March 31,

2011 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol.

XLVI No. 8

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Today the Speaker is happy to welcome members from the Nunatsiavut Government

who are sitting in the Speaker's gallery. The Speaker would like to welcome

President Jim Lyall and his Executive Council: First Minister Daryl Shiwak,

Minister Johannes Lampe, Minister Glen Sheppard, Minister Susan Nochasak,

Minister Dan Pottle, and Minister Patricia Kemuksigak.

Welcome to the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Speaker would also like to welcome the Level III

graduating students from Mealy Mountain Collegiate from Happy Valley-Goose Bay -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: - located in the District of Lake Melville. The group is

accompanied by teacher, Ms Deanna Miles, and by their principal, Mr. Gary

Barrett.

Welcome to the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would also like to welcome the following members'

statements: the hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue; the hon. the

Member for the District of Burgeo & La Poile; the hon. the Member for the

District of Baie Verte-Springdale; the hon. the Member for the District of The

Straits & White Bay North; the hon. the Member for the District of Port au Port;

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

The hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PEACH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize North Atlantic Refining in Come

By Chance for being named as one of the top twenty-five employers in Atlantic

Canada for the second consecutive year. This award recognizes companies that

lead their fields in creating progressive workplaces and providing exceptional

benefits that are a cut above others in their field.

Mediacorp Canada says that North Atlantic was chosen based on such attributes

as exceptional employee health benefits, long-standing employee social

activities, employee communications, training and community investments.

Mr. Speaker, it was also stated that North Atlantic Refining stood out

because of the employee retirement savings program, health coverage benefits

that extend through retirement and their three-week vacation package after one

year.

North Atlantic was chosen from a list of 2,750 Canadian businesses and was

one of three Newfoundland companies to reach top twenty-five.

Mr. Speaker, North Atlantic has 550 dedicated employees to make and market

some of the cleanest fuels in the world for customers both here in Newfoundland

and Labrador and around the world. North Atlantic contributes $160 million to

the provincial economy, $60 million in employee's wages and benefits, $100

million in local business recruitment and $500,000 for direct community support

and local charities.

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

congratulating North Atlantic Refining for the great achievement of placing

twenty-fifth among the Atlantic Canada employers, and also to thank them for

their contribution to the economy of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Burgeo & La Poile.

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to congratulate nine firefighters from my District of Burgeo &

La Poile on successfully completing hazardous materials, known as hazmat,

technician training on March 6, 2011.

In 2007, Port aux Basques got a hazmat response trailer. At that time, only

one person was trained as a technician, and Fire Chief Jerry Musseau had been

lobbying the Fire Association to have additional firefighters trained for the

past two years. The first stint of hazmat technician training was from February

15 to 21, and the final three days were from March 4 to 6. The training was

completed by seven volunteer firefighters from Port aux Basques and two from

Isle aux Morts.

The training involved a mock spill from a leaking drum and cylinder. The

technicians had to stop the leak, assess the situation, and go through the

decontamination unit to remove hazardous material from their suits. Paramedics

were also on the scene to record vitals before and after the exercise. The team

will look after the area from Rose Blanche to Steel Mountain.

Chief Musseau felt that with a lot of dangerous goods coming off the ferry at

Port aux Basques, it was very important that we have a fully trained team in the

area to help if necessary.

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

congratulations to the seven volunteer firefighters from Port aux Basques and

the two from Isle aux Morts on successfully completing this technician training.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Verte-Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. POLLARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I rise in this hon. House today, I am beaming with an abundance of pride.

At the end of the Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador awards banquet,

Riverwood Inn of Springdale was the recipient of the H. Clayton Sparkes award.

This accommodation of the year award is in recognition of quality service,

commitment to the tourism industry, and also to a solid contribution to the

community in which they operate.

Obviously, Mr. Speaker, in all of these aspects, Riverwood Inn was and is a

leader. It is a tremendous asset to the area and to the industry. In fact, it is

a testament to what can be accomplished when people work together to fulfill a

particular vision.

The modern four and a half stars luxury inn features eleven rooms of the

highest standards in comfort, dcor, and services. Nestled in a quiet,

picturesque valley along Indian River, Riverwood Inn offers a stress-reducing

environment to the weary traveller.

Mr. Speaker, I respectfully ask all hon. colleagues to join me in extending

my accolades to the owner, Mr. Chad Wells, to Ms Tracey Penney, the general

manager, and to all the staff of Riverwood Inn for capturing one of Hospitality

Newfoundland and Labrador's prestigious awards and for their extraordinary

contribution to the tourism industry.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate Sabrina Whyatt,

a former resident of St. Carol's, who recently completed the filming of her

first music video entitled, All Over Again.

The video, which debuted on CMT last week, was filmed with the help of

television producers who also do work on the Newfoundland show, The Republic of

Doyle. It was a two-day production, and feedback from around the Province and

Canada so far has been phenomenal.

Sabrina is no stranger to this Province, she was a well-known face on NTV

News, she also owned the magazine Off the Rock , and she is a proud

fisherperson who owns a fishing fleet in Newfoundland and Labrador. Now Sabrina

is branching out into country music, and her first album will be released this

summer.

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

congratulating Ms Whyatt on this exciting venture and to wish her well in her

future endeavours.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CORNECT: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to congratulate

the fine athletes from the Stephenville-Bay St. George-Port au Port area who

participated in the 2010 Canada Winter Games from February 11 to 27.

Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud of the fact that these athletes have had

the honour of representing our great Province, Newfoundland and Labrador, in

Halifax, Nova Scotia. As everyone knows, it takes commitment to become a

highly-trained athlete and to excel in a sport. Badminton coach Mike Alexander

and team members Justin Noseworthy, Bryan Downey, Emily Alexander, and David

Alexander, Chloe Deaves, a member of the provincial curling team, and William

Forsey, Jillian Forsey, and Erica Noonan, members of the ski team, have proven

their athleticism through hard work, dedication, and endurance.

I would like to especially recognize Erica Noonan, Mr. Speaker, on her

outstanding double bronze medal performances in the para-Nordic women's

1,000-metre sprint, and the standing 2.5 kilometre freestyle races, and for the

honour of being Newfoundland and Labrador's flag-bearing person at the closing

ceremonies.

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

congratulating these outstanding athletes from the Stephenville-Bay St.

George-and Port au Port area.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

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

I stand in the House today to recognize and congratulate the staff and

volunteers of the Macpherson Family Resource Centre. The Centre is a Daybreak

East End Downtown Family Resource Initiative and a project of Daybreak Parent

Child Centre.

The Centre first opened its doors November, 2003. With a dedicated space and

the active support of the school administration, teachers and families, the

program quickly grew and by the fall of 2005 there were fifty-one families

registered. In 2005, the Centre provided three playgroup programs per week with

an average of 105 visits by families per month.

Now in 2011, the Centre has eighty families registered and offers four

drop-in playgroup programs per week and two Parent Child Mother Goose programs

per week.

The Centre supports children and their families by providing a safe,

non-judgemental environment. It allows children to explore and learn through

play the beginnings of language, math, and social skills - like caring for a

friend. For parents, the peer and community support offered by the Centre means

friends, skill development, a listening ear, and a shoulder to cry on.

These supports are also important for the many new Canadian families who

attend the Community Connections program. These families have often come from

refugee camps and this group is one of the few ways these families have of

socially participating in their new community.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all honourable members join me in congratulating the

Macpherson Family Resource Centre, especially Maureen Bethel and Janet Kergoat,

volunteers and school staff on their nine successful years of operation and wish

them continued future success.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statement by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to acknowledge the recent increase in the

number of participants in the Newfoundland and Labrador Prescription Drug

Program, or the NLPDP, particularly the Access and Assurance Plans.

The Prescription Drug Program, Mr. Speaker, provides financial assistance for

the purchase of prescription medications for residents of Newfoundland and

Labrador and consists of five main plans: the Foundation Plan, 65Plus Plan,

Access Plan, Assurance Plan and the Select Needs Plan.

Mr. Speaker, utilization of the Access and Assurance Plans was lower than

anticipated. The Access Plan gives individuals and families with low incomes

access to eligible prescription medications based on net income and family

status. The Assurance Plan is offered to individuals and families with high

prescription drug costs, whether from one extremely expensive drug or the

combined cost of different drugs.

In order to increase uptake of these plans by eligible residents, a

Province-wide marketing campaign was launched in November, 2010, and ran until

February of this year. The campaign consisted of a television commercial; print

and online ads; and, promotional materials, including a brochure mailed to every

household, posters and referral cards.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to say the campaign was a huge success as we

are seeing a significant increase and participation of both plans. In comparison

to the same time last year, the number of applications by eligible residents

under the Access Plan increased by 40 per cent between November 2010 and

February 2011. In addition, the Assurance Plan has seen an increase of 28 per

cent during the same time frame.

Affording necessary prescription drugs can cause a significant amount of

stress and financial burden on individuals and families who struggle to pay for

medications. Last year, Mr. Speaker, our government invested approximately $142

million in the Prescription Drug Program. This included approximately $16.2

million for the Assurance Plan, as well as almost $8.9 million for the Access

Plan to ensure individuals in need of assistance continue to be eligible under

this plan.

I would also like to note, Mr. Speaker, that the expansion of the

Prescription Drug Program to support families and individuals with low incomes

is one of the most significant initiatives supported through our provincial

Poverty Reduction Strategy.

We will continue to make substantial investments in the provincial

Prescription Drug Program and I strongly encourage all eligible residents to

apply for financial assistance under the program.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

I am glad to see that there have been more uptakes on the program. It is

still amazing the number of people out there in the Province who do not

understand how they can sometimes access these prescription drug programs. Mr.

Speaker, we must not forget that even though these programs are in place they do

not cover all drugs, and there are still many cases where people who have a

dependency on medications are not covered under our system. I know the minister

is aware of this. He worked with me, last week, on another case for a child who

needed to have medications covered in this Province. Thankfully, Mr. Speaker, we

were able to resolve it, but there are cases where there are still gaps.

I encourage the government to continue to look at this program carefully, but

also to look at other costs that are associated with health care in this

Province. There are still many people in Newfoundland and Labrador who are being

referred to St. John's for many kinds of treatments and therapies where they

have to stay for extended periods of time. We have raised many of these issues

in the House of Assembly and this comes at a tremendous financial burden to

these families in many cases. Especially when they are here doing cancer

treatments such as chemo and radiation, when they are doing dialysis because the

services may not be offered in their own areas, and all of these things as well,

Mr. Speaker, are causing financial burdens to people in the Province who have to

access health care.

I ask the minister and the government opposite to be cognizant of this and to

continue to enhance programs that will meet the needs and meet the financial

needs of what these people need in order to access health care in our Province.

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

Vidi.

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

I, too, thank the Minister of Health and Community Services for an advance

copy of his statement. I am very pleased to see that the Access and Assurance

Plans have increased enrolment due to the ad campaign. I was glad when the ad

campaign started and I am glad to see there has been success.

I think that it would be good, and if the minister could tell us at some

point, if there is a plan for ongoing advertising either to do blitzes at

various times throughout a year or a lower type of ad campaign throughout the

year because there are always new people who would have to come into the program

and still people who do not know about it. As hard as we try, it is still hard

to get messages out there. It would be good to know whether or not the campaign

will be continuing.

I would also like to point out that we still have a problem in the Province

in that many people still have to co-pay a high proportion of cost, higher when

compared to other provinces in Canada and especially with Atlantic Canada which

creates financial hardship. I would like to hope that maybe in this year's

Budget we are going to see an alleviation of that by a change in the proportion

of the co-pay plan.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS POTTLE: Mr. Speaker, I rise to inform hon. colleagues about a recent

event that saw Aboriginal women gather to share wisdom and experience while

celebrating their valued leadership in our communities.

During the 2011 Provincial Aboriginal Women's Conference, mothers, daughters,

and granddaughters came together for two full days of sharing and learning. The

theme of this year's conference: Strong Women, Strong Communities Advancing

Aboriginal Women's Equality was very fitting; today we see many women in the

Province taking on leadership roles in their communities and in government. The

fact that we have a woman Premier and two leaders of the other parties are women

is a notable example.

Mr. Speaker, this was the sixth annual Aboriginal Women's Conference, which

the provincial government is pleased to support financially and through the hard

work of the Women's Policy Office. Myself, and my hon. colleague, the Minister

of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development and Minister Responsible for the

Status of Women, had the great pleasure to address delegates. We were pleased to

tell about how, through programs such as the Violence Prevention Initiative, the

Poverty Reduction Strategy and the Northern Strategic Plan, we are working hard

to improve the lives of women in the Province, including Aboriginal women.

We spoke of how it is essential that Aboriginal women are given every chance

to pursue educational, training and employment opportunities specifically those

available in our own communities or in non-traditional occupations such as

trades, science and engineering, the world of business or positions of

leadership. As a government we are working to remove barriers so women from all

walks of life can fully participate in these growing sectors.

The provincial government is working with female entrepreneurs and community

organizations to create greater business opportunities for women. This is

achieved through working with existing and potential women entrepreneurs to

identify business development opportunities. These were just a few of the

examples explored during this year's gathering of Newfoundland and Labrador

Aboriginal women.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand with Aboriginal women in this Province as we

work to improve circumstances for ourselves and for all women of Newfoundland

and Labrador.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for a copy of her statement.

As an Aboriginal woman in this Province, I am always pleased to support

programs and initiatives for women in Aboriginal communities and those that work

on behalf of Aboriginal communities, Mr. Speaker.

It is not a menial task in this Province; it is a very difficult job and I

know the hon. minister knows that very well. Mr. Speaker, Aboriginal women in

Newfoundland and Labrador have not only led by example in our communities but

they have given voice to many issues voices around poverty, voices around

health care, voices around crime in our communities, education; all the things

that are important to us as a society. They have been the voices that have

brought many issues to the forefront. They have asked and lobbied government for

action on many of these issues.

While I know, Mr. Speaker, that talking is important and I know the

importance of these women's conferences I also know the importance of action

and I know right now today there are Aboriginal communities in this Province

that need action, I say to you minister. They need action when it comes to

housing. They need action when it comes to social programs and they need people

to stand up and ensure that these investments are going to be made in their

communities so that it takes a lot of stress off them as the leaders and as the

voice for Aboriginal people in Newfoundland and Labrador.

We would support you investing money in these communities, investing in these

programs that would help all of those Aboriginal women out there today who are

working so hard to make our communities a better place for us and our children.

Thank you.

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

Vidi.

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

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

I was happy that this year I was able, once again, to attend the dinner that

was part of the conference. It is always the highlight of the year since these

conferences have started. It is wonderful to meet with the women representatives

from the Aboriginal women's community around the Province. It is also very

important because it is a way of increasing the visibility and the voice of

Aboriginal women in this Province as well. A voice which needs to be heard

because of the wonderful presence that these women have in their communities and

have always had in their communities.

Last year's conference talked about how Aboriginal women can get involved in

the resource sector opportunities and this year, of course, we had the Advancing

Aboriginal Women's Equality. It will be a real challenge to us as a Province as

we continue to develop the resources in this Province, especially in Labrador,

to make sure that Aboriginal women have equal opportunity for paid work and good

paid work in the resource development that is going on, Mr. Speaker.

I look forward, as we continue with these conferences, maybe next year, to

hear more about what actually is happening in terms of Aboriginal women getting

more access to the jobs that are there and in a way that helps develop their

communities and their own lives.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, 26,000 litres of offshore drilling mud were spilled

from the Henry Goodrich on the Newfoundland Grand Banks, yet the public

are only finding out about this today. I thought that government had dealt with

this issue of reporting spills in the offshore, Mr. Speaker. I ask the

government today: When did you know about this and why was it not reported at

that time?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there was a spill of some 26,400 litres of a synthetic drill mud

that occurred on Monday. It was spilled from the Henry Goodrich while it

was drilling a hole out there in what we refer to as the Ballicatters Well. The

mud has sunk to the floor. The company and C-NLOPB have sent down remotely

operated vehicles to test the seabed floor. There does not, at this point the

analysis is still ongoing appear to be any environmental damage and we will

continue to work with the C-NLOPB and Suncor, the company, to ensure that the

mud that was spilled will be cleaned up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister did not answer the question around reporting. After everything

that we have been through in this Province, it is not good enough that it takes

three, four days for this kind of information to get out there.

I ask you again today minister, in light of what we have seen in the past and

commitments that your government has made in reporting these particular spills:

Why is it that this one was not reported and not made public until now?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is the regulatory body, the C-NLOPB, that is monitoring and

responsible for the reporting and regulation of the offshore. They posted the

information to their website, which is the process that is to be followed. That

information is available for the public and for anybody else who wishes to see

it. That information is on their website as we speak today.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My next question is for the Premier, and I see she is all dressed up in her

finest today, Mr. Speaker, to go down to see Stephen Harper this afternoon. Mr.

Speaker, I should remind the Premier of the Little Red Riding Hood story

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to pose her question.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I should remind her of the Little Red Riding Hood story because I would not

want the wolf to devour her because there are no woodsmen left to rescue you,

Premier, after you closed down all the pulp

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: and paper mills in Newfoundland and Labrador.

My question, Mr. Speaker, for the Premier is: we want to know what

concessions that you have given up to get Stephen Harper's so-called support,

which is what we are hearing at this stage, on Muskrat Falls. You are quoted in

the media

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to pose her question.

MS JONES: That was my question, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Thank you.

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that chauvinistic remarks are being made by

the Leader of the Opposition. I find it very offensive, Mr. Speaker, in this day

and age to have those kinds of comments preface any question that is being

addressed to me. Mr. Speaker, I do not need rescuing I do not rescuing from a

woodsman or from anyone and particularly not from you.

Now, Mr. Speaker, there have been no concessions of any kind made to the

Prime Minister or anyone else in this Province or in this country, nor will

there be.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry if the Premier is offended because I

said she is all dressed up to go to Stephen Harper's party

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: I am sorry about that, Premier.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: Answer the question now. You are in the media and you are

saying that you have accepted the conditions that Stephen Harper has offered

you. What are those conditions? Tell the people of the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I never heard of anything so foolish before in my life. I do not

care who is speculating about what might have been said or what might have been

given up. She is asking me a direct question: Have concessions been made to the

Prime Minister for anything, Mr. Speaker, including Muskrat Falls?

I am telling you, Mr. Speaker, telling this House, and telling the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador, no, there have not.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: She must be struck amazed again today, Mr. Speaker, because I

will tell you this: She is quoted in the media as saying she has accepted

Harper's conditions.

Tell us what the conditions are, Premier.

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, because something gets quoted, because

you read it, does not make it true. Otherwise, the National Enquirer

would be a much more popular magazine than it is, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: I certainly have not indicated to anybody, media or

otherwise, that I have accepted any conditions with regard to anything, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We do not know what the conditions are that she has accepted, but we may find

out at some point down the road.

Mr. Speaker, let me ask her this, because right before the writ was dropped,

Prime Minister Harper flew to Quebec or whatever, signed off the agreement on

Old Harry, put it in writing, and gave it to the people of Quebec. This is my

commitment.

What did he give to Newfoundland and Labrador, I say to you, Premier? What

was the trade-off for you to get any support at all on this particular loan

guarantee? Was Old Harry a give-up for Newfoundland and Labrador to make that

happen?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, I am embarrassed for the Leader of the

Opposition. She does not even understand the kind of process that is required to

settle a boundary dispute.

Mr. Speaker, we have not been able to settle the Old Harry boundary because

there was no mechanism in place to do it. We were able to settle the Nova Scotia

one because Nova Scotia has an accord and we have an accord. Quebec needed an

accord with the federal government so we could enter into a discussion around

the Old Harry boundary, Mr. Speaker.

There have been no discussions on where that boundary might be. There has

been no process of ratification begun, Mr. Speaker, but thank God, finally,

after fifty years, we have a process in place where we can do that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the Province of Quebec, the very province who said

they would not support loan guarantees for Newfoundland and Labrador, all of a

sudden, Mr. Speaker, have a written commitment from Harper on Old Harry, that

the Premier knew nothing about, had no details of, was not at the table, was not

included, and provided no representation for Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, last week she said transitions can be difficult, when she

referred to her former colleague, Mr. Williams, who she is not speaking to these

days. Well, we know, Mr. Speaker, that transitions are not that difficult

because members on the other side are all out there supporting Stephen Harper

today and they could not trust him a few years ago.

I ask the Premier, Mr. Speaker: What concessions are you giving up on behalf

of the people of this Province to try and get some kind of a bait and deal from

Stephen Harper?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when Newfoundland and Labrador negotiated its Atlantic Accord

with the federal government, I will guarantee you that the provincial Government

of Quebec was not sat up at the table, Mr. Speaker, because they had no business

being there. That is the same for Nova Scotia when they negotiated their

agreement with the federal government, Newfoundland and Labrador was not there,

Quebec was not there either.

Now, Mr. Speaker, because Quebec has an accord with the federal government,

we finally have a process that we can draw on to settle the boundary dispute. I

say again, Mr. Speaker, there are no concessions to anyone with regard to

anything. Mr. Speaker, you do not always need to give concessions, you just need

to make good sense.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We know there were conditions and we know that Quebec got what they wanted,

Premier.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today on behalf of Chelsie Coombs. She is an

eighteen-year-old Memorial student who suffers from a debilitating chronic pain

disease called neuropathic pain. She was hospitalized for 100 days in Eastern

Health's facilities and is currently bedridden at the Miller Centre. The family

has not been able to get a response from the minister, the Premier, or Eastern

Health as to why there are no treatments and interventions and services

available in this Province to treat her pain.

I ask the minister, or the Premier today, if one of you will tell us why

nothing is being done to assist Chelsie and her family, and why her case is not

being addressed?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Although we invest $2.7 billion annually in the health care system, there are

always situations where families or individuals feel that their loved ones are

not happy with the treatment or being treated properly.

Every day, Mr. Speaker, we have thousands of people who go through the health

care system. I am aware of this case but, as the hon. member opposite I am sure

is aware, I cannot comment on details of the case pursuant to

section 39 of the

Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

I am informed that numerous meetings have taken place, Mr. Speaker, with this

family, as late as a couple of days ago, and maybe even today. If this

individual is willing to provide me with a written consent then I am certainly

willing to discuss the case, either in the House of Assembly, on the Open Line

or elsewhere, but until such consent is given I cannot discuss the details of

the case.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sure if the minister had responded to them they would have absolutely

gave you their consent.

Mr. Speaker, in January of 2010, Chelsie was transferred to a Halifax

rehabilitation centre and for the first time she had a team of specialists and

proper therapies. She started to make significant progress and got back the use

of her legs and other vital functions. When she was transferred back to

Newfoundland and Labrador her condition regressed because there were no

therapies available to her.

With all of the abundance of oil resources that we have seen in this

Province, why are we not offering these vital therapies to chronic pain patients

like Chelsie? Why do they have to leave Newfoundland and Labrador to get this

service?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think the hon. member opposite is aware of that. There have been a number

of issues raised by this family with Eastern Health that have been dealt with

through Eastern Health. It is not simply one issue. I did, by the way, reply to

a number of letters over the last few days that have been received either by the

Premier or myself in relation to the family.

Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, there is always going to be situations

where we do not have the services required, or the family, or an individual is

unhappy with the situation.

The member opposite referred to a situation earlier today: 11:30, I think it

was Thursday night, an e-mail was sent to me by the Leader of the Opposition in

relation to a young child and a need for a prescription. By 2:30 p.m. the next

day, Mr. Speaker, we had straightened that situation away.

When these situations come to our attention, we try to deal with them. I am

informed, Mr. Speaker, that Eastern Health is working with this family. As I

have indicated, Mr. Speaker, once written consent is obtained from the family

then I can certainly discuss the details of the case.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am being told by the family that they have been unable to have any contact

with Eastern Health. They have been trying to get meetings with Vicki Kaminski

and they have been unable to get those particular meetings. In fact, the

treatments that are required - it is one thing to say we do not have the

service; it is another thing to make an effort to provide it. From what I

understand, the services they need are not complicated and they are not overly

expensive.

I ask the minister today, if he will take it under advisement to start the

process to provide the services, such as hydrotherapy, to patients in

Newfoundland and Labrador like Chelsie who need it but do not have access to it?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, my concern, as the Minister of Health for the

Province, is the health and well-being of all of our residents. We do the best

we can on a daily basis, Mr. Speaker. There are thousands of workers in the

health care system who provide the best care possible. We are putting

significant amounts of money into the health care system.

In terms of new services or expanding services, we are always willing to look

at that, Mr. Speaker, in terms of helping our public. Because that is the

question, how can we best serve the public of our Province? Mr. Speaker, tough

decisions have to be made. On the one hand you can expand one service but then

we have cancer drugs, we have the issues with the recruitment of doctors. We

have to put significant amounts of money into the health care system. We cannot

be all things to all people, Mr. Speaker.

As for this particular family, again I can check into it but I have been

informed that meetings have taken place and discussions have taken place as late

as Tuesday past. Now, if that is not correct, Mr. Speaker, certainly I will get

back to the hon. member but I think that that is, in fact, the case.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Doctor Anthony Clevenger, a research, wildlife biologist at Montana State

University this morning released a report here in Newfoundland and Labrador

entitled, Moose vehicle collisions and their mitigation in Newfoundland, which

clearly states that Newfoundland and Labrador's government is misleading the

public and they are inaccurate when indicating that there is little to be done,

other than put the responsibility on motorists to avoid collisions with moose

and by clearing brush from sides of highways to increase driver visibility. The

report further indicates that those measures have proven to be ineffective in

both Canada and in the United States.

I ask the Premier today: When will your government consider taking effective

measures including moose fencing to make our highways safe for the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, when it comes to moose-vehicle collisions on the highways of

Newfoundland and Labrador, I do not think there is any member on either side of

the House who would not want that to go away.

I, for one, commute two hours a day over terrain that is conducive to moose.

I have come upon accidents. To say that we as a government would sit back and do

nothing is as far from the truth as anything. We are, given the resources that

we have, doing everything that we can to mitigate and to make the highways of

Newfoundland and Labrador as safe as possible, including doing some brush

cutting, public awareness, and other things that we hope are being effective in

helping to cut down on these accidents.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With all due respect, Minister, this biologist is saying that the programs

that you have in place right now are ineffective and they are misleading to the

public in terms of real action against what is happening with the moose

population out there and the accidents that are being caused.

Mr. Speaker, over a year ago, the former Minister of Environment indicated

that she was developing a five-year moose management plan. Today, we would like

to see a copy of that plan, but we are being told that it does not exist.

I ask the minister: Why do you continue to drag your feet on this issue? When

can we expect to at least see some start on the plan that you promised over a

year ago?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, as my colleague has just indicated, this is a

very sensitive issue and one that we are all very much concerned about when we

hear of people having accidents on the highway. It has impacted many people's

lives and their families.

One of the unfortunate things about this whole discussion, Mr. Speaker, is it

is fraught with misinformation. Just a couple of days ago, for example, we were

informed by the RCMP that the information being distributed in the public domain

about the number of moose-vehicle accidents is, in fact, inaccurate. In fact,

they acknowledge themselves that the information that some of their offices have

supplied has been inaccurate. So, there is no real way of knowing the number of

moose-vehicle accidents that actually occur is the fact of the matter, Mr.

Speaker.

The member opposite just referenced a study released today. That, too, has

many inaccurate facts embedded in that report, Mr. Speaker. So as we try to

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister obviously told me absolutely nothing in that answer, I will say

to you, Minister.

So, Minister, let me ask you this: Because you already committed, your

government did, and your predecessor in the department committed to do the plan

more than a year ago, are you going to do the plan? Will you call together the

stakeholders, such as the Save Our People Action Committee and others out there,

because we understand today they are not able to even talk to government at this

stage for some reason, will you call these people together and start some

movement on a management plan with regard to moose in this Province on our

highways?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me finish my answer I was giving a minute ago. Mr. Speaker,

fundamentally, we have inaccurate information out in the system. The number of

moose that are existing in the Province, Mr. Speaker, they have been on a steady

decline for the last five years, contrary to what people are talking about and

are suggesting that there are rapid increases.

The number of moose-vehicle accidents, I say, Mr. Speaker, again the

information that is in the public domain is inaccurate. Again, with respect to

the moose quotas, we have already published next year's moose management plan,

Mr. Speaker, that maps out the number of moose licences to be issued next year.

Again, the suggestion has been that the number of licences issued on an annual

basis has been in decline,

whereas in the last five years we have been steadily

increasing the number of licences issued a year. Next week, we will be

announcing a significant increase in next year's quota, Mr. Speaker. All a part

of that plan that she refers to

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, let me tell the minister what else has been

increasing. Since you guys took government in 2003, at that time there were 363

moose accidents being recorded, collisions on our highway. Today, Mr. Speaker,

there were 741 in 2010. Mr. Speaker, that is an increase in the number of

vehicle-moose collisions that we are seeing on our highway. Those statistics

itself should be a reason for government to act.

I say to you: Are you prepared to call the stakeholders together, start

taking this issue seriously and take some action on it?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: The member opposite obviously did not listen to my earlier

comment. On March 11, I have a letter here from the Chief Superintendent of the

RCMP acknowledging that the information that their offices have supplied

previously is inaccurate. The 700 figure that she references is totally

inaccurate, Mr. Speaker.

Unfortunately, the information was supplied, it is out in the public domain,

but it is inaccurate. Despite my commenting to that effect, the member opposite

gets up and repeats it so that it actually resonates further in the public

domain, and that is unfortunate, Mr. Speaker. It is a sensitive issue, one that

we need to deal with, one that we are working through and managing.

In the moose management plan that she references, there are many components

to that that I have already shared here this morning, Mr. Speaker.

Fundamentally, we do have an issue that we are managing and working our way

through. The moose management plan is a piece of that, but in the interim we

cannot be out there suggesting that

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Further questions?

The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, last week I raised the issue of people receiving inadequate

compensation of claims they filed with the provincial government due to

Hurricane Igor. The minister stated his hands were tied because of federal

guidelines. Today, we learned from the media, and it is somewhat surprising,

that 500 of some 1,400 claims or so that have been put in looking for government

assistance with rebuilding their lives after the hurricane have been denied the

support they needed.

I ask the minister: Is this government prepared to come forward with a

subsidy to help those who fall outside the federal government guidelines and are

denied assistance in getting their lives back on track?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for Emergency

Preparedness.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is correct that we have to

follow the federal guidelines in regard to any compensation due to a disaster,

and that is prevalent right across Canada in any province that we are in.

If the hon. member had done his research, he would have seen that those

denied claims were claims that were denied for various reasons, insurable

perils, or whatever it may be. If they were not covered by us, we also dealt

with the various organizations, the non-charitable organizations, such as the

Red Cross and Salvation Army, that have stepped in to take over those claims on

our behalf.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, I understand there are various reasons why things

are turned down. I appreciate that, that is a good piece of information, but I

already know that. I think it is also unfortunate that we would suggest that

one-third of the claims that were received, or were processed, have been denied

and we would hand them off to the Red Cross or the Salvation Army for

processing. That seems to be kind of an unfair thing for government to do.

I would ask again, those who have been denied, those who will not get

assistance either from these organizations or from the federal government

program, is this government prepared to help them to get things back on track?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would like to correct the hon. member in

regard to his last comment in his closing remarks. We are on track in regard to

Hurricane Igor. As a matter of fact, 75 per cent to 85 per cent of the claims

that have been submitted have been closed and dealt with, and the householders

have been compensated. As well, there are some complicated files in regard to

home replacements that we are working our way through. As I have said in this

House, and I have said in media sources, we do not see any of the householders

who have been affected by this unprecedented disaster on the Open Line shows,

because our people are working closely with the people affected and making sure

they are taken care of.

We have to go through the process. We have to see what is left over. At the

end of the day, the Province may very well be responsible for 10 per cent to 20

per cent of the total claim. We have to see and we have to follow the proper

guidelines at the end of that process.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, in today's

article on Hurricane Igor in the

Clarenville Packet, one of the claimants who was denied states the federal

guidelines are unfair.

I ask the minister: Given that storms like Hurricane Igor will occur more

often, and given the federal government's Disaster Financial Assistance

Agreement is clearly not meeting the needs of those who need disaster

assistance, will he commit to approaching Ottawa to do a review of this

agreement so that it is more responsive to the needs of those affected in future

times?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Already done, six weeks ago.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

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

Mr. Speaker, good long-term care and home care is essential for people to be

able to live their lives in dignity. Mr. Speaker, we have heard from a

sixty-five-year-old man who waited in an Eastern Health ICU bed for over seven

months because the resources were lacking allowing him to be placed close to his

family and friends on the Northern Peninsula. His lengthy stay in ICU caused

great stress on his family and has been highly damaging to his health.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Health and Community Services: When can we

expect a long-term care and community support services strategy to help people,

such as this gentleman, who have fallen through the cracks of our current

system?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I have indicated in this House on a number of occasions we are working

towards the completion of a long-term care strategy.

What is a strategy? It is a plan. It looks at what we have done in the past.

We have built numerous facilities; we have invested $256 million. What are we

doing today? In the recent past we consulted with numerous groups, Mr. Speaker,

nineteen communities, over 500 people attended sessions. What are we going to do

in the future? We have to look at, Mr. Speaker, that our long-term care

facilities are full. There is almost 100 per cent occupancy rate in St. John's

and throughout the Province. What did we do a few weeks ago? We contracted with

a private agency to take forty long-term care beds so the very people that the

NDP is talking about could come from the acute care beds into a long-term care

type of facility and we criticized for that, so I am not sure exactly what it is

she is looking for.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the reason this man was held in the Intensive Care Unit here in

St. John's is there was no ventilator in the hospital in St. Anthony. Even if

there were, there was nobody trained to use a ventilator, and that is why he was

kept here for seven months, and kept in ICU.

I ask the Speaker: Will having resources like this available everywhere in

the Province be part of the plan he is talking about?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am aware of the case that the Leader of the NDP is speaking about, but what

we are looking at in terms of a plan, Mr. Speaker, is the preventative approach,

first and foremost. We outlined yesterday, $700,000 in Wellness Grants; we will

be announcing $200,000 in Age Friendly Newfoundland and Labrador Grants, and

$200,000 in Wellness Grants.

So we want our seniors to remain healthy, to stay in their homes, Mr.

Speaker, and to be happy and healthy as long as possible.

Then, Mr. Speaker, we want to and we are dealing with home care as we have

dealt with over the last period of time with an investment of approximately $90

million. We are looking at increasing home care. We will have to look at, Mr.

Speaker, what to do with relatives who are looking after their loved ones,

especially in rural parts of the Province.

We have to look at dealing with our personal care homes, Mr. Speaker; how can

we help them remain viable? We have to look at our long-term care facilities. So

we are taking a global approach in trying to address the issues that are out

there.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday at the Medical Association's Senior Summit, NLMA

President Dr. Pat O'Shea talked about the ill effects on elderly patients being

forced to wait for care in emergency departments. Senior patients are becoming

sicker while waiting for care.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Will he realize how major this problem is

and it is much more than offering preventative care? Will he work with Eastern

Health and consult with the NLMA to support solutions that make sure seniors do

not get sicker while waiting for treatment?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Speaker, again, I am aware of this issue. It is one that

we heard of during the Long-Term Care Consultation Sessions where medically

discharged individuals were taking up acute care beds. So we contracted with

Chancellor Park for forty beds to address the very situation raised by the

member opposite.

The other thing we did, Mr. Speaker: In The Isle of Notre Dame and

Twillingate district we opened up five acute care beds that were not being

utilized throughout the year and put in a five bed restorative unit to deal with

the type of situation that the member opposite talking about. So that seniors

who are staying in acute care beds are moved from acute care beds into a

restorative unit, into Chancellor Park, where they receive the help they need.

So we are already addressing the situation.

Again, Mr. Speaker, she criticized us the other day for contracting with

Chancellor Park to address the very situation she is criticizing us for today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allotted for questions and answers has expired.

The Chair is always reluctant to interrupt during Question Period, but I ask

hon. members when they take

part in Question Period to be cognizant of the

language that is directed at other members. While language might be acceptable

to one member, it may not be acceptable to other Members of the House of

Assembly. So I ask members to have some sensitivity when they are addressing

members of the House. Let us show respect to each other.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to table the activity plan there are three activity plans; one for

the Pension Investment Committee of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador

Pooled Pension Fund; another one is the Government Money Purchase Pension Plan

Committee Activity Plan; and the final one is the Newfoundland Government Fund

Limited Activity Plan.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further tabling of documents?

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

MR. SKINNER: Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to table the 2011-2013 plans

for Nalcor Energy and the Chicken Farmers of Newfoundland and Labrador. These

plans provide an overview of key planning priorities throughout the 2011-2013

planning cycle.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further tabling of documents?

The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, in accordance with the Transparency And

Accountability Act, it is my pleasure to table the 2011-2013 Business Plans for

the Northern Peninsula Regional Service Board and the Central Regional Service

Board.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further tabling of documents?

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As mover of the motion yesterday with respect to referring a matter to the

House Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections, moved by myself, seconded

by the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, I withdraw that motion and I would

like to move the following motion:

WHEREAS the Speaker of the House of Assembly has appeared, and has admitted

appearing, at a public event of a partisan nature intended to support and

promote the candidacy of a particular party and/or candidate;

BE IT RESOLVED that this matter be referred to the House Standing Committee

on Privileges and Elections.

Moved by myself, the Member for Burgeo & La Poile, and seconded by the Member

for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased this afternoon to be able to stand and offer this petition. I

will read in the prayer.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS we the students of French Shore Academy in Port Saunders from the

towns of River of Ponds, Hawke's Bay, Port Saunders, Port aux Choix and Eddies

Cove West appreciate the facility we currently learn in; and

WHEREAS unfortunately the sense of fairness and equality existing at school

is absent on the outside due to essential services not equally available in all

our towns; and

WHEREAS the lack of high-speed Internet in River of Ponds, Hawke's Bay and

Eddies Cove West puts some students or our school in an unacceptable

disadvantage at learning today in the twenty-first century;

WHEREUPON your petitioners call upon all Members of the House of Assembly to

urge government to direct funding to ensure high-speed Internet services are

provided in these towns to allow equality and fairness for all members of our

student body.

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, this petition is an important issue. It is one in this case that

is initiated by students from a school that services four or five communities on

the Northern Peninsula, not in my district, but yet they sent me a copy of it. I

have been asked if I would bring it forward for them into the House of Assembly

and I do that gladly because it is a big issue. It is an issue that at this

present time - as people in this Province, we do not see this government really

addressing the issue in terms of putting a plan in place of knowing that within

a certain time frame or whatever the case might be that communities in this

Province can expect to have high-speed Internet services.

What is somewhat ironic about Hawkes Bay, in particular, is that the cable

actually runs through the community. Now I accept the fact that I do not know

the technical issues involved in tapping into that particular cable, if you

will, but I do know that back in 2007 this government spent $15 million on

broadband.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. DEAN: At this point, there really is no particular plan as to where

it is going. It is about students who do not have access to the Internet in

terms of the way that students in other parts of this Province do. Obviously, it

handicaps their training. It is a disadvantage. In Hawkes Bay, for example,

there are several larger businesses there that I know of one for sure that had

to put in their own satellite system or whatever, costing tens of thousands of

dollars so that they could have access to high-speed Internet and do their

business properly.

Mr. Speaker, it is not good enough for the minister across the House to try

and throw it back and shun it and this kind of thing, because this is a real

issue. All the residents of this Province are asking is that the government

would deal with it and show us a plan so we can understand how we will have

access to high-speed Internet.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

The hon. the Member for the District of Burgeo & La Poile.

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to enter a petition at this time on behalf of the residents of

La Poile, which is in my District of Burgeo & La Poile.

The petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS the people of La Poile must use the provincial ferry system in order

to travel to and from La Poile; and

WHEREAS the people of La Poile and visitors are required to wait at the Town

of Rose Blanche-Harbour Le Cou from time to time for ferry services; and

WHEREAS there is no restroom, waiting area at the Town of Rose

Blanche-Harbour Le Cou where users of the ferry service may utilize washroom

facilities; and

WHEREAS citizens of all ages including men, women, children, seniors and

disabled persons require washroom facilities as a basic human need in the course

of their travels and particularly while awaiting the transit systems; and

WHEREAS it is an abuse of human dignity as well as health and safety

regulations to allow such degrading and dehumanizing circumstances to continue;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the

House of Assembly to urge government to immediately construct and operate a

waiting room, restroom facility at the Town of Rose Blanche-Harbour Le Cou such

that all users of the provincial ferry service which operates out of La Poile

may be able to utilize such waiting area and washroom facilities.

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, so far, this is my third petition on behalf of the people of La

Poile in this need of theirs. This is probably one of the few locations in the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador where a provincial ferry service operates

that we do not have such a washroom facility. It is just absolutely

unacceptable, unnecessary, and as I say, it is degrading and dehumanizing when

people, in the worst of weather sometimes, in the dead of winter, who happen to

be waiting for the ferry service - they take a taxi, for example, down from Port

aux Basques to get on the ferry, the taxi cab drops them off. They have nowhere

to go, there is nowhere to stand in out of the elements. If the ferry is delayed

at all they literally, physically have to wait in the cold, and if they need to

use a washroom or bathroom facilities, they actually have to go behind the

buildings and up behind the rocks.

That is just totally, absolutely, unacceptable, Mr. Speaker, in this day and

age, that anybody should have to subject themselves to that kind of treatment.

If you are going to provide the ferry service, I think there is a reasonable

expectation that if you are there waiting for the ferry, or you get dropped off

from the ferry and you are waiting for someone to come pick you up, that you

should have access to a washroom.

We know that the Member for Lake Melville, when he was the minister,

absolutely insulted the people of Ramea and Grey River, he stuck a porta-potty

out on the head of the wharf. Now, I must say, in all due to respect to him, we

pounded him enough in Question Period and in petitions that he subsequently did.

I hope the current Minister of Transportation can see fit in this year's Budget

to provide this minimal of standardization for the people who use the ferry

system.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We will start the Orders of the Day, Mr. Speaker, by doing the third reading

of bills.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Government Services,

that Bill 4,

An Act To Amend The Public Accountants Act, be now read a third

time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that

Bill 4,

An Act To Amend The Public Accountants Act, be now read a third time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Public Accountants Act. (Bill 4)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 4 has now been read a third time and it is ordered that

this bill do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Public Accountants Act", read a third

time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 4)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Health

and Community Services, that Bill 5,

An Act To Amend the Smoke-Free Environment

Act, 2005, be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion as put

forward by the hon. the Government House Leader that Bill 5,

An Act To Amend The

Smoke-Free Environment Act, 2005, be now read a third time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Smoke-Free Environment Act, 2005.

(Bill 5)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 5 has now been read a third time and it is ordered that

this bill do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Smoke-Free Environment Act, 2005",

read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Municipal

Affairs, that Bill 6,

An Act To Amend The Standard Time Act, be now read a third

time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded by the hon. the Government

House Leader to adopt a motion that Bill 6,

An Act To Amend The Standard Time

Act, be now read a third time.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Standard Time Act. (Bill 6)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 6 has now been read a third time and it is ordered that

Bill 6 do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Standard Time Act", read a third

time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 6)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Municipal

Affairs, that Bill 7,

An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999, be now read

a third time.

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

adopt a motion that Bill 7,

An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999, be now

read a third time.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999. (Bill 7)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 7 is now read a third time and it is ordered that the

bill do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999", read a

third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 7)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Justice

and Attorney General, that Bill 8,

An Act To Repeal The Law Reform Commission

Act, be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded by the hon. the Government

House Leader that Bill 8,

An Act To Repeal The Law Reform Commission Act, be now

read a third time.

All those in favour of the motion, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Repeal The Law Reform Commission Act. (Bill 8)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 8 has now been read a third time and it is ordered that

Bill 8 do pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Repeal The Law Reform Commission Act", read a

third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 8)

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

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to call from the Order Paper, Order 8, second reading of Bill 9.

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

MR. F. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Health and Community Services, that Bill

9,

An Act Respecting Correctional Services, be now read a second time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 9,

An Act Respecting

Correctional Services, be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act Respecting Correctional Services".

(Bill 9)

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

MR. F. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased today to rise in this House and introduce Bill

9,

An Act Respecting Correctional Services. Mr. Speaker, this is one of the most

significant pieces of legislation brought from the Department of Justice in a

number of years and represents a major advancement in corrections in this

Province.

This bill, Mr. Speaker, will replace the Prisons Act,

An Act Respecting The

Penitentiary, which was proclaimed back in 1969, and the Adult Corrections Act,

which created the Division of Adult Corrections, and the adult probation program

back in 1975. While there have been some minor amendments in the legislation,

Mr. Speaker, both statutes are woefully outdated. They do not reflect

contemporary practice, and they are silent on issues which should be codified in

law.

Mr. Speaker, in April 2008, the provincial government, under the guidance of

my colleague, the current Minister of Health and Community Services when he was

then the Minister of Justice, commissioned an independent review of adult

corrections in Newfoundland and Labrador. Six of these recommendations in that

report, Decades of Darkness Moving Towards The light, dealt with a review of

corrections legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to reference some of that report where the

government was authorized to review and do jurisdictional analysis of

correctional legislation across the country in order to lay the foundation for

the preparation of our correctional legislation. One of the things that were

noticed, Mr. Speaker, during this jurisdictional analysis was that the old

Prisons Act, as compared to other legislation across the country, did not have

any kind of rehabilitative or reintegrative approach in the legislation. For

example, other provinces use the terminology the Correctional Services Act while

we use the terminology Prisons Act. We use the word prisoner in our legislation

while other jurisdictions use the words offenders and inmates. The terminology

of the then current legislation was far from being anything like what we are

looking for today in terms of rehabilitation and rehabilitative approach.

As well, Mr. Speaker, in the old legislation, for example, I will tell you

how outdated it is today, the only correctional facility that was mentioned in

that legislation was the Salmonier Correctional Institution, which has been

closed now for over seven years. Mr. Speaker, terms pertaining to inmates in the

old legislation were not defined. For example, terms such as administrative

segregation had no definition or explanation in the legislation. Such an

important concept as discipline was not addressed in the old legislation, search

and seizure procedures, which are so important. Very little attention, Mr.

Speaker, given to programs for offenders, Aboriginal offenders were not

referenced at all, and there was no provision in there for any kind of a

significant grievance procedure.

So, that was some of the background as where we are coming from with respect

to the old legislation. As well, Mr. Speaker, that review looked at the prison

regulations and the correctional and conditional release regulations and found

that the regulations were far from adequate in terms of dealing with

professional codes or professional conduct, inmates' rights, rights of members,

training of staff. It also made reference and terminology to such things as

isolation cells, which, of course, today are referred to as segregation cells.

There was no reference, either, in those regulations, Mr. Speaker, to a

grievance process for inmates, nothing in it with regard to search and seizure

of contraband, use of force and so on.

With regard to the rights of prisoners, Mr. Speaker, which actually this new

bill is based on as one of the principles, the only reference to rights of

prisoners in the old act was written correspondence. It did not reference any

rights whatsoever that a prisoner might have under the Charter.

Mr. Speaker, the recommendations in that review dealt with the need to

thoroughly revise and modernize corrections legislation. As I mentioned, these

recommendations cover the areas ranging from the need for the terminology to

reflect a more rehabilitative approach, to the need to ensure that inmates'

rights are respected, including a disciplinary process with independent

adjudication, which I will reference later.

Mr. Speaker, the response to those recommendations in that review by the

Department of Justice is to replace that antiquated legislation with a new,

modern, state-of-the-art Correctional Services Act.

Mr. Speaker, as in the case of all Canadian jurisdictions, this act will

consolidate institutional and community correctional responsibilities so that it

reflects the administrative and operation integration of both adult custody and

community corrections. This act, Mr. Speaker, will provide a legal framework for

a safe, secure and a humane correctional system for inmates and staff.

The question rises: Why so long? It is over two years since that review was

done. Well, there are two main reasons for that, Mr. Speaker. First of all, a

lot of preparatory work has gone into the preparation of this act: the

jurisdictional scanning, the meeting with the stakeholder groups has taken a lot

of time; a lot of careful diligence has gone into the preparation of that act.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, the priorities that came out of that review were:

training, programming, and then inmate services took priority over the

recommendation to put the act in place.

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, in order to create this new legislation, the

Department of Justice completed a comprehensive jurisdictional scan to determine

best practices across the country. A discussion paper was sent to key

stakeholder groups that were invited to participate during meetings and

submissions and briefs. Interested members of the public were also invited to

submit comments.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that twenty-seven stakeholder groups were

invited to participate. While a large majority of these participants were from

the community, consultations also took place with three other departments:

Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs, the Women's Policy Office, and Health and

Community Services.

Nineteen meetings, Mr. Speaker, were held with stakeholder group

representatives. Officials from my department met with, among others, community

organizations, advocacy groups, women's groups, and Aboriginal organizations who

all offered their perspectives on what this new legislation should contain.

Members of the public, as well, provided written responses.

The good thing about all of this, Mr. Speaker, and I am very pleased to note,

is that all of that consultation process should prove extremely valuable. I am

pleased to note that a large majority of the recommendations and themes that

came out of the discussion groups have been incorporated into the proposed

legislation.

Mr. Speaker, one of the tenets of this new act is that it will be shaped by

principles. That is extremely important. These principles will serve as a guide

as to how this act is to be interpreted and how it is to be administered. These

principles are vital to the achievement of a modern, effective, and progressive

correctional system. These principles, Mr. Speaker, reflect the general

direction in which this government and the various stakeholders would like to

see corrections move in this Province.

Mr. Speaker,

section 4 of the act lays out the principles on which this act

is based. They refer to such principles as, "the protection of society shall be

given paramount consideration in making decisions under this Act". It is

followed, in

section 4, by principles which emphasize the importance to

community safety of programming and services that are designed to rehabilitate

and reintegrate inmates and offenders back into the community. It is based on

the principle of training and career development opportunities for staff. It

speaks to the importance of a workplace environment that encourages integrity

and professional accountability. Mr. Speaker, it also sets up an expectation

that while offenders have to obey supervision conditions and correctional

facility rules, they should be subject to the least restrictive measures

necessary.

What this act does, Mr. Speaker, it enshrines that offenders are entitled to

fair treatment, with access to effective grievance and disciplinary procedures,

and we will talk about them later on. It also enshrines that corrections

policies and programs and practices be non-discriminatory, and that they be

responsive to the particular needs of women, particular needs of Aboriginal

peoples, and those offenders with particular mental health and addictions

requirements.

Section 4 of the act, in

Part I, deals with principles that will determine

the direction of corrections, will determine how this act is to be interpreted.

These principles, Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned before, are vital to the

achievement of a modern, effective, and progressive correctional system.

Mr. Speaker, the report of, Decades of Darkness: Moving Towards the Light,

also states that the Prisons Act should be modified to include areas that would

ensure inmates' rights are respected. This has been accomplished, Mr. Speaker,

by what are arguably the two most significant features of this act, the robust

grievance procedure and a disciplinary process.

Mr. Speaker, some of the highlights of the new act, as I mentioned, two of

the main ones that pertain to inmate rights is the fundamental right of

offenders to be able to file complaints about issues arising from their

involvement with the correctional system while ensuring that there will be no

negative consequences arising from the offender's participation in this

grievance process. Now, Mr. Speaker, the details of that grievance procedure

will be fleshed out in regulations.

Section 19 of the act spells out Inmates grievance procedure. It says,

(1) "There shall be a procedure for fairly and expeditiously resolving inmate

grievances on matters within the jurisdiction of the chief superintendent, and

the procedure shall operate in accordance with regulations made under paragraph

48(d)."; which, of course, gives the Lieutenant-Governor in Council authority to

make regulations on a grievance procedure.

Mr. Speaker, the act also establishes a new disciplinary process, a rather

progressive one, outlined in

section 20 of the act, (a) "reviewing breaches by

inmates of the regulations or of the rules of a correctional facility".

Currently, Mr. Speaker, the disciplinary court in correctional facilities for

minor matters is held by a commissioned officer. The commissioned officer makes

a decision on minor breaches. If it is a serious breach, it is conducted by two

commissioned officers. Both parties have right of appeal to the assistant

superintendent and eventually to the superintendent of prisons. Mr. Speaker,

that system has been criticized as being less than independent. As a matter of

fact, there are some people who will refer to it as a kangaroo court because of

the internal nature of the process.

Mr. Speaker, this new disciplinary process will be procedurally fair and in

line with the principles of fundamental justice. It incorporates the best

practices from the Correctional Service of Canada, as well as Alberta and the

Yukon, which are the two latest jurisdictions to improve and update their

corrections legislation. This new procedure will involve the hiring of a

full-time hearing adjudicator from outside of corrections to adjudicate all

offences in which internal charges have been laid against an inmate, a new and

innovative system of discipline.

Section 20 states, the minister may appoint hearing adjudicators to conduct

disciplinary hearings in accordance with the regulations for the purpose of

reviewing breaches, determining punishment. They may be appointed for five years

and reappointed, they may dismiss a charge against an inmate without a hearing,

review evidence and so on. If there is an appeal from that independent

adjudicator, Mr. Speaker, then the minister can appoint special adjudicators to

conduct the appeals of decisions made to the main adjudicator. Again, these

adjudicators are appointed for terms of five years.

An inmate or the superintendent who wants to appeal the decision of the

hearing adjudicator to an appeal adjudicator and eventually, Mr. Speaker,

appeal can be made for judicial review. That procedure is laid out, Mr. Speaker,

section 20 to

section 23 in the act. It is one of the main tenets, main

significant provisions of this act.

In terms of inmate's rights, Mr. Speaker, the two most significant features

of this act are the robust grievance procedure that will be allowed and the new

disciplinary process to be put in place. Now the lead adjudicator, the hearing

adjudicator, will not be hired, of course, until the policies and guidelines are

in office so that this act can be proclaimed.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to security, the new act clearly sets out the

circumstances, for example, for searches of inmates;

section 27 and

section 29

lay out the procedure for the searches of inmates, which may be necessary from

time to time in any correctional institution. The search of inmate's clothing,

search of his cell, search of belongings, these are all standard activities

within a correctional facility but the proper guidelines for searches, including

strip search, are laid out in the new act. As well, Mr. Speaker, the act lays

out the procedure to conduct routine searches of visitors entering or leaving

the facility, guidelines for that. The act as well has a provision for the

search of staff members; none of this was in any of the previous legislation.

It also provides, the legislative authority, Mr. Speaker, in

section 32, for

the illicit drug testing of inmates. If the authorized person in the corrections

believes, on reasonable grounds, the offender has taken an illicit drug then

there are provisions in the act, Mr. Speaker, for drug testing.

There are also provisions in the act, Mr. Speaker, which give express

authority to seize and dispose of contraband under

section 31. It sets clear

guidelines in

section 26, Mr. Speaker, for the reasonable use of force.

Now, Mr. Speaker, these guidelines are all very necessary. We are dealing

with a particular environment where safety and security is the main concern.

These guidelines, Mr. Speaker, promote inmate safety; they promote the security

of inmates and enhance the safety of both correction officials and inmates in

our institutions.

As well, Mr. Speaker, the act deals with communications under

section 24. Mr.

Speaker, communication with the outside world is critical to a person serving

time in a correctional facility. It allows him or her to have contact and

maintain relationships with significant others on the outside, and also cope

with being incarcerated, and facilitates post release planning.

Mr. Speaker, given the environment restrictions needed to be placed on

communication for safety and security reasons, this act, Mr. Speaker, balances

such procedures with inmate's rights.

Privileged communication, Mr. Speaker, between an inmate and a person, of

course, listed in the regulations when they are done, such as communication with

a family doctor or the Office of the Citizens' Representative will not be read,

or listened to, or otherwise monitored by staff members or any other monitoring

system unless there are reasonable grounds to believe that this communication is

not the subject of privilege. That is an important part, Mr. Speaker, and an

important provision in this new act.

Mr. Speaker, one of the main principles of this act allows the act to

recognize unique needs of women offenders and provide for policies, programs and

practices to reflect gender differences. It also allows it to be responsive to

the particular needs of women at all stages of their sentences. Of course, that

means the staff must be in place, equipped, and trained to effectively help

women.

Section 6(3), for example, of the act states: a superintendent of a

correctional facility that houses female inmates, must have knowledge, skill and

education to allow that person to understand the unique challenges and needs

faced by female inmates.

The legislation also provides, Mr. Speaker, for policies, programs and

practices to meet the needs and the culture of Aboriginal offenders on page

Section 45 says: "The director shall coordinate and encourage wherever

possible (ii) specific programming and services to (

A) reflect the needs and

culture of aboriginal offenders, (

B) provide for the particular needs of female

offenders, and (

C) to provide for the specific needs of offenders with

particular mental health and addictions requirements and other classes of

offenders that are identified by the director as having special requirements."

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, the act provides for specific needs for

offenders with particular mental health and addictions requirements. This issue

has gotten quite some discussion in the last few days. Since the release of the

Decades of Darkness, Mr. Speaker, substantial improvements to mental health and

addictions programming are among the many strides taken by this government in

enhancing programs and services within our correctional facilities. Mr. Speaker,

even though this act is not yet proclaimed, this act spells these types of

provisions. That is not to say, as I just mentioned, that we have not already

been involved in some of the provisions, the motives, and the services mentioned

in this act.

For example, Mr. Speaker, if I might for a moment mention, since the release

of the Decades of Darkness: Moving Towards The Light, just two years ago, we

have spent an excess of $7 million on our corrections system. We have put a

number of services in place to enhance mental health services to inmates of all

provincial prisons. Mr. Speaker, these include the provision of psychological

services to inmates of all provincial prisons. Every prison and every

correctional facility in this Province now have access to psychological

services. We have invested heavily in the provision of mental health training

for all staff of all institutions.

At Her Majesty's Penitentiary, Mr. Speaker, we have hired a full-time

psychologist, an addictions coordinator, and a second nurse. We have an

innovative in-reach and transitional planning program for clients with mental

illness. That is offered in partnership with the Department of Health and the

Canadian Mental Health Association, Mr. Speaker. These people work with mental

health issues in the facility and then continue to follow those people as they

get out of the institution and help them reintegrate and assimilate in society.

It is a program, Mr. Speaker, that has gotten rave reviews and very positive

reports from everybody involved in our correctional facilities. We also have,

Mr. Speaker, a continuous in-take addictions program that is offered through the

John Howard Society.

Mr. Speaker, as well, and probably one of the most significant things we have

done again as a result of recommendations in the Decades of Darkness report

we have put into place a multidisciplinary team which is in place and in

operation and has been at Her Majesty's Penitentiary for the last two years.

This team is consultative in nature, Mr. Speaker, and it includes a

psychologist, it includes a nurse practitioner, it includes a general

practitioner, it includes a psychiatrist, it includes representatives from the

front-line security staff, it includes representatives from classification, and

it includes representatives from the Canadian Mental Health Association. This

team meets regularly, Mr. Speaker, to engage in case conferencing and to discuss

aspects of mutual concern relating to mental health clients. Mr. Speaker, we are

quite pleased, quite proud of the work that we have done on behalf of people in

our institutions who suffer from addictions and mental health issues.

Mr. Speaker, it is not possible to address all the issues pertaining to

women, Aboriginals, and those with mental health issues in the act; but, again,

these issues will be appropriately covered in the regulations, where applicable,

and also in policy.

Mr. Speaker, what I have presented in the last thirty minutes or so

represents some highlights of a very comprehensive piece of legislation. It is

arguably as progressive as any in the country. Officials in my department have

worked diligently to create this new Correctional Services Act. The bill follows

the advice that was gleaned from the independent review of corrections. It

updates and modernizes our current legislation. It incorporates the best

practices of other Canadian jurisdictions and it reflects the general spirit and

intent of the recommendations from all the stakeholder groups.

Mr. Speaker, what it also does that will prevent what happened in the past,

will prevent the neglecting of this legislation for forty-two years, it passed a

statutory review of this act to take place every five years.

Mr. Speaker, it was mentioned in the media in recent days that we have

abandoned the Decades of Darkness report and the initiatives. In fact, it was

specifically stated that this minister has abandoned the good work done by

previous ministers in light of the decisions in the last few days with

psychiatric services at HMP. That is rather unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, that the

person who made that statement was not very informed and the comments coming

from the stature of the person who made it, obviously, he has not been in tune

with what we have done in corrections in the last two years.

Mr. Speaker, with the proclamation of the Correctional Services Act,

seventy-four of the seventy-seven recommendations contained in the correctional

review, Decades of Darkness: Moving Towards the Light, will have been either

completed or in various stage of progress - seventy-four of the seventy-seven. I

think we have done very well, Mr. Speaker, in two years with those

recommendations.

In regard to the corrections, Mr. Speaker, we are no longer moving towards

the light, we have moved well into the light. Since the release of the review,

this government as I mentioned before, I want to reiterate, we have put more

than $7 million into the revitalization of Newfoundland and Labrador's

correctional system resulting in significant enhancements in programming and

services. It represents the greatest advancement in corrections in this Province

in more than a quarter of a century.

I am very pleased with the progress, including the preparation of this act

which will provide the necessary legal framework for providing a safe, secure,

and humane environment for both inmates and staff. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to

have the opportunity to introduce Bill 9. I request the support of all hon.

members in passing this significant bill and look forward to their participation

in this debate.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (T. Osborne): The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate an opportunity to have a few words with regard to Bill 9. I

listened attentively to the minister's introduction of it in second reading.

There are some great words there some great words. I guess the question is:

Once this becomes law, is this Administration, and particularly this minister,

prepared to live with what the law will be?

Now, we had a briefing, and I appreciate the fact that the briefing was

arranged yesterday with officials of the Department of Justice. We all knew most

of the people there, of course, we have dealt with each other in the past, very

informed people, people who try their best, people who consulted with numerous

people. I asked, in fact, who did you consult with? I was indeed provided with a

list of the people they consulted with. I will get back to that later. Some

people, for example, had meetings with the minister or the staff preparing this

piece of legislation. Some people had both a meeting and submitted a brief. Some

people put in a brief only, and there were some who were asked to participate

who did not participate. I will come back and take a look at some of the

stakeholders later and the various roles that they played in it.

As the minister says, the intention of this bill is to update, modernize, and

bring our correctional facilities in this Province into the modern age. We have

been for years and years - I believe it was in 1967 we had one of the acts that

are now being replaced here and the other one was in 1975. Even the most recent

one was some thirty-five years ago. Of course, lots of changes have taken place

since that time in our correctional facilities.

Now, there are different kinds of facilities, of course. Everybody heard

about HMP, Her Majesty's Penitentiary, down here in St. John's. There is another

facility in Stephenville, of course. There is one in Clarenville, which houses

women prisoners. There is another one in Bishop's Falls, we have a facility in

Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and we have some smaller lock-ups, commonly referred to,

in Corner Brook, Lab West and so on. So all of it, now, they are all

correctional facilities, or will be, pursuant to this new law.

A lot of the things that were hodgepodge before, never ever brought under an

umbrella of a piece of legislation as to what it should provide: who is going to

run the facilities; how are they required to administer the facilities; what

about protecting the staff; what about protecting the inmates; what are the

rights, if any, that an inmate has; what are the rights that staff have

vis--vis their interaction with inmates when it comes to searching, recording,

telephone conversations, for example, vetting their mail that they might send

out to family or anyone. A lot of that was done on policy before, but a lot of

it was not accurately spelled out in legislation as to what you could and could

not do. This is an attempt, of course, to set a framework, a guideline to look

after all those things.

Now, probably the most important

section here is the one that will take place

after this becomes law, because all we have here is the skeleton, actually. This

is the skeleton. Under section, I believe it is 45 - no, excuse me, not 45,

under

section 48, that is what is going to put the flesh on this skeleton the

meat, the bones, the muscle, and everything else. That is the

section that

allows for the regulations to be made. There is just about every regulation that

you can imagine that the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, that is the Cabinet, is

going to be able to make in order to breathe some life into this skeleton, put

the flesh and organs into it, and make it work. That is where the challenge will

be.

It is no good to set-up the guidelines and the parameters for a modern day

law that administers the correctional facilities of our Province yet not make

the regulations that are absolutely necessary in order to make that work. That

is where we may have some concerns, and I will get into those concerns as to the

ability of the department or certainly the minister's actions in the last little

while which bring that seriously into question.

You question what you say one day, but as people say, actions tell a lot more

than words. We have seen the actions and we have heard the words of the minister

in the last couple of days which I submit were absolutely contrary to the spirit

and intent of the bill that he is introducing in this House today. I will get

into the details of that. I know he is going to disagree with what I am going to

say. Once I lay out the details, it is the public of the Province they have

already spoken pretty decisively, I would submit, when it comes to one of these

issues.

I am referring, of course, to the issue of prescription drug use in our

correctional facilities and the recent report of the Citizens' Rep, Mr. Barry

Fleming; how the minister treated it when he first got it and how the minister

retreated within forty-eight hours; swallowed himself whole, ate his words,

turned around and did something then to try to appease the public that was very,

very upset about his actions, and tried to put a good light on a situation that

he had made bad. I cannot put it any gentler because those are the facts. He

flip-flopped in forty-eight hours. He had no choice and he admitted he had no

choice. The public outcry frightened him to death and he retreated in haste to

try to make himself look good. I just hope, I live in hope that once this bill

we are dealing with here on correctional facilities becomes the law, I hope that

the regulations that come to be under

section 48, and I hope that the

interpretations and good faith that is supposed to brought to bear to make this

work is going to come with it, because we have not seen that in recent times.

With regard to the Citizens' Rep report, just for those who do not

understand, there are a lot of people in the public who might have been busy,

away, now they have an opportunity in front of their television, maybe they

would like to know the story. The story, of course, impacts directly this piece

of legislation and how it is used.

We have a penitentiary called Her Majesty's Penitentiary. The issue, which is

dealt with right in this very bill today, (inaudible): what, for example, will

be the rights of inmates when it comes to prescription drugs, those inmates who

have mental illness. It has been an issue for years and people are saying, what

is the problem, first of all, because some people feel that once someone does

the crime, you do the time, you put them away in HMP; you throw away the key and

who cares what happens. That is not a very open-minded approach to take to it in

my view, because these very people, albeit they did a crime, albeit they need to

be punished once convicted for doing the crime and put away in HMP or whatever,

they are still number one, first and foremost, human beings.

Secondly, there is going to come a day when they are going to be released. If

they enter HMP, or Her Majesty's Penitentiary, with a mental illness and that

is not foreign, by the way, because according to statistics, every single one of

us here in the House of Assembly, and every family has someone who is afflicted

with some form of mental illness. It is not like we are talking about something

years ago, you might sweep under the rug if somebody was depressed or had some

form of mental issue; we have all faced it in all of our families.

Back to the prisoner who gets put away in HMP who had a mental illness. What

do you do? Do you take his drugs away from him or her? Well, that is what has

been happening in a lot of cases at HMP. We have a certain psychiatrist who has

worked at HMP for a number of years and he is what they call a conservative

prescriber' of drugs to these people. He acknowledges people who have mental

illnesses of some form and his practice admittedly is that he is a conservative

prescriber'.

There have been incidents where people who may have been receiving drugs in

the community from their own psychiatrists and doctors for years, but they

happen to commit a crime, they happen to go to HMP to do their time, which is a

good thing, but once they enter there that particular psychiatrist knocks their

drugs down and in some cases eliminated them. You can imagine, of course, that

if somebody has been maintained or had their condition stabilized for years

because of a drug, and all of a sudden it is taken away from them, the

consequences to that individual, but not only to that individual, but anybody

who is around them, whether you are a guard or whether you are another inmate,

if that person is off their meds.

Anyway, there were so many complaints about that, that the Citizens' Rep of

this Province who, by the way, was appointed by this very same government; a

gentleman by the name of Mr. Fleming was appointed. He is one of the persons,

for example, who the minister consulted as a stakeholder in order to come up

with this new bill. He, Mr. Speaker, submitted a brief about what should be in

this new bill. Anyway, Mr. Fleming, having had these complaints, went off to do

an investigation, which he is perfectly entitled, in fact, required to do

maybe he is not required; it may be may instead of shall under the act that

governs his activities that this government passed and adopted.

Anyway, Mr. Fleming went off and did his investigation and he came back. He

confirmed that, yes, that particular psychiatrist who works at HMP, who is paid

for by the government, does have these conservative practices in terms of

prescription drugs for inmates. He concluded that prisoners who found themselves

in that situation were treated unfairly as citizens, not only as inmates but, as

citizens of our Province, were treated unfairly. He recommended that the

Department of Justice, instead of keeping that particular psychiatrist there,

should go to public tender and let someone else have a crack at providing the

psychiatric services to HMP. Mr. Fleming did a thorough review. Mr. Fleming

consulted with dozens of people, not only inmates; he consulted with other

psychiatrists and so on and made his conclusions.

I do not know of any other report - in the Province, in its history since we

have had a Citizens' Rep - that has been rejected outright, out of hand by the

government. Lo and behold, Mr. Fleming, who this government put forward as being

a credible person, best person for the job, who we unanimously voted for in this

House to be the Citizens' Rep, he never had his report in the public domain two

hours when the Minister of Justice was out saying, rubbish. It is just as well

if he had called it rubbish, rejecting it out of hand, he said. Guess what his

reason for rejecting it was? We rejected it, he said, because Mr. Fleming did

not have the expertise to come to the conclusions that he did upon which to base

his recommendations. That is because Mr. Fleming is a lawyer, he is not a

psychiatrist.

MR. F. COLLINS: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

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

point of order.

MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I fully expected the hon. member to bring up

this issue and use it today to try to hijack this act, but I want him to stick

to the truth and to the facts. At no time ever in this debate over the last

couple of days was the word, rubbish, ever used in reference to this report

except when the member just did it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader, to the point of order?

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: No, Mr. Speaker, just to continue my

MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate your ruling that there was no point of order raised by the

Minister of Justice. Now I can get on with my speech without interruption,

hopefully.

Back to Mr. Fleming; his report was rejected by the Minister of Justice, who

just stood on his feet, because he never had the so-called expertise to come to

the conclusions that he did and therefore make the recommendations that he did.

That is the reason the Minister of Justice gave outside the doors of the House

of Assembly or somewhere here in this building, somewhere on Monday. Now, let's

just take a look at that explanation, shall we say, that the minister gave. I do

not accept it because the guy who said it was not an expert in what he did. He

is a lawyer, Mr. Fleming is, he is not a doctor and he is not a psychiatrist, so

therefore he could not have given us any reliable recommendations and

conclusions. That is what the minister said; twist it all he wants to.

Now, let's give you some examples. Justice Robert Wells, for example, just

recently did a year long inquiry, still in process, about the unfortunate and

tragic Cougar crash in this Province. If I recall correctly, Justice Wells is a

Justice of the law, a lawyer. I do not think he is a helicopter pilot. I do not

think he works in the offshore at any time. I do not think he knew much about

safety in the offshore or the oil fields of Newfoundland other than general

knowledge, unless he might have done some cases that involved it. Justice Wells

delivers his report to this government. I never heard anybody in the government

saying we do not accept Justice Robert Wells report because he is not a

helicopter pilot or he is not a technician. In fact, the government accepted his

recommendations when it came to a separate safety board to govern our offshore.

That is one example where expertise was not called into question.

I will give you another example, Justice Margaret Cameron. This government,

after the Opposition put their feet to the fire enough times, agreed several

years ago to have an inquiry into the breast screening in this Province, and we

all know how unfortunate and tragic that turned out to be. Justice Margaret

Cameron, again, a Justice; I do not believe she is a medical doctor, I do not

believe she is a cancer specialist. She did a public inquiry. She came up with

her report and brought it into this government, made several recommendations,

dozens. The government said: thank you very much, you did a great job; we are

going to follow them. The Minister of Health has been giving annual updates at

least on where we are with the recommendations that she put forth. I did not

hear anybody in the government saying she was not an expert.

All of a sudden, within twenty-four hours - I understand the minister

actually received the report on the psychiatric treatment of inmates at HMP on a

Friday from Mr. Fleming, and he was out on Monday saying he was not going to

accept it because he did not have the expertise. That is why I say, Mr. Speaker,

I live in hope when it comes to the correctional facilities in this Province

that this bill is supposed to bring into the modern age. It is no point in

having a piece of legislation in this Province which brings us into the modern

age if the very people who sit at the top of the pyramid when it comes to seeing

that correctional facilities work properly in the best interests of correctional

officers, administrators, and inmates, gives such swift, out the door responses

to things that are supposed to deal with the very same facilities and what goes

on inside them. It is most unfortunate, that within three days of rejecting Mr.

Fleming's report, we have the minister up preaching about how we are going to

improve the correctional facilities in the Province.

The minister, of course, that is just how he rejected it. Thankfully, the

people of this Province watch the media, Mr. Speaker. The people of this

Province, the Open Lines went crazy, the media went crazy, the mental health

groups in this Province went crazy, and sure enough, the minister said: I will

relent, I will relent. I had to do something to fix this. I acted so quickly

when I read the report on Friday, kicked it out the door on Monday, I obviously

must have done something wrong. Now, I give him points for having the ability to

at least admit that he is wrong. That is a good thing. That is good, I admire

that. At least the man knew his initial reaction was exactly that, a reaction,

and that he should not have done it in the first place. It takes a big man to do

that sometimes.

So, he did a complete flip-flop. He turned around then and said we are going

to change that now. We are going to send it off, the same issue, for a peer

review. We are going to send that off. I guess we will wait and see again what

is going to happen now on that issue with the peer review. The saga continues.

Stay tuned, as the Minister of Finance always says on everything. Stay tuned,

and you will get your answer down the road. Now, that is that issue.

In talking about correctional facilities, and I named off a bunch of them,

there is something else this minister had his hands into when we talk about

correctional facilities that was very disappointing to the people of this

Province. I refer, of course, to what happened to the intended extension that

was supposed to go on the facilities that already exist in Happy Valley-Goose

Bay.

I do not know if he has something against Mr. Fleming or if Mr. Fleming's

reports agitates him or what, but I do believe Mr. Fleming was involved at that

time in doing an inquiry, an investigation into how people, particularly

Aboriginal women, were treated in Labrador when they were incarcerated. It

became a major issue. I will not get into the graphic details which became

public. The government's response to it at the time was: We need to fix it.

Mr. Fleming made his report, said that it needed to be fixed, and made some

recommendations. The government said: We are going to put money into that. We

are going to put an extension onto the correctional facilities in Happy

Valley-Goose Bay so that we can improve it. That is the first start. We need the

physical infrastructure so we can at least put programming and services in place

to make sure that kind of stuff does not happen any more.

That was great for everybody who saw it, a great improvement, greatly needed.

Lo and behold, what did we find out a couple of years after that announcement

was made? By the way, it was only found out because the Opposition probed the

government's Budget a couple of years later. We had Estimates meetings and said:

Excuse me, Minister, where is the money that was supposed to be in the Budget?

You started two years ago with money budgeted for this extension of that

correctional facility in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, what happened to it? We were in

this House in Question Period for several days with this member forcing the

Minister of Justice to give us some answers on what happened to the money.

Finally, we got a couple of admissions. He admitted that we were no longer

going to put the extension on the correctional facilities in Happy Valley-Goose

Bay, and only admitted it after it was brought up here in the House of Assembly

under questioning. At no point in time were the people of this Province ever

told that this government's commitment to extend the facilities in Happy

Valley-Goose Bay was scrapped, never, and he admitted it after. Then, he needed

some wiggle room. He could not even come right out fully and say that it was

scrapped, so he came out and said: We changed our mind. He did not tell anybody,

did not tell a soul that we had changed our minds, and just deleted the money

from the Budget. The project was on hold for God knows how long, and God knows

how long the people of the Province might have waited for him to tell us,

because he certainly never told us of his own accord. He told us when he had his

feet put to the fire and the facts were evident for everybody to see. That was

the only time that we were informed.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, he said: We have delayed it. I do believe, if I am

correct, those questions about the extension in Happy Valley-Goose were asked in

this House in last spring's sitting, 2010. The minister's wiggle room then was:

We are doing a complete review now of all of the correctional facilities in the

Province to come up with a comprehensive strategy and plan to see where we are

going to go.

I do believe this is the spring of 2011, we are twelve months later. I have

not heard a peep about where the plan is, when we are going to get it, any

indications of what we need, not a peep. That is not surprising, folks. That is

not surprising because you get out of this minister what you squeeze out of him.

That is the only time we get information. By the way, he is not unique. You only

get out of this government whatever you squeeze out.

That is two incidents where, when it comes to correctional facilities, we

have had two reports from the Citizens' Rep, both of them, albeit are

well-intentioned recommendations, ended up in the dustbin.

I do not know, like I said, what it is about Mr. Fleming that this minister

will not accept any of the reports or follow through on what he says, but that

is two very current circumstances that this has happened.

When we went to the presentation and I appreciate it by the way, the people

who gave it, good people, knowledgeable people in the department yesterday who

gave us a briefing. They did a slide presentation for us. One of the slides

leading right off in the presentation says: This bill, once it becomes law, will

provide a continuity of programs and services from prisons to community. A great

goal. We are going to provide a continuity of programs and services from prisons

to community. In other words, if someone is an inmate, what are the programs

they are going to have available to them when they are in there, for example,

whether it be recreational, whether it be what your food is, what is your

prescription if you need drugs and that kind of thing; can you take training if

you want to get some skill while you are behind bars so that you have a skill,

when you get out, that you can utilize and probably keep you on the good path

rather than the bad path; what kinds of services were available to them while

they were in prison such as the psychiatric drug piece?

When I saw the slide, my first question was: It talks about from prisons to

communities, the programs and services, a great thing, but what about from the

communities to the prisons? Don't you have a major breakdown if someone is

convicted and they are going to be imprisoned or someone is on parole and you

revoke their parole and you are going to yank them back inside and they have an

issue such as a mental health issue? It is no good to talk about what you are

going to do just from the prisons out, what are you going to do when you are

taking them in?

Now, obviously the people who gave the briefing felt those issues were better

left to the politicians and the ministers rather than at the bureaucratic level.

I had no problem with that, but we did have an opportunity, of course, before

the briefing and since the briefing to do a comprehensive reading of the bill.

I refer, Mr. Speaker, to clause 18 in the context of the comments I just

made. When I read it, it says very clearly, it talks about inmate assessment and

plans. I will read it for the record because I think it is very important in the

context of my comments. It says, "As soon as practicable after an inmate has

entered a correctional facility, an assessment of the inmate shall be made in a

manner compatible with the length of the sentence, the inmate's status and the

nature of the offence, and, if applicable, a plan shall be prepared for the

inmate." Now, I am assuming there always was some policy, administrative

procedures in place whereby obviously we have not been putting people behind

bars for years and never creating a plan for them. Now, it would specifically,

in legislation, say that you have to make a plan for them.

Then it says, "A plan referred to in subsection (1) shall assess the inmate's

correctional needs and the appropriate programs to meet those needs to (

a) support the inmate in developing accountability and being rehabilitated, healed

and reintegrated into the community; and (

b) deter and reduce offending

behaviour." That is what the plan was supposed to be geared to, to come in, and

you gear up a plan. Obviously, a plan will be different if somebody is there for

five years versus if they are there for five months. That makes common sense.

You are not going to get into a two-year carpenter program if somebody is only

in there for two months. What is the point? It might give them a start, but they

hopefully would not get time to finish if they are gone in two months, and

hopefully they are not coming back anymore.

It talks about healed, and it talks about rehabilitation. How are we ever

going to accomplish healing somebody, which is right in the law, rehabilitating

them, if we had the circumstance that I referred to earlier whereby someone who

has a need for drugs to stabilize them, to help them with their mental illness

issue, if we have someone down t