Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 4 June 2015 (47th General Assembly, 4th Session, Vol. XLVII No. 26)

2015-06-04

Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)

PDF Version

June 4, 2015

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVII No. 26

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Verge):

Order, please!

Admit strangers.

I apologize for the there seems to be a relatively

high temperature in the room today, but if you keep your debate calm you

will find things much better.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER:

Today we will be hearing members' statements from the Members representing

the Districts of St. John's North, Labrador West, Burgeo La Poile, Humber

Valley, Exploits, and Bonavista South.

The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to stand today to recognize the excellent volunteer

spirit in the Larkhall Academy school community.

This volunteer spirit was on full display at Larkhall

on May 9 when parents and teachers pitched in to put off the school's annual

spring fair. Larkhall's annual

spring fair is the school's main fundraiser for the year.

It is also a wonderful event which brings the school community all

together.

This year's spring fair featured ever-popular games

like fish pond, ball games, bean-bag toss, and others.

There was a cafe serving a variety of refreshments from coffee and

tea to barbequed hotdogs and hamburgers.

There was a silent auction and a variety of ticket sales for items

donated by parents, teachers, and local businesses.

There was also a bake sale with a variety of items to choose from.

This year's spring fair earned over $12,000 to support

school programs. This success

was due to the many volunteer hours contributed by committee members

including: Krista Molloy, Paula Allured, Michelle Coady, Michael Taylor,

Tracey Spurrell, Michelle Culleton, Debbie Collins, Ruby Mullett, and Gordon

and Jeannie Stokes.

I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating the

Larkhall Academy community and thanking their spring fair volunteers.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. MCGRATH:

Mr. Speaker, last Friday I was both honoured and humbled to participate in

an evening of celebration with great food and friends.

The Knights of Columbus Reverend Whelan Council in Labrador City in

Labrador West celebrated their fiftieth anniversary in Labrador City.

Over the past fifty years the Knights have unselfishly

been providing services to the community helping the less fortunate as well

as those impacted by disastrous issues.

This group of Christian soldiers performs and support these projects

and services with only the well-being of the recipient in mind.

During the evening celebrations there were some

significant awards presented: Richard Pittman received a recognition pin for

his fifty years of service with the association; Pat Carroll, along with his

wife Clara and their family, were recognized as the family of the year for

the dedicated service to the community through the association; George

Power, with his wife alongside him, Kathleen, received two very prestigious

awards, Knight of the Year from the Rev. Whelan Council after forty-five

years of service, and also the Knight of the Year within the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

I ask all hon. members to please join me in

congratulating the Knights of Columbus of Labrador City on their golden

anniversary.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise to recognize and commend Ernie Meade of Fox

Roost, Clifford Lillington of Margaree, and Roland Sheaves of Port aux

Basques on their rescue of Mr. Clyde Chant and Mr. John Caines.

This past Monday, June 1, while travelling on Route

470, Mr. Chant and Mr. Caines' truck went off the road and became partially

submerged underwater. Their

vehicle was spotted by a school bus driver who flagged down Mr. Meade and

Mr. Lillington driving by. They

were later joined by Mr. Sheaves.

They could see the two men hanging onto the tailgate of

the truck. Mr. Chant was able to

make it to shore; however, Mr. Caines could not swim, so Mr. Meade waded in

to get him. He said the water

was so cold that he got weak. At

that point Sheaves and Lillington also came into the water; the three formed

a human chain, and got Mr. Caines ashore.

Both men were taken to the LeGrow Health Centre as a

precaution, but they are now doing well at home in Burnt Islands.

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

in commending Mr. Meade, Mr. Lillington, and Mr. Sheaves on their heroic and

brave actions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to commend the Elwood

High Envirothon Team of Deer Lake on their tremendous success at the

Envirothon in Nova Scotia just last month.

The Envirothon program fosters team building and critical thinking

around issues related to our natural environment.

Not only did Elwood finish first overall, but they

placed first in urban and community forests, and in wildlife.

Elwood also placed second in aquatic ecology, and soils and land use.

The team will move to compete at the National Envirothon Competition

at Missouri State University in Springfield, Missouri.

This event is recognized at North America's largest high school

environmental education competition, and will take place from July 27 to

August 2 of this year.

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

congratulating Elwood Envirothon team members Emily Finlay, Alexis Locke,

Kyle Hiscock, Rachael Paddock, and Daniel Williams, along with their team

advisors: Mr. Oral Roberts, and Ms Dionne Snow.

We wish them all the best as they represent our Province at this

prestigious competition this summer.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Exploits.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY:

Mr. Speaker, Shane Pope is one of this year's graduates of Botwood

Collegiate. He is a goal-driven

leader who confidently motivates others.

I feel honoured to be able to list some of his achievements:

President of the Botwood Student Council; board member

of the national, provincial, and local Boys and Girls Clubs; board member of

the Community Advisory Committee; Fusion 2015 National Youth Forum,

organizer and host; Member of the Premier's Youth Advisory Committee;

Newfoundland and Labrador Student Volunteer Award; Future Shop Generation

Scholarship; French Merit Award; Frank and Flossie Antle Memorial

Scholarship; the Harrison McCain Scholarship, valued at $16,000; honour roll

since Grade 7.

Mr. Speaker, Shane Pope is an individual of character,

integrity, perseverance, and dedication.

He has a positive attitude, quietly taking care of business, and no

doubt will be one to watch for in the future.

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

in congratulating this inspirational young adult on his achievements and

wish him much success in the future.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Honourable colleagues, I would like to recognize and

congratulate the Grade 4, 5, and 6 students, and their teacher Mrs. Aylward,

of St. Mark's School in King's Cove for winning $10,000 with their

application to the School Energy Project sponsored by Shell Canada and

Canadian Geographic .

Throughout the months of February to April of this

year, the students were involved in the Energy Diet Challenge.

One of the projects within the challenge was to submit an application

on ways to improve their school to make it more energy efficient and to

reduce waste production. The

students developed a plan that consisted of three separate projects: the

implementation of a school-wide composting program, the development of a

school greenhouse, and the replacement of the cafeteria microwaves with more

energy efficient ones.

Once the application was completed, the students

developed a video explaining their proposal and then worked on receiving

public votes. Once the votes

were completed the top five schools from across Canada were judged by a

panel of judges and, as a result, the school won the top prize.

Mr. Speaker, members of the House, please join me in

congratulating the students and all involved of St. Mark's School in King's

Cove.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On June 4, 2014, a tragic event unfolded in Moncton,

New Brunswick, which resulted in the deaths of three members of the Royal

Canadian Mounted Police and injuries to two others.

On the one-year anniversary of that tragedy, I would

like to take this opportunity on behalf of the Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador to once again offer our condolences to the families, the

friends, and the colleagues of the officers who lost their lives on that

tragic day.

As well, I would like to offer our support to the two

officers who survived.

The officers who paid the ultimate sacrifice on that

day were: Constable David Ross, Constable Fabrice George Gevaudan, and

Constable Douglas James Larche.

The two officers who were injured, but fortunately

survived were: Constable ric Stphane J. Dubois, and Constable Marie

Darlene Goguen.

Mr. Speaker, in addition to being outstanding police

officers, all three constables who died that day were also fathers and

husbands. All three were

integral members of their communities.

All three are greatly missed.

To mark the anniversary of the event in Moncton and to

commemorate and acknowledge those officers who died and for the ones who

were wounded, staff with our local RCMP B Division have established a

memorial display at their headquarters located in St. John's.

As well, Assistant Commissioner Tracy Hardy is in New Brunswick today

on behalf of her officers from this Province to participate in a number of

events.

Mr. Speaker, tragedies such as this reinforce just how

dangerous the nature of police work is.

In Newfoundland and Labrador, we have hundreds of officers patrolling

our communities each day working to make this Province as safe as possible

for all of our residents. They

do so at great risk, and each day they leave their homes, and there is no

guarantee they will return.

Since 1861, twenty police and peace officers in this

Province have lost their lives in the line of duty.

That is twenty too many.

The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador supports our police and peace

officers and we acknowledge the important work they do in circumstances that

are often challenging, unpredictable and dangerous.

Mr. Speaker, our thoughts and prayers are with those

who were impacted by the events in Moncton last June, as well as with all

police and peace officers who work diligently to ensure that this Province

remains one of the greatest places in which to live, to work, and to raise a

family.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the Premier for the advance copy of his

statement today. It certainly is

a tragic anniversary, not just for the people of New Brunswick but for,

indeed, all law enforcement across the country, including right here in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

We also pay tribute today to the three RCMP officers

who were killed and the two officers who were wounded in Moncton one year

ago. Our thoughts and our

prayers are also with their families and their fellow officers.

The loss of our men and women in uniform is tragic, no matter when or

where it occurs. Police officers

put their lives at risk every day to protect others.

They put themselves in harm's way so that we can feel safe in our

homes and in our communities.

Moncton, like so many communities in Newfoundland and

Labrador, is a close-knit community.

When the tragic was unfolding last year, a Newfoundlander was playing

a key role within the RCMP.

Assistant Commissioner Roger Brown of the RCMP detachment in Codiac, New

Brunswick, is a Newfoundlander.

Of course, even in our Province we can relate to the tragedy of such violent

incidents.

Our hearts go out today to the people of Moncton who I

hope will someday find peace. We

must also realize and appreciate the commitment of law enforcement to ensure

our safety. I join my colleagues

in this House today to honour our men and women of law enforcement as we pay

tribute one year later.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, words are not enough to express the extent of sorrow this

tragedy has caused for so many.

In the name of the officers who have died by serving the people of Moncton,

I want to thank all those police and peace officers who give so much to our

community.

To ask people to serve our community in this way

carries a huge responsibility.

As legislators, we must ensure proper resources are in place to not only

keep our communities safe, but to keep those men and women doing this work

safe as well, including any services they need to help cope with the stress

of their very important duties.

As a final note, Mr. Speaker, the Mayor of Moncton asks

all Canadians to leave their porch light on tonight in memory of these brave

RCMP officers.

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!

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House to recognize June as Stroke

Awareness Month in Newfoundland and Labrador and indeed across Canada.

During the month, residents throughout the Province are encouraged to

learn more about how to prevent heart disease and reduce the risk of stroke.

This week, I joined with representatives of the

Newfoundland and Labrador Heart and Stroke Foundation to proclaim Stroke

Awareness Month in an effort to promote public awareness about the

importance of cardiovascular health and to officially launch the

foundation's Stroke Month Campaign.

Mr. Speaker, more Canadians die of heart disease than

any other disease. Over 74,000

deaths from heart disease occur every year and one person in Canada has a

stroke every ten minutes. Since

2006, we have provided over $500,000 in funding to the Heart and Stroke

Foundation to support their education and awareness efforts.

Our government remains focused on stroke prevention, treatment,

rehabilitation, and community reintegration initiatives, as well as

exploring opportunities to further enhance our quality stroke care and

services.

Evidence tells us that up to 80 per cent of premature

heart disease and stroke is preventable.

We are committed to supporting individuals, families, and communities

in their endeavour to live healthy lives through a variety of strategies,

initiatives, programs, and services.

It is never too late to adopt healthy behaviours and make lifestyle

choices that will decrease risks for stroke, even after a stroke has

occurred.

Through our integrated stroke strategy, we are

continuously working with the Heart and Stroke Foundation and our four

regional health authorities to enhance stroke care in Newfoundland and

Labrador and to improve patient outcomes.

Through the twelve designated stroke centres in the Province, we have

the necessary resources, including diagnostic equipment and pharmaceuticals,

to treat acute stroke.

Residents are reminded that stroke is a medical

emergency and every minute counts.

Knowing the signs and acting quickly could mean the difference

between life and death, or between a full recovery and lasting disability.

All you need to remember is FAST.

Face is it drooping?

Arms can you raise both?

Speech is it slurred or jumbled?

If yes, then it is Time call an ambulance right away.

I invite my colleagues to join me in recognizing Stroke

Awareness Month. I also want to

thank the Heart and Stroke Foundation for their continued hard work in

supporting the health and well-being of the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Thank you.

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 his

statement. It is very important

that we raise awareness about stroke in our Province.

The rate of strokes here in Newfoundland and Labrador is the highest

in Canada. We need to do better.

The Heart and Stroke Foundation has said that excess

sugar consumption is linked to heart disease, stroke, obesity, and other

health conditions. They want

Canadians to limit their intake of sugar-sweetened beverages such as soft

drinks, fruit drinks, and juices.

We could also discuss the promised e-cigarette

legislation that we have heard about, but I do not suspect we are going to

see any time soon. It appears

the other side is more worried about legislation that keeps them in power as

opposed to legislation that might save lives.

In addition to having the highest rate of stroke, we

also have the highest rate of heart attacks.

Defibrillators can increase the heart attack survival rate by up to

75 per cent. Last year, our side

lent support to the Heart and Stroke Foundation; the big red team took a

ride on the big red bike.

Education and awareness can save lives and we thank the

stroke foundation for their work in trying to improve the lives of the

people of this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, the Newfoundland and Labrador Heart and Stroke Foundation is

doing amazing work in promoting awareness about heart health and stroke

awareness. Thank you to all the

staff and volunteers who do this great work.

Bravo! It is crucial

government support their work.

Prevention and education are so important.

Mr. Speaker, I have received numerous calls from stroke

victims at home or in long-term facilities begging for physiotherapy, who

need help from physiotherapists or assistants in order not to deteriorate.

The wait-lists are totally unacceptable and detrimental to their health.

It is time government improve this and have a heart.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate the fifty

members of Team Newfoundland and Labrador that participated in the

twenty-first annual Skills Canada National Competition which took place May

27 to 30 in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.

Every year, individuals from all corners of Canada,

travel to attend the Skills Canada National Competition where they compete

in over forty skilled trades and technology contests.

This competition provides hands-on work experience related to skilled

trades and technology careers.

It inspires students, including apprentices, to demonstrate the passion and

dedication in skilled trades and technologies.

This year, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that Team

Newfoundland and Labrador took home fifteen individual and team medals in

twelve different trades and technology-related competition areas from this

event three gold, seven silver, and five bronze.

These competition areas included autobody repair, electronics, brick

masonry, robotics, steamfitter/pipefitter, baking, car painting,

architectural technology and design, job search, job skill demonstration,

photography, and public speaking.

The medal winners attend College of the North Atlantic, the UA Local

740 Training Centre, and high schools located throughout the Province.

Mr. Speaker, Skills Canada Newfoundland and Labrador

was established in 1998 as part of an effort to maintain Canada's

international competitiveness, with a goal to raise awareness about skilled

trades and technology sectors.

In today's global community, education is vital for success and our

students have the tools they require to be the leaders of tomorrow.

Mr. Speaker, the provincial government is supporting

the continued development of a highly-skilled, well-educated workforce

through a variety of initiatives designed to revitalize Newfoundland and

Labrador's apprenticeship program.

In fact, the provincial government has committed more than $100

million over the past seven years to support skilled trades.

I wish to congratulate all students who participated in

the competition and I hope they continue to show an interest in a skilled

trades occupation and consider choosing one as their career path.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. George's Stephenville East.

MR. REID:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his

statement. It is indeed a

pleasure today to join with my colleagues to celebrate all fifty members of

Team Newfoundland and Labrador on their participation in the Skills Canada

National Competition.

The Skills Canada National Competition is the only

national multi-trade technology competition for students and apprentices in

this country. The Province was

represented well with fifteen medals in twelve different competition areas.

Such competitions give people an opportunity to learn from their

peers across the country, network with industry leaders, and have their

skills recognized on a national stage, Mr. Speaker.

Again, it is a pleasure to join with other members of

this House in congratulating the participants and the medal winners in this

very important competition.

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, too, thank the minister for the advance copy of his

statement here today.

Congratulations to all the students who have participated, Mr. Speaker.

We think it is outstanding.

It is no secret that workers from Newfoundland and

Labrador are renowned worldwide for their skills.

I think that we have always known that.

The skyline of New York City, for example, is a testament to the

ironworkers of this Province who come from Harbour Main and the Holyrood

areas.

Mr. Speaker, it is our hope that government has a plan

to support these fine young men and women by ensuring that they have a

chance to live and work in this Province, should they want to.

We hope that government keeps that in mind every day.

We do have an example where government did not pay

attention to that particular issue when it came to the Argentia welding

project down on the South Coast of the Province, Mr. Speaker.

We could have done better than let that work go offshore.

We could have had our people working there.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. MURPHY:

Thank you very much.

MR. SPEAKER:

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier has announced that he plans to push this

year's election out to November, past the fixed election date that is

currently set by law. The Chief

Electoral Officer has outlined in a June 2 letter that it is possible to

have a September election. If

the Premier wanted, he could have had our election over before the federal

election.

I ask the Premier: Why are you ignoring that a

September election is a possibility, and instead trying to push the election

out to November for your own purposes?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, the Chief Electoral Officer has sent a couple of

pieces of correspondence now to myself and leaders of the other parties.

He has laid out the time frame that he requires in order to prepare

for an election, should the legislation move forward and be passed in the

House to reduce the number of seats in our House of Assembly, Mr. Speaker.

He has laid that out, Mr. Speaker.

Based on the review of his correspondence, I believe it would be

prudent to have the provincial election after the federal election.

He has clearly articulated that it would cause a conflict for him and

his office himself. It would

cause HR challenges for the provincial Chief Electoral Officer and conflicts

with the federal government. He

has clearly laid it out and articulated that in his correspondence.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What the Premier did not say is that was a piece of

correspondence in response to a letter that I sent to the Chief Electoral

Officer, not one from the Premier's Office.

In that letter it does say that there is a window there to have a

September election before the federal election this fall.

I ask the Premier: Why are you ignoring what is clearly

in that letter of June 2 from the Chief Electoral office?

Why don't you have an election in September?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The member opposite is quite aware that there is a

minimum five-week writ period for federal elections.

The federal election being held on October 19 would mean that the

federal writ of election would be issued around

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER DAVIS:

The federal writ would be issued around Labour Day, in September, and that

would cause a conflict with the federal election.

As Mr. Powers has articulated, it would cause a

conflict for him. There would be

an overlap, Mr. Speaker. He even

suggests that for members of the general public, it may be a concern to have

two elections running the same time.

That is why we will be moving the election until November.

I look forward to on Monday, once we receive the electoral boundaries

report, we will be making and laying out publicly our date and our plan for

the election, and also how we are going to move forward on electoral

boundary change.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, the Minister of Finance once talked about the

value of fixed election dates.

He said this: It forces government to focus on governing the province and

not positioning itself for an election, or continuously thinking about what

might be opportunistic and call an election at a time when it suits the

circumstance the best. He also

said: Without fixed election dates

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. BALL:

there could be manipulation of the electorate.

I ask the Premier: Since the benefits of the fixed

election dates are clear, why do you want to change the law and push the

election date past the federal election?

Clearly, September is an opportunity for this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition wants to go down a road of someone

once said. Well, if someone once

said that it would be okay to move, he would be finally in full agreement

with moving the election a few weeks if it meant to avoid a conflict with

the federal election.

The member opposite also once said he agrees with

reducing the number of seats in the House of Assembly.

The member once said he does not agree with reducing the number of

seats in the House of Assembly.

The member opposite changes his mind on a daily basis.

He should be able to identify sometimes when that occurs, Mr.

Speaker.

We are taking the advice of the Chief Electoral

Officer, we are going to avoid a conflict with the federal election, and, as

he has endorsed himself, we are going to move it a few weeks so that we do

current law is to keep that period of time within one year.

The Premier is now trying to push this out twenty-two months.

So I ask the Premier: Do you intend to use your

majority in this House to cancel the law that requires you to call an

election within one year of being sworn in?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

So again, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is confirming that he has changed

his position on when the election could be held, because he has clearly

articulated in the past that he supports the concept of moving the election

a few weeks in order to prevent a conflict with the federal election.

He has said it himself

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER DAVIS:

he said it publicly, and he is now once again, Mr. Speaker, as he has done

over and over and over again, he is changing his position, and that he is

taking on a matter.

Mr. Speaker, we have looked at the information provided

to us by the Chief Electoral Officer, we have considered the information

that he has provided

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER DAVIS:

we understand the conflicts that may arise.

I will be quite clear to tell you, as I said before, the election

will be held in 2015 which he was fine with, he was fine with it and it

will be held in November, and we will lay out the full rationale for that on

Monday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, clearly, what is very clear here is the Premier

is using misleading comments to this House today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BALL:

Clearly, what was said on January 15, I say to the Premier, was this: that

we would indeed support that to get away from a federal election.

What he is suggesting today does not do that, when you consider the

special ballot process.

I say to you, Mr. Speaker, the new boundary legislation

next week, and now with the Premier's attempt to change the fixed election

date, several legislative amendments will be debated next week.

So I ask the Premier: Will these amendments be

contained in a Harper-like omnibus bill, or will you separate the bills to

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, it is very clear today that the Premier is trying

to twist my words, just like he is trying to twist the rules of this

Legislature, I say, Mr. Speaker.

takes office, and there is also a fixed election date.

They are the two pieces, Mr. Speaker, that have to be corrected.

We are looking at other amendments to be consistent with other

provinces.

As I have said, we will lay out our legislation and our

bill on Monday for everyone to see, Mr. Speaker.

It will go through due process in this House with a full, fair, and

frank debate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It has been revealed that Nalcor chose a Quebec company

for construction work at Muskrat Falls.

The company has already admitted to a collusion scheme.

At the same time Nalcor approved the company for work at Muskrat

Falls, the majority owner was testifying at the Quebec Charbonneau

commission on corruption in the construction industry.

I ask the Premier: Why did Nalcor choose a Quebec

company that has admitted to collusion and handing over envelopes of cash

for public works projects?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

Mr. Speaker, the leader raises a very important issue.

I will say for the people of the Province that government is not

involved in a process of evaluating or awarding of contracts.

In the process of awarding contracts, there are some

ninety-five construction contracts in Muskrat Falls.

Nalcor has a responsibility to manage the projects.

One of the mandates that they have is to ensure they get best value.

Best value for the project, Mr. Speaker, means best value for the

people of the Province.

Through their process of making that selection, the

Opron company was successful, the work has been completed within the scope

required. So they have gone

through a process. The other

point I will make, Mr. Speaker, is the process is clearly different than

what is being followed in Quebec.

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.

Best value with a company that was testifying in

Quebec? Is that what the

minister is suggesting?

We understand that this contract was worth between $10

million and $20 million range, and that the company is now facing at least a

dozen lawsuits in our Province for not paying subcontractors.

We would have expected that the procurement process would have

identified this company's questionable past.

I ask the Premier: With so many Newfoundland and

Labrador companies able to do this work, why did Nalcor go to Quebec and

pick a company involved in the collusion scheme?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is trying to connect practices in Quebec

with practices in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I know their affinity for Quebec.

They have a long history of understanding and supporting Quebec.

The process is not what we follow here.

Let me get to the point, Mr. Speaker.

The process that is followed within Nalcor is a very detailed,

thorough, rigorous, competitive process where individuals look at issues of

commercial, technical, and safety evaluations.

There is a separate financial evaluation done through the process.

I have been assured that has been done on this company

and through a process of Expressions of Interest and the final evaluations,

Opron was awarded the contract, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe the minister should clarify are you suggesting

that the practices of a Quebec company are not important to the decisions

that we make here in Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

Mr. Speaker, what I am suggesting is the integrity of the process at Nalcor

protects against the kind of activity that is being evaluated and alleged in

Quebec through the Charbonneau commission.

What I am saying, Mr. Speaker, is that the process at

Nalcor is set up so that individuals do separate evaluations on contracts,

it flows up the chains before the decision is made.

Like CBC reiterated today, they have no information to suggest that

there was anything improper about the awarding of the contract, and we do

not have any information likewise.

It is a concern, it is being looked at within Nalcor,

but the process has been followed, the contract has been awarded, and the

contract has been completed, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, for some time Newfoundland and Labrador's students' performance

in mathematics has been declining and sounding alarms.

This year's Budget committed to convening a group of educational

leaders to review math performances.

We have heard nothing about that since.

I ask the minister: When will government finally act on

the math curriculum crisis in this Province and accept the urgency of this

issue?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Acting Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

Mr. Speaker, recently we made an announcement, I guess, around the math

issues in this Province. We have

a brand new curriculum that has been fully introduced to the K-12 school

system, but there continues to be some concerns about math.

We take that very seriously.

I have talked with educators.

It is of serious concern, Mr. Speaker.

What we have announced is that we are going to have a

math conversation. We are not

just going to focus on curriculum; we are going to talk about broad aspects

of teaching math in the Province.

We will also look at other jurisdictions and what they are doing and

what kind of results they are having, since we do share the curriculum in

this Province as it is being delivered in other provinces.

We will look at multiple things about math, Mr. Speaker, and we look

forward to having the conversation to see if we can address those

challenges.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, it does not matter where they come from or who they are, if

students can do math, they will have a future; it is that simple.

This government is undermining our students and their future

prospects by not providing the tools they need to excel in math.

I ask the minister: Will you just stop the political

posturing and provide the resources that students need to turn around their

math performance?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Acting Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to play politics with the students of the

Province. We have acknowledged

that there are a lot of issues with math being talked about in the public.

We have acknowledged it is serious.

Also, our government is committed to have the conversation about

math, include the experts, include the stakeholders, include parents, and

talk to students.

Let's get to the bottom of what the issues are with

math. Is it curriculum?

Is it the amount of time we spend teaching math?

Is it the professional learning?

Is there something out at the universities is there something

happens when they transition from secondary school to post-secondary, Mr.

Speaker?

There are many elements to consider and we want to have

that conversation, and we are fully committed to do so.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, to date, this government has undermined our students and

compromised their employment and educational prospects by downplaying the

seriousness of the math performance crisis in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I ask the minister now: If he is finally ready to get

serious about this issue, will he come clean now and tell us exactly how

much money has been set aside in this Budget 2015 for your so-called math

performance conversation?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Acting Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

Mr. Speaker, so-call it what you will.

I can commit to the people of the Province, particularly around the

math issue, we have a million dollars in an excellent math strategy in the

department, but I will cut travel in the department to deal with the math

issue. I have no problem.

It is a very important issue and we are committed to

dealing with it; but if you want to talk about what we are committing to the

students of the Province, you want to look at how our results are in math.

Our dropout rates have improved, our graduation rates have improved,

and the results for academic students and honour student has improved.

We are seeing improvements in our education system, but it is not

without challenges. One thing

people can be assured, we are not going to run from the challenges.

We are going to take them on, we are going to bring them in, we are

going to work together, and we are going to find some solutions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last week I asked the minister responsible for Income

Support if those who are homeless are able to receive Income Support, he

promised to get the answer.

Yesterday, I asked the same question, and he promised to table the answer

after Question Period.

Mr. Speaker, that minister is usually forthcoming in

providing the answers, but not on this issue.

In fact, he is being very evasive.

I will ask again today: Are people who are homeless,

without an address, able to receive Income Support?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Mr. Speaker, individuals who apply for Income Support without a fixed

address, need to find a way to receive the money they are entitled to.

Whether that be attached to an organization, to one of our so, yes,

there are ways that people can receive those supports.

Mr. Speaker, I question sometimes I discussed this

with the staff, and I think some of the staff take offence to the measures

that the hon. member is challenging some of their positions, I truly do.

These front line workers work day in and day out to approve programs

and supports for their clients, and they are to be commended for those

supports.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. OSBORNE:

It is not the front line workers, Mr. Speaker, who develop the policies, it

is the minister.

Mr. Speaker, his answer does nothing to put a pillow

under the head of a homeless person sleeping under the bridge down on Water

Street.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE:

The rental allowance provided by your department to those on Income Support

has not kept pace with rental rate increases over the past decade.

As a result, people who cannot afford to pay rent, find themselves

with nowhere to live. Without an

address, they do not qualify for Income Support.

A support through Choices for Youth is not Income Support.

Your department is forcing people to become homeless.

I ask the minister not to play hide and seek with the answer.

Will you confirm ?

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I ask the member to ask his question.

MR. OSBORNE:

Will you confirm that people are becoming homeless because the rental

allowance is not sufficient to pay rent?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Now, Mr. Speaker, listen to that, just listen to that.

Mr. Speaker, the people within the department, in

conjunction with the minister, develop and roll out programs.

This member is accusing us as a government we, as a government,

work with all of the agencies out there Choices for Youth, Stella's

Circle, all who are involved in homelessness.

We have committed dollars to that.

We were down to a session just this past week and I have assured

those people that we will continue to work with them.

He need not underestimate what we are going to do and what we will

continue to do as a government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. George's Stephenville East.

MR. REID:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Auditor General reported that Memorial University

identified $145 million in urgent deferred maintenance needs over the next

five years. Memorial said in its

budget submission last year that putting off will threaten their ability to

provide safe, reliable and good quality facilities.

Budget 2015 only allotted $6.6 million, the lowest amount in the last

ten years.

I ask the minister: Are you aware of the implications

of compromising the quality and safety at Memorial University?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Mr. Speaker, I have to say, I was very surprised by the commentary made by

the Vice-President of Financial Operations at Memorial this morning.

I was very surprised.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. JACKMAN:

I took it upon myself to call the President and the Chair of the Board of

Regents, Mr. Speaker. Here is

what we expect from MUN there are priorities, there are life safety

issues. While Memorial may have

major projects happening, we expect that they attend to these life safety

issues first and foremost.

I have been assured that there is an infrastructure

plan in place, Mr. Speaker. I

look forward to the priorities around life safety to be addressed first and

foremost.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. George's Stephenville East.

MR. REID:

Mr. Speaker, it is fine for the minister to have that expectation, but if he

does not give them enough money to do it, it is hard for them to do it.

Putting off maintenance is going to cost the Province

more in the long run, and not just in terms of physical repairs, Mr.

Speaker. Memorial University is

the only university in the Province and it is central to the population

growth and innovation.

The VP of Finance at Memorial University says serious

safety hazards exist, such as windows blowing out of the walkway over the

Parkway. Mr. Speaker, in fact,

they are thinking about closing down some facilities because of repair.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I ask the member to ask his question.

MR. REID:

I ask the minister: Does he think this is acceptable?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

MR. JACKMAN:

Maybe, Mr. Speaker, we should take a look at some of the professors who are

operating in the House of Assembly giving up their bit of salary to

contribute to the cause.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, our commitment and our

funds to Memorial are at $320 million this year.

They have major projects underway.

Before they are going to move with any of these projects, Mr.

Speaker, we would expect that life safety issues would be addressed first

and foremost. We expect no less.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

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

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Mr. Speaker, last September government said it would pay for any

environmental liabilities at the Come by Chance Refinery without knowing

what the liabilities are, and in an

article in

The Telegram it says that the

Department of Environment and Conservation is just now planning phase two of

a three-phase assessment.

I ask the minister: It has been eight months, why are

we still waiting to hear how much environmental liability government has

taken on?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL:

Mr. Speaker, the owners of North Atlantic Refinery Limited are the ones that

are doing the environmental assessment.

We are the ones who are overseeing that process.

We are working very closely with them.

They are going to phase two.

They are on target with what they promised and committed when they

bought the refinery. Everything

is going along perfectly well.

Mr. Speaker, we are taking indemnity with regard to the

soil and sediment and water and groundwater in the area, but everything else

is the responsibility of North Atlantic Refinery Limited.

We are not taking on the full cost of remediation of that site, but

that work is getting done. It is

ongoing, and there are facts that need to be told.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, government has been promising a new Waterford Hospital for over

a decade. It is still years down

the road. How many more horror

stories do we need to hear?

Government is shirking its responsibility and expecting Eastern Health and

staff to somehow, what, just cope?

I ask the minister: What is he going to do to address

this crisis at the Waterford until a new hospital is built?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, we have acknowledged that the Waterford Hospital needs to be

replaced. It is old

infrastructure and it needs to be replaced, and as soon as the Province's

finances will allow us to do so, we will do so.

Some great groundwork has been laid.

The functional program and master plan is complete.

It is solid work and it will inform our future decisions.

With that said, Mr. Speaker, it is important to note

that patients at the Waterford will continue to receive quality care from

well trained professionals, and some of the changes we anticipated would

come with the new hospital can be implemented in the meantime.

For instance, we want to focus on a recovery model of care where

patients are put at the center of decision making, and we are going to

introduce that regardless of when we can build a new hospital, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, how could the minister allow the psychiatric unit at the Health

Sciences Centre to fall into such disrepair?

I ask the minister: For God's sake, will he give them

what they need to properly take care of our people?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, people who are sick need access to their basic needs, such as

hot water, it is a must. They

need to be supported in their recovery.

I want to be clear, that what has happened at the

psychiatric unit at the Health Sciences Centre should not have occurred.

It should have been fixed as soon as it was discovered.

I have a lot of questions, Mr. Speaker, and I do want

answers from Eastern Health. I

have given clear direction. I

want Eastern Health to investigate the situation and I want to understand

why a solution was not pursued when a modest investment would have solved

the problem. It is completely

unacceptable. We must learn from

it, but we also must do better.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, the staff are telling us loud and clearly that these facilities

are falling apart. A crisis

intervention has to be done.

Everyone in this House knows there is a shortage of staff at our psychiatric

facilities.

I ask the minister: What is he going to do about this?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, while we have made a lot of progress over the last decade with

our mental health and addictions strategy, I will be the first to admit once

again that we still have a long way to go.

That is why we have embarked upon an all-party committee to

investigate mental health and addictions services in this Province and come

back to his hon. House to make recommendations for improvement; but, in the

meantime, we are trying to improve the system every day.

In terms of this recent issue at the Health Sciences

Centre, I have directed Eastern Health to increase occupational therapy

assistant hours to allow access for more programming, including leisure

activities and physical fitness.

I have directed them today to purchase additional television units.

I have directed them to increase access to the kitchen which I

understand is locked for safety reasons.

We are looking at all of these issues and we are

constantly trying to improve mental health services and programs for people

in this Province, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The other day in the House the minister, when asked

about 911 service in the Province, said, and I quote, you will recognize

very quickly that governments are constrained by the budgetary policies of

the government

Mr. Speaker, 911 service is not a budgetary policy of

the government as consumers are the ones paying for 911 service in this

Province.

I ask the minister: What say do consumers have and what

type of system delivery if they are to receive the products?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister Responsible for Fire and Emergency Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Good point, George excuse me, hon. member.

It is a very good point.

Consumers do pay. You are

absolutely right. My apologies

to the House, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. member, consumers have all kinds of say in

what kind of service they want.

That is how we have got on the path we are on.

We consulted with consumers across the Province and heard what they

wanted in a 911 operating system.

That is why we brought in, what we call, the first phase of 911

operating. We intend to take it

to the Next Generation 911 operating system.

Very clearly, as I said to the hon. member and my

colleague there several day ago on this issue, what we have right now is a

system that for the biggest portion of people living in the Province, people

in my district, in communities like Lamaline, Grand Bank, St. Lawrence, and

Marystown, had no knowledge of 911, has never had the service.

It is all brand new. We

have that in every part of the Province and we intend to build upon that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The time for Question Period has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

During Question Period, the hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition referred to the Premier as misleading.

This is clearly unparliamentary.

I would ask the hon. member if he would withdraw.

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I withdraw the comment.

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

MR. SPEAKER:

In accordance with

section 19(5)(

a) of the House of Assembly Accountability,

Integrity and Administration Act, I hereby table the minutes of the House of

Assembly Management Commission meeting that was held on May 13, 2015.

Further tabling in documents?

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for Which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER:

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

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a petition to pave Route 434 in Conche.

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 Route 434, Conche Road, is 17.6 kilometres of

unpaved road; and

WHEREAS the current road conditions are deplorable; and

WHEREAS the Canadian Automobile Association ranked

Route 434 the sixth worse road in Atlantic Canada; and

WHEREAS it is government's obligation to provide basic

infrastructure to all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians; and

WHEREAS an improved paved road network would enhance

local business, fish processing operations, and tourism, which is vital to

the health of the communities affected;

We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to

urge the government to allocate funds in the provincial roads program to

pave Route 434.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, today the petition is signed by residents

of Roddickton, Bide Arm, and Grand Falls-Windsor.

There is certainly support all across the Province to see a road like

Conche receive what it should have, as it has been a major contributor to

the provincial economy throughout the years.

Residents are becoming very vocal and outspoken.

Those who live here in St. John's and other areas that

have been from Conche, have ties to the community of Conche this town once

had a population of close to a thousand people, and there is still a very

vibrant fish plant. The only

processing facility that processes crab, whelk multi-species plant

mackerel, herring, all sorts of pelagics there.

There are about 800 to 1,200 trucks that go across this

road, as well as the tourism economy.

It is the heart of the French Shore, with a 222-foot Jacobian linen

tapestry the only one of its kind in North America that sees thousands

of people. Cruise ships come

here, there are archeological digs, and there is small business.

There is a vibrant economy in Conche, and that if this government had

the vision and the insight to pave this road, we would have a stronger

economy on the Northern Peninsula East.

There was $6 million put into this road, and now we

need to see the investment to finalize the project.

So I look forward to seeing that brought to fruition on behalf of the

people of Conche, the neighbouring area, and the people who are employed

from various districts, whether it be Piccadilly, or whether it be from

other areas of the West Coast who work in Conche.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled:

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 cellphone service is an essential safety and

communications tool for visitors and residents; and

WHEREAS the residents and users of Route 470 feel that

the provincial government should invest in cellphone for rural Newfoundland

and Labrador;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly

pray and call upon the government to partner with the private sector to

extend cellphone coverage along Route 470;

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Now, Mr. Speaker, anybody who has ever watched this

House will know that I have made this petition on a number of occasions, but

it has significant meaning, especially today, after we had a near-miss.

We had the possibility of a fatal accident on that particular road on

Monday one that I recognized in a member's statement today.

Now, thankfully those gentlemen are all safe, but the

scary

part is to think that there was absolutely no way for any of them to

call anybody, because there is no cellphone coverage on Route 470.

So thank God we did not have a situation where we had to call an

ambulance or call a fire truck or call the police, because you could not

you could not call. It is

unfortunate that this government continues to do nothing when it comes to

this issue. They continue to do

absolutely nothing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. A. PARSONS:

They are spending their time figuring out how they are going to stick around

longer when they should be spending their time governing and making sure

that people have access to essential safety communication tools, but they do

not want to do that. They are

going to continue to sit over there and cling to power while people here

were clinging on to the tailgate of a truck because in this case there was

no cellphone coverage, and it is shameful and shocking.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Virginia Waters.

MS C. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am proud to stand in this House and present this

petition to the House of Assembly.

We urge the House of Assembly to call upon the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to make literacy a priority by

supporting the development of a robust provincial strategic literacy plan

that addresses the learning and literacy of individuals from the early years

through to the senior years.

Furthermore, recognizing that literacy is intimately

connected to other societal issues, we urge the House of Assembly to call

upon the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to invest funding in

literacy programs so that all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians can enjoy the

benefits of participation in our society so that no one is left behind.

Mr. Speaker, issues of literacy have been raised in

this House of Assembly through a number of questions in this Question

Period. My hon. colleague spoke

earlier today about the ongoing issues that we have as a Province with our

children's scores in math, and I listened to the minister opposite answer

the question and answer it with platitudes about things that they are going

to do.

Well, Mr. Speaker, the results of literacy issues in

our Province are clear but this government continues to choose to ignore the

facts, just like they continue to ignore the facts of what needs to happen

in the best interests of the people of the Province.

They spend more time talking about what happened yesterday and

justifying what they do in this House of Assembly than they do about caring

for the people of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, when we have less than half of

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians with a level three literacy or higher, we

have to hold this government accountable for the money that they had, for

the decisions that they made, and their inability to effect the change that

must happen in our Province to ensure a workforce for the future.

Our Province, as the Finance Minister finally admitted,

is in a recession. We have seen

eighteen consecutive months of year-over-year job losses, yet this

government continues to ignore the fundamental principles of workforce

development fundamental principles such as literacy.

Mr. Speaker, the people of the Province who continue to

fill out these petitions and continue to call on government to act will

continue to do so in the coming weeks when they hold this government

accountable for its lack of attention on the people of the Province and its

attention on its own selfish political priorities.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Trinity Bay de Verde.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the

undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS many communities in the District of Trinity

Bay de Verde do not have cellphone coverage; and

WHEREAS residents of the district require cellphone

coverage to ensure their safety and communication abilities; and

WHEREAS cellphone coverage on many portions of the

highway in the district is poor or non-existent;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly

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

Newfoundland and Labrador to work with the appropriate agencies to provide

adequate cellphone coverage throughout the entire District of Trinity Bay

de Verde.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity this

afternoon to enter the petition on behalf of my constituents in the District

of Trinity Bay de Verde. It is

interesting this afternoon when you hear the Member for Burgeo La Poile

talk about the accident that happened just this past Monday in his district

and the role that cellphones could have played in safety and helping those

people who were very fortunate.

It is very similar in my district.

We have no cellphone coverage.

It was brought to my attention a few days ago, Mr. Speaker, by

actually a resident, not from my district, but a resident from New Harbour.

The New Harbour Barrens is also a connecting road between Trinity and

Conception Bay. It is in the

Bellevue district. I think the

Bellevue district has some issues with cellphone coverage as well.

The constituent said we get in there, there are very

poor shoulders on the road, similar to the Heart's Content Barrens, and

there is no cellphone coverage.

Yet the minister of public safety stands up this afternoon in response to a

question from the Member for St. John's Centre and talks about the

seventy-five cents that consumers pay when it comes to their cellphone

bills.

AN HON. MEMBER:

St. John's East.

MR. CROCKER:

St. John's East, sorry. The

seventy-five cents that every one of us pay on our cellphone bills every

month, is there a plan to take some of this money, Mr. Speaker, and invest

it in cellphone coverage?

You look no further than British Columbia, Mr. Speaker.

In British Columbia the government went to work, worked with Telus,

and now they have a plan to expand cellphone coverage on their primary and

secondary roads. So I urge the

government.

The Member for Lake Melville got up last week in this

House and talked about how it was great for people in urban areas to have

cellphone coverage, but he could not understand why us in rural Newfoundland

and Labrador would even want cellphone coverage.

Well I assure you, Mr. Speaker, the people of Trinity Bay de Verde

want cellphone coverage, and they deserve cellphone coverage for safety

reasons amongst others.

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I also move, seconded the Minister of Municipal and

Intergovernmental Affairs, Motion 8, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that the

House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. today, Thursday, June 4, 2015.

MR. SPEAKER:

The motion is that the House do not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. today.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Motion is carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I also wish to give notice, under Standing Order 11, I

shall move the House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, June 8, 2015.

I further give notice, under Standing Order 11, I shall

move that the House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. on Monday, June 8, 2015.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KING:

Mr. Speaker, I further give notice, under Standing Order 11, I move that the

House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 9, 2015.

Furthermore, I give notice, under Standing Order 11, I

shall move that the House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 9,

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KING:

Furthermore, I give notice, under Standing Order 11, I shall move that the

House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, June 11, 2015.

I further move, under Standing Order 11, that the House

not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 11, 2015.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I would like to call for

Orders of the Day, Order 2, Committee of Supply.

I move that the House resolve itself into Committee of

the Whole so that we can now consider the Estimates of Executive Council as

well as the Office of Public Engagement.

MR. SPEAKER:

The motion is that this House now resolve itself into Committee of the Whole

to consider the Estimates of Executive Council.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Motion is carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a

Committee of the Whole, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Littlejohn):

Order, please!

Today we are considering the Estimates for the

Consolidated Fund Services, Executive Council in the Legislature.

Just a word to the hon. members, we will start with the

opening remarks from the individual in the Opposition for fifteen minutes.

We will go back to the minister who responds for fifteen, then ten

minutes and ten minutes thereafter, the same as Estimates.

I just want everybody to be on the same page as we go

through this. Just a suggestion,

can we start with the first entry, which would be the Consolidated Fund

Services

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible).

CHAIR:

Office of Public Engagement is where we wish to start?

AN HON. MEMBER:

No.

CHAIR:

No.

Okay, the Clerk to call the first heading.

CLERK:

Excuse me, it is Executive Council we are starting with?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Government House Leader, for some direction, please.

MR. KING:

Yes, it would be our wish, Mr. Chair, to start with Public Engagement

because that is the group that did not get covered in the Estimates that

were scheduled. The member

opposite has been very adamant and wanting to do that, but if members

opposite wish to start in a different order we are prepared to co-operate.

CHAIR:

Okay.

The Clerk to call the subhead, please.

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

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Given that the Office of Public Engagement Estimates have already been

devoted, my preference would be to start with the Consolidated Fund Services

so we can debate Estimates that have not been we only have two hours and

forty-seven minutes, so I would like for us to get started on those.

CHAIR:

Fine, thank you.

The Clerk to call the first subhead, please.

CLERK:

Okay.

Consolidated Fund Services, 1.1.01.

CHAIR:

Subhead 1.1.01.

The hon. the Member for Virginia Waters.

MS C. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, I would like to ask questions relating to

page 1.3 of the Estimates.

CHAIR:

Page 1.3?

MS C. BENNETT:

Page 1.3, which refers to item 1.1.01 Temporary Borrowings.

CHAIR:

Subhead 1.1.01 Temporary Borrowings.

MS C. BENNETT:

The Debt Expenses in the Budget for fiscal year 2014-2015 were $50,000,

revised were zero, and Estimates now for this coming fiscal year are

$50,000. I would ask the

minister if he could explain that.

Mr. Chair, for speed, can I go through a number of

these questions and give them to the minister, or would you like them one at

a time?

CHAIR:

Minister, do you have any preference?

One question at a time or a number of questions?

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of

Treasury Board.

MR. WISEMAN:

Thank you.

The member, if they want to lay out a series of

questions on a particular area if we are going to do that, let's try to

contain it to a smaller area so we are not rambling all over a number of

different pages. If there are a

number of things you would like to comment on with respect to consolidated

fund revenue and then you want to raise them, then I can go back through

them after. That may facilitate

it easier rather than you and I popping up and down every two minutes.

CHAIR:

Okay.

The hon. the Member for Virginia Waters.

MS C. BENNETT:

Mr. Chair, what I will do, with the minister's permission, is certainly

follow the pages as they are listed.

That will make it easier for all of us to follow along.

CHAIR:

Okay.

MS C. BENNETT:

I have asked a question about the Debt Expenses.

I will move now to 1.1.02 Treasury Bills, which speaks to the,

Appropriations provide for the interest expense on treasury bill

borrowings.

Under the Debt Expenses there, Budget 2014-2015 had a

budgeted amount of $5 million.

Actual expenses were $2.3 million higher than that.

Then the Estimates are $6.2 million.

I would ask the minister if he could explain those numbers as well

when he gets a chance to get up.

I will move over to 1.1.06.

CHAIR:

Subhead 1.1.06. So now you are

on page 1.4 is it?

MS C. BENNETT:

Yes, please.

CHAIR:

Okay, 1.1.06, yes.

MS C. BENNETT:

At the very top of the page under Revenue Provincial, the budgeted amount

in fiscal 2014-2015 was $711,600, the actual was $432,700.

This year Estimates are $151,900.

So I would ask the minister if he could provide some information on

that one.

I will continue to move along.

Over to page 1.5, under the heading

CHAIR:

Could you just say that again?

The hon. the Member for Virginia Waters.

MS C. BENNETT:

Sure. I am moving to page 1.5 of

the consolidated funds.

CHAIR:

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of

Treasury Board.

MR. WISEMAN:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to make sure I captured them all.

I understand the first question was around 1.1.01 Temporary

Borrowings. The question was

centered around the $50,000, the zero in the budget, the zero for the

actuals, and then the original for this year has been $50,000.

Mr. Chair, government has a couple of ways of raising

capital. They can go to the

market, as we did this past year and floated a $500 million debenture.

We have an opportunity through using treasury bills to raise some

short-term money, but we also have a line of credit with the Royal Bank of

Canada. We have an arrangement

with them where there is some-$200 million line of credit that is available

to us as a part of our cash management process in any given year.

We have staff in the Department of Finance who monitor

our fiscal position on a daily basis, managing our cash flow, looking at

what our cash requirements would be on any point in time.

So we take advantage of opportunities to save money and take

advantage of opportunities of low interest rates.

A number of times we will use treasury bills to borrow some money

short-term, to raise some capital, generally ninety days, but we also have

available to us this line of credit.

If we were to draw on that line of credit, if that

became an option we chose some time throughout the year to use the line of

credit, then we would have to pay interest on that line of credit.

We need to make a provision in the budgetary process, should an event

that we need to actually use that line of credit, then we have to cover off

the interest. What we have done

here under the temporary borrowings provision, we have made a provision here

for interest that would be paid should we use the line of credit.

As it happened last year, because of some decisions we

made, we did not need to draw on that line of credit, therefore we did not

spend any of the money.

Obviously, as we look forward to the year coming, we are not certain what

this year will bring; market conditions, interest rates, our circumstance.

We may find ourselves having to draw on that line of credit, and

should we find ourselves having to do that, regardless of what that amount

would be, we need to pay interest.

This $50,000 that you see here, Mr. Chair, is a provision for the

interest that may be paid on a line of credit should we decide to draw down

on it.

I believe the next question centered around 1.1.02,

which deals with Treasury bills.

I just made reference a moment ago to the Treasury bill program and that

fact that we use Treasury bills as a means of raising capital.

I think the member had a question around the dollar amounts, what we

were actually allocating last year for those costs, what provision we made,

and how much we actually will pay this year.

This activity in 1.1.02 is just that.

It sets up the expense that we incur for interest that we pay on our

Treasury bills.

As I just mentioned a second ago, as part of our

strategy in managing cash and looking at debt and what portions of our debt

may be long term, what portions of our debt may be short term, these

Treasury bills are bills we generally issue for ninety-one days.

They are ninety-one day Treasury bills.

Every week, we go to the market, flow the bill as a part of our cash

management process.

So a couple of things happened last year.

When we started out the year, we thought about how we would manage

our fiscal circumstance this year.

I remember last year in the Budget debate there was a bill that came

to the House that sought authority of the House of Assembly to borrow what

was going to be about $1 billion last year.

So we had the authority to raise up to $1 billion through borrowing.

As we moved through the year, we had to make some decisions, whether

some of this was going to be by way of long-term debt or by way of

short-term debt.

As it turned out, we did not borrow the full $1 billion

anyway, but not all of it was long term; $500 million was long term and we

borrowed some additional on short-term Treasury bills.

So a couple of things happened.

When we started out the year, we were anticipating that we would be

borrowing around $490 million-odd through our Treasury bill program, but

because of favourable interest rates, the interest rates on Treasury bills

are 0.75 per cent.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

CHAIR:

Order, please!

MR. WISEMAN:

As a result of that, Mr. Chair, because of favourable interest rates and

because of our cash management processes in place, we found ourselves

realizing that a better way to raise some capital last year was going to be

by way of enhancing and expanding on our Treasury bill program.

So two things happened.

We thought we were going to be borrowing around $494 million, but we

actually borrowed some $780 million.

The interest that we had forecasted to spend was about $500 million,

but because we borrowed more through this program, we actually spent some

$7.3 million.

Two things happened.

The reason we choose this route is interest rates were very

favourable last year. Short-term

money was a better way to manage our cash, a better way to manage our

finances, so we chose to borrow more through the Treasury bill program than

we had originally thought, and that is how we managed, Mr. Chair.

Throughout any given year, as we have said, we will look at our cash

requirements, look at our borrowing options, and some of it might be long

term and some of it may be short term.

So two things happened, really, to influence that

number, that change from the $5 million to the $7.3 million.

Number one, we borrowed more through the Treasury bill program than

we had initially thought, but at the same time interest rates were much

lower than we had originally thought.

Now, as we look at this coming year, the same thing will happen.

We have made a provision here for $6.2 million we are borrowing in

our Treasury bill program, because we believe that this year we will

continue to use that program.

Interest rates are still favourable, but again this year we will do some

longer term borrowing, and we will do some Treasury bill borrowing as well.

So will maintain our Treasury bill program similar to

what it is now. In fact, when we

go to the market again for some longer term borrowing, depending on what

interest rates might be like, we may choose to liquidate some of that

short-term debt and convert it to a longer term debt.

That may be an option, but fundamentally, the provision here of $6.2

million is just that, it is a provision for the interest that we will pay on

our Treasury bill program throughout the coming year.

Now, I want to make sure I captured them all.

I think the next area was 1.1.06, was it?

CHAIR:

Recoveries on Loans and Advances, yes, Minister.

MR. WISEMAN:

Recovery 1.1.06. The questions

centred around the difference that you would see in a forecast recovery of

$711,000 versus the $432,000 that we actually received.

Mr. Chair, fundamentally this item here captures and

acknowledges and records the interest revenue that we get from the Student

Loan Corporation. That number is

changing, obviously, because the amount of money that is in that Student

Loan Corporation is not continuing to grow, and the reason it is not

continuing to grow is because of some strategic investments that we have

made in eliminating the Student Loans Program and converting it to a

grants-based system. So this

program here, over time, will disappear totally; and as time evolves as

well, as the amount of money that is paid interest starts to come down, the

number that we will recover on annual basis will be much less.

These numbers actually reflect just that.

Last year in our Budget forecast we talked about

$711,000, this year we actually are going to be talking about $151,000, and

we actually only achieved some $432,000.

So already this picture that you are seeing here shows the decline

that is occurring as a result of the decisions we made to replace the

Student Loans Program with a grants-based system.

So students who are going to university now find themselves not

having to borrow as much. As a

result, the interest coming back to the Province through the Student Loan

Corporation is a diminishing number and, over time, will disappear

altogether.

The other number I think was 1.4.01, if I am not

mistaken, Mr. Chair, the Guarantee Fees.

CHAIR:

Subhead 1.4.01, yes, Minister.

MR. WISEMAN:

Subhead 1.4.01. Mr. Chair, we

provide a number of loan guarantees.

Sometimes it is through private enterprise we will guarantee some

loans. There are loans that we

guarantee through Nalcor. For

those guarantees there is a premium, there is a price.

We charge a fee for those guarantees.

Obviously if the Province is guaranteeing a loan to an

enterprise it needs to acknowledge that in its financial statements.

So we need to make a provision should something happen.

Should something happen and the financial institutions need to

realize on their security, then we need to make a provision for actually

paying that off.

In theory we are kind of setting aside a pot of money

to make available should we be called upon by a bank to liquidate a debt

because of our guarantee. So we

have a number of guarantees to private corporations.

We have Nalcor as well, or more precisely Newfoundland Hydro.

Newfoundland Hydro, a regulated entity, a division of

Nalcor, has borrowings. Because

that is a Crown-owned asset it is a Crown corporation, it is an asset of

the people of Newfoundland and Labrador the Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador was called upon to guarantee their borrowing.

As a result of that we charge them a fee.

So the banks have said that if you want to borrow

money, we want the guarantee of the provincial government.

We have said we will provide that guarantee, but because it has an

impact on our financial position and it is recorded in the books of the

Province, we want to charge a fee for that.

Right now there are four loans or four entities rather, I should say,

where the Province has guaranteed the loans.

We charge those entities a fee.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

CHAIR:

Order, please!

MR. WISEMAN:

What this number here reflects are the fees associated with those

guarantees. Mr. Chair, I think

that was the last one that there was a question around, 1.4.01?

Thank you.

CHAIR:

Okay.

The hon. member I am going to go there and come back

to you.

AN HON. MEMBER:

Sure.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for St. John's East, would you have any questions

between 1.1.01 to 1.4.01?

MR. MURPHY:

Yes, Mr. Chair, I do have a couple of questions.

The question is more of a policy question for the Finance Minister

when it comes to actually dealing with the debt of the Province and the

servicing of the Province's debt.

I know in the next couple of weeks, Mr. Chair, what

they are talking about in the markets is an actual possibility of an

increase in interest rates. So I

am wondering about the timing of that, if these numbers are going to be

susceptible to any changes as a result of that, or what government has

negotiated as a result of some of the potential interest rates they are

going to be paying in some of the long-term debt that they are going to be

surfacing?

CHAIR:

Thank you.

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of

Treasury Board.

MR. WISEMAN:

Mr. Chair, it is an interesting question, because obviously markets change

and we need to be very much aware of what is happening around us.

We have a circumstance, as the member has pointed out, there has been

some speculation for quite some time about what the markets might do, what

interest rates might do, how that might change.

We are talking about this year's Budget.

We laid out a five-year plan, and that plan includes some borrowing

over the course of the next four years.

We want to make sure we have accurately reflected what we anticipate

our costs to be in that Budget, because there are a number of things that

this Budget highlights for us. I

just wanted to bring members' attention to the Highlights document that was

a part of this year's budgetary information, where we talked about a

borrowing program, we talked about performance targets.

So there are a couple of things that are really relevant and impacts

your question.

One of the things we have done this year is that we

have said not only do we want to have a budget for this fiscal year, but we

want to build a plan that takes us out for the next five years.

Over the course of the next five years we will have revenues, we will

have expenses, and we will have to borrow some money to be able to offset

our revenue shortfall for at least the first four years.

One of the things we are very cognizant of is the more

we borrow, the more our debt servicing goes up.

So we need to be aware of what the interest rates might be.

We need to be aware of the amount we borrow, and we need to be aware

what that will do as a burden on future years, and how much of future

revenues will be gone to actually service that debt, to pay the interest on

it.

One of the things we have said, if you look at the

Highlights document, particularly page 3 one of the things we have said is

here is our debt expense as a percentage of gross revenue, because it was

not all that long ago, it was back in 2003, this Province was running at

over 25 per cent of all the revenue that was coming in was going to pay the

interest on our debt.

When you talk about 25 per cent of your revenue going

to service debt that is just the interest, nothing to do with principle,

just the interest. We want to

make sure we will never find ourselves back in that spot again, so we have

developed a performance target.

We said that our debt servicing ratio will never go beyond 13 per cent of

our revenue so we can contain that cost.

We need to be mindful of that target and mindful of that performance

measure as we borrow money, and not only do we think about the amount that

we borrow but what we anticipate to be the interest rate.

We have enjoyed, as a country, very low interest rates

in recent years. It has aided

consumers in purchasing cars and homes.

It has aided governments in their borrowing and their debt servicing

costs.

Mr. Chair, one of the things we have tried to do is to

be prudent in our forecasting, both in our borrowing and prudent in our

forecasting with respect to our debt servicing costs.

So we have given ourselves a bit of a cushion.

We have had a look at what we borrowed for this year.

For example, we have a very favourable credit rating,

which will help us, I say, Mr. Chair.

A very favourable credit rating will help us.

We have a circumstance today where we have three bond rating agencies

that have provided ratings.

Standard & Poor's have given us an A-plus rating; Moody's, an AA-plus

rating; DBRS has given us an A rating.

So that puts us in a position where we are able to borrow at very

favourable rates, but the favourable rates, obviously, are relative to

whatever the rates are at that moment in time.

For example, this year when we borrowed we went to

the market back in March of this year and we borrowed at a 2.3 per cent

interest rate. We borrowed a

$500 million amount this past March and we had a 2.3 per cent interest rate,

but we know that 2.3 per cent may not be a valid number next year.

It may not be a valid number the year after.

So what we have done in our forecasting, we have built ourselves a

bit of a cushion.

We had the benefit of the work that we had done on our

pension plan. This past year we

went through a massive exercise with our public sector unions to do some

reform of our pension plans, and we had some actuarially people do some

forecasting for us. We needed to

know the plans performance. We

needed to know about future economic conditions, or at least forecast what

interest rates might do and what the market would look like in future years

for us to be able to do some evaluations for our pension reform.

We had the benefit of all that kind of work and

expertise brought to bear in the last year to help shape some of our

thinking on that. One of the

things we have been able to do is we built in a bit of cushion.

So, rather than use what our most recent borrowing cost has been at

2.3 per cent, we have given ourselves a bit of cushion.

What you see reflected in this year's Estimates in the

forecast of what our interest costs would be, we are assuming that new

borrowing, not what we already have on the books, but all new borrowing we

are using a 4 per cent interest rate for our target.

The numbers you are seeing in our Estimates for our

debt forecasting, or interest cost forecasting, and the numbers you see in

the Highlights document, when you look at the Highlights document when you

see that forecast and what that performance indicator looks like, and we

have mapped that out, we have also said we will use 4 per cent.

If it ends up being 3 per cent, or ends up being 2.5 per cent, then

obviously it is a bonus. Just to

be careful and to be prudent, we have used a rate that is a little better

than 1.5 per cent above what we have actually been given in this past

well, just a few short months ago.

We believe that 4 per cent cushion will give us

adequate protection, and will give the assumptions and the forecast we have

made in our Budget documents. It

will validate them, and they have been validated by the actuarial work that

has been done as a part of our pension in recent months.

That is the number we have used in

our future forecasting.

CHAIR:

Okay. Just for clarification for

Opposition members, I am going to start back with Ms Bennett.

We are going to run the clock for ten.

When the clock expires at ten, I am going to go back to you, the

Member for St. John's East.

There you go, that was your ten minutes.

The hon. the Member for Virginia Waters.

MS C. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Under the line item of 1.5.02.

CHAIR:

Subhead 1.5.02 General Expenses.

MS C. BENNETT:

Mr. Chair, for those people who I am sure are home watching this afternoon's

proceedings, I would just like to take a minute to remind them that the

conversation we are having in the House of Assembly today is

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

CHAIR:

Order, please!

I ask hon. members it is very difficult for the Chair

to hear, obviously then it must be difficult for the Minister of Finance to

hear the questions from members opposite.

I ask hon. members to take their conversations either outside the

Chamber or to the corners, or sit there quietly, please.

Thank you.

The hon. the Member for Virginia Waters.

MS C. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As I was saying, I am sure that those people of the

Province who are home watching today's proceedings will by now understand

that we are debating and asking questions as part of the review of Estimates

that goes on as part of the I guess the deep dive into what the Budget

document is saying.

That in this particular format of discussion, members

have the opportunity to ask government questions, and certainly the

government has a responsibility to answer those.

I think what is certainly evident from the conversation that was

already witnessed here in the House, there is an awful lot of debt that this

Province has as a result of this government.

The cost of servicing that debt is certainly one that requires a

tremendous amount of prudent discussion.

The cost of servicing that debt continues to rise.

Not only are people of the Province, through this government,

spending money to finance the debt that this government has amassed over

more than a decade, now they also have to pay increasing costs associated

with servicing that debt, Mr. Chair.

I would like to ask a question about that number.

We have seen the increase in the

overall servicing of the public debt go up and when you have a cost

associated to managing and executing the items that the minister has spoken

to already, there is no doubt that managing debt certainly takes up a

tremendous amount of time and effort and talent in our public sector that

could be better deployed for other services.

I would like to move now to 2.1.02, which is the

Ex-Gratia and Other Payments Non-Statutory, which are listed under the

Employee Retirement Arrangements.

For those listening at home, these are payments related to special

pensions that have been approved by various governments over a number of

years and these would be people, for example, who and I am sure the

minister will correct me if I am wrong my understanding is this would be

for individuals, say, for example who serviced in the military, who may have

not been available for a pension and this is where governments in the past

have seen fit to make things right for those hon. men and women who serve us

in making sure that we are safe.

One of the questions I would like to ask and I did

try to ask this in Estimates, so I hope, with the minister's permission,

this would be the right place to ask it.

When we were doing work on this side of the House and researching and

speaking to a variety of people around the PeopleSoft implementation, one of

the things that we discovered for those listening at home, just to

clarify, PeopleSoft is a very large piece of technology that government

purchased. It involved several

departments coming together to implement a software program that would allow

our valued public sector employees to be paid appropriately and get every

single penny of every single benefit that they are entitled to under their

contracts.

Mr. Chair, part of what we discovered during the

discussions around PeopleSoft was that some of the many, many changes that

were made uniquely in Newfoundland and Labrador's use, in this government's

use of PeopleSoft, actually related to this pension line and no other

jurisdiction had the amount of complexity around pension management that

this particular Province has. As

a result, the software had to be changed.

So I would certainly like to ask the minister if he

would like to use this opportunity to share some insights on PeopleSoft,

which I am sure will come up a couple of more times this afternoon.

For those listening at home, I think the amount that government spent

on that implementation was somewhere just north of $35 million.

Mr. Chair, I would ask, moving over to page 1.9 under

the heading of 2.2.02 Deferred Pension Contributions Interest, there is an

item there at the very bottom, consolidated funds.

The estimate there has moved up from an actual, under the revised, of

$469,683,900 to over $708 million.

I am sure the minister has the information there to provide us this

afternoon with exactly what that is. That

was 2 Mr. Chair.

CHAIR:

Subhead 2.2.02 the last total, Total: Consolidated Fund Services, the

difference between 2014-2015 and the Estimates for 2015-2016.

Am I correct, hon. member?

MS C. BENNETT:

Yes, Mr. Chair.

brokers that for us.

The $239,000 that she is talking about here the

$255,000 last year and the $239,000 forecasted for this year are fees that

you pay for the bond rating agencies to do the rating.

They do that, but we have to pay for them.

It is important for us to have our ratings done.

It is important for us, for the people who lend us money to

understand I am just wondering, Mr. Chair, of the time.

Am I running on the clock?

CHAIR:

No, you are fine. You are going

to answer those three questions, hon. minister, and then I am going to move

forward.

MR. WISEMAN:

Okay.

I just want to be cognizant of the time because I

thought the clock was being reset for each speaker.

These are the fees associated with the ratings and the bond rating

agencies that we do and there are also some fees there that we pay as a part

of our borrowing process, but the bulk of these fees associated with

professional services is with the bond rating agencies.

I think 2.2.02 was the other question, if I am not

mistaken. You can correct me if

I am wrong, Mr. Chair, 2.2.02.

No, it was more around the Ex-Gratia, 2.1.02.

CHAIR:

Yes.

MR. WISEMAN:

The question came up around the Peoplesoft question and, as the member

opposite referred to, a similar question in Estimates last week.

So obviously, there is an interest in the decision to implement a new

software system.

The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador had a

variety of payroll systems. They

are the people who have retired from teaching.

There is a payroll system that was accommodating their pension

payment. People who teach in the

system, there was a payroll system that accommodates their payroll.

We had people who work within the core government departments, the

House of Assembly employees here, for example.

There was a payroll system that accommodated their payroll.

The payroll system was quite old and had minimal

functionality for other human resource information that was required in the

modern-day time to manage a workforce appropriately.

Then the other part of this and in addition to its functionality, the

software, like payroll software in human resource information systems, they

are supported by vendors who support the software, no different than our

personal computers. You might

have an operating system on your computer today, a version that was ten

years old, and all of a sudden some companies says that the version that you

have on your computer we are no longer going to support so if it crashes you

are done, you are finished, and you have no support for that.

You need to be current with these information systems.

One of the things that government chose to do back in 2008 because of

a variety of reasons such as that, government decided that it needed to do a

couple of things: to make sure that the human resource information systems

that it had to deal with its payroll, to deal with other information,

tracking information around leave entitlement and benefit entitlement, all

needed to be managed in a very comprehensive way by an information system

that was more current, had more functionality and better applications to use

for the people not only a benefit to the employees, but benefit to the

people who manage those benefits and provide those services.

There are attendance systems as a part of that, there are benefit

administration programs, and there are leave-management systems as a part of

that process.

So what happened back then in 2008, government decided

to make an investment in consolidating the systems and making them more

current. So that replaced the

old one that was there for the general public service, it replaced the

pension program, and it replaced the teachers' payroll system.

So we then started a process to implement that new system.

With bringing in and over time under the old system, there were many

changes that were made to reflect the tracking of benefits that were

negotiated in the collective agreements.

Some of the things that happened in the human resource information

system are driven by some of the benefits and some of the things that are

provided for through the collective bargaining process.

So that influences what might be there.

The other thing that happens is your old system starts

to track a lot of historical information and starts to trend patterns and

activity and summarizes data, so you need to be able to import that into a

new system. What we found ourselves

doing, Mr. Chair, we started to do that incrementally over time.

It took up to 2012. The

decision was back in 2008, and when we got to 2012, the first step was to

take what was the core public service component of that payroll and move it

over into the new PeopleSoft system.

PeopleSoft is a software, as I understand it, that has

a great reputation. In fact, it

was in the process of going to the market, it was found that this, in fact,

was the best option, what it had to offer, its functionality, and its

ability to be flexible and ability to make change to reflect the uniqueness

of various payroll systems and the uniqueness of various collective

agreements in this jurisdiction.

So, as part of the implementation team, there was a

project team put together that mapped out a transition strategy from the old

system to the new, and in so doing identified those unique areas of the old

payroll system, the unique areas of collective agreements that provided for

a need to track certain information in a certain fashion, and then started a

process to work with the vendor to identify some modifications.

To help them with that process, they used the services of an outside

expert in this area to work with them through the process.

Then after the core public service was done, we move on

to the pension payroll system and then move on to the teachers' payroll

system. Each of those employee

groups has various uniqueness.

Teachers, for example, have teachers who get called in to work on a

contract. If a teacher phones in

sick this morning and they need someone to replace them, there are temporary

teachers who get called in.

Payroll systems needed to have some flexibilities to do that.

It is a fair observation I suspect, Mr. Chair I am

not intimately involved with it, but I suspect it is a fair observation to

say that when you are trying to have a payroll system that reflects the

uniqueness of a variety of collective agreements because obviously human

resource information systems do things that are payroll related, yes, but

they track other things. They

are tied to an influence and how robust that system becomes and the need for

uniqueness and customizations that occur are all a reflection of the

diversity, the uniqueness, and the nuances in a variety of collective

agreements.

If you think about it for a moment you have a teachers'

collective agreement, you have the marine services collective agreement, you

have skippers on ships, you have people who work with general service, who

work maybe with the Department of Transportation, you have people who work

with the Department of Health, so you have a variety of collective

agreements governing a large number of public sector employees.

The nuances of those agreements need to be reflected, and the need to

track and capture the benefit of entitlements is needed in a robust human

resource information system.

When the member talks about some of the changes that

occurred as a result of the implementation of this system, she is absolutely

correct. Choices, I guess, I am

assuming I was not around for the evaluation of it, but I am assuming at

the time the choices could have been do we actually build our own system

internally, or do we actually go to the market and find a system that has a

solid base, a great reputation, has an ability to be able to accommodate the

bulk of the requirements of what government needed at the time and, at the

same time, be flexible enough to accommodate most customizations that need

to be made for a full and successful implementation.

Mr. Chair, hopefully that gives some context for the

member. There is still some work

being done. For example, there

is some work to be done in some areas of occupational, health and safety;

there is some functionality in the software that can be used to manage our

workplace safety program within government.

That is being worked on as we speak, so there are still things being

done with that system. As I said

a moment ago, it was selected because it was robust.

It was selected because it provided the flexibility to accommodate to

the member.

I see my time is out, but I am sure I will get back to

answer the question. There are a

couple of things that were raised on I think it is 2.2.02 that I did not

get a chance to answer.

CHAIR:

Okay.

MR. WISEMAN:

When I stand again, I will do that.

CHAIR:

The hon. the member has four minutes and twenty-four seconds.

Then George, after the four minutes and twenty-four seconds expires,

I will be back to you. Okay.

MS C. BENNETT:

Mr. Chair, under the Office of Executive Council, 2.1.01, I would like to

ask the minister and the Premier

CHAIR:

Subhead 2

MS C. BENNETT:

Subhead 2.1.01 under the Premier's Office.

CHAIR:

Subhead 2.1.01?

MS C. BENNETT:

Yes.

CHAIR:

Thank you.

MS C. BENNETT:

I would like to ask the minister why

MR. WISEMAN:

Excuse me. Mr. Chair, this is a

point of clarification, not a point of order.

I just want to understand.

I understood in your introductory comment we are going

to deal with the consolidated funds revenue and then we will move on to the

Executive Council. Now we are

moving into the Premier's Office in Executive Council.

I understood we were going to deal with one

section at a time and now

we are moving off into Executive Council.

CHAIR:

Okay.

MR. WISEMAN:

I do not have any difficulty. It

is better to track

CHAIR:

Can I go back there? Okay.

MR. WISEMAN:

It is difficult to jump all over the Estimates.

CHAIR:

Okay.

The hon. the Member for St. John's East, anything left

on Consolidated Fund Services?

MR. MURPHY:

Yes, Mr. Chair, just a couple of points really for the Finance Minister, and

at the same time a question about one of the particular line items there, if

nothing else for the benefit of the viewers and the listeners out there

listening to the debate this afternoon.

The first point I have right now for the Finance

Minister, I would certainly like to see some of these actuarial forecasts

that his department may have. I

am wondering if he could table those.

I would certainly like to look at the numbers that they are talking

about at the time, like 2.3 per cent interest now that is rising to about 4

per cent interest right I believe they were talking about in 2021.

I will put a question mark on that particular part of

it because I presume you will be talking about the debt financing up to 2021

under the budget forecast. I

think that the department is good here with the numbers.

I could see a quarter-point interest rate over the next year forecast

to happen, but I cannot 4 per cent right off the bat.

So I think the department is safe on that.

Having said that, Mr. Chair, the question I have is on

page 1.6 of the Budget, 1.5.01, Discounts and Commissions.

I would like to get a breakdown of the Professional Services from the

minister again. I am not quite

sure if I caught this one earlier or not; I think I missed it.

The Professional Services right now for this year are

showing $14.7 million in the budget Estimates.

The revised figure for this year was only $3 million.

The budgeted forecast for 2014-2015 was $7 million.

That is 1.5.01, Discounts and Commissions,

Appropriations provide for underwriting commissions and management fees on

new capital market borrowings by the Province.

So I am just wondering if you could

give us a breakdown, the list of the Professional Services at the same time

that the government received for the money that it is paying out.

Thank you very much.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board on 1.5.01.

MR. WISEMAN:

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The forecast last year, and as the member has pointed

out, we had built into our fiscal forecast last year $7 million.

You may recall, last year in the Budget debate and during the Budget

discussions last year, the government introduced a borrowing bill and that

bill was asking permission of the House to borrow, I think it was close to a

billion dollars, in or around that.

Now I just forget the exact number, but it was around that number.

We needed to build a number into the Budget as to what

if we were to go to the market, if we went to the market and actually

borrowed that kind of money, what would we reasonably expect to pay when it

comes to some commissions and management fees when we went to the capital

markets? That is where that $7

million came from, but the reality of it is, you never really know what it

is going to be until you actually go out and look for the money.

It is a forecast based on the information you have available to you

at that moment in time.

Last year, when we decided we were going to build in a

$7 million forecast, that was back last year in March 2014.

Fast forward now to March 2015.

As I said a moment ago, back in the first part of March of this year

we went to the market to borrow $500 million.

As I had said earlier as well, our borrowings last year were part of

we went to the market for long-term debt and then we decided we were going

to use treasury bills for some of the short-term debt.

That $500 million that we went to the market with in March was

several months after our forecast.

So a couple of things happened.

When we went to the market the numbers were better than

we thought, in terms of the commission.

I think we paid something like sixty cents per hundred for ten years,

because it is influenced by the tenure.

If we had gone to the market for thirty-year money, it might be a

very different fee structure.

So with the ten-year money, $500 million and favorable

rates, favorable conditions keep in mind, the Province has not gone to the

market for quite some time. It

was in 2007 or something when we went to the market the last time.

We did not have a more current experience of what our commissions

might have been. The $7 million

to be certain, gave us adequate coverage and adequate protection in terms of

our forecasting so as not to be caught short.

We picked the right time to go to the market.

We were fortunate, because of our rating, because of the manner in

which we went to the market, that our selection of a ten-year time frame

versus longer term money, we were able to come up with a very different

figure; hence, the $3 million we are talking about.

When we use the $7 million, obviously, we were thinking it might be

about seventy cents a hundred, but it came out to be sixty cents a hundred.

This year now, you questioned about: Why the larger

amount this year? You recall on

Budget Day when I talked about the fiscal position of the Province, I talked

about the borrowing. Again, if

you go to our Highlights document, you will see clearly our borrowing

pattern that we have projected to have over the course of the next number of

years. We envisage, in this

coming year, going to the market for what we believe to be $2 billion.

Now, if circumstance changes, and through cash

management processes, that might become $1.8 billion, $1.9 billion, but we

believe it is going to be about $2 billion.

A little later on I will be introducing a bill to the House to get

permission of the House to borrow.

So I will be introducing, in near term, a new bill asking the House

for permission for government to go out to the markets and borrow again this

year. I will be asking the House

to approve a piece of legislation that gives us the authority to borrow up

to what we believe to be about $2 billion.

If that materializes and we get competitive commissions

and competitive fees associated with that, then we believe the cost will be

in the order or magnitude of $14 million; hence, the distinction between the

numbers that you referred earlier.

We started out with a Budget last year of saying it is

going to be $7 billion. We ended

up actually spending $3 billion, which obviously is a savings and one that

we would obviously, gracefully, take.

Then next year, because of the increased borrowing over what we did

this year if you look at ratio-wise, it cost us about $3 million to get

$500 million, and if we have a forecast expenditure of $14 million for next

year and borrowing about $2 billion, then that is the order of magnitude.

I do not know if that answers the member's question.

If not, I will be only too glad to

take a follow-up question from you, to give you a more detailed explanation.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MR. MURPHY:

St. John's East, Sir.

CHAIR:

East, I am sorry.

MR. MURPHY:

That is okay.

I am finished my line of questioning, Mr. Chair, but I

am just wondering if the Finance Minister can table those actuarial reports?

Is that a possibility to have a look at those or are they proprietary

information?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. WISEMAN:

The actuarial reports I talked about were a part of the pension reform

process. Offhand, I cannot think

of why they would be proprietary.

They were prepared by a couple of different companies for our pooled

pension plan, and I am certain that information is but I will follow up to

make sure that it is not. If it

is not, then it is fair game and I will share it with you and I will table

it in the House.

MR. CHAIR:

I ask the Clerk to call the clauses for Consolidated Fund Services.

CLERK:

Subhead 1.1.01 to 2.2.02 inclusive.

CHAIR:

Subhead 1.1.01 to 2.2.02 inclusive.

Shall these carry?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

All those against, 'nay.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Nay.

CHAIR:

Carried.

On motion, total carried.

CHAIR:

Shall I report the Estimates of the Consolidated Fund Services carried

without amendment?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, 'nay.'

were overspent last year in this particular office at $215,000?

Is that what the severance packages are for those individuals who

actually were let go by this government as part of that f

Document details

Collection	Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	2015-06-04
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	2015-06-04
Language	en
Format	htm
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	93dbcbfb93d7f03ef7aaead7a9db7549f77962c2

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (htm).