Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 25 November 2004 (45th General Assembly, 1st Session, Vol. XLV No. 47)
2004-11-25
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
November 25, 2004 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 47
The House met at 1:30 p.m
MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!
Admit strangers.
This afternoon, we would like to welcome about eighty residents of Mount
Pearl and area. They are part of the Mount Pearl Seniors Independence Group and
the Mount Pearl 50+ Fitness Group. They are from the District of Mount Pearl and
that equally wonderful District of Waterford Valley. We want to welcome them to
our House and ensure them that seniors are always welcome in the House of
Assembly in Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair has notice of the following members' statements:
the hon. the Member for the District of Mount Pearl; the hon. the Member for the
District of Bay of Islands; the hon. the Member for the District of Bonavista
North; and the hon. the Member for the District of Trinity North.
The hon. the Member for the District of Mount Pearl.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. DENINE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Today, Mr. Speaker, I wish to recognize a tremendous contribution to our
community by our Mount Pearl Seniors Independence Group and the 50+ Club. They
are a very active and vibrant group in our community, and Mount Pearl is very
fortunate to have these two active groups.
The Mount Pearl 50+ program is mostly about being physically active, and
social activity is involved.
The Mount Pearl Seniors Independence Group, their main goal is keeping
seniors independent and healthy in their own homes.
Mr. Speaker, these two groups of seniors are always on the move, all year
round. They finished up another summer of day trips to Heart's Content,
Whitbourne Winery, Clarenville, Carbonear-Bay Roberts and Trepassey. Now, for
the fall and into the winter, they will start their programs of: exercise - dry
land and water fitness; bowling; line dancing; friendship program; craft
program; seasonal dances - Paddy's Day, Valentines and Halloween - and I have
my list already filled out, my dance card -
AN HON. MEMBER: You wish.
MR. DENINE: I wish. I do.
- as well as weekly socials and afternoon teas; and foot care clinics with
the VON.
By keeping active in these programs, it keeps them young at heart.
I must also mention that the Parks and Recreation Department in the City of
Mount Pearl also works in conjunction with these groups. They assist them in
whatever way they can.
Mr. Speaker, congratulations to both groups on all their efforts, and I wish
them all the best in the future.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: Speaking of good dancers, Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend
congratulations to the members of the Meadows Volunteer Fire Department and the
Meadows Firettes.
On Saturday evening, November 20, I had the pleasure of attending their
thirty-second Annual Firefighters Ball. The seventeen members who make up the
Meadows Volunteer Fire Department are an active and committed group of
volunteers dedicated to ensuring the safety of their town and its residents.
They are continuously training and enhancing their skills, and through their
commitment, three members have trained and are certified to teach basic
firefighting skills to other volunteer departments in the Province.
In addition to the firefighters, there is an active fire firettes
organization who continually supports the fire department through fundraisers
and other initiatives. This group has raised thousands of dollars over the past
years to ensure that the firefighters have the necessary equipment available
when needed. Again, on Saturday night, the firettes presented a cheque to the
fire department for $4,000.
One of the key projects for the fire department over the past years have been
to raise funds for a new fire hall. While the Town of Meadows applied and
received approval in 2003 under the Municipal Capital Works - which the minister
was involved and got proper recognition on Saturday night at the firemen's
ball. Construction started this summer. The Meadows firefighters and firettes
made a commitment to help with the cost towards the fire hall, and at their
banquet on Saturday night, Fire Chief Colin Tucker and Firette Madonna Brake
presented a cheque of $20,000 to the Town Council of Meadows as their
contribution towards the construction of the new fire hall.
I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating the Meadows firefighters
and firettes for the continuing hard work and dedication to their town and its
residents.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in this House today and offer congratulations to the Anglican Church
Women of St. Mary's congregation in Indian Bay. Just recently, St. Mary's
ACW celebrated their seventy-fifth anniversary. Throughout the year a number of
community and church events were held celebrating this milestone in their
history.
On October 27 I had the honour of attending and sharing in their anniversary
celebrations with approximately 300 parishioners and guests, including fourteen
former ministers of the Parish and Bishops: Don Young and Eddie Marsh.
On October 27, 1929, two ladies from Indian Bay, namely, Hannah Parsons and
Minnie Parsons, travelled to Wareham and attended an ACW meeting. Upon their
return to Indian Bay, they started their own association. Since that time, St.
Mary's Church has been able to count on the ACW for providing tremendous
community outreach services and organizing activities that have benefitted
spiritual life. As an example of their outreach service, every second Wednesday
they serve breakfast to the children at Centreville Academy.
The Town of Indian Bay has an population of approximately 200. Thirty-eight
women of that population are members of the ACW. I sincerely thank these women
for their dedicated work in improving the lives of others. Under the very
capable and faithful leadership of President Renee Easton, I am sure they will
enjoy many more years of distinguished service to the church and the community.
I ask all hon. members to join with me in offering congratulations to St.
Mary's ACW in Indian Bay on their seventy-fifth anniversary.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to acknowledge the ninety-third birthday of a very distinguished
gentleman in my district. Mr. Sam Drover celebrated his ninety-third birthday
last week.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Drover has a very impressive career to his credit, including
seven years in this House of Assembly. Mr. Drover is one of two remaining
members of the First Assembly to sit after Confederation in 1949. He sat in the
Twenty-Ninth General Assembly; we are sitting here today in the Forty-Fifth. Mr.
Speaker, I want everybody to acknowledge the tremendous contribution that Mr.
Drover has made to the history of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Prior to his election as well, Mr. Drover had already established himself as
a leader in his community as a former teacher, a former member of the Royal
Newfoundland Constabulary, and a former member of the Newfoundland Ranger Force.
Mr. Drover's contribution to Newfoundland and Labrador took place in a time
when Newfoundland and Labrador was very much in its beginning. Many changes
occurred during that time. Even though in his advanced years of ninety-three, he
is still keenly active, very interested in political life and watches very
closely the current events that are affecting Newfoundlanders and Labradorians
and has been watching particularly close recently to what has been happening in
the discussions around the Atlantic Accord. He reads everything he sees. He
listens to all the news and is very much aware. In fact, a frequent caller to
give me some tips, hints and suggestions about what government should be doing
and how I should be functioning as an MHA and, for that, I really appreciate his
support.
I ask all members of this hon. House to join with me today and help celebrate
and congratulate Mr. Drover on ninety-three lustrous years and wish him well for
the future.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in this House today to speak to the recent incidents that have
occurred offshore Newfoundland and Labrador.
As members are aware today, there was a significant spill at the Terra Nova
FPSO early Sunday morning. It is estimated that upwards to 1,000 barrels of oil
were discharged into the ocean. As soon as the Canada-Newfoundland Offshore
Petroleum Board was made aware of the incident it issued a suspension order for
the operations of the FPSO. There is a procedure in place to respond to such
incidents and an emergency response team was immediately mobilized.
Unfortunately, weather conditions did not cooperate with cleanup activities as
we had hoped.
Furthermore, this morning, this government was notified there was another
spill incident offshore - this time at the semi-submersible Henry Goodrich,
which is drilling for Petro-Canada on the Terra Nova site. The immediate
estimate is less than six barrels of oil had been released into the ocean.
Both of these incidents are now under investigation by the
Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board which has a mandate on behalf of
regulate the offshore oil and gas industry. The investigation into the FPSO has
been ongoing since Sunday and this investigation has now been broadened to
include the Henry Goodrich incident. The board investigators will be flying to
the rig as soon as arrangements can be made to determine the extent of the spill
and commence their investigation.
Mr. Speaker, I want to inform this House and the people of Newfoundland and
Labrador that this government is gravely concerned about these incidents. We are
taking both of these incidents extremely seriously, regardless of how much oil
was released into the environment. We understand there are risks associated with
the offshore petroleum industry. Our objective and our goal is to ensure that
every possible safeguard is in place so that we do not have any incidents
whatsoever, but we also have to acknowledge and be realistic that there are
risks associated with the prosecution and exploitation of this industry.
Having said that, when such incidents do occur, the proper procedures have to
be and must be in place to mitigate the negative impact on our environment.
I know the federal government shares my concerns, I have spoken with them,
and we are making arrangements to meet as soon as possible, potentially as early
as tomorrow. Once the investigation into these incidents is complete, we will be
in a much better position to determine whether the procedures that are now in
place are adequate or whether there needs to be any adjustments as to how the
industry operates offshore and how we regulate it.
I want to assure the people of this Province that this government does take,
very seriously, our responsibility to ensure that the offshore industry operates
in an environmentally responsible way, in an environmentally sensitive way, and
to that end we will be ever vigilant.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advanced copy of his comments. It is nice to see
and it is good to see, actually, that the government, and particularly this
minister, are engaged in this most serious and important issue; more so than I
can say for his colleague, the Minister of Environment, who was more concerned
with politics than policy yesterday afternoon when some very serious questions
were asked in this House.
Whether it is six barrels or 1,000 barrels, it is all too much. There ought
to be none. This is very serious. This is a wake up call, I would suggest, to
the industry and to government. It is not only the concern of biologists,
ecologists or environmentalists, this must be a concern of everybody in this
Province. The possible destruction that this does to our environment and to our
ecosystems and to things like our fisheries, the potential of it is just
absolutely devastating. It is a very serious problem and I realize, as well does
the minister, the solutions may not be simple. The solutions may not be easy to
come up with.
There have been some suggestions, for example, from a detection point of
view, we should certainly have independent observers onboard these rigs so that
we are not relying upon the industry to tell us when there is a spill. There
ought to be someone else there independent of the industry who says if there is
drop of oil that goes in that ocean that should not be there, that it happened,
to find out why and to make sure that it does not happen again. There may be
more investment required from government to make sure that it does not happen,
proper monitoring and proper cleanup. We cannot be, and we cannot afford to be,
reactive to problems. We must be proactive to the prevention and detection of
the problem.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the minister for an
advanced copy of his statement.
There are quite a few things that are very disturbing about this, including
some of the statements made by the minister today where, on November 25, today,
Thursday, he announced that the board investigators will be flying to the rig as
soon as arrangements can be made to determine the extent of the spill and
commence their investigation. This was a spill that occurred last Sunday.
MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible) occurred in the morning, Jack.
MR. HARRIS: You say the rig, Henry Goodridge is a drilling ship that is
out there. I hope that they are out there and they were out there on Sunday
looking into what happened on the Terra Nova platform because, Mr. Speaker, this
is an oil spill that apparently was only detected by visual inspection, that is
estimated by one marine engineer, who was on TV last night, that had been,
perhaps, going on between four and ten hours.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's time has expired.
MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.
MR. HARRIS: That may have been going on for four to ten hours. Mr.
Speaker, the kind of confidence that I would like to have, and I think the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador would like to have, is that if an oil and
water separation unit is not working properly and is spilling oil into the
water, that there should be some automatic detection, there should have been
some electronic detection, some alarm bells should have gone off or there should
have been some sort of automatic shutoff.
What I really want to know, and I think before we have any significant
confidence in what is going on, is that that is the kind of system that is going
to be in place, that is in place, and is going to be working before the platform
starts operating again.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further Statements by Ministers?
The hon. the Minister of Human Resource, Labour and Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I rise before the House to inform members of a
very important recognition that has been given to Ms Vivian Randell, who served
as Deputy Minister of the Department of Human Resources, Labour and Employment
before retiring last spring.
The Newfoundland and Labrador Regional Group of the Institute of Public
Administration of Canada has announced Ms Randell as the recipient of the 2004
Lieutenant Governor's Award for Excellence in Public Administration.
Ms Randell was honoured today at a ceremony held at Government House in St.
John's. The Honourable Edward Roberts, Lieutenant-Governor of Newfoundland and
Labrador and Patron of the award, presented Ms Randell with the Award for
Excellence in Public Administration. The award pays tribute to Ms Randell's
exceptional and sustained contribution to public administration in Newfoundland
and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, Vivian began her career with the Government of Newfoundland and
Labrador in 1970 as Child Adoptions Coordinator. Since then, she has served the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador with distinction for over thirty-four years.
During her career, Vivian held increasingly responsible positions in the
Department of Social Services, eventually in the position of Deputy Minister of
the Department of Human Resources and Employment.
Mr. Speaker, Vivian's many accomplishments include the development of a
provincial strategic social plan. She also laid the groundwork in the area of
early childhood development in the Province; and led the establishment of the
Department of Human Resources and Employment, including a new approach to income
support and career services.
I would like to say, Mr. Speaker, how much I valued Vivian's vast knowledge
and expertise in her role as Deputy Minister of Human Resources, Labour and
Employment. During the first several months of my appointment as minister of
this department Ms Randell's support was invaluable.
Along with today's recognition, earlier this fall Vivian received the
Newfoundland and Labrador Public Service Award of Excellence and also recently
received the Canadian Association of Social Workers' Distinquished Service
Award for her outstanding career in the field of social work.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask all members to join with me in
congratulating Vivian Randell on her outstanding career and for receiving this
year's Lieutenant-Governor's Award for Excellence in Public Administration
in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to thank the hon. minister for her statement with regard to Ms
Vivian Randell, and to say I wish to join the minister in congratulating Ms
Randell on this very prestigious award.
Fifteen years ago, Mr. Speaker, little did I think, after working with Vivian
in the Department of Social Services, I would be standing here today and paying
recognition to her for this wonderful award.
Ms Randell played a very significant role in early childhood development, and
her service, not only to the constituents of this Province but also to the
workers that she had with her within the department, was very invaluable, very
informative, and she was a very gracious lady. I am honoured today to say that
this award that she has received, the Award for Excellence in Public
Administration, to go with the very impressive collection of awards that she has
already received, is very due to the woman.
I wish to join the minister and all members of this hon. House in
congratulating Ms Vivian Randell, and wish her every success in her retirement.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to join with the minister and the Member for Port de Grave in
recognizing the contribution made by Ms Vivian Randell to the Public Service of
Newfoundland and Labrador. She is well known to many members of this House, and
to people in the social services field throughout Newfoundland and Labrador and
nationally. She is treated with great respect for her ability and dedication and
commitment.
Mr. Speaker, we are lucky to have public servants with the kind of dedication
and commitment and knowledge of Vivian Randell, and I think it is something
that, I believe, is important to say to young people looking at a career, that a
career in the Public Service of Newfoundland and Labrador is a -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's time has expired.
Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.
MR. HARRIS: Perhaps we should make it a little more automatic, Mr.
Speaker.
I was in mid-sentence and I forget exactly where I was in the sentence, but I
do want to say, Mr. Speaker, that young people in this Province who are
attending university, who are thinking about attending university or seeking
education, really deserve to look to a career in the Public Service of this
Province as something where you can make a significant and valuable contribution
to the government and to the operations of government and to the life of people
who are served by departments such as the Department of Social Services, which
she served for many years, Human Resources, Labour and Employment.
I wish her many happy years of retirement as well.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
Oral Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in this House the Premier indicated that retroactivity
on Atlantic Accord payments is no longer on the table. In a briefing we received
from the Deputy Minister of Finance on October 20, we were informed that
government was looking to receive retroactive payments to April 1 of this fiscal
year. I would ask the Premier, or the Minister of Finance in his stead, to
clarify whether there will be any retroactive payments to either April 1 of this
fiscal year that we are not operating in, or at least to June 5 when the
commitment was made, or are the payments going to start when we finalize the
deal some time, hopefully, before Christmas?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is well understood by both sides that the proposal put forth includes the
2004-2005 fiscal year. In other words, you cannot calculate the income tax of a
company (inaudible) one month or two months and three and say, here is how much
you made in this part of the year. You file your returns on a year, and it is
accordingly. We are of the understanding, and it has not been questioned and it
has been in any exchanges, that 2004-2005, this fiscal year, is one of the years
that is included in this.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to ask some questions of the Premier or the Minister of
Fisheries and Aquaculture again with respect to Fishery Products International.
Mr. Speaker, when the Premier was negotiating with the federal government on
the Atlantic Accord, he stated that no response to letters that he sent to the
federal government meant that they accepted what he said. Derek Rowe of FPI has
stated that the Harbour Breton plant will close, Fortune will be drastically
reduced, if not closed altogether, Bonavista could be next, and he has also
stated there is absolutely nothing the government can or should do about their
private business decisions.
Mr. Speaker, I ask this: Does the silence of the Premier to date on this
issue - does the silence of the Premier to date - mean that the Premier and the
government agree with Mr. Rowe?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier has been far from silent on this issue. The Premier
has spoken on the FPI issue on numerous occasions, both as it relates to the
income trust transaction and FPI's ongoing operations as it relates to
groundfish on the South Coast of this Province.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier is fully engaged in this situation. FPI are fully
aware of our concern about the situation and our resolve to try and find a
solution, not only for Harbour Breton but for the groundfish operations on the
South Coast and the fishing industry generally in this Province.
Mr. Speaker, we are fully involved in this. I, as the Minister of Fisheries
and Aquaculture, am lead minister on this file. I am the chief spokesperson, I
suppose you could say, on the file, and that is the way it is until the Premier
changes his mind.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the record shows that when asked in the House before, the
Premier has said in this Legislature: I can't talk about FPI because it is a
private company - and yesterday he refused to answer three very direct
questions.
Mr. Speaker, many people in the Province, I am sure, were shocked by the
arrogant attitude and comments of the FPI Chairman, Mr. Rowe, in last evening's
newscast. Mr. Rowe said that his only responsibility is to his shareholders and
that politicians should butt out of his business.
It seems, Mr. Speaker, based on his lack of response to date, that the
Premier has listened to him and butted out, because we have heard absolutely
nothing from the Premier.
In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, the Premier states -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the member now if he could state his question very quickly.
MR. GRIMES: In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, I ask - because I remind the
Premier that he has stated he is all over these files, that if he doesn't act
soon it will be all over for these communities in rural Newfoundland and
Labrador.
I ask the minister: When will he, and the Premier specifically, stand up to
Mr. Rowe and let him know that we are not going to butt out and that we are
going to exercise our responsibilities?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier's comments - as I articulated in the House
yesterday, and the Leader of the Opposition knows, or he ought to know - about
FPI last spring were about the income trust transaction that had not been
divulged publicly by FPI at that time. The Premier certainly indicated clearly
then that we, as a government, could not say anything publicly because of
security commission concerns. That, Mr. Speaker, is well known to everybody in
this Province and it should be known to the Leader of the Opposition.
As for the rest of it, Mr. Speaker, the executive of FPI, the board of FPI,
and the shareholders of FPI, know that they are governed by an FPI Act. They
know that they have an issue with the income trust transaction, for example.
They came to government on this.
I ask the Leader of the Opposition: Have they proceeded on the income trust
transaction? No, Mr. Speaker, because they recognize that we have issues, we
have concerns, and, unlike the Leader of the Opposition when he was Premier, we
are asking questions.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: On a supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The record will show that when I was the Premier the plants did not close.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, long-time supporters of the Progressive
Conservative Party are even getting frustrated with the lack of action from this
government, and the Premier personally. Last night former Conservative Cabinet
Minister, Tom Hickey, stated that the Atlantic Accord money will be of little
use if this government does not use its legislative power and get involved to
save the future of rural Newfoundland and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: When will the Premier - who seems to have
lost his tongue on this issue - and this government stand up to FPI and tell
them they cannot shut down the plants and use the money to expand their
factory-freezer trawler operations instead of protecting the interest of the
communities in rural Newfoundland and Labrador?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I do not want to leave any doubt in anybody's mind about our resolve to
solve the situation in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Unlike the previous
Administration, Mr. Speaker, who could not find a way of assisting the people of
Arnold's Cove for two years after National Sea indicated that they were
putting it for sale and were prepared to walk away, we found a solution for the
people of Arnold's Cove. While the aquaculture industry on the South Coast on
the Connaigre Peninsula in the area of Harbour Breton in the Bay d'Espoir area
could not get feed financing, we, in ten or elevens months of government, found
a solution to that problem also, Mr. Speaker. That speaks to our situation, our
resolve, for rural Newfoundland and Labrador and our ability to find creative
solutions to assist people who have problems moving forward and growing our
economy and we will commit no less to the people in Harbour Breton.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Last June I asked the Premier a question about the FPI restructuring plan. He
told me he was not at liberty to discuss it in this House - even though the
company was created in this House - because it was a private company.
AN HON. MEMBER: That's not right.
MR. REID: Yes, it is right. He said it was a private company. However, he
did say he would stay on top of the file and other issues surrounding -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the Member for Twillingate & Fogo and his question
should be heard in relative silence.
The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Premier did however say that he would stay on top of that file and other
issues surrounding FPI. If that is the case, I ask the minister: When did you
learn that FPI would not be doing H and G cod in Fortune this year? Do you agree
that this will effectively close that plant as well?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Premier has been fully involved in the FPI file since last April. He had
a number of meetings with Derek Rowe. We have had a number of meetings with
their senior executive, and I have had quite a few conversations with all of
them involved. I have had a number of conversations with the fishermen's
union. We have a working group that we have put together to deal with Harbour
Breton, and I have also suggested, given the nature and the magnitude of the
problem with groundfish, that this needs to move beyond just a discussion about
Harbour Breton. I suggested that the fishermen's union and FPI.
As for the situation with Fortune, and the head-on, gutted cod issue coming
from Norway, I was aware of that quite some time ago. It is not for me to
divulge FPI's corporate strategy, what they are going to do or not. They have
to have that discussion with the union, and then it is up to them when they
release that publicly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo on a
supplementary.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I say to the minister, that was the twelfth question that I have asked him
and that is twelve times that I did not receive a response.
Mr. Speaker, we have the Harbour Breton plant closed and the future of
Fortune is not looking very bright. Right now, if you listen to what Mr. Rowe
said yesterday afternoon on the broadcast, the people of Bonavista should also
be quite concerned.
I ask the minister: What is FPI's plan for Bonavista this year?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Maybe he should ask FPI what their plans are for Bonavista this year. It was
clearly articulated on the Fisheries Broadcast yesterday evening. It was clearly
articulated in the media. As far as I know, in my conversations with FPI, in my
conversations with the union executive when I was out in Bonavista a short time
ago, FPI's intentions in Bonavista this year is the same as they were last
year. They will buy their crab. Half of the crab will go in Triton, half the
crab will go in Bonavista. They will continue to operate Bonavista. At this
point, they have no plans of building a new facility. They have told that to the
workers. If they want a new building it will be a new building that will be
significantly streamlined with less workers, and that is the fundamental issue
there.
As for what is going to happen with Bonavista and crab in the long-term, only
the 3K crab resource and the 3L crab resource and the quota levels associated
with that will determine that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate & Fogo.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we have all, in this House, for the most part, been accused of
playing politics with this most serious of issues. To avoid this, I ask the
minister, quite sincerely, will he set up an all-party committee of this House
so we can put politics aside and attempt to truly do what is in the best
interests of the employees of FPI in this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
There is an all-party committee. All the parties who are relevant to this
discussion are involved. We have already, Mr. Speaker, got a working group
involved on Harbour Breton that includes the town, that includes the union local
in the plant, that includes the senior executive of the union here in St. John's,
that includes the provincial government, includes the local MHA, and FPI. Mr.
Speaker, there are not many other relevant parties in this situation that have a
reason to be involved with the discussions.
Mr. Speaker, if FPI and the Fishermen's Union want to get other people
involved, then that is fine, but as for our role in this we will work with the
company, the union, the town and the federal government to try and find a
solution here.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, my question is also for the Minister of Fisheries. Mr. Speaker,
the CEO of FPI recently accused politicians of grandstanding on the issue. I
want to assure him and everyone in the Province that I am not grandstanding, I
am fighting for the people of Harbour Breton, the same people whom he abandoned
last Friday.
Yesterday, we heard the belligerent and condescending CEO of FPI, Derrick
Rowe, say that the quota that was processed in Harbour Breton belongs to the
company and paid for by the company, an absolute falsehood, and would not under
any conditions remain with the town.
My question to the minister is: Will the minister assure the people of
Harbour Breton that the portion of the FPI quota traditionally processed in
Harbour Breton will remain with the town if FPI ceases operation?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I do believe that the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune is not
grandstanding or playing politics with this situation and is sincerely trying to
find a future for Harbour Breton. As for the question which is a serious
question, unfortunately I am not the person who can answer it. I say that in all
sincerity. The quota allocations are made, as we all know, by the federal
Minister Regan can answer the question that was asked. It is up to him where
quotas are given, it is up to him when quotas are taken.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, if the people on the other side would give me
the opportunity to answer, and stop playing politics with it, as they are, and
take this as the serious matter that it is, we will work with the people of
Harbour Breton to try to find a solution.
I did also hear Mr. Rowe, yesterday, say that if there was a solution that
could be found in Harbour Breton, that the quotas could be used to facilitate
that solution, then he would be prepared to entertain it.
Mr. Speaker, at this point I cannot give any more than that. I wish I could;
but, Mr. Speaker, we will work with all of the people involved. That is why we
proposed an amendment yesterday to include the federal government, to find a
solution for the people of Harbour Breton and also, Mr. Speaker, not to be lost
on everybody here, there is a serious problem in our industry, partly because of
the way that we have handled it over the past number of years, and we have to
address that situation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.
MR. LANGDON: Mr. Speaker, the company has said that the reason for
closing the Harbour Breton fish plant is the structure of the building. Neither
the committee from the town, nor I, as MHA for the area, have received a copy of
the report on the structure of the plant. It is possible that the company has
put its employees at risk as recently as last week when they worked in a
building that the company described as dilapidated. Will the minister have a
copy of that report made available to the committee and to myself, so that we
can see for ourselves if that was the situation?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as I am sure the member can appreciate, any report that is
commissioned and paid for by a private company is the property of that company.
It is not for me to divulge what that report is. I do not even have a copy of
that report.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. TAYLOR: I do not have a copy of the report to provide. I can tell you
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) on top of it.
MR. TAYLOR: Yes, we are very much on top of it, I would say. That is why
we have Occupational Health and Safety inspectors going down there. That is why
the Minister of Government Services has asked for, and received, a copy of the
report, thank you very much.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. TAYLOR: No, I don't have a copy of it in my possession. It is
private information. When the Occupational Health and Safety inspectors'
report is completed, I am sure, Mr. Speaker, it will not be a problem to provide
that publicly.
As well, I understand there is going to be a working group meeting at 6 o'clock
this evening, and another groundfish group meeting tomorrow, and maybe, Mr.
Speaker, the company will divulge the report at that time.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. LANGDON: Thank you.
The Minister of Fisheries will be sending an Occupational Health and Safety
team to inspect the Harbour Breton plant. I believe they are probably on their
way, and will be there tomorrow. I will just ask the minister: Will someone with
engineering expertise accompany the team so that an assessment of the structural
integrity of the building can be made as well?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I can say at this point that a number of different people are involved in the
assessment of the structure. I cannot answer with any great certainty as to
whether there is a structural engineer. I know there was some concern expressed
by the minister that there were not structural engineering capabilities
available within the department, and that is why they asked for a copy of the
report, which the company had to provide once the Occupational Health and Safety
inspectors requested it. They have taken that, and they are going to look at
that report. Then, if they feel that they need to have engineering support from
outside, picked up from outside the private sector, then I am sure they will
move to do that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question today is for the Minister of Health and Community Services.
I want to ask the minister: Given the fact that this Province received $35
million in extra funding from the federal government for health care for this
fiscal year, can the minister tell us - because we have not heard much since -
what the plans are outlined for the spending of that money in the near future?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is an important issue and question that is raised by the hon. member, and
I know it has received some media attention in the last few days.
This government spends well in excess of $4 million in addictions counselling
and addictions related matters, and has in the last fiscal year. With respect to
gambling, the minister suggested yesterday that we are in excess of $100,000,
and that is the case, Mr. Speaker. This government, this year, has allocated
well in excess of $100,000 in gambling addiction services. I have had
discussions with my officials, Mr. Speaker, to learn precisely how these monies
are spent. We do know, for example, these funds are allocated towards self-help
groups, towards counselling services, and there are, Mr. Speaker, other examples
where these funds can be raised.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
That was a very interesting answer for perhaps another question, but
certainly had nothing to do with the question that I asked.
Mr. Speaker, I will ask the minister again. This Province received $35
million extra funding for health care this fiscal year from a new arrangement
between the federal government and the provincial government. Can the minister
tell us how that money is planned to be spent during this fiscal year?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: I certainly can, Mr. Speaker, and the issue of
addictions, I can say, will be front and centre with respect to the -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, when the First Ministers' Summit was held
back in September, there were a number of priorities and priority areas that
were identified; for example: home care, wait times, wait lists, Aboriginal
health, the issue of Labrador transportation, and transportation of the North.
These, indeed, are priority areas that have been recognized, and these will be
the focus of attention, and these particular priority areas will, in fact,
receive the funding and receive, in part, when allocations are finalized and
when decisions are made by this government in the very near future.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Labrador
West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for that answer. He summarized, sort of, what the
perimeters of the deal would be, but the big question is when. I don't think
soon is a good enough answer. We need an established date.
I would like to point out to the minister that other provinces, such as
Saskatchewan, for a month now have outlined a detailed plan to the citizens of
their Province. I want to emphasize upon the minister: Will and can the minister
say today that there will be funding provided for people who live in Labrador,
who have to spend exorbitant amounts of money for travel to other centres and
who have to, right now, rely upon the generosity of the community that they live
in, in order to do so?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I can say yes, because indeed that is an area that was identified at the
First Ministers' Summit in September. The area of concerns of the North,
whether it is with respect to Aboriginal issues generally, or transportation
issues, it is an area of priority.
I would like to add, however, that this Province cannot move immediately in
the absence of federal legislation which has yet to be enacted. I understand
that the federal government has to enact legislation to allow the flow through
of funding to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and other provinces, and
upon that particular act being completed, Mr. Speaker, we will then deal with
the priority issues that have been identified.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, last January, the Innovation, Trade and Rural
Development Minister announced that her department was assisting the
Stephenville Airport Authority to carry out a feasibility study on the
viability, on the future of the Stephenville Airport. We understand the report
has been completed. We understand, as well, that the minister recently made
comments to the media that she will no longer help the airport financially.
Given the government's claim that this session is about accountability and
transparency, will the minister or her alternate please tell this hon. House
what were the key findings of the report.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
How the world changes in just a few short months. In 1998, Transport Canada
downloaded all airports, or many airports, in provinces right across the
country. One in particular was Stephenville; they transferred to a non-profit
group called the Stephenville Airport Corporation. Since that time - when the
hon. minister was the minister herself, they did not provide any core funding
for Stephenville Airport.
Now, with respect to the question you have asked: Government, both federally
and provincially, through ACOA, the Labour Management Development Agreement, and
through the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Renewal, have provided
assistance. One, we provided the money to fund the plan that she has talked
about. Secondly, through the Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, we
entered into a creative 50-50 under the Multi-Year Capital Works Program so that
the Town of Stephenville could purchase land from the corporation to put money
into the corporation. We are not in the airport business. That is the federal
government's responsibility.
The fact with respect to the questions she has asked -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the minister if he could complete his answer quickly.
MR. E. BYRNE: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
The Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair says it is a history lesson. It
is one that you all need, worth reminding, I say to the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse
au Clair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: The fact of the matter is this, Mr. Speaker: that the
study, while it is not ours to release, it belongs to the Stephenville Airport
Corporation. That is theirs, but I refer back to The Georgian because
somebody from there leaked it several months ago.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, it is ironic how the hon. member can be so
defensive and say nothing in terms of the future of the Stephenville Airport and
what this government is going to doing, not what past governments did.
Mr. Speaker, rural airports are vital to the future of rural Newfoundland and
Labrador. Obviously, this government never did have a plan for rural
Newfoundland and still does not have one.
Last week, the airport could not refuel planes. Several military aircraft
were parked at the facility for three days because they could not refuel. What
is this government going to do to ensure that vital rural airports continue to
operate because they are so vital to the future success of rural Newfoundland
and Labrador?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we are going to do what the former government failed to do, and
that is, we are going to continue to hold the federal government accountable.
The minister from the region, the member who sits directly to my right and just
behind me, is meeting with the federal representatives on Monday. We are going
to continue to work with the town to try to find a solution. We will continue to
try to help where we can in terms of marketing, but the fact of the matter is
this, Mr. Speaker: Even in your own second sober thought, and privately, you
know that this government - and when you were the government - are not in the
airport business, but we will do whatever we can, wherever we can, to provide
help for Stephenville and, as a matter of face, Mr. Speaker, any other rural
community that needs our assistance.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, it sure sounds like they are prepared to see
another major employer in rural Newfoundland and Labrador close its doors.
We understand as well that other airports, including Gander, are facing
similar financial pressures. Has the minister actually funded studies concerning
the possible divestiture of the Wabush and St. Anthony airports to local
authorities? Are they giving up on local airports all together, and are they
going to allow them to go the same route as Stephenville?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I will make two points.
First of all, had she been successful in her federal bid, she might have been
able to ask that question in the place that it belongs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Secondly, Mr. Speaker, it appears to me that the Opposition
should be in the business because they are flying by the seat of their pants.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: The fact of the matter is this, Mr. Speaker -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
A question has been asked. The minister is attempting to make a response. I
ask all members for their co-operation.
The hon. the Minister.
MR. E. BYRNE: The fact of the matter is this, Mr. Speaker: A year ago,
the then Leader of the Opposition -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, if they want to ask a question they can ask
it. It is pretty clear they do not want to hear the answer when the truth cuts
so close to the bone. That is what I say, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question today is for the Minister of Education.
Minister, the community of Hopedale was saddened when a fire destroyed parts
of their school and caused smoke and water damage to the many classrooms in
early September. Your government, under the previous Minister of Education, the
Member for St. John's West - (inaudible) last week, students returned to the
portion of the school that was repaired. For that, Minister, we are grateful.
My question to you today is: Will you confirm today in this House that the
remaining part of the school, including the gymnasium that was damaged beyond
repair, will be rebuilt to its original size and shape this coming construction
season?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Education, for a very short response.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the member for that question and the short answer is, yes.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The time for Oral Questions has expired.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees.
Notices of Motion.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I give notice that I will on tomorrow move that the House resolve itself into
a Committee of the Whole to consider certain resolutions relating to the
granting of Supplementary Supply to Her Majesty. (Bill 51)
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motions?
The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask
leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act to Revise Various Acts of the
Province with Respect to Certain Functions of Justices of the Peace." (Bill
49)
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motions?
The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,
"An Act To Amend The Jury Act, 1991." ( Bill 50)
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motions?
The hon. the Minister of Government Services.
MS WHALEN: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave
to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Securities Act." (
Bill 47)
Also, Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to
introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Insurance Companies
Act." ( Bill 48)
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motions?
Answers to questions for which notice has been given.
Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present a petition on behalf of a group of people in this
Province concerning the use of VLTs. The petition states, Mr. Speaker:
WHEREAS there is one VLT for every 155 adults, the highest ratio of any
province; and
WHEREAS it is estimated that at least 5 per cent of those who gamble face an
addiction which has led to not only cost to society, but tragic consequences in
the lives of those affected;
We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to direct the government
to increase funding for problem gambling, strictly enforce the existing VLT
regulations, at least remove VLTs from areas frequented by individuals under age
nineteen, and that government hold a province-wide referendum of banning VLTs in
conjunction with the 2005 municipal election.
Mr. Speaker, I think the best way that I can respond to this petition - I
would like for all members to pay attention to a letter that I want to read in
presenting this petition. I read a letter that I want all members to hear.
You were once my friend, allowing me to escape into your world with a small
price, or so I thought -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair is having great difficulty hearing the hon. Member for Labrador
West. I ask members for their cooperation.
The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
"You were once my friend allowing me to escape into your world with only
a small price to pay (or so I thought).
Your lights, music, flashing screens made me retreat into my fantasy world
away from reality, time and friends.
For a long time you filled an emptiness inside me, and did not ask for much
besides money. You let me sit for hours, never questioning, always with a
promise of maybe the next spin.
I stayed and played on your empty promises and lost not only money but my
soul. I lost me sometimes while being mesmerized by your offer of more.
I sold my soul to play your game, you never judged, every ready to accept my
money. I always knew that you would be there when I was stressed, hurt,
frustrated or just plain lonely. I came looking for love, acceptance and that
and must more was taken from me.
I lost my self-respect. I lost my trust in me. I lost my dignity. I no longer
trusted my feelings. I just became numb, oblivious to the hurt I was causing my
family and myself.
If you would only let me out of your clutches and allow me to reclaim back my
life, without constantly fighting to stay out of your grasp. Your grip is
unbelievably strong, still trying to tempt me back into this insidious illness.
I want to beat you, yet I know you will patiently wait for me to fail so that I
will run back to you. Isn't this what I have done for years.
I have to let you go, you have hurt me more than anything or anyone in my
life. You made me reach depths I thought were impossible. You, with my
assistance, turned me into a liar, thief and a con.
I never thought I would be 30 years old going to court for fraud and writing
bad cheques."
Mr. Speaker, that says it much more strongly than I could do, and I want to
let all members know this letter was written by Susan Jane Piercey shortly
before she took her own life as a result of being addicted to VLT machines.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution calls for many things. I think it is important
that we, as Members of this House of Assembly, and people in the Province
understand the misery that is caused by VLT machines. That misery -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's allotted time has expired.
MR. COLLINS: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: The member has been granted leave.
MR. COLLINS: That misery, Mr. Speaker, is well documented by shows such
as The Fifth Estate , special presentations by NTV, CBC, radio
programs, newspapers and all others. VLTs are more addictive than any other type
of gambling we know of in this Province. It has been referred to as the crack
cocaine of gambling. I do not believe that we need these machines in our
Province. We managed to run things, as a government, prior to these machines
coming into place and we can do so again, because the hundreds of millions of
dollars that is spent into these machines would not be kept under someone's
mattress. They would go back into our economy for more meaningful reasons than
is being spent for right now.
I would like to also, Mr. Speaker, before I clue up, commend Mr. Nick McGrath
of Labrador West who decided, by his own initiative, to remove these VLTs from
his establishment. I think it is the first time, that I am aware of, that
somebody has actually taken them out of their establishment voluntarily. I think
he is to be commended for that. I think we have to draw the line and not
identify VLTs with bingo, other forms of gambling for recreation or 649s because
nobody in this room has ever seen the destruction caused by these VLTs by any
other forms of entertainment in our Province today. It is time that this
government made a commitment to hold a referendum during the next municipal
election, place this on the ballot so that the people of our Province can decide
what type of society we want for our people.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present a petition with regard to health care and to give my
hon. colleague, the Minister of Transportation and Works, a break today from my
transportation petitions.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to read the petition into the record:
WHEREAS the provincial government made the decision to reduce the number of
health care boards in the Province from fourteen to four; and
WHEREAS Labrador and the Northern Peninsula will be part of one board; and
WHEREAS the Grenfell Regional Health Board and the Labrador Health Board will
be amalgamated to form one Health Care Corporation; and
WHEREAS this new Corporation will have an accumulated debt of almost $14
million; and
WHEREAS the Corporation will be serving one of the most rural and northern
regions of our Province; and
WHEREAS these services are already stretched to the limit on a marginal
budget;
WHEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that the petitioners request that the Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador pay down the accumulated debt and allow this
corporation to move forward, not backward, with health care delivery in this
region.
Mr. Speaker, this petition, of course, is driven out of sheer concern and
anxiety over the transformation that is occurring in the health care sector in
Newfoundland and Labrador.
Recently I had the opportunity to meet with employees of both Health Labrador
and the Grenfell Regional Health Board, as well as management with those board
areas, as well as board of director members. Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that
there is a great deal of anxiety in this particular region, not just by staff
and by board members but also by the people who are receiving health care
through this new corporation, as to the level of care that they will continue to
receive.
Mr. Speaker, we all realize that these boards operating in the North, in the
past have had a great deal of difficulty when it came to the service delivery
and program delivery, especially with delivering community health programs. They
have had significant challenges with regard to transportation as most of it is
done by air and it can be very expensive for these corporations to provide the
services using that mode of transportation.
Yesterday, I understand, the minister appointed four new Chairs for these
four boards across the Province, and I congratulate all four of them on their
appointments. Mr. Speaker, their task will not be an easy one, as there will be
insurmountable challenges to try to provide health care services in the Province
under such fiscal restraint.
The petition is appealing to the minister and to the government to strongly
consider the debt that is accumulated in this particular board area in the
North, to look at providing some assistance to help pay down this debt so that
they can start off on a new page, a new chapter, with delivery of health care in
this particular region.
Mr. Speaker, people are very concerned because a lot of this region is made
up, all of the North Coast with small clinics, and of the South Coast with small
clinics, a number of regional hospitals around the Northen Peninsula, along with
a hospital in Labrador West, one in Happy Valley-Goose Bay and one in St.
Anthony.
Mr. Speaker, people are afraid that they are going to lose the services that
they are presently getting under this system because if the board is asked to
come up with $14 million -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's time has expired.
MS JONES: May I have leave, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been requested.
MR. E. BYRNE: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the Government House Leader
for his gracious time of three more minutes to clue up my petition.
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying -
MR. RIDEOUT: (Inaudible).
MS JONES: Thank you.
The Minister of Transportation and Works has gladly granted me leave today,
Mr. Speaker, to clue up my petition on a very serious matter no doubt.
Mr. Speaker, it will be quite difficult, as I was saying, for this board to
be able to pay down a debt this size and continue to operate the services and
the programs that they are now providing in this northern region. The appeal is
to the minister to strongly take this under advisement, to work with the new
chair - I am sure that he will - that he has just appointed in that area and
whoever the new CEO and board members will be to try and address this deficit on
behalf of the people in this region.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.
MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the children in Labrador.
Today I present the petition on behalf of the students of Mary's Harbour. It
is their request for an auditorium.
Mr. Speaker, today in the House I raised a question with the Minister of
Education on rebuilding the school in Hopedale with a gymnasium. The answer was
yes. Some people laughed because they thought he was a fast dancer. Imagine
today, the children in Hopedale knowing that their gymnasium is going to be
restored to what it was.
If I could, Mr. Speaker, part of my petition is to say to the hon. minister,
and people across the way, what that gymnasium meant to the Community of
Hopedale. During Newfoundland and Labrador's Winter Games we saw a volleyball
team from Hopedale that became famous and known as the Mighty Mites.
Mr. Speaker, we are very glad of the response from the minister. I hope that
the minister, along with the Minister of Tourism, the Minister for Labrador and
Aboriginal Affairs, two ministers who carry the portfolio for Labrador, that
they will certainly talk to their colleagues on the importance of what the
auditorium means to the children in Labrador.
My daughter, who is teaching school for the first year, had the opportunity
today - I guess it is a bit ironic that I said it was Mary's Harbour because
her first teaching position is in Mary's Harbour. She was selected, as a
teacher, to take a group of students to travel to the Labrador Creative Arts
Festival in Happy Valley-Goose Bay.
Mr. Speaker, I ask this government and the ministers responsible again, to
give the children in Labrador their auditorium. As I mentioned yesterday, talks
of the Labrador Creative Arts Festival not continuing next year, I think, would
be a shame.
I call upon this government of today to make the announcement to the children
in Labrador now before the House closes this session to give the people in
Labrador, the children, what they rightfully deserve. I am sure we will thank
each member in Cabinet and those who sit on the other side and encourage them to
make that decision.
Mr. Speaker, I am glad that the former Minister of Education believed in the
children in Hopedale, he gave me his full commitment that they would restore the
school, but, I guess, the way this government changes their minds from time to
time, I was obliged to ask the present minister the same question. I am
certainly happy with his response. As I mentioned before, I am sure the children
in Hopedale are.
Mr. Speaker, again, I call upon the Premier, I call upon the Cabinet
ministers, who sit at the Cabinet table, to make this decision. As the Minister
of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs, I was glad to convince my Cabinet, that I
was a part of, to give them the money. Mr. Speaker, I ask this government and
this Cabinet to do the right thing, with Christmas around the corner, and give
the children in Labrador their auditorium and to announce the funds before
Christmas.
Mr. Speaker, I can assure you that until we get the answer from this
government, I will be on my feet everyday -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's allotted time has expired.
MR. ANDERSEN: - and I look forward to standing again on Monday.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise at this time to present a rather large petition on a very important
matter. This petition has some 7,000 names on it that were collected over a
period of three months by an organization called the Advocates for Fair Auto
Insurance.
Mr. Speaker, these petitioners come from some 200 different communities in
Newfoundland and Labrador, and it concerns the issue of public automobile
insurance.
First of all, let me congratulate Victoria Harnum, who is the chief
spokesperson for the Advocates for Fair Auto Insurance, who has been vigorously
promoting this issue for quite some time, a year or two. This petition, the
official one, calls upon the House of Assembly, but the one that was collected
refers to the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador but the official petition
calls upon:
The undersigned petitioners humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly
to direct the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to request an impartial
third party committee be set up to look at the feasibility of a public auto
insurance system for our Province that would be similar to the BC Public Auto
insurance system.
Now, Mr. Speaker, this is very similar to the proposal that we had made as a
Party here last year, last spring rather, that there be an all-party select
committee of this House to look into the type of public automobile insurance
system that would work for Newfoundland and Labrador.
We have seen in the last year the significance of this issue amongst
consumers in this Province, the extremely high costs of insurance. The
tinkering, I guess, with the system that this government and others in the
Atlantic provinces have done, which have not really changed the water on the
beans for consumers of automobile insurance. The insurance rates still went up
despite the freeze, and the freeze expires in March and we have already got the
insurers gone to the Public Utilities Board looking for more money.
What we also see, Mr. Speaker, is that when we called upon the government to
do this last spring they said: No, no, no, we don't need to that. The Public
Utilities Board is going to study that. Well, Mr. Speaker, that is not going to
happen. The Public Utilities Board will start hearings in January but they will
not be looking into the feasibility or the kind of public automobile insurance
system that could work for Newfoundland and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, there are four reasons why a public automobile insurance system
would be cheaper and better for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Cheaper
for four reasons, Mr. Speaker. Number one, there is no profit. The profit on the
premium dollar is in excess of 10 per cent per year. In fact, the insurance
industry is doing very well, thank you very much. Recent reports of the first
nine months of 2004 they made $2.1 billion -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's allotted time has expired.
MR. HARRIS: May I have a moment, Mr. Speaker, to clue up?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the member have time to continue?
MR. E. BYRNE: Yes.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.
MR. HARRIS: They have just announced $1.2 billion in the first nine
months, which is equal to what they made last year. (Inaudible) heading for a 25
per cent increase. So, there is no profit in a public system. There is less
overhead; perhaps 10 per cent-plus less overhead. There are fewer uninsured
drivers. In B.C. there is less than 1 per cent. In this Province and the rest of
Canada, between 10 per cent and 15 per cent uninsured drivers who do not pay any
premiums and yet cost the system money. Number four, there is a public
investment in safety by the public system that accrues to the benefit of all
people who are insured because there are fewer accidents and therefore fewer
costs.
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important issue to all consumers. We think, along
with the petitioners, that this should be studied by this Legislature, as was
done by the Legislature of New Brunswick. It is time that we took this issue
seriously. As can be seen by this petition from over 200 committees in the
Province, this is something the public is very interested in and wants to see
happen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Have you called Orders of the Day, Mr. Speaker?
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: As soon as you stand, Sir, we will call Orders of the Day.
MR. E. BYRNE: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Seeing that we are on Orders of the Day, Mr. Speaker, I would like to call
Order 5, second reading of a bill,
An Act To Amend The Pharmaceutical
Association Act, 1994. (Bill 35)
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 35,
An Act To Amend The
Pharmaceutical Association Act, 1994, be now read a second time.
Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Pharmaceutical
Association Act, 1994." (Bill 35)
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am pleased to speak for a few moments this afternoon on Bill 35,
An Act To
Amend The Pharmaceutical Association Act, 1994,
an act to regulate the practice
of pharmacy in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
I want to recognize the fact that this act is a result of a lot of effort by
individuals, not only within the department itself but certainly within the
profession as well, Mr. Speaker. I have met with a number of the pharmacists and
those individuals engaged with the profession, and it was easy to learn that a
lot of preparation, a lot of engagement, a lot of contribution, was made by the
profession and its membership in terms of the preparation of the legislation
that we have before us this afternoon.
What these amendments will do, essentially, Mr. Speaker, they will do several
things. Number one, it will incorporate new disciplinary procedures and
governance structures with respect to the profession. It will remove the current
advocacy function of the Newfoundland Pharmaceutical Association and delegate
that particular role to the Pharmacists' Association of Newfoundland and
Labrador, and it will allow the delegation of tasks to pharmacy technicians, and
protect pharmacists from liability when they release certain information to the
department for the purpose of administration of the Prescription Drug Program as
funded by government.
Mr. Speaker, the changes to the disciplinary procedures and governance
structures are part of an ongoing process to provide for uniform disciplinary
procedures and criteria for lay representation across all professions with
self-regulating status. These changes reflect an intent to ensure that
self-regulatory bodies operate in a very open and transparent manner, and that
the disciplinary process eliminates professional or personal bias and, in
general, to enhance and improve the public protection mandate of the regulatory
body.
All provinces that regulate the practice of pharmacy and discipline
procedures are, in and of themselves, the central tenet of regulation.
Mr. Speaker, for the past couple of years pharmacists and the Newfoundland
Pharmaceutical Association have been lobbying government to amend the act. As I
indicated, their involvement led, in a very special way, an important way, to
the legislation that we have before us. In their lobbying, they wish to separate
the professional advocacy function from that of a professional regulatory body.
Removing the advocacy function from the Newfoundland Pharmaceutical Association
and delegating the role to the Pharmacists Association of Newfoundland and
Labrador will, Mr. Speaker, eliminate the current conflict that exists between
professional advocacy and public protection, the latter being the prime
rationale for regulating occupations generally.
Allowing the delegation of tasks, such as doing an inventory of pharmacy
supplies or entering data in the computer database, to pharmacy technicians will
legitimize the use of technical support staff and provide for more efficient and
effective use of pharmacists within the Province. The Association has requested
that the practice be regulated under its governing statute by granting authority
to pass regulations in that particular area.
The Association, and the Pharmacists' Association of Newfoundland and
Labrador, had expressed concern that providing personal information for the
purposes of administering the act, and in sending copies of documentation, could
place their membership at risk.
I am pleased to say, Mr. Speaker, that there has been a mediated wording with
respect to a particular
section of the legislation that gives some comfort, it
seems to me, to the profession and its members with respect to the forwarding
and transmitting of documentation to the department.
All jurisdictions in Canada are in the process of reviewing and amending
their legislation, policies and guidelines, as a result of growing concerns
regarding the protection of personal information. Statutory clauses allowing the
release of health information in prescribed instances and protecting individuals
who release the information from liability, from civil liability, are widely
used to ensure that personal information is only released by appropriate persons
and for the appropriate reason.
In all jurisdictions a practice has evolved whereby pharmacists rely upon the
assistance of non-professionals in the field of pharmacy to preform non-clinical
duties. These amendments will enable the licensing body to establish standards
to regulate this practice, and thereby ensure public protection.
Public safety is also a central concern of government and, of course, the
Association and the Pharmacists' Association of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Pharmacists dispense millions and millions of dollars worth or prescription
drugs each and every year. In the name of public safety, we have an obligation
to monitor the use of prescription drugs in our Province.
Therefore, I guess, in one sense, this legislation and the administration of
this act becomes an exercise in balance. We must facilitate a process whereby we
can effectively monitor prescription drugs without compromising public safety,
confidentiality, and causing excessive burdens for members of the profession.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that Bill 35 accomplishes much of what was being
requested by the profession. It seems to me that we have a meeting of the minds
with respect to the requirements of government, the standards, of course, that
have to be put in place, and also meets, in a very meaningful way, the
professional concerns that have been brought forward by the pharmacists in
general.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that we have very important and significant
legislation here. Again, I think it is important to repeat what I had said
earlier, that it is very much strongly supported by the profession, and I look
forward to any further debate that may take place with respect to Bill 35.
I understand, I believe, the hon. the Opposition House Leader may have a few
words. I understand that we may have a further member or two from the government
side who may wish to address this issue as well.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au
Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I wanted to just make a couple of very brief comments with regard to Bill 35,
An Act To Amend The Pharmaceutical Association Act. I guess this was a reform
that we started when we were in government. It was being lobbied for at that
time by pharmacists in the Province, and we certainly started to move forward
with that initiative and a great deal of the research and groundwork was done. I
want to commend the minister today for finally bringing it forward to be
legislated through the House of Assembly.
I will not go into any long comments, but just to say that one of the key
pieces to this, I guess, is with regard to the licensing board itself, and that
was certainly a piece that was recommended by the pharmacists in the Province,
and the Association. They certainly have seen it as a way that they could have a
lot more accountability, a lot more openness and transparency, within their own
organization - and the accountability piece in particular. I guess, like all
occupations, pharmacists are prone to have a certain amount of self-policing
within their own establishments and of their own work as well, the same as we
see with regard to accountants or lawyers or anyone else in the business. I
guess the discipline board piece of it is an added precaution for them, as they
do their work and carry out their work in the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador.
While this is very much a regulatory piece of legislation, and looks directly
at regulations and licensing and so on, I guess it is also an opportunity to ask
ourselves: Is there enough being done with regard to the access to prescription
drugs within the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador?
Over the last twelve months there have been a number of issues in the media
with regard to the access to prescription drugs, the doubling up of
prescriptions, and so on and so forth. I guess with the issues around OxyContin
being available in the Province and so on, it has raised a lot of those
questions. Is there a way that we can work through the pharmaceutical program
and through the pharmacists in the Province to look at how we can reduce the
access to some of these prescription drugs, and how we can streamline that
particular process to ensure that these things do not continue to happen into
the future?
I am sure these are all things that the minister, in his capacity - and he is
just new in that capacity - will be looking at over the next few months, and I
would certainly encourage him to do that, because I think it is a very vital and
valuable component that needs to be put in place, and those particular stop-gap
measures need to be put in place to ensure that we do not have the excessive
access to prescription drugs, and that pharmacists know right across the
Province what is being issued so that we do not have those particular conflicts.
Mr. Speaker, we have no objections to Bill 35. As I said, it is a piece of
work that we started to do when we were in government, working with pharmacists
in the Province. I know that it is something they have been wanting for some
time. I commend the minister again today for bringing it forward, and I look
forward to seeing this particular act in place in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would just like to take a few minutes at second reading of Bill 35,
An Act
to Amend The Pharmaceutical Association Act, and I want to say first of all that
I agree with the purposes and the philosophy behind the act, in that what this
act seeks to do is what has been done with a number of professions: to separate
out, let's say, the professional-promotional aspects of an association with
the licensing and discipline side of things.
We see that, for example, in the nursing profession, where we have the
Association of Registered Nurses of Newfoundland and Labrador, which is the
licensing and professional body that looks after professional management
licensing discipline, and we see the Nurses' Union acting in the interests of
nurses. In the legal profession, for example, we see the Law Society on the one
hand, which is the professional association which looks after discipline, and
then the Canadian Bar Association acting in another way to promote legal matters
and legal issues as well as the interests of lawyers.
We see in the medical profession, we have the Newfoundland and Labrador
Medical Association, and in addition to that we have a Newfoundland and Labrador
Medical Board. The Medical Board looks after the licensing of physicians,
looking after disciplinary matters and that sort of thing.
What we are doing here, and what the government is proposing here, is that
the Pharmaceutical Association Act be amended to provide that, in addition to
the professional association, there would be a board, a pharmaceutical licensing
board, that the Newfoundland and Labrador Pharmacy Board would be a corporation
continued under
Section 5 of this Act to allow the licensing board and the
Pharmacy Association to be two separate organizations. In fact, this establishes
the Pharmacists Association of Newfoundland and Labrador as a separate
corporation with the objective of promoting and advancing pharmacy and related
disciplines, promoting liaison amongst the various branches of pharmacy, and
negotiating with providers of prescription drug payment programs. In other
words, they can act as the advocacy group on behalf of pharmacists in dealing
with government, in dealing with drug companies, in dealing with agencies, and
ensure that they are part of that. At the same time, the issue of licensing,
professional standards dealing with complaints, is left to a licensing board.
I think it is important that we see that happen in the pharmacy profession.
We do know the increasing importance of prescription drugs, and not only
prescription drugs but the non-prescription drugs that pharmacists are
continuously giving advise to people about. If somebody goes to a pharmacy, they
don't necessarily just go with a prescription and say, here, can you give me a
refill of my prescription. They might to go a pharmacist and say, look, I have a
cold or I have this, and pharmacists give out a tremendous amount of advise to
people as part of their profession, what the side effects are of certain types
of medications, even something as simple as a dandruff medication or something
like that: Well, this one works or this one doesn't work, this one works
better, or I noticed that some people have trouble with that one because of
certain additives, any number of bits of information that are passed out by
pharmacists. A lot of people seek to relieve their symptoms by going to a drug
store instead of waiting to see a doctor or travelling, in some cases, to see a
doctor. The pharmacies are there to offer that kind of advise.
They play a very important role in our society, as professionals, and people
rely on them. That is the reason why we expect them, as professionals, to adhere
to certain ethical standards and professional standards. We will now have,
through the licensing board, a body that will look after that, so that if people
have a problem with certain practices of a particular pharmacist or a pharmacy
the complaints can be made, that there will be a method of dealing with those,
the same way if somebody has a complaint against a lawyer or a doctor or another
professional in their professional capacity.
I am fully supportive of the change here and certainly from a second reading
perspective, approve it in principle. I have no problem with the bill. All the
details of it, because this is a bill that has only been printed in the last
forty-eight hours. I have not read every single
section of it but it appears to
be patterned after the same kind of discipline that we see in the other
professional associations with a complaint authorization procedure, a
disciplinary panel, authorities being given to the board to do that. I think
that part of the act appears to be consistent with the other professional
activities.
I do have one problem that I just raised with the Minister of Health and the
Government House Leader. Maybe we can get some more information on that and have
further discussion on it before this act is passed into law. I have a little
difficulty with the implications of
section 34.1 of the act, found in clause 29.
It repeals an existing
section of the act and replaces it with the following -
and I have not had a chance to look at the previous section, but this one here
says, "Upon the request of an employee or agent of the department
authorized by the minister a pharmacist shall provide the information that the
employee or agent requests with respect to prescription drugs prescribed to a
resident of the province and received by that resident with the assistance of
the Newfoundland and Labrador Prescription Drug Program administered by the
department."
Section 34.1(2) says, "The information requested under subsection
(1) may include (
a) prescriptions, patient records, notes and other documents held
by that pharmacists; and (
b) photocopies of the information referred to in
paragraph (a)."
Section 31.1(3) says, "An action for damages does not lie against a
pharmacist or a pharmacy solely because the pharmacist provides the information
requested of him or her under subsection (1)" and that (4) "A
pharmacist is not guilty of professional misconduct solely because that
pharmacist provided information requested of him or her under subsection
(1)."
Why would we need those extra protections at the end, Mr. Speaker? Why would
we say a pharmacist is not guilty of professional misconduct solely because he
provided that information? The reason you have to say that, Mr. Speaker, is
because if you did not say it they might otherwise be guilty of professional
misconduct by making that information available to someone else.
MR. E. BYRNE: What was the law before?
MR. HARRIS: I do not know what the law was before. Maybe the law before
was something we did not like either.
MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible).
MR. HARRIS: Perhaps we can get into this discussion during Committee of
the Whole, but the Government House Leader says: What about the law profession?
Well, we are not talking about regulating the profession here. We are talking
about the government running a prescription drug program. In other words, if you
have a drug card and you go to a pharmacist and you get a drug prescription,
these are the only people who are affected by that.
What they are saying here is if the government is paying for your drugs the
pharmacist has to pass over all kinds of information to the department because
the Newfoundland and Labrador Prescription Drug Program is the one that we are
talking about here, whether it is senior citizens or whether it is people on
social assistance or qualify by reason of income for a drug card. That is what
we are talking about here and I am presuming, without any full information here,
that the whole purpose of this is to somehow monitor the operations of the
prescription drug program by the Department of Health because they are paying
the bill. The reason for raising this at this point is that I think this is
something that we need to be very careful about, because the kind of information
that we are talking about here, patient records, prescriptions, notes and other
documents held that the prescription drug program -
MR. E. BYRNE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, on a point of order.
MR. E. BYRNE: I am reluctant to stand on a point of order and interrupt
because we are really into a specific clause by clause debate and this is second
reading.
I want to make a suggestion because I am not convinced that what the member -
actually I am sure of it - is referring to and the implications of it are
absolutely correct. I know my colleague, the Minister of Health and Community
Services, has an arrangement made with some of the stuff outside so we can have
a look at it. So, if we can, Mr. Speaker, if it is okay by consent of the House,
once we get into the committee stage we can get into the detailed discussion in
a clause by clause
section which is normally and solely reserved for the
committee stage of the bill.
Again, I am reluctant to interrupt. I apologize to the member for doing so. I
do not want my interruption or the time that it has taken to come out of his
time and I certainly will make any allowance to allow him to have whatever
maximum time he wants. I just wanted to make that clarification because for
anybody who may be watching, they may be getting a sense that government is
doing something that may be intrusive. That is not the case. I would not want
anything untoward or out there that is not true to start to take shape or to get
some wind under its sails that is not necessarily true.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
We are into second reading of Bill 35 and second reading is a general
discussion on the bill itself and the spirit of the bill. Once we get into the
committee stage of Bill 35 there will be an opportunity then for each member to
ask questions on specific articles of that bill and maybe that is the right time
for this discussion to take place.
The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quid Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The tradition in this House has always been to allow discussion of a bill at
second reading, the general principles of the bill or any clause of the bill. I
do not know if you are ruling me out of order or not. If you are, then I will
have to accept your ruling, but the tradition of this House has always been that
at second reading you can talk in broad general terms or you can talk about
specific sections of the act. It has always been that way. I do not really think
it was a serious point of order but rather to try and interject and suggest that
we can discuss it in more detail; and I would be very happy to do that, I want
to say to the Government House Leader. I was merely flagging this.
MR. SPEAKER: If the Chair did not make himself clear, there was no point
of order. If I failed to say that, then I say it now to the hon. Member for
Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: An excellent ruling, Mr. Speaker. I totally agree.
I recognize, however, that what the minister was suggesting is correct, that
we should not necessarily get into a big harangue about this clause before we
have a chance to discuss it in detail. I am merely flagging it, as many members
do, when they are dealing with second reading of the bill.
I said quite clearly from the beginning that we are talking about the
principles of the legislation, and I have no difficulty with the principles of
the legislation, the fact that we are setting up a licensing board that people
can complain to if they have a problem with a particular pharmacy practice. We
are setting up standards to be adhered to. We are recognizing that a pharmacist
is to be a self-governing professional along the same lines as lawyers and
doctors and engineers and accountants, that we have had a number of bills passed
in this House giving professionals that kind of responsibility to the public
because they are in a professional capacity.
What I was doing, and I will continue to do until I am satisfied that this is
not overly intrusive, was to flag this issue as one that I am particularly
concerned about, because we are dealing with pharmacists who have access to
intimate information about people's lives and habits, and details of their
medical condition. I do not know if I need to give examples, Mr. Speaker, but
there is a drug called Antibuse. Antibuse is a drug that is prescribed for -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) off the market.
MR. HARRIS: It may be off the market. I am not a pharmacist. There are
probably other ones that are prescribed for people who are alcoholics, so that
is how much I know about it, but there are drugs that are prescribed that flag a
particular illness. So, if a particular individual is going to a pharmacist and
getting a particular drug, anybody who has a knowledge of either pharmacy or the
medical profession, or read something in a book, or access to the Internet can,
in fact, figure out that there is somebody who has a particular problem, and
that is personal, private information; personal, private information.
Pharmacists have an ethical and moral duty to keep that information private,
just as doctors do when someone goes to a doctor and tells him about a
particular problem. That professional responsibility is there, because it is
that professional responsibility and professional situation that allows people
to talk in confidence about personal, intimidate things, or go to a lawyer and
talk about a legal problem.
What I am flagging here is what appears to be a provision that allows some
government employee or agent of the department, authorized by the minister - I
presume it is the Minister of Health - can go to a pharmacist and say: I want to
see your records on Patient X.
What I am saying is that I am flagging this as a potential concern from a
protection of privacy point of view. From a protection of privacy point of view,
is there a level of protection that is required by these circumstance where we
have access to personal private information? Not about the cost of drugs, not
about the expenses incurred by the Department of Health, but about patient
records, prescriptions, notes and other documents that the pharmacist might hold
about an individual.
I have a concern, and we will see whether or not that concern can be
satisfied, but it is something that I want to raise. We had a big debate in the
previous session of the House when the government members were over here and
members opposite were over there, and the current Minister of Transportation and
Works and Aboriginal Affairs and I both intervened on the creation of the
Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for Health Information, as to how that was
being structured, what was being done to ensure that the health information was
kept properly, set up properly. As a result of the interventions of the hon.
Member for Lewisporte, who is now the Minister of Transportation and Works and
Aboriginal Affairs, and myself, as a result of that, the structure was changed,
revised, presented and done in a very different way.
This is the same kind of concern that is being flagged here, and I look
forward to an opportunity to discuss this issue a little further with the
minister's officials, if that is okay. If we move on to Committee stage here
today and discuss that and pass it, then so be it.
I raise it because I want people to know, first of all, that this is here and
we should know about it, but I also want people to know that members of this
House have an obligation and a duty to be vigilant about issues of privacy, and
a duty to bring up, to question, items in legislation that could give rise to
concerns, because that is our role. That is what we were elected for, and
whether we are in Opposition or in government, in the back bench or the front
bench, it is all of our roles to ensure that the legislation that we pass is the
best legislation that can be done. If we can ensure that is the case and still
achieve the proper objectives of government, then that is the role that we play.
Having said that Mr. Speaker, I support the bill at second reading. I think
it is a positive step forward for the pharmacy profession in Newfoundland and
Labrador, because we do have a lot of issues that involve pharmacists, whether
they be drugs that are now out of circulation or drugs such as OxyContin, that
have become a significant problem in the last year-and-a-half in our
communities, having given rise to serious social problems, health problems,
criminal justice problems and addiction problems that have exploded in the last
eighteen to twenty months in a very surprising way. These drugs are legal
prescription drugs that somehow are finding their way into the street market and
into the hands of individuals not only in this Province but in many other
provinces of Canada.
Pharmacists and the pharmacy association have a role to play in trying to
make our streets safer, and our communities safer, and our people safer, when
powerful drugs such as that can so quickly become drugs in our society that
people are buying and selling, getting high on, dying from. We have had deaths
in this Province from OxyContin. We really do need to have pharmacists - who
themselves, I am sure, are very concerned about this, but they need to be
empowered with the kind of ethical guidelines and expectations that can help
them to deal with it; or, if there are individuals who are not dealing with this
properly, can be held to account and can expect to be disciplined by a proper
licensing authority.
I think this bill, in that way, is timely. I hope that we can resolve
whatever issues may arise out of the query raised by me about the protection of
the privacy of individuals who make use of pharmacy services in Newfoundland and
Labrador.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services
speaks now, he will close debate.
The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Firstly, I would like to thank the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair
and the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi for their input into this debate. I
appreciate the overall general support for Bill 35,
An Act To Amend The
Pharmaceutical Association Act, 1994.
If I may make a suggestion to the hon. member, if he has five or ten minutes
now, I have arranged some officials outside the House. If he were to have five
or ten minutes now on the issue, and it is an important issue, I say to the hon.
member, that he has raised. If he is in a position to have a few minutes now I
would be happy to meet with him and a couple of representatives to address the
very issue that he has concerns with and hopefully there may be some answers to
the important points that he raised during second reading.
I say to the hon. member, if he does have a few minutes I would be happy to
join him now momentarily. I understand from the Government House Leader we are
moving on to another piece of legislation and that may give us time, hopefully,
to come to some understanding with respect to
section 34. We will just - as the
saying goes - take it as it comes.
Mr. Speaker, I thank hon. members for their contribution to this debate and I
look forward to the next proceedings of this particular bill.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Order 7,
An Act To Amend The College Act, 1996 And The Memorial University
Act. (Bill 42)
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Before I recognize the Government House Leader and before I call that bill,
we may as well finish off the second reading of Bill 35.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now read a second time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: Against?
Motion carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend the Pharmaceutical Association Act, 1994.
(Bill 35)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a second time. When shall this
bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House? Now? Tomorrow?
AN HON. MEMBER: Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.
On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Pharmaceutical Associations Act,
1994," read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole
House on tomorrow. (Bill 35)
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
You are like Panasonic, you are slightly ahead of your time, Sir.
Mr. Speaker, Order 7,
An Act To Amend The College Act, 1996 And The Memorial
University Act. (Bill 42)
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am delighted to rise today in my place with regard to,
An Act To Amend The
College Act, 1996 And The Memorial University Act, Bill 42.
Certainly, this is a bill bringing forth amendments that will increase the
student representation on the Board of Regents of Memorial University and its
Senate. As well, it will enhance student representation on the College of the
North Atlantic's Board of Governors. I say to you, Mr. Speaker, that this is
indeed a pleasure on my part to be able to stand and comply with requests that
have come in from the students of this Province, the post-secondary students and
these two institutions, to give them, what I would consider a stronger voice in
the governance of these two institutions.
With regard, first of all, to the Memorial University Act. On that particular
act, currently there is provision for - the number of Board of Regents student
appointments stands at two. With the moving forward of this Bill 42 and its
enactment, we will increase that membership on the Board of Regents from two
students to four students. Certainly, a 100 per cent increase, Mr. Speaker. The
part as well with regard to the Senate of that institution, we will be adding
one more
student.
I say, Mr. Speaker, that this is yet another example of a commitment that
this government made to the students that we are following through with and
bringing forward in a timely fashion. This is an opportunity to fulfill that
commitment and I am delighted that the first bill, for me, as the Minister of
Education, is directly towards the post-secondary students.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: With regard to the two representatives for the Board of
Regents, we also find that the students took these appointments and made sure
that they would be allocated in a democratic fashion. Looking at post-secondary,
with regard to Memorial University, the first thing is that we certainly
concurred with the students to make sure that all aspects of that university
were represented. Now, when this bill is to go forward, we will have one student
representative which will be from Memorial Student's Union. There will be one
from Memorial Graduate Student's Union. There will be one representative from
the Marine Institute Student's Union and one student representative from the
Sir Wilfred Grenfell College Student Union.
Mr. Speaker, this certainly looks at the full university, the Marine
Institute, Sir Wilfred Grenfell, the main campus at St. John's and also the
graduate students in that institution. It is certainly a move forward; a move
forward that has been requested and which has been complied with.
In addition to these representatives who are moving forward, I might also add
that, in future, that these student appointments will be appointments however,
it will depend on the students to select from their various campuses who they
want to represent them. It will be a democratic election and a majority vote
from these four unions, from which these representative will come from, will
move forward. So it is through democracy that we will have our representatives
and, again, giving the post-secondary students in this institution the
opportunity to elect their own representatives to move forward in a democratic
fashion to represent those unions which I just referenced.
Now, over the past several months we have worked with the student leaders in
this Province to research student representation across this particular nation.
I am delighted to report to the Legislature that what the bill that I am tabling
today ensures is that the Province has the same involvement of students in
post-secondary decision making as we find anywhere across Canada. Again,
pointing to the importance of the voices of students in the governance of the
institution of which they are a part.
Again, with regard to Memorial University, we know part of the governance in
there is the Senate of Memorial University. We will put another student on that
particular board and that will broaden the student involvement with regard to
the university.
To the College of the North Atlantic; again, Mr. Speaker, I say to you, a
very important institution for this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The
programs that are contained within that college, not only within this Province
but internationally as we look at Qatar. This institution has clearly
demonstrated their ability to meet the needs of the post-secondary students not
only here but abroad as well. Currently, students have one seat on this Board of
Governors for the College of the North Atlantic. Again, this legislation will
allow one more student to be added on so that they would again have double the
representation that they had prior to this. As with the University, this
representation on the Board of Governors, as with the Board of Regents, gives
the students fair representation, gives the students an opportunity to voice
their concerns, to have some
part in the decision-making process, the governance
of these two institutions.
As I have referenced before, these commitments to the students of
Newfoundland and Labrador, and others - because we do have, in either one of
these institutions, students not only from the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador, but we do have them from across this country and indeed
internationally in other countries of the world. It was, as I pointed out, a
commitment that was made during the last provincial election. The Premier - and
I remember the day that he met with the students prior to the election - in his
conversation, student representation was put on the table. The Premier
immediately responded by indicating that he would clearly like to see more
representation with regard to the governance of these two institutions, and made
a commitment to the students that he would, if elected - certainly if his party
was elected as government - that he would fulfill that commitment.
I stand in this House today to make sure that commitment has been fulfilled,
and that we are committed to enhancing student representation in the
post-secondary. The legislation that I am tabling today ensures that we keep
this commitment, and in fact that we are doubling, in both institutions, the
number of student seats on both of our post-secondary boards - a position
endorsed by the student groups in this Province.
I am proud, as I pointed out, to stand. I am proud of this legislation. I am
proud to enhance the democratic rights of post-secondary students in this
Province. They have so much to offer in the decision-making of these
institutions, and this legislation ensures that their voice is even stronger
today.
I move, Mr. Speaker, that this House pass this legislation in the interest of
all post-secondary students in this Province, and I would certainly hope that,
in passing it, we do it unanimously; because I say, Mr. Speaker, this is a
request that we are fulfilling from the post-secondary students in our Province,
and I would hope that there would be no impediment for us to move forward on
this particular bill.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.
MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am delighted to stand today and respond to Bill 42,
An Act To Amend The
College Act, 1996 And The Memorial University Act, and I must congratulate the
new Minister of Education. This is a good news piece of legislation, and I hope
that all succeeding pieces of legislation that he brings to this House will be
as good as this one today.
I want to say that this is a good move to increase student participation in
the Board of Regents and also the Senate. We need student participation and, in
fact, while I was the Minister of Post-Secondary Education prior to this new
government, we increased student participation on the Board of Regents from one
to two, a 100 per cent increase, and I am glad to see that the new government is
going to use the same trend and they are going to increase it by 100 per cent
today. That is a good move.
Mr. Speaker, I also have to use this opportunity here today to remind the new
Minister of Education and the new government of their commitment to students,
which they have broken time and time again.
I noticed, when the Minister of Education stood in his place, he repeatedly
said that the commitment to students would be shown by this bill here today with
the increase in their participation at Memorial University and also the College
of the North Atlantic.
Well, I have to refresh his memory, because this is year two for the new
government and their word in their bible, the Tory Blue Book, or Blueprint as it
is now called, has been broken. If they thought for one minute that they were
going to commit to students to do their best, they broke that right off the bat.
They did that. They said, a Progressive Conservative government will work with
post-secondary institutions to develop provincial funding formulas that, when
costs go up, provincial funding will be increased to mitigate the effects on
students' ability to pay relative to their family incomes.
What did we witness last spring and throughout the summer? We witnessed a
series of broken promises by the new government to students. Are they going to
turn a leaf with this act and we are going to see nothing but good things happen
in the future? I do hope so, because government right now are engaged in what
they call a White Paper review on Post-Secondary Education. It is a review that
is going to cost $250,000. What will be the end result of that review? I think
that - I not only think, but I know - students are very concerned about that
White Paper review.
On November 10, in Grand Falls-Windsor, I was invited to speak to an
education forum. At that particular time, it was organized by the student union
out there at the College of the North Atlantic. Jessica Magalios also attended;
she is the Chairperson of the Canadian Federation of Students in our Province.
Also, the Member for Windsor-Springdale was invited to attend but twenty minutes
before start time we had word that he was not going to attend.
Most of the questions there were directed at government. I can tell you that
students are very concerned about the outcome of what the White Paper review
might be. It is not only students who feel that way. In fact, we had a professor
from the Department of Sociology at Memorial University. This was October 25,
just a month ago. The letter to the editor was in our local paper, The
Advertiser , in Grand Falls-Windsor. It was entitled, "Is White Paper
Study masking hidden agenda?" He raised concerns in that letter to the
editor that I think students and parents all over the Province are concerned
about. It was relating to an interview that was held with the new Minister of
Education who just introduced this bill. The minister was quoted in that
particular interview as saying, "We have to be open to possible (College of
the North Atlantic) campus closures." An announcement by the new minister
sounding an alarm that we have to be open to the possibility of College of the
North Atlantic campus closures. I relayed that possibility last year when the
Budget was announced, and the former Education Minister said: No, that is not
even on the radar screen. Well, our new Minister of Education, who is only into
the job a few days, October 25 th had that out onto the radar screen.
It is nothing short of astounding that the new minister - this is Professor
Overton writing this - that the new minister could anticipate possible campus
closures as a result of the White Paper process. If a repeat of that is what we
can expect the White Paper process to result in, then we have been seriously
misled by Minister Ottenheimer in the spring. That possibility is out there.
He was making references to four or five campuses. Now, where would those
campuses be? They certainly would not be in St. John's and I doubt very much
if they would be in any of the urban centres in our Province. We did hear that
they would probably be in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. That is another
strike against rural Newfoundland and Labrador that must be on the minds of all
parents out there today and all students.
We also had the President of NAPE who wrote a letter to the editor as well
about the White Paper review. He had the same concerns. He said: When the
government makes decisions about our public college system, it makes decisions
about the future of our people, particularly our rural people. There is a lot a
stake here. Let's not jump to hasty conclusions.
I am concerned about that White Paper review and I think anyone out there in
education, or anyone who has children, or town and communities, they have the
same concerns about the White Paper review. Is that just a mask, it is just
ammunition that will give the government the justification they want to go out
and make further cuts to the education system in our Province and increase
tuition? When you look at the long line of things that have happened since this
government came to power - the first thing they did was cut out the new
Department of Post-Secondary Education. Does that say they are committed to the
students of this Province? Their first piece of legislation in this House was to
destroy, cancel, a tax credit for people paying on the Newfoundland and Labrador
portion of their student loan. That is the first thing they did when they came
to this House, they cancelled that benefit for people paying on their student
loans, something that we had introduced the year before.
Then they talked about student participation. They unnecessarily passed an
act to include the Newfoundland and Labrador Student Loans right here into our
Treasury, part of our general account, our commitment. Then we asked about
student involvement and being on that committee to administer the student loans.
They said: Oh, no, students are not required to be on that committee. That will
all be internal. We do not need student participation at all in handling student
loans; even though students are the main ones who benefit and use student loans,
but they did not need students then.
The next thing they did, they took $3 million out of summer employment for
the students in our Province. Was that important? I think it was. I had students
calling me day in and day out looking for work, looking for a job that would
normally be there so they could save their money and attend university or the
College of the North Atlantic or private colleges in the fall. So, as a result,
students did not have any money to put away to attend university or
post-secondary education. Where did that money come from for them to get a seat
in at the university or college? It had to come out of their parent's wallet
or it had to come out of a loan or the student had to go further in debt. Is
this the model that this new government wants, harness the students with all the
loans they need so that they will be forever paying them out?
Then the next thing they did, they promised they would supply the university
and the College of the North Atlantic with enough money to meet their operating
expenses. Well, the next thing they did was say: You find me $2 million each,
the College of the North Atlantic and Memorial University. How did they find
that money? They decided they would cut programs and they decided they would cut
staff. That balances their budgets. What does it do to students?
As late as lunchtime today I had a call from a student unable to get her
particular course. What is the remedy here? Too bad, you will just