PDF Version

April 17, 2024 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. L No. 64

The House met at 10 a.m.

SPEAKER (Gambin-Walsh): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Government Business

SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

J. HOGAN: Thank you, Deputy Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Motion 1.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

J. WALL: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

It is early in the morning, but happy to be here, happy to stand and represent the people of my District of Cape St. Francis and I'm happy to speak to Budget 2024 .

Madam Speaker, when I was thinking about what I was going to say here this morning, I went back through the four budgets. When we came in this House in March of 2021, the budget was CHANGE starts here . In 2022: CHANGE is in the air . Budget 2023 was Your Health. Our Priority. And, in 2024, Transforming Our Health. Our Economy. Our Province.

Happy to have been a part of those four discussions, those four debates. Happy to stand here today, in my role to discuss Budget 2024 , and I'm going to touch on a couple of topics this morning. But as I did, when we stood for Interim Supply, I went back through my notes over the last couple of years when we debated Interim Supply. One thing that jumped out at me in my notes over the last number of years is the question that says: Will this budget meet the collective needs of the people of our province?

When I think about that question and I think about my critic role – and I'll start with housing; I did have a couple of questions yesterday and asked about housing. As I said yesterday, there are thousands of people on a wait-list for housing – over 3,000. That number is staggering. We have people who want to buy homes and can't afford to. We have people dealing with inflation, the high interest rates. I have people in my district who are couch surfing. I'm sure many others in this hon. House have the same issues.

I can say, with surety, my constituency assistant and I are answering calls on a daily basis with respect to the lack of available housing in my district. We have seniors who are looking to downsize because they can't afford to make the payments to stay in their own homes. We have individual examples that arise, Madam Speaker, when we have a single mother of three, who's trying to get away from a relationship and has to move into a one-bedroom basement apartment for four people, because of the lack of availability of housing, of places to stay. That's why some people are couch surfing.

We have shelters here in the province that are full. These are real-time, real-live examples of what we're dealing with here in the province on a regular basis. We have homeless people living in tents, at the tent encampment, as we are all well aware of.

As I said, a friend of mine and I had the opportunity to visit the tent encampment at the Colonial Building. We spoke with people who are living there. We spoke with the volunteers who are there on a daily basis, helping these individuals who feel left out, and it's not a very easy situation when we have to lay our heads on the pillows at night to know that there are people living in this environment.

We have vulnerable people in our society who are living in unsafe dwellings and a tent is their alternative. Well, the Minister of Housing said yesterday that they – and I'm paraphrasing – visit the tent encampment on a daily basis. Well, if they go to the tent encampment on a daily basis, what time of the day are they there? Are they there at 9 a.m. or 9:30 in the morning when most people are leaving the tent encampments and going looking for a bite to eat or going looking for some services?

I was there at 5 in the evening and there was 21 people at the encampment. It was no trouble to tell, Madam Speaker, you can see on their faces and in their eyes, the stress that they're under and what they're going through. It pulls on the heartstrings, I can assure you of that.

I thanked the minister when he said that they're there on a daily basis, but I want to know what is exactly being offered. Are they speaking with them on a regular basis? Are they going there and there are two or three people at the tent encampment because they've dispersed for the morning?

All these issues are very important. It was even mentioned here yesterday by one of my colleagues – I don't know who, but we have post-secondary students who are giving up their studies and returning to their homes out of province because there's nowhere to live here. These are our future leaders who we are educating here at Memorial University. I find that troubling. I really find it troubling.

We also discussed here in this House about the number of new housing initiatives that were announced in the budget. I'm sure we'll have the answers given how many are already announced. Are any of those announcements from previous years?

We have had, in other departments, announcements that have been carried forth from one year to the next but how much is actually new money when we're looking at the housing announcements in Budget 2024: Transforming Our health. Our Economy. Our Province .

Madam Speaker, I'm going to go back to the number of 3,000 and I want to put that in perspective. When we left the House yesterday, that number stuck in my mind. My hon. colleague from Exploits has a town in his district, the Town of Botwood. We were told that there are 3,008 people on a wait-list for housing.

According to the last census done in the province, the Town of Botwood has 3,008 people. That puts it in perspective when you have a town the size of Botwood with 3,008 people who are looking for homes – they are looking for homes.

The town the size of Botwood puts into perspective, for me, the number is dead on the mark: 3,008. As an hon. Member opposite has always said, numbers don't lie, and that puts it in perspective. It really does. When you're looking at 3,008 people, how many homes are we looking at here? Well, in the Town of Botwood, according to the official numbers, there are approximately 1,250 homes in Botwood. We are looking at 1,250 homes to house 3,008 people. I'm sure you could do it for a little less than that, but that's a rough number.

According to one of the news releases from government with respect to housing, which was on April 10, $20 million to construct 50 provincially owed units in Corner Brook. I've stood here many times and the hon. Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance realizes that. I will give credit where credit is due. That's a good thing. That is a good start, no doubt. But when we're looking at 1,250 homes needed for 3,008 people – and this is 50 provincially owed units, which, according to the news release, is going to take two years to complete, completed by 2026.

We look at April of '24 to 2026, how many more people are going to be included over and above that 3,008 number by the time we hit 2026? All of this comes before us and all of this is very concerning when we look at the number that's needed and what we need to do as a province to have these people placed in homes, then we look at the building capacity.

When we look at the building capacity here in the province and the construction industry that's needed to put this housing in place, is all that currently available as well? Will we come to a point where we are bottlenecked and it can't advance and the buildings can't advance in a timely manner?

What do we actually need to get that new housing available and construction started and keep it on time without being held back, without being bottlenecked?

All of these things come before me; I'm sure they come before every Member here. But when we look at the number of people who are requiring housing, what is needed to go forward? It certainly is more than concerning when it comes to what's in this budget, and, of course, from the government's own news release for 50 homes, $20 million to construct. That's very heavy, it's very heavy.

Madam Speaker, I'll go back to my opportunity I had to visit the tent encampment at the Colonial Building. While we were there speaking with the volunteers, and I'll give a shoutout publicly to the volunteers that are there on a daily basis, providing a lot of necessities. At one point while I was there, there were four propane tanks dropped off – four 20-pound propane tanks –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

J. WALL: – by an individual who wished to remain nameless. The lady is a senior citizen. I know the price of filling one 20-pound propane tank. This lady was doing it on a weekly basis. She's taken it upon herself to fill four propane tanks, go to the encampment, pick them up, fill them and drop them back off so that the people that are living there have the opportunity for heat and to cook. I was blown away by this lady. As I said, a senior citizen, I'm sure on a fixed income but wants to do her part to know that these people are not cold, that these people are not hungry.

And we do know that there are many other people that are donating food on a regular basis, donating meals, but she did her part with propane.

While I was there, there was a gentleman who was released from Her Majesty's Penitentiary and he walked from the penitentiary to the Colonial Building with his clear plastic bag in his hand and the belongings that he had, with his 8½ by 11 envelope. He had nowhere to go. There was nothing offered to him when he left the penitentiary that day and he walked straight to Colonial Building to see if he could get his head in a tent.

I daresay this House is very quiet right now because that is reality, Madam Speaker. For that gentleman, 38 years old, to be faced with that; no other opportunity and this is what he is faced with. I was there and I still can't believe it happened that this individual had to go to Tent City to try to get shelter for the night and had no other supports.

So, when we talk about wraparound supports, we need to keep that in mind as well. We need to keep that in mind for anyone released from the penitentiary.

Madam Speaker, these are real life examples. This is what people are going through. That's what we are hearing, that's what we are witnessing, and it comes back to the budget and what it has to deal with these examples. As I said when I started the question: Will the budget meet the collective needs of the people of our province? That is something that I do struggle with.

I fully realize what the Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance has on her plate, I do. I've stood here before and I've said that, but when we are here discussing a budget and we're dealing with these issues on a regular basis, and I see it for myself with my boots on the ground, that's why I have to share it here, Madam Speaker.

In the remaining time I have left, Madam Speaker, I wish to recognize Volunteer Week, as the theme is Every Moment Matters. I'm going to give a shout-out to the wonderful volunteer groups in my district for what they do on a daily basis. As a volunteer all my life, I realize how taxing it can be. I've stood in this House in last year's budget and discussed volunteers not able to do the work because they can't afford to volunteer any more. I've had that discussion as well with respect to the cost of living, the cost of the price of fuel, putting gas in their vehicles and doing what they need to.

I understand that, but I want to give a shout-out to those in my district, the fire departments, the Lions Clubs, the 50-plus clubs, the community volunteers and community committees. I'll give a specified shout-out to the Town of Bauline, for their community committee, one of the most active committees in my district. The amount of work that they do with the few people that they have, they are to be commended. I've attended many functions in the Town of Bauline –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

J. WALL: – and I want to give a shout-out there.

We have scouting and guiding movements and various sports teams, but today I want to take this opportunity to speak to the volunteer fire departments. Everyone here knows that's something near and dear to my heart and whenever I get the opportunity to speak on the volunteer departments, I will do so.

On Monday of this week, I had an honorary life member from the Town of Torbay, Mr. Joe Tilley, was here and recognized in a Member's statement and Fire Chief Rodney Gaudet and Fire Prevention Officer Ray Clarke, where all here from Torbay fire department. I realize and understand the important work that they do and the Town of Pouch Cove, with the Pouch Cove volunteer, but I want to bring up a topic this morning, and I know that the Minister of Justice and Public Safety is fully aware of it, we had the opportunity to discuss it briefly.

Both departments in my district are trained in Level I and Level II offensive and defensive firefighting, responsible for Code 4 medical calls, responsible for high-angle rescue and cold-water rescue; a very vast amount of dedication in both those departments. The problem that we're facing now in the Town of Pouch Cove, with the Pouch Cove Fire Department, is with respect to the SCBA sets that are going to be coming out of date this December. For the Members of the House of Assembly and for those listening, SCBA is Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus, crucial and essential for offensive firefighting.

The problem is, in December of this year, we will have 14 sets of SCBA gear come out of service in the Town of Pouch Cove – 14 sets of gear. That's 14 firefighters that will not be able to respond offensively and, Madam Speaker, you have to realize that one set of SCBA gear is $9,700 – $9,700 for one set of SCBA.

If we do the math, it's very easy: $135,800. I can assure this House that the Town of Pouch Cove cannot write a cheque for that line item, and I fully understand it and appreciate what the Minister of Justice and Public Safety has to face with respect to the collective needs of fire and emergency services across the province.

There's $3.76 million, I believe, if I'm not mistaken, in this budget for fire apparatus and equipment. So getting back to the $138,500, if those 14 sets of bunker gear are not approved for the Town of Pouch Cove under some way, shape or form – if it's through the town, if it's through fundraising, if it's through government grants – I shudder to think what's going to happen with respect to offensive firefighting in my hometown.

We cannot let that happen. With respect to bunker suits, and for the benefit of this House and those listening, bunker suits also have a shelf life and bunker suits each are $3,200. Do the math when you have 35 volunteers in the Town of Pouch Cove, it adds up quickly.

I want to give a shout-out to them , but I also want to bring that to the attention of this House because its important. You've heard me say it before, the volunteer firefighters in the municipalities across this province – and I stand to be corrected, I think there are about 6,000 volunteer firefighters – I shudder to think where we would be without those individuals, those brave men and women in our municipalities for what they offer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

J. WALL: I'll go back to Code 4 medical calls because that is something that is crucial. We all realize ambulatory services here in the city, what stress they're under, and most of the time we are in red alert. Then we rely on our volunteer fire departments and those brave men and women to come in and perform the Code 4 medical response that is needed.

One more quick thing with respect, Madam Speaker, 10 years ago, you could get a pumper unit to a fire department for around $300,000. Today, you're pushing $550,000 to $600,000. You know that; I know that; most of us do here. The problem is, we're going to have a lot of outdated equipment.

My colleague from Placentia West - Belleview spoke of it many times, with respect to services in one part of his district. That's something that we need to be mindful; $3.76 million for fire apparatus and equipment might seem like a lot of money, and that amount is welcomed in that line item in the budget, but it does not near do what's needed as we go forward in 2024.

Madam Speaker, my time is running down. I appreciate your attention, of course, the government Members' attention. I will have opportunity to speak on this again, and I do thank you all for the opportunity.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

J. BROWN: Thank you, Speaker.

First off, I guess, I want to say a quick shout-out to College of the North Atlantic who turned 60 years old – as an alumnus of the College of the North Atlantic, I can't not congratulate them on 60 years. I'll do that first because I have a lot of fond memories of the College of the North Atlantic. Even after I left the college, they were in Labrador West, I did do a lot of work with them when I was with the Heritage Society. I want to wish them a happy 60th birthday as an alumnus from there and Labrador West having a lot of alumni from College of the North. I'll send them a bouquet and congratulate them on 60 years. It's a fantastic institution and I have a lot of fond memories there.

I will go into that now. I do want to talk about, I guess, the thing that residents of Labrador West have a love/hate relationship with and that would be the Medical Transportation Assistance Program. The reason why I was bringing that up is that we saw some changes and, fair enough, but, at the same time, it's not exactly what Labrador West residents hoped for. Their relationship with it is that we don't have the same services available to us in Labrador as available here on the Island. For most part, mostly concentrated here on the Northeast Avalon. The reason is that we're seeing less and less services being available in Labrador in the last number of years.

I did bring up the question and I'll give a little bit there. Amputees came to me recently – two individuals actually came to me, completely confused on why they couldn't access MTAP when there is no prosthesis tech available in Labrador. They were having to go back and forth consistently, quite a lot, a few trips to the Northeast Avalon, to the Miller Centre, to have their limbs looked at and to be adjusted for a fit and all the other things I can only imagine they go through. They were very upset by the fact that they were disqualified from the Medical Transportation Assistance Program. I brought it up and, fair enough, and hopefully it gets addressed.

There are other services that are similar that are completely exempt from Medical Transportation Assistance Program. Another one was someone had to go out for services for a podiatrist. We don't have a podiatrist in Lab West, but they're disqualified under MTAP so they had to go out. So there are a lot of different things like that. We're talking about the continuum of care and bringing all these services together. Well, it's not going to happen in Labrador West because we just can't have a specialist on every corner. We understand that. But having access to that individual, even though they're in a different part of the province, needs to be critical.

I'm not standing in this House of Assembly and talking about Lab West without at least mentioning the Medical Transportation Assistance Program and the work that needs to be done to make it a holistic service that actually brings care to people or people to care, whatever way. If you bring a specialist into Labrador City or Labrador West to do something, fantastic, you've brought care to the people. But if you can't do that, you have to get them to where they need to be.

Once again, we're still hearing stories of people who are saying I just can't afford to go out or, in some cases, with these amputees, they were getting exempt from the program and they couldn't get out. We need to make sure that we're not leaving anyone behind. It's happening far too often for my taste.

These are the things that we need to do, is to get on the ground and actually speak to the individuals who are using these programs and people who need access to these programs.

Another thing that I just can't not talk about when it comes to Medical Transportation Assistance Program is the burden of paperwork – especially seniors – on how to get through the program. Requesting all these letters and these signatures and all these things. I got an individual I've known my entire life. This man was the most patient man I've ever met in my entire life. A very sweet, caring man. It was the first time in my life – and I've known him since I was a child – to actually see him completely lose it. It was over paperwork for the Medical Transportation Assistance Program.

This is where we need to have a conversation about signatures and letters and what is actually required, legitimately required, for the program to work and to get there, versus just blatant red tape and a burden of paperwork.

I'll throw that over to the minister for consideration and, hopefully, the minister will take my concerns and stuff over that and go back and try to work together to actually make a program that Labradorians can use, understand and actually get people to where they need to be. Which is to the office, or the clinic of a specialist, so that that way we can make sure that we have meaningful and fulfilling lives and get a lot of their care looked after.

Speaking of health care in Labrador West, we were told, oh yeah, don't worry, Jordan, we're going to get a collaborative care clinic up in Labrador West. Well, it's been over a year. No location has been picked out. No people have been hired. Is this a two-year or three-year project, because the way it put to me was we're getting this done, we're going to get this done, we're going to get health care in Lab West. Well, we're still waiting for this collaborative care clinic to even announce that it has a location. We have the announcement that it was going to happen, but it seems to have stalled somewhere along the way.

I've had people call my office, day in, day out, I lost my family doctor, I can't (inaudible). Mom got this condition and she needs to get her referrals and needs to get this. There's no way to actually get people into primary care. We've had a nurse practitioner office open in the hospital there. They stopped taking patients. They just couldn't – it went from a walk-in clinic into – if you've already signed up for here, that's it, no more, no less.

So now we have the nurse practitioner at the clinic that was trying to do a good thing and bridge the gap until we had some more primary care in the region and even they have to start turning away people. Now, unfortunately, another physician, due to health concerns, is no longer practising, so now we're down another physician and we're still waiting for other primary care.

So we're wondering where is this collaborative care clinic? Where is this going? You announced it over a year ago in the last budget and haven't seen nothing, not a peep, not a sound, nothing since. So we have to ask ourselves what's going on here? Why would you announce something that never even rolled out? There's nothing on that.

This is a concern that the people of Labrador West have raised with me. The people are concerned that they want to be able to access primary care. It's not like we can get in a car and go to the next town over or go there. We are on the very edge of this province and the next community to us is Churchill Falls, then after that is Happy Valley-Goose Bay and Happy Valley-Goose Bay is over 600 kilometres away. Unless you're expecting people in Lab West to drive 600 kilometres for an appointment – that's not going to happen. We have to understand that it's a responsibility that we actually try to do and get people to services or get services to people.

We're fed up. Legitimately, we're fed up with the lack of understanding, the lack of actual concern and the lack of to do and to help put resources into this region. Remember now, we have over 2,000 people working in heavy industry. This is a region that does have a lot of economic output, but at the same time, we're putting a lot of people into an industry that is actually hard on their health.

You talk to anyone who works in either of the mine, you have to understand they work, but at what price? The price of their health. This is something that we have to understand, is that a lot of these people are working in an environment that has a negative impact on their health and now we're absent of basically the most basic things of primary care.

You have to take this seriously. We're all going to treat this province fair; we want our fair share. We want our ability to actually provide services to a region, but right now, like I said, we're down physicians; we were promised a clinic that never ever showed up; we are not getting the resources that we've been promised, let alone, deserve; we just want our fair share.

What is going on? Why aren't we actually taking this seriously?

We got MTAP and the burden of paperwork for people to get to care and now with the basic care, obviously the primary care, we can't even get that, so what's going on here?

Then we got to move over to the other side of heavy industry and one of the pitfalls of actual prosperity and that is the mental health and addictions side of things. We have long struggled in Labrador West with addictions and mental health. It's no secret. It comes with prosperity and these things always come with the side of addictions.

I've seen it my entire life living in Labrador West, the demon that is addictions in Labrador West, but we don't have any addictions treatment clinic in Labrador. We have people wait-listed, upon wait-listed, upon wait-listed to go out to the two here on the Island. I know for a fact, and I know from speaking with people with addictions, people I grew up with and I spent my entire life with, people who have battling this, tell me the minute that you decide to have a moment of clarity where you want to be able to find help or anything like that, it's never available.

You go there, you talk to them, you're waiting four or five months to get into addictions treatment. By the time that comes around, sometimes the will of actually going to seek treatment just disappears because you feel defeated.

This is why I mentioned to the minister before, and I'll mention it again, there needs to be a plan to put some sort of addictions treatment centre in Labrador. We need to be able to access it in a lot faster timeline than currently are available options to people. It needs to happen.

I know they talked about their committee and stuff like that, but this is a serious concern. We've been fighting this demon in Lab West for far too long and nothing was done and now we need that. We need to have some ability to say, if someone finds that moment of clarity, that moment that they want to go and seek that treatment and better their lives, we should be able to give them a way better timeline than months to wait for that. It's hard to see and watch.

I'll even go back to MTAP again: The moment I had an individual who finally got their call to go to treatment and they obviously had no money to get out to their treatment and they had to apply for MTAP. It took so long that they actually missed their actual start date for treatment.

So this goes back to the burden of paperwork and bureaucracy and stuff like that. The individual actually had the moment to actually go and seek treatment and it was fantastic for that individual and then turn around and get bogged down in MTAP.

These are things that we need to work on. I think we need to actually ask government to actually do the work and try to make sure that all these systems work in place, especially for people in Labrador who don't actually have – like I said, we don't have a specialist on every corner, we understand that, but we need to get people from Labrador to these individuals for the health of themselves and the community.

We see the part that we want to do this. We want to actually be able to get people to actually come and work and stuff in Labrador. The biggest hurdle that I keep hearing is that there's just no effort on affordable housing. I understand the side with Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, but outside of that is the market housing. I haven't seen anything from this side to actually help the municipalities put in the infrastructure to actually expand their footprint, to actually have the ability to encourage development of affordable housing in the region outside of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.

The two municipalities have said to the former minister who was responsible for Housing, I think he came up the day before he was no longer minister of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, that's fine, but we've said to him and we've said to every other minister, municipalities need the ability to access funding to actually increase the footprints so they actually have water, sewer and roads and stuff so that we can actually get housing built in places like Labrador West.

We have a challenge when it comes to getting that kind of workup done there because, we understand, it's Labrador. There is what I think everyone colloquially called – there was a commercial growing up, for Mary Browns and it used to have the price come up across the screen and they always had a little thing down at the bottom: a little more in Labrador. That's what they used; the Mary Browns' ad even used to have to say: We're going to charge you more in Labrador.

Well, that actual thing actually applies to everything in Labrador, even in the construction industry, they'll charge more in Labrador to do work. It's becoming a hinderance without the support from government to municipalities to actually get work done. We can't make housing affordable if right off the get-go there are these companies and these developers and stuff who are automatically going to throw on a Labrador tax on top of this work. It's not going to be worthwhile. Nobody is going to be able to afford the house that's going to get built.

We need to actually have government be a partner with municipalities, in a sense, to actually help increase the footprint, to actually get this water, sewer, roads and streets put in place to bring down the costing and make it an affordable investment for people to come up to Labrador and build housing.

We can't succeed as a region if this provincial government cannot be a partner in the success. We have an opportunity – a golden opportunity – in Labrador West to bring in a lot more revenue to the province, to increase our mining output, to actually be a partner in success, but we need everyone on board. That includes this provincial government, this includes the municipalities and this includes the private sector.

We want to be a crown jewel in the province. We want to be that, but unless someone actually says okay, let's do this; we can't. We're just going to sit idle in the region and just piddle away. But we want to be better. We want to actually help and be a contributor to this province, but we need government as a partner, and I'm not seeing that here today. I'm not seeing the ability to help us with the issues with the municipalities and to invest and to actually help grow Labrador West. Right now, I just see status quo and it is unfortunate.

I want nurses and doctors to look at us as an opportunity to move up to our place but where are they going to live? There is not a house to buy. There is not a house to rent . I want to fill the many, many empty roles in the public services in Labrador West , but they can't afford to move to Labrador West. I have no sheriff officers. I have no occupational health and safety officers. I'm down clerks. I'm down all kinds of different roles within the public service in Transportation and Infrastructure and everything because they can't afford to rent – not even buy.

They can't afford to rent a house in Labrador West unless they're working for one of the mining companies. The salary is just not there for them to be able to actually make that.

My parents bought a house in 1988 for $25,000; valued right now, it is almost over $400,000 today. The person that Dad sold to a few years ago still hasn't even painted it and resold it for triple the amount that dad sold it to him for. So, you know, this is the thing that's going on up here. We want to be a partner in success, we want to help the province grow, we want to be a part of the green transition, but without actual partnership from this province to the municipalities it is just not going to happen.

We have to look at the bigger picture here. We have to look at an investment into a region like us is an investment back into the province – fair share. But unless we're going to build houses, if not – the mining companies are going to move ahead. That's fine; they're going to do their thing. But you know what's going to happen? Labrador West is going to turn into a fly-in, fly-out mining camp. That's what's going to happen because there are just no services there. There is no ability for investment. There is no ability for any of that.

We're going to just be a fly-in, fly-out camp and we're going to be more of a hinderance on the province than we're actually going to be a partner in the province, and I don't want that.

Labrador West has an opportunity to be a crown jewel in this province, but in the instance of this without partnership, without actual investment into health care and education and those kind of things to actually make sure that people want to build houses there and make sure people want to actually move up there and actually enjoy the beautiful thing that we have going on up there, we're just going to turn into a mining camp. That's what's going to happen.

We've already seen it with part of the industry. There are way too many fly-in fly-outs right now as it is. At the end of the day, we don't want the actual primary driver, the actual mining companies themselves, the operation sides of things to go fly-in, fly out. We're not that. We're a community. We're not a mining town; we're a town with a mine. That's what we are, and we want to be able to continue to be a community.

A lot of our seniors here, a lot of them are second generation seniors. Their parents came up and their parents left and so on, but they stayed and all those people are seniors now. They have their grandkids. They have their things. They're not going anywhere. They want to stay in Labrador West. They want to be able to enjoy their family that they built there, but with the lack of investment in health care, the lack of consideration for what's going on there, the lack of actual understanding of how things work there, these individuals are looking at me going, Jordan, I have these grandkids.

I have these beautiful grandkids that I want to be able to enjoy and have that, but they can't because there's no investment in health care, there's no investment into housing and there's no investment into any of that.

So what do they have to do? They have to move to a town they've never lived in their entire lives just so they can be closer to the Health Sciences Centre. A lot of them are out living here on the Northeast Avalon as miserable as all can be because their grandkids are back in Lab City. They're out here because there's no investment in the health care, there's no investment in housing, there's no investment into any of that and they're sitting out here miserable while their grandkids and their kids are up in Lab West working and not being able to enjoy the actual thing in life that they want to enjoy.

They worked for 30 years. They gave up their health for the mining companies and now they have to turn around and move to Newfoundland, a place they've never been in their entire life.

This is the thing that we're facing here. We're facing the degrade of our community. We're losing the sense of community because we can't get the province on board as a partner, and that's the thing. We have an opportunity; don't squander it. You have a great thing going in Lab West, but you're going to ruin it and you're going to ruin it for everybody.

So this is what I want to talk about. We want to see investment into the municipalities so they can actually build affordable housing and they can actually get people to move up there and increase the GDP of this province but, instead, you squandered it.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible.)

B. PETTEN: Amazing how they wake up really quick, isn't it? It's all good.

It's always a pleasure to stand in this House, Madam Speaker, and speak on the budget or anything important, actually. As I drove in this morning, I was having a moment. You drive along sometimes and you think about what you've got to say and what you're going to talk about and you do this over and over again. I think I say this often. I always like to say it again. It bears repeating what a privilege it is to represent your community. Most of us represent our hometowns in the House of Assembly. Sometimes we take this for granted and we get frustrated.

It's a job that you take on and how many times have I left this building and drove up Higgin's Line and questioned what have I got myself into.

But there are more days that I drive and I say what a privilege, what an honour to be able to do what you do. Because I always say every day in this job – someone asked me one time about this job. It's really a lifestyle. You're doing something to better your community and your hometown, people in your community, to better their lives. No greater privilege. Forty of us, what we take in here, we should never lose sight of that.

I know my former colleague from Cape St. Francis, he always told me – first day I sat in the House, my first swearing in was in here. I was sat in the chair. There were only seven of us on this side then. He looked at me and he said, take in the moment because you don't realize how fortunate you are to do what you're doing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: So I like to remind myself, and anyone out there and anyone in here and a lot of people across the way who came in when I came in, you have a separate, different type of relationship when it comes that way. Lawyers say they went to the bar together; politicians sometimes come in the House together. It's something that's never lost on me outside the banter we get on in the House. I never lose sight of that, and I always like to speak of it.

On that note, too, before I get into anything else I want to say, I want to congratulate, first of all, the newest Member who will be in a couple of week's time in the House of Assembly, Mr. Jim McKenna. Well done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Very big win for him. Again, he's going through probably what we all went through back when we all came in here. I want to tip my hat to him. Looking forward to working with him. I'm sure he'll be an asset to the House of Assembly.

There are probably a lot of people who don't do this, and a lot of people probably haven't experienced this. I want to also pass along my best regards to Ms. Dana Blackmore.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Because the Minister of Finance, I think she knows what I'm going to say, but I think I told her yesterday out in a side conversation that I went through in 2014 – a lot of people may know, probably people don't know. I went through a similar thing. I ran in a by-election and I lost. It was a heartbreaking; close by-election, but I lost. It was something I learned, something I took with me the rest of my life. It was one of the biggest learning moments of my life. There don't be a day go by I don't remember the feeling.

You've all been around scrums and you've all been in areas, but when you're devastated you feel like you've disappointed everyone. You've let everyone down. Your family, your party, your good friend – Terry French, we were best friends, we worked together – new premier. It was a lot of weight on me. The government opposite were on the rise and we were on the decline. When you walk in and there's a bank of cameras in front of you and right leading off the first microphone is David Cochrane jamming it in your face and you feel like you're at the lowest point of your life.

So the other night, ironically, I was elated for Jim, I was happy for us, like you would be. But I had a moment and I said to my wife, my heart was breaking for Ms. Blackmore, so I just wanted to just acknowledge that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Kudos to her.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Madam Speaker, we talk about in the House, this is a budget debate and we can go any angle. There's so much stuff, you know, you start sometimes, where do I start? There are so many areas we could start on. I guess, one area there's a lot of conversation on and we hear it all the time, it's a big issue, as the government opposite like to say sometimes, it's a federal issue, but I think it's a national issue but it's a provincial issue, too, we can't shake it, it's the carbon tax.

Everyone out there understands the federal government, the carbon tax was initiated, it's a federal government initiative. But my argument has always been steadfast on it, I think the provincial government dropped the ball in not standing up against it from the get-go. I really, strongly believe that was the problem.

Right now, the Premier has a lot of trouble getting people on side and I think you've seen a lot of disdain, I heard a lot of it at the doors when we were in the election. Don't underestimate the voter and don't underestimate rural Newfoundland sometimes because you think this may be an urban issue, but this is affecting the entire province. People are feeling this at the gas tanks. They're feeling it in the grocery stores. Everyone is feeling the impacts.

Whether it's a result of carbon tax, we're not sure. I'm sure it's not helping. It's a lot of factors at play, no doubt carbon tax is one of the many factors, but you can't – like I watch this over and over again, I watch the media, we all watch media. Of course, we watch our angle, we're writing letters, we're demanding First Minister's meetings. We want to get to the bottom of this issue. We're against it.

Three years ago, we stood here in this House and we debated into the night on the implementation of the carbon tax, the enacting legislation I believe it was called. We stood our ground and we said: vote against it. We called for Division. We stood up and we voted against it.

Now, the argument on the other side was we had no choice; it was the way it had to be. This was the best mechanism out there. I think ministers were getting up one after another and spewing the virtues of carbon tax. Why couldn't you stand then? My argument, and it still stands today and I said to the Premier during an exchange here the other day here in the House: Why didn't you stand with us three years ago? Where were you three years ago that you never stood with us when we got up here in the House and we asked for unanimous support?

Maybe it would have been symbolic, I'm not sure, but I guarantee you now, the Premier would have a lot more backing on the issue if he would have stood his ground three years ago when we all stood up because nobody, and I mean nobody, that I ever spoke to ever thought carbon tax was a great initiative, outside the Liberals, especially Trudeau's federal Liberals, and a lot of provincial Liberals up until recently.

That's the problem, now it's about people, you can't take someone at their word. A few years ago, it was the best thing ever, it may not be the greatest mechanism but it's the best one until we get something better, I think was what one minister said.

I got up here in the House then and I got on like sometimes I do, it's probably getting into the wee hours of the night, the witching hour, and I went on a bit of tangent on carbon tax: Is that the biggest issue facing the province today? It's not. It's not.

Does that make me a climate denier, as they like to use. The Premier likes to always remind people: a climate denier. No, absolutely not. I got a grandson; our new grandson, he's going to grow up in this world.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Which, by the way, is a great experience. I love every minute of it, on a side note, but they're going to grow up in this world. We all got families and that.

I mean, I care about the environment. We all care about the environment, but do we think taxation is the answer? No. That's what we're saying, we don't believe you can tax people into behaving differently.

So, you allot for $6 million in your budget, and that's what your expectation was, your line budget when it was enacted – I'm in the wrong, I'm tripping ahead of myself; I'm talking about sugar tax there now. So I'll go to the sugar tax because that's what I'm going to tie it to.

You got the carbon tax and it's punitive, I call it punitive, to get you to cleaner energy, better environmentally friendly stuff, being kinder to your environment. They're going to give you a carbon off-set payment. You're going to pay out all this money on fuel, at the grocery store, you're crossing the ferry, you're getting on a plane, it's costing us a lot of money and the idea is we're going to give you an off-set payment.

So if you stop burning less emissions to be friendlier to the environment, you'll actually make money because we're going to give you money in your pocket with these cheques. The concept just defies my logic. I can't figure it out. Yet, do you see any less trucks on the road? Do you see less of anything? Do you see less travel? It's just not sensible. We're not even equipped to do in our environment.

Then you bring us over to the sugar tax. The comparative thing is – and this has come to me, I've been thinking about this – they're similar, they're punitive, they're behavioural modification taxes, really, when you look at it, because the Premier likes to use that word behavioural modification and sugar tax.

The line item suggests it's $6 million. Last year, it was $16 million took in. So does that mean people are using less sugar or buying less sugary drinks? No. If that was working, that line item would be down to $4 million or $3 million. That would be a descending. Then I would say, okay, this is working. But that's not what's happening, it's increasing.

So what's going on is people are saying, oh, it's another tax; carbon tax, it's another tax and the burden is hitting the people in the pocketbook, which is the wrong place. It's not working. You can't tax your way to prosperity. You can't tax your way to a cleaner environment. It's not how it's done. You need to educate people. We need to come up with better technologies. But people have become more aware of their environments. You can't punish people. We have to work together; you have to find a solution for this. But taxation is not the answer.

In my mind, it's probably the laziest move any government can make, when you tax people to try to stop them. We're not talking about speeding. You're not talking about speeding on a highway. You're talking about everyday life. It affects every part of your life. It defies logic.

When I see – and I've seen this over and over again, I watch the Premier and his sleeves are rolled up and he's ready to go fighting with Ottawa, it plays well. It really does and I understand the dilemma because now you've got to do a total about-face, because for years you were – first you had your made-in-Newfoundland approach and you were collecting money in the green fund and it was tolerable. Then when you never followed through on the federal government's initiatives, they took over and they implemented carbon tax. Now, they became enemy number one.

But they became enemy number one, more so lately, because they have no friends. The federal Liberals, they're on an island by themselves. Nobody is lining up, I mean, Trudeau don't have a lot of friends anymore. The polls are showing that. It's not a bad time now to go after them. It's the lowest hanging fruit out there. I mean, he's like a pinata, because every time his name is mentioned, he's like a pinata; the man is being bet to death. I'm amazed he's still staying in the prime minister's office, to be quite frank with you. I can't believe it. How the federal party, the Liberal party who was always a strong operation, how they've kept the man there.

So right now is not a bad play to go after him. In the eyes of most Canadians, not only Newfoundlanders, Canadians, you look like a champion. You can't miss on that issue. But when I look at morals and when you stand your ground, you do it in face of adversity. Why didn't this happen three years ago when he wasn't the pinata? When he wasn't getting bet to death.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: That's what would stand out more, because then the Premier would be doing it and the government would be doing it for the people of the province. That would have been true leadership. Right now, all this is a political game, to save your own face, because right now the federal Liberals are in big trouble and the carbon tax is killing them across this country. The damage is irreparable.

Whether you like Pierre Poilievre or the federal Conservatives, that's another debate for another day. Polls don't lie. They're a mile ahead and the federal Liberals are sticking to their guns on the carbon tax. They believe – they're boxed in and they can't turn back and now, all of a sudden – the only Liberal government in the country – the revelation is hang on, we can't be in favour of that. That's a death sentence to us. We can't do that, but it's too late.

Last week, in the media, a question came up and it was on this issue and I was asked to respond. I mean, it didn't take me much to respond. The Premier was all over it. He was writing letters and demanding meetings and whatnot. My question was: Where were you three years ago? That's all that really needed to be said. It wasn't cool enough to be on the outs with the Liberals three years ago, but now it is.

You've got a provincial party who changed their signs – changed the colours of signs. I've said this before, actually, one of the first times I spoke in the House. My grandparents were some of the biggest Liberals that you'll ever meet. They worshipped Joey. They were Liberals to the core. If they were to be able to come back now and go down the road during election and see some of the Liberal signs, they'd be lost. They wouldn't know what happened to the Liberal Party, because you don't see anything. It's on the bottom corner: the Liberal Party of Newfoundland.

It's laughable, right? They're ashamed to be a Liberal. You're ashamed to be a Liberal. I mean, it is a wonder they don't have red banished. I seen the Minister of Environment, yesterday or today, he wore a red tie and I said that's pretty good. I think the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure, he's got a bit of a red tie on today, but it's not that common. Oh, the Member for Mount Pearl North got a red purse. That's good. Nice to see you haven't totally abandoned the colours but now you gotten a case – and red shoes I might add. Well done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: But I make my point that we're not ashamed to be blue. There's no one on this side of the House who are ashamed to be blue. When we go down around, we wear our blue jackets in pride. Things haven't always been that great. In 2015, I ran when blue wasn't that cool, but my truck was tattered in blue and I would never sway from who we are. That's who we are. Whether you like us or not, stand your ground and be –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Even when it's not popular, why turn your back? That's the point of this matter. So when it's not cool and people thought the PCs were getting wiped off the map, here I was, a year later after I lost the by-election, I put my hand up and I ran again and my truck was covered in blue. Some people thought I was after really going over the edge, but I stuck with it, because that's about conviction and that's standing up for what you believe in and putting yourself out there. I've got a lot of people around me on this side of the House and our colleagues, we've all done that in the face of adversity.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: It's not always easy to do when you're looking at government opposite and they're in the driver's seat and you're not. You've going in knowing or thinking very well if you get the chance, you are going to be in Opposition. That takes courage and I got a lot of people around me that are courageous.

It's too bad we don't see government opposite and the Premier didn't show the same courage three years ago. Instead, now we've come into the new age now and we have the Premier's last name – because I know some of them will nitpick and say I'm going to say his name. But it's no longer the Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador; it's the last name. So when he moves on, you got to create a new party. That party is gone because there's a name on the party now. It's the last name of the Premier.

So what do you have to do then? You have to rename your party? It's no longer the Liberal Party; it's his party. No one person is a party. It's not the Trudeau party; it's the Liberal Party of Canada. But here in Newfoundland, no, it's no longer the Liberal Party of Newfoundland. It's a little sign on the bottom, you can hardly read it, you need a microscope to see it on the bottom: the Liberal Party of Newfoundland. Totally, totally ashamed of who you are. It is incredible.

They don't have a red book anymore, there is a white – a little tinge. I don't know, we were looking the other day and we can't find any red lettering. I don't really know. I think there might be a few graphs in there that is a bit of red to show deficits and that, but we're not nitpicking, we're just being obvious. Where's the red? There was a time you need a pair of sunglasses when you opened the budget book because the glare – the sun would come in the through the window, the glare of the red would blind you.

In one election when the Liberals were running high, I went up one street in my district and there were that many Liberal coats, it was that much red coming at me – I think they were in red jumpsuits back then – they were coming up the street. This is a true story. Me and my former colleague from Cape St. Francis went up knocking doors in Anchorage Road and we got in and he looked at me and everyone knows – I'll say his name – Kevin quite well and Kevin says: B'y, Barry, we got to get out of here. They were coming down over the hill and all I could see was red on both sides.

Literally red pants and red coats and I was, like, oh my. I said: Yeah, Kevin, I'll take your advice and we turned around and we went to another street.

But now that don't happen. You walk up the street, you see the crowds coming, and they're wearing grey, little name on the jacket. A little bit of white around the sign. So you're over and actually some people I think wonder: Is this not an independent? Are the independents running against the Tories and the NDP? We got no Liberals. The Liberals are gone; they've left the building. So it is no longer cool to be a Liberal in Newfoundland and Labrador. No, no, no; you can't be Liberal in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I got a lot more to say, Mr. Speaker. I didn't know if I had the energy, but it seems like it just grows. There are a lot of angles you could go on.

Anyway, there's a bit of banter on that issue. But the moral of my story is people are not pleased in Newfoundland and Labrador today. Simple.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: The Premier said in his scrum in his analogy of what happened and winning the by-election, people are frustrated. Pure and simple; they're frustrated. It's not just the carbon tax, it's not the fishery, in general. The clear message sent to this side, they like what they're doing; to that side, they don't like what you're doing. People can argue that all day long, but 3,300 people in Fogo Island - Cape Freels stated what I'm saying now and I think it's time for everyone to pay attention to that and we'll keep doing what we're doing.

On that note, Mr. Speaker, my time winds down, I went to present this as a non-confidence amendment.

I move an amendment, seconded by the Member for Terra Nova, that all the words after the word “That” be deleted in the motion before the House, Motion 1, and the following words be substituted: this House faults the Liberal government for missing the mark for seniors; missing the mark for students, teachers and children; missing the mark on health care; missing the mark for persons with disabilities; missing the mark for Labradorians; missing the mark in the fisheries; missing the mark for businesses wrapped in red tape; and missing the mark for everyone struggling to make ends meet while paying their high taxes.

SPEAKER: This House will stand recessed while we take time to review the proposed amendment.

Recess

SPEAKER: Are the House Leaders ready?

Order, please!

Upon review of the proposed amendment, I do find that the amendment is in order.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

B. PETTEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's good to get up again and, I guess, continue on. Before I do, though, my colleague from Ferryland pointed out something. I congratulated the candidates in the Fogo Island - Cape Freels by-election and I missed, actually, to congratulate Mr. Jim Gill, the NDP who also ran in it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Well done.

Anyone who puts their name on a ballot is a brave person. Not everyone got the courage to do it and people don't realize what it's like sometimes, but you always remember the first time you saw your own name on a sign or a brochure or your picture up on the news, it was one of them moments. We forget about it as the years go on, but the first time you see your first election sign, I'll say it again: What have I got myself into? I say that a lot of days.

Speaker, I got a lot of issues on the budget and that. In my own district, there are a couple of issues when the budget was announced, and it was a lot of tense times then with the protest. It was a weird budget. It was announced and we never really had time to process it. We watched it from afar, based on the situation that was happening outside the building.

But there were two things that really, I guess, when I say it annoyed me or it frustrated me, I say that collectively for my district. Because a new school in Foxtrap for me, personally, will probably not make a huge amount of difference. It probably will make a difference for a lot of families, there's no doubt, a lot of families in the district, but me, my children are raised. Our grandson, right now, is in Mount Pearl.

P. LANE: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: I'm hoping to get him back to CBS. For right now, he lives in Mount Pearl North, but my plan is to get him back to CBS. Rest assured, by the time he's 18, I'm hoping he'll be in CBS, but anyway.

When the budget was announced and anyone that was around and listened to me – and I know that the guy on VOCM, the guy Dave who does the calls for VOCM, sadly, he knows my number off by heart when I call in. I said: I got a problem. I've been leery of calling in. I said: My God, if you know my number off by heart. But one day he said: You're calling about Frank Roberts, aren't you?

When he said it, it was one of them moments, I said it's very interesting, of all of the issues I talk about and I talk about a lot of issues, he tied me – and I called Open Line on lots of other topics of the day in your role, I mean that comes with the territory, that's the one that was obviously resonating with him. I'm not a psychic, but, obviously, he associated me with the Frank Roberts issue because it resonated with him.

Ironically, that resonated with a lot of people in my community, which it became a huge issue for me, personally. Because I don't go to that school. My children went there. That was my high school. I'm not in that school every day and last year when those issues were brought to light, the protests were held, I did tours of the school; I met with the school council; I met with the parent groups; I met with teachers. It was disturbing. I seen the buckets in the hall. I seen hoses running from the ceiling catching water that was there for seven or eight years.

I seen a classroom which was cut in half and half of that classroom had a few vending machines in it and the other half was a half a classroom.

There are 650 students in that school, young adults. This is junior high school. They're young adults in that school. I witnessed there are plumbing problems. I witnessed there are heating problems. I witnessed screens on the windows were missing. There were ventilation issues. The list went on and on.

If anyone don't know me well enough by now, I'm not one of those people that's a million miles up in the sky, I'm boots on the ground. I know the cleaners. I know the teachers. I know the boys that goes up and works for the school district and fixes the doors. It just comes with someone who has lived in the community all their life. I know this community –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: – and the community knows me.

They know that I go to Tim Hortons. I go to Sobeys. I go to Dominion, sometimes – I'll relapse a bit, anyone remember the King of Kensington, the show? He used to walk down the streets sometimes. He was in his own town and he was walking down and saying hello to everyone, waving.

There are parts of my communities like that. I'm sure we all got it in our community, we walk down – I feel sometimes – it's kind of funny but you're going down, you spend your time waving and talking. Anyway, it's one of those notes, but in the supermarket, they're asking me: Are we getting a new school? B'y that's shocking, what a state of the school. B'y isn't that terrible, rodents up in the school. Isn't that terrible about the ventilation? What our children have to go through. I can't agree with them more because I witness it, I went through it, I seen it first-hand and I found it very disturbing.

I give credit where credit is due, the current Minister of Health, when he was Minister of Education, toured the building with me. We had a great tour. He acknowledged there are problems. He committed to trying to bring in a portable, I believe, and acknowledged we needed to do something about a cafeteria space, get some immediate action on the school. But he acknowledged – it was an acknowledgement that, you know, I'm not pretending, the teachers are not pretending. We're not pretending. We're not faking. This is actually real. It's real.

It was there and he witnessed it. I give credit and I thanked him. I thanked him many times, publicly, on that and I'll thank him again because that's what I expect I should do. If I'm a minister in the same role and a Member of this House of Assembly comes and wants some help, we can have all the banter in the House, we can have all the back and forth in the House, that comes with the territory, but I do appreciate the respect shown to come up and listen to the concerns and view it first-hand and acknowledge we've got a problem.

Now, the current Minister of Municipal Affairs, we never really had that rapport in the few short months he was the Minister of Education because he went up and supposedly did a walk-through. The school was second to none, best kind. There were no issues up there. I was imagining it. I was fear mongering. I was out to lunch; how foolish was I. I could go on, but I wouldn't want to waste my time much longer going on because it's not going to solve anything.

AN HON. MEMBER: Rats were mice.

B. PETTEN: And rats were mice and mice were shrews. I magnified everything. There were rats as big as cats, but they were really only the size of a mole, but that's not going to get me anywhere.

The current Minister of Education, again, very receptive; comes up, done the tour with me; great visit, walked through. This was in the school. I've got to put this in context. This was September. They spent three months, the better part of two, 2½ months, they scoured the school. I think her words were they did a triple cleaning of the school. The school was scoured. Everything was moved. There were tiles fixed. The buckets – these unsightly things were fixed. There was painting done. The floors were waxed. They were re-waxed. The school has never been that clean, ever. Cleanliness second to none. It was spotless.

She come up. She done a tour of the school with me; walks through it; had a look around; acknowledged: not adequate. One word. One statement. There's no secret. I've said it here. You don't even have a cafeteria. These people don't even have a cafeteria.

To put it in context, Frank Roberts is on the Foxtrap Access Road. There's nothing around it. So unless you've got a vehicle, which in junior high you don't have a vehicle; if you go off site, you're on the side of the Trans-Canada, literally. You can't walk to a store. You can't go to the pizza place or a lot of places associated or a Tim Horton's to get a sandwich. You're trapped. You're there.

So to put in perspective, you've got a room that's, literally, I would say it's 12 by 12 by 12, that's the cafeteria. They can't eat in there, but now they've expanded that room, they've opened it up. It's a classroom. That's all they've got for 650 students. That's almost a form of punishment.

I talked to those parents – I'm ad nauseum talking about it. I've been on the media talking about it. As I said, the guy at VOCM he associated me calling about Frank Roberts because, do you know what? That stuck with me. I'll tell you why it stuck with me because my message, obviously, on that issue resonated with him. He shook his head in disbelief.

The Minister of Education also agreed and full on, I thanked her for being frank with me and honest. The school is in desperate shape. We'll see now what's going on and we're well aware. I kept the issue up. It's not like I never. I kept regular emails reminding her. She could have turned it into whatever announcement she wanted to, to say it was on a list, it was whatever. Even if you do the way they do things and not invite us to even be a part of it, that's fine. It's about the people in my district.

I'm not going to be there forever, but I've got a community that's at 28,000 people, with a catchment area that is growing leaps and bounds. That's in one of the largest catchment areas in the community. It's right in the heart of my community. It's the largest catchment area in the community and the school is not adequate. It's not the matter that it's in a Liberal – you know, you go to a Liberal district or an NDP district, if the school is not adequate, it's not adequate. Simple, full stop.

So we have those conversations and you do things the right way. You bring us these issues. You speak out on those issues. Different ministers go in and review it. You're pleading with government. It's what we do, sometimes, what we have to subject ourselves to, cap in hand, go in and try to get something for your community.

Then when the budget comes down and there's not a mention, not a word. It's insulting to the people of CBS. Actually, a lot of them people, a good few of the people, probably used to vote Liberal. They remember. They're taxpayers. It is their money. They own that money just like anyone else here. We all own a share of the pot. They've got every right to demand a new school. Why shouldn't they? Why shouldn't their children have the right to go to a school that's clean and meets the needs of their children any more than anywhere else? Why should you have to be in a Liberal district to get that?

What makes the children at Frank Roberts in Foxtrap any different than the ones in Portugal Cove-St. Philip's? What makes them any different from the ones out in Kenmount Terrace? What makes them any different?

They announced a new school in Paradise. I had people up in my district saying, oh yes, they've got one down in Paradise. I said, yes and so they should, because that was promised back in 2015. It should be there. It should never have been took off the books. It was took off the books because the government changed. It was a Tory down there. That's what happened.

So why should the people of Paradise be punished because it's not a Liberal district? No more why should the people of CBS be punished because it's not a Liberal district. This is the people's money. It's public money. So when the budget come out – and I point across to my colleague from Topsail - Paradise there who has advocated long and hard for that school. They put $50,000 in the budget – $50,000. Sure, you can't even pay for photocopying for $50,000 in this day and age. So what's that? To get you peace? To keep the school advocacy group at bay? Mr. Speaker, $50,000, it's insulting. It is absolutely insulting.

You go down and you argue, you bring it up to the minister, and you express your disappointment and what do you get back? Crickets. As a matter of fact, there are a few times you get these little comments or remarks back and it's almost like a smug remark or a confident remark, but it's fine when you're on government's side. It is fine when you're on the right team; you don't really care. Like, what does it mean to you.

So what does it mean to them over there to be looking after a Tory or an NDP or an independent? It means nothing. But if you cared, and I mean truly cared about what you're put here for – because we're supposed to be here to improve the lives of the people we represent. And 40 of us should be trying to improve the lives of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and not the Liberal district you represent.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: My constituents matter. My colleague for Topsail - Paradise constituents matter. Our leader for Stephenville - Port au Port, his constituents matter. I can go right around our caucus; every one of our constituents matter just as much as the constituents of the government side. And every one of them have an equal share and an equal right to that Treasury of almost $10 billion. It is our money. We say sometimes this is the people's House. We're put here, in our desk here, by them people to voice their interests to the floor of this House of Assembly. That's the whole premise of this Legislature.

This is not the Liberal's Legislature. This is not government's – I shouldn't even say this is not government's Legislature because if we were on the other side, we should not be in that control situation either. I have been here long enough to know and I've been here even before I got elected oh yeah, they done that; the other crowd done that; they done that. That means nothing to me.

My colleague for Ferryland, yesterday, he made a point, if they were in government, these announcements that are happening, I'd invite them. I'd invite them to the announcements. It doesn't matter who was the Member; if you were a minister, you're in government, invite the local Member to the announcement. I think that's where we need to be.

We get back to Fogo Island - Cape Freels – and it just came to my mind as I'm saying it – when the former Member and a friend of all of ours in the House here – mine included – was minister, he was doing an announcement in CBS and the first person he called was me and he also told me and you're going to get a chance to speak. He said: My crowd mightn't agree, but you're getting a chance to speak. He said: They voted for you, not me. And I thought that was –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: I've told that story before he ever got sick and I always reminded him of it and I complimented with credit. Credit where credit is due, and it was something that I've never forgot. I said, well, good on you, because that told me a little bit of what this man was about, and I really respected that. He followed through on his word. He went up and we cut a ribbon and he let me cut the ribbon. So what can I say? I would like to be able to do the same thing, if I was ever on that side, I'd do the same thing for Members opposite because you know what –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: – the public appreciate that. The public get that and by not doing that sometimes – if I'm not at an announcement in my district, it doesn't play well by not being invited, because the people see it. How come you weren't there? I wasn't invited. They're disgusted by it.

So that's just a note to anyone that do that – some do and some don't, but I just wanted to follow up my colleague from Ferryland, he made a really great point on that. I think that makes us look better. It makes us look better as people, and that's where we need to be.

Again, I might digress because I've got time. The Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands, on his Facebook site, he congratulated our newest Member, Jim McKenna. That's fine. I mean, he's an independent. He's not affiliated with any of us. The first comment under it was: I love this. Do you know what? That's really, truly, the majority of the people – they know we're Liberal and PC and NDP and they have their own leanings. People like that.

They like to see an NDP or a PC and a Liberal out conversing. They like to know that you're human, that you can actually interact and you're respectful to each other. Because sometimes the House of Assembly is not always what people think it is. But we have a job to do and the job to do is what we do here every day in this House – it's a long day sometimes. People don't realize what we're at behind the scenes, but your ultimate goal is the people you represent and, collectively, we represent the entire province.

So ultimately whatever we do and we might look, you're doing a message, you might be on the phone call and people might pass by and think you're talking to your friend, but little do they know you're talking to a family that's in crisis, trying to get their mom or dad in a home, or they're dealing with home care issues or their dealing with health care issues and you're doing your best to listen to them. You may not be able to fix the problem, but you're doing your best to listen, hear them out and do what you can. Even words of comfort sometimes.

I think sometimes our job, as MHAs, we become counsellors more than MHAs sometimes, because people want someone to listen to their problem. You may not fix it. You may tell them upfront you can't fix it, but when you listen to their problem, you read their email and you respond to their email, I'm sure a lot of people can attest to this, people respect that and appreciate it and they'll come back to you, at least you tried. At least you responded or thank you for responding. That matters and is everything in this world. It's something that I learned a long time ago as well.

Always respond to people and be respectful and it will never fail you. You'll never go wrong. You'll never fix everyone's problems. Don't think you can, but that little bit of whatever, that goes a million miles and people will always be eternally grateful.

I have people that they've called me several times, I've never been able to help them. I knock on their door and, without hesitation, they're fully supportive, not because I solved anything or done anything for them, but because I listened and I tried. That's all people really want. They want you to try. They'll punish you for not responding or doing nothing, but they'll never punish you if they know you tried. That's all we do. That's all we all do in this House every day – we try. Whoever gave me this water, I want to thank them, too.

To get back to Frank Roberts – I'm trying. The school in Mobile – the Member for Ferryland is trying. The school in Paradise – the Member for Topsail - Paradise is trying. He got further than I got or the Member for Ferryland, but we try. We're not magicians. It's not magic. We try. Really and truly, I believe we do it for the right reasons. I think you need to come into this Legislature with the mindset that we're doing it for the right reason and I truly believe the majority do that for the right reason.

You can get lost sometimes in the partisan shots and the foolishness that goes on. No one party or the one person or one group of people owns that $10-billion budget. They're responsible for the expenditure of it, but we're also responsible for keeping government into account. That's something that we take quite serious and we continue on.

So part two with the budget that really irritated me was Family Care Teams. Again, CBS, a community of 28,000 people, has no public transportation. People say you're in the metro area. I argue that because we're more rural than most anywhere else. I think the metro area stops in Paradise to be quite honest with you. When you get up around Kelligrews, Upper Gullies, parts of Foxtrap, you're no longer metro. You're urban. I mean, my community is vastly urban. It's fish markets. It's agriculture. Even though I'm 25 minutes away, it makes the lure of being in St.

John's coming out and buying a home in the backyard with the fields in the back of you. That's what CBS really is and most of my community is. I love it and that's probably why we all love it so much. That's why everybody else wants to come out there.

The barrier I'm separated by: I have no public transportation. People cannot get to the Health Science. They cannot get to St. Clare's. They cannot get to any of the major health centres in the city because they have no way there, unless you have a family member or you get a cab. That's the only way of getting there so I'm no different than anywhere on the outskirts. There's no Metrobus. There's nothing so that's a big barrier.

There are a few private blood collection clinics up there, that's it. I've pleaded. I've argued. I've spoken about this as well on many, many occasions. I was talking to the current minister and expressed to him. I know when the Health Accord was in its stages, I talked to them and we met with them, me and my colleague from Harbour Main had several meetings. It's not lost on anyone. It should never be lost on anyone the argument, the need: big family doctor shortage, major clinic closed up a few years ago, doctors dispersed to St. John's. There are barriers that exist there from getting adequate health care.

So I'm led to believe or I'm hopeful that there would be something in the budget last year: no; maybe next year: no. I even had a meeting with the council up there and they were all very hopeful that something was going to come down the chute for CBS in the form of a Family Care Team. But did that happen? No. Two went out to the Baie Verte - Green Bay District, which is a by-election on the route. Another one went down to Portugal Cove-St. Phillip's, which was part of the one pork-barrel election promises during that by-election.

But that one kind of caught me off guard, because I don't know where that was to, because the former Member argued against that. That was not even nowhere near on the table. Maybe it might have been like the school, I'm not sure. But people in CBS, no mention, forget you.

Would that have happened if I was a Liberal Member up there? Probably not. Or if there was a by-election? Definitely not. I'd say if there was a by-election there – maybe that's an option, I'll figure that out down the road. I'm not ready yet, but maybe a by-election might be the answer to getting a new school and a family care centre in CBS. So there you go, right.

I'm not ready yet, I tell Members opposite, don't get too excited, I'm not going anywhere yet. But the moral of my story is, this should not be the way we govern. This should not be the way we govern this province. It's insulting.

My wife – and she wouldn't be too pleased even mentioning her, because any of you that have spouses in politics, it's kind of one of them topics that you don't really talk about a lot or they don't want to talk to you about it a lot or we just kind of agree not to talk about it at all. But there a while ago, she was watching on Facebook, she said: Why are they doing these announcements during a by-election? That's not right. I kid you not, she's saying this truly and innocently and it's sincerely. It's in her own mind, because I follow her.

She's my soundboard for a lot of things believe me, I'm sure we all do the same thing. She brings me really right back to my feet. I'm flat on the ground. I'll never be no eagle. There's no problem for me getting through doorways up in my place. Her and my two daughters got me well in check, so no problem. I said, you know, that's a good point. It's a really good point. You're right what you're saying.

Again, I'll give credit again – I'm crediting a lot of people here this morning – to the Mount Pearl - Southlands MHA, he spoke up after the Conception Bay East - Bell Island by-election and he said it was an unfair advantage from what's being done. And do you know what? It was a very good point he made. It was one that was not lost on me; I thought about it, too.

You're the Premier and you're landing on someone's doorstep and you're promising a school or you're promising a shore-based manager or you're promising them a family care centre or you're promising them pavement.

How many people in the province has the Premier of the province showed up on their doorstep? Not a lot. That's powerful. Whether you're a Liberal or a PC or whatever you are, the Premier showing up on your doorstep means something. They're looking at you and for your vote for the Member and you're promising stuff like that. That's pretty powerful.

Now, we can show up and our leader can promise we'll do what we can if we get elected, if we get in government we'll look at that, but it doesn't have the same – to a voter, they're respectful of you and they may very well vote for you, but they don't have the same impact.

Then the election is done, then they start ticking the boxes, the election promises. Okay, move on, we got that one stowed away. Let's go out to Fogo Island - Cape Freels now, we're going to put an extension on the hospital on Fogo; we're going to put a doctor on Change Islands and we're going to rotate him between Fogo and Change Islands; we're going to get some bunker gear for Stoneville fire department. This is all done on the backdrop of photos. Never forget the photo op. Never forget the glossy photo. They're all there and they're all happy.

They're all waving and their fists are in the air and the piece of paper for the bunker gear. The mayor for Fogo Island is out praising them up and the Premier: we got to vote Liberal, we got to vote for the Member out there because we're getting an extension to our hospital. Unbelievable. Incredible. Absolutely incredible.

I ran in CBS now for four elections. My predecessors ran in many elections and I ran their elections behind them. I was the campaign manager before I became the candidate. We never had any municipal official ever do that. Think about that. Now, I'm talking about my community, other communities may be different. Never have they done it.

Can I pick if I know they're Liberal or not? I can go right through that council and tell you where they all marks their X, but not one of them have ever come out publicly or put their name on a piece of brochure supporting me or any of my opponents, nor have I ever gotten involved in their elections. It is a respectful thing and it is the way it should be. That is the way democracy is supposed to work.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: We get down in Bell Island, Portugal Cove-St. Philip's, we're in a tight election. We knew we were up – we're not totally oblivious to the backdrop. It's the Premier's district. He lives there. The current Member who got elected there was a well-known person. In people's living rooms for 20-odd years. From his own town – he's from there, very formidable. We got that. We had a good candidate as well.

We worked hard, so did they and that's what campaigns are all about. Knock on the doors, get out in the cold weather. I seen the newest Member out a few days when we drove by, there were a few cold days, on Neary's Pond Road, I believe, was one day and I wondered again, what have I got myself into but I was knocking on a lot of doors. I seen them out knocking on doors and it was cold, but I respected what you were doing, because I was there and I was helping out. I know what it was like. That's how you win elections and the proof is there; he's here today.

But when I see a brochure and the mayor of Paradise, the mayor of Portugal Cove-St. Philip's, the mayor of Bell Island who used to make phone calls for me, when we were in government – think about that for a second – all endorsing the Liberal candidate. The Premier over there, every second day, knocking on doors. How can you really and truly – how unfair is that? You talk about mudding the field. How unfair is that?

I would question why would you allow that to be put in your brochure? If you truly want to go in there and even the playing field and you want to go in there head-to-head, that's an unfair advantage. It should never be – never be. So now the mayor of Fogo Island is going to have to talk to our newest Member. I'd like to be a fly on the wall in that conversation. It just makes no sense.

My advice to any municipal person out there, if they want to quote me for it, stand aside, let the election unfold, because you have to work with these people. That will an irritant for any Member out there that's running and that happens.

Now, is this a new thing that's happening? Is this a new way that this – I'm not sure. I can't say what party the government are now because I can't use names, but it's that crowd with the grey signs is all I can tell you.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible.)

B. PETTEN: Yeah, the pork-barrel party, grey backdrop, little white sign. Where have all the Liberals gone? I guess that should be the one: Where have all the Liberals gone? They were so proud. They were, arguably.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Little do anyone know, back in my previous life, I done accounting. I've actually done marketing. Do you know what? I done marketing and when I was in my schooling doing marketing, do you know what they considered to be one of the top branding in the country? One of the top brands that people related to in the country, do you know what it was? It was the Liberal Party.

Go into a marketing course, trust me – and it's not now because that's gone. That's gone down the shredder. The Liberal Party was one of the examples used by one of our professors; that's branding. It was simple. It was red. It was Liberal but everyone knew what it was. That “L” on a red – if you went around to a group of people with that red sign with just “L” on it, the majority of them people knew what that stood for. That's a true story.

Now we get a grey sign with a white boundary, and it's got these letters on it – it's F-U-R-E-Y. I'm not allowed to say the name, but I can spell it, I guess. F-U-R-E-Y – so when F-U-R-E-Y leaves, we've got to find a new party. So then the new name will become the new party. We got an ever-changing parties. We've got a two-party system, but we've got a party that really don't know who they are anymore. They're ashamed to be a Liberal. When he leaves, they can't be F-U-R-E-Y anymore. So they don't know who they are. It's an identity crisis, Mr. Speaker.

We all went through that one time. In adolescence, you go through an identity crisis. They're going through it now. They've been around forever. One of the best, well-known brandings in the world, in the country, but you're ashamed to be who you are because you're not pleased with what you've done over the years. So now, all of a sudden, we can't be Liberal no more. We don't like Trudeau no more. We can't talk to them. Oh, everything is bad Liberal. But unless you –

AN HON. MEMBER: I agree with that.

B. PETTEN: Actually, there are certain things in life we agree on and, actually, we both agree on that. We actually are in agreement with our views of the federal Liberals, but you can't separate that now. You can't deny who you are. All of a sudden, you can't say they're no longer my mother, my father, my brother or my sister. You just can't do that. You can't divorce yourself from – that's who you are – but you can go in disguise.

I kid you not. Those grey signs with the white trim and F-U-R-E-Y, pull back the layer and I hazard to guess you'll see a lot of familiar faces behind it that, looking across the way now, that used to be Liberals. When you open the door, guess what? That's what you're going to see. Right now, keep the door shut, run for cover, keep your head down – that's all you've got to do. Try to weather through this and hopefully we get through another election.

Boy, I don't know anymore. The other night I wouldn't have said – I didn't think the margin was going to be what it was. I knew there was a lot of distrust. I knew people were frustrated out there and there were actually some Liberals looking for the red signs, because we went out and a few people said, sure, they don't even –

AN HON. MEMBER: They don't have a candidate.

B. PETTEN: They don't have a candidate out here. They don't have signs, what's that?

We told them who the candidate was. They didn't have a sign. But by the sheer volume of voters and by the margin, that speaks so much. So, I guess, maybe they need to do another revamp, because their grey signs with the white trim is not working. I mean, they probably should do another revamp.

I personally think it would be probably worthy for them to go into a bit of a witness protection program, for the short term. Emerge when things settle down a bit more, maybe if Trudeau decides to move on, but right now it's not a good time to be a Liberal. You can write letters, you can ask for First Ministers' meetings, you can do all you want to do, but you're not going to erase who you are.

You can't run. You can run but you can't hide. They're trying to hide, they're trying to run, but we all know what's behind that grey sign. It's the same ole, same ole. We see it. We see it every day. We see it in the House. We see it in reactions. We see what they're doing and no one is really buying this.

I get up here and we talk about health care is a huge issue in the province. We got up day after day – I know myself and our leader here, we talk about issues of importance. Probably one of the issues now that we've been debating a lot here in the House is the travel nurse fiasco, is what it is. But am I saying, when I ask the questions, the minister probably did something wrong or is a bad person? No.

What I'm asking is, there are questions we need asked and answers to and we're not getting them. You're asking about where did the $80 million go? Well, that went to many agencies. How come the Comptroller General – where's the report? They wanted to know something yesterday. Now we told them we're going to do that. Now they want the Auditor General and now it's gone to the Auditor General, so what are you looking for? It's always like trying to play on words. What did you ask for? All we asked for was an answer. But that is so hard to get in this Legislature.

As a matter of fact, yesterday the Premier stood up twice. I was really surprised. He stood up once and he said he was unaware of a situation, and we took him at his word. I think he was unaware of the chemo nurses getting different pay. At the end of it, he was concerned about where the money went and he wants to know where the money went. But this travel nurse issue, the problem you have – and I get back to some of the stuff being a Liberal and being ashamed to be Liberal and that – is you can't investigate yourself.

So, again, I'll come back to the reality of when you walk the streets, when you go into the communities. I go down to Tim Hortons – and I said this in here many times before – and the locals are there, and what do they bring up to you? They bring up the regular stuff. They said: Well, what's the Premier saying now? Getting the minister to do an investigation, sure, that's the foolish talk about. I said: Well, exactly, that's what I'm saying.

But it seems like no one else is listening. I'm really concerned. I've asked the minister to investigate me and him. That's what he is saying indirectly. I've asked the minister to do an investigation on myself and him. Now, that is the heights of – I don't know – I'll say hypocrisy. I don't know what it is the heights of – it is silliness.

No, you call in the AG and you ask the AG to make this a priority and get this investigation done here and now. Not in 18 months; here and now. Like air fryers and accommodations and the list goes on. I mean, fill in the blanks, we have situations of families being flown here for Christmas, on and on and on and on. This is our money. What about the meal per diem? The list goes on and on and on. We're not getting any answers. But the Premier asked the minister to get someone to investigate.

We find out yesterday the Comptroller General was at it for a month or two maybe and now they're going to get the AG to look into it. Sure, we asked for that in the beginning. But through a round of questions yesterday – I'm up to 22, and I used to have a counter for Muskrat Falls references. I can't remember. I had it somewhere in my binder. I used to look at the ticker – yeah, it's my ticker there; look, I got a lot of ticks. But I'd say I'm up 50 or 60 and I stopped at it; I stopped ticking off the Muskrat Falls references. But now the new one is operational – operational. Don't ask me, I'm only the Minister of Health; that's operational.

So who is responsible for the health care budget? The Minister of Health. Okay. Who runs NL Health Services? Mr. David Diamond, who is a great guy and soon retiring and I commend him. Okay, can you answer us, Minister, you're responsible for the four point some-odd billion-dollar budget; what about this? No, that's operational; I'll give you David Diamond's number. I'm not answering it. That's very comforting – very, very comforting.

So I guess every department, is that the new age for this F-U-R-E-Y government? Is that the new way of doing business? We'll pass it off to officials or we'll hide behind – now, they're bringing stuff into government so they're not going to be able to hide behind CEOs of boards much longer.

People want answers. They want the facts. You're not always afraid – you're more annoyed by not getting an answer than getting some of this smoke and mirrors stuff. People just want the truth. As the movie goes, the saying goes: You can't handle the truth. But people would appreciate you being upfront with them. Nothing more annoying – and I've seen all colours in this House come in here and stand up and talk in circles and think they're being smart. Trying to avoid issues; trying to get around issues. But as you're starting to see lately and it's starting to become more reality, people are not buying it anymore.

People are not bought into this stuff anymore. People are seeing through this stuff. People know what's happening. They know this is not right. We have a very smart electorate. I've stood in my place over and over again and many, many, many, many times and I say the same thing: It's annoying to the people; it's frustrating.

People just want the answer. You ask a question. The Member for Ferryland – he's always been really frank about it. He said: Why don't they just answer my question? You ask a question, why don't they just answer me? When he says it, he's sincere when he does say it because what he says and what he means: Answer my question. That's not so hard a thing to do. I guarantee you, you curry a lot more favour in the public. People see through it, Speaker. People are seeing through this over and over again. It's getting old.

Actually, it's affecting politics in general because people want you to be honest with them. They want you to tell the truth. It may not be what they want to hear but tell them that – it's full transparency; it's a full, unobstructed view; this is what we're doing and this is how we do it. In all sincerity, that is the way I operate and sometimes – well, I should say, for the most part, it don't get me in that much trouble. Some people may not like what I say. Some people may grin. I am honest with them.

A lady called me – and we all have, in our municipalities, issue with councils because a lot of our issues come from municipal. A lot of the issues, I get frustrated myself trying to deal with council because it gets caught up in the quagmire of things. She called me about snow clearing. Her road wasn't cleared. I said: I can't answer that, that's municipal. But my sweet God, you must have some pull down there, do you? I said: Yes, I've got a lot. I said: Actually, my buddy is the superintendent. I'll call him and see if he'll plow your road. I said, but in saying that, they've been up my way three times. I happen to live on the next street across from her.

The next thing, within an hour, my phone was lit up by the mayor or the ward councillor and a councillor at large – will you stop telling this lady that your road has been done three times and hers hasn't been done once? Sometimes you'll make your little dig, but I said I can't deal with council no more than you, but sometimes, I guess, your words go further than you wish.

Anyway, the bottom line was she did get her road plowed. It was a bit later than normal, but do you know what? All that moral of what I was telling, because I found it really funny when I got the mayor calling me and we were laughing but he was making a dig at me. Her only comment to everyone out there was: The only person who called me and listened to my concerns – she was really frustrated – was the MHA who really never had no real skin in the game, but he listened to me. I think that's the lesson that we all should take whenever we do stuff because I was listening to her –

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: – and I was snowed – I wasn't totally snowed in because my street was plowed, but my driveway was full. I was like, I can't do nothing no more than you can, other than the fact I did reach out to a good friend of mine who was actually down there. No one could understand why the street wasn't plowed, mind you, but he apologized. They went and plowed the street.

I didn't do anything magical no more than I would call them, this morning, there's no water and half of CBS is up there without water. I reached out again this morning: What's your timeline? There was another pipe cracked so that's another delay.

But it was interesting, this lady, out of all of her frustration and everything was said and done, at least I listened to her. That reminds you every time you do that, that reminds you what we're here for, what our jobs are really meant to be, not what we want them to be, not what we envision. Because I'm telling you there's nothing more humbling to walk a street and your ankles in water, froze to the bone, soaked to the bone, brochures in your pockets so they are not getting wet, trying to keep a good one to get to the door and knocking on someone's door and they come out and they got no more interest in talking to you than they do flying a spaceship, and asking them for their vote.

I always said it was one of the most humbling things I've ever done. I still feel that way. It's on the ground as on the ground it can get.

Everyone thinks it's the prestige, it's the honour – it is an honour to be here, but all thinks it's the prestige and that, but when you're on the ground and you're knocking doors day in and day out, daylight till dark, trying to get the vote out, trying to get your signs up, trying to win an election; you're tired, you're cold, you're wore out, but it almost all done – most everyone after an election, your hoarse, you lost weight, you're exhausted, mentally, physically exhausted, it's one of the most humbling things you'll ever do in your life. It has to be one of the most humbling things.

So it makes you wonder sometimes, why do we do this? But that's why we do it. At the end of the day, that's why we do it. The last election, we were going around taking pictures of people's driver's licence, in the mail-in ballot fiasco. Pictures of driver's licences, through the window – their licence in the window and you go up and take the card, what a prestigious job. You're up with your phone, snap, snap, snap and you're going in and you're trying to give them their ballots. That's what you were doing to try to get back in here to represent those people.

You got to love what you're at. You got to believe in what you're at. Who would ever do that? Who would ever do what we do sometimes for a job interview? Sometimes out there, you know, we get ridiculed, we get talked about and I say this in generalities of the House here, who would ever do what we do, just to get here? I'm sure that our new colleague, Mr. McKenna, is probably down there now, because I think he's suffering a bit of a flu and that. I'd say he's exhausted because it's post-election syndrome, they call it. Two or three weeks after an election, you hit a wall and you're drained. You're exhausted for a week and you're trying to get your energy back.

But you do it because you believe in what you're doing. You want to do better in your community. You want to come in here and address the issues. You want a new school for your district because your other school is run down, it's wore out. You want health care facilities for your district because people deserve it, it's 28,000 people. You want schools in Paradise. You want schools in Mobile.

We know there's a budget, we know there are cost involved, but we fight for that because we believe – that's what we're here for. We know that you can't do it all in one day, but you can do it if you listen and you respect what people have to say. Because when I speak here, like I say a lot of times, it's not me speaking, it's the people that I represent, it's their issues.

I know sometimes government has to sit down and listen to us, speaker after speaker after speaker, speak about issues that probably they don't want to listen to, some ridicule they don't want to listen to, some they may enjoy, I'm sure, but it's not easy. It's not easy, because I was in the backrooms when the former government were there. I know, I used to be there sometimes. I know some days that it was a hard slog for some ministers to find their way to the House of Assembly. They'd be dreading: My what have I got to face today? What's going to happen today? Or an issue was a hot issue. I remember those days.

It's not easy. I know some ministers; they were under heavy scrutiny. I knew them personally, friends, they'd go in there and take a deep breath and they'd face the music. It's not easy.

I respect the fact what they have to do, but it's about respect in what we have to do, too, because there are days that I get up here, do I want to do what I'm doing in the degree I have to do it, sometimes it's a passion, the vigour. Not really. It sometimes ironic because people said to me one time: Barry's soft spoken. He's a mild personality, but I've seen him in the House and that's not the same person. I've heard him on Open Line , that's not the same person.

It's very interesting because, in actual fact, when I remove myself from this and I go home with my family, I am very laid back. I don't get engaged in big fanfare, big debates. I'll talk to whoever wants to talk to me but I'm more low key than anything. I like to have a chat with some people, but, overall, I don't get engaged like that.

But what I learned – and this is another thing, I'm sure other Members in this House learned this along the way – it's an out-of-body experience sometimes because sometimes it's like a den. Because when you come in here, if you don't find that courage to stand your ground and be direct and be hard on issues, be challenging, I don't know if courageous is the word, I'm not sure what the right word would be; you've got to find that within you. I found that it was something like an out-of-body experience for the most part, all of it was an out-of-body experience, but you had to find that courage to be able to bring yourself to that level because, if not, you would not be effective.

Sometimes you might have too much courage, too much vigour, too much vim, I don't know. I've had that happen to me, too. Sometimes your quick remarks, sometimes that may not be the right word. You may have to apologize for saying a word or retract a word. That's fine, if you do it for the right reason and you have the passion. I believe as time went on, I realized that's what it becomes, a passion.

A former teacher of mine, I met him a while back, a teacher I have a lot of respect for. He's an elderly man now. He ran into me. We were serving pancakes up at the Winterfest breakfast. He came over and he was having a sidebar with me and, not that I was a bad student, actually, I had a good relationship with him and he looked at me and said: You're enjoying what you're doing. I watch you. He was very complimentary. He said: I think you found your niche. I said: B'y, it's about time, isn't it? I suppose he was waiting. I don't know what he thought I was ever going to become. I don't know what his expectations were, low or high, but, anyway, I kind of found it funny. We had a little chuckle.

His point was and what he was trying to say to me was he feels the passion. When he hears me speak, it's not that I'm being nasty. He feels that I'm being passionate. He says that comes through in what you say. I'll take that as a compliment because I just speak what I see.

I see that around this Legislature. I see it on my side, and I'm pointing back here to the benches behind me, but all my colleagues, I hear them often. They get up here, everyone has their own style. We're all, ourselves, different but everyone I hear speak, there is conviction and passion. There's water out there up to their knees and snow and water and froze because they believe in what they're fighting for. They believe in the people in their areas. They believe, it's not cliché. That's true.

Anyone that takes this on as a job, I think you're doing it for the wrong reason. You'll never be effective if you take this on to punch the clock at 8 o'clock and punching out at 4 o'clock. You're not signed up for the right thing. It'll never work. It never has. It never will. People may try to do it but you're not going to be effective. You've got to be plugged in 24-7.

You've got to be ready at the drop of a hat to go to that event 7 in the night when you're dragging yourself out the door or the phone call at 10 in the night or the Saturday morning breakfasts, the Sunday morning breakfasts or the Sunday night events. We all know what it's about and trust you me, I enjoy most of that stuff but there are a lot of times I push myself because it's like, oh my, here we go again. It's what you sign up for so it's not a job. It's not a job.

I say that because you can have all the banter in here, but I sometimes say this collectively, as a group, because I think even some people in the public don't really get what we do in here sometimes. They think it's all a bit of theatrics and everything else. There's some of that, too, but we all do it for the right reason. We've just got different ways of getting there.

We feel we got a better plan than the government got; the NDP feel they got a better plan than two of us got. That's fine. We'll agree to disagree on that, but we got to stand up for what we believe in. We got to fight with the passion and vigour.

I hear it every day when I hear people get up and they'll ask questions that's pertaining to their district. It could be their critic roles because all of us got our own shadow Cabinet roles and we take ownership of those issues. You take them on.

I'm Health, so when I'm hearing someone can't get in for a MRI, it hits home with you. You're hearing all these health care stories. I get them every day, multiple – multiple and every one of them hits home to you. You're trying to respond to them, but you also take an interest and you make it your own. That's your own conviction. Every one of us here, we do that, on top of representing the community, you're representing their needs and their issues.

No one should ever underscore the importance of that job. But I do know and I'll hear it, it's by me talking today or if I get up every day this week and talk, if I got out in front of Confederation Hill there and talk to the masses, people will never fully appreciate and never understand, and probably they don't want to understand.

But I do know that this job and what we take on, it's a very important job. We should never underestimate the importance of what we do. It affects the lives of everyone in the province. Whenever I go to doors, you equate it back to elections and someone says: I don't vote. Why don't you vote? I'll always ask: Do you mind me asking why you don't vote? I've said this before and people have witnessed it: Do you know what? I'd like you to vote for me, but, most importantly, I'd like you to go vote. I believe you should vote.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: Whatever reason you got, whatever way you're disjointed, I believe you should vote.

I see sometimes that's the part we're getting, the 56 per cent coming out in support, voters I mean, that should be much higher. We should be so fortunate to live in the country we live in, in the province we live in. We should go to polls with a smile on our face.

Turn on the world news reports and you're seeing the way the rest of the world is living, look at Gaza, down there. My heavens look at Ukraine, Russia and those places, and where we're too. We're actually given an option, unlike down in Russia where Putin has put in a decided that he is going to remain president until 2027 or, I don't know, 2030. He's there forever. The legislation is he can never lose. Think about that.

They're having a protest, then they're jailed or they're probably shot for doing so. We have the opportunity to say we don't like you or we don't like you, we want a change here, we want a change there. We're given a democratic right in a very safe environment to go in and mark our X, and we only get 50 per cent of the people do that. I don't want to vote. There's nothing going to matter. It'll never matter if you don't go in and mark your X.

Your opinion really should matter. I know people might look at that as being – maybe it's the incorrect way of putting it, but how can you voice a matter if you're not going to engage in the process? That's how change happens. That's how the masses are spoken for, so the masses, if you get 80 per cent or 90 per cent, then they've elected a Liberal government, fine. Good on you, you got your wish and here you go and you carry on and hopefully everything works out and vice versa, but we're getting these low percentages and then you get this disenchantment of politicians are this and politicians that.

I was talking to a lawyer the other day and, in the conversation, I was talking about people's views of politicians. I said in the meantime, you're not far behind. It's terrible.

P. LANE: Imagine being both.

B. PETTEN: Imagine being both, yeah – and I'm not saying that. The Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands said that, but I have respect for my two colleagues opposite who are both, and they know that. We may argue, but I have respect. That wasn't my words. It was his words.

But I want to give credit where they come from. I never said that.

P. LANE: All in good fun.

B. PETTEN: All in good fun, but I can only imagine, we listen to it as being politicians, so what they listen to as having both, good point. I don't envy the second part of your job.

L. O'DRISCOLL: Don't forget the car sales part.

B. PETTEN: There's a car salesman one, too.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

B. PETTEN: We have a few of them here, too. I never got into that one. Some of them are good, I say.

My point of the matter, Speaker, as my time is starting to wind down, we go and we debate and we get out and as time goes on, sometimes I get frustrated. I know me and you probably discussed it ourselves behind the scenes. It's a struggle sometimes to do what's right. You're trying to keep ahead of things. And I say this again, everyone in here are trying to do what's right. We always lock horns. We always disagree. It looks like this bit of banter is always back and forth, but if you removed them layers of the banter, underneath that there are people who care. We just have different ways of getting there.

But if we stop caring about the people we represent and we stop caring about the province, we're in big trouble. But the bigger problem you have to face – and it happens with governments over time, too – is listening. Back in 2015, the former premier come in here and their slogan was, you can't lead if you don't listen. If you don't listen, you can't lead, or you can't lead if you don't listen, vice versa. Very true, no one questioned that logo; it was a good one. To lead, you have to listen. But I don't think that followed through.

As the year went on and 2016 and 2017 came and things started multiplying and I'll say this – and I'm saying this about the Liberal government that I'm referring to then – you could go back and talk about from 2011 to 2012 to 2013, when the PC government were there, there became inherent problems and we went through it and we experienced it. A lot of that, you stopped listening. Bill 29 comes through; that was tone deaf. I mean, people can say what they want and friends in my own party might question what I'm saying but I'm trying to be as honest as I can.

They were tone deaf, because I knew when I saw it up there that was not the way to go. But I was just someone that was kind of behind the scenes, whispering in people's ears, but I knew that was wrong. They forged ahead. We know the outcome among other outcomes; they stopped listening.

And I fast-forward then to the next administration that went on and that was a slogan, which meant a lot when you went through a crowd that wasn't doing none of that. And then it turned into, they stopped listening. And I think I happens in time – it becomes the norm in time, when you're there so long and you get there and you do stuff and you do it innocently. But the one thing we all – and I say all – need to realize is people are watching; people know.

And I revert to our newest Member, and I heard a couple of public comments he made since the election. He said: What he heard at the door – and this guy seems to be a really genuine, straight shooter. He said: People were frustrated because they felt that they weren't being listened to. Pretty powerful statement from a person that's – I don't know if I would have had that statement my first day when I got elected. I was, like, whatever, I heard everything at the doors. But that was the resonating thing that resonated with him. I've heard him say it repeatedly at different times.

Obviously, I heard – I went down and knocked on some doors down there. This man knocked doors 12 hours a day and heard that day in, day out. That is a lesson in that for a lot of people. Obviously, government listen to it loud and clear. We all should take from that. And better governance is never a bad thing and striving to be a better government is not a bad thing. But doing it for the right reasons is always the right thing. I say that with the utmost respect and sincerity, because sometimes we lose sight of that. As time goes on and as you get longer in your tenure and we lose sight of that – even in Opposition, sometimes you can be guilty of that.

As I am down to my last minute, one thing I will say is my time as a Member representing my District of Conception Bay South has been an honour and a privilege, and I plan on continuing on even though a couple people chirp me. I plan on continuing on, but I am forever grateful that they gave me the opportunity because it was an opportunity that didn't come by chance. I worked like a dog to get it, because I tell everyone I lost my by-election by 60 votes and I won a general election in 2015, when the red wave was on – remember, it wasn't a grey wave, it was the red wave, and I won by 170.

In total, I ran two elections and the combined total margin of 110 votes. I never went in there by any means flying. There was no landslide. There was no headline of a landslide. The people were shocked there was no landslide, but I'll be forever grateful for the people of CBS for giving me the opportunity to stand in my place in this House and to talk about issues that are important to them and issues that are important to the people of the province.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for Indigenous Affairs and Reconciliation, and Labrador Affairs.

L. DEMPSTER: Thank you, Premier, I think it's my first time to stand – Speaker. I am going to speak about our Premier; maybe that's why it was on my mind. This is my first time to stand since we've come back. It was good to get back into Labrador after the Finance Minister brought down the budget and I had an opportunity to be on the ground there for a couple of weeks.

It has been really challenging. We talk about the weather and climate change, and the Member just speaking talked about there's always another event to go to and sometimes you wonder about your energy levels and things like that. Well, I would say to the Member, who does have the luxury of commuting a few minutes each day to and from the seat of government, that if you represent Labrador, and I have other colleagues here in the House that represent Labrador, for me, my shortcut back to my riding is two hours on a plane and a 275-kilometre drive. I know that you have a lot of travel as well.

Then, if I have an event farther north somewhere, like Cartwright, I have a 210-kilometre drive the next morning and then 210 back home and then on Sunday, I start the 275-kilometre drive back, and that's the shortcut.

This winter, due to weather and the really reduced flights out of Blanc-Sablon, I have been travelling quite extensively in and out of Goose Bay, which is a three-hour flight and then I drive 420 kilometres to the coast and then I do my district things. So you really do have to place a lot of value on the job that you do. It really is a tremendous privilege to serve.

I had no intention of standing here today, Speaker, but I have to respond to the Member and some comments that he spent considerable time – I was listening for some information about the budget. I didn't hear any of that. He spent considerable time talking intently about the politics of it all and how ashamed we are to be Liberals. I have to stand to