Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 4 June 2008 (46th General Assembly, 1st Session, Vol. XLVI No. 38)

2008-06-04

Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)

June

4, 2008

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVI No. 38

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Today we welcome the following members' statements: 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 Kilbride; the hon. the Member for the

District of Humber Valley; the hon. the Member for the District of Mount Pearl

North; 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, I am delighted to stand today to congratulate

Mr. Eric Jerrett and the Bay Roberts Heritage Society on the wonderful occasion

of establishing the Western Union Cable Building in Bay Roberts as a designated

National Historic Site.

This accomplishment has taken many years of dedication, perseverance and hard

work. I can remember as far back as 1989 when I had the opportunity, along with

Mr. Jim Tee of the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, and Mr. Eric

Jerrett, of visiting the old Western Union Cable Building, when plans were just

being formed to rescue the crumbling building and preserve its history.

Mr. Speaker, the Bay Roberts Heritage Society has worked diligently for the

past nineteen years. They encountered many difficulties along the way, but they

kept going, they kept their dream alive, and they faced adversity head on.

These dreams came to fruition recently, Mr. Speaker, when the Western Union

Cable Building was designated as a National Historic Site.

I ask all members of this House to join with me in congratulating Eric and

Betty Jerrett, the Bay Roberts Heritage Society, and all those individuals who

have contributed and played a very important role in the success of this

project.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PEACH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise here in this great hon. House today to inform you of the event I had

the pleasure of attending this past weekend: the thirty-sixth Annual Ceremonial

Review of the 2903 Royal Canadian Army Cadet Corps Norman's Cove-Long Cove.

These fantastic young people put on a wonderful show. Their shoes were

shined, their uniforms pressed, and their drill was perfect.

Many of these cadets will go on to the cadet camp this year to train in their

chosen cadet field of study, and they will bring this knowledge back to the

corps to share and encourage their corps to grow and strengthen.

It is organizations like this one which help to give our young people a sense

of dignity, pride, leadership and confidence.

I ask that this great House join me in congratulating the 2903 RCACC Norman's

Cove-Long Cove on their job well done and many successes in their future

endeavours.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize and

congratulate the Sisters of Mercy Centre for Ecology and Justice, and

specifically their Seed and Feed project that has been operating for the past

five years.

For each of these five years the Mercy Centre for Ecology and Justice has

been farming approximately one acre of ground in the Kilbride-Goulds area

producing fresh produce for local food banks, Emmanus House, and the Gathering

Place.

The primary purpose of the project is to bring young people back to growing

food and to reach out to the poor who are among us.

For the first three years of this project, using student grants and student

volunteers, the Seed and Feed group grew thousands of pounds of food. For the

past two years, the Association of New Canadians has become eagerly involved in

come out to the farm and go to work. Last year, young children from Day Break

participated.

Besides learning the types of vegetables that grow best in our climate, and

the skills for organically growing food here in Newfoundland and Labrador, this

project affords a healthy, respectful connection to the land which is part of

us. It also helps young people who volunteer to become contributing members of

our community.

Local farmers in Kilbride and Goulds have helped greatly with this project by

spreading manure and plowing the ground.

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

congratulating the Mercy Centre for Ecology and Justice and the great work they

are doing.

I specifically want to reference Sister Mary Tee, a driving force with this

group.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Humber Valley.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today and pay tribute

to the Deer Lake Chamber of Commerce. All members were invited to a celebratory

meeting at the Hideaway Pub in Deer Lake on Friday last week. The Chamber

recently received notification that it had been awarded "Chamber of the

Year 2007 Award" from the Newfoundland and Labrador Chamber of Commerce.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Richard May, Regional Director from the Newfoundland and

Labrador Chamber, was at the gathering to present the award and applauded the

Chamber's level of activity and commitment of its executive in his

presentation to Chamber President Guy Stratford. The award carries the

inscription, "Deer Lake Chamber of Commerce, for your outstanding

commitment and promotion of the Chamber movement in your local region of

Newfoundland and Labrador."

Mr. Speaker, in accepting the award, Chamber President Guy Stratford was keen

to acknowledge the Deer Lake Chamber's high level of membership, the huge

effort and commitment of its executive committee who give up their time on a

regular basis, and the tireless support of the Chamber's co-ordinator, Susan

Goulding.

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

congratulations to the Deer Lake Chamber of Commerce on winning this award and

wishing them well with their future endeavours.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Mount Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize the recipients of the Duke of

Edinburgh's Provincial Silver Award. This ceremony was recently held at

Memorial University in St. John's.

Mr. Speaker, this success is a testament to the hard work and dedication of

those individuals who participate. I myself participated in the Duke of

Edinburgh's Award program and I know first-hand the commitment and

perseverance it takes to achieve this honour.

I would like to recognize all the recipients, and in particular Julie Orr and

Deidre Halliday of Mount Pearl. I wish them all the best in their future

endeavours and hope that they continue to participate in those activities that

are of great interest. They are role models for others who have hopes of

exploring their inner talents and interests.

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

winners of the Duke of Edinburgh's Silver Award.

Thank you.

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.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform my hon. colleagues of a significant

achievement of a resident in my District of Grand FallsWindsorBuchans.

Chris Feener, a twenty-year-old prodigy guitarist in Grand FallsWindsor,

has just been chosen as one of the top twelve guitarists in an international

competition entitled "Guitar Idol '08." Guitar Idol is an on-line

guitar competition based in the United Kingdom and is open to competitors

worldwide. Guitarists submit an audio and/or video entry showcasing their

guitar-playing abilities and the public votes for the entrant they believe

displays the most talent as a guitarist.

Chris, along with eleven other finalists, will be heading to London, England

next week to perform and compete for the title of Guitar Idol 08. These twelve

talented guitarists were chosen out of over 700 entries worldwide, and votes

were cast by more than a quarter of a million viewers in a two-month period.

In addition to being a finalist in the Guitar Idol 08 competition, Chris has

also won a Provincial Arts and Letters Award for an original music composition

which he performed at The Rooms this past weekend.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this hon. House, I offer my sincere congratulations

and best wishes to Chris Feener as he travels to London to represent us for the

final stage in the Guitar Idol 08 competition.

Good luck, Chris.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, with an investment of $750,000 in Budget 2008, we

plan to expand the Futures in Skilled Trades and Technology high school program

to an additional thirty-five schools across the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: State-of-the-art equipment is now being shipped to these

schools, ready to be used for the new school year.

We all know that there is an increasing demand for skilled labour to meet the

needs associated with the many large-scale development projects on the Province's

horizon. This dynamic program exposes students to the skilled trades using the

same calibre of equipment that is found on job sites across the country. With

our investment in this year's budget, more schools can renovate their space to

accommodate the new equipment and courses and ultimately, increase opportunities

to more students.

The Futures in Skilled Trades and Technology program is currently offered in

thirty-seven high schools. Four new courses have been developed, with the goal

of eight new courses to be implemented Province-wide by 2010. These courses are

supported with industrial equipment such as computer-controlled routers, sliding

compound mitre saws and a wide variety of power tools. Courses engage students

in a variety of activities associated with technology and skilled trades

from simple construction and small engine repair, to the design and development

of control programs using computers and robotics.

Special measures are also being made to raise awareness about the

opportunities in the skilled trades among female students. Last fall, we

launched the campaign, Jump Start Your Life, designed to show young women that a

career in the skilled trades is exciting and lucrative, while at the same time,

demands creativity and skill.

Mr. Speaker, over the past two years, government has allocated an

unprecedented $53.8 million in the areas of apprenticeship, science and

technology, programming, training and infrastructure.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: These investments have funded new programs at the College of

the North Atlantic, improved infrastructure and learning resources, and

effectively doubled the number of seats in trades-related programs at campuses

throughout the Province.

Building our Province's skills base is critical if we are to be competitive

in the global marketplace. These investments are ensuring we have a strong,

responsive education system. A career in the skilled trades offers enormous

opportunities in Newfoundland and Labrador. With more students having access to

the skilled trades program in high school, we look forward to increased

participation in post-secondary skilled training.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement, and to say

that we, I can assure you, are very pleased to know that there are additional

schools in this Province that will be taking

part in the skilled trades program.

We all know that there is a tremendous shortage here in the Province of

skilled trades. As major projects come on stream, no doubt that will increase,

Mr. Speaker, but we also have to be very cognizant of problem that we are

experiencing and why many of our skilled trades people are not here in the

Province today. They are just leaving the Province and going away, not only in

my district but I am sure right throughout the Province.

With this wonderful program that we are talking about here, we also have to

find the way to get the people to come back. I know the Premier said from time

to time they will return, and no doubt they will, but we have thousands of

skilled trades people who are outside the Province now, let alone the ones we

are going to train in the future. I think that is the challenge that we have to

encounter.

It is good to see those programs in the schools, there is no doubt about it,

and to know that the female component of this in the schools is also taking

part

in skilled trades program. Mr. Speaker, we say that this is a good program, and

hopefully down the road, we will see to it that individuals will not have to

leave this Province when it comes to not only the skilled trades, but any trades

in the Province.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: 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 advance copy of her statement.

I, too, am quite pleased to see the increase in the skilled trades program in

high schools. It is extremely important in the context of today's economy and

climate here in Newfoundland and Labrador, as the minister has pointed out.

This program, the orientation of trades and technology for women program at

the College of the North Atlantic, the apprenticeship program, all of these

pieces together should help to increase the numbers of people with skilled

trades here in our Province.

I would encourage the government also to continue with its goal of decreasing

the cost of education for our students, so that when they go into post-secondary

education they will want to do their training here in this Province. The

government will also have to be ready to be working with industry as the large

scale developments develop to assure that the salaries and benefits that are

being offered in these large scale developments are going to be competitive with

the developments that our skilled trade workers are now working on outside of

the Province.

I say, this is good and let's keep up the work because there are many steps

and many pieces to what has to be done.

Thank you, very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers.

The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to bring to my hon. colleagues' attention the need for federal

engagement in housing and in particular the need for long-term sustainable

federal funding for housing. Of immediate concern, Mr. Speaker, is the federal

government's cost-shared funding programs for the Province's Provincial Home

Repair Program, the Affordable Housing Program and the Homelessness Partnering

Strategy. These are set to expire in March of 2009.

The options for the longer term management and sustainability of the existing

social housing stock represent a critical issue for all levels of government.

Federal funding for the operation of the existing social housing portfolio in

the Province is declining each and every year with no more federal funding for

the existing housing stock after the year 2039.

Mr. Speaker, in February of this year I became the Chair of the

Provincial-Territorial Housing Ministers Responsible for Housing and in April of

this year, all of the provincial and territorial minister were invited to meet

informally with federal Minister Monte Solberg. As a result of our meeting in

Ottawa, there was unanimous agreement among all of my provincial and territorial

colleagues to press Minister Solberg to attend a formal meeting as soon as

possible to address these urgent housing issues. To date there has been no

response.

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing is the Province's largest landlord with

approximately 5,700 non-profit social housing units Province-wide. Many of these

properties are twenty-five to fifty years old and house an estimated 14,000

individuals. In addition, Housing serves an annual 2,500 applicants under its

Provincial Home Repair Program to assist low-income homeowners. In addition to

the approximately $130 million spent by the provincial government over the last

four years alone on housing programs, the government has announced two major

initiatives in the past year. The first initiative was a $25 million increase

over five years for more modernization and improvement to our existing housing

stock.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: The benefits of that investment, Mr. Speaker, can be seen if

you drive around some of our cities and towns throughout the Province where we

have social housing units. As well, there was a $24 million increase over six

years to our Provincial Home Repair Program.

Mr. Speaker, throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, there continues to be

considerable demand for placements within the social housing portfolio, for

funding under the Provincial Home Repair Program and for funding for affordable

housing in communities throughout our Province.

I ask all of my colleagues in the House of Assembly to support the provincial

government in our efforts to urge the federal government to agree to meet with

the Provincial and Territorial Ministers Responsible for Housing as soon as

possible. We are calling on the federal government to reinstate social housing

funding limits to the 1993-1994 levels and to extend the existing cost-shared

arrangements for the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program, the

Affordable Housing Program, and the Homelessness Partnering Strategy beyond next

March, 2009.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for a copy of his statement and to say that we

agree with government in, I guess, pressuring the federal government to come on

stream. I believe that they will, because those are three wonderful programs,

very much needed here in the Province.

With regard to the Affordable Housing Program and the Homelessness Partnering

Strategy, I am not all that familiar with those but I can assure you that, with

the repair program, I know what work that does for many of the people of our

Province, and in my district in particular, Mr. Speaker.

In calling upon the federal government we have to co-operate and have a good

relationship, and I say, Mr. Speaker, that is a two-way street; because, back

about a year-and-a-half ago, there was what they called the Home Heating

Efficiency Program, where funding was put into a program by the federal

government for the people of this Province and other provinces. I believe we are

only one of two provinces in this country today who have not signed on. We were

told back a year-and-a-half ago that applications would be made available to the

people of our Province. I believe under the new federal government the program

now is called the ecoENERGY Retrofit Program. To date that program is not in

force, and I am of the impression that it is being held up by consultation with

two departments here in this Province, and the people in the Province cannot

avail of it yet.

I just call upon the minister. I agree with your statement, Sir, that we have

to force the federal government, but I also call upon our provincial government

to see that this other program is put in place so the people of our Province can

avail of that service.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: 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 advance copy of his statement.

These announcements are so very important, because housing is an important

determinant of health, and having good housing is essential to everyone. Also,

bad housing for people who are dependent on social housing, bad housing adds to

their poverty, and, in that way also, is part of a determinant of health.

I applaud very much the minister, as Chair of the Provincial-Territorial

Housing Ministers Responsible for Housing Committee, in the stand that they are

taking with the federal government. I think it is very important that they

really get the federal minister at the table, to try to get agreements going. It

is an issue right across the country, and I am really glad to see that the

minister from this Province is chairing and giving that leadership.

I also applaud the extra money that has gone into housing this year. Of

course, some of it is money that will be going on over a five-year period. At

least for the next five years we will see that, and I am sure that we will

maintain a commitment to this housing.

I also look forward to the long-promised housing strategy that I hope the

minister and his department are still working on, because it is not just enough

to see money without the strategy. I would like to see the strategy and then,

one would hope, more money matching with that strategy.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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.

The Conception Bay North area has a significant problem with recruiting and

retaining family physicians, something that is not just unique to that

particular region, Mr. Speaker. There is a high turnover rate as doctors come

and only stay for a short period of time. The joint councils in the area have

already made their concerns known to the department and to government.

Mr. Speaker, the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association have indicated

that we need an additional 120 family doctors for the Province.

I ask the minister today: What is being done to address this growing shortage

of doctors throughout the Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite references a particular location in the

Province that is experiencing some difficulty now in recruiting physicians. What

is interesting, Mr. Speaker, if you look at the number of physicians in the

Province today, and we just had a reconciliation of the numbers from last year

compared to the previous year, I think it is seven or eight more doctors in the

Province today then we had last year at this time.

The recruitment initiatives over the course of the last twelve months have

been on par with our recruitment initiatives in previous twelve month periods.

So I say, Mr. Speaker, through our four regional health authorities, together

with the additional resources we have put in as a government, in establishing a

centralized recruitment process for physicians, we have had a tremendous amount

of success in attracting physicians to Newfoundland and Labrador. Some regions

of the Province have had more difficulties than others in retaining them, but I

say, Mr. Speaker, together with the four regional health authorities and the

investment we have made in the centralized recruitment process -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WISEMAN: - we will continue with the efforts that we have put into it

in the last twelve months, I say, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We are pleased to see they have recruited another seven or eight doctors,

family physicians, this year more than last year, but it still takes the vacancy

rate to about 115 to 120 family physicians in the Province. This is being felt

in areas like Gander where today people may have to put their name in a hat to

be drawn out to see if they can access the services of a physician. In fact, Mr.

Speaker, the manager there told us that they have about 3,000 names on a list

right now, of people wanting to have a family physician, and they will be

accepting names up until tomorrow night.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister again: When can people of the Province, those

people like the ones I mentioned in Gander, expect to see family physician

services being provided to them in a timely and effective manner?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: I am glad the member opposite raised the issue of Gander and

used that as an example because I say, Mr. Speaker, that is a real good example

of where a local family practice clinic working together with the regional

health authority and the Department of Health and Community Services were able

to attract two new physicians to that clinic and that region very recently. We

have done that in other parts of the Province, I say, Mr. Speaker, very

successfully, so we will continue to do some of the things we have done

successfully in the last twelve months.

One of the other things that we have done this year, Mr. Speaker, we are

increasing the enrolments in the medical school to be able to ensure that we

have more Newfoundlanders and Labradorians entering medical school, because our

history has shown us that they will, in fact, have a greater opportunity to stay

and they are more likely to stay in Newfoundland and Labrador to practice.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer.

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Put that together with the increased investment we have made in bursary

programs in this past year, I say to the member opposite and to the people of

the Province, stay tuned because I think we will see some great results in the

future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It does not help the people today in those regions who have to put their name

on a list to see a physician.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, in Labrador West, the availability of physicians,

or the shortage, has reached a crisis level in that region. None of the family

doctors there are accepting new patients, and you know that there is a booming

population in this part of the Province. In fact, the Iron Ore Company of

Canada, in the last week, let six more contracts for the expansion of their

mining operation.

I ask the minister: What is being done to deal with the critical shortage

that currently exists in Labrador West, and will continue to grow in the next

few months, as well over 100 to 150 new people move into the region to look for

work?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, whether the member gets up and asks questions

about Gander or Labrador City or Clarenville or St. John's, if the question is

the same and the community just changes the answer becomes the same.

I have just laid out for her, in the previous two questions, some of the key

things that we have done: (

a) We have established a centralized recruitment

office at Memorial University working through the medical school; (

b) We have

invested new money in bursary programs and we have had a full uptake on all of

those bursaries we have offered, and those individuals have made a commitment to

come back to practice in Newfoundland and Labrador as a result of our

investment; (

c) We have made a major investment to expand the medical school

because we have had experiences that tell us that Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians who attend medical school in this Province will stay in this

Province to practice and that is where we are putting our money, making

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer.

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In addition to what the Regional Health Authorities and our department are

doing today in the short-term, we are making some major investments in some

foundational pieces of work that will hold us in the long stint.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Paramedics in rural regions of the Province are not unionized. Those in the

St. John's are, however, unionized. Rural paramedics are typically paid forty

hours per week. They often provide unpaid on call for another sixty-four hours

per week for a total of 104 working hours, in some situations of paramedics that

we have talked to.

I ask the minister: Will government move to establish a Province-wide working

standard for paramedics within the Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: We must be getting near the end of this session, they are

going back through Hansard and pulling up old questions. I think, about two

weeks ago, I had that same question in the House, so we are going to run out.

What I said a couple of weeks ago - and let me repeat it - in this Province

we have ambulance services provided by hospital-based services, community-based

volunteer organizations and the private sector. The individuals who work at our

hospital-based practices are part of one of our regional health authorities, and

they generally would be members of NAPE or CUPE.

The other individual organizations in private sector, they have a contractual

arrangement through the Department of Health & Community Services with our

regional health authorities, to provide a service in their region. They hire

their employees, they have to meet a certain standard, they have a level of

training, they have standards in terms of equipment, the nature of their

practice but we basically have a contractual arrangement for those

organizations to provide the service. We do not define

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With all due respect to the minister, it is the first time I have raised this

issue in the House of Assembly because it is only in the last week I have met

with paramedics.

Many of them in the Province feel that the emergency medical service system

is a piecemeal system at best, and in different areas of the Province there are

different standards of care. For example, if you need an IV, in one area of the

Province a paramedic can do it, in other areas of the Province they cannot do it

until you get to a hospital.

I ask if the government will commit to an independent, operational review of

ambulance and paramedic services with the Province.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am glad the member raised that particular example about the IV, because

what she is speaking to, Mr. Speaker, is a set of standards, a set of standards

that typically, in that industry, would be referred to as medical control.

I am happy to report to the House and to the people of the Province, that in

the recent past we have been successfully in recruiting a physician to work with

Eastern Health, and that physician will take a full responsibility for ensuring

that we have medical control throughout each of our services throughout

Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, in fact, before the arrival of this individual

because this individual will be charged with the responsibility to ensure it

is Province-wide there had already been a significant amount of work done on

that particular piece of work. So, many of these services throughout the

Province already had medical control in place; but it will become a standard for

the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If I could get action like that on every question, well, we would not need

thirty minutes, we could do it in fifteen minutes, I say to the minister.

Anyway, the minister talked about recycling questions, well, let me ask you

this one, which is recycled from 2006, on a commitment that your government

made.

There was evidence to suggest that people who live near and are exposed to

transformers and cables are more prone to developing cancer. I raised this

question in the House of Assembly in May of 2006, in reference to a story that

was disclosed by Mr. Gerald Higgins, whose wife had died of breast cancer. Mr.

Speaker, as a result he feels, and experts in this field feel, it was linked to

transformers.

Mr. Speaker, at the time I ask government to investigate this issue.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to pose her question.

MS JONES: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

I asked government at that time to look at this issue, to investigate it, and

to report back. The minister of the day agreed to do that.

I ask you today: what action

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

If there is a question, I ask that the member pose it now.

MS JONES: Yes, I thought I just did, Mr. Speaker.

My question again is: the minister of the day committed to look at this issue

and I ask, what

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: I do not think we would mind recycling questions from two or

three weeks ago but raising an issue that her former party, and I think it was

your former leader, had already discounted the notion that that had any real

credibility, if I am not mistaken. I sat in this House, if I am not mistaken,

and Mr. Grimes, the former premier, her leader, a member of her party, stood in

this House and discounted that notion as being frivolous; it had no merit, if I

am not mistaken.

I think, as she just pointed out, it was our government and a former

colleague of mine who committed to undertake to look at that question.

I can tell the member opposite that I do not know exactly what came out of

that evaluation that would have been done by my former colleague, but I will

undertake to find out for you and advise you in due course.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If the Minister wants to read Hansard, Roger Grimes asked those questions in

the House of Assembly to John Ottenheimer, when he was the Leader of the

Opposition, and I asked them to Tom Osborne when he was the minister.

Mr. Speaker, my next question is to the Minister of Finance.

Recently our office was contacted by a gentleman from Catalina, Mr. Sam

Stead, who recently lost his wife to cancer. People in the community made small

donations to help him cover the cost of this funeral. Mr. Stead is almost 70

years old, he lives on a small pension and has a disabled daughter. He was

shocked to learn that $750 of his cost was taxes that were added to his funeral

bills.

I ask the minister: how much money is generated by government on an annual

basis from tax on funerals, and does he agree that such a tax on bereaved

families is somewhat repulsive?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the hon. Leader of the Opposition for her question.

I will have to get the information as to how much of the HST, because it is

the Harmonized Sales Tax that we would receive.

When the government of Newfoundland and Labrador, I believe it was in 1997,

agreed to harmonize its provincial sales tax with the GST, along with Nova

Scotia, New Brunswick and the federal government, it was agreed by the

government of the day that we would accept the tax base set out in the GST.

Therefore, what is taxed, the items that are taxed, is set out in the GST and we

are bound by that. The only way that can be changed is if there was unanimous

agreement of the three provinces and the federal government to change the base.

Recently I was in Ottawa and had discussions with the Minister's of Finance

of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. We had agreed to meet

and have a discussion, and that was one of the taxes that had come up. There was

another-

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Also there is a HST on certain aspects of home care that is a concern to me.

We will meet and then, after we have had that discussion, we intend to approach

Minister Flaherty and the federal government to address these concerns.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to see that the minister will begin a process to ask the federal

government to drop their portion of the tax.

In the meantime, I ask if the Province would consider reducing the tax that

they apply to funerals as well, your portion.

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

Board.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, in terms of personal taxes we have just

undergone a two-year review of the taxes in this Province and as a result of

that we have given the biggest tax decrease in the history of our Province last

year -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: - $160 million, and this year by a further amount of

$178 million. Also, the Premier announced on April 22 of this year the complete

elimination of the hated 15 per cent tax on insurance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, this government has certainly done more

than probably any other government in history in reducing taxes in this

Province. As our financial situation continues to improve hopefully we can do

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly urges the government to

consider the advisability of resuming the practice of matching increases for

public service pensioners to wage increases for public sector employees.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, I just want to take a few moments on this. I am not

going to belabour the issue, but there are a few comments I want to make. I

know, as the evening progresses we will have hon. members on both sides

standing, and no doubt the members on the government side will be telling us

about what has been done this year and in previous years for the seniors. That

is true, Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt there are many issues that have come up

from time to time that will help those people; but, Mr. Speaker, when it comes

to the indexing of their pensions, it is another issue.

On May 1 we heard the Minister of Finance responding to some questions by the

Leader of the Opposition with regard to issues that have been dealt with in

reference to low-income tax benefits, doubling the seniors' tax benefit,

improving the drug program, home heating programs, and more or less, Mr.

Speaker, putting money back into seniors' pockets.

While members opposite were in Opposition, I can assure you, Mr. Speaker,

they travelled this Province preaching how they would stand shoulder to shoulder

with those people in supporting indexing of their pensions. I say, what a change

has occurred. Just a little stroll across this House and the issue has come to

the point now where indexing has been placed on the back burner.

On April 30, the Premier of this Province made a statement that public sector

pensioners would not be getting any indexing or any further benefits on their

pensions in the foreseeable future under his mandate.

Mr. Speaker, I guess that has been disturbing to those people, because we

hear so much about the reference to the lower income tax benefits and we know

that many of those people, Mr. Speaker, the figures that we have seen, some of

them are trying to survive on as little as $10,000 a year.

We talk about the funding we have put into the drug program, and I know there

are three or four different phases of the drug program and it is very beneficial

to many people, but I can assure you, I have people in my district who just

cannot afford to get all the medications they need. Some of them are to the

point now where doctors are giving them samples that they have come from time to

time, and that is very unfortunate. I am not saying that is what government

wants to happen, but that is the position that many people find themselves in.

We talked about the home heating program - a good program, Mr. Speaker, let

me assure you - and there are more people this year availed of that than in the

past, and that is all wonderful, but I can tell you, many seniors, many people

who are on fixed incomes, find themselves in a very difficult position. I have

had people call me over this past few months, not only in my district but other

areas as well, saying: I do not have an invoice to send in so I can avail of

those funds because I was unable, in the last two or three months, to be able to

buy the fuel. I bought it last winter, and there is still some of it there.

I have been in homes, Mr. Speaker, where those people and seniors have been

unable to turn on their heat because it was either, from time to time, buying a

drop of oil to keep the house warm or buying food from one end of the month to

the other, Mr. Speaker. That is very unfortunate. Those people have served this

Province well, Mr. Speaker.

I know recently that seven different groups came together - they are called

Pensioners' Coalition 2008 - and those seven groups represent some 22,000

retirees. When you consider their family members, that figure jumps to about

60,000 people, Mr. Speaker, and their pensions have been frozen now for nineteen

years.

I know this Administration has not been office for nineteen years, and I know

it happened back in 1989, but that is immaterial, who was there. I think the

time has come that those people have to be considered, and what better time to

do it than now? We know that you cannot take every penny that the government has

and just throw it to the wind. I think the issues that those people are asking

for are legitimate, Mr. Speaker, and they include many different groups who have

worked for this Province and for this government. We have the staff at Memorial

University, penitentiary wardens, firefighters, police officers and teachers. I

can assure you, from what they have in the paper, they were disappointed with

the Budget not disappointed with everything that is in the Budget, but the

fact that they were not considered with the indexing of their pensions. The

financial position that we find ourselves in today, I believe they thought,

definitely, there was going to be something there for them. We also know that

the various unions I know NAPE has spoken out recently in favour of those

people, because I guess many of them were members of that particular union.

Over a period of time I know prior to the last election and since the

last election - I had the, I suppose, distinct honour of meeting with those

people; but, I am going to tell you, what took place in the meetings was

something that I did not think I would encounter.

I remember meeting with them, up on the fifth floor, when they came in and

explained to us what they are receiving now, what they could purchase for that

amount of money back in 1989, and how they are left and what they can buy today,

Mr. Speaker.

Some hon. colleagues here I know the Member for St. John's East, the

Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, and the Opposition Leader we met with I

think it was close to 800 of those people in Mundy Pond, and that is since the

last election. When you hear the stories that those people had to put forward, I

believed that, and I think they believed at the time, that something would come

forward in the last Budget to help support them.

Mr. Speaker, I have read with great interest the provincial resolutions that

were put forward by the Newfoundland and Labrador 50+ Federation, when they held

their meeting back in 2007, and I believe they met with the Minister of Finance

and presented their cases to him, and some of the issues that they had in their

resolutions have been dealt with to some degree. Others have not, but the

indexing of their pensions is one that - they feel today that something should

be done.

We understand that the cost of living has increased since 1989 by 46 per

cent. All we have to do, I guess, is think about it ourselves, if we were on a

fixed income, knowing what the increase was over that period of time.

Mr. Speaker, we know, not only the price of gas, how it has gone up, but how

it affects everything that those individuals have to deal with, whether it is

when they go to buy their groceries, whether it is when they go to buy fuel to

heat their homes, or even to buy their groceries, because we hear it on a daily

basis, how things are increasing. These people, like I said, Mr. Speaker, have

worked all their lives providing a service to the people of this Province.

I know one of the recommendations that they put forward at their convention,

and I am sure the Minister of Finance is well aware of it, with regard to - I

think it was resolution 14 - the retirement pensions' increase, and explained

very seriously how they are suffering on many issues and how they have cared,

whether it is teachers caring for the children, or other individuals here in the

Province, Mr. Speaker.

Hopefully, as this day progresses, I know members opposite will stand and

talk about all the good things that have happened, and that is true, but I hope

when they stand that they will be able to relate the stories, just like I

related, because we all live in Newfoundland and Labrador. Each and every one of

us has constituents, and I am sure we have received phone calls from them asking

us to plea to government and to urge government to consider this.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to conclude my opening comments just on one comment

that I read recently in The Telegram. I guess you cannot believe

everything you hear or see or read in our local papers or in the media, but the

article was written by Mr. Russell Wangersky, and he concluded by saying one

thing in that his quote he was referring to the relationship and how we

feel about the deal that was promised us from Ottawa. In order words, in his

article he is saying: A deal is a deal.

Those people, yes, they signed off on a deal when their unions agreed with

what they would expect from their pensions, but he went on to say: How can you

campaign on the grounds that unfair deals should be changed while refusing to

change them yourselves?

In other words, what he is saying, Mr. Speaker, is that those people are in

our Province, they are the people who have carried the burden of our residents

for many years in providing the service, and what they are saying is: Yes, we

know we are receiving what we agreed to at that time, but the time has come when

that deal should be broken; it should be reconsidered.

Hopefully, as the evening goes on, Mr. Speaker, I will take my place and just

listen to fellow colleagues as they make their presentations, and return later

on to close debate.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER (Collins): The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour

and Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to be able to stand today and speak to this motion,

and I am glad that the hon. member opposite brought the resolution forward to

give us an opportunity to bring forward some of the initiatives that have taken

place to try and assist, as the motion refers to, provincial government retired

pensioners who have seen the value of their pensions diminish in time. Some, in

fact, do live in some dire circumstances. I am sure every member in this House

could tell the story.

I have visited many seniors, many public service pensioners, who are having

difficulty. A lot of them are struggling. It is an opportunity for us, as

members, to be able to get up and speak to what it is that we are doing.

Make no mistake, Mr. Speaker, I do not care what side of the House you are

on, this issue is one that every member of this House takes seriously and wishes

to be able to do something to try and assist.

In terms of the public service pensioners, in terms of this government, we

understand the difficulties that public service pensioners are experiencing.

They are a smaller sub-set of the bigger population of seniors who I receive

e-mails and calls and letters from every day. I go to visit them every day, who

are talking to me about the challenges they face, in particular in the winter

months when the cost of heating is something that is an onerous burden on them,

a burden that they have to bear. I have been to homes where people tell me that

they have to choose between turning on the heat or maybe feeding themselves,

putting some food on the table, or maybe their car is broke down in the

driveway, their only means of transportation. That vehicle is very important,

not just as a means of transportation, but it is a means of social inclusion for

them. It allows them to get out and go to the grocery stores, to go do a bit of

shopping, to go see their physicians, to go see their family and friends, and it

is broke down in the driveway, they do not have the funds to be able to fix it

or to make it work.

Mr. Speaker, this government, I think, and all members in this House

understand the challenges that public service pensioners are facing, but, as I

said before, I believe we placed that in the context of they are a smaller

subset of a larger group of older adults in this Province who are experiencing

similar challenges. Our approach as a government has been to try and address the

larger group, and by addressing that larger group the subset of public service

pensioners will also feel some benefit from some of the initiatives that we have

brought forward.

We understand that the public service pensioners have had an employer

sponsored pension plan that they made contributions to. We understand that they

thought there would be money there at the end of the day to be able to live a

reasonable standard of life, but those decisions were made in some cases, Mr.

Speaker, thirty or thirty-five years ago. It is hard to project what your needs

are going to be and it is hard to project what your needs will be in five years

let alone thirty-five or twenty-five years. We understand the quandary that

people find themselves in, but we as a government, I guess, took a couple of

approaches.

I was at some of those meetings that the hon. member referred to. I wanted to

when I was campaigning - when I was originally elected as a new MHA I went to

some of those meetings to hear the concerns of the public service pensioners. It

was an issue that I felt I had to educate myself about, so I went and listened

to a lot of those stories and what a lot of the people had to say. The first

thing I heard, and the thing that struck me most, was, first of all those

pension plans were in dire straits. Those pension plans were in a position where

they may not be able to provide a pension to the people who rightly and who in

good faith contributed to a pension plan that should be able to pay benefits to

them once they retired. That message rang through to me loud and clear.

One of the first things our government did when we took office, when we had

the privilege of being elected by the people of the Province, was we looked at

those pension plans in terms of trying to put them on a bit more of a firm

footing. I do not remember specifically which one, I think it was the Teacher's

Pension Plan; it was only funded to the tune of 26 per cent, Mr. Speaker. We as

a government had to make sure that we addressed that because if we did not the

projection showed in 2003 when we took office that that particular public

pension plan would run dry by 2012, four short years from now; would not be able

to meet its obligations. Not only would the people who receive a pension from

that pension plan be complaining about the fact that they were receiving too

little to live on, there would actually be nothing left in the plan to be able

to be funded out. This government had to take some drastic, serious action, and

we did that. We put about $4 billion in total into the pension plans to make

sure that they were given a more solid financial footing. In actual fact, we

raised the level of funding from around 26 per cent up to about 80 per cent for

these pension plans.

We further, in 2007, put almost $1 billion, $982 million, almost $1 billion,

with a b, into the Public Service Pension Plan to raise it up. It again was

around 28 per cent or 30 per cent funded and we had to make sure that the

benefit was there for people on a go-forward basis.

There were things that needed to be addressed, no doubt, in terms of the

Public Service Pension Plan. The immediate need as we saw it and as I saw it and

as I heard it in some of the meetings I attended and as I heard it from some of

the people I spoke to, was, make sure you sure up that pension plan. Funds were

taken from that years ago - and we all know the story, I will not beat it to

death - but funds were taken from that years ago by previous administrations to

pay for infrastructure. They paid for hospitals, they paid for schools and they

paid for roadwork. That money that people were putting away for their pensions

was being used for purposes other than what it was intended for and that had to

stop, and it has stopped.

We had an obligation as a government to address that liability. The first

thing we did was address that liability by making sure that we put enough money

into the pension plan to make sure that it was on firm footing so that the

continuation of benefits was there, people would not have to go to sleep at

night wondering, will my benefits run out in 2012, will I wake up one morning

and be told by the provincial government there is no more pension money for you.

We made sure that did not happen. That was the first thing that was done by this

government, Mr. Speaker. We wanted to make sure that the unfunded liability was

taken care of.

The second point that was made by this government, when we brought the

unfunded liability up to the point where it needed to be, when we basically

re-injected the funds that had been taken out - and that was done by an actuary.

There was a calculation done and an assessment made as to how much money needed

to be put into that plan. It was not just the amount that was taken out. It was

the money that was taken out plus the estimation as to what the benefits would

have been had the money been left in the plan. There was an evaluation done by a

professional called an actuary who did that and said, here is the amount of

money you have to put in. The amount of money that was taken out was put in as

well as an allowance for how much money the plan would have made over the years.

That was done and we are now about, as I understand it, 80 per cent, 82 per

cent, funded in terms of those pension plans.

The second point that this government made, Mr. Speaker, was that we would

not be able to look at any increases in the pension plans until they were able

to fund it which meant that the plans had to be 100 per cent funded. We are

moving towards that. We are hoping that we will be able to get there sooner

rather than later, but there may be a day when we see that we will be able to do

something in terms of increasing pension benefits when the pension plan allows

for it. That is how you would normally do this. That is the normal process and

the normal practice that will be followed, that you would take the extra

benefits from the plan to be able to provide more benefits to those recipients

of the plan. At some point, we hope that may be able to happen.

Mr. Speaker, I only have a short period of time to speak so I want to go back

to the point I was making earlier about the public service pensioners being a

subset of a larger group of people in this Province. One of the things that this

government has been trying to do is trying to make sure that the benefits we

have, the revenues that we have as a government, are used for the benefit of the

most people possible. We have our low income drug program. I believe that it is

over 90,000 people now who have been affected by that. Our home heating program,

we have raised threshold on those. There are a whole bunch of initiatives that I

could talk about in more detail but we have tried to make sure that we cover or

encompass as many people as possible in the Province. It is not the will of this

government, nor do we feel it is the right move to make, to go and target the

Public Service pensioners in terms of trying to do something extra for them. We

feel it is something that should be done for all seniors in the Province.

What we have looked at doing is, we have looked at the kinds of things that

people are talking to us about. Just as an example, taxes were something I heard

a lot about when I went around. People talked to me about taxes. Well, we have

brought in the low income tax reduction measure, we have now raised the

threshold level, so seniors who are receiving pensions, who are receiving

$10,000, $12,000, $14,000 and $15,000 in pension money, who were paying taxes on

that, we have now been able to make adjustments to our taxes so that they no

longer have to pay taxes on that amount of money. We have done it for all

seniors. We have not done it just for Public Service pensioners.

There are seniors out there, a great number of them, who are not in receipt

of pensions, but they are the individuals who are paying into the revenues of

government through our tax system and we feel they should receive some of the

relief and some of the benefit of us using our tax money. By using this low

income tax measure for all seniors, those that are Public Service pensioners are

also positively affected by that.

As well, Mr. Speaker, we look at the home heating rebate. I can tell you, I

have many, I would go so far as to say hundreds, of constituents in my district

who I have spoken to who have benefited from the home heating rebate. I have

personally delivered dozens of applications to people who asked if I would be

able to drop it off and help them with their application. There have been

hundreds, thousands across the Province. I do not know the number. When the

Minister of Finance gets up, maybe he will give us more detail. I would

speculate there are many thousands of people who have been helped by the home

heating rebate.

A lot of those people who I have delivered these forms to are seniors living

in their own home. Some of them are Public Service pensioners. We have done a

number of things with the home heating rebate to make it beneficial for all

seniors, and by making it beneficial for all seniors we have made it beneficial

for the Public Service pensioners as well, because they are a subset of that

senior group. We have increased the threshold in terms of the income threshold

and we have increased the amount of money that has been paid out. You now can

earn higher levels of income and be eligible for the home heating rebate. We

have now made sure that the amount we give out is a higher amount, so it is on a

graduated scale. It can be as little as zero if you are over the income

threshold; it can go up to $400. We have also expanded the types of fuel. It is

no longer just oil, but it is oil, it is electricity, it is propane and it is

wood sources. There are a variety of sources that are being used.

The point I am making, Mr. Speaker, is that by addressing all of our senior

population with some of these positive initiatives, which allow seniors to keep

more money in their pockets - and ultimately that is what we are trying to do,

we are trying to keep more money in people's pockets. We are trying to ease

the financial burdens that they have faced. What has happened, Mr. Speaker, is

that by addressing the broader group of seniors in the Province, we have, in

fact, done some things for the subset of pensioners in the Province.

I want to talk a little bit about the Provincial Home Repair Program, which

comes underneath my ministry as well. We have a higher percentage of people in

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador than any other Province of Canada who

own their own homes. A lot of the people I deal with through the Provincial Home

Repair Program own their own homes, obviously, and they to reside in rural

areas. The majority of people tend to reside in rural areas. A lot of them are

on fixed incomes. Some of them are pensioners, some of them are not pensioners,

but they have fixed incomes. They tend to have lower levels of incomes.

The Provincial Home Repair Program, Mr. Speaker, allows people to be able to

fix up their homes, to stay there, to stay in the home where they raised their

family. Their friends are there, all of their memories, all of the community

work that they have done, their church, the places where they socialize, the

Lions Club, the Kinsmen, whatever it may be, all of that is where their home is.

That is why they want to stay in their home. They do not want to have to go

somewhere else.

People now, who have homes that are aging and have incomes that are fixed or

incomes that may be declining, are given some benefit through the Provincial

Home Repair Program. Up to $5,000 can be given without any payback required by

the person receiving it, under certain circumstances, to do work on their home.

It might mean electrical upgrades to install heating systems, in might mean roof

repairs so you stop leaks, it might mean windows and doors and those kinds of

things, so you do not have the drafts that normally would come and cause people

to have to put up their thermostats. There are all kinds of things that can be

done there, Mr. Speaker, with that $5,000. It does not have to be paid back. You

can actually get more than $5,000 to do that kind of work, if you want to enter

into a loan arrangement where on everything over $5,000 you are given a very low

interest rate.

Those kinds of initiatives that I have touched on are initiatives that are

available for all seniors. The approach this government has taken is that by

bringing in initiatives that raise it up for all seniors, we will, in effect,

raise it up for the Public Service pensioners. We understand the difficulties

that they are facing, we understand the challenges that they are facing, but we

feel that we can address their challenges and their difficulties by making sure

we do it for all seniors in the Province.

That is the approach we have taken, Mr. Speaker. We believe it is working, we

will show that it is working in future budgets, and I thank you for your time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am certainly pleased to rise and to speak in the debate today, on the

motion that was put forward by my colleague, the Member for -

AN HON. MEMBER: Port de Grave.

MS JONES: Port de Grave.

There are so many of us over here, Mr. Speaker, we tend to lose track.

Certainly, the motion put forward by the Member for Port de Grave, Mr.

Speaker, is a very important motion that actually impacts well over 20,000

people in our Province today.

Mr. Speaker, this is not an issue that has been taken lightly and we have

never suggested that it has been taken lightly by any particular government or

administration, but it is also an issue that needs to be elevated in the minds

of those people who make decisions within our Province. The reality is, that

people today who are public sector pensioners are living on incomes that are far

less, Mr. Speaker, far less than they ever intended for them to live on in their

retirement after giving service to the people of this Province for so many

years.

We will hear, I am sure today, as government continues to speak to the

motion, about programs like we just did from the minister opposite that are in

place to help offset the cost of living to seniors in our Province, and we have

never disputed that. We have never disputed the need to have home heating

rebates, to have subsidization of drug programs, to be able to provide seniors'

benefits to those in the Province who qualify, and we are certainly not

advocating today that any of that should change.

Mr. Speaker, do not skew the issue, because the issue that we are talking

about today has to do with a decade after decade old problem in this Province

that has gone unattended to and unfunded appropriately. Mr. Speaker, that is not

just a reflection on the government opposite but a reflection on governments

going back to 1989 with the exception, I guess, of 2002 when there was a modest

increase in indexing provided for at 1.2 per cent at that particular time. Mr.

Speaker, I will be the first to recognize that the current rate of inflation at

that time was still at 1.9 per cent, so even the indexing in 2002 at the 1.2 per

cent fell short of what the actual inflation rate was in the Province at that

particular time.

Mr. Speaker, we wanted to table this particular motion in the House of

Assembly because we feel that it should be on the radar of government to be

dealt with. We feel that the money that is available in the provincial coffers

today is able to adequately address this problem like it has not been able to be

addressed in the past.

For example, Mr. Speaker, when this program was created in 1965 it was done

at a time when inflationary measures were not the kind of phrases and

terminology that were being built into the contracts of that time. In fact, it

was not until the 1970s, until Trudeau came to government nationally, that we

started talking about escalation clauses in contracts and inflationary clauses

in contracts. When these pension plans were set up, from the very beginning,

they did not build in those measures. When governments say, through the years,

and continue to say today, the government opposite, that they did not pay for

any indexing program so therefore they should not get one, really, Mr. Speaker,

if you look at the contracts and the time frame in which they were negotiated,

inflationary language in those contracts was unheard of at that particular time.

This is something that developed over time.

Mr. Speaker, in 1989 they did receive a 2.5 per cent increase. I did not go

back to look up what the current rate of inflation was at that time but it was

probably on par with what the inflation rate was, so it was bringing them to the

current standard of living in that particular year. Again, as I said, in 2002

there was a 1.2 per cent indexing that was granted; but, Mr. Speaker, the Bank

of Canada themselves estimate that the cost of living has risen over the past

eighteen years by 48 per cent, and this has had a detrimental effect on seniors

all across the country, not just in our Province.

Mr. Speaker, while we look at broad-ranging programs that affect seniors and

support their initiatives we deal with a specific case, and that is the

pensioners of the provincial Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, who they

have served with for twenty-five and thirty-five years, Mr. Speaker, making this

government their former employer and therefore the only place that they can turn

to look for some kind of redress on their pensions over that period of time.

Mr. Speaker, we have listened to what the public pensioners have said. We

have listened to their president, Mr. Langdon, who talked about how the dollar

for pensioners has eroded over the years. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I think at one

point he said that what most pensioners receive today is only providing for 50

per cent of the cost of living in today's standards as to what it was when

they actually accepted those pensions and took their exists from government.

Mr. Speaker, this is the reason that we have wanted to elevate the issue. We

feel that government is in a position to address it. The minister has informed

me that for every 1 per cent that you would give in an indexing increase in the

pension plan it would cost the government about $40 million a year annually.

Yesterday, I did not have the actual numbers to look at what the full cost might

AN HON. MEMBER: Forever (inaudible).

MS JONES: Forever. Oh, 1 per cent is $40 million forever.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS JONES: Okay.

So, let me correct that, Mr. Speaker, because it gets better. It sounds

better, too, I say to the minister. It sounds better, and maybe we should be

advocating for more, but anyway the 1 per cent means it will be a $40 million

cost to the government over the course of time to index the pensions for the

retired public service employees.

If you look at that cost, which would be $40 million, and then you look at

what it would take to bring them up - and we are not advocating that government

should be going out now and giving a 48 per cent increase to public pensioners.

What we are saying is that you are in a fiscal position to be able to address

this problem like governments before you have not been able to.

For example, when the minister brought down the Budget this year he has

already forecast a surplus for next year - a surplus, at that time, which would

have exceeded over $500 million. That was based on the oil prices per barrel at

$87. Mr. Speaker, if you look at where the price of oil has gone per barrel

since March, or April, when the minister introduced the Budget, it has climbed

to $120 a barrel. It may even have exceeded that on occasion, but it has climbed

that high. That would indicate to us automatically that with the amount of

production that is out there, with the price at the level that it is, not

forecasting to take a dip any time soon, that the government's own numbers, in

forecasting a surplus for the next fiscal year, are way low. Instead of looking

like $500 million, Mr. Speaker, at the rate we are going now, it will again be a

surplus of well over a billion dollars.

We know that when governments make decisions to invest money, especially in

programs and in those kinds of indexing and wage increases, that they have to be

able to budget for it and sustain it over a long period of time. We certainly

understand that. In that understanding, we also realize that there is still room

for government to move on doing something for public sector pensioners. We are

asking today that it be put on the radar of government, that you give it strong

consideration, and you look at what needs to happen here to bring them in line

with a more reasonable rate of return as a reward for their service to

government than they are actually getting.

Do not bog it down with terms of contracts, because those arguments do not

hold weight in today's society. We can dig out many contracts that have been

signed by governments in the past that did not build in inflationary clauses or

escalator clauses that today we would never dream of negotiating without having

that kind of terminology into it.

Mr. Speaker, the public sector pensioners have formed a coalition in the

Province, actually formed it within the last month, and it does involve the

Public Service Pensioners' Association, the Retired Teachers' Association,

the Memorial University of Newfoundland Pensioners' Association, the Royal

Newfoundland Constabulary Association, the St. John's Fire Fighters Retirees'

Association, the NAPE local and the Retired Penitentiary Warders. So, Mr.

Speaker, they have already collectively formed a group as a coalition, not

necessarily to take on the government but to work with government, to work

effectively with government so that you understand the issues that they are

faced with and the circumstances that they are faced with, things like my hon.

colleague from Port de Grave already talked about, the hardship that many of

these people face every day in their lives because they have insufficient amount

of monies as a pension to be able to live on.

Mr. Speaker, the other piece to this is that every single year we are not

seeing things go down; we are seeing things go up everything, from the

medical benefits that they receive, which we have seen increases in the premiums

that we pay for medical benefits in the Province, so have they. They have seen

increases in everything from food products, and every day we are identifying a

new product because of the global impact of war around the world. It impacts

things like oil prices and food prices, and all the rest of it, and these things

are felt right at home, by people like ourselves and people like our pensioners

who have to pay more money.

Mr. Speaker, we feel that there is not a need for government to continue to

belabour this or provide a rationale for not doing it. We think that the Budget

surpluses themselves and the fiscal position of the Province speak to its

ability to be able to address the problem, and this particular coalition wants

to work with government to ensure that these problems are addressed. They do not

want to accept no as an answer, but rather they want to work to achieve a

compromise that at the end of the day will help relieve the financial burdens

that many of them have been faced with.

Mr. Speaker, the other issue that needs to be dealt with is the issue of how

the federal government claws back pension benefits as well; because, once these

individuals qualify for Canada Pension benefits they tend to enter into a phase

whereby the federal government claws back a certain amount of their money.

I have not really been able to get into the discussions around that aspect of

it, to understand it more fully, but I am sure that the minister would have

probably already provided some details with regard to that particular issue but

it is one that I have received a number of e-mails on, in terms of how the

percentage rate works and how the clawback works. Maybe there is something that

can be done to address that particular issue as well that would be able to

probably lessen the burden, at least, on some of the people who receive this

benefit, and how they are impacted.

Mr. Speaker, I know that many of the people who are going to talk today are

going to say that this is an issue that other governments could have addressed

and did not address. The reality is that many other governments in the past were

not in a fiscal position to address it. Even those that were not necessarily in

a fiscal position tried their best to address it, such as the government of

2002, when they looked at indexing at 1.2 per cent for pensioners at that time.

As small as it was, it was a reflection and an understanding that there was a

problem and it was a problem that should be dealt with within the fiscal

realities of any government to deal with them.

This government does have the ability to be able to address the problem, to

be able to bring some relief to the 20,000-odd public sector pensioners in this

Province, Mr. Speaker, who feel that they should be considered for indexing,

especially when you look at the rate of inflation and you look at how the cost

of living has risen in the Province over the last eighteen years.

Mr. Speaker, we certainly hope that government will not just provide excuses

or talk about universal programs that affect seniors, but we would like to know

directly, as the employer and the former employer of public sector pensioners in

this Province, when you are going to put them on the radar, when you are going

to consider giving them something substantial in terms of indexing at a time

when the Province can well afford to be able to do so.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, thank you.

It is a pleasure to stand here today to take

part in this debate.

I can assure the people of this Province that the Williams' government is

certainly cognizant of the adverse effects that the rising energy prices have on

the people of this Province, especially those who are on fixed incomes,

especially those who are on low incomes, and especially our seniors. I can

assure you that it is something we take very, very seriously, and I can assure

you that it is something that I know the Premier and all members of this

government and I am sure all members of this House watch very, very carefully.

We want to help our seniors. I do not think there is any group in the

Province that all of us would like to help and like to show respect to, than our

seniors, but we have an obligation to help all of our seniors. That is why the

Williams' government has taken a number of initiatives to ensure that all of

our seniors are helped, initiatives that will put money in people's pockets.

Realistically, Mr. Speaker, I think if you look at the initiatives that the

Williams' government has put in place since 2003, and especially in this year's

Budget and last year's Budget, the increases in those benefits that are going

to all seniors certainly would be larger than a 2 per cent or 3 per cent ad hoc

increase in the pension benefits that our retired civil servants do have.

Mr. Speaker, the position of the government is that we have to help all

seniors, and that will include our retired civil servants but not just our

retired civil servants. Indeed, it is all seniors, because that is the way to be

fair and that is the way to be equitable.

Mr. Speaker, it is important to note that, based on the latest figures we

have for the year 2006, there were 72,400 seniors over sixty-five who filed

income tax returns. That would include people without income, but who would file

returns to access government benefits. Of those 72,000 seniors, Mr. Speaker,

46,000 of them did not have an employer sponsored pension. These are people who

rely entirely on the benefits they receive from Ottawa, and the benefits they

might receive from the province government. Of the approximately 26,000 who do,

those over sixty-five, 10,000 are public sector pensioners, and the 46,000 who

had no employee sponsored pension would have an average income of about $15,000.

Mr. Speaker, it might be helpful for the purposes of this debate and I

commend the Member for Port de Grave for raising this in the House, because it

is important that we all discuss this, and I know that all MHAs, as we go around

our districts in the summer, will run into retired civil servants who will want

to discuss these issues with us it is important to note that, of the public

sector retirees, the average pension income is $16,700. This is in the public

sector pension plan. For those who have served longer, because obviously a

public service pension will increase the longer you have worked and the greater

contributions you have made over time, the retiree with twenty-five years of

service would have a $24,000 pension, and a retiree with thirty years of service

would have $26,300 pension.

Obviously, the longer you contribute to the plan the bigger the pension would

be. Obviously, someone who would retire at fifty-five, who would retire early,

would not have as large a pension as someone who would stay and retire at sixty

or sixty-five.

With the Teachers' Pension Plan it is higher; the average is $30,000. For

those who stay for twenty-five plus years the average would be $32,200, and for

those of thirty years the average would be $34,000.

Mr. Speaker, it is said by many that the first pillar of retirement, the one

we consider, are the benefits that are provided to all senior citizens by the

include, of course, Old Age Security, it would include the Guaranteed Income

Supplement.

The Old Age Security, I understand, this year is about $6,000. It is payable

to everyone over sixty-five. The Guaranteed Income Supplement, I am advised, is

about $7,500. Someone who does not have a pension other than the OAS and the GIS

would have, in total, an income of $13,500 a year. Those benefits are subject to

full indexing every quarter and, in addition, there are some supplemental

benefits such as a spouse allowance for a spouse who is sixty to sixty-four,

whose husband or whose wife is qualified for both the OAS and the GIS. There is

also a survivor's allowance for someone who may have lost their spouse,

someone who is sixty to sixty-four.

In addition, the next pillar would be the Canada Pension Plan, which is a

plan that everyone can contribute to, who is employed in this country. The

maximum benefit under the Canada Pension Plan is $10,500. Obviously, the amount

that one would receive or qualify for would be based on how much you have

contributed and how long you have contributed, because that is the way pensions

work. The more you contribute and the longer period of time you contribute is so

important. I know many of us, when you talk about retiring and you look at

retiring, the experts tell you that the earlier you start contributing and the

longer you contribute will add, in a major way, to the amount of retirement

benefits that you receive.

Mr. Speaker, the next pillar would be what I will call employer sponsored

pension plans. For those who do not have those, they would be Registered

Retirement Savings Plans. Those who have had the advantage of being a member of

a defined benefit pension plan, it is a plan where the benefits are certainly

set out.

Whereas, in a defined contribution pension plan, or a money purchase

pension plan, you do not know what your pension is going to be. You are going to

contribute to the plan, your employer is going to match those contributions, and

how well you do depends on how smart you are in choosing the investment manager

that is going to manage those funds.

At the end of the time, when you are ready to retire, you get a lump sum of

money, and then you use that to buy a life annuity or to buy a RRIF, and it is

what it is, but in a defined benefit pension plan, the benefits are set out, the

benefits are known. While you are an employee, you know what the benefits are

going to be, because there is a formula that is used, and of course it depends

on what your contributions are, and it depends on how long you have been a

member. The benefits of the plan are, in fact, known at that time.

Under the plan that the retired pensioners have, under the defined benefit

plan of this Province, indexing was not part of the plan. When the benefits are

set out, what would happen, an actuary is hired and the actuary would look at

the benefits and then cost those benefits, and then the contributions to the

plan would, of course, be based on what the actuary says. If indexing was to be

part of the plan, then obviously, that would have been costed as well, and the

employees and the employer would make the contributions.

Indexing is expensive, full indexing is very expensive, but that was not part

of the pension plan. Therefore, the contributions were not made. Of course, what

is happening now is that the benefits that our employees are receiving are the

benefits that were set out in the plan. The benefits that our retirees are

receiving are, in fact, the benefits that their contributions are paying for,

even though the plan certainly has an unfunded pension liability.

The plan is not funded enough to pay the benefits that are actually being

paid out, and I think that is why when the inquiry was set up in 1989 or 1990

I think it was called the Cummings Inquiry the recommendation was that

there should not be any more ad hoc increases, that there should not be any more

until the benefits that are being paid out now are fully funded, and that if any

enhancements were to be made in the future to those benefits, that those

enhancements will be fully funded as well.

Mr. Speaker, when the Williams government took office in 2000

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that on a number of occasions now he has referred to

the government by using the name of the Premier and that is not appropriate in

debate, so I would ask him to refrain from doing that.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When the present Premier and his government took office, I remember reading

in the Auditor General's report that there was an unfunded liability of about

$4 billion, and I remember thinking, will any government be able to deal with

that, ever get to that, to correct that problem. The teachers' pension was

only funded to the tune of 26 per cent. It was forecast to go bankrupt in 2012.

Government worked very hard to deal with this, and after the Premier negotiated

the $2 billion from Ottawa, from Prime Minister Martin, then the government had

to decide what should we do with this $2 billion? There were many people who

wanted that $2 billion into programs that they thought were important. The

Premier said, no, we are putting the money, the entire amount of money, into the

pension plan because we have to secure the pension plans for the future and for

the benefit of our retirees. That was done and in addition to that, in addition

to the $2 million going into the that is $2 billion, I should say, going

into the teachers' plan, there was just under another $1 billion that went

into the public service sector plan to get those plans up to, I think it was

around 86 per cent funded, so that they would be secure for the future. That was

done. Now, they have fallen back a bit because there were bad investment results

last year. I think the average now is about 77 per cent.

Now you have $3 billion in the funds, in the plan, that hopefully as

investments improve will grow, so that hopefully some day those plans will be

fully funded, even go into surplus and out of that surplus enhancements can be

paid to our pensioners. We certainly look forward to that day.

Mr. Speaker, the motion is that government consider the advisability of

resuming the practice of matching increases for public services pensioners to

wage increases. Now, that is the ad hoc increases which the commission that was

set up by the Wells government in 1999 rejected. The commission recommended that

this ad hoc indexing be discontinued and that any formal indexing should be

properly funded by both the employees and the employers through contribution

increases.

Mr. Speaker, an ad hoc increase of 1 per cent would increase the plan

liabilities by $40 million. An ad hoc increase of 8 per cent would obviously

increase the unfunded pension liabilities of $320. So, these increases in the

deficit of the plan, or in what is called the unfunded liability of the plan or

the debt of the plan, would totally undermine the efforts that the government,

under the Premier, the efforts that put money into the plans to reduce the

unfunded pension liability. This recommendation would ask us to go back to

increase the unfunded liability which really would undermine the efforts that

have taken place not only by this government but there were also payments made

by previous governments into the fund.

In spite of the efforts made by former governments, in spite of the efforts

made by this government, in spite of the $3 billion invested into the pension

plans, the plans are still under funded to the tune of about $2 billion. I know

the Leader of the Opposition talked about indexation, the cost of full indexing

of all employees from the date of retirement would require the contribution

increases to increase by 1.55 per cent for the Public Service Pension Plan and

2.35 per cent for the Teachers' Pension Plan, and in addition, the total

unfunded liabilities would increase by $1.8 billion.

Now, this increase in unfunded liability for these massive amounts would not

be as high if the indexing was just from age sixty-five. It would be more just

under three-quarters of a billion dollars as opposed to $1.1 billion. The

increase in these unfunded liabilities would have to be paid for by all

taxpayers, including seniors who are not receiving a pension and including

workers who are not members of the pension plan. It would be unfair to use the

taxes of all of our citizens just to benefit one group of seniors. Surely, if we

are going to protect our seniors we have to protect all of our seniors,

including our civil servants, but not just our civil servants. This is the

position that government is going to take. If government is going to use tax

dollars to help senior citizens, then we believe that all senior citizens must

benefit.

Mr. Speaker, we have, as I said earlier, brought about a number of

initiatives. I met with retired teachers and I met with retired public servants

and they have given me their advice as to things that we should do to help them

cope with the rising cost of living. We increased the threshold for the Seniors'

Benefit. We pay a Seniors' Benefit each October. Fourteen thousand seniors

received that benefit who were not getting it before last year. This year we

doubled the benefit from about $400 to $800, just under those amounts. There are

31,500 people who were not getting those benefits before who are going to get a

cheque of just under $800 since October.

We also eliminated - and this was the advice from the Retired Teachers'

Association - the 15 per cent tax on insurance. We made amendments to the low

income tax reduction which eliminated 20,000 people from the provincial tax

rolls. We allowed seniors, starting in 2007, to split their pension income

resulting in tax savings. We eliminated the 15 per cent on insurance. We

enhanced the Home Heating Rebate from $100 to $300, from giving the benefit to

11,000 people to giving the benefit to in excess of 75,000 people this year. All

of this puts money back into people's pockets.

Last year we had the largest tax cut in the history of the Province, $160

million in reduction in fees and taxes; this year, a further $178 million. It is

amazing that this year the people of this Province are paying $340 million less

in taxes and fees than they did two years ago. That is something that should be

applauded and celebrated in this Province. We have reduced motor vehicle

registration fees. Retired teachers told me that is something we should do, and

we did it in this Budget.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. minister that his speaking time has expired.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, if I might have leave just to warp up?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member by leave.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I could be here for another hour, going

through the list of the things we do.

I am looking at the lower rental rate for senior tenants that the Minister of

Human Resources mentioned, the $6 million - the $24 million over six years, to

more than double the funding to the Provincial Home Repair Program - I always

call that the RRAP program - and that will eliminate the housing list.

I know the hon. Member for Port au Port told me about $7,500 going to seniors

who were disabled, to help them to put ramps and lifts in their homes; $27.5

million for the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing's Modernization and

Improvement Program.

When I went door to door, Mr. Speaker, in the first campaign, when I first

entered public life, I ran into a number of widows, in particular, in the age

group between fifty-five and sixty-four, who were concerned about the cost of

heat and the cost of drugs. They said to me: Which do we pay, the heat or the

drugs?

That is why we brought in - we expanded the new drug program. That, I think,

we are more proud of, something that the Premier did, than any other program: to

provide the drug card to 97,000 people, to make sure that no one has to pay more

than 4 per cent or 5 per cent of their income on drugs. I am extremely proud of

that. At the same time, we took that home heating program, to deal with the heat

aspect, and took it from $100 for 11,000 people to $300 for over 75,000, and

$400 in Coastal Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we will continue to be cognizant of the costs that our seniors

are facing, and as our financial position continues to improve and we can do

more, we will have more initiatives, we will continue to bring forward

initiatives that will help our seniors cope with the rising cost of living, and

we look forward to that, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal HillQuidi Vidi.

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

I am very pleased today to be able to stand and speak to this motion put

forward by the Member for Port de Grave, and I am very glad that the member put

this motion on the Table and is giving us, because of that, an opportunity to

speak to the needs of the pensioners.

We are dealing with a special group of people. We are dealing with the public

service pensioners and the motion, as I read it from when the notice was given,

is that the House of Assembly urges the government to resume the practice of

matching increases for public service pensioners to wage increases for public

sector employees.

I am struck by what I have heard a couple of the ministers say today, and

when I went back over Hansard and looked at answers to when I had raised similar

questions in the House to a former Finance Minister, I am struck by the

commonality of one of the things that they are saying. I guess it is the

position of the government, so they are all saying it. I am not sure that the

ministers today used this term - but it was, I think, and when I read Hansard it

was used - but the concept was still the same: that the pensioners are a subset

of the group of seniors in our Province and, while they may have a particular

issue, the large group of seniors is the group that government has to be

responsible for, and they are going to be taking care of that large group and

not treating a subset of that group differently.

That is what I would like to speak to first, because when we are talking

about the public pensioners we are talking about a group of people who are in a

very particular situation. They worked for government, directly or indirectly.

They were public service sector workers. From that end, they had a system that

they were part of, a financial system that they were part of, and part of that

was the pension system.

As the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment said, we do not

want to beat to death the history of the pension plan, but going right back to

1965 when it first started, and for about the first fifteen years of that plan,

it wasn't only that government took from it; government did not even pay into

it initially, although that was the initial agreement. It should have been paid

into; the funds should have been built up and invested. We know none of that

happened. I do not want to go back over that but I do need to mention it to get

at the point that I want to get at, that the pension plan was part of the

expectation of public service workers. Yes, as pensioners they are seniors, but

because of the particular situation they were in there may be

Document details

Collection	Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	2008-06-04
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	2008-06-04
Language	en
Format	htm
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	a1e6b7fc1c730b71b0bfaf9b592a4e1ed33a6b0a

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (htm).