May

13, 2008

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVI No. 26

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Before we start today's proceedings, I wish to advise hon. members and our

viewing audience that today's proceedings will be shortened by approximately

one hour and a half. At 4:00 o'clock a ceremony will take place right here in

this Chamber to unveil the portrait of former Speaker Harvey Hodder.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: The following members' statements will be heard today: the

hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave; the hon. the Member for the

District of Bellevue; the hon. the Member for the District of Placentia &

St. Mary's; and, the hon. the Member for the District of Grand

Falls-Windsor-Buchans.

The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, May 10, Mariner Resources

Opportunities Network and their partners sponsored Youth Works 2008. The event

was held at Ascension Collegiate, Bay Roberts, with participants from Carbonear

Collegiate, Carbonear, Baccalieu Collegiate, Old Perlican, and Crescent

Collegiate in Blaketown.

Youth Works 2008 was available to youth between the ages of fifteen and

eighteen high school youth and community youth between the ages of

eighteen and thirty.

The project involves assisting participants in facing multiple barriers to

employment and obtaining the necessary labour market information to make

successful career decisions in order to connect to the workforce.

Mr. Speaker, both displays by local, regional and provincial employers

provided a venue to promote their organizations and business and give

information on current and future employment opportunities right here in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating MRON on a very successful

event.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PEACH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise here in this great hon. House today to recognize the Arnold's Cove

Lions Club on their fortieth anniversary. This club was founded in 1968 by a

group of very ambitious men and women, and today it stands as an outstanding

statue of volunteerism in the Town of Arnold's Cove.

Lions Clubs are certainly recognized as visions of one of the most

outstanding and well-organized charitable organizations originating in the U.S.

and has certainly become an international form throughout Canada, starting in

the early 1920s. Newfoundland and Labrador has certainly been recognized as one

of the leading roles throughout this wealthy organization in volunteerism within

the Lions Clubs.

This organization has made a significant impact on the lives of those

locally. They have helped in the fundraising for the defibrillator for the fire

department of Arnold's Cove - a necessity for the community and surrounding

communities, to say the least. This organization has been a supporter of the

local Army Cadet Squadron. They have been active supporters in school functions,

especially in the scholarship area. They organize seniors' functions, and

Arnold's Cove Days and others, all of which shows dedication to the community.

The Arnold's Cove Lions Club has raised $30,000 for the Children's Wish

Foundation through the Carol Service during Christmas time. Other charities

their club has contributed to include the Purina Dog Walk and the Lions Max

Simms Camp. This shows how active their club has been, and their club can

certainly be a model for all the other clubs throughout the whole Province.

I ask that my colleagues in this hon. House join me in extending

congratulations to the Arnold's Cove Lions Club and wishing them all the

success on their fortieth anniversary and in their future endeavours.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Placentia & St.

Mary's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to pay tribute

to the volunteer fire brigade of Long HarbourMount Arlington Heights.

Recently, I attended an awards ceremony in Long Harbour and was pleased to

present long-service awards to several firefighters. Alton Whiffen, Wayne Bruce

and Gerard Bruce all received twenty-seven-year awards. Louis Ennis, Frank Ennis

and Wayne Rees received twenty-six-year awards. Chesley Temple received a

twenty-three-year award.

Mr. Speaker, the number of years of service of these individuals epitomizes

what volunteerism is all about. Communities such as Long Harbour and Mount

Arlington Heights owe a great debt of gratitude and appreciation to those

volunteers. They deserve all the recognition we can give.

Incidentally, Mr. Speaker, there was a major fire in Long Harbour on Saturday

morning and I am advised by the mayor that this committee responded in exemplary

fashion and prevented what could have been disastrous results in the community.

I was very pleased, Mr. Speaker, to hear of the special licence plate which

was just designed for exclusive use by volunteer and career firefighters in this

Province. It recognizes the valuable services of firefighters such as those in

Long Harbour and Mount Arlington Heights.

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

congratulating the Long HarbourMount Arlington Heights fire brigade and all

those volunteers in our Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Grand FallsWindsorBuchans.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to acknowledge the many talented young people who made the

forty-third annual Central Newfoundland Kiwanis Music Festival in Grand

Falls-Windsor an overwhelming success again this year.

More than 6,000 contestants from the ages of five years and up delighted

audiences with their solo vocal presentations, instrumental performances, choral

renditions, musical theatre and so on. The festival in Grand Falls-Windsor is

one of only two on the Island that also boasts a solo and choral speech

category.

This year's festival required seven adjudicators and accommodated

competitors from communities in the Lewisporte area, the Connaigre Peninsula,

the great District of Grand Falls-Windsor-Buchans, and as far west as the Baie

Verte Peninsula.

This festival is successful as well in large part due to the talented music

teachers and instructors in our area. The endless hours of practice and support

given to our young people is phenomenal.

I would be remiss if I did not commend the Kiwanis Club of Grand

Falls-Windsor for their inspirational dedication and belief in this festival.

Since 1961, this festival has had a reputation for hosting a first-class event

that is a tribute to the Kiwanis Club and their many supporters as well as the

hospitality of the residents of Grand Falls-Windsor.

I ask all hon. members of this House to join me in offering congratulations

to the participants of the forty-third annual Central Newfoundland Kiwanis Music

Festival and extend our gratitude to the Kiwanis Club for sponsoring this event.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this House today to pay tribute to the nurses across our Province

during National Nursing Week, which runs from May 12 to May 18.

Over 8,000 nurses, nurse practitioners and licensed practical nurses

throughout Newfoundland and Labrador are critical in the provision of quality

care to the people of our Province. On behalf of our government, I thank each

one of them for the commitment and dedication to the people of the communities

in which they serve.

In recognition of its centennial celebrations, the Canadian Nurses

Association is reprising its 2007 theme, "Think you know nursing? Take a

closer look." This theme serves to raise awareness about the many roles

that nurses play in the health and community services system.

Mr. Speaker, you will find nursing professionals in just about every corner

of the health and community services system. They are researchers, counsellors,

advocates, educators, administrators and developers of policy, just to name a

few.

Our government is committed to supporting our workforce of nurses. With an

investment of more than $2 million in Budget 2008, we are strengthening our

ability to attract and keep qualified nurses living and working in Newfoundland

and Labrador. Our incentives include: bursaries for third- and fourth-year

nursing students with a one-year return-in-service agreement; relocation

allowances to cover 50 per cent of the moving costs; and, signing bonuses for

targeted positions.

As well, Mr. Speaker, we are also fulfilling our Blueprint commitment to

expand the number of funded seats in the School of Nursing by thirty-six,

bringing the total number of seats to 291 which includes seats for the LPN

bridging program. This expansion is a strategic one with the goal of positively

impacting the supply of nursing graduates in this Province.

These initiatives complement the many other additional actions we have taken,

including: funding educational leave for registered nurses; hosting a conference

in nursing leadership; approving some $579,000 for 101 bursaries or signing

bonuses over the last year; and, hiring 187 new graduates in the last fiscal

year.

Mr. Speaker, collectively these measures mark a strategic investment by our

government that will strengthen our nursing recruitment and retention successes

and have a positive impact on the provision of quality care for the people of

this Province.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the nursing profession who work in

every corner of Newfoundland and Labrador, supporting and protecting the health

and well-being of individuals, families and communities.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

We certainly want to acknowledge and recognize nurses, LPNs, nurse

practitioners, and all of those who work in the nursing profession throughout

our Province. We know the vital role that they play, from our hospitals to our

clinics to our long-term care facilities.

Mr. Speaker, it has been well known to us this year, we have constantly

received complaints about surgeries being cancelled in hospitals, unavailability

of bed spaces in ICUs and so on, and a lot of this, Mr. Speaker, contributing to

the fact that there is a shortage of nurses in this Province.

In the third quarter, in Newfoundland and Labrador, we were short 440 nurses

in this Province, and that is only the vacancies that have been listed for

advertisement, not including those positions that often take months and months

before they are actually advertised.

Mr. Speaker, I think nurses have picked a fitting theme. The theme that says,

"Think you know nursing? Take a closer look." is not by accident. It

is an opportunity for all of us to take a closer look and realize that this

profession is understaffed, underpaid, in Newfoundland and Labrador, and that

they are critical to the ongoing health care needs of the people of this

Province.

There is no fitter time for government, Mr. Speaker, to acknowledge that and

to negotiate salaries and benefits, Mr. Speaker, for this profession that are on

par with the rest of the country.

In recent days we have seen nursing negotiations in Saskatchewan giving

another 27 per cent increase in salaries to nurses in that particular province,

making it even more difficult for us to recruit in Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

I ask the hon. member to conclude her comments.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I conclude my comments by saying to the minister, and to his government, put

your money where your mouth is. If you want to recognize the role that nurses

play in this Province, go out and do something to enhance the recruitment and

stability of the profession in Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

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

I thank the minister for the advance copy.

I, too, am very happy to pay tribute to the nurses in our Province. We could

never have the health care system that we have without them. I think we all are

aware of the wonderful work that they do in this Province, and have always done.

I do recognize the things that were put in this year's Budget with regard

to recruitment of nurses, but we have to worry about the retention of nurses.

That is why I wish that the minister would have put in the reality.

The reality is that we do need better wages. The reality is that we have too

many nurses on casual and we need nurses on full time. We have too many nurses

that are being called in to do overtime after they have done their shifts; they

are still expected to respond to calls for overtime. We have to make sure that

all of our facilities have sufficient nurses to do the work that has to be done,

and that they can do it proudly knowing that they have permanent jobs, the

benefits that they need, and the salaries that they are worth.

Yes, let's take a closer look. All of us have been invited to a breakfast

on Thursday morning by the Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses' Union, at the

Fluvarium. I know it is an invitation to the MHA breakfast. I hope that all of

us are going to turn up and take a closer look by sitting with a nurse on either

side and listening to their story as they talk about the nurse shortage, because

that is what the breakfast is about Thursday morning.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers.

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge an employee of the Department of

Environment and Conservation who has received international recognition for his

conservation efforts. On Friday, Mr. Shane Mahoney, the Executive Director of

the Sustainable Development and Strategic Science Division, was named the 2008

International Conservationist of the Year by the Safari Club International

Foundation. Mr. Mahoney was presented with this award at a ceremony in

Washington, D.C. this past weekend.

This award, Mr. Speaker, recognizes individuals who have dedicated their

lives to working on behalf of sportsmen and women. The International

Conservationist of the Year is the highest testament to conservation efforts by

the Safari Club, and it acknowledges an individual's outstanding conservation

achievements. Mr. Mahoney's name, Mr. Speaker, is without a doubt synonymous

with conservation efforts in this Province. He has had a distinguished career

with the Public Service of Newfoundland and Labrador and is world-renowned for

his research on wildlife populations. He has published numerous scientific

articles on the topic, and his expertise is sought by wildlife researchers and

conservationists internationally.

Mr. Speaker, Budget 2008 allocated $3.3 million as part of the $15.3 million,

five-year scientific and management strategy for the island woodland caribou

populations. The strategy builds upon earlier efforts to better understand and

mitigate the current decline in woodland caribou numbers of 40 per cent to 60

per cent for most herds on the island portion of the Province, as well as the

role of predators in this decline. Mr. Mahoney has played a significant role in

the development of this strategy, lending his expertise as this government works

toward ensuring proper management measures are in place to mitigate the decline.

The Safari Club International, Mr. Speaker, is the leader in protecting the

freedom to hunt and in promoting wildlife conservation worldwide. Active in more

than 100 countries, this organization focuses on protecting the hunting heritage

enjoyed by the more than 45 million families around the globe while, at the same

time, understanding the delicate balance that needs to be struck in terms of

conserving our wildlife.

I am sure I am joined by all of my hon. colleagues when I say that Mr.

Mahoney's efforts are justly recognized by this prestigious award, and I offer

my sincerest congratulations.

We are challenged more than ever, Mr. Speaker, to make prudent decisions that

shape our environment as we work toward sustaining it. Mr. Mahoney's efforts

will undoubtedly remain a legacy in Newfoundland and Labrador as he continues

helping us achieve our conservation targets - and with your permission, Mr.

Speaker, he is in the gallery today and I wish that all members certainly show

their applause for him.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I want begin by thanking the minister for a copy of her statement, and to

also offer congratulations to Mr. Mahoney on winning the 2008 International

Conservationist of the Year.

Mr. Speaker, I guess in my former life as an executive assistant, I had the

opportunity from time to time to attend meetings where Mr. Mahoney was - as a

matter of fact, I even have some of the charts here. They may be fourteen or

fifteen years old, but some of the issues that we discussed at that time.

We all know, Mr. Speaker, the caribou population was at its height, and

through this we know, I think, the coyote was introduced here in 1986. This was

the conversation we had back at that time - and I know this gentleman has done a

tremendous job and we want to congratulate him on that. I have to say, when

hearing the minister mention about the $15.3 million, it gives me an

opportunity, I guess - she is talking about the money that was in the Budget and

I have to say, I think we know because at that time we knew the Martin, the

Artic Hare, and the Red Fox, as well as the Caribou, were on a decline from the

time the coyote was introduced to our Province, and we seen that today. To know

that this amount of money, Mr. Speaker - we stood here last Wednesday trying to

come up with a few dollars for home care in our Province, and now we are talking

about the Cameron inquiry and about the funds to help those who are going

through difficult times.

I have to say, Mr. Speaker, yes, we are here to congratulate the gentleman on

this wonderful achievement in our Province, but I have to say to the minister, I

think the $15 million that we have allocated could have been used in other

avenues as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

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

I thank the minister for the advanced copy of her statement; I, too, am very

happy to stand and congratulate Mr. Shane Mahoney on the award that he received,

the 2008 International Conservationist of the Year by the Safari Club

International Foundation. I know that Mr. Mahoney's expertise is very useful

for our government as it does the work that it does with regard to the

maintenance of the herds in our Province, and especially the herd on the Island

that we read about here today in the minister's statement.

I stand with mixed feelings because I do recognize Mr. Mahoney's work and I

do not want anything else that I am going to say to reflect away from his work

but I would hope that the minister would rethink the issues that I have already

raised here on the floor with regard to the proposed Mealy Mountain National

Park, because maintaining the calving area of that - the area that is being

suggested for the park in the national park will be really important for the

people in Labrador who have a hunting heritage, a heritage of Aboriginal

peoples. I would, once again, ask the government to make sure that they support

the original plan for the Mealy Mountain National Park.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to acknowledge

a great loss to Newfoundland and Labrador's visual arts community.

Helen Parsons Shepherd, a local artist known for her commissioned portraits

and still life paintings, passed away on Friday, May 9, at the age of

eighty-five.

Mrs. Parsons Shepherd was a pioneer in this Province's arts community. Her

drive, vision and talent led her to the position of co-founder and operator of

the Province's first-ever formal art school, the Newfoundland Academy of Art

in St. John's. The school, which opened in 1949, was a joint project between

Mrs. Parsons and her husband, the late Reginald Shepherd.

As the first person from this Province to earn a fine arts degree at the

Ontario College of Art in 1948, Helen Parsons Shepherd's work consisted of

portraits of people from all walks of life, as well as scenes from everyday

life, including 1965's Spring in Newfoundland , one of her more

well-known works.

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Parsons Shepherd's portrait work was in very high demand.

She captured perfectly the essence of her subjects, bringing many of this

Province's residents to life on canvas.

In fact, she is responsible for seven of the Speaker portraits you see around

the House of Assembly today, including the portrait of Speaker Harvey Hodder,

which will be unveiled today.

I invite my colleagues to join me in offering condolences to Mrs. Parsons

Shepherd's family and friends. She has led the way for many of the Province's

aspiring and established artists, and her legacy will continue to live through

her work.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advanced copy of his statement today.

Mrs. Shepherd was not personally known to me, but we in the Opposition would

certainly agree and would love to pass along condolences to the family of the

late Mrs. Shepherd and her friends. I do note, however, that going to Ontario

back then must have been a challenge. This lady was indeed a trailblazer when

sixty years ago, before we ever were a part of Canada, she undertook to further

her interests in Ontario and get her fine arts degree. She certainly was a

unique individual in order to do that some-sixty years ago.

We are blessed here in the Chambers, as you say, because we get to look at

her work each and every day that the House is sitting.

We would also like to pass along our condolences to the family and friends.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

For some reason I have not been reading the papers, and I did not know that

Helen Parsons Shepherd had died. So I am really glad to have gotten this

notification today because of your statement, because I did know her. I did not

know her in later years, but I first met her as a young teenager when one of my

friends, one of my very good friends who was an aspiring artist went to the

Newfoundland Academy of Art in St. John's - it was on Cochrane Street,

actually. Helen Parsons Shepherd was a wonderful woman. I remember how warm she

was and as a personality. Another friend and myself used to sit for portraitures

for her students, so it is a nice memory to have.

I am very pleased to be able to stand today and to offer my condolences to

her family and friends.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are for the Premier.

Mr. Speaker, we heard earlier today in the media from Justice John Gomery,

one of the most distinguished inquiry heads in Canadian history. Justice Gomery

stated that the Premier's characterization of the Cameron inquiry as the

Spanish Inquisition conjures images of torture and was very unfair to Justice

Cameron. He also felt that comments such as witch hunt and prosecution were also

inappropriate.

I ask the Premier: Why would you want to use such inflammatory language

against Cameron and the inquiry, in fact, undermining the very process that you

set up to restore confidence in our health care system?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Actually, Mr. Speaker, the term Spanish Inquisition

came from the doctor who was sat next to me at the meeting that we had last

week. However, I did fully agree with her comment and had indicated that I

personally thought in the same terms.

With regard to the inquiry itself and the purpose of the inquiry, I am

totally supportive of it, have been from the start. As you know, we called the

inquiry, and as I said yesterday, we have admitted liability when it comes to

the issues that are before the inquiry. However, it is in the best interests of

the patients and the people in this Province that that inquiry be conducted in a

proper manner, expeditiously so that these people can get answers for the

problems that they have suffered and that they have incurred, and also to get on

with the issue of compensation. As a lawyer, I know that is a long process and

it takes some considerable period of time. The quicker that this inquiry is

resolved and we get to the heart of it and we get to the bottom of the causes,

then that is in the best interest of the patients and, ultimately, the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House of Assembly the Premier

referenced the Rules of Procedure and Practice in discussing the Cameron

inquiry, and I would like to reference one of those rules. In fact, rule 16,

which I am sure the Premier would know, or ought to know, and it states: The

conduct of and the procedure to follow in this inquiry are within the control

and discretion of the Commissioner.

So knowing this and agreeing to this, I ask the Premier: Why would you even

interfere with Justice Cameron's judgement on this?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: There is also a rule, which is rule 18, and also rule

29, which is the basis upon which we have grounded our application. That

application is to make sure that the Commission's counsel conducts itself in a

proper manner. This is not the first time this has been raised. It was not

raised simply by myself and by the Attorney General. In the brief that has

actually been filed with the Commissioner today for her consideration, there are

examples of other counsels specifically stating that in fact they felt that

Commission counsel, Mr. Coffey, was in fact breaching the rules of

cross-examination. So, that is there. It is attached to the brief, that brief

will be a public document. You are more than welcome to have a look at it and

get a legal opinion on it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have a copy of the rules and procedure. I just ask the Premier: Does it

not say that on the consent of the Commissioner that counsel can cross-examine

witnesses?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Will you take that?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In relation to the question from the Leader of the Opposition, let me quote

from - I am not allowed to quote, sorry. Let me paraphrase from a previous

report where we talked about the principles that govern the conduct of a public

inquiry. They are thoroughness, expedition, openness to the public and fairness.

Those are the guiding principles that must apply, and you must never forget that

the purpose of an inquiry is to determine what went wrong to determine in this

case what happened, how to prevent it from happening in the future and to

educate the public. Those are the guiding principles.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: I have no idea how restricting cross-examination by the counsel

is going to interfere with that, I say to the minister.

Mr. Speaker, in this Province we have had several inquiries. In fact, the

Hughes inquiry, the Ocean Ranger inquiry, the Lamer Inquiry, the Turner inquiry

and I am sure there are others, and each of these inquiries use very similar

techniques, if not the same, that are currently being used by the Cameron

inquiry.

I ask the Premier, again: Why not stay out of the process, and I ask that you

withdraw your application in fact limiting questions and allow the inquiry to do

its job as was originally intended?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to reiterate on the part of the government and on

behalf of myself that we are committed to finding the truth in this inquiry.

That is what we want. This government called the inquiry; we want to get to the

bottom of what happened. However, Mr. Speaker, it must be made clear, I have

been involved myself in two major inquiries in the last couple of years,

Commission counsel examines. They can in certain circumstances with leave

cross-examine. If Mr. Crosbie were cross-examining, there would not be any of

these questions arising. The Commission counsel, and as stated in his opening

comments, his role is to prevent a full and balanced picture as efficiently as

possible.

As the Premier has pointed out, Mr. Speaker, we want to get to the bottom of

what happened. We want to move on with the compensation process, and we want to

ensure fairness for all parties involved.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The ER-PR testing is one of the biggest tragedies in our health care system

in our Province. There is a public inquiry that is ongoing, and, Mr. Speaker, I

feel that government is trying to stifle that process and stop the important

questions from being answered as part of this inquiry.

I ask you again, minister, Premier: Will you withdraw your application and

allow this process to continue as was originally intended?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Absolutely not, Mr. Speaker.

We are entitled to have an inquiry conducted in accordance with the proper

Rules of Procedure and Practice. My learned friend, the Attorney General, and I

have been involved in inquiries before. We have gone through the process; they

have to be done by the rules. I repeat again, we called this inquiry. The

problems that occurred here did not happen on our watch. They happened while the

hon. members opposite were in government. We were saddled with this problem. We

are trying to deal with it. We are trying to make sure we get to the bottom of

this problem. We fully support the inquiry, but Madam Justice Cameron has set

down rules of procedure. What we are simply doing is asking her to clarify her

own rules, and as I said yesterday, once she makes her ruling she will have the

last word.

This matter, as of today, will be before her. We will not be commenting after

today until that ruling is given on the merits of that application.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Here we go. The Premier is going to be judge and jury again today as to who

is to blame and where the blame comes from, Mr. Speaker. All of those things. I

think going out and calling it a witch hunt is hardly a process to be followed

in terms of dealing with any part of this inquiry.

Mr. Speaker, there are a number of people out there today, and especially

victims, who want to see this inquiry continue and to see it completed. We have

heard from the medical association who want to see this inquiry completed, but

yet we have no idea if government will grant the appropriate period of time that

has been requested or give the resources to have this done.

I ask you again today, Premier, why let the anguish for those people

continue, make a decision, will you allow for the resources for Judge Cameron to

finish her job?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: I stated yesterday inside the House, and I stated it

outside the House, we will provide the resources that are necessary. We are

asking Judge Cameron to give us an estimate of what her time is going to be,

what is going to be involved in dealing with it until February, whatever costs

are necessary, whatever expenses are necessary that she needs in order to

complete that inquiry accurately will be provided to her. Extensions that are

necessary in order for her to complete that in a reasonable manner will be

provided to her, provided as well that her own Commission counsel are acting

within the scope of her own rules and her own

interpretation of those rules. The

matter is completely in her hands.

There is an excerpt in the brief which can be read by any member of the press

or the public, which has been submitted by us, which talks about the Walkerton

Inquiry. In the Walkerton Inquiry, the Ontario Law Firm Commission has

commented, the public benefits of an inquiry must be weighed against the cost of

interfering with the privacy, the reputation and the legal rights of

individuals.

This is about making sure, as I said before, that at the end of the day we

have a health care system. We cannot turn around and try and fix a problem in

one area and end up with significant damage to the health care system. That is

the job that I have been tasked with.

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

I ask the hon. the Premier to conclude his answer.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That is the responsibility of the Premier, the Cabinet, and the government,

to make sure that at the end of this process we have the answers for the victims

and the best possible health care system that we can.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Justice.

Minister, we know that Friday past on an Open Line show you came to the

defence of the Premier concerning his comments about the Cameron inquiry on

Thursday evening. I ask you: Did you have any discussions with the Premier

related to this issue before the Premier made his statements Thursday evening?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First, let me point out, I did not come to the defence of the Premier. The

Premier does not need to be defended. As the Leader of this Province he has the

right to make the comments that he sees fit, and far be it for me to tell him

what to say or what not to say.

As for my comments on the Open Line show, I made those comments because they

needed to be said; they were said, and I maintain them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you.

Maybe the minister now can address the question: Did you have any

conversations with the Premier about this Cameron situation before he made his

comments about the witch hunt on Thursday evening?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can indicate that I did not know the Premier was meeting with the doctors,

so in terms of his comments about the witch hunt, if that is the comment that

was used, the first I would have heard about that -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. KENNEDY: Sorry, did you say something?

The first comment I would have heard about that would have been that night.

Myself and the Premier discuss matters on a regular basis, especially as it

relates to legal issues, and we discussed this issue. In terms of that night,

there were discussions as to what took place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do not mean to be inquisitorial here, or cross-examining, but I ask the

minister again: Can the minister tell us if you had any discussions about the

process that you are now following under the rules and procedure? Did you have

any discussions with the Premier about following that procedure for example,

trying to question the scope and the procedure that is being followed at the

Cameron inquiry by Commission counsel - did you have that discussion with the

Premier before the Premier made his comments last Thursday in the foyer of this

House, concerning the witch hunt?

That is all; it is pretty straightforward.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Pretty straightforward but a little obtuse, I might say, Mr.

Speaker.

We had meetings that day. The Cabinet meets on a regular basis. There were

discussions, obviously, in Cabinet that I will not get into. Myself and the

Premier and other members of the Cabinet and government discuss these matters on

a regular basis.

As to an approach to be taken, it was only when he became aware of the

concerns of the doctors, if I remember correctly, as expressed to the Premier,

and expressed unequivocally to the Premier during that meeting, that the

comments by the Premier were made. That is my understanding from discussions

with him.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe I will paraphrase, because the minister is obviously being evasive.

The Premier and the Justice Minister made their recent public statements

without following the proper process as outlined in the Rules of Procedure and

Practice of the Cameron inquiry.

I ask the minister: If you were so adamant that questioning should be limited

at the inquiry - and the Premier has referenced here again today that it was

raised before by someone else at the inquiry why wasn't Ms Brazil, who

showed up yesterday on behalf of the government, why was she not dispatched to

the Commission before yesterday morning and before the Premier was out calling

it a witch hunt and you were on the Open Line shows agreeing with him?

You have been in possession of these rules since last August. They are

published on your Web site. Why did you not follow the rules of procedure, and

you only came about after the Premier made his comments?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It was only as a result I was driving to the district on Friday and I

listened to the

preamble on the Open Line show, and that was when I heard what I

would refer to as the inflammatory comments of the Open Line host. As those

comments continued throughout the day, and there was misinformation and

inaccurate information being put out there, I decided at that point that it was

time to address the issue.

There is no magic as to why or when I addressed it. It became an issue on

Friday as a result of comments made on the public airwaves. I said then and I

say now that the Premier, as the leader of this Province, has every right to

make those comments and I support him in that respect.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, at least we have now established that this issue of following process

under this rules and procedure only came about after the Premier's comments

and not before; it was never a consideration by the minister at least.

Mr. Speaker, my next question is also for the minister. At the Lamer Inquiry

there are lots of comparisons back and forth here the current minister

and his law firm was paid over $320,000 in public funds to ensure that justice

was properly done.

I ask the minister: Knowing how important it is to drill down into the

details when you are at one of these inquiries, why were you suggesting on the

Open Lines on Friday that money might be an issue? Why are you putting a price

tag on justice?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: I say to the Opposition House Leader, that is the kind of

stunt that he pulls. That is the kind of misleading information he puts before

this House.

Yesterday afternoon, I gave him all of the information of what people had

been paid at the inquiry. There were seventeen lawyers. My law firm, I think,

was eighth on the list. So, for him to stand up here today and to utilize that

kind of comment, again, I would suggest to you, is misleading and it is

unbecoming of a member of this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

For the record, the minister is referring to Estimates Committee meetings

which happened yesterday and I did ask him if could give me a breakdown of who

was paid what at the Lamer Inquiry, as I have asked the same for the Cameron

inquiry and he did give me the list.

By the way, he might have given me his law firm as number fifteen, but they

were not the fifteenth-lowest paid. I do believe he was in the top third or

fourth ranking, if he wants to get into how much money was spent. Anyway, that

is aside from the point.

My next question -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It seems like I struck a raw cord here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe the Member for The Straits & White Bay North might want to stand,

if he has a question, but right now I think I have the floor, based on yourself.

My question is to the Attorney General. Minster, I submit that your comments

last Friday I said this on Open Line, following your comments

inappropriately interfered in the judicial process.

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. the member to pose his question.

MR. PARSONS: I ask the minister: In your capacity as Attorney General,

will you cease and desist from commentary on the Cameron inquiry, follow the

law, and let the Commission do its job?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The lecturing ethics come from the man who said: If you make me a judge, my

son will run for you in my district. Now, there you go! That is what we are

dealing with over there, Sir.

What happened in the Lamer Inquiry, Mr. Speaker, so that you are aware: the

numbers have been broken down and have been provided. There was $1 million in

fees provided by lawyers representing the police. There was $950,000 in fees

provided for lawyers representing Crown counsel including Mr. Bernard Coffey,

and there was $550,000 provided to counsel representing the wrongfully

convicted.

There you go, Mr. Speaker. Why doesn't he put the full picture before?

Because he doesn't have it in him, that is why.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Education, and they are regarding a

serious matter of possible criminal misappropriation of funds from this Province

under the International Student Education Program.

I ask the minister: When did you, as the minister, and your department first

become aware of this matter and who brought it to your attention?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I first became aware of the matter, not in

particular detail but through an official with the Department of Education. At

that time I was advised that there were some issues. The board handled the

issues, had legal counsel, dealt with the collective agreement and made their

decision. I got further information on August 30, 2007.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: I ask the minister: Did the school board at the time raise the

issue with you at all?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, it was raised to the Department of Education

through the school board through the Assistant Deputy Minister in March of 2007.

It was through the Assistant Deputy Minister in March of 2007 that I was advised

that an employee had been investigated. The board, at that time, sought legal

counsel, had followed the collective agreement and the employee was no longer

working with the board. That was the information I received in March of 2007.

On August 30, 2007, I received an envelope of documents in relation to some

issues with that particular program. That evening I contacted the person who

sent that information to government and I arranged a meeting for September 6,

2007. It was on that day that I met with Ms Lisa O'Neill who was the agent who

had submitted that information.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister, when the school board raised this with your deputy minister, I

think you said, or ADM, at that particular time were there any discussions

between yourself and the school board, and who would have been representing the

school board in those discussions?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, at that time I had no direct conversations with

the school board over this matter. I talked with the Assistant Deputy Minister.

At that time, just based on the information, I felt it should be turned over to

the police. However, I was advised that the board had sought legal counsel on

this matter. We are dealing with it in terms of the collective agreement and

that the individual was no longer working with the school boards. So I was

advised that the school board, having been tasked with the operations of the

school and HR issues, had dealt with the matter through their own legal recourse

at that time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Did you seek any direction from the Department of Justice

knowing this was a potential criminal matter and there was a misappropriation of

funds? Was there any direction sought by the Department of Justice?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, when I received the documents on August 30, 2007,

I asked that the police be contacted. I was advised by the officials that they

were going to seek advice from the Department of Justice as to how we should

proceed. The information was shared with the Department of Justice and at that

time it was determined that the board had the responsibility to deal with the

issues and had dealt with it through the appropriate means. I was not satisfied

with that response. In November of 2007, I again approached officials in the

Department of Justice regarding their opinion and felt I was not necessarily

comfortable with that opinion. I further requested that the information - that

the police be advised that we had this information and if they required a copy

of it or anything that they should contact the department. So, Mr. Speaker, I

personally felt that the information should be turned over to the police and it

was done so in November.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, by November the minister knows that the lady who

disclosed this information to her department and to the school board had then

flown halfway around the world and reported it to the police herself.

I ask you minister, when you said you gave direction back in August to go to

the police, who did you direct and why was it not followed?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, at that time I spoke with some officials in the

Department of Education who felt the proper procedure for them to follow was to

consult with the Department of Justice, which they did. They reported back to me

and they also wrote Ms Lisa O'Neil at that time and I certainly understand the

opinion that I was given. However, I did not necessarily feel it was the

appropriate decision at that time, and I met with Justice again and I further

requested that we write the RNC and turn the matter over to the police.

Now, Mr. Speaker, it did not matter to me where Lisa O'Neil was at the

time. That was certainly not even a consideration. Had she been in the Province

or had been in Korea, I still felt that we had this information in our

possession and it needed to be turned over to the police.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: I would like to ask the minister to Table the letters that were

circulated between your department and the Department of Justice, and your

department and the school board on this matter, the one's you just referred

to.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, any information that we have in relation to that

we will certainly Table in the House. As a matter of fact, I may have some of it

with me here today, but I will certainly make sure that we go through, look at

what correspondence was there, and make sure a copy is provided to the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, going back to March when the school board was

advised and met with officials in your department, minister, why were you not

asking questions and directing the school board at that time to take this matter

to the police? It was known, very early on, that it was a potential criminal

investigation. Why were those directions not given, going back as early as

March?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, at the time in March, 2007, I was advised by the

school board, and of course the school board can certainly speak to their

actions - but I was advised at the time that they had the information, that they

had sought legal counsel, they were following the collective agreement, they

brought the matter to the trustees, and they made a decision. So I was assured

that the issue was being addressed, they had sought legal counsel at the time,

and that they were dealing with the issue. It was an operational matter, an HR

issue that was within the board's domain at that time. At that time, as well,

I did not have any details, nor had I spoken with the agent, the person who I

spoke with on September 6 - but in March of 2007, I was assured that the board

had dealt with the matter appropriately through the recourse that they had

available.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

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

My questions are about the Cameron inquiry.

Mr. Speaker, the fact that the Cameron inquiry is asking tough questions is

not what will ruin our health care system. Inadequate investment in health care

has done more to damage our system than will two lawyers asking tough questions

that witnesses may not want to answer.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier, if he is prepared to invest whatever money is

needed for the work of the inquiry and also to address the recommendations that

come out of the inquiry?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I am going to careful. We cannot write a

blank cheque for anything that happens to be requested. I can certainly tell you

though that you have my assurance, you have the assurance of Cabinet and the

Minister of Health that we will do whatever we can to implement all reasonable

recommendations that come out from the inquiry. I would suggest to you that we

can probably do 100 per cent of those, but I have not seen them, I do not know

them. It would irresponsible for me to even suggest right now that we could

cover them off.

Having said that, the inquiry is there for a purpose, it is there to make

recommendations. When we see those recommendations, we will certainly take them

under very serious advisement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the Premier: Expecting that Justice Cameron will be a reasonable

Commissioner, as I really believe she is, and expecting that whatever request

may be made from where time will be, within reason, will the Premier commit that

adequate money will be there for the Commission to finish its work?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Absolutely, Mr. Speaker.

I have said that in a question that was asked before by the hon. Leader of the

Opposition, that we are there to make sure that the Commission does get the time

to do its work, it does get the resources that are available to do its work. We

have indicated that right from the start. Again, it comes back to the question

of responsibility and accountability. We do have a proposed budget in now from

the Commissioner seeking an extension to February, 2009. We are going back and

asking questions just about that budget to make sure we have complete

clarification on whatever expenditures are there, but we will make sure that the

Commissioner has the time to conduct her inquiry properly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On April 7, the Premier was chastising the Opposition about their questions

on the inquiry and he said that the inquiry should be allowed to go its full

process so that conclusions are drawn from all the evidence and not just parts

of it.

Mr. Speaker, in order to give the public an assurance that we have the best

system available, we need to get to the bottom of what happened with the ER-PR

testing.

I ask the Premier: Will he allow the inquiry to proceed without the added

stress of the Premier intervening publicly with regard to the work of the

inquiry?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I have the heavy burden and heavy

responsibly, as does my Cabinet, of making sure that the health care system in

this Province is the very best possible health care system that we can deliver.

Our minister, this year, and the Minister of Finance in our Budget, increased

health care expenditures to $2.3 billion. We have increased it by $400,000. We

are replacing long-term care facilities. We are building on to hospitals. We are

building new hospitals, putting new drugs in place. We are providing more money

for human resources. We will continue to do that. We are meeting this week with

the oncologists and the pathologists, to make sure that we specifically address

this problem, but we have to do it all within reason and all with the balance of

the responsibilities that we have to a government, to provide social assistance,

to provide education, to try and grow our infrastructure in the Province, to try

and grow our economy in the Province, and it all has to be done within that real

balance.

I can tell you, we take that responsibility very, very seriously and we want

to make sure that at the end of this process we deliver the best possible health

care that we can for the resources that we have available to us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.

The time for questions and answers has expired.

The Chair would like to just raise a couple of points that came from Question

Period today. The Chair is reluctant to interrupt when things happen during the

asking of questions or the answering of questions.

The Chair would like to remind the hon. member, the hon. the Opposition House

Leader, that asking repetitious questions is certainly unparliamentary. The

question should be asked, and it is up to the minister to answer the question,

but to ask the same question repetitiously is certainly unparliamentary.

The Chair has ruled in the past about unparliamentary language in the House.

The Chair has ruled that misled, or the Opposition House Leader misled, or

information was misleading, that is certainly unparliamentary and I would like

to ask the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General if he would withdraw

that remark.

The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, first, when I look at the information that was provided

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has asked the hon. Minister of Justice to withdraw the term

misleading or misled, and I ask the hon. minister to do it without explanation

and to do it now.

The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

MR. KENNEDY: I withdraw the comments, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee of the House of Assembly on Privileges

and Elections has been charged by the Speaker of this House, under subsection

35(1) -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee of the House of Assembly on Privileges

and Elections has been charged by the Speaker of this House, under subsection

35(1) of the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act,

with developing a Code of Conduct for members.

As Chair of that Committee, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to present the

report respecting a Code of Conduct for the hon. members of this House.

MR. SPEAKER: Further reports by standing and select committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the

following resolution:

WHEREAS under subsection 35(1) of the House of Assembly Accountability,

Integrity and Administration Act the Speaker referred to the Standing Committee

of the House of Assembly on Privileges and Elections the responsibility for

developing and proposing to this House of Assembly a Code of Conduct to assist

members in the discharge of their obligations to the House of Assembly,

constituents and the public at large; and

WHEREAS the Standing Committee of the House of Assembly on Privileges and

Elections has met, considered and reached an agreement on a Code of Conduct to

apply to all Members of the House of Assembly;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly, for the purposes of

section 35 of the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration

Act and for the benefit of the electorate of Newfoundland and Labrador, adopt

the following Code of Conduct:

Commitments:

Members of this House of Assembly recognize that we are responsible to the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador and will responsibly execute our official

duties in order to promote the human, environmental and economic welfare of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Members of this House of Assembly respect the law and the institution of the

Legislature and acknowledge our need to maintain the public trust placed in us

and integrity.

Principles:

1. Members shall inform themselves of and shall conduct themselves in

accordance with the provisions and spirit of the Standing Orders of the House of

Assembly, the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration

Act, the Members' Resources and Allowances Rules, the Elections Act, 1991, the

House of Assembly Act and this Code of Conduct and shall ensure that their

conduct does not bring the integrity of their office or the House of Assembly

into disrepute.

2. It is a fundamental objective of public office to serve our fellow

citizens with integrity in order to improve the economic and social conditions

of the people of the Province.

3. We reject political corruption and will refuse to participate in unethical

political practices which tend to undermine the democratic traditions of our

Province and its institutions.

4. Members will act lawfully and in a manner that will withstand the closest

public scrutiny. Neither the law nor this Code of Conduct is designed to be

exhaustive and there will be occasions on which members will find it necessary

to adopt more stringent norms of conduct in order to protect the public interest

and to enhance public confidence and trust.

5. Members will not engage in personal conduct that exploits for private

reasons their positions or authorities or that would tend to bring discredit to

their offices.

6. Members will carry out their official duties and arrange their private

financial affairs in a manner that protects the public interest and enhances

public confidence and trust in government, and in high standards of ethical

conduct in public office.

7. Members will base their conduct on a consideration of the public interest

that are individually responsible for preventing conflicts of interest which

they will endeavour to prevent from arising and members will take all reasonable

steps to resolve any such conflict quickly and in a manner which is in the best

interest of the public.

8. In performing their official duties, members will apply public resources

prudently and only for the purposes for which they are intended.

9. Members will not use official information which is not in the public

domain, or information obtained in confidence in the course of our official

duties, for personal gain or the personal gain of others.

10. Relationships between members and government employees should be

professional and based upon mutual respect and should have regard to the duty of

those employees to remain politically impartial when carrying out their duties.

11. Members should promote and support these principles by leadership and

example.

12. This Code of Conduct has a continuing effect except as amended or

rescinded by Resolution of the House of Assembly.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

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

I am very pleased to bring, again, a petition concerning the need for a

Province-wide 911 system. I will not read the prayer, since it is now on record

when I first presented this petition last week, but once again I bring the

petition with hundreds of signatures.

I noticed in the Advertiser from Grand Falls-Windsor this week that

the latest call for a Province-wide 911 system comes from the Fire Chief of the

Grand Falls-Windsor Fire Department, who speaks very eloquently about how lives

will be saved and how lives sometimes are not saved because of not having a

Province-wide 911 system.

It is a wonderful opportunity to stand and present the petition, because good

things happen because of that. I have noticed recently, as of this morning

actually, because of raising the issue here in the House and also because of

speaking to a statement by the Minister of Municipal Affairs the other day, that

the parties responsible for the Web site on the Violence Prevention Initiative

picked up on what I said here in the House and I am glad to know that what

we say is paid attention to and the home page of the Violence Prevention

Initiative now has accurate information on it. It does say for emergency dial

911, available at the moment only in the St. John's and the Corner Brook

region. So I really thank the minister responsible for hearing what I said and

for making sure that the correction got made on the Web site. As I said, it is

good to know that when we speak it is being listened to.

I have heard what the minister has been saying, the Minister of Municipal

Affairs. We have had conversations across the floor and we have talked about it

too in the Estimates meeting. I am glad that the Province has finally attended

an Atlantic province-wide meeting on 911, but I still urge the minister to speed

up the process. There is a lot of experience out there that we can learn from.

While I know there are details that we have to work out here in our own

Province, that the minister's ministry working in close collaboration with

municipalities should be able to speed up the process, especially around the

information of how to identify roads and laneways and that kind of thing. I know

it is difficult, but it has been done in other places and it can be done here.

What I would like to see is for the minister to set up a special committee

dedicated to nothing else but getting the 911 set up and for that committee to

work with municipalities and stakeholders.

I am really pleased to stand here as the voice for over 50,000 people who

signed the petitions that I am presenting. They are very pleased to know that

this issue is being brought to the House and they are also pleased to know that

government is indicating that it is hearing, but in their name, I once again ask

for the process to be done expediently as possible.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to send another petition on behalf of the residents of Pouch

Cove, Flat Rock, Torbay, Middle Cove and the Bauline area in relation to the

proposed Torbay Bypass road. They have some major concerns when it comes to the

safety and the congestion of the traffic in that area and they are asking all

members of the House to urge government to reconsider the route.

Mr. Speaker, as I stated before, the issue that they are involved with is the

- apparently two kilometres of this proposed road will go right through the Town

of Torbay, turning it into a five-lane highway. That is one of the major

concerns that they have. They would like for it to start at the entrance to the

boundaries of St. John's and bypass the town altogether. Many people got

together at a public meeting recently and discussed this issue.

It was only today I received a letter from a resident in Torbay itself on a

different topic altogether, and their concerns about the environmental study,

the damage that they feel will be done to the wetlands and the wildlife in that

area for that proposed road.

Mr. Speaker, we are calling upon government to take another look at this. I

know the issues that they are saying is because of the possible extension to an

airport and the terrain of the land and also the watershed area, but those

people believe that there are other incidents in the immediate area around the

city and this area that those issues are just as prevalent as they are in this

one.

On behalf of the residents, I once again ask the government to reconsider

this proposed road, the route of it, and ask government to take that into

consideration.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

Orders of the Day

Orders of the Day

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to call Motion 3, first reading of Bill 32,

An Act To Amend The

House Of Assembly Accountability, Integrity And Administration Act, first

reading of that particular bill.

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Government House Leader shall have

leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The House Of Assembly

Accountability, Integrity And Administration Act, Bill 32, and that the said

bill be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the minister shall have leave

to introduce Bill 32 and that the said bill be now read a first time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

The motion is carried

Motion, the hon. the Government House Leader to introduce a bill, "An

Act To Amend The House Of Assembly Accountability, Integrity And Administration

Act," carried. (Bill 32)

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The House Of Assembly Accountability,

Integrity And Administration Act. (Bill 32)

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

When shall the said bill be read a second time? Now? Tomorrow?

MR. RIDEOUT: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 32 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would now like to call Motion 1, the Budget Speech, That this House

Approves In General The Budgetary Policy Of The Government.

I believe that the hon. the Member for Lewisporte is prepared to take

part in

the debate.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Lewisporte.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is indeed an honour to stand in the House today to speak on Budget 2008. I

still get a little bit of jitters standing in the House. It is something I look

forward to doing but I am not quite as accomplished as the Deputy Premier. He

can get up in this House and speak for, last week, sixty minutes. I was sitting

behind him and all I saw were two little sticky yellow tabs of notes in front of

him. I am not quite as accomplished as that.

In my last speech I remarked on something as I was concluding my maiden

speech. I said that this government does their research and they listen to the

people. That is what I want to speak on today. I want to take a few minutes to

talk about a government that listens. In reflecting on this, Mr. Speaker, I

decided and started to think about something, and I want to share a little

personal perspective.

Since entering politics six, seven months ago, a lot of people come up to you

and they will ask you questions like: How are you enjoying it? One question that

has sort of come to my attention several times is the question: Why did you

enter politics? I reflected on this in the last little while, and there are a

couple of things that came to my mind. One thing I had to ask myself, I guess,

and some people have asked me: Did you get in it for the money? Well, I thought

about that: Did I get in it for the money? Well, I had twenty-two years of

experience in education. I was a school principal and sort of gotten up to the

levels you could climb, I suppose, in the financial ladder of success in

education. Doing the calculations, I think it is about, in terms of take home

pay, $300 or $400 a month that I am getting by doing this job over what I was

getting before. I really can say it was not for the money. Even though I will

take every cent I can get, it was not for the money.

Another question that people ask and I have reflected on: Well, did you get

in there for the power? Again, when I think about the power that I have as a

Member for Lewisporte District and I think about that, I said: well, really the

only power I have is the power to serve, the power to serve the people. The only

power I have really is what the people have given me as they have elected me to

be their member. Those same people can remove that power in the next election if

they wanted to, so the power that one gets from being a member can be short

lived. I would also argue, if that is a reason for being there then I would

think it would make me very ineffective.

There are all kinds of reasons, I suppose, I might give as to why I did not

get into politics. I have to say that I am being totally honest when I say I got

into this position because I really did believe that I could make a difference

for the people in my district, and I really do believe that once I leave this

office, whenever it is, that my district would be better served because I was

there. I believe that, and that I why I am in here.

That brings me back to what I said; I was going to talk about a government

that listens. I ran for the political Conservative Party under the leadership of

our current Premier because I believe they had set a record and a standard of

listening to people. If we are working for a government that listens to people

then we who are members of this House have the ability to influence what

happens, and as the people tell us their issues we bring them forward to a

government that listens, and therefore we are doing a noble job. I think the

ability for all of us to influence what happens as members is there because the

government does listen.

Now, enough philosophizing; I am going to move from that now to sort of give

the proof. On February 18, 2008, I went to Gander in the afternoon to the

pre-Budget consultation meetings. The Minister of Finance was there with his

officials. In the evening I went to Grand Falls-Windsor to listen to pre-Budget

consultations again, on the same day.

I have to say, I was really impressed with the atmosphere that was created in

these meetings. The Minister of Finance introduced himself and the officials

around the table, and talked a little bit about the Budget and where we are

going as a Province and why he was doing the consultations. His demeanour

created an atmosphere in the room that I would argue was welcoming. People felt

comfortable; there was not an air of intimidation. The people who came to

present felt comfortable in doing it, and I thank the Minister of Finance for

that. His gentle approach with people, his honest, up-front manner created an

atmosphere where people felt comfortable contributing. I remarked to one person

that the Minster of Finance reminded me something of a gentle giant very,

very gentle in his approach - and that was quite welcome.

The debt clock was there. During the consultations we heard about the debt

clock. Some people in the media were saying do away with it, and some were

saying it is a good thing, but I watched it and to me it was fascinating because

I saw these thousands of dollars clicking up on this clock, by the minute. It

was a real eye-opener, and that was a good thing, because it showed us how much

money we are spending on an hourly basis to service our debt.

Of course, I said, well, if we can cut down the debt, what will happen is we

will slow down that clock. Mr. Speaker, I would love to be in this House, still

a Member for Lewisporte District, when that clock stops. That will be a great

day, I think, if we can ever get that debt clock to finally stop; because, once

we do, hundreds of millions of dollars every year we will have to improve health

care, to improve social programs, to further cement our position of prominence

in this country and in our world; and, of course, that will improve the lives of

our citizens for years and years, and forever. So it is nice to see that this

debt clock is slowing down, and I look forward to the day when indeed it will

stop.

At the Budget consultation hearings, I heard lots of stuff. I will tell you

what I did hear. One of the things I heard people say is that they would like to

see the debt reduced. What happened in the Budget? Did the government listen? I

would say yes, the government listened. As a matter of fact, I was reading in

one of the financial reports from the Department of Finance, in the Budget, that

said by the end of this current fiscal year our debt will be reduced from $11.9

billion to $10 billion. Significant. Significant.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: Another thing I heard at the consultation hearings, there were

representatives there from the different municipalities in Central Newfoundland

and I heard them ask for increased funding for their municipalities.

It was only a couple of weeks ago I had the privilege of attending sort of a

press release, a pre-Budget announcement if you wish, when the Minister of

Municipal Affairs announced a great new cost-shared funding arrangement for

municipalities; an arrangement which will see our smaller areas, of which all

but one town in my district will come under, a ninety-ten cost-shared

arrangement for infrastructure and capital projects, 10 per cent. Ten percent is

what these municipalities will have to come up with.

So, again, when I go back to the pre-Budget consultations and I listen to our

municipal leaders asking for increased funding, the government listened. We

listened, because we are a government that listens.

Another thing I heard, there was a plea for the government to reduce the tax

on insurance - to reduce it - and what happened in the Budget again, Mr.

Speaker? We eliminated the tax on insurance. It is gone, at a cost of $94

million this year and some $75 million a year as we go forward.

I looked at my own insurance. You know, I have a couple of vehicles, and my

daughter has a vehicle, and a house. I added it up and, for me personally, I am

saving about $500 a year in insurance tax. People across this Province are

saving hundreds of dollars in insurance tax, and our businesses, indeed, if you

are looking at some of the fisherpeople and people with their own trucks and

that, they are saving thousands of dollars every year in insurance. It is money

in their pockets, and again I will say it is because we have a government that

listens.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: Our Premier said that the Minister of Finance heard this

everywhere he went and the Minister of Finance, with the Premier and the

government, acted.

As I attended the meetings in Gander and then out in Grand Falls-Windsor,

there were presentations about an MRI machine coming, and wanting an MRI machine

for Central Newfoundland; again a great piece of equipment that will help to

service the medical needs of all of the people out in Central Newfoundland. What

happened in the Budget again? We have an MRI machine announced for Central

Newfoundland. Great stuff! Great stuff!

I heard someone ask about the cost of registering a motor vehicle, $180,

saying it needed to be reduced. Again, what happened in the Budget? A government

that listens, and we reduced it.

Outside of the Budget consultations, I will say, Mr. Speaker, my experience

in my professional life has been in the field of education. As an educator,

consulting and listening to parents, students, fellow teachers, school board

officials, et cetera, over the years I have heard issues raised in the field of

education. I am sure that those same issues have risen in the ranks to the

Department of Education and to the minister and government.

Before coming in here I was a school principal and in recent years I actually

served as the President of the provincial School Administrator's Council. It

is a branch of the NLTA, but it basically advocates for school administrators in

the Province. I will say, Mr. Speaker, that one thing I have found too, is that

I believe our school administrators are very busy people. They are the people

who bear the responsibility of ensuring that their schools are open in September

and a

schedule is in place, a

schedule that provides for maximum educational

opportunity for our students. They are the people who manage the disciplinary

concerns, including fair and open communication with the homes. They are the

ones who ensure that the school board and departmental policies are communicated

and followed. They are the first called in case of emergency. They are the

people who evaluate teachers. They ensure proper supervision and make sure the

school is a safe and caring place.

One of the tasks that school administrators would like to be more involved

with is this whole area of instructional leadership for teachers. Unfortunately,

it is one of the duties that has been left on the back burner for some time,

because there were more immediate and pressing issues that had to be addressed.

With the provision of additional administrative time to our schools, it will be

possible to meet some of these instructional leadership needs. Our school

administrators, our principals and our vice-principals will have more time to

dedicate to instructional leadership. Mr. Speaker, I want to say, that is a good

thing, that is a great thing. This improvement has come about because this

Minister of Education and this government has listened as people have brought

their needs forward, and again we have an improvement that has come about

because the government listens.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. VERGE: Another thing that I have listened to in my experience as an

educator - I have often heard teachers and school board people talk about the

manner in which we allocate teachers in the Province. It was done pretty well by

a numerical formula, and what happened sometimes is that the numbers did not

quite add up in schools and the numerical formula did not work the way we wanted

it to.

Just a few weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, our Minister of Education - I had the

privilege of hearing him again - made an announcement regarding the adoption of

a new teacher allocation formula. That formula will assign teachers now on the

basis of student need as opposed to district-wide numbers. It is an example of a

decision, I would argue, that will impact the students of our Province in a very

direct manner. It is my experience, Mr. Speaker, that nothing impacts a student's

education like the teacher you put in the classroom. Capping class size will

ensure teachers now have a class of students that they can manage, and more

importantly, a number who they can build relationships with. It will allow

teachers, especially those at the younger grades where the homeroom concept is

very widespread, it will allow them to more adequately address and care for the

emotional needs of children. It is these needs that I think are very important

to meet because sometimes they stand in the way of fully addressing the academic

needs.

I will give you an example. A couple of years ago I was principal of a K-12

school and I had a group of students in one grade on the primary elementary

level, one grade of about thirty-two or thirty-three and another grade, the same

number, thirty-one, thirty-two. The formula provided for me, as principal, to

assign one point five teachers per grade. Now, how do I assign one point five

teachers per grade? Well, I had to make a decision. Either I would, in one

grade, put all of the students together for morning classes maybe, let them

separate into two different groups for afternoon classes. I could have done that

in both grades, but I looked at both classes. Anyway, I made a decision. In the

first grade I would put two teachers and in the other grade I would put one

teacher. What happened was that as the year progressed we had students transfer

in to the other grade and that class swelled to thirty-five or thirty-six, and

it was a bit too late at that point in time to do anything about it.

I share that story for this reason only, because under the new way of

allocating teachers that this minister has announced, I would not have to make

that decision now because at that level, with that number of students, there

would actually be two teachers per grade allocated. That is great, it is

wonderful.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to conclude his comments.

MR. VERGE: By leave, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member by leave.

MR. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Another thing that I - again, sticking with education just for another

minute. One of the issues that parents and students and teachers, the whole

gamut in education have talked about the whole issue of secretarial time in

schools and some of the smaller schools did not have quite enough hours it was

felt, and talking about the demands of a school secretary and the fact that it

would be nice to have somebody on the front desk when people come in and

visitors come in. I have heard it at principal's meetings for years. I was

very pleased when, again I saw this Budget, and it was announced in the Budget

that $1 million is being allocated to more fully address that need in the

upcoming year. Again, Mr. Speaker, I say that that happened because the Minister

of Education, this government listened and they made improvements, and I believe

that we will continue to listen, Mr. Speaker, as the needs continue to arise.

I will conclude, Mr. Speaker, with saying this, that while I stand here as a

new member and proud to be here, happy to be in this new role, I can say without

fear of being contradicted, that this job is enjoyable and I believe that this

government listens to the people and we have made progress. We have made a lot

of progress. I do not stand here naively and say that there are no problems left

to be addressed in this Province. Sure there are issues. There will always be

issues that we will deal with. I can also safely say that as long as we stay the

course, we operate good fiscal management, we keep servicing our debt and we

keep listening to the people, that more and more needs will be addressed. We

will solve more and more of the problems as we move forward. What will happen is

that our standard of living will rise. Our attitudes will rise and people will

be taking greater and greater pride in living in this Province.

Thank you for your time, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Good afternoon. I am very pleased to rise in this House this afternoon to

speak for just a few minutes and take

part in this Budget Debate.

Mr. Speaker, it is indeed an incredibly historic Budget for the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, and for this reason I am very proud to stand in this

House on behalf of our government and talk about some of the great things that

are happening in this Province as a result of this most recent budget.

It is a special day in this House, actually, Mr. Speaker, because my

predecessor in the House of Assembly, the former Speaker, Mr. Harvey Hodder,

will be hanged later this afternoon, as his portrait will be proudly displayed

on the walls of this great House. So, I am pleased to get a chance to speak in

this House today just prior to that significant event, and I am very pleased

that I will be able to be here with my colleagues to celebrate with him.

Mr. Speaker, in talking about this recent Budget, I think it is important to

look at the financial performance of the Province over the last year. With the

provincial surplus of over $1 billion, there is no mistaking the obvious

economic prosperity that exists in Newfoundland and Labrador. There is great

wealth here. We are wealthy as a people, we are wealthy as a Province, and

beyond that wealth I think that such a surplus is indicative of the sound fiscal

management that this government has brought to our Province over the last

four-plus years.

Another interesting note about the economic performance of our Province

relates to - not out-migration, but in-migration. In fact, we had a net of

almost 2,000 people in the last half of 2007 come back to Newfoundland and

Labrador. Our population is actually on the increase, which is quite

encouraging. I think that is a sign of the kind of prosperity that is taking

place here. It is a sign of the growth of our Province, both economically and

socially, and I think it is great news and a sign of great things to come in

this Province.

I would now like to speak for a few minutes on some of the budget highlights

from my perspective, some things that directly impact just about every

Newfoundlander and Labradorian, but, in particular, people in the district that

I represent, in Mount Pearl North.

I was very pleased to see further income tax cuts. It was not something I

necessarily expected to see after the cuts that took place last year, but I was

delighted to see a further cut to income tax rates in the Province. We have gone

from having among the worst in the country to being among the best in the

country, and I think that is significant for each and every citizen in our

Province.

This latest cut will put $75 million back in the pockets of taxpayers in

Newfoundland and Labrador. That will strengthen the economy in each and every

community in this Province. So regardless of your income, regardless of your own

personal wealth, that kind of investment back in the economy will mean good

things for all of our communities, which I think is very positive.

Like most people, I was delighted to see the insurance tax eliminated. As I

was knocking on doors back in the fall, it was an issue that many constituents

raised with me, and I was pleased to say, as the Member for Lewisporte pointed

out, that this government is listening and that concerns such as this have been

addressed even in this year's Budget.

Like most Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, I was pleased to see motor

vehicle registration fees going down from $180 to $140 effective May 1. This is

a $10 million annual benefit for the people of our Province, which indeed is

good news.

Like the Member for Lewisporte, who spoke just a moment ago, I was incredibly

pleased with the investments in education in this Province. The total budget for

education increased by another $70 million this year, bringing the budget up to

$1.1 billion. That is a significant investment in education.

I was pleased to see $500,000 allocated for additional funding to school

districts for substitute leave, which I have heard from teachers in my district

is a concern, and I am pleased to see that concern continue to be addressed. I

think the most significant thing is that, despite the fact that over the years

the population of our Province has fallen, this government, year after year, has

put more money into education and put more teachers in our schools, and once

again this year we are seeing that kind of leadership and that kind of visionary

thinking which is great to see.

In particular, in terms of my district, I was pleased to see $89 million in

the Budget for new school construction which will directly impact families that

I represent, particularly in the Elizabeth Park neighbourhood in the Town of

Paradise. There are going to be a couple of new schools built in Paradise over

the next couple of years, and an expansion to Holy Family School as well. So

that is great news for the many young families that I represent in the Town of

Paradise.

As someone who graduated from post-secondary education only a few years ago,

I was delighted to see the tuition freeze at Memorial University and the College

of the North Atlantic continue. This is requiring a considerable investment on

behalf of government of $56 million over four years. Over 25,000 students will

benefit from the continued tuition freeze at Memorial and the College of the

North Atlantic, and this will mean more money in the economy as well and less

debt for students which is great news for post-secondary students across the

Province.

Mr. Speaker, a new initiative that was announced in this Budget is the Youth

Retention and Attraction Strategy. Bringing young people back to this Province,

and keeping young people in this Province, is something that I have always been

very passionate about. Even as a high school student, Mr. Speaker, I remember my

guidance counsellor at high school talking to me about all the great

universities that exist in Ontario and Quebec and Nova Scotia and elsewhere. I

made the decision to stay in Newfoundland and Labrador and attend Memorial

University, and I quickly discovered that it is among the best post-secondary

institutions in the country and our young people, even in terms of pursuing

post-secondary education, certainly do not need to leave this Province to pursue

those opportunities. I think the government's commitment this year of $1.38

million for a Youth Retention and Attraction Strategy will mean good things for

young people in our Province. It will allow more students and more young people

in our communities to pursue opportunities here, so I hope that I will be able

to contribute to that initiative over the year ahead.

In addition to that commitment, Mr. Speaker, $5.3 million was set aside for

Opportunities Newfoundland and Labrador, to inform students and job seekers

about existing opportunities and about emergent opportunities here in this

Province, training in career supports, and also to highlight the many benefits

of working in this Province. That is good news for young people, and if our

communities are going to remain strong and vibrant then we do need to keep our

young people here. This government recognizes that for sure.

There is also money being spent on recruitment fairs and other recruitment

initiatives right across the Province, which I think will mean good things for

all of our communities and for business as well.

Mr. Speaker, in recent weeks we witnessed one of the biggest and best

infrastructure announcements in the history of our Province. As someone who has

a background in municipal government, I fully understood the significance of the

announcement that was recently made and how it will impact our communities. We

are talking about a commitment of over $673 million for infrastructure,

increasing the six-year investment to more than $3 billion. Three billion

dollars, Mr. Speaker. That means significant investment in each and every

community, practically, in Newfoundland and Labrador. The new cost-sharing

program for municipalities is like nothing we have ever seen. It is going to

mean, in the communities I represent, in Mount Pearl and Paradise, it is going

to mean more money for roads, for water and sewer infrastructure, for new

recreational facilities, for expansion to recreational facilities. We are

talking about tens of millions of dollars over the next few years for those two

municipalities alone. I want to congratulate my colleague, the Minister of

Municipal Affairs, for introducing an infrastructure program that is going to

benefit all of our districts, and it is certainly going to be of great benefit

to the district that I represent as well.

On top of that, Mr. Speaker, this Budget set aside $182 million in road

improvements, including $73 million for the Provincial Roads Improvement

Program. I think, as community leaders and as provincial leaders, we recognize

that we have to have the foundation in place. If we are going to generate

economic growth in all communities in this Province, we have to have the

infrastructure in place, and this government has demonstrated a commitment like

no other to that objective.

Mr. Speaker, staying on the topic of municipal government for just a moment,

I was pleased to see a commitment to regional co-operation in this Budget as

well. One million dollars has been set aside to help municipalities eliminate

barriers to regional co-operation, and I think that is really positive. There is

also funding in the Budget for a five-year pilot project to explore regional

governance models and explore the delivery of municipal services over a broad

geographic area. I commend the minister for those new visionary initiatives as

well.

I can speak to that personally, because I believe that one of the best

examples of regional cooperation anywhere in this Province, and perhaps, Mr.

Speaker, anywhere in this country, is right here in the Northeast Avalon region.

Despite some of the rhetoric, we have communities right here, the two cities,

the towns that surround the two cities, working cooperatively on many fronts to

deliver municipal services. In fact, one of the best examples of that kind of

cooperation is right here. Hopefully, other communities can learn from some of

the experiences of communities in this region.

Mr. Speaker, as a young person I am very concerned about our environment and

protecting our natural environment. We have a lot of reasons to take great pride

in the natural environment that we all enjoy here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

One announcement in the Budget that I was particularly pleased to see was a $2

million commitment over three years for the Newfoundland and Labrador Green

Fund. It includes climate change initiatives and energy efficiency initiatives

which can affect virtually every citizen in the Province. We do need to be

concerned about climate change. Living on an Island in the North Atlantic we

definitely have reason to pay attention to the climate change issue. I am

pleased to see that it is an important priority on government's agenda and

that steps are being taken to make advancements in that area as well.

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to our natural resources the Budget commitments

are practically endless. It was amazing to see such a strong commitment to the

responsible development of our natural resources in this recent Budget. The

Budget expands on the Province's energy plan commitment. There is a $215

million investment for the energy corporation to support the financing required

for major projects that are on the horizon; an investment in Newfoundland and

Labrador Hydro to improve the company's financial profile which will bode well

for the future; and an investment in site maintenance and upgrades at the Bull

Arm Site to ensure that that facility remains vital and important as an economic

driver in this Province.

One initiative that relates to the energy plan that I think is also

significant from an environmental perspective is a $4.5 million investment in

the Ramea Wind-Hydrogen power generation demonstration project. That will result

in the purchase of two or perhaps three wind turbines. Wind energy is perhaps

the way of the future and something that I am very pleased to see our government

investing in as well. Mr. Speaker, the continued development of our energy plan,

I think will bode well for the future of this Province.

Another area of our provincial developmental that I am quite passionate about

is tourism marketing. We have made incredible strides over the last

four-and-one-half-years as a result of the work of this government. We have

received many, many awards, as I have spoken about in the past in this House, as

a result of our tourism marketing campaigns and our efforts.

In the tourism budget this year I certainly applaud the minister for

committing another $100,000 to maintain the East Coast Trails Network, which

certainly impacts people in my district. While the trail itself is not in my

district, many of the residents who I represent certainly do take the

opportunity to enjoy the Trails Network. I think it is an important part of the

tourism infrastructure that we have in place in this Province and particularly

in this region.

I was pleased to see additional funds in this Budget dedicated to the

Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council. I believe we have a unique, a vibrant

and an incredible culture here that is worth preserving. It is worth promoting,

it is worth investing in and it is certainly worth celebrating. For that reason,

I am pleased to see government meet its commitment to double the budget for the

Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council over three years.

Mr. Speaker, the North Atlantic Fiddle Convention is coming up in our

Province, and $250,000 was dedicated in this Budget assisting with that effort,

and with other awards programs like the East Coast Music Awards, and with other

special events that bring visitors and economic activity to our Province.

Mr. Speaker, during Volunteer Week I had the opportunity to introduce a

motion in this House which was passed unanimously, to recognize the importance

of our volunteers and to recognize the contribution of our volunteers. I was

pleased in this Budget to see $650,000 allocated to the Office of the Volunteer

and Non-Profit Sector. In discussions with the minister, I know he is very

committed to getting out and meeting with representatives from the voluntary

sector to ensure that this new office really has teeth and really makes a

difference in terms of engaging the sector and working collaboratively with the

voluntary sector to move initiatives forward. I certainly hope that I can be of

some help and some support to the minister in that effort.

Mr. Speaker, many of my colleagues in government have spoken about the

Province's Poverty Reduction Strategy. In this Budget alone, we saw an

investment of $12 million this year which represents $17.3 million annualized.

That brings the total to more than $100 million annually to support the Province's

Poverty Reduction Strategy. These are significant dollars and they will allow

for many initiatives to be expanded on. It will also allow for many new

initiatives to be explored as well.

In this Budget we saw $1.7 million to support initiatives related to youth at

risk. We saw $605,000 for a Youth Addiction Prevention and Early Intervention

Program. We saw over $400,000 to support residential and transition services for

youth through a supportive board and lodgings model.

We saw over a half million dollars to expand the Community Youth Network to

form additional sites in Newfoundland and Labrador. That is a program, Mr.

Speaker, that I have had an opportunity to work with. We have seen great success

from Community Youth Networks in this area, and I am pleased to see that that

initiative is being expanded to support other regions of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, this Budget, in terms of poverty reduction, also set aside $1

million to improve access to healthy food and community activities. We are

talking about investments in Healthy Baby Clubs, in Kids Eat Smart programs and

JumpStart programs right across Newfoundland and Labrador.

This government recognizes our role in economic development. We are also very

serious and very committed to playing a very meaningful role in the social

development of each and every community in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, there is great work being done in the Department of Justice and

there are numerous announcements that directly affect people in the communities

that I represent. I was very pleased to see $1.6 million dedicated to

strengthening the RNC and the RMCP.

Mr. Speaker, several years ago, before this government took office in 2003,

it was no secret that the RNC was not well resourced and was not well supported.

It was lacking in equipment, the morale was low, and the RNC was struggling to

deliver its basic mandate in a lot of ways, in my opinion, as someone who worked

with them on a community level. We have seen a real change over the last four

and a half years, and this Budget once again builds on this government's

commitment and vision to improving policing throughout Newfoundland and

Labrador.

We see a great recruitment and training partnership with Memorial University.

We see an investment in new equipment and new technology. Morale within the

force, I would argue, Mr. Speaker, is at an all time high. Other specific issues

in this region are being addressed in this Budget. There is a new cyber crime

investigator going to be put in place. The drug trade unit, the unit that

explores drug enforcement, will double as a result of this Budget. These are

just a couple of examples of the investments made in terms of Justice in this

Budget.

Mr. Speaker, I could go on and on. There is lots of money in this Budget for

public sector wage increases. There are many great initiatives for seniors,

increased investments in health care, not only in terms of infrastructure but

also in terms of personnel, and there are some particular initiatives that

relate directly to the recruitment and retention of nurses which I am

particularly pleased to see as well.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be a member of this government and a member of

this House for such a historic Budget, and I look forward to seeing many of

those new initiatives implemented over the course of this year.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have the opportunity this afternoon to

participate in what I believe is a historic Budget Debate for this Province.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Mr. Osborne): The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just have a few words to add to the Budget debate today.

A few days ago, I had an opportunity to speak for an hour on the Budget and

to talk about where the revenues are generated in the Province and how they are

being spent, in terms of where the money comes from, not just where the money

goes.

I know that some members at that time took some offence to me calling the

Budget a banker's budget, but I certainly stand by those comments, and they

are certainly very relevant, but today I want to talk about one of the

expenditures that is in this Budget and that is the expenditure that is being

provided for the Cameron inquiry. That is the inquiry that is ongoing in this

Province, a judicial inquiry into the ER-PR testing of many patients in

Newfoundland and Labrador, and how there has been some faulty testing that had

occurred, how information was communicated within the health corporation, how

information was communicated within government and held within government, in

some departments, for up to two years, from 2005 onward, and the accountability

for that information and how it is portrayed to the public.

I want to talk about that expenditure today, Mr. Speaker, because this is one

of the largest health disasters that we have seen in Newfoundland and Labrador

history. It has contributed to the deaths of a number of women in this Province

and there are still many others, men and women, who are fighting cancer today

because of wrong diagnoses or wrong treatments that they may have been

prescribed at that time.

It is no small issue and it is no small matter. It is every bit as equivalent

to other major inquiries that we have had in this Province, whether it be the

one into Mount Cashel or the one into the Ocean Ranger disaster, and therefore,

Mr. Speaker, no one in this Province should make light of what is happening

within that inquiry, or of the time or the expenditure that is required in order

for it to be done appropriately.

I want to talk about that today, and I talk about that simply because there

has been application made to the government by Justice Margaret Cameron, who is

the appointed Chief Justice for this inquiry, appointed by the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador through the Premier, and this individual, Mr. Speaker,

has requested that there be an extension of time given for her to finish her

work as part of this public inquiry, and that also she be given additional funds

to be able to carry out and fulfill the terms of reference and the mandate that

she has been given.

Now, those issues have become the centre of discussion and controversy in

this Province, accusations being made by the Attorney General, of all people.

The one individual in this House of Assembly and the one individual in this

Province who is expected to be non-biased in upholding justice in this Province,

Mr. Speaker, is the one person that is out there today questioning this.

Now, there is something wrong with that. There is something wrong with that,

when the Attorney General is the person speaking out and lashing out and

questioning what is happening within the judicial process within this Province.

Mr. Speaker, his referenced comments have been in relation to the amounts of

money being requested, in relation to the amount of time that witnesses are

taking to give testimony. Well, Mr. Speaker, witnesses are invited there for one

purpose only, and that is to provide information to the inquiry and to the

counsel that is there, so that they may take that information and analyze it to

form into recommendations at the end of the day.

Anyone who has witnessed and watched this inquiry, it is not like a running

flow of information that is coming from witnesses. We have seen occasions where

there had to be probing and questioning in order to get the details that they

need to be able to make a decision.

So, why would one want to stifle that process? Why would one want to limit

the amount of time that a witness would need to take to give testimony or to be

questioned? Why would one want to limit the number of questions, or those

counsel that would be entitled to ask questions? Because that is exactly what is

happening in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, let's back up a little bit. We know that there was a request

made from Justice Cameron for an extension and additional resources. We also

know that on Thursday, on that same day, there was a meeting that occurred

between the pathologists, the oncologists, the Medical Association, the Minister

of Health, and the Premier, in the Province. We also know that meeting was based

around: discussions around pay and salary benefits for pathologists in the

Province; the shortage that we are incurring right now; the workload that they

are about to take on; what will have to happen to tests that have to be sent out

of the Province; what kind of delays will this cause for patients who need to

know what their prescribed treatments should be in the event of having gone

through cancer.

Mr. Speaker, this was what the meeting was about and it took three weeks of

probing in this House of Assembly, probing the Minister of Health, probing the

Premier, to get them to realize and look at this issue seriously enough that

they would actually take the time to sit down with these people, listen to what

they have to say, and act on their behalf.

On Thursday night we finally got to that stage, and that happened, but

something else happened, Mr. Speaker. Something else happened. The Premier came

out of the meeting with the pathologists and the oncologists and he was on fire,

Mr. Speaker. He was on fire. Something was scorching the Premier at that time.

He ran before the cameras, and the first thing he did was question the integrity

of the Cameron inquiry. In front of the media, in the middle of the scrum,

scorching, Mr. Speaker, for some reason, he questioned the full integrity of the

individuals and the process regarding the Cameron inquiry in this Province

the very inquiry that he himself set up, the very Justice that he appointed.

In this House we asked to have input into the terms of reference and we were

shut down. We were told by the government: No way, you will not have any input

into the terms of reference. We are the government; we are going to do this. It

is going to be done our way.

Well, Mr. Speaker, they did it their way and now the Premier has a problem

with his way, because nobody is falling in line. The soldiers are not marching

to the drum, Mr. Speaker. The problem here is that all the soldiers are not

marching to the drum. He cannot line them up like he can his caucus and his

Cabinet. He cannot have them all play to the one beat and, because of that, Mr.

Speaker, he is scorching, so he goes out and he questions the Cameron inquiry

and the integrity of the people who are there. He calls it a witch hunt. A witch

hunt, Mr. Speaker, is the phrase that he uses. He talks about it being a

prosecution, not an inquiry. This is the kind of inflammatory language that the

Premier used to be able to describe a process that is ongoing in this Province

to get to the bottom of some very serious, serious issues.

Mr. Speaker, people were offended by his comments, and he knew they were

offended by his comments, so what happened? The next day, the Minister of

Justice, the Attorney General, runs to the Open Line shows - in fact, he didn't

run, Mr. Speaker. He told us today he was sitting in his car, on the way to his

district, and he pulled over or something to make a phone call. He went to the

public airwaves, to the Open Line shows, in what was supposed to be in defence

of the hole that the Premier had just dug himself into; but, as opposed to

digging him out, Mr. Speaker, he made the hole bigger. The Minister of Justice

actually made the hole bigger, calling into question not only the integrity of

the Commission and the Commissioner, but then calling into question the amounts

of money being spent, the amount of time it was taking, the amount of time that

witnesses had to spend on the stand. This is the Attorney General for the

Province, the highest officer in the justice system within our Parliament, Mr.

Speaker. Notwithstanding the Supreme Court, but within our Parliament, the

Attorney General, who is now out questioning on an Open Line show in his car on

the side of the road, so fuming mad by this time with the host of the Open Line

show that he does not bail the Premier out of the mess he is in or come to his

defence, but, in fact, he makes the hole bigger in my opinion. This is the

classic activity that we have seen play out over two days. For some reason the

government was getting scorched here and this was what we seen happening, as

opposed to them keeping their nose out of this and letting the people who are

involved do their work.

Let's see what happened on Monday morning, Mr. Speaker. It gets a whole lot

better come Monday morning. All Mother's Day they must have been scrambling up

in the Department of Justice. They must have been scrambling in the Department

of Justice to try and find a clause somewhere in these rules and procedures that

would outline the Commission and how the Commission was to be run, to try and

bail the Premier out of the hole he just made for himself in calling into

question the integrity of this inquiry. I figure they must have had every lawyer

in the Department of Justice on overtime on the weekend going through this

document to try and find something that they could use to bail themselves out.

Well, let me tell you what they found. They found something called

section

29. This is what they were intending to use,

section 29, which says that you can

adduce evidence from a witness. It says some other things here. Adducing

evidence, maybe I will give you a definition of it now in a little while, if I

have enough time, then the hon. members will know exactly to what I refer.

Mr. Speaker, this is what they decided they would use. They sent a lawyer

from the Department of Justice, a lady by the name of Jackie Brazil. Now, Jackie

Brazil is an employee in the Department of Justice, answers to the Minister of

Justice in the government that is preceded over by the Premier of the Province.

Jackie Brazil shows up. She has now been selected, single-handedly, to go down

to the Cameron inquiry first thing Monday morning and state that we do not want

to have Bern Coffey asking any more questions at this inquiry. He cannot do any

cross-examination. That is what Jackie Brazil was told to do, but guess what

happened, Mr. Speaker? She showed up. No written agreement, nothing in her hand,

not even a hat in her hand, I say, she had nothing. She showed up in front of

this inquiry and the first question that Justice Cameron asked her was: Who sent

you? She was stumped. She was stumped, Mr. Speaker.

The legal counsel in the Department of Justice who was told by her master to

go to the inquiry and shut this down, and we are going to appeal, and we are not

happy with the process. She was told to go down, go before the microphone and do

this. The first question that Chief Justice asked her was: Who sent you? Mr.

Speaker, she relented. She did not want to tell who her master was and what he

had asked her to do. She relented. She tried her best to jump around the

question, to dance through the hoops, but at the end of the day, before the day

was over, we knew who sent Jackie Brazil to the Cameron inquiry. We knew who

sent Jackie Brazil down to say Bern Coffey should not be cross-examining

witnesses at this inquiry. It was the Minister of Justice, the Attorney General

for the Province and the Premier for the Province, because by now the two of

them were in the same hole. They had it big enough now that the two of them

could fit into it and they needed to find a way to crawl their way out of it.

They needed to find a way that could be justified, one which would seem to be

somewhat legitimate and not just be seen as a Premier's short fuse and a

minister coming to his defence, blowing off in the public airways, undermining a

political process in this Province. That is what happened here, Mr. Speaker.

That is why Jackie Brazil, I am sure, would not say who sent her. In fact, she

was questioned time and time again by Justice Cameron but she was not going to

disclose who, under which she had taken her instruction, and who had sent her

here to do this.

Mr. Speaker, we found out before the day was over. We found out. In

questioning in the House of Assembly that afternoon, this is what we were told.

We were told that they were trying to ask Justice Cameron to look at

section 29

of the Rules of Procedure and Practice that would govern the Commission of

Inquiry into the ER-PR testing. That was the purpose. This was the

section under

which it was questionable as to whether Mr. Coffey would have the right, as

legal counsel to the Commission, to cross-examine witnesses that were testifying

at this particular hearing.

Well, Mr. Speaker, this is open to

interpretation. If you want to look at

section 18 in this agreement, it will tell you: If counsel is granted the right

to do so, examination shall be confined to the normal rules governing the

examination of one's own witness. Counsel for a party may apply to the

Commissioner to lead a particular witness' evidence in chief.

Now, you can determine whether this is interpreted to mean that with the

consent of Justice Cameron, Mr. Coffey would have the ability to cross-exa