the way it ought to be and that is good.

previous speakers had mentioned about the school board being a buffer zone and

he looked at it from the political ramifications. I looked at the school board

as sometimes being closest to the people of which it served. If we now remove

the school board, which we are and we're going to consolidate, we need to look

at the buffer and the distance between the people of which we serve, the

children, the school system and those who are making the decision which would be

now, I would assume, Cabinet, the Department of Education.

When we

transition and look at transition, we need to make sure that that gulf between

the people that are out there in rural Bonavista and between those, the

decision-makers, that there is a lot of continuity and that bridge and that gap

is not too large. That's doable. I think the transition team will work at that

to make sure that there is a connectivity along the lines.

I, too,

would like to thank those school trustees – the ones I know and in particular

the one that serves region 11. I have tremendous respect for this member. Her

children are still in the school system. Probably on two or three occasions,

we've engaged about education issues and her head and her heart is in the right

place for education in the K to 12.

I would

certainly state that if we're looking at a smaller committee – and I think

research would state that the ideal committee is a committee of seven. I haven't

ready anything and it may be out there where a committee of 17 was – but seven

is what my understanding would be. We're going to move to a smaller committee

primarily made up of existing trustees that will be selected, I guess, for what

skill set they may have or connectivity with the school system and these will be

the ones that will be driving the transition.

I have

no problem with that and I, too, would support the bill. I do thank all of them

for their service, because several people that I know of it is no doubt that

their heart and soul was into the K-to-12 system and making it better, I think

probably without exception that is. I do tip my hat for them.

The

minister had stated in his

preamble – which I like the thought of. He talked

about school –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

C. PARDY:

He talked about school based

decision-making; we like that. In fact, the further the decision-making moves

from the regions and from where the schools are or the community of schools,

that's often where the disconnects occur. So if we can bring it down to the

levels of which the schools exist on the Bonavista Peninsula or beyond, but at

least in pods that we have decision-making that would be in those areas, that's

a good thing too.

The

Department of Education wasn't always the ones that I would reach out to on

school-based issues in K to 12. They had their knowledge and they had their

expertise, but it wasn't often in the (inaudible) – I'm having trouble with that

word.

AN HON. MEMBER:

Operationalizing.

C. PARDY:

I'll pass on that. But as far

as making the school work – operationalizing the school.

AN HON. MEMBER:

There you go.

C. PARDY:

Wow.

anyway, in that, they weren't because they never had the expertise in a lot of

cases. I understand that because their skill set that they hired was for a

different item. They trusted the system to run itself and for others to have. So

if we contact now, under this new system, the Department of Education, we'll

certainly have people that will be in sync with the operationalizing of the

school, which is important. That may not be the case now. I would think in my

estimates there may be discussions that I would've had in my short time here

that I would think a lot of the times they weren't involved in the K-to-12

system and the running of the system.

previous speaker had mentioned about the NLESD and I would say there are some

wonderful professionals and skilled professionals that run and operate in the

NLESD. I know many of them, I worked with many of them and I would think I would

give them quite a reference and a nod that we're in good hands with many people

that are in the NLESD. So I tip my hat to them. The whole goal of this was to

merge the two entities to find more efficiencies and to streamline the operation

and not at any sacrifice to the K-to-12 system. I think that we can do that and

that is achievable. I firmly do believe that that would be the case.

A couple

have asked on the transition that we look at. We'll often hear and say: Our

geography and our diversity would speak that we can't consolidate like we are

doing. I would say: Well, if you look at Toronto that would be – I don't know if

it's Toronto and the greater area; it may be one-tenth – we may be one-tenth

their size of what they have. They have one board, one that would look after

that. We'll have one for half a million people and, yes, we have diversity out

there, but the representation that we'll have on this seven and knowing the

areas that we serve on the Island, that will work well.

When we

appoint it is key to make sure we've got people that are in these executive

positions now that know the system, and we'll have those because I think, at our

disposal, we currently have that. It's only to make sure that the new group is

one that is very well versed in our system and the operationalizing of the

system.

It was

also mentioned before about reporting back to the House on the transition. I

find that, whether it be the ATV or some other debates that we have, a lot of

good things are raised in the debate within the House. Sometimes, I guess for

one reason or another, it doesn't make it to the floor of the House for the

debate. I often thought when COVID and the change that we had in the school

system, if we fleshed it out here and had a good, open discussion on COVID and

what the school system ought to look like when we made some changes, we would've

had made some wonderful inroads. I know we talked outside the House –

SPEAKER:

Stay relevant, please.

C. PARDY:

Right. But even in the House.

I would

say when it comes to this Schools Act it'd be nice that when we do transition

let's bring it to the House periodically that we can have a discussion on where

it is, what's happening and we're all in sync with it. I would think from the

discussions that we've had thus far we're all on board with this first step and

with the initiative that's going forward. But it'd be nice to know now how it

was formulated and what that set-up is that's going to improve on the

school-based decision-making and on the system that we're going to have. I think

the minister had stated previously that there would be satellite offices that

would be looking up how they're going to be staffed, and to what the nature they

are and how this school-based decision-making, that is to come, and hopefully

that can be discussed at some point in time within this Chamber.

So I do

support the bill as presented, and I know there are some great people that are

currently within the school trustees, and I'm sure that from that – which a

majority, I think; not exclusively – a majority will be from these trustees. I

would think that they'll do a good job with the transition, because I think

they'll be consultative by nature in making sure that people's voices are heard.

Thank

you for the opportunity, Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This

amendment is short, but I still find it very concerning. The elected board of

trustees will be replaced by an appointed interim board that doesn't go through

the Independent Appointments Commission, and some of the elected members will

get to stay, be appointed and also some from government will be appointed. So it

would be really interesting to see how this is determined. I was on the

technical briefing this morning and my concern is that strong voices could be

silenced by exclusion – who's now on the board. So that is a bit concerning. How

the board is appointed may not reflect what people want. People out there who

are involved with the schools, education system, you know, these things are very

important to them. So that is a bit concerning.

Also,

the interim board that's appointed, that'll be in place until September 2022,

then a new board will be appointed. We're not really sure how long this board

will serve. The minister said just now a permanent board will be in place. So

will the new appointed board be the one that actually serves? There are some

concerns because of questions that we need answers.

Also, if

you look at our geography, rural Newfoundland and Labrador, Labrador as a whole,

Indigenous groups, there are a lot of groups out there. I know one of the MHAs

was talking about diversity, but at the end of the day when areas are not

reflected in the decision-making it creates a lot of problems. I think that we

need to ensure efficiencies at the cost of transparency and proper

representation doesn't happen.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Thank you, Speaker.

I won't

be long. I just wanted to add a few comments to it, listening to the discussion

and to the minister's comments. In the explanatory notes here it talks about the

Lieutenant-Governor dismissing the trustees of the board so that they can

reappoint trustees in order to facilitate the integration. I think that's a key

word, “facilitate.”

I go

back to the minister's comments at the beginning when he quoted from the Budget

Speech and he quoted: “With the goal of making better use of our considerable

investment in education and ensure that investments target the classroom, not

administration ….” That's a lofty goal and, obviously, one that we would all

support. The challenge is we've never seen the backup. We've never seen the

data. There's an old saying: In God we trust; everybody else requires data. We

haven't seen the data. The Green report made this recommendation. It was in the

budget, it's been passed and today we're going to take this first step to

facilitate this integration. We all agree of that lofty goal, but none of us

have been able to actually see how it's going to be done.

When we

talk about better use of considerable investment that implies that there's going

to be savings that are going to be able to be used from an administrative side

into the classroom side. I would ask that if there's analysis been done or there

are briefing notes, rather than have to try to ATIPP them, it would be nice to

understand exactly what our goal is to get at it. I've been involved, in my

previous life, in a number of amalgamations, or consolidations or integrations,

whatever word you want to use, but one of the things that were never done was to

actually go back and try and figure out: Did we achieve our goal? Did we really

make a difference? Did we really achieve that goal?

So I

would just simply want to ask, if we're going to do this, let's identify exactly

what our goals are and what we hope to achieve and then somehow have some way of

actually measuring that.

Now,

we've got the Auditor General Act

coming up for some amendments, you know, whether it's the AG that goes back and

looks at these things. It's not just about the education system. I went from 27

health boards to eight, to four and now there's talk of maybe we should only

have one.

At the

end of the day, despite all that change, I'm not so sure we ever achieved the

goal that was set at the time. So sometimes governments in the past have made

changes simply for the sake of change to be seen to be doing something.

But I

applaud the goal and I would like to see the backup that supports the goal, the

reason you want to move ahead with this so that the people could actually see

that this is what we're going to achieve, these are the savings to be had and

this is the benefit, not only to the students, to the teachers, to the parents

and to our entire system.

That's

all I ask for is that, as you move forward to facilitate this integration, let

us be privy to some of the information that you have about what exactly you will

achieve.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Lake

Melville.

P. TRIMPER:

There's my light.

Thank

you, Speaker. I've got too much on my desk to tell whether I'm on or not.

I just

wanted to speak for a couple of minutes. I wanted to do two things, one is

because I know them and I wanted to recognize them, the board trustees

representing the three zones in Labrador: Mr. Raymond Bennett on the North

Coast; Mr. Goronwy Price, a long-time friend who serves as the chair,

representing also the schools in the Central Labrador area, pretty well overlaps

the district I represent; and, Mr. Guy Elliott, who represents the Labrador West

area.

As with

my colleagues, I guess we're all hoping that government will continue to make

use of good people, current trustees as we watch and go through this evolution

of sorts. I think everyone's welcoming it; we're just hoping that the same good

people will have an opportunity to continue to influence the education of the

youth of our province.

The

other point I wanted to make – and I just want to thank the minister for his

co-operation – I had a petition this spring relating to some challenges around

the Innu school board and private schools, too. So I'm looking forward to this

first step and hoping that we can find a way, as these two entities become

integrated, that we can see some other savings and solutions to some problems

that have been out there.

I thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Humber - Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE:

Thank you, Speaker.

I'm

going to speak just very briefly on this and just the few questions that I know

I'll be bringing up to the minister. I think it's a great idea to bring it

in-house and under government to be able to make the decisions. Also, I hope

that the savings that's going to occur will go back in the school system as

committed.

There

are a few things – the question that I would have is: If you reappoint the

board, which will be coming up in other parts of this, in 2022, how long will

the board be in place? You mentioned it's going to go through the IAC process.

Will the board be in place for a specific amount of time? Is it four years or

five years? That's the questions.

I know

many of the board members that are there now, and they have tried their best

during very difficult times, I know the minister recognized that and I just want

to recognize that also, the work that they did during this trying time for

everybody.

This is

where I'll be bringing up questions about it. If you bring it under government

so government could have the responsibility, why are you reappointing a board?

Like, will the board have ultimate control or the government have ultimate

control?

Usually

when you bring something back under government is because government wants

control and wants to be able to make the decisions, quicker decisions and faster

decisions. But if you're bringing them back under government and you're

appointing another board, the question got to be: What role will that board

have? Will that board have the final decision or will the department, the

minister at the time, have the final decision?

They

usually don't work in the government process. I don't know another department

here that has – for example, Municipal and Provincial Affairs doesn't have a

board. They might have a municipal board, an assessment agency outside, which

would do their own bit, but there's not a board that Municipal and Provincial

Affairs – or even, I say, Environment, they don't have a board with a minister

or got a board within the Department of Environment. They might have an agency

outside.

The

question is: What authority will this board have? What legislative authority

will they have? How will they be appointed? How long will they be appointed?

These are the questions that I'll be asking. I'm sure there are answers. I just

don't have them right now.

I just

hope – and there's no reason to disbelieve him until it's done and if it's good

decisions and the money is going back into education, I think you'll get support

from this whole House to do that. We know sometimes it is nice to have decisions

in-house so you can make them quicker and you can make policy statements, you

can make statements, you can act.

This is

absolutely no reflection on the current board and the workers within the school

boards across the province because I think they do a great job with the

circumstances they have. I know a lot of them out on the West Coast, personally,

and I know a lot of them work tirelessly to do what they can to help out. I know

during this pandemic they went over and above on many occasions to help out. I

am sure a lot of the staff that we have in the school board now will remain

within the staff in the school board – a lot of them.

Those

are the few questions that I will be asking the minister when this comes to a

full debate. But for any reason to help put money back into the school system,

and if this process is going to work, I'll be definitely voting for this motion.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I just

want to touch on this briefly because I do have a lot of reservations about it.

I still get people who come up to me who are part of the school system, who

still talk about they miss the Labrador school board when Labrador had its own

thing and even when it was divided between Labrador East and Labrador West. They

always felt that there was a sense of identity, a sense of something taken away

from them when it came to education of Labrador's youth.

Not even

very long ago, I did meet with some former educators that still say things were

better under the Labrador school board than it was under the current school

board system. I do have reservations in the sense that: What is there to make

sure that Labradorians are educated with their culture and their way of life and

everything that's in mind?

Like I

said in this House when we debated Red Indian Lake, I was lucky enough to be

taught about Indigenous culture because I was a part of the Labrador school

board and they took the exception to make sure the children of Labrador had the

opportunity to learn about their home.

If we

keep centralizing and keep centralizing and keep centralizing, where is the

voice of minorities and people of Indigenous background or Northern background?

Are they going to lose a touch of themselves? Are we going to be monoculture? Is

this where we are going or are we going to make sure that children in certain

regions of this province with distinct heritages will learn about it.

I look

at Port au Port for an example and the great French culture that's out there.

Or, like I said, Northern Labrador where they have a very unique and beautiful

culture there. Or even take Labrador West where we want to learn about our other

neighbouring cultures and stuff, so we can understand where we come from and

what Labrador is all about.

I know

I'm really generalizing about my area, but at the same time it does worry me

that we're going to centralize to the point that we're going to drown out the

unique parts of this province. That's why even when they did change it from a

– are we going to lose a part of ourselves? Are we going to lose this? Are the

voices of these smaller places going to get drowned out by centralization and

the larger urban districts?

That's

my biggest fear when we come to this stuff. Are we going lose a part of

ourselves? Are we going to ground down to just results instead of actual

educating and promoting what makes us unique in all the different little corners

of this province? That's where my worries will always come to. What are we going

to lose for the sake of something else? Is it worth it at the end of the day? Is

it important at the end of the day that we are not going to deny the certain

aspects of our culture and certain aspects of our education for this?

Like I

said, I graduated from the Labrador school board and that's a badge of honour

I'll wear for the entire time of my life. I had the opportunity to be educated

in a sense that made sure I understood that I came from Labrador. I live in

Labrador and I understand the different unique cultures and stuff of where I

come from. Like I said before, I had family that were educated on the Island and

probably could never tell me the difference of the different Indigenous groups

of Labrador because it wasn't a part of the school board in that particular part

of the Island at the time.

So I

just want to make sure that when a Labrador child is getting educated, that

they're going to make sure they understand who they are and what makes them a

very special, important part of this province, and that they can learn things

about their culture, things about where they live in a safe environment that is

actually designed for them, instead of a generic, watered-down, here are the

basics, good luck to you, because that's my biggest fear.

One

other thing is when we were going to school we were lucky that one of our

teachers actually was originally teaching in Nain and developed a course about

living on the land and Inuit culture.

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I remind

the Member to stay relevant to the bill.

J. BROWN:

Yeah, it's relevant because

it's an education course in the school.

Anyway,

so he developed a course for children in Nain about Indigenous culture. He

brought it to Lab West because it was the same school board. When they

took the course away because it didn't fit the box at the time. This is my fear

that when we keep centralizing things, these special courses and these special

education things are going to be wiped out and that we're just going to have a

monocultured education that will, I think, be more of a hindrance.

At the

end of the day, is it really worth the cost? That's where my one thing is. Is it

really worth the cost to do these things? That's my biggest fear and my

reservations about dissolving what's left of our school board per se.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

Seeing no other speakers, if

the Minister of Education speaks now this will close debate.

The hon.

the Minister of Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Speaker.

appreciate the comments that were made by all Members and some of the

suggestions that were made. We'll certainly take those into consideration as we

move forward. I know that the transition team is being put in place to deal with

many of the issues that were raised. As we move through the process of

transitioning the district into government, the suggestions that were made here

today – we will compile the suggestions that were made and present it.

A number

of the matters that were raised are still under active consideration and

discussion within the department. The amendment here is essentially to allow the

transition into government. Further amendments will come back to the

Legislature.

I know

one of the Members had asked about having further input. Further amendments, as

we move through the process, will come back to the Legislature. This is the

first of perhaps a number of amendments that we will have to make. I look

forward to debate in Committee.

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

Is the House ready for the

question?

The

motion is that Bill 34 now be read a second time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK (Barnes):

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Schools Act, 1997. (Bill 34)

SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

second time.

When

shall the bill be referred to Committee of the Whole?

S. CROCKER:

Now.

SPEAKER:

Now.

motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Schools Act, 1997,” read a second time,

ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, by leave. (Bill

34)

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Minister of Education, that this House resolve itself into a

Committee of the Whole to consider Bill 34.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into Committee of the

Whole to consider the said bill.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself

into a Committee of the Whole, the Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the

Whole

CHAIR (Warr):

Order, please!

We are

now considering Bill 34,

An Act To Amend The Schools Act, 1997.

A bill, “ An

Act To Amend The Schools Act, 1997 .” (Bill 34)

CLERK:

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Shall clause 1 carry?

The

Chair recognizes the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

question on this for the minister: Has the department done either

cross-jurisdictional scan on other school trustees, how they're set up and what

the consensus is – democratically elected or what? Do you have it from across

the country on that? If you do have it, could you table it or provide it to the

House?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you for the question.

I don't

know if we have anything in writing. I can check. I do know that there was a

jurisdictional scan done. PEI, for example, has done the same as we are doing,

where they put a transitional board appointed in place to see the transition of

their school district into the department.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

B. PETTEN:

Also, will the new board have gender balance and geographic and First Nation

Indigenous representation?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Chair.

The

majority of the interim board will come from the existing trustees. That is

something that we're looking at is geographic representation and looking at

gender as well, to the best degree possible, in terms of the appointments to the

interim board.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

B. PETTEN:

Minister, I guess the question is – we're eliminating school board elections.

Can you answer why we're changing the democratically elected process to an

appointed process?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

I will try to not sway too

far from the bill because the question does require me to sway a little bit from

the bill. I'll try to keep my remarks as tight as I can.

We will

be empowering the Federation of School Councils, providing additional resource

to the Federation of School Councils and they will have an advisory role to the

department. In effect, every school in the province will feed into the school

councils. Right now, they're an ad hoc committee but every school will have a

voice into the Federation of School Councils who will have a formalized voice

into the department.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Chair.

Minister, will parents have more say or have every bit as much say as the do

now? Where will that be channeled through, still through these trustees

appointed or, as you just referenced, will school councils be their best point

of contact?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, again.

Yes,

through the Federation of School Councils, the parents will have a stronger

voice than they currently do today. As we know and as many Members in the

Legislature had outlined in their comments, the turnout at the trustee elections

has been very low, traditionally. In some cases, less than 100 people would

select a trustee.

Giving

the Federation of School Councils a more defined and recognized role gives

parents, through their school councils, into the Federation of School Councils

and as a direct advisory to the minister, would have a greater say.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

B. PETTEN:

Minister, I guess somewhere

in the topic of – maybe sway a little bit from the bill, but it's still within

the bill. We're talking about appointing trustees to oversee the merger or the

amalgamation of the school district. Any specific timelines for the next 12 to

24 months? What's going to happen? When can we expect it? This is one step along

– this sets the wheels in motion to the endgame, basically.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Again, it does require me to

stray a little bit from the bill. I know the bill is specifically for the

appointment of an interim board. I will ask, I guess, some latitude in terms of

answering the question because it does –

CHAIR:

(Inaudible.)

T. OSBORNE:

A little bit the Chair says, so I'll keep it tight.

September of 2022, we are hoping to establish the public schools branch within

the Department of Education, which will have an ADM. I outlined earlier in the

Legislature. Once we get it moving, and this is the first official step, I

guess, the formal step, but the transition should, in large part, take place

within 12 to 18 months.

I think

that answers your question, keeping it as tight as I can keep it.

CHAIR:

The Opposition House Leader.

B. PETTEN:

I guess, again, this may sway

a little bit, too, but it's all pertinent.

You said

in the past that any targeted savings would go back in the school system. So I

guess two parts: Do you still expect savings, and are you still committed to

putting them back in