Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Statements by Ministers — 12 April 2004 (45th General Assembly, 1st Session, Vol. XLV No. 14)
2004-04-12
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
April 12, 2004 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 14
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: Today we have statements by the following members: the hon.
the Member for Humber Valley, the hon. the Member for Bellevue, the hon. the
Member for Trinity North, the hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune, the
hon. the Member for Port au Port, and the hon. the Member for Grand Falls-
Buchans.
The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS GOUDIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to pay tribute to a true gentleman and friend, Mr. A.M. (Gus)
Kerwin, who passed away April 4, 2004.
Mr. Kerwin's name needs no explanation to the people of the West Coast of
this Province, especially to the people of Deer Lake where he served many years
as a councillor and Mayor.
Mr. Speaker, Gus Kerwin was born in St. John's but lived most of his life
in Deer Lake with his wife Cavelle and three children Tony, Joanne, and Pattie.
He was a tireless volunteer who served in many capacities such as the Deer Lake
Chamber of Commerce, the Deer Lake Lions Club and the Deer Lake Concerned
Citizens Committee that helped retain the Deer Lake Airport.
More importantly, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Kerwin was a great friend. As a child, I
spent almost every day at the Kerwin home, as his daughter Joanne and I were
great friends. Each time I visited Joanne, I felt as welcome in the Kerwin home
as I did in my own.
Along with his dedication to the community of Deer Lake, I will remember Mr.
Kerwin for his kindness, generosity and friendship, and I am sure the people of
Deer Lake feel the same.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join with me today and extend
their sympathies to the Kerwin family.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bellevue.
MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the many years of
hard work and volunteer service by five individual firefighters of the Seaside
Fire Department in the beautiful Districts of Bellevue and Trinity-Bay de Verde.
Volunteer firefighters Ronald Smith, Rex Hollett, Donald Bishop, Melvin Newhook
and Alonzo Reid all received recognition for over twenty-five years of volunteer
service to their local fire departments.
The Twenty-fifth Annual Ball of the Seaside Fire Department, which I was
pleased to attend, was a great success and honoured many of the region's
citizens who volunteer long and thankless hours to ensure the basic needs of a
community are met.
Mr. Speaker, indeed all regions of our Province are daily aided by the work
of volunteer firefighters and indeed the many fire-ettes, and we as
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians appreciate their thankless efforts.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join with me in
congratulating Mr. Ronald Smith, Mr. Rex Hollett, Mr. Donald Bishop, Mr. Melvin
Newhook and Mr. Alonzo Reid, on recognition of many years of volunteer service
to the communities of Blaketown, Old Shop, South Dildo, Dildo, and New Harbour.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to congratulate the Flying Blades Figure Skating Club of
Clarenville for another successful year. Last Saturday, the season closed with
their ice show entitled, "The Wizard of Oz", and they showcased
skaters from the ages of two to eighteen.
Mr. Speaker, at the end of the performance, the Ruth Bailey Memorial Award
was presented to Paul Hopkins for demonstrating a natural ability to dance with
expression and style, and also for his placement at the regional and provincial
level.
Mr. Speaker, during that same ceremony, Susan Thistle received the Elizabeth
Swan Cup for the best all-around member of the club: the skater who best
demonstrated hard work, dependability, consideration and co-operation.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask all members of this hon. House to join me today in
congratulating all of the skaters of the Clarenville Figure Skating Club and
also a special thank you to the many volunteers who make that club a very
successful one, and for the great work that they do in contributing to the
development of young people in that region of the Province.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.
MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate an up-and-coming hockey player from
my district: seventeen-year-old Lorna Tibbo. Lorna is the daughter of Wade and
Angie Tibbo of Harbour Breton, and is currently completing Level III at King
Academy School.
Mr. Speaker, Lorna began playing hockey at the Connaigre Arena at the age of
six. Her parents enrolled her into the figure skating program, but it was right
from day one that Lorna developed an interest and began to play minor hockey.
She has been an avid member of the Harbour Breton Minor Hockey Program and has
expanded her hockey knowledge and skills through various hockey camps, including
camps offered at Dalhousie University.
Lorna has played in many tournaments, representing her hometown, and also
with teams representing Central Newfoundland during the Confederation Cup and
the Newfoundland and Labrador Winter Games. Most recently, Lorna was a member of
the provincial team and played in the 2004 Esso Women's National Hockey
Championship that was held in Sherwood Park, Alberta. The team produced the best
result for the Province in the history of the tournament.
I join with Hockey Newfoundland and Labrador in congratulating the ladies on
their success and professionalism as they compete on the national level. All
team members have contributed tremendously to increasing the awareness of female
hockey in the Province. Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to stand here today and
congratulate Lorna on her successful hockey career thus far and wish her luck
with all her future endeavours.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.
MR. J. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to bring to the
attention of the House that this year the Royal Canadian Army Cadets celebrate
their one hundred and twenty-fifth anniversary. I also wish to point out that in
Newfoundland the largest Army Cadet Corps in the Province - boasting over 100
cadets - resides on the Port au Port Peninsula in the District of Port au Port.
It is the only known bilingual Cadet Corps on the Island and they proudly fly
the Francophone flag of the Province as part of their colours. A large number of
the Cadets are fluently bilingual and many others embrace their native origins.
In spite of out-migration, the Cadet Corps has continued to grow to the point
where they are today.
The Cadets are made up of young men and women from all of the communities on
the Peninsula and show great loyalty to their Corps. They boast a twelve-piece
military marching band, an eight-person colour party, an Honour Guard and three
platoons of Cadets.
The Corp's logo - the lynx - is synonymous with the area, and the cadet
motto is, "shining through adversity."
A year of activities has been organized to celebrate this 125 years of
excellence, and I was honoured to have earlier this year reviewed the Cadets and
taken the general salute.
The Royal Canadian Army Cadets inspire thousands of young men and women with
the highest ideals of character, conduct and patriotism, as well as develop in
youth the attributes of leadership, good citizenship and physical fitness.
I ask members to join with me in extending congratulations and best wishes to
the Army Cadets in the Province on their one hundred and twenty-fifth
anniversary.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, public speaking among youth is an art that is
alive and well in Central Newfoundland.
Recently at the Knights of Columbus regional speak-off in Grand
Falls-Windsor, which had the highest number of participants ever, many high
school students in the Central West region had the opportunity to display their
skills in the art of public speaking.
One such student, Joanna Barker, a Grade 10 student at Exploits Valley High,
was honoured with the competition's highest award, first place overall.
Mr. Speaker, Joanna delivered a riveting speech on an issue which continues
to affect every citizen of our planet - Global Warming.
She said she enjoys public speaking because it allows her to educate her
audience and voice her opinion on an issue that is important to her.
Joanna said she was very happy with her first place outcome, but even more
happy that she had an opportunity to spread the message on global warming and
ensure that the message continues to be spread to the public.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating
Joanna Barker, and indeed all participants in this speak-off, on their
performance at the recent competition.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and
Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring my colleagues, and all
Members of the House of Assembly, up to date on the results of the most recent
employment survey by Statistics Canada, which shows an encouraging growth in
employment in Newfoundland and Labrador.
The Labour Force Survey, Mr. Speaker, is one of the primary sources of
information for a variety of labour market indicators including employment,
unemployment and participation in the labour force. These monthly survey
estimates are also among the most important indicators used to measure the
performance of the Canadian and provincial economies. It is from this survey
that the official unemployment rate is calculated.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to report today that employment in March 2004 in
Newfoundland and Labrador rose by 2 per cent compared to March of last year.
That represents an increase, Mr. Speaker, of just over 4,000 people successfully
employed in our Province who were not working during the same period last year.
At the same time, the unemployment rate has dropped by a full percentage point,
compared to March 2003.
In addition, Mr. Speaker, the number of people participating in the labour
force has increased. This is traditionally viewed as a sign that confidence in
the economy is building and our citizens believe that opportunities in the
workforce are increasing.
These figures, Mr. Speaker, are consistent with results in earlier months as
well. For the first three months of this year, compared to the same period in
2003, employment is up 1.5 per cent and the unemployment rate is down 1.1
percentage points. These are truly encouraging results compared to the same
period last year.
Mr. Speaker, this government intends to build on these figures, investing in
economic development and job creation that will bring prosperity and opportunity
to the people throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to thank the minister for a copy of her statement before we came to
the House, giving us an update on the recent employment survey statistics by
Statistics Canada. I understand that most of the increase that we see there is
basically here on the Avalon.
I am also very pleased to know that a trend is continuing, Mr. Speaker, a 2
per cent increase. I know for a fact that the employment rates have risen month
after month over the last several years.
I also want to say to the minister, I am pleased to see that they intend to
build on those figures to build the economy. I have to say, they had a marvelous
foundation, a solid foundation to begin with, that was laid by the former
Administration.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. BUTLER: A lot of those figures, Mr. Speaker, come from White Rose,
the work that is going ahead in Marystown and Bull Arm, and the wonderful
project called Voisey's Bay. I never thought I would hear that name anymore in
the House. Even though the statement says there are 4,000 more people working
now than there was twelve months ago, I fear what is going to happen when the
4,000 are going to be eliminated out of the service over the next three or four
years.
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.
It is always good to see an improvement in the unemployment rates going down,
but we still have a very considerable problem, Mr. Speaker, on the Burin
Peninsula and South Coast and on the Central Newfoundland-Northeast Coast. We
still have unemployment rates of 25 per cent and, very sadly, young people in
this Province between the ages of fifteen and twenty-four, the unemployment rate
has actually increased year over year, not decreased. We have now three times
the national rate for young people between fifteen and twenty-four unemployed in
this Province. That is a very disturbing number, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time has expired.
MR. HARRIS: By leave, for a moment, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: By leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. HARRIS: That is a very, very disturbing number. The closest province
to us - we are at 24.9 per cent - the closest province is Prince Edward Island.
That is 15.1 per cent. The next one after that is New Brunswick at 11.6 per cent
in the unemployment rate. We find it is very disturbing, Mr. Speaker, for young
people who want to make decisions about whether they will stay or go.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works and
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to advise hon. members of government's decision on the
Labrador Coastal Marine Service.
My Cabinet colleagues and I have carefully reviewed the report on Labrador
Marine Transportation presented by Memorial University's Public Policy
Research Centre and have chosen to adopt a modified version of the second of its
eight service configuration options. The PPRC study concluded that the freight
service from Lewisporte should be continued.
The Labrador Coastal Marine Service Configuration beginning in 2004 will be
as follows:
The Sir Robert Bond will provide freight and passenger service on a weekly
basis; its route will be Lewisporte, Cartwright, Happy Valley-Goose Bay,
Cartwright, Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Cartwright, Lewisporte, until September 10,
after which time its configuration and routing will change to accommodate
increased freight traffic demand anticipated out of Lewisporte.
The Northern Ranger will provide freight and passenger service between
Cartwright, Happy Valley-Goose Bay and points north, including Black Tickle.
The Trans Gulf will provide freight service between Cartwright and points
north, including Black Tickle.
The Challenge One will service south coast ports (that is, Norman Bay and
Williams Harbour from Charlottetown and Port Hope Simpson).
This decision will bring much-needed stability and certainty to the coastal
marine service. Cartwright will see the same level of activity as last year and
more than in the previous years, established supplier relationships will be
maintained, which was a concern expressed by Central and Western Labrador
businesses, and the residents and businesses of the isolated north coast will be
reliably and well served. Our objective is to put an end to the upheaval and
confusion that afflicted it in 2003, and make good, long-term, evidence-based
decisions.
Government has closely examined the evidence provided in the Public Policy
Research Centre Report, which looks at eight service options in terms of cost to
the provincial treasury, cost to Labrador's isolated coastal communities and
the potential broader economic effects associated with each. We chose the option
that achieves the best balance of economic considerations and consistent,
reliable service to the people who depend on it.
The gross cost of this service configuration is estimated at $21.6 million;
the net cost to government after revenue will be $16.4 million, approximately
$600,000 more than last year. Government considers that a good investment in
order to achieve the greatest benefit for the greatest numbers of
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, especially those who most depend on the
Labrador Coastal Marine Service.
Mr. Speaker, government does not agree with everything in this report,
particularly where it goes beyond the scope of work requested. However, today we
are releasing it as promised. It has played a very important
part in our
decision making, particularly the stakeholder input as outlined in
Chapter Two.
We have been mindful that behind the math and macroeconomic models are the
people of Labrador's isolated costal communities and the service exists for
them.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advanced copy of his report.
Mr. Speaker, I have to say today, to the minister, that I am totally taken
aback by his report. Certainly, the Sir Robert Bond, there are people in
Labrador West and the upper Lake Melville area who will applaud the Sir
Robert Bond going back on. There will be some who will be against it. I am
sure that the people on the south coast of Labrador will be devastated, as they
have invested a lot of their personal money into the road and services going
that way.
Mr. Speaker, the part of the Trans Gulf now being rerouted to
Cartwright onto the north coast, a part that the people spoke out that was
needed so badly. The north coast of Labrador are the ones who depend upon the
marine services more so than anyone else. Again, they are going back and having
their freight re-handled two and three times prior to getting on the north coast
of Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier said in his own words they would provide a service
that was less costly to government. Well, I look forward to seeing the report
and certainly, I can guarantee the minister and his government that I think once
we see the report we will prove you wrong. I can say, Mr. Speaker, that proving
this government wrong on some of the promises they made and where they
flip-flopped and come back, that proving them wrong on the marine services will
be a very easy task.
I look forward to getting the report and going through it, and I hope the
minister will release that report -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's time has expired.
MR. ANDERSEN: - so people can go through it. I assure him that the
minister will hear from me and a lot of other people in Labrador in days to
come.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I know everybody will not be happy with this report but we are certainly
satisfied that it offers the option to people to make a choice as to how they
want to travel. I know my colleague from Labrador West has been representing to
this House and to the government that the overwhelming majority of people in
Labrador West, travelling to the Island, would rather have the option of being
able to travel to Lewisporte if they so choose, and this option satisfies that.
We are favourable - this is a favourable decision as far as many, many people in
Labrador West are concerned. It still provides plenty of business opportunities
for the people in Cartwright.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, over the past number of days the people of the Province have
been expressing great disappointment with the lack of progress being made in
negotiations to end the largest strike in the Province's history. Media
reports have indicated that the government's latest offer is final, an offer
that the unions describe as worse than the initial offer.
The question for the Premier, Mr. Speaker: Are these reports factual? Is this
most recent offer government's final position or is government just playing
games with the unions and with the people of the Province?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I can answer the Leader of the Opposition categorically: This is not our
final offer. It was never presented as a final offer. We have never stated it to
be our final offer.
We have gone through a process last week with the unions where they presented
us with an offer. We countered with our counterproposal. They came back to us
with an offer. We then countered again with a second counterproposal. That
proposal was placed with them on Friday past, and we are still waiting for their
counter-offer to our counter-offer. No, it is definitely not a final offer.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am sure that many people will be glad to hear that, especially
since the Minister of Finance was on the Open Line shows again this morning
describing it as the final offer from the government as far as they could
possibly go.
Mr. Speaker, many people, including myself, fail to see the logic in the
Premier's and the government's approach to negotiations. If he truly wants
to reach a settlement, why did government put forward a proposal that is
described now as having more concessions than the previous offers and a smaller
wage increase than was actually being discussed publicly a week ago? How can the
government justify going backwards if the government is truly interested in
reaching a settlement, Mr. Speaker?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I never indicated anywhere it was a final offer. I indicated on Open Line
this morning, and I have said it in the media today at the daily news conference
that we have, that we responded to their proposal. We responded on Friday. We
stated clearly what our offer was, and I said we are waiting to hear a response
to our last offer. I said we do not intend to respond to our own proposal. We
are waiting to hear what their response is, and I said we would respond back to
that.
As to the offer being worse, Mr. Speaker, as a result of March 31, we
received an offer from the union that had significant money in year one and year
two, when we previously had agreed not to have any money in years one and two.
That offer was 2 per cent and 2 per cent respectively. We counter-offered back
to them again, and they came back again with 1.5 per cent and 1.5 per cent in
the first two years. We indicated that, to get our fiscal house in order, we
need to have a period of restraint. We cannot afford to put money on the table,
and that offer is up to any public consumption to look at our two offers and
compare the two of them and see who made what offer and what is considered to be
reasonable, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am glad to have both the Premier and the President of Treasury Board, the
chief negotiator, now suggesting that the people who wrote the headlines were
wrong. They wrote in the headlines that it was the final offer, as stated by the
government, and it is pretty clear from the answers that they are satisfied, day
twelve, in the biggest strike in the history of the Province, to be going
backwards, both themselves and the unions, rather than forward to a constructive
solution.
Mr. Speaker, the question is this: Instead of working constructively to find
a resolution of the strike at the bargaining table, the Premier and his chief
negotiator, the President of Treasury Board, seem more intent every day on
waiting for a health or safety risk to emerge in order to justify legislating
workers back to work. So, instead of waiting for an inevitable health or safety
risk to occur, which it surely will if we wait long enough, why won't the
Premier or his chief negotiator get back to real negotiations, stop going
backwards, twelve days into a strike, and try to work towards an agreed-to
resolution and bring this strike to an end?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We are prepared and we are open to move the process along. The last offers
made improvement from the first offers last week, and the gap was closed
somewhat, I might say, and we are hoping that the response to that will close
the gap further and that is grounds to be able to move forward.
Mr. Speaker, we are acting in what we feel is responsible. We have dealt with
a lot of issues. We made a tremendous number of concessions. We allowed changes
to automobile allowances that was not there before. We have agreed to numerous
incidents within specific units - I will not get into all the details - things
that were not there before. We think that what we are doing is responsible. We
feel it is important, on behalf of the people of our Province, that we deal with
today's problems today and not push them off into the future, that has been
done so often here in our Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, it is becoming more evident every day with statements just like
that, that they intend to get these concessions that are still on the table,
because they are going to fix some things into the future; that there is going
to be no agreed-to resolution when all the unions are saying we will not
voluntarily accept concessions.
It is clear then, Mr. Speaker, that the government must now be seriously
looking at what kind of legislation they are going to bring in. It was talked
about quite widely and speculated through the week's end and the weekend, and
talked about again today by leaders in the government, that they will do it only
if necessary. That means it is only a matter of time.
With that happening, Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: What work has been done?
Is it legislation that is going to send the workers back, bargaining unit by
bargaining unit, or are they all going back at the one time? Is it going to
have, in the legislation, Mr. Speaker, any kind of binding arbitration for the
outstanding issues that the unions have said they will never agree to; and, Mr.
Speaker, in fact, is it going to be that way or is he going to dictate changes
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member now to complete his question.
MR. GRIMES: - that the unions have said they will not accept?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We have not looked at legislating people back, or what type, or any
legislation whatsoever. We feel that it is a right of unions and their
membership to go out on strike to fight for their cause, to put forth their
case. We have responded to each of them. They might be wishing we did, Mr.
Speaker, but I can tell you in all sincerity that we have not, in any way,
entertained back-to-work legislation. We have not looked or discussed any type
of back-to-work legislation. We have not given anybody any direction to put any
type of back-to-work legislation before us. We have not even discussed that
point, Mr. Speaker, in all sincerity. I have answered this in the House before,
I will answer it again. If a situation arose, the House, or whomever is
available then, would be the first to know that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Maybe, then, we can have an answer to this last question that I will ask on
this issue today. With a negotiation that has been characterized by imposed
deadlines that mean nothing - there obviously cannot be any deadlines if we are
trying to get a settlement. We are twelve days into the largest strike in the
history of the Province. With insincere offers - actually worse than they were
before the strike started - on the table, in writing by insistence of the
government, the answer to this question might be very enlightening to everybody
In Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker.
Why is it that every single member of the government caucus, on Wednesday
past, voted against a resolution asking them to live to the commitment that the
Premier of the Province made to not use the Legislature to force people back to
work and to write the collective agreement for them? Why did they vote against
that, if they have no intention of voting, at some point in time, to put the
people back to work?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We have not imposed any deadlines. Everybody is fully aware there was a
deadline of March 31 to get a settlement, and the union indicated if there was
not a settlement they would - no contract, no work. The only deadline received:
We received a deadline on Thursday, when we received the latest offer from the
union, a deadline to respond to them by I think it was 2:30 or 2:00 o'clock on
Friday afternoon or they would go public. We worked Thursday night and into the
afternoon here on Friday to prepare a proposal, that we responded to them with
that in writing. We met the deadline that they imposed or asked us to meet. We
did that.
As to legislating back to work, Mr. Speaker, as the former Premier of this
Province he stood in this House and said he will not rule out the possibility of
legislation. In fact, we are not going to throw out any particular option if the
need arises in the system. We hope it does not happen. We hope there is going to
be a settlement occur, Mr. Speaker. We are not going to start planning for
something that we do not anticipate, that hopefully will not happen. We want the
people back to work.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the minister now to complete his answer.
MR. SULLIVAN: We want a fair agreement on behalf of the people of this
Province. I am not going to play games with legislation to trick government into
making a decision here on a private member's resolution. We are going to do
what any responsible government would do in the circumstances. We will monitor
that on a daily basis, and we will make that decision, Mr. Speaker, if and when
the time comes.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the President of Treasury Board.
Hasty and hot-headed comments are not helpful to the current labour
environment. The minister has time and time again, and even today in his update,
accused workers of abusing sick leave and other benefits. I ask the minister:
Why is he giving a false impression to the people of the Province, that public
employees are dishonest, disloyal, manipulative of sick leave, vacation pay and
compassionate leave. Does he think this type of personal insult and attack on
employees will help settle the strike?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I basically stated, I tell the hon. member, what is available now in the
current system. I have indicated that anybody working in the public system today
can get up to twenty-nine days of annual leave which they are entitled to,
statutory holidays which they are entitled to; it can be a maximum of
thirty-nine. They have twenty-four days sick leave, they have three family,
which is sixty-six days over thirteen weeks. We consider that fair and
reasonable. We respect the right of people to be absent when they are sick. We
fully expect that, Mr. Speaker. The average number of sick days in the system -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I would like an opportunity to answer the
question if I could, please.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Members should know, and do know, that this is a time of some intense
differences in the Province. Questions have been asked, and I ask all members to
permit the ministers to be able to answer them without being interrupted unduly.
The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, a short few
moments to complete your answer.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The average number of sick days taken in the Province is over sixteen. In
jurisdictions that have only half the allotment of hours they are using
considerably less. We are looking at standards that are taken across this
country. We do not know why, basically, people have more sick days in this
Province that elsewhere. We feel that when people legitimately deserve them they
can, but sick leave is not intended to be annual leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the minister now to complete his answer.
MR. SULLIVAN: It is a cost to the health system alone of almost $50
million, to the health system, and we think something has to be done to correct
it. We want, Mr. Speaker, sick days to be used for sick purposes. That is why
they are there, for insurance, when somebody gets sick.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. LANGDON: Thank you very much.
I want to tell the minister, Mr. Speaker, that we are not living in Ontario
or British Columbia. We are living in Newfoundland and Labrador.
You have just said it is fair and reasonable. If it is fair and reasonable,
why are you taking it from the workers? If the minister has evidence that there
are a small number of employees who are abusing the benefits, then deal with
them individually. Don't tar everybody with the same brush.
My question again: Is he saying that public employees in the Province abuse
every sick day, every family day, all compassionate leave they are entitled to?
If they are not, you should apologize to them for falsely accusing them over the
public airwaves.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Of course not, Mr. Speaker. He is trying to grandstand and trying to put a
division among the public servants. We value the public service people of the
Province and we value the people in the system who work hard for the system. We
feel, and jurisdictions have shown, that when sick leave is less there is less
taken for sick leave. He knows as well as I do that in every system out there,
there are abuses. We don't want the people who truly need it to be paying the
price for people who abuse the system, Mr. Speaker. We want it corrected right.
We want to have a number of sick days available to an average person who can
expect to work in this country and here in this Province.
The member is doing nothing only driving a wedge between the people who are
out there, who are being sincere in their work in the workplace and working here
in our Province, Mr. Speaker. That is an unfair accusation, it is not want I
indicated, and if he doesn't know the facts and doesn't like them, then he
should research them and find out what other jurisdictions are doing.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Minister of Health and Community Services today.
Are you concerned at all about the crisis in our health care system right
here in our Province? This is day twelve, as other speakers have said, of the
largest strike in our history in this Province and already we are hearing from
all over the Province that surgeries are on hold, cancer patients cannot get
their treatments, long-term care patients, the ones in our seniors' homes, are
in their beds day after day. Are you going to show some compassion to the people
of this Province and get this matter resolved?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS E. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Whenever there is a strike, especially involving health care, it is a very
difficult situation. We are having ongoing contact with our health care boards
and we are sure that essential and emergency services are being provided.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Grand
Falls-Buchans.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, pretty amazing! Twelve days into a strike and
everything is fine according to the Health Minister. Well, you know something,
Mr. Speaker, clinics in many rural communities are closed because of this
prolonged strike and it is clear that many of these same clinics will be
permanently closed because of your right wing health reform agenda.
I ask the Minister of Health and Community Services: Is this a preview of the
level of service patients can expect to receive after the strike is over,
because of these Budget cuts that you are planning to implement in health care?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS E. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This government is committed to providing excellent health care to the
residents of this Province. As I have indicated earlier, in times of a labour
dispute it is very difficult to provide essential health care services, but we
are. We are having daily contact with the health care boards. We are monitoring
what is happening across the Province and we are confident that emergency and
essential health care services are being provided.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Premier. For many, many years, including the whole
previous Tory regime, the provincial government put nothing into the public
service pension plan and told employees that pensions were not negotiable. Well,
after the last round of negotiations in 2001, including a commitment by the
employees to put an additional 1 per cent into pension plans, something has
changed with the public service pension plans so it is now the best funded of
all the pension plans of government. Why does this government want to turn back
the clock and is telling unions that pensions are no longer negotiable and wants
to have the unilateral power to either decrease pensions or increase the
contribution rate?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Government has the power now to increase or reduce benefits or the amount of
premiums that are paid. They have the power right now, currently as we stand.
That is a concession the unions are looking for us to give up, that right to
that power.
Prior to 1980, money was used out of the pension plan and used for wages, for
roads, bridges and for the general public service. Since 1980, the plan has been
performing at 10.2 per cent. Currently, the plan is 48 per cent funded. If we
give up that right now to be able to have any control over that, it means that
if we stop the clock today, that only 48 per cent of the people who paid in and
want to be a recipient of a pension plan in this Province we will have no money
to pay it. That is the reality of it and that is something no government, in
their right mind, would want to do.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The President of Treasury Board knows that is nonsense. CUPE and NAPE were
the ones who brought to the negotiating table the last time a solution to the
unfunded liability, and the member knows that.
Mr. Speaker, I want to know, and the people who are on strike, I am sure,
want to know: What plans does this government have to reduce benefits for
striking workers or increase the cost to them?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We have no plans to do either. In fact, we put in writing - I heard one of
the union negotiators who called in - a guy Oliver, I think he said, from
Clarenville - and said that we, in disagreement, indicated that we are looking
at rolling the pension plan into one. A person who is negotiating on behalf of
the union should know that we put in writing to the union that we will not roll
the pension plans into one. We will maintain independence. How can members of a
pension plan understand if negotiators are saying something that we put in
writing that is not accurate? We have no plans, Mr. Speaker - we do not have an
intention.
Like I said in answer to the first question, we will not, at this point in
time, compromise the rights of any government here to allow a pension plan to
continue when it is 48 per cent funded and give up any rights we have. We are
currently paying $60 million a year into that plan. Prior to 1980 -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the minister now to conclude his answer.
MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, the premiums that people paid prior to 1980 -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SULLIVAN: I would like an opportunity to answer, Mr. Speaker.
The premiums that people paid prior to 1980, even if government had not spent
it on something else, would not have made that plan fully funded. So there is a
responsibility for the difference to be funded equally by employers and
employees, and they have not agreed to fund that particular portion of that
plan.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, on a
supplementary.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Why will the minister not admit that what this government wants is four
years, at least, to tinker with that pension plan, to increase the cost to
members or to decrease the benefits? Tell the truth and admit that.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I will tell the truth. We agreed to put $60 million to continue into that
plan. That plan is showing experienced gains now. It has averaged 10.2 per cent
since 1980. We hope it will continue to experience that in the future and there
will not be any need for anybody - it will become a fully funded plan down the
road with the significant contribution that government has made and there will
not be any need to do anything. One thing that we do not want to do, Mr.
Speaker, is twenty or thirty or forty years down the road, compromise people's
ability. We want to deal with today's problems today. We do not want to pass
on to future and future generations the costs that are incurred here in this
Province. I think that is unfair. It is not a responsible thing to do, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have a question for the Minister of Transportation and Works, and
Aboriginal Affairs. Since the strike started twelve days ago the residents of
Fogo Island and Change Islands have been getting one trip a day in a ferry that
takes half the capacity of the regular boat that does the run out there. Since
Saturday night this replacement ferry has been tied up to the wharf, leaving the
residents on both islands stranded. I ask the minister, what is he doing to try
and remedy the situation that is ongoing out there today?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works, and
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the member knows that an essential service agreement was worked
out between the union and the Province, and the jest of it is a trip a day, as
he indicated. We have been having some technical problems of a technical nature
with the vessel. The vessel sailed across this morning, and we are waiting for a
piece of software equipment that has something to do with the alarm system on
the ship to be accessed so that problem can be corrected and the ship will then
continue to operate as was previously scheduled under the essential services
agreement.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Twillingate &
Fogo.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to redirect my questions to the Minister of Finance and Treasury
Board.
Every day I hear the minister stand in the House, or in front of a camera,
and talk about how the system is coping. When you have people on Fogo Island and
Change Islands who are running out of fuel, stores out there that are running
out of provisions, people who are missing doctor appointments, I ask the
minister: When are you going to give up your stubbornness and sit down and
negotiate a deal in good faith with the unions?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The essential services agreement provides basic essential services, and we
want to see the health, safety and security of people. I understand there were
provisions on Fogo Island that were low and they arranged -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SULLIVAN: I am not sure if the member wants to hear an answer because
he is interrupting, Mr. Speaker, but there was an extra trip made, I think, to
get provisions over there where they were getting low.
MR. REID: The boat has been out of service for the last two days.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Again, I ask hon. members for their co-operation to permit the minister to be
able to go and answer the question. I ask him to do that now. You have about
another twenty seconds left.
The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am aware that on Sunday, April 11, the Beaumont Hamel, a part of the
alarm system went down and they are trying to access a part for the
reprogramming of that. They are trying to get access to that. They have to go
through a strike line at a particular campus here. They have not been able to do
that up to now, I understand. Hopefully, that can be accessed and get back. I am
prepared and waiting for a response to our offer that we made on Friday, our
proposal. They have not gotten back to us since we presented that to them on
Friday afternoon.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the Minister of Government Services.
As we know, her department is responsible for most inspections done by the
government to ensure that public safety is protected. Will the minister give an
update in the House today on how the strike is impacting this work? Are weigh
scales being kept open, and is highway enforcement being carried out? Minister,
is public safety being compromised by your government's inability to negotiate
with good faith with the unions?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As President of Treasury Board, my department is responsible for monitoring
all aspects, whether it is in government services, transportation, health or
education all over the Province. I receive updates on an ongoing basis. I met
with the Chief Executive Officer of the health boards today. We have services in
place that meet essential service agreements there. We understand that you
cannot have the full range of services that are available as if everybody was
working, but we are dealing and managing with the system under the
circumstances, Mr. Speaker, and we will continue to do that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour
Grace.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, I say to the Premier, I have just found another
way to reduce the deficit: to stop paying some of his Cabinet Ministers if he is
not going to let them go to work.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SWEENEY: Can the minister tell the House if restaurants and other
food establishments are being inspected at an appropriate level? Can the public
be guaranteed of their safety?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, the public does not have to worry about this
safety. While there is a strike going on in this Province, we are maintaining
the services to the public health and I would tell the hon. member not to worry
about that. We will monitor it day to day and make sure that our public is not
at risk.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Tourism, Culture and
Recreation.
Due to the strike caused by the one-man show here, your leader, there are
many schools and many extracurricular activities, sports wise, culture wise,
that are being cancelled throughout the Province. When you sat on this side, on
many occasions I heard you say, personally, that students should not be used as
pawns for any strike. What have you done to help with this strike to ensure that
the students, who have put in the hard work and dedication in this Province, are
going to be able to have their events on time? What have you done differently
from when you were over here as the Opposition?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, I can tell the minister, I was waiting for a
long time on a question. I have finally gotten one; I will get one today.
I certainly do support all of those groups. I have been in contact with many
of those groups, as a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, and we are doing what we can
under the circumstances. The member knows that full well, and we will continue
to do what we can while this job action is in place.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The time for Question Period has expired.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on tomorrow I will move the following private
member's resolution:
WHEREAS Canadian Forces Base 5 Wing Goose Bay has long been and remains one
of Canada's strategic important military bases, as well as a key military
training site for countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO; and
WHEREAS the future of 5 Wing has been clouded in uncertainty in recent
months, to the detriment of the people and economy of Happy Valley-Goose Bay;
and
strengthening its investment in national defence, particularly in light of
concerns about global terrorism and Canada's ongoing military operations in
Afghanistan and elsewhere; and
military flight training at 3 Wing Bagotville, Quebec and 4 Wing Cold Lake,
Alberta; and
WHEREAS the Minister of National Defence has announced significant financial
support for current training partners over the next two flying seasons and is
engaged in developing and implementing marketing, training and cost allocation
initiatives; and
WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is committed to ensuring
the future viability of foreign military training at 5 Wing and has been working
to achieve this objective;
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House call upon the Government of
Canada, to expeditiously develop and implement a new strategic plan for 5 Wing
Goose Bay that includes substantial new investments in the base in order to make
optimal use of the infrastructure, expertise, geography, climate and other
tremendous advantages of 5 Wing while boosting the local economy and making
Canada stronger.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
I do believe you wish to go back to Presenting Reports by Standing and Select
Committees.
MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, if I could have, with leave, to revert to
table various -
MR. SPEAKER: Has leave been granted to revert to Presenting Reports?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees
MR. SULLIVAN: I thank the members for their cooperation.
Pursuant to
section 28(4)(
e) of the Financial Administration Act, I am
tabling two Orders in Council for the creation of two new activities of
expenditure for the 2003-2004 fiscal year.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, Oh!
MR. SULLIVAN: They are there, two of those decisions. I can give them, if
they would like. They are decisions that were made by the former government. I
can go into these, if they so desire. One is dealing with the BSE Recovery
Program. There was a decision that was made by the previous government back in
August, I believe. The other particular one, Mr. Speaker, was a decision
regarding Electoral Districts Boundaries Commission that was made by the former
government also. Both of these are pertaining to that. It is standard to have
them tabled here in the House. They are here for the members to see and have a
look.
Also, Mr. Speaker, if I could, pursuant to
section 26(5)(
a) of the Financial
Administration Act, I am tabling sixteen Orders in Council relating to funding
pre-commitments for 2004-2005 to 2007-2008 fiscal year. This is normal
commitments with ongoing projects. If they want a list of each of these sixteen,
I can go through each one; if not, they can have an opportunity to look at them
and then deal with them accordingly. Do you want a list?
MR. SPEAKER: Table them.
MR. SULLIVAN: I will table these, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion, the hon. the Government House
Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I move, by leave, and I have consulted obviously with the Opposition House
Leader, that the following members of the House confirm - we have to confirm
their appointment to the Public Accounts Committee; these members. It basically
confirms we move that they be appointed, but it confirms the appointments made
by the Leader of the Opposition and by the Premier of the Province, following
the swearing in of the new government. The following members:
Mr. Eddie Joyce, Member for Bay of Islands, confirmed as Chair of the Public
Accounts Committee; Mr. Harry Harding, Member for Bonavista North, as Vice-Chair
of the Public Accounts Committee; Mr. Ray Hunter, Member for Windsor-Springdale,
member of the committee; Mr. Wallace Young, Member for St. Barbe, member of the
committee; Ms Kathy Goudie, Member for Humber Valley, member of the Public
Accounts Committee; Mr. Gerry Reid, Member for Twillingate & Fogo, member of
the committee - you will enjoy your work on that, I used to be on that myself -
Ms Yvonne Jones -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. E. BYRNE: No, I mean that in all sincerity. It is a good committee to
be involved with. Myself and former member Tom Lush, who used to be Speaker, a
member here and Government House Leader, both he and I chaired and vice-chaired
that committee.
Ms Yvonne Jones, Member for Cartwright-L'anse au Clair, member of the
Public Accounts Committee, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I am wondering if the hon. Government House Leader would like to move that
motion now, as you just gave notice of it - the Chair is uncertain - and then we
could dispose of that particular matter.
Does the member have leave to move his motion now?
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I will reiterate. I asked for leave to move
the motion that we confirm the appointments. I believe I have already done that,
Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair misunderstood. It was under the Notices of Motion,
so therefore the Chair apologizes.
It has been moved and seconded these named members be appointed to the Public
Accounts Committee.
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: Contra-minded?
The motion is carried.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I rise to complete a petition that was presented
by the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne on Thursday, which she presented on
behalf of the Member for Conception Bay East & Bell Island, who chose not to
present it on behalf of her constituents.
Prayer of the Petition:
To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador,
in Parliament assembled, we the undersigned petitioners or Bell Island, as in
duty bound, petition, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly.
WHEREAS at a March 30, 2004 public meeting assembled on Bell Island,
residents had gathered to consider an impending crisis facing Bell island due to
a threatened blockade of their marine highway by a public service strike
WHEREAS the Provincial Budget of 2004 had proposed measures to reduce ferry
services and raise ferry rates with significant negative impacts to the
Community's economic future;
THEREFORE we petition:
A. Reconsideration of ferry rate increases: that proposed ferry rate
increases of 25 per cent slated for implementation for the on Island portion of
our Province services only, not be approved for implementation; that instead,
government continue the Party policy contained in the PC 2003 Blue Policy Book
specifically "phase in adjustments over a five-year period to bring rates
on provincial ferry routes in line with the cost of highway travel" be
implemented in its place, with lower rates, not higher rates; that government
ferry rate policy be applied in a manner consistent with government's own
pleas to the federal government not to increase Gulf ferry rates and that
government adopt intra-provincial rates based on the equivalent cost of road
travel.
B. Reconsideration of proposals to reduce Bell Island's ferry service and
schedule by 20 per cent: that the proposed 20 per cent reduction in Bell Island's
twenty-one daily round trip schedules by four trips to seventeen trips be
reconsidered; that the long-standing core
schedule not be changed; that the two
vessels operating together on the service not be reduced from eight hours daily
to three hours; that the restriction to limit daily sailing hours to twelve
hours on Bell Island's service is unfair and that it be lifted in favour of a
minimum of fourteen daily sailing hours per vessel on all intra-provincial ferry
services; that
schedule cuts not be implemented as they will cripple Bell Island's
growing economy, threaten the jobs of Bell Island's 850 employed workforce and
trigger major increased in counterproductive budgetary spending resulting in
increased government income support payments to displaced workers; that shutting
down one of Bell Island's two ferries at peak traffic, at 5:00 p.m., will be
equivalent to shutting down one of the two exit lanes on the TCH from the city
at 5:00 p.m. and neither is acceptable.
C. Proceed with an investment in 2004 to construct a new provincial
replacement ferry: that consistent with the policy position laid out in the PC
2003 Blue Policy Book, as well as consistent with a 2001 House of Assembly
resolution, and further consistent to a plea -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time has expired.
MS FOOTE: By leave, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: By leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MS FOOTE: - by the Auditor General in annual reports that government move
forward to build new replacement ferries; that in view of an incontestable
desperate need for new ferries to replace an aged fleet, that government secure
lease financing in 2004 and undertake an economic investment to construct a new
replacement ferry for the Hamilton Sound at a provincial shipyard.
D. Appeal for fairness for Bell Island in any 2004 ferry service
schedule
reductions; that in applying any reductions in ferry service schedules for 2004
that Bell Island not be singled out as the only ferry service out of the sixteen
intra-provincial ferry services to have a cut apply to its scheduled trips; that
the loss of four trips daily or 20 per cent cut in scheduled service with no
cuts in the schedules of other services would not be fair and will result in
serious economic consequences for Bell Island and that the decision be
revisited; that
schedule cuts will hamper Bell Island's rural rejuvenation and
renewal leading to rural economic stagnation and should not be approved.
E. Seek to renegotiate NAPE strike essential services agreement, which
resulted in a cut of 95 per cent of Bell Island's daily schedule: that NAPE be
requested to reconsider the January 2004 essential services strike agreement,
which reduced Bell Island's ferry
schedule from twenty-one trips to an
unacceptable one single daily trip to Bell Islanders and Bell Island's
economy; that as a minimum during the strike four round trips be provided.
F. Move to have all sixteen intra-provincial ferry services designated as
strike free: as government, in order to protect the health and safety of its
residents and the economy, has successfully lobbied the federal government to
declare the Gulf ferry service as strike free with a full
schedule during labour
disputes, than the provincial government act quickly to extend the same right to
its own sixteen intra-provincial ferry services; that land and marine highways
not be blockaded, preventing users from travelling and thus compromising public
health and safety as recently ruled by the Canadian Labour Tribunal Board in
November 2003 on the Gulf Service.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS FOOTE: As in duty bound your petitioners humbly pray.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 6, Bill 6,
An Act To Amend the Fire Prevention Act, 1991.
MR. SPEAKER: Moving first reading.
It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of Municipal and
Provincial Affairs shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To
Amend The Fire Prevention Act, 1991. (Bill 6)
Is it the pleasure of the House the hon. Minister of Municipal and Provincial
Affairs shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against?
Motion carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs to
introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Fire Prevention Act, 1991,"
carried. (Bill 6)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against?
Carried.
CLERK: A bill,
an Act to Amend the Fire Prevention Act, 1991. (Bill 6)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time? Now? On tomorrow?
On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 6 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, Motion 7, Bill 8,
An Act To Amend The
Municipal Affairs Act, now be read a first time.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Municipal and Provincial Affairs shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The Municipal Affairs Act. (Bill 8)
Is the pleasure of the House that the hon. Minister of Municipal and
Provincial Affairs shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against?
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs to
introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Municipal Affairs Act,"
carried. (Bill 8)
It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a first time?
All those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against?
Carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Municipal Affairs Act. (Bill 8)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time? Now? On tomorrow?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 8 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 8, Bill 5,
An Act To Amend The Emergency Measures Act. I am looking
for first reading again, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Municipal and Provincial Affairs shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act to Amend The Emergency Measures Act. (Bill 5)
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. Minister of Municipal and
Provincial Affairs shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against?
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs to
introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Emergency Measures Act,"
carried. (Bill 5)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a first time?
All those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against?
Carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Emergency Measures Act. (Bill 5)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time? On tomorrow?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 5 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 9, Bill 16,
An Act To Amend The Financial Administration Act.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Finance and President of Treasury Board shall have leave to introduce a bill
entitled,
An Act To Amend The Financial Administration Act. (Bill 16)
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of the Finance and
President of Treasury Board shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against?
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to
introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Financial Administration Act,"
carried. (Bill 16)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a first time?
All those in Favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against?
Carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Financial Administration Act. (Bill
16)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time? On tomorrow?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 16 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 10, Bill 7,
An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Finance and President of Treasury Board shall have leave to introduce a bill
entitled,
An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000. (Bill 7)
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Finance and
President of Treasury Board shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against?
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to
introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000," carried.
(Bill 7)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time. Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a
first time?
All those in favour?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against?
Carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000. (Bill 7)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time? On tomorrow?
Tomorrow.
On motion, Bill No. 7 read a first time, ordered read a second time on
tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, before I get to Motion 11, a member just said that she had
thought that we had, or I had, made a commitment not to introduce any
legislation while the strike was on. Just for her informational purposes, all we
are doing here today - and this has been worked out with the Opposition House
Leader - is enacting first readings so that we can get bills distributed to you,
so that you can have an appropriate amount of time to have an informed debate in
the House. We will not be debating legislation. After your thirteen hours of
standing, responding to the budgetary motion, some of us are going to get an
opportunity to do that today. That is all we are doing today, I say to the
member.
Mr. Speaker, Motion 11.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: Motion 11, Bill 9,
An Act To Revise The Law About The
Practice of Optometry.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, An
Act To Revise The Law About The Practice of Optometry, ( Bill 9).
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Health and
Community Services shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.
Motion carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services to introduce a
bill, "An Act To Revise The Law About The Practice Of Optometry,"
carried. ( Bill 9)
MR. SPEAKER: Is it moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time. Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a
first time?
All those in favour, aye.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill, "An Act To Revise The Law About The Practice Of
Optometry," (Bill 9).
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time? On tomorrow?
AN HON. MEMBER: Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.
On motion, Bill No. 9 read a first time, ordered read a second time on
tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 12,
An Act To Incorporate The Newfoundland And Labrador Centre For
Health Information, ( Bill 17)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Health and Community Services shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, An
Act To Incorporate The Newfoundland And Labrador Centre For Health Information,
(Bill 17).
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Health and
Community Services shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services to introduce a
bill, "An Act To Incorporate The Newfoundland And Labrador Centre For
Health Information," carried. ( Bill 17)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill, "An Act To Incorporate The Newfoundland And Labrador
Centre For Health Information," (Bill 17).
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time? On tomorrow?
AN HON. MEMBER: Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 17 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 13, Bill 11,
An Act To Amend The Survival Of Actions Act.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Justice and Attorney General shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, An
Act To Amend The Survival Of Actions Act, ( Bill 11).
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Justice and
Attorney General shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.
Carried.
On motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to introduce
a bill, "An Act To Amend The Survival Of Actions Act," carried. (Bill
11)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time. Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a
first time?
All those in favour, aye.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill, "An Act To Amend The Survival Of Actions Act."
(Bill 11)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time? On tomorrow?
AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 11 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 14, Bill 4, "An Act To Amend The Corporations Act."
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Government Services shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To
Amend The Corporations Act, (Bill 4). Is it the pleasure of the House that the
hon. the Minister of Government Services shall have leave to introduce said
bill?
All those in favour, aye.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against?
Motion carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Government Services to introduce a bill,
"An Act To Amend The Corporations Act," carried. (Bill 4)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time. Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a
first time?
All those in favour, aye.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill, "An Act To Amend The Corporations Act." (Bill 4)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time. When shall the
said bill be read a second time? On tomorrow?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 4 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Motion 15, Bill l0, "An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act."
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of Government Services
shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The Services
Charges Act, (Bill 10). Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the
Minister of Government Services shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Government Services to introduce a bill,
"An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act," carried. (Bill 10)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time. Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a
first time?
All those in favour, aye.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill, "An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act."
(Bill 10).
MR. SPEAKER: This bill is now read a first time. When shall the said bill
be read a second time. Now or on tomorrow?
AN HON. MEMBER: Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 10 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, before I move Motion 1, I am always amused.
Last week we were being criticized because we had no legislation. Now we are
being criticized by the Opposition because we have it. It is amazing, amazing.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Let me say also, Mr. Speaker, that the idle venter from
across, saying, you had better not introduce some of that today before we close
because we will have some chatter about it, I understand that and this
government will provide any and all opportunity for members opposite to chatter
about any piece of legislation, but I want to tell members opposite, Mr.
Speaker, that this is only the beginning of the legislation. There is more
coming. We are doing it in a fashion that has been worked out between myself and
the Opposition House Leader so that we can get it done, get it all in members'
hands a week or so before we debate it, so that members can have an opportunity
to study the legislation, study the bills, discuss the impacts of it, so that we
can have an informed debate in this Legislature about legislation.
Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that right after I move Motion 1, we are
going to hear from the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. With that,
Mr. Speaker I move Motion 1, that this House approves in general the budgetary
policy of the government.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I say to the former Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, I only have
twenty minutes. I could go an hour, as there is lots to be said, but that is all
I can do. I am sure the members opposite would not give me leave to go an hour.
Mr. Speaker, I stand today -
AN HON. MEMBER: No leave for me.
MR. J. BYRNE: I have no doubt, we will get leave on this side.
Mr. Speaker, I stand today to speak to Motion 1, which basically says that we
approve, this House approve, in general, the policies of the Budget of this
Administration.
Mr. Speaker, I have sat in this House of Assembly for the past number of days
listening to the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans speaking for over thirteen
hours. I have to compliment her on having the fortitude, I suppose, to be able
to stand for thirteen hours; albeit, Mr. Speaker, on different days, but she did
go for thirteen hours. Also, Mr. Speaker, she did repeat herself a lot, I would
have to say that, but still she said some things that I agree with, and many I
did not agree with.
One thing that I will agree with, and I remember her saying on that side of
the House of Assembly - she did not say much good about the members on this side
of the House, but one she did pick out and compliment was myself, and I thank
her for that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. J. BYRNE: Not that she shouldn't have complimented all members on
this side of the House, which would be - I say to the Member for Twillingate:
What was that?
Anyway, Mr. Speaker, the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans was on her feet for
thirteen hours and said a lot - said a lot - not a lot of content with respect
to quality, I suppose, but she made some good points and she beat the former
critic for Finance by one to one-and-a-half hours.
Mr. Speaker, we find ourselves, as an Administration, taking over the reins
of government in very difficult times in the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador. It followed fifteen years of Liberal Administration, pretty well
fifteen years. We saw many things being done, and when I was on that side of the
House I criticized the government of the day for many things that they did -
many, many things - and, in particular, the abuse of the Financial
Administration Act. For many years they were doing that, would never listen.
The Public Tender Act, Mr. Speaker, how many times did they get up in the
House of Assembly and speak on the Public Tender Act and the abuse of the Public
Tender Act? Is there any wonder that the Province today is in the state that it
is in financially?
We have the Minister of Finance who, when he was on the other side of the
House, was questioning the previous Administration day in, day out with respect
to their policies and their procedures, and whatever they were doing at that
point in time.
Mr. Speaker, when we formed the government, we found out the dire financial
situatiton of this Province, and we had to bring down a Budget, and some would
say it was a very difficult Budget. For many of us, it was a difficult Budget.
We talked long and hard on it, and we had a lot of problems but, Mr. Speaker, we
have to look after the future of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
I was a member of the Opposition for ten-and-a-half years. They have a job to
do, and they are doing it, but I sometimes question their motives and why they
are doing and saying some of the things that they are saying, because we are in
a situation in this Province today - and I saw in the House of Assembly last
week when we had people in the galleries. I could not believe some of the things
that were coming from the other side of the House. Really, Mr. Speaker, they
were almost to the point of inciting. That is the way I would describe it. It is
shameful, because there are people out there now in the unions who are on the
streets. We do not want them on the streets. I certainly do not want them on the
streets. I can tell you that as an individual, as a Minister of the Crown, I
thought long and hard on this and we did not want to see the public service hit
the streets, by any stretch of the imagination.
We have questions coming from the other side of the House, and rightly so,
but I think they should be kind of tempering their questions, especially when
there are people in the galleries, Mr. Speaker. They should not be looking to
incite people. That is from my own personal perspective.
The Budget, Mr. Speaker, came down here and there are a lot of good things in
the Budget.
MR. JOYCE: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: The Member for the Bay of Islands is up now, Mr. Speaker,
on the other side of the House, interjecting as he normally does. He will have
his time to get up and speak to the Budget. There is no doubt about that. We, on
this side of the House, will give lots of time for all members on the other side
of the House to speak to the Budget.
Mr. Speaker, we have a Budget brought down that we thought was a difficult
Budget, there was no doubt. There are some good things in the Budget. It is not
all negative, Mr. Speaker. There are many good things in the Budget. I will get
to them possibly today, and, if not today, when we speak on the Budget itself,
but I want to talk about a few things within my department today. One is, of
course, we have had a lot of attention from some of the municipalities with
respect to the Municipal Operating Grants.
I, as a former mayor of a small town, understand the importance of the
Municipal Operating Grants. We saw the previous Administration basically cutting
the Municipal Operating Grants from $48 million down to $21 million. When we
came this year and each department were looking at their financial situation to
prepare the Budget, and looking at the programs, I thought long and hard on
municipal operating. I did not want to go there. I really did not want to go
there because I knew the importance of the Municipal Operating Grants to the
smaller municipalities. We decided, basically, I decided, then, to look at what
was the best way. If we are going to have to address reductions in the Municipal
Operating Grants, what is the fairest way to address it, to implement it? We
decided, over three years, to cut the Municipal Operating Grants by
approximately $5 million.
Then we looked and said: What municipalities can absorb the impact of this?
Then again, we looked at the tax growth of the municipalities involved. There
are some fourteen municipalities that will be impacted by this, Municipal
Operating Grants, and the larger municipalities are getting the biggest impact.
For example, St. John's is going to be hit with some $900,000. Then, when you
look at St. John's and the potential for growth in this region, and their
municipal assessments, in the most recent municipal assessment, I think, they
went up by millions of dollars. We have the industry growth in the Northeast
Avalon, in and around St. John's, so they would be impacted.
If you look at the Municipal Operating Grants themselves, the total amount,
Mr. Speaker, is $21 million. The fourteen municipalities that are impacted take
up half of that, or $10.8 million. Of that $10.8 million, they have a total
budget of $272 million amongst them all, the fourteen municipalities. So, in
actual fact, the $10.8 million is very little when you look at the overall
amount and the impact is going to be less than 1 per cent on those fourteen
municipalities. When you look at it from that perspective, I think it was the
fairest thing to do.
In the election, and leading up to the election, we spoke often about what we
wanted to do for rural Newfoundland, how we would try to revitalize rural
Newfoundland. In the Budget, we had the minister talk about a Rural Secretariat
that is going to be put in place, that is in place, to help revitalize rural
Newfoundland to try and create some industry in rural Newfoundland and not to
have the municipalities just depend on the Municipal Operating Grants. Some of
the municipalities out there - many, Mr. Speaker - are in debt, up to their
ears, really, if you want to look at it. I mean, I was shocked. I could not
believe it when I went into the department and saw some of the debt that is owed
by these municipalities. The debt ratio for some is 30 per cent, 40 per cent, 50
per cent, 60 per cent, 70 per cent. As a matter of act, there are municipalities
out there that are up to 100 per cent debt ratio. So, basically, if they take in
$100,000 as their revenue, they have to pay out $100,000. So, where do they get
the money to run the towns?
I understand the need of the Municipal Operating Grants for rural
Newfoundland. From that perspective, one of the good things in the Budget, Mr.
Speaker - and I fought hard for this one, to get it, because the Province is in
a very difficult financial situation, as the Minister of Finance has said, as
the Premier has said, and ministers on this side. We went after some debt
relief.
Now the previous Administration, I have to say, brought in the Debt Relief
Program and it was a good program. They spent some $47 million over a number of
years to help municipalities in the Province to reduce their debt, so I wanted
to continue that. The money had been used up, and I wanted to continue that.
What we did - yes, we are taking away $5 million from the municipalities that
can best absorb it, but in the Budget we have $9 million for debt relief. Now,
this money will go towards the smaller municipalities that have a lot of debt,
that really cannot operate. I can almost say, I suppose, they are on the verge
of bankruptcy. This $9 million will go and assist some twenty-six
municipalities. We have a list done up now. We are looking at municipalities and
we are going to be talking with the municipalities, the smaller towns in various
districts all around this Province. We are not looking at it from a political
perspective, because that is why we are in the situation we are in today, Mr.
Speaker. In the past, in this Province, since 1949, all parties, not just one or
the other, have looked at doing things, especially around election time - lets
do this, lets do that, lets do this, spending money and putting money in places
where it should never have been spent in the first place. These municipalities
now are up to their ears in debt, as I said, and it was done for political
reasons.
What we are going to be doing, Mr. Speaker, is looking at the towns that need
this money most, regardless of where they are, what district they are in or what
political party their member, whom they have voted into this House of Assembly,
is supporting. We are going to start doing things right. Across this Province,
we are going to be putting money in where it is needed the most. That is the
idea that we have on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker, and it is long, long
overdue.
Nine million dollars for municipalities for debt relief, as I said, will
assist some twenty-six municipalities and will reduce their debt by 50, 60, 70,
80 or 100 per cent, maybe, in some cases, municipalities that cannot afford it.
That is a good thing in itself. You know, it is not all negative when it comes
to the Budget.
Mr. Speaker, when we came in here and the Minister of Finance stated that, on
an accrual basis, we have over $800 million in debt in this Province for one
year for 500,000 people, I mean, it is just not sustainable. People out there, I
think, are starting to realize this, that we have to get our house in order.
During the election, for example, Mr. Speaker, the Opposition, which was the
government of the day, were saying that we were going to cut the civil service,
we are going to layoff thousands and thousands and thousands of people. What we
said at that time - and we were elected on this - was that we would look at the
civil service and in the next number of years, five years approximately, there
are going to some 5,000 to 6,000 leave the public service and we will look to
reduce the public service, through attrition.
It was only last week, Mr. Speaker, I heard a public figure on the radio
waves saying that he felt so bad the other night when those 4,000 families got
their layoff notices. There is nothing could be further from the truth. Four
thousand people didn't get their layoff notices. That is going to be happening
over the next number of years. Obviously, Mr. Speaker, there are positions
within the civil service that, if they retire tomorrow, those positions have to
be replaced. There are no ifs, ands or buts about that. But there are some out
there that we can look at. For example, if a nurse retired tomorrow over at the
Health Sciences Centre, do you think that nurse is not going to be replaced? I
mean, lets get real here. If a snowplow operator retires this evening or if his
time to retire comes in January or February, you mean to say, Mr. Speaker, that
person is not going to be replaced? Really! I think there has been a lot of
fearmongering going on over the past number of weeks, and it is too bad.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Some people got their notices, yes. There are some people
who may have gotten their notices but it was not in the thousands. Maybe here or
there throughout the civil service, but what they are trying to say on the
opposite side of the House, Mr. Speaker, is that 4,000 people got their layoff
notices. It did not happen, and not going to happen, Mr. Speaker, by any stretch
of the imagination. It is shameful for people to be putting that out there; to
be fearmongering as they are.
The previous administration had said many times - I remember on that side of
the House - that they had balanced budgets, Mr. Speaker. They had balanced
budgets.
MR. E. BYRNE: Not one.
MR. J. BYRNE: Not one balanced Budget did they have, I say to the Member
for Kilbride; not one.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: The Member for Bay of Islands said they had one. He is
agreeing with me now, Mr. Speaker. A number of times they said they had balanced
budgets.
How many times, Mr. Speaker, did they say they had a balanced Budget? It was
not by any stretch of the imagination, especially when you look at the accrual
basis of doing the books. It is all, I suppose, in how you look at things in the
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador these days.
We, on this side of the House, will try over the next number of years - in
the next four years, as the government, try and bring in a true balanced Budget.
When we get there, Mr. Speaker, can you imagine the hundreds of millions of
dollars that is being spent on interest now for the debt of this Province, how
far that could go to paying public service? Seriously, Mr. Speaker. We cannot do
it today - hundreds of millions of dollars, how far could that go to hiring
doctors, hiring nurses, hiring civil servants throughout the public sector?
Hundreds of millions of dollars that is being spent today to pay down our debt.
Now the interest, not the principal, the interest on the debt in this Province
of Newfoundland and Labrador. Again, we need to get our house in order.
As I said, Mr. Speaker, I can go on and on, on this but there are a few
things that I would like to say and it is in the Budget Highlights, if anybody
would want to see it. Look at some of the positive things in the Budget, Mr.
Speaker. Let's talk about a few of the positive things for a change, I say to
the members. There are some over there saying, what positive things? Well, I
will tell you some now. I am just looking at one here now, the RNC, who over the
past number of years have been cut to the bone; driving around in vehicles that
were not safe to be on the road in this Province, Mr. Speaker.
MR. MANNING: Could not even get a set of tires.
MR. J. BYRNE: That is right, could not get a set of tires. Vests that
they had were like ten, fifteen, twenty years old. They were outdated with
respect to the safety of them. They had the - the numbers themselves, Mr.
Speaker - the uniforms. You see the RNC going around with their uniforms,
especially their dress uniforms. All kinds of issues. They were completely
neglected. When people retired they were not replaced in the civil service.
By the way, Mr. Speaker, we are up-front with the people in Newfoundland and
Labrador. The previous administration had a policy in place over the past number
of years, by the way, Mr. Speaker, that if someone retired they were not
replaced. They did not tell the people that, no. They would not tell them that.
We are being up-front and telling the people this, Mr. Speaker. At least we are
being honest with the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
As I said, one good thing in the Budget, the RNC; over three years
seventy-five officers training in Newfoundland and Labrador. Creating jobs
there, Mr. Speaker, and equipment -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Pardon? Do you have a problem? You do not want us to do
that?
Mr. Speaker, in health, "An investment of $1 million for community
mental health..." That is coming out of the Reid-Power Inquiry.
A very serious situation in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador
developed over the years, and I will tell you what happened. Again, the previous
administration, when they decided - Mr. Speaker, the previous administration
decided that they were going to go to community health, and they did not do
their proper homework beforehand and put the infrastructure in place for
community health, and let the people go out and not have the infrastructure in
place, and we saw the results of that. So, we have $1 million going to that. Not
nearly enough, Mr. Speaker, not nearly enough, but it shows where our priorities
are. It shows that we are going to go down that road, when we get our financial
house in order, that there will be more money pumped into that.
We have, "$8.6 million increase in the Drug Program to over $106
million..." - an extra $8.6 million.
"Funding for additional social workers for Labrador." Now, Mr.
Speaker, that is a positive thing. I know out there, because I know many people
in the social work field and -
MR. SPEAKER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: One minute left is all. The Speaker is saying I have one
minute left.
Mr. Speaker, the social work field; the social workers out there are maxed
out, they are stressed, they are overloaded - the work cases, you know. Then
again, we only have so much money. There are people listening, I say to the
people out there. When it comes to the social work field, there is people
listening. As we put our house in order there will be funds, I am sure, become
available to do that, Mr. Speaker. No problem on that. It will come in due
course, and hopefully sooner than later.
"200,000 to assist the new Ministerial Advisory Council for Aging and
Seniors to ensure that the needs and concerns of seniors are properly understood
and addressed." Now, Mr. Speaker, we all know in Newfoundland, and in
Canada actually, that we have an aging society. The seniors, of course, paid
their dues. They have been paying taxes for years and years and years, and what
kind of a society are we if we cannot take care of our seniors and our young and
our sick?
Other things, Education, $22 million to be spent on new school construction
in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Again, positive.
We do not hear too much about this from the Opposite side, "Help for
Those Who Need it Most." Commencing in the 2005 taxation year there is
going to be a tax credit for individuals with $12,000 income and families with
$19,000. So, they will have to pay no taxes. I think that is a good step. I
think that is pretty positive. Again, I would love to see it higher. I would
love to see it - a progressive move, a very progressive move. I would love to
see it higher, and maybe in years to come that will be increased to $12,020 or
$13,020 or $14,000 or $21,000 as time goes by. We will put it up in increments
over the years.
Here is one: $500,000 grant for the Kids Eat Smart Foundation. Many people, I
would assume, thought that would be gone this year, but no, we kept that in, Mr.
Speaker, for the Kids Eat Smart. It is money well spent.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time has expired.
MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I could go on but I am sure there are people
who may want to speak on the other side. When the Budget Debate comes up, I will
get up to speak and make some more comments on this very positive Budget from
the perspective of good things in the Budget. There is some hard stuff too, but
we can only do what we can afford at this point in time.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I stand today to speak on the Budget Debate. It is interesting to hear my
colleague, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, get up and
speak to the merits of this Budget. I am sure you will understand that I have to
stand and speak to the questionable aspects of this Budget, and there are many
of them, Mr. Speaker.
First, I want to talk about all of the measures that were supposedly taken to
reduce the size of Cabinet and to make a more efficient government. It is
interesting when you look at the decisions that were taken, Mr. Speaker, because
I think they impact negatively on significant components of our Province. For
instance, we look at the Department of Education. We used to have a Department
of Youth and Post-Secondary Education. Now, of course, it is combined in one
department. We used to have a separate Department of Labour, very much needed in
this Province, especially when you look at what is happening now and the
twelve-day-old strike that is going on. I think, clearly, we need to have a
strong Department of Labour with strong leadership. That department now, of
course, has been put in with Human Resources and Employment. We look at the
Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development. Interestingly enough,
where we had one Department of Industry, Trade and Rural Development, we now
have two departments. We have a Department of Business, led by the Premier
himself, and a Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development.
Interesting, that would be the one area that they would choose to, in fact, take
a department, break it up and create two instead of going with the one
department. If they were looking for efficiencies, that is an area there where
they certainly could have realized more efficiencies.
When I look at this new Department of Business, I have yet to see a vision. I
have yet to read a vision. I have yet to hear a vision espoused by either the
Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development or the man who himself is
leading up that department, and that is the Premier, who is the Minister
Responsible for the new Department of Business. So, I guess, when I look to the
future of Newfoundland and Labrador and I look at the whole idea behind growing
the economy, and the commentary that we hear all the time about, you know, what
the Premier is going to do based on his business experience in terms of growing
the economy, I have yet to hear anyone talk about exactly what it is he is going
to do. I suppose one of the things that he has indicated is this new department
of Newfoundland and Labrador Federal-Provincial Relations Office in Ottawa. Now,
what that is meant to do to grow the economy, I would say again is questionable
and whether or not it is even necessary. You are talking the first outlay of
expenditure for this new department is something to the tune of $350,000 and we
still do not know what it is meant to accomplish. Even though in the Budget it
referred to, you know, equalization payments, transfers, natural resources,
trying to get a better deal for Newfoundland and Labrador, as far as I know we
still have seven MPs in Ottawa representing us very ably in the federal
government, so I question whether or not this department is meant to replace
those seven. Certainly heavens, why would we be duplicating services? Why would
we be allocating $350,000 for an office in Ottawa when we have seven MPs there
who are tasked with doing the very sorts of things that the Budget refers to
this new department of federal-provincial relations doing for us in Ottawa.
I have to question the Budget with respect to business again because when you
look at the fee increases - and Bradley George who, of course, has written a
column in the local paper here talks about the fee increases and the negative
impact they will have on small business. Those of us who know our Province well,
especially rural Newfoundland and Labrador, know that small business is, in
fact, the backbone of our economy; that while we have large initiatives, while
we have Voisey's Bay, while we have White Rose, at some point in time they are
going to end. They are not going to be with us forever, but small business will
be with us forever. Manufacturing will be with us forever, if we treat it right
and if we make sure that we have rules and regulations in place that are very
friendly towards small business. So, when I see fee increases to the magnitude
that we saw in this Budget, it is bothersome because it will have a negative
impact on small business. It will have a negative impact on the people in
Newfoundland and Labrador. As Mr. George has said, it is a tax grab by any other
word. Of course, the Premier obviously played words with this one by suggesting,
as did the Minister of Finance, that there were no tax increases. Well, I can
tell you that from everyone I have spoken with in Newfoundland and Labrador, the
suggestion that you are going to increase the fee for ambulance, the fact that
you are going to increase the fee for a private room, the fact that you are
going to increase a fee for a semi-private room, the fact that you are going to
increase the cost of a medical escort, if the doctor suggests that you need to
have one with you when you go to hospital, these are all substantial fee
increases and affect the most vulnerable in our society.
I do not know about the members opposite, but my knowledge of anyone who is
looking to go into a private room in hospital, or a semi-private room in
hospital, are usually very, very ill and want and need their privacy. All of a
sudden now we are looking at a substantial increase in the amount that a person
will have to pay. In fact, let's look at an ambulance.
An ambulance will now cost $115 one way. That is up from $75. That is a 53
per cent increase. In addition, if it is determined that you require a medical
escort, that cost has gone from $25 one way to $50 one way, a 100 per cent
increase. So, if you are taking an ambulance and a doctor has determined that
you need a medical escort with you, that has now gone up by 65 per cent under
this government. That is really a lot to expect people to be able to pay: people
on fixed incomes, people who are on social services, people who are the working
poor. It is a lot to expect anyone to pay, but it does in fact impact on the
most vulnerable.
If you look at the fee increases, at one point it did cost you something to
get a birth certificate. Of course, that has not changed but now you have to pay
$25 for a death certificate. So, they get you coming and they get you going,
either way you look at it. In addition, if you look at the cost of the private
and semi-private rooms, semi-private accommodations have gone from $60 a day to
$85 a day, and private accommodations from $75 a day to $100 a day.
Once again it shows a lack of compassion by this government for yet the most
vulnerable in our society. The fact that we have people who are sick, who may
require private accommodations, who may require semi-private accommodations, not
because they do not want to be with anyone else on a ward in a hospital, but
because they may very well have no choice.
Fee increases, whether it is in the parks - and we have seen their fees have
gone up substantially there. Whether it is to licence a motor vehicle, again you
are impacting most people with fixed incomes and the most vulnerable in our
society.
I listened to the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs speak, when he
spoke about the fact that you are not cutting 4,000 jobs. No, he is right, but
there are 4,000 positions that are in fact being let go. When you think that
those jobs will no longer exist, that does, whether you want to accept it or
not, mean that there are 4,000 jobs that will not be there for people to fill.
In fact, you are impacting on 4,000 families. It is not just the person who
would hold that job. It is their families, it is their extended families, all of
them who will be impacted by this decision.
I feel today, as I did when the Budget came down, that we have students who
are graduating from our post-secondary institutions who really will have to look
outside of this Province to find employment. That is so unfortunate. Here we are
trying to grow the economy, here we are trying to make it possible for our young
people to stay in Newfoundland and Labrador, and these are the leaders, these
are the people to whom we will be looking down the road to be where you and I
are today: to, in fact, make decisions that impact on this Province. They are
our future. At the end of the day, the decisions that we have taken, or the
government has taken, with respect to the Budget -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I was wondering if we could have a little more quiet. It is difficult for the
Chair to hear what the hon. member is saying in this very important debate.
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I appreciate your observation in terms of the level of noise in the House
today.
It is important, I think, for us to recognize again the impact that the
Budget decisions will have on our young people, on the post-secondary students
whom we are all encouraging all the time to go to post-secondary institutions.
We are always saying to them that no longer is a high school diploma enough if
they want to get a job. We are always encouraging them to get a post-secondary
education. In a lot of cases they need more than one degree. What are they going
to face when they get out? They are going to face the fact that they have to
leave Newfoundland and Labrador and move away. Just as we were at the stage
where, in fact, we had reduced out-migration, where people were, in fact, coming
home to work. What are they going to find now? That job is no longer here. That
is so unfortunate because, I repeat, we need those young people among us.
We talk about an aging population. We talk about treating our seniors with
respect. Well, you know, we have to treat our young people with respect as well.
We have to find ways and means of keeping them among us so that we will not have
an aging population, so that Newfoundland and Labrador will once again be that
vibrant Province where people will want to come and live, where they will, in
fact, be able to find employment, and will be able to attract others to come in
and share their expertise as well.
Another area that is cause for concern as a result of this Budget is the
impact of decisions having been taken by the government in terms of our cultural
industries. The fact that you have taken an opportunity here to really harm the
cultural industries in our Province; because, when you look at the Art
Procurement Program, a very good, substantial program, a program that was put in
place to not only support and help our artists but, at the same time, to grow
the industry, because, you see, in a lot of cases this is Newfoundland art. It
is so important for us to preserve our culture. A lot of our artists, in fact,
always looked forward to their procurement program. They were always excited
about the opportunity to put in submissions, hoping that at the end of the day
the government Art Procurement Program, with the board that was put in place to
select from the submissions, would, in fact, select their piece of artwork. It
was a good program and I know that it has been cut, but I hope that it is not
being cut permanently. You know, one year of cuts to that program can have a
devastating impact on our artists.
I heard Pam Hall, a very well-known local artist, lament the fact that this
program's being cut for this year will have devastating results for her. She
may now have to move out of the Province. A lot of artists look to that program,
in fact, to be able to continue with their work, which is so important for
Newfoundland and Labrador, because everyone knows that of all of the provinces
in Canada we are the most culturally rich and we have so much to offer. We have
an abundance of artists, whether they are graphic artists, whether they are
writers or artists themselves, in terms of a watercolor or oils or you name it.
We have a wealth of artists among us and I would hate to see measures being
taken that will harm that. I am afraid that what has happened to the Art
Procurement Program will do just that.
Then, of course, we look at The Rooms, and we are hearing constantly about
what a bad decision that was. You are talking about how it is a way of saving $1
million, but in the long run, I can tell you, the impact that this will have on
the preservation of our materials, everything we have been striving to do to
find a location suitable for ensuring that all of our artifacts are preserved -
it is just going to have a devastating impact. Right now, as a result of
decisions taken by this government, there is nowhere for artists to display. A
lot of the things have been packed and gone into storage and no travelling
exhibits. Where are they going to showcase? It is a devastating decision and,
again, I cannot understand why the government would make a decision that would
have such a devastating impact on the culture of Newfoundland and Labrador.
The fact that The Rooms was ready to open in June: I cannot imagine what
could have gone into the decision, just two month in advance, to find a way of
not opening it, when everything was up and ready to go. It is sad and it is
really regrettable, Mr. Speaker, that that wonderful building that so much work
has gone into, it is not going to happen.
I need to go back again to speak, in the bit of time I have left, about rural
Newfoundland and Labrador and the so-called rural secretariat. While it has been
thrown out there as a way of working and trying to find a way to rejuvenate
rural Newfoundland and Labrador, I have yet to see any kind of explanation of
what it is supposed to do, how it is going to work, who is going to be involved
and how it is going to interrelate with the Regional Economic Development
Boards. Of course, these boards themselves are very grassroots oriented,
included people from all parts of our economy, from municipalities and from
education. It was very good structure. It could use with some refinement, I
would expect, after being in place for a number of years, but I am not sure what
is planned for the so-called Rural Secretariat. I do know that Dr. House is over
in the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development. I am not quite
sure what his role is. Well, he is a deputy minister but I did hear that he
spoke out in Corner Brook and I am just a little concerned if the policy that he
espouses is, in fact, the policy of this government when it comes to
Newfoundland and Labrador, let alone rural Newfoundland and Labrador. The fact
that he is the deputy minister in his Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural
Development really is cause for concern if what he is espousing with respect to
unemployment insurance or sick leave, or you name it, I would say that there is
concern Province-wide in terms of whether or not his thinking will play a
significant
part in this Rural Secretariat.
We know that Dr. House has been around a long time, and a fine gentleman that
he is, but I think it was twelve years ago that he was on the scene in terms of
making a contribution to Newfoundland and Labrador from an economic perspective,
and I would hate to think that after twelve years we now have a plan that has
been dusted off, or Dr. House has been dusted off, and brought back in the
system, and I am wondering where that is going to lead us in the long run. I am
very concerned about that. I am very concerned about rural Newfoundland and
Labrador. I am concerned that there is an emphasis by this government to
centralize government offices, to centralize government services.
I just for a minute speak to the whole idea of taking the HR&E offices
and reducing them where, in fact, we are taking twenty offices out of the
system, and that concerns me. At this point, the minister has indicated she does
not know where those offices are coming from, which concerns me a great deal.
Obviously, I would think that anyone who would be heading up a department would
know six months into that department where exactly those offices are going to be
taken from. I expect that in Grand Bank, as in Bay L'Argent and other offices
where they have few, maybe four employees, fewer than four employees, in fact we
could see those offices go by the wayside, and you end up centralizing those
offices meaning that where you would see an office exist in that region would be
in Marystown.
What you would end up doing is seeing a lot of those services and offices
being centralized. That is a serious issue for us. It is an issue because we
recognized, when we were there as a government, the need to decentralize; the
need to get our government services out around the Province; the need to make
sure that the services were where the people could access them and not be
centralized. That is an issue for us as well, and I would like to think that the
government will consider some of those moves. Again, it is in the Budget. It was
one of many decisions that I think will have a negative impact on rural
Newfoundland and Labrador. If we want rural Newfoundland and Labrador to
continue to exist, then we have to work with rural parts of our Province. I am
afraid that what I am seeing is a move away from doing just that.
As a government, when we were there, we did a lot to involve people in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador. Again, we decentralized government services. We went
out of our way to do everything we could to give them a hand up, not a hand out.
At the end of the day people respected that. They knew they were being consulted
and they were part of a process and that they had something to offer. We really
appreciated that and they appreciated the opportunity to make a contribution.
I am afraid, Mr. Speaker, that is not happening today. If it is, no one knows
about it.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time has expired.
MS FOOTE: Thank you.
Just to clue up? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I am afraid we are not hearing anything positive from this
government. The whole idea of making sure that we have measures in place to work
with rural Newfoundland and Labrador, somehow that is not there. It is not even
on the radar screen. Everything out there is doom and gloom; everything you hear
in terms of what the Premier says. I have heard very little from the Minister of
Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, so I am not quite sure where they are
going in terms of any kind of vision but, Mr. Speaker, I have to say, if this is
the new approach, it is