Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — 25 April 2002 (44th General Assembly, 4th Session, Vol. XLIV No. 13)
2002-04-25
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
April 25, 2002 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 13
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!
Before we begin our routine proceedings for today I would like to welcome to
the House of Assembly nine Grade 6 students from E'cole Francaise de
Saint-Jean. They are accompanied by their teacher David Foley.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I ask leave to make a statement with respect to an appointment of an Officer
of the House.
By leave?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Today, with concurrence of the Leader of the Opposition and the Member for
Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, I will move that Mr. John Noseworthy be appointed as
Auditor General for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
I wish to inform the House that this proposed appointment has been made, as I
indicated, by agreement of all parties in the Legislature. As you are aware, Ms
Marshall, our previous Auditor General, has completed her ten-year term as
stipulated in the legislation.
Mr. Noseworthy began his career with government in 1981 as a senior auditor
in the Department of the Auditor General. Since then Mr. Noseworthy has held
positions of Auditor Manager and Audit Principal, and more recently, the
position of Deputy Auditor General. Having performed at these levels, Mr.
Noseworthy is very much aware of the challenges that face an Auditor General.
Mr. Noseworthy is a member of the Council of the Institute of Chartered
Accountants of Newfoundland and Labrador and is Chair of the Canadian Council of
Legislative Auditors Strategic Issues Group reporting to all Auditors General in
the country. Mr. Noseworthy recently completed a three-year term on the Canadian
Institute of Chartered Accountants Task Force that researched and developed
public sector accounting standards for pensions and other post employment
benefits.
We look forward to having Mr. Noseworthy serve this Legislature and the
people of the Province as Auditor General for the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Just to make a few comments on the Premier's statement. Certainly, we
support the appointment of Mr. Noseworthy. I came to know him in my former
capacity in the House as Chair of the Public Accounts Committee. A career public
servant who certainly, as the Premier said, knows the challenges that he will
face. We also understand the challenges that he faces as Auditor General, but in
the meantime, we want to be associated and support the appointment. We believe
it is a good one.
Mr. Noseworthy's record of service with the Office of the Auditor General
speaks for itself. There will obviously be no learning curve from that officer's
point of view; that he can pick up where the former Auditor General, Ms
Elizabeth Marshall, left off and continue the work that he has been associated
with over time.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise to speak in support of the appointment of Mr. Noseworthy as Auditor
General. As the Premier has indicated, we were consulted on this appointment and
we are particularly impressed with Mr. Noseworthy's commitment to the public
service of Newfoundland and Labrador and his involvement at the national level
with the task force on audits across the country and setting accounting
standards for audits of governments and public institutions. He clearly has a
high standing in the profession being on the Council of the Institute of
Chartered Accountants of Newfoundland and Labrador and his national involvement
and experience as Deputy Auditor General gives him full qualifications for the
important position of Auditor General of Newfoundland and Labrador. We endorse
the appointment and support Mr. Noseworthy in the appointment of Auditor General
for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I give notice at this point and ask leave to
move the following resolution to make the official appointment:
WHEREAS under subsection 4(1) of the Auditor General Act, the
Lieutenant-Governor in Council has authorized, under the Great Seal of the
Province, to appoint a qualified auditor to be the Auditor General of
Newfoundland and Labrador; and
WHEREAS the Lieutenant-Governor in Council has been pleased to appoint Mr.
John Noseworthy to the position of Auditor General of Newfoundland and Labrador
effective April 25, 2002; and
WHEREAS under subsection 4(2) of the Auditor General Act, the person
appointed to the position of Auditor General must be confirmed in office by a
resolution of this hon. House of Assembly;
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House of Assembly confirm the
appointment of Mr. John Noseworthy to the position of Auditor General of
Newfoundland and Labrador, effective April 25, 2002.
MR. SPEAKER: All those in favour of the resolution, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'. Carried.
On motion, resolution carried.
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay East & Bell
Island.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WALSH: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to one of Canada's
leading archeologists and an expert in the original native people of the Island
of Newfoundland, the Beothuks. Dr. Ralph Thomas Pastore at Memorial University
died at the age of sixty this past February.
In the summer of 1980, while conducting a project for the Newfoundland
Museum, Dr. Pastore made an exciting find in Boyd's Cove in Notre Dame Bay.
The rich site, abandoned by the Beothuks about three centuries ago, contained
eleven house pits, circular mounds and depressions that indicated where the
walls, central fires and the sleeping platforms would have stood.
Dr. Pastore's research and theories did much to put the extinction of the
Beothucks into context. The mythology said that they were victims of intentional
genocide. Dr. Pastore emphasized the role played by the ecology of Newfoundland.
Boyd's Cove now has an interpretive centre opened in 1997 with a large
gallery, images of the archeological investigation, drawings by David Preston
Smith showing Beothuk life around 1620-1730, models and videos, including
footage of Dr. Pastore.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members to join with me in recognizing the important
work of Dr. Pastore and expressing our condolences to his friends and family.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today - it is National Volunteer Week - and certainly send a tribute
out to all the volunteers in my district, but especially I would like to honour
the volunteers at the Immaculate Conception School in Colliers. Mr. Speaker,
this is a K-4 school with a population of 106 students. More than thirty
dedicated and special individuals administer and run several volunteer programs
in this school.
As a matter of fact, Mr. Ralph Percey, who is the President of the School
Council, describes every day at the school as being: alive with volunteers.
Every school day starts with a breakfast program that is free to all
students, serving real juice, fruit, toast, cereal, milk and waffles. This is
followed each day with a hot lunch that costs, I think, a minimum of just one
dollar a day.
Every Friday, they celebrate Green Days as part of their active recycling
program. To date, they have raised over $7,000, again, recycling various
products, but more importantly, teaching these students to take an active role
in protecting the environment.
On the academic side, Mr. Speaker, the volunteers regularly assist teachers
in the classroom with the Book in a Bag program and as guest readers. Just
recently the parents held a read-a-thon and a book fair which was entirely done
by themselves and generated more than $5,000 in new books for the reading
programs.
Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to stand here today and to inform all members of
this House that the Canadian Home and School Federation, in partnership with
Healthy Alternatives, have named the volunteers of Immaculate Conception School
in Colliers as the national winner of the Canadian School Volunteer Program
Award.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. HEDDERSON: By leave, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This prestigious award also provides the school with a $10,000 cash prize.
The volunteers have decided that this award would go directly back to the
children through the purchase of much needed playground equipment.
I would ask all members of this House to join with me in extending
congratulations to the entire school community of Immaculate Conception, the
school council, administration, staff and students, but, in particular, to the
volunteer core of dedicated people doing their
part locally, provincially and
nationally in service to those 106 students.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Her, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Today I rise to bring attention to yet another significant accomplishment by
a youth of this Province.
Recently, eight students participated in a Corner Brook Lions Club fiftieth
annual high school speak-off competition. The winner received the George C.
Poole Memorial Trophy which was donated in Mr. Poole's memory, as a founding
member of the Corner Brook Lions Club.
This year's competitors spoke on a wide range of topics, including: The
Importance of Volunteers; Life as a Member of the Air Cadets; The Popularity of
Harry Potter; Human Bonding, and several others. However, this year's winning
speech was given by a Regina High School student, Danielle Lewis, who spoke on
the prospects of genetic engineering with the idea of creating the so-called
"Perfect Person". Danielle faced talented competition, finishing ahead
of runners-up Susan Tibbo of Herdman Collegiate and Andrew Spencer, also of
Regina High.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join with me in
congratulating Danielle Lewis and all participants in this year's Corner Brook
High School speak-off, and the Corner Brook Lions Club on fifty successful years
of sponsoring this event.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.
MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, on Saturday morning of last week, the City of Mount Pearl hosted
an appreciation breakfast for its city volunteers. I rise today to recognize the
many men, women, boys, and girls of Mount Pearl who each year give so much of
themselves so unselfishly to their community.
Mount Pearl has a reputation as one of those communities where the volunteer
base is exceptionally strong. Volunteerism is the essential core of Mount Pearl's
past and will, I am sure, continue to bring the young city continued vibrancy in
the future.
Volunteerism takes many forms. Most often we note it as a fundamental part of
our sports community and in our many community organizations. However, it finds
itself in simple acts we do for a neighbour, from things like shoveling the
driveway for a senior or a disabled person to reading at the local library or
arranging to spend valuable time with a senior who may need an outreached hand
of encouragement.
Volunteerism is also about networking and about a team approach when a need
arises. Just to give one example, last September, after all transatlantic
flights had been diverted to Canada, and particularly Newfoundland and Labrador,
I was witness to many acts of outreach in my own community. As an example, at
about 8 p.m. on September 12, I received a call asking for blankets for those
passengers being accommodated at the St. John's Civic Centre. I made only two
calls and using the networking system already in place at my local church, we
had three vans loaded with blankets and other supplies within forty-five
minutes. When the need arose last September, volunteers all over the Province
opened up their homes, their hearts and their lives to assist in any way they
could.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the City of Mount Pearl for its initiatives in
thanking these community volunteers and I encourage them to continue these
special recognition receptions in the future.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. H. HODDER: Without our community volunteers, all of our communities
would miss many of the social strengths that bind us together and make our towns
and cities such wonderful places to live and raise a family.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to recognize the accomplishments of the Eagle River Credit Union who
recently held their annual general meeting. At the meeting the Credit Union
reported that it paid out $160,431 in dividends and patronage refunds, based on
the profits that it earned in 2001. The return to the members consisted of a 10
per cent dividend on non-equity shares, and a 5 per cent rebate on loan
interests. This is a unique accomplishment and the Eagle River Credit Union is
the only credit union in the Province to give such a return to its members.
Credit unions have become popular in Labrador in recent years when banks
began to abandon the area. The success of the credit unions prove that rural
Newfoundland and Labrador does have a profitable and lucrative business
environment despite what the larger banks maintain.
The Eagle River Credit Union has operations located in Mary's Harbour,
Cartwright, St. Anthony, Port Saunders, and their head office in L'Anse-au-Loup.
With five branches forging ahead on a very steady and stable course, the overall
health of the Eagle River Credit Union is very good, Mr. Speaker. Economic
opportunities in the region such as the fishery, tourism, the Labrador highway
and small businesses have allowed the credit union system to experience a great
deal of growth in all aspects of its operation. There were increases in assets
and in the membership of the credit union in the past year. Their membership has
grown by 418 people, an increase of 10.3 per cent.
The Eagle River Credit Union offers a variety of products and services and
intends to offer more in the coming months.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MS JONES: By leave, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MS JONES: They are projecting that within the next twelve to eighteen
months, they will be fully operational on-line and will be able to provide
on-line balances, telephone banking and electronic bill payment. This success
must be credited to the dedicated employees, members and volunteers. The Eagle
River Credit Union is another example of the success in rural Newfoundland and
Labrador.
I ask all the members of the House of Assembly to join with me today in
congratulating the Eagle River Credit Union in its success and wish them even
more profit in the future.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Sunday, April 28, is a National Day of Mourning. A day when we remember all
workers who have been killed, injured, or died or became disabled by disease
from exposure to hazzards in the workplace.
Throughout our history, workers were considered dispensable with little or no
regard for their health or their lives. This becomes quite evident, Mr. Speaker,
when we consider the following facts: Throughout the life of the mines on Bell
Island, 104 workers were killed; mines in Labrador West had more than twenty
deaths; Buchans had their tragedies; and untold numbers of deaths, Mr. Speaker,
occurred from disease in Baie Verte and St. Lawrence.
We have also seen disasters in our fishing industry, the loss of the Ocean
Ranger and many other places where workers went to earn a living for their
families but ended up dying.
Behind all of this, Mr. Speaker, are countless numbers of people left behind
whose lives will never be the same again.
In 1978 the longest strike in Canadian history took place in Baie Verte on
the sole issue of health and safety, four long months.
Safety and health was not something that was bestowed on workers. It was not
given to them by any employer or government, workers fought for it and they paid
a huge price, many times with their lives and their health.
It is appropriate, Mr. Speaker, that we have a day set aside each year to
remember all workers who have been killed, injured, or suffer from illnesses and
disease caused by their workplaces.
Mr. Speaker, we have come a long way since the mid-seventies when the
national slogan in this country was "stop the slaughter in industry."
I am pleased to say, Mr. Speaker, that we have probably the best health and
safety legislation in the country, and, if I recall correctly, we were the first
Province to have the right to refuse unsafe work.
However, sadly, in this Province last year we had twenty-six workplace
related deaths and approximately 11,000 new claims to Workers' Compensation
for work related injuries. A very alarming figure.
MR. SPEAKER: Order please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. COLLINS: By leave, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. COLLINS: It is only through cooperation between workers, employers
and government and a continuing education program that we will be able to
eliminate accidents in the workplace.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage all members to take
part in services that will take
place in various regions of this Province on Sunday, April 28, to remember all
those who have died or became incapicated while simply trying to make a living.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labour.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Sunday, April 28, as
National Day of Mourning in Canada. This solemn occasion is set aside to pay
tribute to workers who have been injured or who have died as a result of
industrial disease or workplace related accidents.
At noon on Sunday, here at Confederation Building, I will join employers,
employees and families of injured or deceased workers, for a wreath-laying
ceremony. In keeping with this occasion, flags on Confederation Hill will fly at
half mast.
Statistics show, that in Canada, approximately four workers are killed every
working day of every year. Thousands of others die each year from work related
illnesses; and thousands more are temporarily or permanently disabled.
The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador recognizes the need to work with
business, with labour, and with communities at large, to foster an environment
where we can reduce human, social and economic loss that often results from
workplace accident, injury and death.
Striving for excellence in health and safety in our Province's workplaces
is one of those extremely important areas where employers, employees, along with
government, have to remain constantly focused. A healthy workplace means healthy
employees, and that is good for everyone.
On this Day of Mourning, I ask all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to
encourage your employers and fellow employees to strengthen their commitment and
support of occupational health and safety, in an effort to bring an end to
work-related illness and injury.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank the minister for an advanced copy of
her statement and to say that we on this side of the House, as well, are very
glad to associate with the minister and government to recognize the injured
workers of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to say to the minister that there are people in
this Province who are injured and who remain injured to this day. I am glad to
know that on Sunday we are going to recognize - and I will be here with the
minister as well - to recognize these people who unfortunately have lost their
lives. But, Mr. Speaker, I just want to say to the minister that I hope and pray
- because I know every member in this hon. House gets the calls as they relate
to workers' compensation in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I can
only impress upon the minister to say to the people who deal with these injured
workers in this Province, it is time for somebody to have a heart. It is time
for the injured workers of this Province to be recognized and treated fair, and
not only to be treated fairly, Madam Minister, but as well to be treated with
some dignity in this Province. I have seen too many cases, since taking over
this job -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. FRENCH: I have seen too many injured workers who have not been
treated with the dignity and the respect that they so honestly deserve in this
Province.
I would ask you again to impress upon your co-workers and the people who work
for your department -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. FRENCH: - to just make sure that the injured workers in this Province
are treated fairly.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions this afternoon are for the hon. Premier.
We have more confirmation today from the Minister of Mines and Energy that
this government will soon make a secret deal with Inco to ship nickel
concentrate from Voisey's Bay for processing in Thompson, Manitoba, and
Sudbury, Ontario. A secret deal that is an absolute contradiction of every
commitment the Liberal government and the Liberal Party made to the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador in both 1996 and 1999.
I want to ask the Premier about another deal in the making, relating to
Voisey's Bay, and that is the land and benefits negotiations with the
Aboriginal people of Labrador. The Premier likes to pretend this agreement is
between Inco, the Innu and the Inuit of Labrador, but it is also an agreement
with the Province, I say, Mr. Speaker.
Will the Premier confirm that whatever agreement Inco reaches with the Innu
and the Inuit on land use and benefits from Voisey's Bay, that will become
part of the overall Land Claims Agreement that the provincial and federal
governments are negotiating with the Aboriginal people of Labrador?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I regret that we are not very good at keeping our secrets, because obviously
everyone I speak with all over Newfoundland and Labrador knows full well the
principles on which we are negotiating with Voisey's Bay Nickel and Inco, and
those are principles that will allow us to see full processing to a finished
nickel product in this Province, and that in fact there might be some
concentrate that would be shipped out for some defined period of time to raise
the cash to make sure we get the capability to process to a final nickel product
right here in Newfoundland and Labrador, which we all want to achieve.
Mr. Speaker, the other negotiations that are going on, there have been
negotiations between the Inuit and the Innu and Voisey's Bay Nickel with
respect to benefits agreements that have not engaged and involved any
participation by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. We have not been
at any of the negotiating sessions. It is not our role. We are at the bargaining
table with both the LIA, on behalf of the Inuit and the Innu Nation with respect
to land claims and self-governance, which we hope to accomplish further
achievements later this year. We have already had an Agreement-in-Principle with
the LIA and we are hoping to move towards that with the Innu, and we would like
to have a final agreement with the LIA this year. All of those issues have been
debated publicly as well. The documents have been actually voted upon with
respect to the Agreement-in-Principle by the LIA, and will be by the Innu Nation
if we are successful in the conclusions.
Any monetary arrangements that are made for benefits for the Aboriginals in
those two groups that are paid for by Inco and Voisey's Bay nickel are not
issues that are of concern or related to any land claim deal that we will make
with those two Aboriginal groups; hopefully, in the near future.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Will the Premier confirm that as a result of Supreme Court rulings and
federal government policies, the land claim agreements negotiated with the Innu
and the Inuit, including that portion of the agreements now being negotiated as
part of the Voisey's Bay agreement, will become part of the Constitutional Law
of Canada and will have the full force and effect of the constitution? In other
words, Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier, in effect, will they not be amendments to
the constitution of this country?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, we look forward to successful conclusion
because we have made more progress in the last year or so with respect to land
claim negotiations with the Innu and the Inuit than has been made for the
previous twenty-five years, and we are very proud of that. We have committed the
time frames to try to conclude it in the next year or so if we can humanly and
physically possibly do so.
We do recognize, Mr. Speaker, that a land claim agreement, in which those
groups would give up their claim to ownership of the land in return for certain
benefits that are bestowed upon them by the Government of Newfoundland and
applicable law in Canada would apply. We are glad to have every bit of the law,
including constitutional protection, applied to the final agreements that we
reach with our Aboriginal partners in Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Again, I ask the Premier: Will the Premier confirm that the framework for
these negotiations provide for a ratification process by the Innu and the Inuit?
- that we wholeheartedly support, I might add, Mr. Speaker. But this involves a
separate referenda by both the LIA and the Innu Nation and majority approval by
the Innu and Inuit populations in Labrador. Will the Premier confirm that this
ratification process is, in fact, required?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I am glad to confirm and add to this. A land
claim agreement, if we are successful in reaching - I understand that the
Official Opposition and the NDP party all support the concept and would like to
see the details, of course, when it is done to make sure that everyone can
support exactly what is arrived at. A land claim does have to go through a
voting procedure within the LIA and within the Innu Nation. It also has to go
through a voting procedure in this Legislature and in the House of Commons.
Mr. Speaker, there is opportunity in that respect for absolute and full
debate because it is a requirement by law to change the law and to have impact
that is then protected by all the laws of this Province and of Canada, to have
that kind of debate because there is an absolute requirement to bring it to this
Legislature for approval. Those kinds of things, Mr. Speaker, do not apply to
business arrangements that are made between the government and other companies
or any business arrangement that might be made between the government and the
Aboriginal nations, or the LIA in this case and the Innu, because that is not a
requirement as it is in changing the law of the land and dealing with land
claims that are covered by particular law in the Province and in Canada.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: I am pleased to hear, Mr. Speaker, that this issue, this
ratification process, will involve the people of the Province because, of
course, we are talking about not only the membership of the LIA and the
membership of the Innu Nation, but, indeed, forty-eight other members, and that
is all the members of this hon. House of Assembly.
I must ask the Premier again: Why is it when an issue as important as these
land claims - and the Premier has acknowledged that this will be brought back to
the House. Why is it, that on such an important public policy issue as Voisey's
Bay and what it means to every single citizen of Newfoundland and Labrador, why
is it that this Premier refuses to have this openly disclosed and debated in
this House so that all members, on behalf of all citizens of this Province, can
see exactly what we are in for?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am glad to see that the Official Opposition is now back to recycling
questions which were asked, actually, much more effectively by the Opposition
House Leader when he was the Leader of the Opposition last year. A year ago, a
year-and-a-half ago, two years ago, all these issues have been raised here in
the Legislature before.
Mr. Speaker, let's not misunderstand this, we have already had, through
Question Period, through private member's motions and other motions in this
Legislature, extended debate about the Voisey's Bay arrangement and the
possibly of development of that project in Labrador. We even had a private
member's motion asking the Opposition to join us in support for research and
development so we might actually get a hydromet technology approved (inaudible)
to use in this Province and they voted against it. It has been debated in this
Legislature, components of the deal that people all over Newfoundland and
Labrador are already fully aware of.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER GRIMES: The debate will not be restricted to this Legislature,
has not been already, it will be debated in every nook and cranny of
Newfoundland and Labrador, in every public place that anybody wants to see the
details. It has been debated since 1996, Mr. Speaker, and we hope that we can be
the group that can finally be debating something that will actually happen -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his remarks.
PREMIER GRIMES: - instead of something that the Opposition is frightened
to death that might happen, Mr. Speaker. We are going to keep trying to make
sure that this proceeds so we can actually start accruing the benefits to the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador that we badly need and deserve.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we are going to see to it that the Premier receives a Juno award
for that act.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, the people of this Province -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, and he was singing a song that time, I say to the
Member for Bay of Islands; a song and dance show.
Mr. Speaker, the people of this Province are very close to losing another
long held tradition which is very dear to their hearts. How priceless and
valuable is it to be trouting with your son or daughter, trying to catch a
pan-sized trout? Mr. Speaker, this is about to end. New regulations sent by DFO
officials to the minister for approval require that only trout thirty
centimeters in length, twelve inches long, and over one pound be retained by
anglers. How many members in this House of Assembly, I say to you, Mr. Speaker,
have been trouting with their kids and caught trout over a pound and twelve
inches long? Not too many.
Also, licences for specific species may be required. I ask this to the
Minister of Tourism or the Minister of Fisheries because, I would imagine, both
would be involved. Does this government agree with these proposed regulations?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Minister of Tourism, Culture and
Recreation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, my understanding, at this time, is that these
are proposed regulations. I do know that my officials are looking into the
matter with DFO to get more information, but I do not have any further
information than what is publicly available at this time.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Over the past ten years our people are consistently losing their traditions
and way of life. You cannot catch a cod anymore. You cannot go out with your
pickup and get a load of wood without getting a permit, Mr. Speaker, and this
government privatized the public parks that we once held. These new regulations
are being proposed without any research or even a trout population study being
completed.
Mr. Speaker, will the minister tell us what representation our government has
made with respect to this very serious issue for the people of Newfoundland and
Labrador? Who is pushing for these changes and for what purpose?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in my previous response, my
officials are looking into this matter and, I believe, they are in contact with
the Department of Fisheries and Oceans on this matter. I would look to having
further information in the very near future, in the next few days, at which time
I would be able to provide that to my hon. colleague.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would like for all Members of this House of Assembly to speak
in unison in opposing these new proposed regulations.
Mr. Speaker, will the minister give a commitment in this House of Assembly
today to contact the federal minister responsible and let him know, in no
uncertain terms, that the government and the people of this Province will not
stand for, nor support, these ill-conceived and poorly planned proposed
regulations?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BETTNEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I have always made it a position of mine that before taking a
position, as a minister, that I would have full information. My officials are
looking to get the full information on the proposed regulations. When we have
time then, to analyze those, we will be taking a position, whether to support
further or to contradict or to oppose those; but in the absence of the kind of
information that I would like to have before making that kind of position, I
think, at this point, the best thing is to do the research and the analysis that
is required.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Cape St.
Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Before these proposed regulations were sent to the minister for approval - I
would like to ask the minister: Why wasn't her department involved in putting
these regulations in place? And such a serious -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. J. BYRNE: But they should have had some involvement before they went
forward, I say to the minister. Why not? They should not have been there in the
first place.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BETTNEY: Again, Mr. Speaker, I understand that they are proposed
regulations, that they are not in effect. If the hon. member is looking for
rationale as to why the Department of Fisheries and Oceans would do something
like put out proposed regulations, I suggest that the best course would be to
ask them, and not to ask me.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions today, Mr. Speaker, are to the Minister of Education. They are
on behalf of my colleague from the District of St. Barbe, who, unfortunately,
was called away on a family emergency just before the House convened. Basically,
they are his questions to you today.
The parents in Rocky Harbour, Norris Point and Sally's Cove, Mr. Speaker,
are very concerned about the rushed manner in which the K-6 school has been
turned into a K-12. They have concerns. The main one is the lack of consultation
on the design, but three other concerns follow from that: The adequate
separation between elementary and high school students. The life and safety code
requirements have been met for the cafeteria; however, issues pertaining to
overcrowding have been raised in a letter from the local fire chief to Mr.
Elliott of School District 3. A site plan has many obstacles, especially
pertaining to the safe and efficient flow of traffic.
Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister, two school chairs have resigned over this
issue and parents are talking about civil disobedience if their concerns are not
taken seriously. I ask the minister: Will the minister make a commitment today
to the parents of Rocky Harbour, Norris Point, Sally's Cove, that their
concerns will be properly addressed before construction begins on this school?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for the question and I
recognize that there are some concerns being expressed up in the Rocky Harbour
area. I have to say, Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the member opposite heard the
interview that was done this morning by Dr. Ross Elliott of the school board,
where he put forward a case which clearly said to me that a great deal of
consultation had taken place prior to the tender being let for this particular
school.
I have to say, Mr. Speaker, as well, in the correspondence that I have had
and the questions I have asked subsequent to receiving that correspondence, I
have every assurance that the concerns that were expressed prior to the tender
being called, that were expressed by the school councils, have in fact been
responded to and taken care of, and it has been done in a very positive manner.
Mr. Speaker, we know that when we are building schools in this Province, and
we are trying to work with the resources available to us, which has in fact
amounted to $170 million that this government has put in, the most since
Confederation, I have to say that even with that amount of money it is still
difficult to respond to all of the special requests that come forward from
parents and teachers and school boards. We have to work very hard to make sure
that we respond to as many needs as we can, working with the resources that we
have available to us.
On the issues that the member raised with respect to separation of our
primary and elementary from junior high and high, Mr. Speaker, that, in fact,
has been taken care of. I am told that there will be a separation between those
student bodies, so that we won't have -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. minister now to conclude her answer.
MS FOOTE: - constant interaction among those students.
As well, Mr. Speaker, with respect to the cafeteria, that has been dealt
with. I am told, as well, that the Fire Commissioner, in fact, has approved what
is happening in that school, that it is a safe environment for our students.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Harbour
Main-Whitbourne.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The question of finances is not the question here, Minister, it is the
question of consultation. We have two school chairs who have resigned. They
thought it important enough to resign, because they have not been given the
courtesy of being in the loop when this design was put into place. They need to
be in the loop, and they are asking for a commitment from you to do so.
Minister, just to go one step further - I say, Mr. Speaker, just one step
further - when you talk about finances, a common practice for school boards when
closing a school is to utilize the savings over a period of three years to
assist in the transition into a new facility.
So, I ask the minister: The board has a savings of $300,000 by the closing of
the school in Norris Point. Will the minister see that these savings go towards
addressing the concerns raised by the school councils and parents of Rocky
Harbour, Norris Point and Sally's Cove?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, two questions there from the member opposite. One,
in terms of the consultation: I can only tell you what I am being told in terms
of what transpired. Mr. Speaker, as far back as June of 2001, in fact, a meeting
took place with respect to the Rocky Harbour School to introduce the project,
and at that time the participants were the school council chairs and others, of
course. Then, throughout the fall, their specifications and draft plans took
place. Mr. Speaker, on December 11, joint council members met as well with them.
I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that the list goes on in terms of the consultation
with the school councils.
Unless you are telling me that the board is not being upfront in this, Mr.
Speaker, I have to go by what I am being told. I am certainly being told by the
board - and I have every confidence in that particular board, Mr. Speaker, as I
do in all of our boards. Certainly that one has been very upfront and working
very closely with the school councils to ensure that they are well aware of what
can and cannot be accomplished, again working with the resources we have, but
making sure that at the end of the day we deliver a quality education for our
students.
With respect to the savings, Mr. Speaker, what I can say to the member
opposite is that this government has been very responsible in ensuring that
every bit of savings that has accrued as a result of school closures and
consolidations has gone back to the boards, and we are going to continue to do
that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Minister of Health and Community Services, concerning
criteria for home support requests, and particularly for natural families caring
for family members in their own homes, as opposed to having them living in
alternative care or independent living arrangements.
The new criteria put in place in December, and planned to continue through
2002 and 2003, has made it next to impossible for these families to get
short-term home support. When they really need support and it is not being
approved, the only alternative in many cases, I say to the minister, is to have
them admitted to hospital for periods of time. These families are looking for
short-term support to give them respite. They want to care for their family
members in their own homes, but occasionally they need support to give them a
break. Given that it is far more expense to hospitalize someone compared to
providing home support hours, particularly for short-term, I ask the minister:
Will he commit to reversing this policy so that family caregivers can get relief
they need before they end up needing care themselves and probably saving the
health care money in the long run?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The hon. member raises a very important issue that from time to time in this
House we have had questions related to the whole area of home support. Indeed,
in recent years in this Province we have all seen that this has become a major
cost driver in terms of the health care budget within the Province. Nobody is
denying the need that is there.
The case that the hon. member referenced - well, I am not familiar with the
individual case but certainly the circumstances that he describes, I think we
can all relate to, and we certainly have some sensitivity and feeling for the
families who are involved. The difficulty is, in terms of crafting a budget and
trying to respond to the many demands that are out there in the health care
system - home support is one, important as it is, and government has tried in
recent years to respond to that. In fact, in the last four or five years we have
seen the budget go from some $31 million to $60 million in terms of support for
that program. We do acknowledge that it is an important program. It is an
important service, and we also recognize that in some areas there are probably
things where we still have a ways to go.
Our commitment, to the people of the Province, is to continue to work in that
area and other areas to make sure that we do deliver a quality service to all of
the people of this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I say to the minister, sometimes short-term care and relief can save money to
the health care system overall, versus admitting someone to an hospital. I think
the minister is well aware, Mr. Speaker -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary, I ask him to get to his question.
MR. COLLINS: The minister met with many families in my district last fall
and was made well aware of the problems they had in getting home support.
Shortly after the meeting new criteria was put in place that made the situation
even worse. The people felt positive about the meeting they had with the
minister. I wonder if the minister could give an explanation to these people as
to why, after such a positive meeting which they felt would lead to positive
changes, they are now worse off than before? What went wrong, Minister?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Indeed, as the hon. member points out, I did have occasion last year in my
other capacity to meet with a number of families and groups in his district to
discuss their concerns as it relates to providing quality services to their
families. Indeed, as I acknowledged to them at that time, I have acknowledged to
this House today, and my position still is that I recognize the importance of
that service, the importance of the need and, I guess, the challenge to us all,
to try to be able to response in an appropriate fashion to those needs that are
out there.
In fact, I do not know if the hon. member would be aware, the presentation
which I made to the Romano Commission a short time ago on behalf of the people
of the Province did reference that very issue, and pointed out to Mr. Romano
that as he moves forward in drafting a report for the federal government - this
is one of the areas that we have suggested that he take a hard look at, because,
in fact, we feel that there is a role here for the federal government to play.
We all have to acknowledge, and we always have to remind ourselves as well,
during a period of time when we, in this Province, have seen the contributions
from the federal government decreasing, we have managed in this Province -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. minister now to conclude his answer.
MR. SMITH: - to not only sustain, but actually to increase, year over
year, expenditures in health care in this Province.
Mr. Speaker, that speaks to the commitment of this government, but it also
speaks to the challenge that we have as a people, and as a government, in terms
of trying to deal with the many challenges that are out there.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the Minister of Environment. I guess another example of
the lack of information and planning put forward under the tire recycling
program. Is the minister aware that in addition to the $3 recycling fee charged
by tire retailers, in addition to the tax on the $3 recycling fee, that there
are tire retailers in the Province that are charging a $2 disposal fee over and
above those fees that are put forward by the government?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, the program requires the $3 fee to operate
and that is the fee that we are asking be charged for the program. If there are
other fees being charged, I am not aware of it; but I can tell you, that is
being done by private retailers and that is up to them, I suppose, in their
business practices. The bottom line is that the program is going to proceed and
we are looking forward to it being a success.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to ask the minister: Is there anything in the regulations to
prevent tire retailers from charging a fee over and above the $3 fee and the tax
on the $3 implemented by government? Why would a tire retailer charge a disposal
fee when the $3 is supposed to cover disposal transportation and recycling in
the first place?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, before we brought the program in tires were
sent to landfills. So there were private arrangements previous to that.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. K. AYLWARD: Exactly. So they are going to end up going to landfills
again. If one of the retailers is out there doing that then maybe we will get
the list and we will say to the ones that are not - well, maybe they will suffer
the business consequences of it. The bottom line is, I will check it out and see
whether or not they are doing it. If they are, we will see if we can deal with
it. The bottom line is, for a $3 fee we are going to take care of a big
environmental problem in this Province that needs to be done.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, my question today is for the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
The Minister of Health and Community Services keeps telling us that there is
a strategic plan that is being developed and going to be delivered later this
spring. Will the minister confirm for this House today that there is a
section
in that plan that deals with the location, the delivery of certain services?
Which, by the way, Mr. Speaker, is very similar to one of the sections in the
plan recently announced by a Liberal government in B.C. Will the minister
confirm for the House today, and tell the House today, what changes are going to
take place in certain hospitals and clinics with respect to the delivery of
services when that plan comes out? What changes are going to be made in the
roles of certain hospitals in this Province?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member himself has said, this is a
plan that is being developed. The plan has not been finalized, so it certainly
would be inappropriate for me today to stand here and respond to a hypothetical
situation put forward by the hon. member opposite. All I can say to him is you
have to wait for the plan to be unveiled and then, he, like everyone else in the
Province, will have the opportunity to analyze and ask the appropriate
questions.
MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Lewisporte.
MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise this afternoon to present a petition on behalf of 682 residents of the
electoral District of Lewisporte. Four hundred and sixty-seven of those
residents reside in the Town of Embree and 215 reside in the Town of Little
Burnt Bay. The prayer of the petition relates to the condition of the road
connecting those communities. I could, I suppose if I wanted to, present the
petition on two separate days, but the petition was sent to me as one. Since it
deals with the one piece of road, I think it is only appropriate that the
petition be presented together rather than in two separate parts.
Mr. Speaker, I want to take just a few minutes of the time that I am allowed
on presenting a petition, to impress upon the government and the Minister of
Works, Services and Transportation, in particular, the dire need to do something
with this piece of road. It was a dire need that was recognized and committed by
the government when the previous member represented the district. It was a dire
need that was committed by the government under at least three separate
ministers, and has not yet been completed. Now, in fairness to the government,
Mr. Speaker, some of it has been completed. The few kilometres from Lewisporte
to the town boundary of Embree has been repaved over the last couple of years,
but from Embree to Little Burnt Bay, which by far is the worst of the piece of
road, has yet to be addressed.
The prayer of this petition is that the government, in their capital works
spending under Works, Services and Transportation this year, move to address
this desperate need.
Mr. Speaker, I have driven over that road myself on numerous occasions.
Without exaggeration, you are actually taking your life in your hands to go over
it. Driving over some of those potholes in deteriorating and rotting pavement is
worst than driving over a dirt road. It does more damage to a vehicle than
driving over a dirt road. It cannot be maintained by going in and putting coal
roll in it like you can put a grader over a dirt road.
The school children, the people who have to go to hospital, the taxis, the
people who have to go to Lewisporte for every service that they need from Embree
and Little Burnt Bay are pleading with the government to keep the commitment
that they made to them three years ago, which is not yet fulfilled but which
should be fulfilled, which needs to be fulfilled and we are hoping that the
minister, in making those commitments on behalf of the government, will make
sure that those commitments are fulfilled this year.
Mr. Speaker, I have to say this, in closing, that each year for the last
three years, I personally have gone and sat down with whomever the minister
happened to be at that time, whether it was the Member for Humber Valley or
whether it was the Member for St. John's North or the present member, I have
gone and sat down with them in their capacities as ministers and pointed out to
them the desperate need of fulfilling this commitment that this government has
made to the people of Embree and Little Burnt Bay. Mr. Speaker, I call on the
government and call on the minister to keep that commitment and to make sure
that it is kept this year.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Today I rise to present yet another petition mostly from the residents of the
Town of Pouch Cove. These petitions continue to come in, and they concern the
Torbay bypass. I really do not see the need to read the petition, Mr. Speaker,
because I have read it into the record before, but it does concern the Torbay
bypass. Again, it emphasizes the need for a roads agreement between the Province
and the federal government.
I have asked the minister in this House a number of times - we spoke on this
topic with respect to the Torbay bypass - and not long ago he mentioned that
they are working on an agreement of sorts with the federal government for roads
in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. On that presentation, he mentioned
that the Torbay bypass is one of the roads to be done if and when we get this
roads agreement between us and the federal government. Hopefully, Mr. Speaker,
it will be much sooner than later.
The Torbay bypass is desperately needed. It is becoming a safety issue in our
district now. The residents of Torbay, Pouch Cove, Flatrock, Bauline, Logy
Bay-Middle Cove-Outer Cove are signing these petitions and I am receiving them
every now and then, Mr. Speaker, so I present them in the House of Assembly.
We have now over 12,000 vehicles a day travelling the Torbay Road. In
particular, of course, the area where the Holy Trinity school is, in Torbay,
right on the road, very near to the road, the intersection between Convent Lane,
the Marine Drive, and Torbay Road itself is a four-way intersection, Mr.
Speaker, and in the mornings with the school children - there are some 600 to
700 children going to that school - we can only imagine the traffic jam and the
potential for a very serious accident there.
It was only yesterday that I had a meeting set up between myself, and the
Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, and the Mayor of Torbay, to
discuss this issue. Unfortunately, the minister could not make it. He was in
another meeting. Maybe in the near future we can get together again to address
this very serious concern.
The Torbay bypass has been on the Order Paper, we will say, for years and
years and years. The former Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, the
man now who is running for, I think, Bonavista-Trinity Conception, John Efford,
when he was the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, he put this on
the back burner. Now, Mr. Speaker, the Torbay bypass, as I said - I see the
Premier looking and listening very attentively. I am glad he is; I appreciate it
- there are 12,000 vehicles per day on this road. It is getting like Topsail
Road used to be years ago, Mr. Speaker; very dangerous.
We have numerous intersections. We have the Bauline Line intersection, the
Indian Meal Line intersection, the Marine Drive intersection, the WindGap
intersection, and it goes on and on and on. The road is desperately needed, the
Torbay bypass. It would alleviate the traffic on Torbay Road going through the
community of Torbay, as I said, and the people in the area, the town councils,
Mr. Speaker, the five town councils now are supporting this, from what I
understand. I see the minister paying very close attention, and I am glad he is.
I appreciate it. As I said earlier, he has stated in this House that the Torbay
bypass is on the list of work to be done if and when we get a roads agreement
between the federal government and the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. As
I said, Mr. Speaker -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. J. BYRNE: - I urge the minister to continue his talks and to try and
get this roads agreement speeded up because the Roads for Rail Agreement is
about to come to an end in the very near future, Mr. Speaker, and we know that
$800 million has been spent on roads in the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador from the previous Administration, Mr. Speaker, a P.C. government that
worked out that agreement -
Is my time up, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Yes.
MR. J. BYRNE: Oh, I am sorry. I apologize.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would urge the Premier and the Minister of
Works, Services, and Transportation, to take this matter very seriously. It is
becoming a very dangerous road to travel on, and I hope the minister does well
in his negotiations with the federal government on this issue.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have a petition to the House of Assembly today, from the undersigned
residents of Newfoundland and Labrador. It is on behalf of Gary and Karen Smith
of South River who have applied to adopt an orphan child from Kazakhstan. Gary
and Karen Smith have been denied a letter of recommendation from the Department
of Health and Community Services to facilitate this adoption. The pray of the
petition is:
WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador
to provide the necessary documentation to Gary and Karen Smith allowing them to
proceed with the adoption of an orphan child from Kazakhstan.
There is a long history behind Gary and Karen Smith, in their efforts to
adopt a child. They were in the adoption process back in early 2000, along with
a couple of other couples from this Province. They were not, however, as
fortunate as some of the other couples of this Province, and I refer to one
couple in particular and that is a couple from Bishop's Falls in Central
Newfoundland. They were able to receive a letter of recommendation from the
Department of Health and Community Services.
They went through the same onerous process as Gary and Karen Smith; however,
there was an interesting twist to their process. I have it here in an e-mail
from this couple from Bishop's Falls and it says: I finally got it put
together. The short and sweet of it is, we had a meeting with Roger on Tuesday,
March 27, 2001. We were able to get Marilyn to sign the letter of recommendation
by Friday, March 30, 2001.
Now, we have to wonder why the couple from Bishop's Falls were able to get
the letter of recommendation and why the couple, Gary and Karen Smith from South
River, Conception Bay, in the District of Harbour Main, were not able to get a
letter of recommendation.
We made some calls to the Department of Health and Community Services, and in
the process I made some calls to the member - Bishop's Falls - who also
happens to be in the Premier's Office, and I was told: Oh, yes we made a call
to the Department of Health and Community Services but we did not put any
pressure on them.
Now, I ask the hon. House: if a department in this government receives a call
and says, this is the Premier's Office calling, isn't that pressure in
itself ? Isn't that making a request that says it is probably in your best
interest to do this because this call is coming from the Premier's Office? One
would think that a call coming from the Premier's Office, that the Premier
would know about this. I have every reason to believe that the Premier did,
because this couple from Bishop's Falls -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MS S. OSBORNE: By leave, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you very much.
The department said that they were following, when I questioned them, in the
spirit of the policy, but there isn't a policy yet in place. So I am asking,
if the spirit of the policy wasn't contravened on behalf of the couple from
Bishop's Falls, and they were going to stick to the spirit of the policy on
behalf of the couple from Harbour Main, or not, those questions have remained
unanswered.
Here is the letter of recommendation from Marilyn McCormick, the Provincial
Director of Child, Youth and Family Services, that was issued, "After a
meeting with Roger on Tuesday, March 27 th , 2001...".
Whether there was an error made or not, we are not quite sure. The jury is
still out on this. However, we have a couple who have gone through a lot of
emotional trauma. They have suffered. They have paid a dear price. They have
been supported by this couple from Bishop's Falls, and I am asking the hon.
the House of Assembly to please grant this couple from Harbour Main the same
privileges that were granted to the couple from Bishop's Falls.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the residents of Labrador
West.
The undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, the undersigned
petitioners, believe that the raiding of the Labrador Transportation Initiative
Fund is a gross violation of the purposes of the Fund and a breach of trust with
the people of Labrador and hereby petition the House of Assembly to direct the
government to immediately put this $97 million back into the Labrador
Transportation Initiative Fund to be spent on transportation initiatives in
Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, many of the people in Labrador are concerned that this $97
million being taken out of the Fund and put into general revenues of the
Province to reduce the deficit seriously jeopardizes the completion of Phase III
of the Trans-Labrador Highway.
Further than that, Mr. Speaker, people realize also that over the last number
of years monies from this Fund were being used to address problems with the
current existing road network in Labrador that will not be there in the future
if this money is taken for that to be able to be done, thereby putting us into a
position in Labrador where we will have to compete with every other portion of
the Province for the meager dollars that are available for roadwork in the
Province on an annual basis, monies that cannot address the problems that are
being experienced now, as we hear from petitions from different parts of this
Province.
Mr. Speaker, it is important for the roads that we have in Labrador to be
maintained in an adequate manner, and in a good condition. A lot of people now,
versus a few years ago, are using sections of that highway to make a livelihood.
They are hauling and putting sometimes up to 200,000 kilometres a year traveling
between Labrador West and Happy Valley-Goose Bay to deliver goods to the
business community there.
Also, Mr. Speaker, the roads at the present time, particularly from Labrador
West to the Esker turnoff, has deteriorated to the point where it has become
unsafe for the public transportation, for the truckers who use that road to
provide for a living for their families, and we really believe that by taking
this money from this Fund is going to interfere with and jeopardize any
opportunities that we have to maintain our roads in an adequate condition.
Not only that, it is going to impact greatly upon tourism, an industry that
we have been trying and working hard to develop in Labrador for the past number
of years. Tourists who I met last year, with broken hitches on their vehicle
after traveling over sections of that road, continuously talked about how they
enjoyed their trip to Labrador but they would never, ever, return again, or they
would never recommend to their friends to make that trip until road conditions
improve to the extent where they can do so safely, and without sustaining great
damage to their personal vehicles.
Mr. Speaker, people are asking for this $97 million not to be taken from the
Fund. That was put there for one purpose and one purpose only. As a matter of
fact, the intent of the money in that Fund is so clear and so concise that
government -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. COLLINS: By leave to clue up, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. COLLINS: The intent of the money in that Fund is so clear and so
concise that it is by a special piece of legislation in this House that protects
that money, and in order to get access to that money it is unlawful for the
government to take it right now. They have to pass legislation to change that
act in order to be able to make the grab for that money that they seem to be
intent on doing, and that the people of Labrador do not want them to do. They
want this government to reconsider that and to leave the money where it is, to
go towards transportation that it was intended for.
Thank you.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. LUSH: Order 2, Mr. Speaker. I move that the House resolve itself into
Committee of Supply.
On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on
Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.
Committee of the Whole
MADAM CHAIR (Ms M. Hodder): Order, please!
Heading 2.2.07.
Shall 2.2.07. carry? Carried.
Shall 2.3.01. carry?
The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.
MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
I believe you called subhead 2.2.07. If you did, Madam Chair, I would like to
- I don't really know who I would ask this question to, but I am sure somebody
on the other side, maybe the Government House Leader, could answer me.
I noticed under 2.2.07., where it says Senior Management Development, there
was no amount budgeted last year under Salaries, which is 2.2.07.01., but yet we
spent $17,100. I would like to ask the minister, what exactly did we spend the
$17,100 on? Who did we have hired that we paid $17,100 to? I notice under the
budget 2002-2003 there is no amount budgeted again under Salaries. I would like
to ask the minister what that money was spent on.
As well, under subhead 2.2.07.03., Transportation and Communications, there
was $6,000 spent. I would like to know what the Transportation and
Communications were. There was no money budgeted, there is no money budgeted
again for this year, but yet, last year we spent $6,000 when nothing was
budgeted.
Madam Chair, under 2.2.07.05., Professional Services, we did not budget
anything but yet we spent $30,000, and there is no money being spent again for
this year. I just want to know what that is for.
Under Purchased Services, if the minister would be kind enough to tell us
exactly what they are. We budgeted $25,000 last year, but yet we spent $92,400.
I would like to know what that was spent on, and we are back again to budgeting
$25,000 for the upcoming year. I would like to know exactly what Purchased
Services are, and why last year did we spend $92,400?
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
Under 2.2.07.01., Salaries of $17,100 was revised into that from zero because
there were some hirings from some services that took place that were not
anticipated. Now, if you want to know the names of the individuals, I can get
you that. I do not think that is important in terms of answering the question.
Under 2.2.07.06., it was revised, you are correct, from $25,000, the
expenditure, up to $92,400 and that level of Purchased Services is noted as
being for meeting room rentals and all other associated expenses with respect to
senior management activities. A further breakdown of that would require a
specific additional inquiry to Treasury Board, and I could get that information
if it is of sufficient importance to you. The notes that I have with respect to
the explanation under these two items are the explanations that I have given
you.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.
MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would say to the minister: Minister, I would like to know what we spent
$92,400 for, on renting boardrooms or meeting places, and why there would not be
boardrooms in here that we could have used and, in actual fact, saved the
taxpayers of this Province $92,400. So, Minister, I would ask you to supply me
with specifics as it relates to this $92,400, the names and places of where
these meetings were held, and who held them.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
I take the question quite seriously and, quite honestly, it is a good
question and I will undertake to get the information for you. It may be that I
will have it before the Estimates hearings are concluded this afternoon, in
which event I will provide the information to you.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Madam Chair.
Just a few questions to the Acting Minister of Finance. This is an
interesting
section in terms of Senior Management Development. It is not the
section, but what it refers to. In the Explanatory Notes in the Budget, it talks
about this section. It says, "Appropriations provide for the development of
human resource policy for management and executive groups throughout Government
and includes allocations approved under Government's Organizational
Development Initiatives Fund."
What are these ODI Funds? Nowhere else in the Budget, for example, within
each department, do you see a subhead that says, Organizational Development
Initiatives Fund. Who manages these funds? Are they in every department? What
are they used for? What is the purpose of the fund? Who has control over the
fund? Is it the minister? Is it the deputy minister? Again, this is an
interesting
section from that point of view. If you go to any department in this
Budget - and lets go to the Department of Education as an example. Nowhere, that
Organizational Development Initiatives Fund. Is there a fund in the Department
of Education called the Organizational Development Initiatives Fund? If so, how
much is in the fund? What is it being utilized and used for? The Department of
Intergovernmental Affairs; does it have an Organizational Development
Initiatives Fund? If so, how much is in that fund? What is it being used for?
The Minister of Youth Services and Post-Secondary Education; does that
department have an Organizational Development Initiatives Fund? If so, why is it
not in the Estimates presented to this House for approval? If so, how much is in
that fund, in her department? What is that fund being used for? Who has access
to it?
I am not going to waste the time of the House in terms of going through each
and every department, but it is a legitimate and bonafide question to the
minister. Does every department have such a fund, or only some departments? What
is that fund and the purpose of it? What is it for? Who has access to it? Who
controls the fund? Equally important, is there the same amount of money in each
department, or how much money is in each department?
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
I think the answer to the question really is this; in terms of the area of
Cabinet Secretariat - Organizational Development Fund as allocated here is
specific to, if you like, the central agency that revolves around the Cabinet
Secretariat. It is part of the central agency of government.
Throughout the other departments of government, absolutely, there is
provision made for staff training, for staff training initiatives, for language
training and that sort of thing. The level of appropriation under each
department varies from department to department, depending on the size of the
department, and I am sure that is they type of question that is raised in the
Estimates for each department as they go through the hearings with the various
ministers. I cannot, obviously, quote verbatim what is in each department for
staff development, or for organizational development, or for staff training.
There is an allocation under all of the departments, to some extent, for those
types of initiatives and that information and those questions, I think you would
agree, are more appropriately asked by the committee members examining the
various departments and question the various ministers as the Estimate hearings
are moved forward.
On this particular one, the $92,400 under Purchased Services, which is a
revision upward from the $25,000 and is considerably more than $25,000 allocated
in this year's Budget that we are now debating. It is a valid question and I
have asked the officials to provide me with the answer so that I can give you as
detailed a response on that specific item as I can. Hopefully, I can do it
before the day is out.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Madam Chairperson.
The answer provided by the minister may be sufficient for somebody else who
may have asked the question, but it is very difficult - and I think the minister
would also agree with this - when the other committees are meeting in the
mornings, in the nighttime, with the appropriate departments - it would be very
difficult to ask a question related to Organizational Development Initiatives
Fund when you have not even bothered to list them and their amounts in the
Estimates. How can - as a member of the Opposition, myself for example, as
critic for Industry, Trade and Rural Development - I question an Organizational
Development Fund that exists in that department when you, as the government,
have not included the amount in the Estimates? It is hidden. If it is not here
that means it is hidden. The only conclusion, minister, that anybody could draw.
If the ODI funds, as they are called, and I have heard of their existence -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) none there.
MR. E. BYRNE: Well, that is not what I am told, minister; that every
department has such a fund. The questions that I asked - and they are called ODI
funds.
For example, as the Minister of Government Services, is there an
Organizational Development Fund, ODI fund in your department?
MR. NOEL: This is not our estimate session.
MR. E. BYRNE: So you will not answer the question. This is not our
estimate session. He will not answer the question; all right fair enough. I will
ask the minister again: Why is it that those funds are not included in the rest
of the Estimates? Is there a million dollars in the Minister of Government
Services' department for staff training, development and for whatever other
purpose that fund may be used for? If there is a million dollars in his budget
for the Organizational Development Initiatives Fund, then why isn't it in the
Estimates under his department? - so that we, and all members of the House, have
an opportunity, a rightful opportunity, to question during the budget process
what that fund is being used for, what was budgeted last year, what was spent
this year and what is being budgeted this year.
It is extremely difficult - even the minister has suggested that we question
other ministers on it - to question other ministers when it is not included here
in their estimates. So, I would like to ask him this question: Why isn't it
included there? Can he make a commitment to the House today to provide to this
House a listing before next week is concluded - because this is our last sitting
day for this week, but before next week is concluded. Will he make a commitment
on behalf of the government to table in this House a list of each department's
Organizational Development Initiatives Fund, what was budgeted last year, what
was actually spent from those funds last year and what each department is
budgeting this year?
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Let me clarify my earlier response for the member. What I
was intending to convey was this; that in all of the departments there are
activities carried out with respect to training in various areas, French
language training specifically being one. The appropriation is made within
government to pay for those items. What the hon. member is asking, I think, with
respect to government as a whole: How much money do we spend for organizational
development throughout the whole of the government of the Province? Whether it
is at Cabinet Secretariat or whether it is in the department.
I understand, Madam Chair, that there is just one fund for this particular
issue and I believe it is about $2 million. I will confirm that $2 million
figure for the hon. member as what should be spent throughout government. Let me
say to the hon. member, that I do undertake to get for him the information that
he has asked specifically today, to the extent that I can, with respect to how
much money we spend throughout government under ODI. I think that is what the
member wants to know: how much do we spent throughout government, and how much
of it is spent in various departments.
MR. E. BYRNE: I am going to get it?
MR. MATTHEWS: Oh, you are going to get it.
MR. E. BYRNE: I am going to get it.
MR. MATTHEWS: Absolutely! The hon. member is right, the hon. member is
going to get it. The hon. member is going to get it, because I am going to get
it for him. If, Madam Chair, I don't get it for him, it is ungettable. So, he
might as well understand now that he will get it. If it is not ungettable, he
will get it and he will get it as quickly as I can retrieve it through the
officials for him.
Now, if there is a more inconspicuous question that he is really trying to
get at, I would ask him to - in the words of a former member from that side of
the House - to come clean and tell me what it is he is really asking, so that I
will really know what it is I am making a commitment to get on his behalf.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Madam Chairperson.
The minister may want to be a little bit too cute by half. There is something
going on here - there are ministers over there looking at me, smiling - and I
would like to know what it is. I don't need the minister to put my question in
a context so that he could try to get me to agree with it, so that he can go
back and talk to officials in departments and come back and say: We spend $4
million or $5 million throughout government on Organizational Development
Initiatives. That is not what I asked.
Madam Chair, the question I asked the minister - and he refused to give me
the commitment - is: Will he make a commitment today to table, before the end of
next week in this House, department by department, how much money is in the
Organizational Development Initiatives Fund, and why isn't it listed in the
Estimates?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. E. BYRNE: Well, let me ask the Minister of Fisheries. His colleague,
the Minister of Government Services, I asked him the question, how much money is
in the Organizational Development Initiatives Fund, and his response was: This
is not the estimates for Government Services. Since he won't give me the
information - I am going to get it from you. Whether you give it to me or not, I
am going to get it somehow.
I will ask the Minister of Fisheries: Will you stand today and tell me how
much money in the Organizational Development Initiatives Fund is in your
department? Why isn't it listed in the Estimates for our critic and for people
who are on the Resource Committee to be able to legitimately question what is
here, what was budgeted last year, what you spent in that fund, and what you
budgeted this year?
MR. REID: I answered all the questions.
MR. E. BYRNE: No. You may have answered - look, Madam Chair, the Minister
of Fisheries just shouted across the hall, he answered all the questions that
were posed to him in Resource Committee, and I assume that he did. But the
problem here is this: You can't ask a question about the Estimates when
government is actually hiding a fund that each department has. How can we ask a
question about an Organizational Development Initiatives Fund in the Department
of Fisheries, Government Services, Education, Mines and Energy,
Intergovernmental Affairs, Aboriginal Affairs, Human Resources and Employment,
Labour and all others, when you have, either indirectly or directly, not
provided to the House, and therefore to the members of this House, and through
us the people of the Province, what that fund is being used for? Who has
ultimate discretion over the fund?
So, how is it, then, that we can ask the questions that we need to ask, that
we are obligated to ask in performing our function as the Official Opposition,
when you, as the government, won't even include, in the Estimates, what these
ministerial funds are being used for, or departmental funds, whatever they are?
I don't know. The reason we don't know is because you have not provided the
information in the Estimates, which you are obligated to provide.
I will ask the minister this question again: In his capacity as the Acting
Minister of Finance, and certainly he knows the department, he was the former
Minister of Finance, will he provide to this House, by the end of next week - it
will not take long; your Cabinet colleagues can provide it to you, if you
request it - a breakdown of the Organizational Development Initiatives Fund,
department by department?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. E. BYRNE: By the end of next week, on what was budgeted last year,
presented as it would be in the Estimates. It is under three headings, what was
budgeted last year, what was actually spent from that department last year, and
what you have budgeted this year, department by department.
I can take out my own calculator, Minister, to be quite frank about it, and
add up exactly how much you have spent, but what we want to know, and what we
have a right to know, is how much of the ODI Fund is in Mines and Energy, if
there is one that exists there. Seeing you are the Acting Minister of Finance
today, and you are responding for the government, maybe you can speak wearing
the hat that you now wear at the Cabinet table, as Minister of Mines and Energy.
Do you have an ODI Fund at your discretion? How much was in it last year? How
much did you spend? How much is budgeted this year?
Can you make a commitment that, department by department, that breakdown will
be provided so members of this House, in particular the Official Opposition, can
do the job that we have been elected to do?
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
I do not have my own Estimates in front of me, so I obviously cannot give you
that amount, but I will be happy to answer that question when I get into my own
committee hearing.
To the specific question of the hon. the Member for Kilbride, I will
undertake - I would like for him to pay attention to my answer as I paid
attention to his question. I will undertake -
MR. E. BYRNE: I am paying attention. I am going to get your Estimates for
you now and pass them over to you.
On a point of order, Madam Chairperson.
MADAM CHAIR: On a point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: The minister, in response to my question, has said -
MR. MATTHEWS: I never had a chance to respond.
MR. E. BYRNE: Hold on.
You said that you do not have your Estimates in front of you so you cannot
give me the answer related to Mines and Energy. Would he mind if I sent over my
Estimates book? Then, he would have it in front of him and he will find, as I
have found, there is no ODI Fund listed. Maybe he can tell me from what subheads
or sources he is drawing his ODI Fund? Would you like a copy of mine, Minister?
Because I can provide it to you.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
I must say, I am smitten to the point of almost falling as to the level of
co-operation and assistance that is being offered from the hon. the member on
the other side to help me do my job today on behalf of government. If he wants
to send some information over, I would be glad to receive it and use it as best
I can.
MR. REID: He also complimented you on your looks. He said you were cute.
MR. MATTHEWS: I say to the Minister of Fisheries, when the hon. member
suggested that I was cute, I think he was speaking in a descriptive rather than
in a very - in an acting rather than on a personal perception context.
Madam Chair, there is no difficulty with me giving an undertaking to the hon.
member to ask for the information that he specifically requested, and that is,
as I understand it - and, let's be clear what the question is now - he wants
to know how much ODI money is allocated directly and/or indirectly under various
subheads throughout the various departments of government, how it is spent, who
has control over spending it and makes decisions on it.
I will attempt to get that information for him. If I cannot get it before the
end of this sitting day, which I am hoping I can, I will undertake to provide it
for him certainly before the end of next week. I say to him, he can hold me to
that commitment on behalf of the Minister of Finance, who will be back in the
House next week.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Madam Chairperson.
I have down this road before on other issues and that is fair enough. You
will endeavour to get whatever you are going to give to me, because you are only
going to provide what you want to provide anyway. So when I leave the House
today, before this day is over, there is a Freedom of Information request that
is going to be going out to every minister in terms of: Is there the existence
of the ODI Fund in every department? How much was budgeted last year? How much
was spent, and how much is budgeted this year?
It is clear to me, from even the reactions and responses across the way from
government ministers and members, there is a fund in each department. It is not
listed here. It is hidden throughout the subheads somewhere.
Seeing that I have the Minister of Mines and Energy, who is fulfilling a dual
capacity today as Acting Minister of Finance and Minister of Mines and Energy,
and I asked him a question about his own department and he, in a very nonchalant
way, a disarming way, trying not to get to the answer to the question I asked of
him in terms of his department, where the ODI Fund was, let me ask him this:
Minister, on page 141 of the Estimates in your department - you have it there
now - subhead 1.1.01., in terms of what you spend in your office, is the ODI
Fund, or any of it, located in that subhead of your department?
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
In my own department - I do have my own Estimates here now, so thanks for the
offer but I have located my own - under 1.1.01.01., Salaries in the Minister's
Office, $279,200 is for salaries, end of story, full stop, nothing else, nothing
more, nothing less.
The hon. the member would also note that there are other -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MADAM CHAIR: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Madam Chair, there is no issue here that cannot be dealt
with. There is no level of information being requested that I would not be happy
to provide, and I intend to provide to the hon. member, because I believe I have
a duty on behalf of government, in response to his question, to respond to him
and try and identify as best we can throughout government the level of
Organizational Development Funding that is spent throughout government. I
undertake to provide that information to him.
To his specific question as with respect to my own department, I can say
under 1.1.01.01., Salaries, the amount of money allocated there is for salaries
only, or salary and salary associated costs, not to do with any other
professional or any other type of development.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Minister, I will just ask one final question on it. Some
members have shouted across the House: what are we badgering for, trying to
create suspicions, none of which is true. This is the Estimates Committee
process, and the Estimates Committee process is about asking questions. There is
the existence of funds in departments that are not listed in the Estimates and I
am allowed to ask those questions, as is every other member, about public money.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: That is what our role and duty is.
Minister, one final question. If it is not contained in 1.1.01, where is the
ODI fund contained, because you have said there is one for your department? You
said that right here today. So where is it contained in your estimates, the
money spent on organizational development? I am not suggesting, in any way,
shape or form, that this fund is being used for some sinister purposes. I am not
suggesting, in any way, shape or form, that this fund is being used as a slush
fund by ministers. All I am saying is simply this, that it is not in the
Estimates. It exists in some departments and where it does exist, why isn't it
included in the Estimates? How can we, as members of the Opposition or members
of committees which include members opposite, ask questions about different
funds within departments when you do not even provide them here for us?
The question I will ask to you is this: Where in your
section of the Budget,
that you, as Minister of Mines and Energy are responsible for, where is the ODI
fund in this department? You said that you have one. You said that one is in
existence, so under what subhead would I find it?
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MATTHEWS: Madam Speaker, thank you very much.
I have no difficulty with respect to the level of questioning that the hon.
the member is putting forward. He has every right to ask questions in this House
with respect -
MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible) colleagues.
MR. MATTHEWS: And my colleagues would agree with that. What I am saying
to the hon. member and what I have said in -
MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).
MR. MATTHEWS: Madam Chair, Hansard will indicate what I said in answer to
the questions earlier. What I said to the hon. member - at least what I
attempted to convey to him - is that yes, there are funds allocated for training
purposes in all of the departments of government at various levels. Now, what
the hon. member is saying is that there isn't a sufficient number of
subheadings contained in the Estimates that sufficiently identifies, for him,
how much money is being spent under organizational development. I take his
point, and I have undertaken to provide to him, under what subheadings -
MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).
MR. MATTHEWS: Hold on now.
I have undertaken to provide to him under what subheadings Organizational
Development Funding, if any, in the various departments is recognized for the
budget purposes. I have undertaken to identify for him, if I can, how much
funding that is. I will find out where that money is in terms of subheading
listings in the various departments of government, and I will find out for him
how much money is involved in each department and collectively throughout
government, and provide that information to him at the earliest possible moment.
I hope I can do it before the House rises today, but certainly, if not, we will
try and get it to him next week.
I have no difficulty with your question. I have no difficulty with what you
are putting forward. You are asking a simple question: How much money does
government spend for ODI? Why doesn't it identify it more clearly in the
various Estimates? Where is it covered in the various departments and how much
is it in total?
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Madam Chairperson.
I appreciate the forthrightness by the minister to the extent that he has
answered the question in terms of what he has undertaken. I take it as a
commitment to provide it back to me in terms of the information that we are
looking for;, department by department, I might add, so that we can have a sense
of - you know, not that you spent $10 million last year, but department by
department because there may be - and legitimately so - some departments that do
not require the same level of staff training because they do not have the same
numbers, I guess, vast numbers of people in terms of Organizational Development
Initiatives.
I would put forward to you, Madam Chair, and to the government, that every
department has every right and should be involved in in-servicing, in staffing
initiatives, in developing staffing initiatives. It is good for morale. It is
good for the public service. It is good for the people of the Province. The only
point that I am making here today is simply this: Why haven't we outlined in
the estimate procedure, in the estimate in the Budget itself, through the
various headlines - for example, and I will just use an example. In the Minister
of Works, Services and Transportation's department we have outlined everything
that department does, I suppose; Road Maintenance, Maintenance And Repairs. We
just don't say we are passing $40 million on Road Maintenance. We have
identified it and broken it down even more. We have said: Maintenance And
Repairs; Snow And Ice Control; Administration; Technical Support Services;
Building Utilities and Maintenance. That is what a budget process should be
about; providing us the details and the head-by-head of where we are spending
money.
The question that I simply ask is this: Why haven't we identified these
Organizational Development Initiatives Fund in the Estimates procedure? There
are some departments that have them; others may not. That may be fair enough.
All we are looking for and seeking, in our role in this House as the Official
Opposition, in terms of playing the constitutional role that the parliamentary
system outlines to us, is for the information; and we have a right to have it.
We have a right to ask the questions. When we discover that such funds exist and
are not outlined in detail, then we have a right to be concerned. We have a
right to ask the questions department by department.
Now, there have been some suggestions here this afternoon by certain
ministers, not all, that you know: I have answered all the questions in my
estimate procedure; or I will do that, I have already done that. We cannot ask a
question if we are not possessed with the knowledge and the facts related to the
Budget or for any other topic for that matter. If we do not have the information
that government is obligated - this is not your discretion. It is not up to
government and how they are feeling today, if they provide it to us or not. We
cannot ask questions related to the Budget, and the money government spends in
the delivery and prosecution of public services, unless government provides us
all of the information that you are obligated to provide us with.
I appreciate the minister's answer. Let me ask him one final question. I
know in answering a series of questions, that I put forward to him, he may have
inadvertently overlooked the last question I asked him. He certainly would have
knowledge of this because he said his department does have an ODI fund. Where is
it in the Budget, in your estimates under the Mines and Energy Department, where
is the ODI fund there and what subheads or subhead is it contained in?
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
No, I do not think that I did say there is an ODI fund in my department. I
said that within my department there is money provided for training and that
sort of thing, but I will undertake to get for the hon. member the amount of ODI
funding, if any, that is included in all departments of government, where it is
included in the subheads, and how much money that is in each department in
total. I think that will complete the level of information that he is looking
for.
If he has policy issues with respect to ODI funding - and I gather from his
comments that he agrees that it is not a bad area of expenditure for government.
As a matter of fact, I would suggest -
MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).
MR. MATTHEWS: Yes, I would suggest - as he says, I agree with him - it is
an absolutely essential area of expenditure to some extent within government;
but he should be afforded the information of what department has what and under
what subheadings it is located. I will get it for him.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.
MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Thank you, Madam Chair.
Just a couple of comments on this heading before we move on. It is an
interesting discussion between the minister and my colleague. As a point of
interest and information for the minister, when we were doing the estimates on
Justice, that same question came up but it was answered under Professional
Services. So, all of the organizational development funding came from that
category. It is obviously spread around in a number of areas.
There is one particular point here I want to raise, Madam Chair, and that is
- before I do though I want to say unequivocally, that I personally think we
need to spend a lot more money and invest a lot more money in developing our
employees. Staff training and development, orientation and in-services are
critical parts of a workplace and ensures that we have capable, competent people
working in our departments.
One of the points I think is important to raise here, it is not so much what
the money was spent on but I note in this particular category here under
Executive Council, it falls under Senior Management Development. In the
Estimates Committee when we talked about Justice, it was also in the
Administrative category. The similarity between the two - last year's
budgeting in Justice allocated about $15,000 for the figure, but we spent
$225,000. In this category here, for Senior Management Development, there was a
$25,000 budget and the department spent at the end of the day $140,000-odd.
AN HON. MEMBER: Where are you now, Ross?
MR. ROSS WISEMAN: I am making a comment to the minister about - we are
still on the same subject in terms of 2.2.02 where we talk about Senior
Management Development.
MR. MATTHEWS: 2.2.02. I thought you were on 2.3.01 you said.
MR. ROSS WISEMAN: I am sorry, I am still on 2.2.07.
The point I am trying to make, minister, is that this category here under the
Executive Council area, we are talking about Senior Management Development. I
was commenting, for your benefit, that when we had the discussion around
training and development within the Department of Justice Estimates, we also
noted that in that department, when it came to Administrative and Senior
Management Development, there was no money budgeted for last year but yet there
was a significant amount spent.
I think, rather than talk a little bit about the notion of organizational
development, I want to talk a little bit about the principle here, the principle
of budgeting. Each year, in this House, we do what we are doing now; we debate
the Budget Estimates. Every minister, every department, every government agency,
develops a plan; they develop a strategy for the next twelve months. In that
twelve months they talk about the kinds of programs they are going to deliver,
the kinds of initiatives they will undertake, and they will attach a budget
figure to that. We get in this House and have a debate around the budget. We
talk about the reasonableness of the figures, we talk about the reasonableness
of the program, and from that discussion this House approves a fixed amount of
money for that department to stand on each expenditure category.
We assume, Mr. Minister, that when we finish this debate each department,
each minister, will take that budget and they will work within that budget. They
will provide services and deliver programs within that budget allocation. We
assume that if there is some deviation from that plan, some deviation from that
budget, and someone has to make a decision to spend more money than was actually
allocated, then that is done after some serious deliberation, some real
consideration around what that might be.
I think it sends the wrong message, Madam Chair - and to the minister - it
sends the wrong message when you have departments which develop budgets,
allocate a certain amount for certain programs, and then senior people in the
department make decisions to spend more money than was actually allocated; but,
when that more money gets spent, it is spent to their individual or collective
benefit. I think that is a significant message and an important point to
recognize, that we rely on the minister and the senior people in government
departments to provide the leadership, to provide the direction to the
department, and to ensure that there is prudent and effective spending of our
money.
I say that, Mr. Minister, not to suggest at all that we should not be, as a
government, and as an employer, spending money on organizational development. We
need to invest in our employees. We need to invest in the development and growth
and their education but, Mr. Minister, I suggest to you that if those decisions
are going to be made by senior managers, to deviate from a budget that this
House approves, we need to be very careful that the decision to invest more
money into staff development and more money into staff education, that decision
applies right across the board so that all government employees, and all
individuals, get the collective benefit and individual benefit of that decision
to spend money on education and development, and not just at the senior level.
As I said, Mr. Minister, the critical thing here is deviation from budget. It
is one thing to look at a budget figure last year that this House approved that
was maybe $25,000 or $30,000 and we, at the end of the year, spent another
$5,000 or $6,000. That is not a significant amount of money in the broader
scheme of things; but, when we start looking at large amounts of money, when we
are talking about budgeting $15,000 or $20,000 and come in at the end of the
year and spend $225,000, that is a very different question.
Like the Minister of Health and Community Services, we have had discussions
in this House about health expenditures, and how much money we are spending on
health, and we continuously get reminded that this Province is spending $1.4
billion a year on health care, and the suggestion is, that is a significant
amount of money. I think, Minister, anyone in this House would acknowledge that
$1.4 billion is a lot of money. Anytime you start spending 45 per cent of your
program money in a particular area, like health care, that is a significant
commitment.
I say to the minister, we need to have a comfort in this House when we
discuss these budgets, and at the end of the day when we approve the budgets,
that we are going to have good use of that money, so that when we allocate that
$1.4 billion someone does not arbitrarily make the decision: Well, that is only
a budget figure. That is a guideline. That is something that suggests that we
need to stay in the ballpark.
We need to be careful that, when we make decisions to approve budgets and
then leave this House and have our staff decide to go in a very different
direction, that is a prudent expenditure and there is a mechanism in place. A
mechanism in place to ensure that if we are taking it from one area and spending
it in another, that is going to give us value for our money.
I think what we are talking about here, Minister, is the difference between
it being effective and it being efficient. Inasmuch as I do not for a moment
suggest that we discontinue spending money on staff development, I suggest that
we need to look at budgets more seriously. Given the history of last year and
this year in deficits, and organizations running deficits, we need to be very
conscious of the role of budget, what it really means, and take the process
seriously; and, when the allocation is done, to recognize that senior staff -
particularly, senior staff, because they are the organization's leaders. They
are the department people. I rely on you, Minister, and your colleagues and your
senior people in departments to ensure that they, in fact, comply with the
budgets that are being approved by this House and that they do not arbitrarily
make decisions to go out and to indiscriminately spend money without having
prior approval of this House, particularly when this House takes line by line,
department by department, and debates and discusses each of the issues in the
Budget document.
Therefore, Minister, we assume that this year when we are debating the Budget
and Estimates here, that, at the end of the day, if this House decides to give
approval to your department or any other minister's department, that their
allocation, their request, is being approved as they submitted it, and they, in
turn, will go out in the next twelve months and not just use it as a guideline
but recognize that it is a directive from this department and that they need to
comply with that directive, and that they need to spend the money prudently and
as directed by the House, which means to deliver a balanced budget.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
I thank the hon. the Member for Trinity North for his comments and
suggestions.
In part answer to the question asked just a few minutes ago by the hon. the
Member for Kilbride, the Opposition House Leader, I would refer him, for part of
the information that he is looking for, to page 25 of the Estimates, the
Treasury Board Secretariat. He will see there that the full budget for
Organizational Development Funding is $2 million, and that is allocated
throughout the various departments of government. I will try, as I said earlier,
to get what is allocated under the various departments for him, on a department
by department basis, so that he can have a greater level of detailed knowledge
and information as to who spends what out of this fund. As I have said to him,
on page 25, under Executive Council, Treasury Board Secretariat, the global
budget of $2 million has been identified. That is the big figure; the breakdown
will come.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Madam Chair.
Again, under this Senior Management Development, I certainly am very
supportive of any initiatives that can help the staff development. I am looking
at it and it says, I guess, "...human resource policy for management and
executive groups...". I would ask the minister: Is that simply just for top
management, or does it filter down through the whole department? Would it be
workshops, staff development, professional days? Also, what would be the process
whereby a department, a particular part of the department, would apply for this
type of development initiative? Would it come from the top down or from the
bottom up, so to speak; if you know what I mean, Minister? I don't know. Who
administers the fund? Who makes the decisions? Is it someone in-house or is it
some consultants who basically come in and advise the people in the various
departments as to what - what is that?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. HEDDERSON: Yes, and this is another thing I am looking at. When it
comes to development, you are going to, I assume, look at what is going on in
the corporate world, in the outside world. Are there provisions made, Minister,
for consultants to be brought in to, I guess, take some of these funds and
perform various workshops, professional development, or otherwise? Minister?
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
What I hear from the hon. the member is an observation that the Opposition
generally supports government spending money for organizational development
purposes. That is good to hear, because I think it is only common sense that we
would all support that, and I appreciate the Opposition's indication of
support for the $2 million that is identified under the Treasury Board
Secretariat, page 25 of the Estimates. That is the big figure.
The question that the hon. the critic for the Department of Education is
asking is: On a policy basis, how do we spend that money? What are the policy
drivers that dictate how it is we go about providing the services that we
procure under this $2 million?
I would say to him, that some of the answers to his questions are located on
page 25, under the Treasury Board Secretariat Estimates, where it indicates
that, yes, we pay some salary to in-house people out of this; yes, we do bring
in professional people to help out. Professional Services, obviously, are under
3.1.08.05. We do acquire Purchased Services which includes some level of
professional services attached to the previous $390,000. So, we do bring in
outside people, we do acquire outside services, to discharge the training and
the development that goes forward in the name of, and on behalf of, government.
With respect to the broad policy that covers why it is we have an ODI Fund
and how it is it has to be managed and delivered throughout the department, I
can probably get that for him in terms of a policy statement. I am sure there is
one in existence in Treasury Board somewhere that would satisfy his needs. I
will undertake to get that for him. It is not a budget question per se, it is a
policy question. We will endeavour, even in the Budget Debate - we will extend
latitude in the Budget Debate to allow for some questions that are quasi-budget
debatable questions and get into policy issues and we will see if we can get the
policy for him.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Madam Chair.
Again, I say to the minister, you were correct in assuming that the people on
this side would support initiatives that would make for better, I guess,
employees, better management, better executive groups, but I say to the
minister, as well - because again my curiosity is peaked when it comes to this
Organizational Development Initiatives Fund. I say to the minister: Does it
extend beyond the departments? Why I say that is because when I look - and you
mention, of course, as the Education critic, that is probably an area that I
would be curious about. But with regard to the Initiative Fund; let's just
take, for example, the directors and assistant directors of our school boards.
They are on the leading edge of education in many, many ways, and we have eleven
of them in the Province. I am wondering, this Initiative Fund, could that extend
beyond just the department border, so to speak, and out into - and of course,
the health boards and other boards that are out there. Do they have an
opportunity or is there any initiatives that would allow senior management from
these areas - even so far as to say our school trustees, because they, too, are
part of the management of the school system in Newfoundland and Labrador. Many
times they are not, necessarily, I guess, skilled at organizational situations
and that sort of thing. Is it possible or is there anything in this Initiative
Fund that would allow for, let's say, people like board directors, school
board directors, trustees, to avail of this opportunity, to become better
skilled in management?
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
This ODI Fund is essentially to deal with training within, let's say,
central agencies or the departments of government; government as a centre. This
is an activity, I might point out, that has been, in previous years, delivered -
I am not sure when we made the change. I can find that out for you but, once
upon a time, this type of activity was done under the Public Service Commission.
A number of years ago the scope and extent and the activities of the Public
Service Commission were changed and there was a lot less money allocated over
there.
To his specific question with respect to directors and assistant directors;
the boards have their own budgets that account for and allow for a level of
professional development and training and all that sort of thing. The only way
that this fund could respond to a request from a school board, or the NLSBA
representing all the school boards, would be to the extent that it was thought
appropriate through the Department of Education, the line department, to make a
request for assistance under this fund, and if the minister and the department
thought it was appropriate to bring it forward, they would do so and it would be
considered. The bulk of the training - if not 100 per cent of the training -
training funds, professional development funds that is used to benefit directors
and assistant directors is contained in a separate budget in the various school
boards' budgets specifically.
MADAM CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Madam Chair.
Just to get back to the Estimates, minister; I am just looking down at the
lines, and I do not know if I have missed it or not but I do know that the
budget process means that you have to look ahead and you have to make
projections and whatever. Now, under this section, this whole section, I will
just take it as a section. Obviously, someone underestimated last year because
there was only one line filled really and that was line 06, in Purchased
Services, which was $25,000; but then when you went to the actual, what was
actually spent, you are looking at $149,000, and then it is back to $25,000 this
year. Again, the question I would have to ask the minister is: Why is that
difference? I would assume that - why would you go with just $25,000 this year
when last year it was bumped up to almost $150,000? Is there something that I am
missing here? Is there something that happened last year that is out of the
ordinary? I am just looking for an explanation as to why