March

7, 2013 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol.

XLVII No. 73

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Before we start today's proceedings I know this goes back a ways, but most

of you might recall the last session we had before Christmas; it was quite a

lengthy one. On the last parliamentary day, December 18, there was a point of

order raised. This is the first opportunity I have had to be back in the Chair

to make a ruling on that point of order, a point of order raised by the Leader

of the Third Party.

The Leader of the Third Party rose, stating that she had been accused of

unparliamentary language by another member. I indicated at the time that I would

take some time to review Hansard, the transcript of that day's session, and I

have done that. I have had the opportunity to review Hansard and the video clips

and found that there was no unparliamentary language, either written or audible,

made by the Leader of the Third Party.

Hansard, however, does not identify the member but it does identify the

comments made by a member accusing the Leader of the Third Party of

unparliamentarily language.

The Speaker has no way to identify who that member was; however, given the

responsibilities the members have in this House and to this House, I would ask

that if the member is present today, they would stand and apologize for their

comment.

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Of course, there was no ill intent, and I do apologize.

MR. SPEAKER: Thank you.

Today, I am very pleased to welcome to the Speaker's gallery Ms Sandra

Pupatello, a former Cabinet Minister from the Province of Ontario.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I am assuming she is here to check up on her husband, the

Member for St. Barbe.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: We are also very pleased today to have in our Speaker's

gallery Dr. James Rourke, who is the Dean of Medicine at Memorial University,

and Dr. Danielle O'Keefe, Family Medicine Program Director from MUN's Faculty of

Medicine.

Welcome to our Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Today we have members' statements from the Member for the

District of St. Barbe; the Member for the District of Bonavista South; the

Member for the District of Terra Nova; the Member for the District of Lake

Melville; the Member for the District of Bonavista North; and the Member for the

District of St. John's West.

The hon. the Member for the District of St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House to recognize the

contribution of rural development associations in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Since their inception in the early 1970s, they have played a major role in the

social and economic development of the regions they serve.

The rural development movement initially incorporated fifty-nine associations

representing all regions of Newfoundland and Labrador. The umbrella group,

Newfoundland and Labrador Rural Development Council, celebrated its fortieth

anniversary in 2009 and remains active. There have been many changes in rural

and economic development delivery in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador,

and rural development associations found their place and continued to contribute

through many partnerships.

Specifically, I would like to commend the Central Development Association and

St. Barbe Development Association in my District of St. Barbe. Through many

changes and challenges they have remained steadfast in their commitment to the

well-being of the areas they serve. I was honoured to be Charter President of

the Central Development Association in 1974.

Rural Development Associations epitomize what the commitment of volunteers

and dedicated staff can accomplish.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of the House to join me in this recognition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Bonavista South.

MR. LITTLE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize Bonavista resident

Frances Sweetland, who has devoted her life to volunteering.

Frances helped her father establish a thriving business. She became the local

correspondent for The Fishermen's Advocate and the Clarenville

Packet.

Mrs. Sweetland has been heavily involved with the Canadian Red Cross from

operating the Healthcare Loan Program, to organizing Canadian Blood Services

clinics. Her long-time affiliation with the Guiding movement includes Girl Guide

Captain, District and Division Commissioner, Ranger Captain, public relations,

treasurer, chairperson, and Brown Owl. Also very active with the Anglican Christ

Church, Frances has served as the President of the Altar Guild, organist, choir

director, and superintendent and treasurer of the Sunday School.

Mrs. Sweetland was on the Bonavista Tourist Committee, serves on the

Bonavista Peninsula Health Centre Auxiliary, and is Chairperson of the Memorial

Library Board.

Frances has received such prestigious awards as CJON's Citizen of the Week,

Air Canada's Heart of Gold, the Canada 125 Medal, a certificate and pin for

fifty years as a Girl Guide Leader, the Order of the Red Cross, and the Order of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, please join me in honouring Mrs. Sweetland, a true

representation of the spirit of volunteerism that keeps our communities alive in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for the District of Terra Nova.

MR. S. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Andrew Sheppard, a resident of Glovertown, had long dreamed of becoming a

third generation firefighter, after his father, John, who served twenty years,

and his grandfather, Jack, who served five.

Andrew's father would continually tell him that once he graduated he could

consider joining the department. Mr. Speaker, as soon as Andrew finished high

school, it did not take long for him to submit his name. The Glovertown Fire

Department happily accepted Andrew, and he would become a member for two years.

Andrew would eventually take a job out of Province, and for that reason had

to take time away from the department, but always said that upon his return to

Newfoundland he would once again become an active member, as he had a

deep-rooted passion and dedication.

Sadly, while home on vacation last year, while kayaking the Terra Nova River

in his hometown, Andrew was involved in a tragic accident one that would take

the young man's life at age twenty-two. Recently, the fire department honoured

Andrew for his commitment and remembered him fondly as a great member, but, more

importantly, as a wonderful human being.

Left to mourn Andrew is his mom Allison, father Johnny, and sister Stephanie.

I ask all members to join me in remembering this young man a young man who

was taken from us far too early.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Lake Melville.

MR. RUSSELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to recognize the life of the late Mrs. Mary Anne Michel of

Sheshatshiu.

Mrs. Michel was born to her mother Anne Philomena in Quebec. She was part of

the Mackenzie clan from Betsiamites, Quebec. She moved to Labrador as an adult

and became an important figure of the Innu community of Labrador as an elder.

She was the mother of the late Ben Michel, formerly a president of the Innu

Nation. He himself played an important role in promoting the Innu Nation and the

Innu vision of self-determination, Innu rights, and United Nations protections.

Many of these ideas were rooted in the guidance that he received from his

mother.

The loss of Mrs. Michel is a great loss to the Innu and to all of Labrador.

This is a sad time for those who knew Mrs. Michel, but we can celebrate that

while she was here she did her absolute best to make the lives of all Innu just

a little bit better.

Tshinashkumitin, Mary Anne.

I ask all hon. members of this House to join me in celebrating the life of

Mary Anne Michel, a true Labradorian.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Bonavista North.

MR. CROSS: Imagine, Mr. Speaker, a place where everyone is accepted as a

true equal, and smiles and hugs are the most valuable currency. Compliments are

freely used and criticism never rears its head. Age, gender, and ability are

ignored. Opponents cheer as loudly for the competition as their own team.

A few days ago I had the distinct privilege to visit and participate with the

Special Olympics, the Bonavista North Polar Bears.

The athletes who meet on Thursday nights at the Badger's Quay Lions Club are

Dean, Carole, Andy, David, Wallace, Dylan, Abigail, Madison, Travis, Logan,

Samantha, and Suzanne. Wallace greeted me by saying: You are bowling with me

tonight; are you any good?

Everyone competes with a smile and gives their best effort. Scores and

winning are optional. On behalf of all members of this Legislature, and on

behalf of the Special Olympians, I wish to recognize the generous efforts of the

organizers, volunteers and chaperones for making Thursday nights special for

their athletes.

In fact, when you leave this event, you wish every night was filled with

Polar Bears and every night was a Thursday night.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the St. Matthew's

Elementary After School Physical Activities Program.

Mr. Speaker, St. Matthew's Elementary and the Parkside Community Centre were

selected to participate in a pilot project whereby students are encouraged to

partake in physical activity during the after-school time period and it has been

a resounding success.

Over 400 students in Grades 4 through 7 have participated in the program,

which offers a wide variety of activities to get students more physically

active, including swimming, baseball, soccer, canoeing, zumba, rugby, yoga,

orienteering, bowling, archery and geo-caching. Mr. Speaker, students are also

participating in various winter sports including snowshoeing, outdoor cooking,

skiing and curling.

I am told that the excitement among the students as well as the staff

involved with this program is enormous. It encourages young people to get active

and get healthy and the school community has benefited greatly from this

program.

Mr. Speaker, I commend all those involved with the After School Physical

Activities Program at St. Matthew's Elementary and I ask all hon. members to

join me in wishing them continued success in their upcoming activities.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Ministerial Statements.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand and inform this hon. House

of another commitment being met by this government to benefit the people of the

Province. We are moving forward with the construction of a new vertical lift

bridge for Placentia and surrounding area.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DAVIS: Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, I had the pleasure of being in

Placentia with my colleague, the Minister of Intergovernmental and Aboriginal

Affairs and also the Member for Placentia St. Mary's. Along with Mayor Hogan

and members of the community I announced a contract award of $40.6 million to HJ

O'Connell Limited for the construction of a new lift bridge.

Mr. Speaker, construction will begin this spring and will take approximately

three years to complete. The work will include construction of new road

approaches from Jerseyside and Placentia, and the removal of the existing Sir

Ambrose Shea Lift Bridge.

Mr. Speaker, I expressed my thanks to the residents for their patience shown,

particularly over the past year, in seeing this work re-tendered and the

competitive bidding process move forward. This resulted in three bids, with a

successful bid of $2.5 million lower than the sole bidder that was received in

The new bridge is welcome news for Placentia. The existing structure is more

than fifty years old, and government will continue with necessary repairs to

best ensure that it remains in use while the new bridge is being built.

Mr. Speaker, our government is making strategic investments to support key

infrastructure projects throughout the Province. These developments serve as

catalysts for even greater economic and business activity. The new bridge in

Placentia will support the transportation needs of residents and businesses in

the area for many years to come.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy. If we only can get them now,

Minister of Health, we might be able to get the hospital in Corner Brook built.

I just want to congratulate the people down in the Placentia area for this

bridge because it is a lifeline to the economic development in the area, and I

agree, it is well needed. It is something that has been on the burner for years

and it was pushed by the people in the area. I know the government thought it

was a priority at the time and came through with the commitment for the bridge.

It is going to help the whole region.

This is definitely something good for the area. I even spoke to the minister

on the elevator earlier and said it was great for the area. It is great for the

people, even before the ministerial statement, that it is being done. To the

people of the area, I am proud for them. For the government, it is good to see

that this area will be helped out in many ways.

There is one thing in the ministerial statement that I noticed, is that the

infrastructure throughout the Province when we look at the RED Boards and the

cuts to the EAS programs, that is not going to help these areas very much with

the bridge.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would also like to thank the minister for the advance copy of his

statement.

It is good to see that the bridge is finally getting done, Mr. Speaker, and I

know this has come at an immense cost in time and in effort to the people who

are living down in that area who depend so heavily on the bridge.

I have to question government's wisdom in re-tendering this project,

particularly the time that it took for the people down there in that area to

wait, Mr. Speaker, because I keep thinking, for the amount of money they put

into fixing something that was bad in the first place I think it was something

in the area of $2.5 million to $3 million initially to help keep the bridge

going when they probably could have had a new bridge now for the cost that was

quoted back then.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the minister for the strategic investment in

this bridge but it could have been done at a lot sooner time period

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MURPHY: - and at the same time, a lot of inconvenience could have

been saved by the people down in that particular area.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to offer congratulations on

behalf of the Premier and the provincial government to Memorial University's

Faculty of Medicine. Memorial has been awarded the prestigious Keith Award for

having the most effective postgraduate rural family medicine program in Canada.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: The award, given annually by the Society of Rural Physicians

of Canada, recognizes medical schools that graduate a significant number of

practising rural physicians. Memorial's Faculty of Medicine was selected for

this honour for having the highest number of doctors in rural practice ten years

after graduation in comparison to all other family medicine training programs

across the country. Memorial University's Faculty of Medicine continues to excel

in this area, having also received the Keith Award in 2000, 2002, and 2010.

Mr. Speaker, our government recognizes the importance of encouraging medical

students to enter rural practice. Of the 1,115 physicians currently practicing

in Newfoundland and Labrador, approximately 45 per cent are working outside of

the Northeast Avalon.

We invest over $2.1 million per year on bursaries to attract medical students

and residents to provide return in service to the Province. We continue to

provide accommodations for medical students in rural areas of Newfoundland and

Labrador and work with the Faculty of Medicine and the regional health

authorities to meet present accommodation standards.

Students tell us that if they have a positive experience during their rural

placement, they are more likely to practice in rural communities. Our medical

school's success in this area can also be attributed to the fact that

approximately 40 per cent of students are from rural communities versus the

Canadian average of 11 per cent.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, we will continue to build on the successes

acknowledged in this prestigious award. I congratulate Dr. James Rourke, the

Dean of Medicine, and the faculty at Memorial's School of Medicine for their

efforts in delivering exemplary training in the preparation of our rural

doctors.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

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

I thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement.

Big congratulations to Memorial University's Faculty of Medicine for

receiving the Keith Award for the fourth time. Welcome to Dr. Rourke and Dr.

O'Keefe for being with us here today. We are certainly very proud of them and

all that our MUN Faculty of Medicine has achieved.

Time and time again, Mr. Speaker, Memorial has been recognized as a global

leader when it comes to post-secondary education. However, despite government

initiatives and investment, the problem of attracting and retaining doctors in

rural areas remains a major challenge. The family medical clinic in Lewisporte,

for example, is facing major recruitment and retention issues, and unfortunately

that is not an isolated issue in this Province.

We do not have a system that is built with any give to it, and when we talk

to our family doctors across this Province, they are certainly concerned. We all

have to work together to make sure that we have the best health care system for

the people of this Province.

While we have 45 per cent of our doctors outside of the Northeast Avalon, 60

per cent of our people live outside of the Northeast Avalon. We are not where we

need to be yet.

Again, we are very happy to have the doctors here with us today, and big

congratulations to Memorial University Faculty of Medicine.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for an advance copy of her

statement, and congratulate Dr. James Rourke and his team at the MUN School of

Medicine for their exemplary work in rural family medicine, earning them the

Keith Award.

I have just returned from Labrador, where people told me stories about

difficulties getting to see a physician, and stories of physicians getting ready

to retire. This is also still true in many parts of the Province.

It is imperative that government continue to work with the Newfoundland and

Labrador Medical Association and the MUN School of Medicine to find ways to

improve physician recruitment and retention in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, I am sure my colleagues would like to join me in

saying: bravo, Dr. Rourke and MUN's medical school.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the Member for St. John's South have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate

best-selling author Lisa Moore, winner of this year's CBC Canada Reads for her

novel, February . February tells the heart-breaking story of one

woman's struggle to cope after the death of her husband in the Ocean Ranger

disaster.

Canada Reads is an annual literary competition organized and broadcast by

CBC. During Canada Reads, five panelists defend five different books. At the end

of each episode, the panelists vote out one book until only one remains.

This year's debate was broadcast over a serious of four episodes. The five

books represented five different regions of Canada: British Columbia, the

Prairies, Ontario, Quebec, and the Atlantic provinces. February was

defended by well-known Newfoundland and Labrador comedian Trent McClellan.

Mr. Speaker, this exciting competition boosts publicity and results in a

significant spike in books sales, especially for the winning book. Several

winning books have gone on to become bestsellers. This win actually came on the

thirty-first anniversary of the storm that sank the Ocean Ranger oil rig.

Lisa Moore is the author of three other works of fiction. Her highly

anticipated novel, Caught , is scheduled to be released this June.

I invite my colleagues to join me in congratulating Lisa Moore and all of the

Province's outstanding writers and publishers for their dedication to the growth

and promotion of the literary sector in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the minister for an

advance copy.

We also on this side would like to congratulate Lisa Moore on winning this

prestigious award. It does bode well for a lot of the writers in Newfoundland

and Labrador on the history of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I also happened to see Trent when he was defending this book. I know Trent

personally; I was talking to him last Friday night, actually. Trent is a very

passionate Newfoundlander and Labradorian and he promoted this book with a lot

of vigour for Newfoundland and Labrador. Through this book, it shows the tragedy

of Newfoundland and Labrador, but it puts a human face to it. We all as

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians remember that sad day when the Ocean Ranger

sank. We know how much it means to us in Newfoundland and Labrador. Now we know

that Canada is well aware of all the trials and tribulations that people had to

go through after the sinking, and it has a personal tone to it.

Congratulations to Lisa, a good job to Trent, and of course I also commend

the government at times when they promote people to help writing, because it

does help promote our culture and history and keeps it alive. Congratulations to

everybody all around.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

We all have stories to tell and I commend author Lisa Moore for her

accomplishment and for sharing one about the Ocean Ranger disaster.

It is evident that we have a unique culture, history and events, and those

with creative talents in the Province should have that opportunity to share

them. I encourage the minister to continue investing in our literary arts

community.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for St. John's South have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier is rolling out job cuts to the public service in dribs and drabs.

Every day there is a new round of pink slips issued, causing considerable unease

to the people of the Province.

I ask the Premier: Why are you using this death-by-a-thousand-cuts approach

by throwing hard-working Newfoundlanders and Labradorians out of work? How many

more people do you intend to fire? How many more people will be let go because

of your fiscal mismanagement?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by saying what a pleasure it is to be back in the

House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, we have been very busy. We have been

very busy over the last year in finding the best way to provide services to the

people of this Province in the most efficient, effective way.

Mr. Speaker, we are facing a deficit in 2013-2014, a deficit that has been

forecasted for a number of years, I would say. Anybody paying attention to our

budget documents in the last number of years would know that this deficit was

expected, Mr. Speaker. What we are doing is part of normal business here in the

Province, which will culminate with the Budget.

We appreciate the hard work that public servants do on behalf of

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Good stewardship calls us to make sure it is

done efficiently and effectively, Mr. Speaker, but we do appreciate all that

they do for all of us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier mentioned how busy they have been in the last year. Just last

year, in the spring of 2012, the Premier was quoted in the media as saying this:

"The public service is growing and has been growing steadily over the last eight

yearsSo we're certainly not going to be laying people off but we're going to

look at attrition" so that we can manage growth. These were your words,

Premier.

I ask you: Now that we are hearing daily about job losses, is this an

admission that your government is responsible for this mismanagement?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, let me tell the Leader of the Opposition what this government is

responsible for. Mr. Speaker, we are responsible for one of the most booming

economies in this country.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, we are responsible for students in

Newfoundland and Labrador having the lowest tuition rates in the country.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: We are responsible for students attending Memorial

University and needing student housing, and having the cheapest housing rates in

this country, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: This government is responsible over the last number

of years for putting $500 million in tax relief into the pockets of

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, in terms of valuing the public service,

it was this government that put $500 million annually on our bottom line for

eight, four, four, and four.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There are people going through the doors of their offices today who are not

worried about that; they are worried about being out of work, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BALL: This government is also responsible for some of the largest

forecasted debt in our history. Mr. Speaker, we are talking about mismanagement

here. This is what this government is responsible for.

The Premier has said that front-line health care and education services would

be ring fenced and exempted from cuts, but now she has changed her tune.

I ask the Premier: Why are front-line health and education services now on

the chopping block?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, let us talk about financial mismanagement

for a second. In 2003 we inherited a Province that was almost bankrupt: $12

billion in debt, crumbling infrastructure, and very little economic activity.

What has taken place since then, Mr. Speaker? As the Premier has pointed out,

we have a booming economy. Unfortunately, our revenues are down as a result of a

number of factors, Mr. Speaker.

Let us use health for example. When the Liberals were in government they

spent $1.2 billion on health care. Today we spend $2.9 billion, Mr. Speaker, an

increase of 142 per cent.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Let's talk about education, Mr. Speaker. When they were in

government, they spent $700 million. Today we spend $1.2 billion, a 71 per cent

increase.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Memorial University's budget, Mr. Speaker, has tripled. So

let's not talk about what we have done; let's look at what we have done.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, it is interesting to hear the Minister of Finance; he has had in the

last three years $7.4 billion in offshore royalties to work with. The Liberal

government did not have that. The Liberal government put it on your books. They

signed the deals that made it possible.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BALL: So it is clear that the Premier had no plans to get this budget

mess under control. For years she spent hand over fist with no regard for fiscal

responsibility.

I ask the Premier: How much money are you looking at saving by cutting vital

services to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians? How much money do you plan to

save?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have heard the Leader of the Opposition and other members of

his party and the NDP talk in the last number of weeks about frivolous spending.

So let's talk about frivolous spending, because I would like them to be very

specific. Tell us where we were frivolous.

Should we not have put schools in Labrador? Should we have not put hospitals

in Labrador? Should we have not done the Trans-Labrador Highway, Mr. Speaker?

Should we not have done dialysis services in Harbour Breton? Should we not have

expanded them in Burin and St. Anthony, Mr. Speaker? Should we have not built

roads? Should we have not maintained tuition freeze?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, stand up and tell the people of the

Province where the frivolous spending has been, what services we have provided

to the people of the Province that you do not support.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, I do not support the Office of Public Engagement. I do not support blue

windows on the building either, Mr. Speaker. These are frivolous spending that

the Premier just asked about.

Mr. Speaker, this week the government announced they are paying Deloitte $4

million to find $15 million in inefficiencies. Meanwhile, this year they have

made two senior appointments to deal with procurement in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BALL: So I ask the Premier: Do we not have the expertise right here

in our own government to do this work?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me continue now where I last left off. In 2004-2005

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. KENNEDY: In 2004-2005, Mr. Speaker, there was $208 million spent in

this Province on infrastructure. In 2012-2013, Mr. Speaker, $773 million will be

spent, a 270 per cent increase.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: We have reduced debt by 25 per cent. Now, Mr. Speaker, we

are at a situation where as a result of our tax reductions, our loss of the

Atlantic Accord money, no equalization, that we are at a situation where our

revenues now do not equal our expenditures. What we have to do, Mr. Speaker,

whether you run your own household or running your business, we have to sit back

and say, now we have to make sure that we bring this into balance. That is what

we are going to do, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, the Minister of Finance did not mention that it took us almost fifty

years to get to $9 billion in debt. You are forecasting $4 billion in three

years.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier recently announced that she is not cutting but

rather suspending her secret bonus pay for senior bureaucrats.

I ask the Premier: How much money did you pay out in those bonuses in the

last three years? Specifically, how much was paid to two people, Mr. Ross Reid

and Mr. Len Simms?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, that information was provided to a

reporter at The Telegram . I can certainly find it again. The bonuses have

been suspended, Mr. Speaker.

What we have indicated is that everything is under review. We are looking at

all aspects of our programming and delivery of services, and I can assure the

members opposite that it is a very thorough and in-depth review that is ongoing.

What we are finding, Mr. Speaker, is ways to save money.

What we are trying to do, Mr. Speaker, and what we are hoping to do is not to

impact health and education services. That is our ultimate goal, Mr. Speaker.

Unfortunately, when you have reduced revenues and you have increased

expenditures

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. KENNEDY: then what we have to try to do is to ensure

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. KENNEDY: that we bring the Budget back into balance. I can assure

you, the Leader of the Opposition, that the Premier's sustainability plan will

be released on Budget day and you will applaud because it will make sense and it

will be a long-term (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, agencies around the Province are left

reeling after government's announcement to cut funding to Employment Assistance

Services agencies, leaving over 200 people unemployed.

I ask the minister: With a labour shortage of 70,000 people and your core

mandate of attaching people to the labour market, how do you justify terminating

226 people?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, with the projected job openings in Newfoundland and Labrador,

those job openings are a result of the deals this government has made, whether

it is with Hebron, with Vale, or with Muskrat Falls. We know there are jobs in

the economy in Newfoundland and Labrador and that is a direct result of the work

of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, we have a system set up right now where services for labour

market information employment services are set up in a two-tier system. We

have a system set up where if people are eligible for EI, they go through a

certain system. If they are not EI eligible, if they are a person who wants to

enter the workforce, who has been out of the workforce for many years, somebody

who wants to enter for the first time as a graduate, or somebody on the Income

Support program and not EI eligible, we have another system set up for them.

Mr. Speaker, this is about making sure that everybody has access to these

services without having a two-tier system.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I still never heard the justification for

226 people finding out their jobs were cut on Friday afternoon. In fact, Mr.

Speaker, the minister acknowledged back in 2009 that they agreed with the feds

to fund EAS agencies until March 2012.

I ask the minister: If you knew that you were going to cut these agencies

four years ago, why did you only give them four months' notice?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, we have set up a series of career work centres

across Newfoundland and Labrador, and we starting setting them up in 2004.

Today, Mr. Speaker, we have a number of career work centres. We have 139

employees in the Department of Advanced Education and Skills doing employment

counselling and providing labour market information in this Province.

As a separate exercise from the development of the career work centres, the

LMDA devolved to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. With that, Mr.

Speaker, we inherited the contracts of the Employment Assistance Services that

were set up across the Province by the federal government.

We agreed that we would maintain these contracts until March of 2012. In the

last year, under the new department, we looked at the services that we provide

and wanted to come up with a plan so that we treat people equally but make sure

that people have access to the services and employment in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I would say, along with the inheritance of

these centres, there was an inheritance of hundreds of millions of dollars and

we do not know where it has gone.

The Minister of Advanced Education indicated the $14 million taken from EAS

would be diverted to be attaching people to the labour market.

I ask the minister: Do you plan on hiring staff to replace the 226 workers

just axed, and if so, how many do you plan to hire?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, approximately $129 million comes from the federal

government into this Province under the Labour Market Development Agreement.

This government wants to make sure as much money as possible goes to the people

on EI so that they can attend post-secondary or other training, or the training

programs that are available to them, Mr. Speaker.

We want to ensure that the bulk of that money and the $14 million that no

longer will be paid into the EAS offices benefits the people who are unemployed

in this Province and helps them attach to the labour market. This is not about

hiring more people, Mr. Speaker. This is about making sure Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians have every opportunity to attach to the labour market.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, the Child and Youth Advocate recently

released three reports wherein she stated a central theme was evident in all

three stories. Despite the fact that investigations were called prior to or

immediately after the formation of the current department, we continue to see

these same issues present in our current advocacy work.

I ask the Premier: Why do we continue to see these deficiencies in our

Department of Child, Youth and Family Services?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, let me say first off, I find the member's question

very insulting to the social workers of Newfoundland and Labrador who practise

child protection day in and day out in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, prior to the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services, and

during the clinical assessment done by Susan Abell, there were issues that were

pervasive in every part of child protection in this Province. Mr. Speaker, this

government took action, created the new department, went through the Abell

report, set up plans and timelines

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS SHEA: Although we have made the system better and there are checks and

balances in place to measure that, I can honestly say and I think this would

be agreed to by most people who understand the child protection that despite

all the investments you make into a system, you still cannot prevent things from

happening.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I am certainly not blaming the hard-working

social workers; I am blaming the ministers of the department now and the one

before that.

Mr. Speaker, the Child and Youth Advocate stated it is vital that issues and

recommendations contained in the reports be given immediate attention

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. PARSONS: She further stated that unless and until these

fundamental principles are adhered to children and youth of this Province are

still at risk.

I ask the Premier: In a time of slash and cut, how do you plan to address

these recommendations in a timely manner?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, the Clinical Services Review that was done by Susan

Abell outlined ten areas for improvement in child, youth and family services in

the area of child protection. This government accepted that report and all the

recommendations. Mr. Speaker, there were plans developed around each and every

recommendation and also time frames so that we can go back and measure and look

at our progress.

One thing we have instituted in this Province, Mr. Speaker, was a ratio of

one social worker to carry twenty cases. Right now, I can say, and proudly say

in this Province, we have reached a ratio of one social worker to twenty-one

cases. That is phenomenal work that is done in this Province, Mr. Speaker.

We have also brought the ratio for supervisors to social workers for every

supervisor, there are six social workers. These are actions that came in as a

basis of the Susan Abell report, and we are seeing improved results in the area

of child protection.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, this week three more communities Salvage,

Jackson's Arm and Hant's Harbour were hit hard with the sudden closure of

their fish plants, marking the ninth, tenth, and eleventh fish plant closure

since December 2011.

I ask the minister: What is government's plan to help communities like these

identify new economic opportunities to secure a better future? Does government

even have a plan for our rural communities?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly want to acknowledge the member opposite's comments. Obviously, it

is a very difficult time for these communities. Workers have been displaced and

closure of their plants.

We will offer to those displaced workers and their communities what we have

offered other communities in the Province in terms of our fish plant worker

adjustment programs, our labour market services to the individuals. Whether it

is through my department or other departments across government, we will do all

we can to support the communities. Any new ideas they want to bring forward we

will work with them.

Mr. Speaker, what we have seen this week is very unfortunate, but it is a

reality. A company with eighty-five years in the fish business has recognized

that the challenges in the fishery, which we have talked about, which industry

talks about, are real. Mr. Speaker, it is a reality that we have to face.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

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

In December, the Premier stopped at nothing to ensure Muskrat Falls

legislation was passed in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier, if she was aware then of the $1.6 billion

deficit when she was forcing the Muskrat Falls mega debt project on

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians through the House of Assembly this past fall?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, let me repeat again how happy I am to be back in the House of

Assembly because we really have to start dealing with fact as opposed to spin.

Muskrat Falls is one of the best projects to happen to this Province in a very

long time, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, this week we heard the Leader of the

Third Party talking about diversifying the economy, government had to diversify

the economy. Well, Muskrat Falls is diversifying the economy, Mr. Speaker.

Twenty billion dollars will come into the coffers of Newfoundland and

Labrador, thanks to Muskrat Falls, Mr. Speaker. The only puzzle in all of this

is why the Leader of the Third Party remains against this project, Mr. Speaker.

Stakeholders like unions support it. Her national leader supports it, Mr.

Speaker. She still stands against one of the best things in Newfoundland

(inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

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

I point out to the Premier that another huge mega development this project

in this Province is not diversification of our economy. I want a yes or no

answer, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: Yes or no

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has recognized the Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just want a yes or no answer. Did the Premier in December know that we had

a $1.6 billion deficit looming in the future? Yes or no?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, let me share a little life lesson with

the Leader of the Third Party. You do not always get what you want.

Mr. Speaker, Muskrat Falls is a good development. Mr. Speaker, yes, we knew

we were coming to a deficit in 2012-2013, and if you had read the budget

documents for the last four years you would have known also. Mr. Speaker, we

have heard spin from the Opposition parties talk about our deficit being due to

$600 million transferred to Muskrat Falls.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Spin, spin, spin, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Absolute spin.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Speaker has acknowledged the Premier. The Premier has the floor.

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we have heard from both Opposition parties over the last number

of weeks about the deficit and the fact that $600 million have been allocated to

Nalcor for Muskrat Falls. Wrong, check the facts. Do not continue on your

practice of not allowing the facts to interfere with

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

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

I did not hear a yes or no answer to the $1.6 billion. All I heard was spin.

Mr. Speaker, last year the Premier said her government was conducting a

review to try and reduce spending and they were going to protect jobs as best

they could. She also said that her first priority was to provide efficient,

effective services for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. With job losses

mounting, her first priority seems to have changed, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the Premier: Will she table the core mandate review that was started a

year ago so that the people of the Province can see what her priorities really

are?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, our principles remain the same, and our record speaks for

itself. In the last nine years we have come from a virtually bankrupt Province,

Mr. Speaker, to have one of the leading economies in this country.

In terms of fiscal management, Mr. Speaker, our work has been validated by no

less than the Governor of the Bank of Canada, our bond rating agencies, our

banks across the country. Every think tank in this country validates the work

that is being done. It is hard to listen to criticism from the Opposition, who

in their day particularly the Official Opposition, who ran six deficits out of

seven and nearly bankrupted this place, Mr. Speaker. It is a far different

picture in Newfoundland and Labrador today then there was in 2003, and we will

not give up the progress

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: I ask the Premier, Mr. Speaker: How can she justify spending

money on Muskrat Falls while making cuts on the backs of our government service

staff to deal with the deficit she has created?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, it is hard to understand that after the

hours and hours and hours of debate that have taken place, and the number of

briefings that have occurred on Muskrat Falls in the last two years, the Leader

of the Third Party would still be of the mindset that somehow Muskrat Falls is

contributing to the $1.6 billion forecasted deficit, Mr. Speaker.

All I can do, Mr. Speaker, is ask the Leader of the Third Party to show the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador where five cents in the 2012-2013 Budget is

going to Muskrat Falls. Show us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Mr. Speaker, last Friday this government got caught trying to

quietly cut off funding to Employment Assistance Services providers. To date,

the minister responsible has refused to explain how the affected agencies will

be able to continue to provide programs and services to our communities.

Can the minister explain how she expects fourteen career work centres to

carry out the work of dozens of agencies she abruptly decided to cut?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, what is extremely ironic in this question is the

fact that the EAS offices have been established, or had been established, to

provide services to EI-eligible clients. Not once have I heard the member ask

why in recent years we have not provided similar services for non-EI people in

Newfoundland and Labrador. That is very interesting.

Mr. Speaker, we did not sneak anything out on Friday. We gave notice on March

1, which happened to be on a Friday. We had to give that, the

three-to-four-month notice, to the EAS offices. Mr. Speaker, I had no control

over the day when March 1 was going to fall on the calendar.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Mr. Speaker, last year this government paid $150,000 to failed

PC Party candidate John Noseworthy to conduct a departmental review in the

Department of Advanced Education and Skills. Now we have no way of knowing

whether or not the EAS funding cuts were recommended in the secret Noseworthy

report, since the minister has refused to release it to the public.

Will the minister finally clear the air today and release the secret report

and table it here in the House of Assembly?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SHEA: Mr. Speaker, once the business transformation report of the new

department is finalized and in the department, within the time frames allotted,

we will release the report. At this time, Mr. Speaker, the EAS offices set up a

parallel system of employment services in Newfoundland and Labrador. We expect

people who are non-EI eligible to go to one centre and people who are EI

eligible to go to another centre. There was $14 million for services set up in

communities that excluded people who were not EI eligible.

Mr. Speaker, we feel that $14 million, based on the needs of this Province

and the employment that is going to be available in this Province, can best

serve the people by helping them be able to attend training, or post-secondary,

or making sure programs are available to them. That is what that money is all

about, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Mr. Speaker, the Tory Blue Book promises to make a

concerted effort to provide Province-wide high-speed access by 2015. In round

one of the Rural Broadband Initiative, they announced only twenty communities,

while a whopping $7 million went to large companies.

Wireless networks are inexpensive solutions to provide Internet to rural and

remote communities. Mr. Speaker, 200 communities are without broadband.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: When will the Minister of IBRD stop padding the pockets

of large companies who claim no business case and build our own inexpensive

wireless networks?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Business and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, it is amazing how the hon. member can turn a

good story into such a poor story for rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we have made a commitment for high-speed and for cellular

coverage in our Blue Book. We invested, last year, $7 million, and leveraged

another $20 million, for a $27 million investment. Again, this year, or last

fall, we did a call for RBI two. This year we invested 1.5; we leveraged another

1.5. In total, there will be forty communities in rural Newfoundland and

Labrador that will again be hooked up to high-speed Internet. That brings our

total to the Island to 89 per cent, and 95 per cent in Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we make no apology for hooking up high-speed to Newfoundland and

Labrador, to rural Newfoundland and Labrador. We have done it and we are going

to continue to do it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Mr. Speaker, the second round of the Rural Broadband

Initiative had budgeted $2 million; yet, in Tuesday's announcement only $1.5

million was awarded. It is quite evident that wireless solutions can provide far

greater reach, enable local ownership, provide low-cost Internet to rural

communities and remote communities, and generate revenue. So why is the minister

continuously shortchanging the people of rural Newfoundland and Labrador and

using the tax base to subsidize large companies?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Business and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member asked for a briefing from my

officials and we brought him over and gave him a briefing. Unfortunately, he is

going to need another one because he does understand the industry. We have no

capacity to build fibre and to build wireless. It is controlled by the CRTC, the

industry is. There are private providers. We have to work with those private

providers.

We could sit by, do nothing, and not invest, but that is not the principle of

this government. We want to invest in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. We want

to build broadband. That is why we are investing public funds to work with

partners. We will continue to do that. It has been quite successful.

I do not know where the hon. member is to. He has had people hooked up in his

area, certainly on the Northern Peninsula. Certainly the Member for St. Barbe

has recognized that, and I give him credit for recognizing the good work we are

doing. It has been a good project. We are going to keep it going because it is

making a difference in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will move that the House resolve itself into a Committee

of the Whole on Supply to consider a resolution for the granting of Interim

Supply to Her Majesty, Bill 62.

MR. SPEAKER: Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Burgeo La Poile.

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

I have a petition to the hon. House of Assembly in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the

undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS hundreds of residents of the Southwest Coast of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, including residents of the communities of Margaree,

Fox Roost, Isle aux Morts, Burnt Islands, Rose Blanche-Harbour Le Cou, Diamond

Cove, and La Poile use Route 470 on a regular basis for work, medical,

educational, and social reasons; and

WHEREAS there is no cellphone coverage on Route 470; and

WHEREAS residents and users of Route 470 require cellphone coverage to ensure

their safety and communication abilities; and

WHEREAS the Department of IBRD recently announced significant funding to

improve broadband services in rural Newfoundland and Labrador; and

WHEREAS the residents and users of Route 470 feel that the Department of IBRD

should also invest in cellphone coverage for rural Newfoundland and Labrador;

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

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

the users of Route 470 in their request to obtain cellphone coverage along Route

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, this is a petition I have entered in this House of Assembly on a

number of occasions. I know the minister is aware how many of these have been

entered. Again, I say this also at the same time acknowledging the broadband

commitment that has been made. There was an announcement just as recent as last

week. In fact, I know some communities in my district had an upgrade to their

services. Now, the money did not come last week, the money was announced a while

ago and there was another announcement just signifying the completion.

The reason I wanted to talk about cellphone service is because broadband is

one thing, we cannot confuse that with the need for cellphone service. I wanted

to mention a little story, Mr. Speaker. I had the opportunity to speak to

students at Grandy's River Collegiate out in my district just a couple of weeks

ago.

I sat down and we talked about politics in the Province and democracy and how

it all works. Very engaged young men and women of different grades; they really

took it in, they were listening, and they had an opportunity to ask questions. I

think the first one actually is: Why don't we have cellphone coverage on our

road that we go back and forth?

I was trying to explain to them the difference between private industry and

public investment. They said: Well, isn't it the government's responsibility to

ensure the safety of the people of this Province and make sure that we have a

basic service available, which is cellphone coverage in this day and age, making

sure that people on that highway, whether it be for the fact if they are stuck

right now, there is no way they can contact people. If we want to talk about

tourism, if we want to talk about economic development, if we want to talk about

the fact that people are still relying on calls so they can get to work, they

need to get those calls from their employers.

They asked that question and I promised them that day that when I came back

the first opportunity I had I would enter this petition again in the House of

Assembly urging the government that we need to work together to make sure that

there is an investment there. That investment will deliver significant dividends

to everybody in this Province in so many different areas as I just named.

We need to work together to make it happen. I know there are fiscal

realities, but this is one that is going to have a definite result down the

road.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today, to the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland

and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents

of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS the Regional Economic Development Boards diversify, grow, and

strengthen economies throughout the Province

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MITCHELMORE: by providing training opportunities, marketing advice,

proposal writing, leveraging funds, collaboration, and other means; and

WHEREAS the federal government's decision to cut funding to the Atlantic

Canada Opportunities Agency is resulting in the elimination of funding to RED

Boards and their termination in May of 2013; and

WHEREAS 75 per cent of the operational funding for the RED Boards, roughly

$3.6 million, is provided by ACOA with the additional 25 per cent from the

provincial government; and

WHEREAS the Department of Innovation, Business and Rural Development has $200

million in their suite of programming, some of which has poor uptake; and

WHEREAS just 1.5 per cent of the Business Attraction Fund of the Department

of Innovation, Business and Rural Development was used last year, $366,800 of a

$25 million budget;

We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to

commit to bridge funding in its 2013 Budget, which may come from the Business

Attraction Fund, to preserve the RED Boards in Newfoundland and Labrador that

provide support to municipalities, communities, organizations, and businesses.

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I received this in the fall while the House was closed. There

are petitioners here from Burgeo, Mount Moriah, St. Alban's, Baie Verte and

Burin who signed this petition. It just goes to show that $3.6 million could

have retained nineteen boards and sixty-plus jobs across the Province and really

helped communities. Instead, government once again invested in large companies.

We see that when we invest in large companies they close up after their tax

incentive or those breaks are gone.

Just last year they invested in Desire2Learn, a high-tech company, $3.5

million to create a maximum of thirty-five jobs over a ten-year period. The

preservation of the RED Boards could have meant a way to lead them to self

sufficiency and provide a lot more for communities, and look at things like

providing wireless in our regions and a way to solve our problem of cellular

coverage on the highway. Instead of providing cellular towers, we could be

putting up Wi-Fi repeaters and using the Wi-Fi on our phones so that areas like

the Burin Peninsula can be covered, so that Labrador can be covered, so that the

Northern Peninsula highways can be covered.

These are things that we need to do. We need to build infrastructure in our

Province. Invest in it wisely so that the revenues can come back into the

communities, Mr. Speaker, and that is not happening. We are investing in

actually just expending money. I urge the House to listen to this petition.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like read the following petition into the record.

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

Parliament assembled the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador, humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS the process of slickwater hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, injects

hazardous chemicals into rock formations to extra oil, and is polluting

groundwater and air across North America; and

potential environmental impacts of shale oil and gas extraction in Canada,

including fracking; and

WHEREAS Quebec, Nova Scotia and a number of US states have halted fracking,

and others are introducing regulations specific to fracking; and

WHEREAS it is incumbent upon the provincial government to ensure that our

natural environment is protected from harmful industrial processes;

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

House of Assembly to urge government to impose a moratorium on slickwater

fracking until it develops comprehensive regulations and ensures that each

proposed project undergoes a conclusive environmental assessment to determine

whether it is safe for the environment, the integrity of water supplies and

human health.

And as in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, this is probably recognition, if you will, that the shale oil

and gas revolution has hit this Province. It is something we talked about during

the Muskrat Falls debate. This is something that was talked about in other

environmental circles. Everywhere else, except for here. We could almost turn

our backs to it. To some, I guess, we almost believed that it would never happen

on our own grounds, Mr. Speaker, but the time has come. There has been an

immense interest, of course, over on the West Coast of this Province, anywhere

from Bay St. George South and then as far north as Parson's Pond and pretty much

up the whole western side of the Great Northern Peninsula.

Mr. Speaker, the danger here does not come from the fracking process itself,

because fracking has been ongoing since the 1860s when it was first used. It is

the industrial process known as slickwater fracking that brings a lot of danger

and a lot of warning signals along with it. That process was first used, as far

as my research entails, backwards of 1998. We do not know exactly what kind of

chemicals they are injecting into the ground. We know from certain groups for

example, Internet groups out there, like FracFocus, that these chemicals are

still being injected into the ground are very harmful to health and they ruin

water supplies.

It is the mandate of this government, and us as legislators, to ensure that

the protection of the environment and the integrity of water supplies in this

Province, first and foremost, have to come first. It has to be protected for the

people of this Province. We not only have to make sure there are going to be the

proper regulations put in place in order to use this new process called

slickwater fracking, but what are going to be the environmental costs if we

ignore what has been happening, Mr. Speaker?

I anticipate that I am going to be getting a lot more of these petitions

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

Are there any further petitions?

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Order 2, Bill 58.

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

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance and President of

Treasury Board, for leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act to Amend

An Act

to Amend the Services Charges Act, Bill 58, and I further move that the said

bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. Minister of Finance

and President of Treasury Board shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act to

Amend

An Act to Amend the Services Charges Act, Bill 58, and that the said bill

be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the minister shall have leave to

introduce Bill 58, and that the said bill be now read a first time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to

introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend

An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act",

carried. (Bill 58)

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend

An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act.

(Bill 58)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time.

When shall the bill be read a second time?

MR. KING: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 58 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, Order 3, Bill 59.

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

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Service

Newfoundland, for leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The

Highway Traffic Act No. 2, Bill 59, and I further move that the said bill be now

read the first time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of

Service Newfoundland and Labrador shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act

To Amend The Highway Traffic Act No. 2, Bill 59, and that the said bill be now

read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador to

introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act No. 2", carried.

(Bill 59)

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act No. 2. (Bill 59)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time.

When shall the bill be read a second time?

MR. KING: On tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 59 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I call Order 4, Second Reading of a Bill,

An Act To Amend The

Animal Health And Protection Act, Bill 45.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment and Conservation, that

An Act

To Amend The Animal Health And Protection Act be now read a second time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 45,

An Act To Amend The

Animal Health And Protection Act, be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Animal Health And

Protection Act". (Bill 45)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is nice to be back in the House of Assembly. It is nice to be back

listening to the debate that is of concern to the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador. It is nice to hear about some new issues. I see the fracking issue has

now been raised. So I think it is going to be an interesting session where we

can have lots of good discussion and hopefully advance the hopes and dreams of

the people of this Province even further.

Mr. Speaker, this particular bill is entitled

An Act to Amend the Animal

Health and Protection Act. Honourable members will recall that awhile ago this

House passed a new Animal Health and Protection Act; as well, subordinate

regulations came forward at that particular time. It is now necessary to do an

amendment to the act. It is a very short amendment. The explanatory note to the

bill is helpful. It says that: "This Bill would amend the Animal Health and

Protection Act to provide for the disposition of fines to a municipal authority

whose enforcement officers enforce the Act and the regulations by means of a

ticket."

We are amending the original act and it has to do with where an inspector

appointed by the minister under the act it could be an RCMP officer, it could

be an RNC officer, it could be a conservation officer, or it could be anybody

else, somebody working for a municipality or community appointed by the minister

is out enforcing the act, whether it is by ticket or whether it is by going to

court and seeking a judge to order a fine, the revenue from that would go to

where the inspector works for a municipality; the revenue would go to the

municipality as opposed to the government. Like all fines and tickets there is a

provision for, I think it is, a 15 per cent surcharge that goes to the Province

to cover the Province's administrative expenses relating to ticketing, because

obviously there is a cost to the taxpayer, a cost to the people of the Province,

when fines are issued.

The highlights of the original legislation, just to jog hon. members' memory:

it arose out of a provincial government decision to review the animal welfare

legislation in 2009. There had been no significant reviews, no significant

amendments to the Animal Protection Act since it was passed back in 1978. It was

time to review the legislation and it was time to make some changes.

This was prompted, and government was prompted, by requests from the SPCA to

update the legislation, as well as internal concerns over the manner in which

the act that existed at the time was being enforced. In addition, it was

recognized by many people that the statute and other live animal legislation,

such as the Dog Act, the Heritage Animals Act, the Livestock Act, and the

Livestock Health Act, were in need of updating.

There were also related requests from the fur industry to have a licensing

process implemented that would protect legitimate producers. We are talking here

about the fur industry. Of course, this is relatively new to me, but we are

talking about the mink industry and we are talking about fox farms that exist in

the Province.

Consultations, of course, were held with the people of the Province right

across the Province a report was made to the minister today on the results,

and there were a number of recommendations. Arising out of those

recommendations, new legislation was then drafted and it was introduced into the

House for debate. The resulting legislation was the Animal Health and Protection

Act. It was passed on June 24, 2010 and it was proclaimed May 2, 2012, about two

years later. In addition to the act itself, there were eight sets of subordinate

regulations that were also proclaimed May 2, 2012.

Just to jog members' memory, these were the Animal Health and Protection

Ticket Offences Regulations. Secondly, there was the Animal Health Regulations.

There was the Animal Protection Regulations, the Animal Protection Standard

Regulations, and there was the Animal Reportable Diseases Regulations. Number

six was the Fur Farming Regulations, and there were also new regulations

involving the Newfoundland Pony, called the Newfoundland Pony Regulations.

Finally, there was the Nuisance Animal Regulations.

The highlights of the act and the new regulations specific to animal welfare

included fines that could be assessed through ticketing. Previous to that the

ticketing option was not available. There were maximum court assessed fines of

$50,000 in the new legislation, and it included a new potential lifetime ban on

animal ownership.

In addition, the adoption of national codes of practice, where available and

appropriate, was instituted in order to define the details of care that an

animal must receive. We relied on national codes of practice of national

organizations.

A clear description of how dogs can be teetered, housed, penned, and

protected while in a moving vehicle; they also dealt with the standards of

housing and care for shelters that look after animals. There were also minimum

standards for dogs and cats that were raised for sale in order to prevent puppy

and kitten mills.

There was also a ban on cosmetic surgery, the cropping of ears, and the

docking tails in dogs. It was set out in the legislation the ability to appoint

municipal employees as inspectors under the legislation. The matter of

inspectors is very important because you can have legislation, you can have

regulation, you can have laws, but laws have to be enforced and if not enforced,

people will have no respect of the law.

The act identifies, right in the legislation itself, that the Royal

Newfoundland Constabulary and the RCMP are going to be inspectors under the

legislation, as well as a limited number of departmental staff, such as the

chief veterinary officer. The intent is for the dog and cat enforcement to be

done by municipalities, to be done by the police and others who the minister can

appoint under the legislation as inspectors.

Enforcement for farm animals, on the other hand, and research animals will be

done primarily by conservation officers of the Department of Natural Resources,

with a level of self-regulation accepted for those animal use groups that have

well-established national animal welfare programs, such as in the university and

as exists in industries such as the poultry industry.

Training for all enforcement personnel was to be carried out by the Animal

Health Division of the department in co-operation with a series of specialists.

A two-week training course was held, for example, in December 2012 for municipal

employees from St. John's, Mount Pearl, Torbay, Flatrock, Pouch Cove, Logy

Bay-Middle Cove-Outer Cove, Wabana, Conception Bay South, Placentia, Gander, Lab

City, and Wabush. A second training session is planned for Mount Pearl,

Conception Bay South, Carbonear, Gander, Grand Falls-Windsor, Reidville,

Peterview, Deer Lake, and Wabush. In some cases, communities present in the

first session, we are sending additional and further employees for the second

session. Other sessions will be arranged around the Province as are needed.

Municipal employees will be issued with an identification certificate to show

that they were trained and they have the powers under the new act. Training

sessions for conservation officers are also planned this year, 2013.

Mr. Speaker, referring to the amendment itself I should say the proposed

amendment set out in the bill. As I said, the original legislation was passed in

June 2010 and it was proclaimed in law on May 2, 2012. Again, five acts were

consolidated in one. As I said earlier, the Animal Protection Act, the Dog Act,

the Heritage Animals Act, the Livestock Act, and the Livestock Health Act were

consolidated into one legislation. That legislation had been enacted in the

1970s and had not been significantly updated.

The new legislation, the Animal Health and Protection Act, demonstrated

government's commitment to animal protection and to animal health. It responded

to an enormous call, a really enormous call from the public for greater

penalties, for stiffer penalties for those who are convicted of abuse and

neglect of animals. The new act clearly outlines what constitutes inappropriate

and illegal treatment of animals. The act also addresses the definition of

animal cruelty and it prescribes appropriate penalties, enforcement, and

activities for animal control.

It is sad to say that the public of this Province have been witness to

extremes that are possible in animal abuse and animal neglect. During the

consultation sessions that had taken place for the new act back in 2009, the

people of the Province clearly told government that these actions were totally

unacceptable. The department subsequently met with and received positive

feedback from various parties who are interested in animal welfare and animal

protection. Significant public education will be undertaken by the department to

ensure the people of the Province, the residents of the Province, are aware of

the new legislation.

The proposed amendments are going to clarify that when a municipality is

appointed, when officials in a municipality in their enforcement division are

appointed as inspectors under the legislation, and when they carry out an

investigation and they proceed further, either through court or through issuing

a ticket, we are providing it is the municipality that is going to receive the

revenue generated from both ticketable offences and court-generated fines. That

is the purpose of this particular amendment.

We need it because it is going to help municipalities deal with their

administrative costs that are associated with enforcement. Enforcement, as I

said earlier, is important. If you have a law, Mr. Speaker, if you have the

regulations, you have to have people to enforce the regulations and to enforce

the law. It is very important, but it is costly.

The municipalities have asked that if their officials are appointed as

inspectors, their officials do the enforcement, and their officials arrange for

the ticket to be issued and arrange for a judge of a court to impose a fine, it

is appropriate that they would get the money to cover the cost they are

incurring in animal protection.

Usually for these things there is a surcharge, and the surcharge would go to

the Province to help the Province cover some of its costs. So, the purpose of

the surcharge being paid to the government is to recover the administrative

expenses relating to the processing of tickets. These are costs associated with

the production and the distribution of ticket books, and the registration and

collection of fines.

The enforcement of the act's animal welfare provisions is going to be carried

out by a variety of agencies, as I mentioned earlier, and it is going to depend

upon the type of animal in question. The RNC and the RCMP are going to have

authority to enforce all regulations, but I guess as other agencies are trained

up, I would expect to see probably a diminution in the amount of enforcement the

RNC and the RCMP undertake, given the fact of the more serious crimes well,

the more serious crimes that they have to enforce, and the number of laws that

they have to enforce.

So, training for those who are going to enforce the act began, as I said

earlier, in September 2012; in September the police were trained, and

municipalities in December. The training is going to continue this year.

Municipalities and the department have been dealing with and are very pleased

with the training that has been provided. I read earlier the municipalities that

have taken part, and there is no need for me to repeat that.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that this pretty much covers the highlights of the

previous legislation; it covers the purpose and what is intended by this

particular piece of legislation. So, I will take my seat at this time and allow

other members to take

part in this debate. I look forward to members opposite

and members on this side having an opportunity to say a few words on this

legislation and the importance of it to the people of the Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is certainly a pleasure to rise to speak to the bill to amend the Animal

Health and Protection Act. As the minister pointed out, the Explanatory Note is

very straightforward, that this bill would amend the act to provide for the

disposition of fines to municipal authorities and enforcement officers by means

of a ticket and or a fine.

Mr. Speaker, this was certainly a long awaited amendment looked forward to by

many people of this Province. I would just like to say, Mr. Speaker, I think it

is the incidents throughout this Province of cruelty towards animals that has

caused a near uproar in this Province. The old legislation, Mr. Speaker, was

very, very minimal and was almost non-existent in terms of being enforced.

It is good to see the animal protection act being amended and coming forward

with some action and some positive steps, Mr. Speaker. I speak for those of us

on this side, Mr. Speaker, that we support this amendment and we look forward to

implementation.

Mr. Speaker, the amendments to the Animal Health and Protection Act are

fairly straightforward. These amendments regard the fines recovered from cases

of animal neglect and cruelty being directed towards municipalities and a

portion of it going to the Province. Mr. Speaker, there is some concern that I

have because it does not say in the act or in this bill what these funds are

going to be used for. I am sure, Mr. Speaker, and I am hopeful that directing it

to animal welfare and enforcement would be beneficial.

The act and the regulations make positive steps regarding the welfare of our

pets. For example, Mr. Speaker, the regulations lay out how a dog is to be kept

outside, especially in the colder months, requiring shelters for dogs and having

a separate hallway or entrance to protect dogs from the elements. Mr. Speaker,

it also talks about the length of the tether being five times the length of the

dog.

There are benefits to animals built into this act that are enforceable. We

look forward, because although we have seen a lot of cases of cruelty in this

Province, Mr. Speaker, and some of them very, very horrific documentation, I

am sure, has been provided on all sides of this hon. House, Mr. Speaker,

certainly we have seen our share in the media as well. Mr. Speaker, these

regulations also recognize daily play and exercise as vital aspects of a

well-cared-for dog.

Mr. Speaker, with these regulations should come funding to animal welfare

organizations. I am sure, Mr. Speaker, with the implementation of these new

regulations we will see an increase in seizures of animals that are not being

treated in accordance with this new bill. Certainly, we will have a higher

population of seized animals that we will have to deal with in our

municipalities. In some cases, animal shelters now are bursting at the seams and

are overwhelmed on a daily basis.

I am sure, Mr. Speaker, there will be more calls coming in and reports of

cruelty to animals or, at the very least, calls that are contrary to what is in

the animal protection act once it is implemented. Certainly, the agencies that

are tasked with enforcing this act have to put the animals somewhere to be held

for the short term, or in fact the long term. In this Province, that is one of

the shortages we see, Mr. Speaker.

In terms of cruelty to animals, as I said earlier, we have seen many, many

incidents. I think I would like to refer to Max as a poster dog for the abuse in

our Province. A very, very sad story and just one of many that has come out in

the last number of years in terms of cruelty, Mr. Speaker. We have had cases of

cats, of dogs, of other pets, being mistreated, abused, starved, and suffering

from hunger and physical abuse. Mr. Speaker, I do not think I would care to

mention some of the specific examples of what we have seen in this Province in

terms of cruelty.

I think once again, Mr. Speaker, the need is for assistance to the animal

shelters, because when this enforcement act is in place I think you will see a

lot more enforcement officers or municipal officers seizing animals and not

having anywhere to put them. I think this is a mechanism that should be

following tight on the heels of this act, Mr. Speaker. Certainly, I would like

to see some of the revenues generated from fines and tickets being put back into

the community to ensure that our animals are properly treated and that they have

a safe place to go once they are seized by the enforcement officers.

Mr. Speaker, it is also good to hear the minister say that some training has

been completed in terms of enforcement officers. I did not get all of the

locations, but I think there is room for expansion in areas of the Province that

really need this enforcement. I was also glad to hear the minister say that

training is ongoing.

Mr. Speaker, I think in my conclusion, I would just like to point out that we

have animal shelters all around this Province. In Labrador we have a wide range

of animals that are running loose and need protection, the same as on the Island

portion of this Province. In Labrador we have one shelter, Mr. Speaker, located

in Happy Valley Goose Bay, and this shelter has been overpopulated and under

funded. I think that the case has been made to the minister responsible for

Aboriginal affairs during consultations, in talking about the importance of this

shelter in Labrador. I certainly urge the Minister of Natural Resources to take

this into account when you are looking at revenue generated from this act and

the act being implemented.

As I said earlier, with this implementation of this act that is more for the

protection of our pets and our animals, it is also going to be a demand on our

facilities. I certainly urge the minister to take this into account when he is

looking at the final implementation of this act, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Littlejohn): The hon. the Parliamentary Secretary to the

Minister of Natural Resources and the Member for Humber West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GRANTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a privilege to able to stand in the House on the first day in the

spring session to speak to this proposed amended bill. It is also a privilege to

be able to be in the Department of Natural Resources as the Parliamentary

Assistant to the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry and Agrifoods. It is

a privilege for me today to be able to speak to this amended bill. I first want

to welcome all members back after a little break since Christmas and wish

everyone well in the spring session, Mr. Speaker.

As we all know, sometimes in our lives we have all had the opportunity to

either have a pet or have an animal and care for pets or care for animals, Mr.

Speaker. Let it be known, I believe they are the responsibility, all animals and

all pets, of the owner. It is an obligation, I believe, a moral responsibility

to be cared for in a very positive way, even without legislation. Yes, in the

absence of legislation, I believe the proper care of animals and pets is a moral

responsibility of all of us; however, we all know of situations for many

different reasons where that is not the case. The reason for this, Mr. Speaker,

is often convoluted, often very detailed, but that does not negate the

responsibility of the owner to live up to the expectation and care of animals in

their responsibility.

The Animal Health and Protection Act, Mr. Speaker, is amended by adding

immediately after

section 77 and I will read directly from the act, "Where an

employee of a municipal authority is designated as an inspector and commences

proceedings under this Act or the regulations by means of a ticket, a fine that

is recovered in those proceedings shall be forwarded by the court imposing the

fine to the municipal authority."

"

(2) The municipal authority shall pay to the province an amount that the

Minister of Justice may establish for every ticket processed by the Province."

Those are, in small form, the

amendments to the act.

As was spoken to earlier, this act was passed in the House in June 2010. What

is happening today is an amendment to the act to allow in legal terms for a

municipality who carries out an investigation, that municipality to receive the

revenue, or the dollars, that are collected or generated from both ticketable

and court-generated fines.

Mr. Speaker, I think and I believe that this is the reasonable and proper

thing to do, to assist in covering the cost of the municipality in administering

the protection of animals in their jurisdictions. I think it is the right thing

to do and that is what this amendment does.

Mr. Speaker, the municipalities that have committed to dog and cat welfare

enforcement and I believe that was a question that came from the previous

speaker from the other side of the House they include St. John's, Mount Pearl,

Conception Bay South, Torbay, Placentia, Wabana, Grand Bank, Marystown,

Reidville, Stephenville, Pasadena, Labrador City, and Wabush. There are other

communities, Mr. Speaker, across the Province that are looking into this act and

considering to coming onside. They include Gambo, Corner Brook, Happy

Valley-Goose Bay, Portugal Cove-St. Philip's that have expressed an interest in

looking at this act and coming onside.

Mr. Speaker, the enforcement of animal welfare provisions will be carried out

by a variety of agencies, depending on the animal in question. That could range

from a municipal agency, municipal government, like the ones I just mentioned in

the long list for dogs and cats, to conservation officers within our department

of forestry and agrifoods, Natural Resources, for animals like fox and mink, to

uniformed police officers, the RNC and the RCMP, Mr. Speaker, who will be able

to enforce all of the regulations. As the minister said in his

preamble, it is

believed that over time that will reduce the amount of investigations needed by

the RNC and the RCMP because it will be covered with the other municipalities as

well as the Forestry and Agrifoods Agency, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, significant effort has already taken place on training or

preparing for training for inspectors under this act and under the amendments.

These include, and are not limited to, seminars for the RNC and uniformed police

officers, as well as meetings with the various municipalities across the

Province. Those that are onside and those that are considering to come onside,

Mr. Speaker, and those who wish to accept the enforcement responsibility for dog

and cat animal welfare.

Mr. Speaker, what this amendment does is return the municipality's revenues

collected through a ticketable offence or court-generated fine after the fine

has been paid to the Crown by the offender. Just to add, there will be a $7 fee

retained by the provincial government to cover the cost of the provincial

government's administrative fee based on those fines, Mr. Speaker. That is not

uncommon in other departments as well and other fines under the legislation in

other departments.

Mr. Speaker, for clarity and to put things in perspective, especially for

those who may be listening at home, to put things in perspective on the Animal

Health and Protection Act, it clearly outlines the offences and the fine's

structure for the first, the second, and the third offences.

I would just like to cover for a minute or two some of the offences, and

there are a good many. I want to also list the amount of the fine. For example,

Mr. Speaker, causing an animal to be in distress: the first offence $100, the

second offence $250, and the third and subsequent offences $500. Causing a

service animal to be in distress: again, $250 for the first offence, $500 for

the second offence, and up to $1,000 for a third offence. Owner permitting an

animal to be in distress: $100 for the first offence, $250 for the second

offence, and $500 for the third offence.

Harming or causing harm to animal used for law enforcement purposes it

could be a police dog, as an example $250, $500, and up to $1,000 for the

third offence. Maintaining or keeping an animal for the purpose of fighting I

know we have all seen videos on television, and that was in the news right

across North America in the last number of years $250 for the first offence

and up to $1,000 for the third offence.

Mr. Speaker, just to take a few more: confining or permitting to be confined

an animal in an enclosed space, including a motor vehicle, without adequate

ventilation: $100; $250 for the second offence, and $500 for the third offence.

This is where we see animals maybe in automobiles and it is in the heat of

summer or in the cold winter and no ventilation for them.

Transporting or permitting to be transported an animal in the trunk of a

motor vehicle: $100; $250 for the second offence, and $500 for the third

offence, Mr. Speaker. Permitting an animal to be hitched, tied or fastened to a

fixed object where a choke collar or choke chain forms part of a securing

apparatus: again, up to $500 for a third offence. Cutting or permitting to be

cut the solid part of a tail of a horse: up to $500 for the third offence.

Cutting or cropping, or permitting to be cut or cropped, the ear of a dog: $500

I just have a couple of more, but there are a good many of these on the list.

Failure of a veterinarian to promptly report to the Chief Veterinary Officer:

$500 for a third offence. Failure of a veterinarian to provide information that

the Chief Veterinary Officer requests: $100 for the first offence, $250 for the

second offence, and $500 for the third offence.

Mr. Speaker, which often comes out, and we often hear about the failure of an

owner to keep a dog safely tethered or penned, $50 for the first offence, $100

for the second offence, and $250 for the third offence. Again, Mr. Speaker, the

list goes on and on, but I will just give one more. Destroying or interfering

with or disposing of a heritage animal, $100 for the first, $250 for the second,

and $500 for the third.

Mr. Speaker, as you can see, the act we are referencing, as spoken to by the

minister, and the proposed amendments evolve by bringing together into one a

number of previous acts. They include the Animal Protection Act, the Dog Act,

Heritage Animals Act, Livestock Act, and Livestock Health Act.

Mr. Speaker, this act and the associated amendments today illustrate, I

believe, and I think every member in this House would agree, the moral and

ethical responsibility of all citizens in this Province, and indeed, in our

country, that we have for the protection of animals in our care, whether that is

in our home as a pet, or on a farm being a farm animal. It demonstrates, Mr.

Speaker, the commitment of this government to animal protection and animal

health. It responded to an enormous public call for stiffer penalties for those

convicted of abuse and neglect of animals.

Nothing tugs on our heartstrings, Mr. Speaker, when we hear about stories in

the media with regard to animals in our care that are mistreated and abused, and

left alone to die and starving to death. It tugs on our heartstrings. It is our

responsibility, and it is the responsibility of every person in the care of an

animal to take care of that particular animal, with legislation or without

legislation.

What this legislation does, Mr. Speaker, it validates the fines structure.

The municipalities will now be able to issue the fines and monies will come back

to the Crown. The monies will then be returned to the municipalities in order to

cover the administrative cost of administering those fines.

As I illustrated just a few moments ago, Mr. Speaker, the act clearly

outlines what constitutes inappropriate and illegal treatment of animals. Mr.

Speaker, the act also addresses the definition of animal cruelty, along with the

appropriate penalties. A few minutes ago I listed down through some of the

appropriate penalties for cruelty to animals.

The proposed changes today, Mr. Speaker, and I would say to all members of

this House, are needed. It will allow municipalities that deal with these issues

to cover the costs associated with enforcement. When the act was passed in 2010

this government did not have confirmation from the municipalities which I

listed at that point in time if they were going to be a part of the

enforcement of this particular law.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. GRANTER: As I mentioned earlier, Mr. Speaker, and in request of the

previous speaker from the opposite side of the House, I went down through the

list of communities that have signed on to this particular proposal. These

communities in Newfoundland and Labrador now will have the legal authority to

carry out and issue fines and receive the money back from the Crown to carry out

their responsibilities.

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, the very first week that I was appointed

Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Natural Resources, and Responsible

for Forestry and Agrifoods, in the very first few days there was an incident

with regard to a couple of horses here in the Province that were not being cared

for appropriately. We had to take the stand to get care for those horses. They

were, at the end of the day, taken care of and transported from where they were

into a town. They were taken care of and I understand they are doing very well.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I believe that all members of this House we

have seen the stories on television, we have heard about it. I believe that all

members of this House, when we get a chance to vote on this legislation, to

accept this amendment in its entirety, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure to be back into the House with our cohorts. We are talking

about some of the more interesting pieces of legislation that are going to be

coming forward. To hear what the government is going to be coming forth with,

for example, in the new Budget, as regards to a new funding formula for

municipalities would be nice to see.

The Minister of Natural Resources himself talked about the whole idea of

fracking and everything. It is going to be an interesting debate there. My

ultimate favourite right now amongst the bills to be presented this time around

has to do with the Minister of Service NL and Bill 59 with the Highway Traffic

Act, the changes as regards to the move over laws. It is going to be a pleasure

to be talking about that.

It is going to be a very interesting session. It is great to be back in the

House, and welcome back to our compatriots. It is going to be a great session, I

am sure. It is going to be very disturbing at times as regards to the Budget,

for example, but it is going to be very interesting at the same time, so stay

tuned.

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure I will say pleasure, I guess to speak to

Bill 45, even though it tells us something about humanity and the way that we

are treating animals. Sometimes you get a piece of legislation in front of you

that you necessarily have to deal with that at times can be disturbing. In this

particular case, when we are dealing with an animal protection act, we really

should know better on how we are treating animals out there.

It is all too often now that we are hearing more and more about the cases of

animal abuse out there and the strict needs for enforcement. I know that this is

only a slight amendment when it comes to this piece of legislation, when it

talks about the actual billing, the ticketing and the handling of those fines. I

feel that this bill is a little bit too extensive not to be touching on some of

the issues as regards to the Animal Health and Protection Act and the act

itself, of course.

A couple of things came to mind when I was listening to the Minister of

Natural Resources speak. I heard him refer to the Royal Newfoundland

Constabulary and the RCMP as being the principle enforcement agencies in this

Province that are going to be dealing with this particular end of the act.

One of the things that struck me while he was talking was cutbacks. I am not

talking about provincial cutbacks, because I do not know what is happening with

the RNC yet hopefully nothing. We do know what is happening on a federal level

when it comes to the federal end of cuts. Right now, according to PSAC, we are

probably going to be dealing with a little bit less enforcement when it comes to

the RCMP end of things. I think we are talking about fifty-six jobs coming out

of police enforcement on the RCMP end of things in this Province.

That presents the government with a little bit of a problem when it comes to

enforcement and how far they go when it comes to the appointment, for example,

of enforcement officers and when it comes to the legislation. I just want to

bring that note forward to the government on that and bring that to their

attention, because if we are talking about fifty-six fewer enforcement officers

in rural Newfoundland, we are going to have more of a problem with enforcement

in rural Newfoundland. It is plain to see that there is going to be a problem

there with that and government needs to overcome that.

The second thing that came to mind as regards to enforcement, particularly on

this piece of legislation, was a simple fact; while we are reading off the names

of some communities, we are also dealing with a lot of unincorporated areas

here, too, and a lot of areas in this Province that may have to share

enforcement officers, for example. Is there an idea here where we can have

Municipalities NL, for example, participate in this particular program and ask

them how they would carry out enforcement where there are no incorporated

communities, for example, in unserviced regions and that sort of thing?

You have a bunch of unique problems here that government is going to have to

deal with when it comes to the enforcement issue on this particular piece of

legislation. I know it is only a money change, so to speak, but still it has to

be looked at.

The other thing I wanted to bring forward as regards to that was the actual

powers of inspectors and who those inspectors are going to be. I know the

government is going to be holding courses from time to time to do this, but they

really need to look at the possibility of incorporating other groups that are

out there, too.

For example, we know the SPCA have done a number of initiatives over the

years when it comes to the enforcement of the animal regulations. Is there a

possibility, for example, that they can go outside of the SPCA and get other

groups involved? It is not just a single domain for groups like the SPCA. I can

think of other groups in this country, for example and I will go

coast-to-coast Beagle Paws being one, that also have offices here that should

be considered when it comes to actually getting out there and doing the

inspections and the enforcement when it comes to these animal regulations.

I just wanted to bring these points forward, let government know as regards

where they could go with the enforcement, and bring forth our party's ideas when

it comes to the enforcement element of this particular bill. I know it is only a

little bit of housekeeping as regards how the ticketing and everything is done,

but again I figure these points are pretty important, especially to animal

lovers out there who cannot stand to hear a case of abuse out there.

Of course, when it comes to abuse, nothing is more abhorrent than that and I

think we all have to have a hand in it. It would be on that end that I would

hope government would expand that footing out there in order to increase

enforcement, particularly where we know the traditional methods like the RCMP,

for example, are feeling the pressure from a lack of personnel.

The only other note as regards this was, I guess, in thinking in retrospect

when this bill came through and again, according to the minister it came

through in May or June of 2010 that it was voted in the House. It took us two

years, Mr. Speaker, to actually get it passed and get it proclaimed. That was in

May of 2012. I do not know what the delay was with regard to getting that passed

and proclaimed, but it seemed like it was an awful long time that the animals

had to wait certainly when it came to getting the enforcement done.

I am glad to see government come forth with this piece of legislation in the

first place and have it introduced and passed again in the House. Like I said,

it was a long time to do it.

We also have to remember as well, when we are coming to this, that while

government has taken the leadership role in this, again we have made our

suggestions as regards to how government can take a stronger leadership role in

passing along the duties of enforcement.

Mr. Speaker, I will leave it at that. We hope that the proclamation of these

changes, these amendments, will come through a lot faster than the original bill

did.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is certainly a pleasure for me to stand in this hon. House today and speak

to Bill 45,

An Act to Amend the Animal Health and Protection Act.

I certainly want to thank my colleague, the Member for Humber West. He did

such a detailed job of explaining it. He pretty much said everything I was going

to say actually, so I thank him for that. That being said, I think it is a very

important piece of legislation, Mr. Speaker, and I think it is important that as

many of us as possible have the opportunity to speak to it.

Mr. Speaker, when we look at society as a whole, I think we have come to

realize over the years that it is very important to protect those in our

society, the most vulnerable among us, but I think we have also realized the

importance to expand that to all living beings that we share this earth with.

That certainly includes animals, whether they be pets or whether they be other

animals that we are using in terms of dairy farms, in terms of the fur industry,

and so on. While they are used certainly for a purpose, it is very important

that they do be treated humanely.

We have certainly seen, Mr. Speaker, over the years, the horror stories that

you catch on the news where people have mistreated animals and people have

abused animals. We have seen situations where we have had enforcement officers

and groups such as the SPCA and so on that have had to go into a particular

residence and remove multiple animals from the home. We have seen that in many

cases they have been starved. A lot of them have died and a lot of them had to

be put down and so on.

I think it is important, Mr. Speaker, that as a government, as a society, we

recognize those things and we do the best that we can to do something about it,

to protect all living things, all living creatures.

Mr. Speaker, having said that, this is actually an amendment, as we know, to

a piece of a legislation which was already passed in 2012. We know that

certainly there had been calls to the government over the last number of years

by groups such as the SPCA, Beagle Paws, and so on, and many advocates who felt

that there was certainly a need to tighten up legislation. While it did take

some time to get it done, we wanted to make sure that once it was done that it

was done right. That is the important thing.

It is very easy to just simply jump on a bandwagon to react, sort of a

knee-jerk reaction, but it is also important when we do this stuff, Mr. Speaker,

that we do it properly. So, we had to take the proper time. We had to consult

with municipalities. We had to consult with people such as the SPCA, people who

have a vested interest in the protection of animals, Mr. Speaker. We had to do

that and it takes time. We came to a place last year in 2012 where we were able

to put this legislation in place.

Mr. Speaker, in terms of the legislation, we had a number of pieces of

legislation that were put forth and a number of regulations. Those included the

Animal Health Protection Ticket Offence Regulations, the Animal Health

Regulations, the Animal Protection Regulations, the Animal Protection Standards

Regulations, the Animal Reportable Diseases Regulations, Fur Farm Regulations,

Newfoundland Pony Designation Order, the Newfoundland Pony Regulations, and

Nuisance Animal Regulations.

Mr. Speaker, we enacted a number of pieces of legislation to deal with all of

the issues surrounding the protection of animals. In addition to that, it was

not just enough, certainly, to put legislation in place. We all know that once

you see acts and legislation passed, coming from those acts in many if not all

cases there are a number of actual regulations that have to be written, as well,

under that act, which is actually the meat of it and gets down to the business

of dealing with the issues at hand.

Mr. Speaker, there are a number of regulations here that cover all types of

issues surrounding the protection of animals. As I said, my colleague from

Humber West listed a number of them and he listed the fines. I am not going to

repeat those, but there are a number of them there. I think they are well

warranted and I am pleased that we have done that.

In terms of this actual amendment itself, this is really an amendment to this

act that we already put in place, this comprehensive act one of the best acts,

I understand, now in the country in terms of being comprehensive and including

everything that needs to be included.

What this is doing is actually, as has been said by a number of people,

dealing with the enforcement piece. We all know that any time that you put any

kind of legislation into place, the legislation itself is useless, it is written

on a piece of paper, unless you are going to actually enact what is there,

unless you are going to enforce what is there not just enforce the act but

enforce all the regulations that are there. This is really about enforcement.

When you think about enforcement, a lot of the legislation that we had in

place in the past was left to our traditional enforcement agencies in many

cases. It was left to the RCMP in the rural areas of the Province. In the St.

John's Metro area, Corner Brook, and Labrador West, it was left to the RNC to

enforce.

That is something that they would enforce, but I think the other reality of

it is that when we look at our law enforcement officers, quite often, Mr.

Speaker, they are engaged in activities in terms of enforcing the Criminal Code,

in terms of enforcing the Highway Traffic Act and so on. It is important that we

get more people, more agencies and, in this case, municipalities as well

involved.

As was already said, there have been a number of training seminars that have

taken place. There are a number of municipalities that have participated in that

training. I know I heard it mentioned there earlier which I knew anyway that

the City of Mount Pearl is certainly one of them. So they have the training now

and they are going to have the ability to enforce these regulations, and that

could lead to, in some cases, charges being laid, obviously, in-court actions,

and fines levied as a result of that.

Also, another thing that is being put in place which I think is very

effective and it is something that was introduced to the City of Mount Pearl,

I know St. John's, Corner Brook, and I think it is expanding now to a number of

other urban municipalities is the ability for municipalities to ticket.

Ticketing is a very effective form of enforcement, I believe, because quite

often, when you are into a situation where you are having to lay charges under

an act and so on and you have so much paperwork involved in it and going through

the court system and everything else, it can be a long, tedious process, require

a lot more time and effort, enforcement activity tied up in the courts, and so

on. Having the ability to just simply issue a ticket is a quicker, cleaner way

of doing it. I think it is going to result in a lot more fines being levied.

It is not about levying fines so much as it is about protecting animals,

because that is what it is about. Obviously, we would love to believe and hope

that this piece of legislation is not going to receive a lot of enforcement. We

would hope that there are not going to be a lot of fines levied, because the

more fines that are levied, that means the more people who are potentially

mistreating animals. That is what it means. So, obviously, we would hope that is

not going to happen, but I think we all know, realistically, that unfortunately

it is going to happen. It has happened in the past; history shows it. Some

people, of course, do this out of cruelty; they mistreat animals because of just

downright cruelty. Some people, it might be a case of they are just not really

they do not understand; they are not educated in those ways and so on. There

could be any number some people probably do not even realize they are doing

something wrong, sometimes.

I think we have all seen, from time to time I know I have witnessed in the

past when you see some of these regulations that are written there and they talk

about an animal, for example, left in a car in the middle of the summer and the

window is not opened or whatever; there is no ventilation. I think at some point

in time we have probably seen that. I think it is fair to say that a lot of us

may have seen situations where there could be a dog, by way of example, tied

onto a tree, or tied onto a post or something, on a very short leash. I think we

have seen that.

I think many of us have experienced, over the years, situations where

somebody may have had a dog, by way of example, perhaps a rabbit dog or

something like that, a beagle, and people put them in a very small, confined

pen; sometimes two or three of them in a very confined pen, probably not

protected from the elements, no space, and being mistreated. Those things

happen, unfortunately.

Certainly, it is important that education has to take place within the

public. I think groups like Beagle Paws, groups like the SPCA and so on, have

done a good job of bringing that to the forefront. I think we need to do more to

bring those issues to the forefront, to educate people in what is acceptable and

what is not acceptable.

That being said, beyond any education, I think we all know that we can

promote things and we can educate people as much as we want, there will always

those, for some reason or another, who will not follow those guidelines. When

they do not follow those guidelines there has to be a penalty. This, now, is

going to provide that opportunity. It is going to provide that penalty to people

so we can help to protect animals even further than we are doing now.

Of course, the other key piece in this is that while it is related to

enforcement, fines, and ticketing, as I said, which are all a very positive

thing, the good thing here is that the money derived from the court action, if

there is a court action and there is a judgement issued, will go back to the

municipality. If there are tickets issued, the money from those tickets, those

fines, will go back to the municipality.

That is minus a surcharge. I believe there is a surcharge of 10 per cent or

15 per cent, or whatever it is that will go back to the Province for the

administration. Obvious