Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Statements by Ministers — 4 December 1998 (43rd General Assembly, 3rd Session, Vol. XLIII No. 55)
1998-12-04
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
December 4, 1998 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIII No. 55
The House met at 9:00 a.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!
Before we begin routine proceedings today the Chair would like to take
this opportunity to welcome to the gallery twenty-nine Level I, II, and III students from
the Canadian Issues Class in Holy Heart of Mary High School, accompanied by their teacher,
Kathy Henderson. The school is in the District of St. John's East.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: As well, the Chair would like to acknowledge one of
our senior Commissionaires, Mr. Ladd Bursey, who will be celebrating his seventy-fifth
birthday tomorrow, Saturday, December 5. On behalf of all members, I want to wish Mr.
Bursey a very Happy Birthday tomorrow.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It gives me great pleasure to rise before the House today to inform my
colleagues of another month of employment growth in Newfoundland and Labrador. Statistics
Canada reported this morning that in November there were 8,600 more jobs in this Province
than we had last November.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. DICKS: That is an increase of 4.4 per cent.
AN HON. MEMBER: Slow it down, Minister, slow it down.
MR. DICKS: I say there may be some job losses on the other side
shortly, Mr. Speaker.
The average job gain over the first eleven months of this year was
6,300 or 3.3 per cent.
The labour market numbers are reflecting the improvement in the
provincial economy which has benefited from strength in both investment and consumer
spending. Investment spending is expected to grow 6.7 per cent in 1998, with the Terra
Nova development being an important contributor. Consumer spending has also increased with
retail sales up 2.9 per cent over last year for the January to September period.
Furthermore, our exports are performing strongly. Exports of crude oil, iron ore, and fish
products all increased. In fact, for the first nine months of this year, the value of our
international exports increased by 12.3 per cent. Other year-to-date indicators are also
positive with the value of manufacturing shipments up 8.6 per cent, the volume of iron ore
production up 5.2 per cent, and fish landings up 30 per cent.
Although it increased slightly by 0.8 percentage points in November,
the unemployment rate averaged 1.1 percentage points lower on a year-to-year basis. The
number of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians out of work averaged 1,700 fewer than last
year. Although we have much further to go before we have low unemployment, we are making
significant progress.
On a seasonally adjusted basis, employment declined slightly by 1,700
following two large consecutive monthly gains totalling 14,000. Despite this decline, the
level of employment achieved in November remained higher than that achieved in any of the
preceding forty-two months.
In addition to these employment gains, the Conference Board of Canada
reaffirmed its confidence that this Province will lead the country with 4.5 per cent real
GDP growth in 1998, and 5.7 per cent in 1999. Although we suspect that figure for next
year may be somewhat overstated, nevertheless we expect to lead the country again in
growth next year.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I want to thank the minister for a copy of his statement. The good news
reviews continues. I thought this was usually for Sunday afternoon on VOCM, with the
Premier but now the minister has decided to take up the slack.
He talks about the job increases. Does the minister remember that last
week Revenue Canada reported the number of people of filing has decreased in Newfoundland
and Labrador? Has he forgotten to mention that 41,000 people left in the last five or six
years from Newfoundland and Labrador? He talks about Terra Nova and so on, and then he has
the nerve to mention that iron ore exports are increasing.
Yes, it has. Iron ore is increasing, to move to Sept-Iles, Quebec,
where it will create another 200 jobs in the Province of Quebec. That is the reality of
this, as the minister stands and confirms the increases and so on. The truth is in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador, and with the projects that are going on now - the make-work
projects for TAGS is what they are. You can put any kind of spin on it, call it what you
like. Make-work projects for TAGS have increased some of those numbers, that is the
reality of it. What people in this Province are waiting to see from this government are
the long-term plans -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the member's time is up.
MR. SHELLEY: - for what is going to happen after these short-term
projects take place. So the good news review continues, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community
Services.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am making this statement this morning on behalf of my colleague the
Minister Responsible for the Status of Women, the hon. Julie Bettney.
On December 6, across the country, we mark the National Day of
Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. On this day in 1989, fourteen young
women in Montreal were murdered, because they were women. As we reflect on this terrible
loss, we must never forget that many women continue to live and die in the shadow of
violence.
Today, I join the federal, provincial and territorial Ministers
Responsible for the Status of Women, in a declaration of the commitment to end violence
against women.
Violence against women has devastating consequences in many women's
lives and significant social and economic repercussions for society as a whole. Every day,
women are intimidated, harassed, stalked, assaulted and abused, often at the hands of an
intimate partner. As a society, we cannot and must not tolerate this violence. We must
recognize and address the root causes of violence against women and the underlying issues
of power and control.
The Ministers Responsible for the Status of Women share a vision of
safe, healthy communities where women are not exposed to violence or the threat of
violence. The vision is based on the full equality of women and men. They stress the
importance of culturally-appropriate and community-based solutions that take into account
linguistic, cultural and geographic diversity, that respect Aboriginal values and culture,
and that reflect the particular needs of vulnerable groups.
To achieve this vision, all of society must take responsibility. The
elimination of violence is a long-term goal which can only be realized through lasting
change in societal values and attitudes. Governments cannot achieve this alone.
Individuals, service providers, voluntary and professional organizations, the broader
public and corporate sectors, all have a role to play. It is important that men, as well
as women, participate in finding solutions.
Sustained action is required, combined with innovative, creative
approaches. It is particularly important that programs and services be flexible in their
design and delivery in order to be accessible and effective. In this comprehensible
effort, strong coordination across all sectors is essential, first and foremost to provide
safety, as well as to deal with perpetrators and to prevent violence before it happens.
The work to end violence against women is guided by the following
principles: living free of violence is a right, not a privilege; violence against women is
a crime and should never be considered a private matter. Crimes of violence must be dealt
with accordingly; safety for victims and survivors must come first; in order to eliminate
violence against women, equality and healthy relationships amongst boys and girls must be
promoted from an early age.
The approach is built on three key strategies: a long-term focus on
public education and awareness to change attitudes and behaviour; accessible and
responsible services to provide safety and support to victims and prevent
re-victimization; and effective justice programs to hold perpetrators accountable and
provide treatment programs for abusive men.
On many fronts, our governments have shown their determination to end
violence against women. Through polities and initiatives across the country by the
Ministers Responsible for the Status of Women, and leadership at the international level
in ratifying United Nations conventions and supporting UN action plans, the ministers have
clearly articulated the unacceptable and intolerable nature of this violence.
Much work has been done to address violence against women. Ministers
responsible will continue to build on the expertise of women's groups and other
communities partners.
On behalf of the hon. Julie Bettney and the federal, provincial and
territorial Ministers Responsible for the Status of Women, I reaffirm the determination to
stop violence against women. This is a top priority for our governments. This commitment
will be realized through the actions of each jurisdiction. Together, these actions will
enable governments to meet the challenges and achieve this goal. We owe it to all women
who may be affected by violence, now and in the future.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.
MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for providing me with a copy of her statement. I
too would like to stand today and pay tribute to these fourteen women who were so brutally
murdered nine years ago on Sunday. They are not here with us today, but their deaths have
left us with a legacy and I would like to read their names into Hansard so they will not
be forgotten:
Genevieve Bergeron, Helene Colgan, Nathalie Croteau, Barbara
Daigneault, Anne-Marie Edward, Maud Haviernick, Barbara Marie Klueznick, Maryese
Laganiere, Maryse Leclair, Anne-Marie Lemay, Sonia Pelletier, Michele Richard, Annie St.
Arneault, and Annie Turcotte.
This puts faces on these women who were murdered nine years ago because
they were women, and each year we remember them and pay tribute to them. They have left us
with a legacy. We are reminded of the violence towards women and we are reminded that it
is still very much with us.
We have had various initiatives toward prevention of such violence. We
have studies on violence, the Provincial Strategy Against Violence, the five-year strategy
entitled: Towards The Year 2000 which began in 1995, and still violence against women
exists.
This leads me to believe that as well as continuing with initiatives we
have begun thus far, we should introduce a target group. As the minister mentioned in her
statement, we should begin with boys and girls from an early age.
The children of today are the men and women of tomorrow, and how they
behave tomorrow depends on how we guide them today. We have a golden opportunity with the
legislation we are presently addressing in this House, with the Child, Youth and Family
Services Act. With the proper resources in place to see that this act is affectively
implemented, we will be starting with these young children at a very early age to address
the -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you.
We will be starting at a very early age to address the problems of
violence not only against women, but indeed against all people.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi, does
the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to join in the remembrance of the events of 1989 when fourteen
young women in Montreal were murdered, and they were murder because they were women.
Me. Speaker, why do we remember this and why is this such a significant
event? I think the answer is that it is recognized - and it was recognized then and it is
still recognized - that it was not the act of an isolated person who may have been
mentally imbalanced. It was something that was in fact part of the background of attitude
towards women, the tolerance of violence against women, the tolerance of attitudes against
women, that negative attitude against women in our society that permitted this kind of
thing to happen.
So even though it is nearly ten years ago, it is something that we
remember because we remember we have to do something about those attitudes throughout our
society. We have to recognize that the root cause of this type of violence rests in our
cultural attitudes and in the changes.
Mr. Speaker, I have a personal interest, of course, in the future
changes, as the father of two young daughters.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker, for a moment to continue?
MR. SPEAKER: By leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. HARRIS: The future must change. We must have a totally
different approach to women. We need affirmative action in certain areas such as police
forces to ensure that more women are involved in all aspects of society, such as policing,
such as non-traditional occupations, so that there will be no discrimination against women
and no room for violence of this nature to ever occur again.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair,
does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to join as well with others in the Chamber this morning, and the
minister, in paying tribute to these women and the terrible and brutal death that they
have suffered at the hands of society and the social attitudes that have been taken
against women in the past. I think many across this country and in our own Province have
worked very hard to end violence against women and to bring recognition to the kinds of
things that have been happening. I want to commend the minister this morning for joining
with other federal, provincial, and territorial leaders across our country to bring an end
to violence against women.
MR. SPEAKER: Before I call Oral Questions, I would like to take
this opportunity to welcome today to the gallery a former Member of the House of Assembly,
Mr. Nick Careen.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yesterday in Question Period we asked questions with respect to the
resignation of the former minister. I would like to ask questions today to the Premier:
Under what
section of the act did the Premier make the reference to the Commissioner for
Members' Interests that he announced on Wednesday?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, we have not made a reference to the
Commissioner under a specific
section of the act but rather have referred the question to
the Commissioner to exercise his judgement and his discretion in carrying out his duties.
There are no restrictions on the Commissioner.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, under the act I guess there are a couple
of avenues by which the Premier could make a request. I would ask him this question: Did
he phone the Commissioner and ask him to look at it, or did he write the Commissioner and
ask to him to look at it? If he wrote the Commissioner, would he be able to table that
correspondence in the House?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER TOBIN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would be quite happy - I do not
have a copy with me - to make available my correspondence with the Commissioner. I think
the Commissioner himself has issued a statement yesterday making clear that he has all the
powers that he requires, and all of the discretion that he requires, to undertake the
investigation of the matter at hand.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. E. BYRNE: Premier, in your written request to the Commissioner,
did you make any reference to any other minister or department besides the former Minister
of Development and Rural Renewal, or did you just refer to the former minister and that
situation?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I referred to the matter arising out of
the resignation of the Minister of Rural Renewal and Development and the questions arising
out of the allegations with respect to the staff of that department.
The conflict commissioner - and the Leader of the Opposition is now
entering the stage, having heard my answers yesterday, where he is being deliberately
disingenuous. The Leader of the Opposition knows, if he can read the act - and he knows
that he can respond and listen to the answers given yesterday - he knows, or he ought to
know, that the conflict commissioner is quite free to go wherever his investigation takes
him, to whomever his investigation takes him. He has quite broad powers under the Public
Inquiries Act to secure evidence, to secure testimony. The Leader of the Opposition knows
that.
To suggest, when I have in this public place - the most public place,
the people's House - said repeatedly, that the conflict commissioner cannot - even if I
wished it - be constrained by me or be constrained by the Leader of the Opposition. To
continue to suggest that is disingenuous on the part of the Leader of the Opposition. I
would ask him to acknowledge the powers of the Commissioner, and acknowledge the scope and
breadth of his investigation.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. E. BYRNE: I suggest to the Premier, save the lecture for your
Cabinet ministers. It is obvious they are more in need of it than I am right now, this
morning.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, we saw last night on television, as did
the Premier -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: We saw last night on television, as did you, that the
former minister -
PREMIER TOBIN: My supporters deal with it to my face. You deal with
your (inaudible) at the back.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: Just asking a question.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
AN HON. MEMBER: Get up and apologize, boy. Get up and apologize. Be
a man.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker -
MR. J. BYRNE: Control that motor mouth over there.
MR. FITZGERALD: The House has reached an all-time low.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, it is clear from the conversations this
morning that the Minister of Education made a policy change for one person and one person
only. No other school had indicated for that policy change.
I ask the Premier: Premier, does this not provide enough evidence to
ask to broaden the investigation, to ask the minister or the Commissioner of Conflict of
Interest to look at other departments? After all, that is where Mr. Woodrow got his
licence. Will the Premier do the right thing and ask the Minister of Education to offer
his resignation - not resignation, I am sorry - to take a temporary leave of absence until
this matter is cleared up?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I really find it incredible, given the
developments of the last few days, that the Leader of the Opposition would stand and make
that comment. He knows, and members opposite know, that the matter before the House is now
with the RCMP. The RCMP are the nation's police force and have total ability and power,
unconstrained by anybody, to investigate this matter in any way they deem appropriate. Mr.
Speaker, the Conflict Commissioner is not constrained by any member of this House, not by
me or not by anybody else, and can go wherever he deems appropriate.
The innuendo, and it is deliberate innuendo, on the part of the Leader
of the Opposition, that maybe the police cannot go wherever they want to go, and the
innuendo, and it is deliberate innuendo, that the Conflict Commissioner cannot go wherever
he wants to go, is beneath the dignity of an officer of this House, and the Leader of the
Opposition is an officer of the House. The Leader of the Opposition today wants to, by
innuendo, cast into question the reputation of the Minister of Education.
Mr. Speaker, let me say for the record that to this point in time there
have been no specific allegations brought to my attention, either in the correspondence,
which was referred to yesterday, from Mr. Woodrow to me and which was referred to the
Department of Justice, against any specific minister, including the former Minister of
Development and Rural Renewal; not a single specific allegation in that letter, nor were
there specific allegations against ministers in the comments made to a Justice official.
What there were, were comments of general innuendo, general suggestions, unspecific, and
those comments were given immediately to the RCMP and the gentleman was advised that if he
had comments to make he should go to the RCMP.
Indeed, Mr. Speaker, let me go further. The letter in question has
innuendo and comments and suggestions of a conspiracy that involves a large cast of people
in government and outside of government, and members of the Opposition have seen that
letter because it was shown to them.
AN HON. MEMBER: We haven't seen it.
PREMIER TOBIN: Well, members of the media have the letter. They
have seen it and they know the nature of this large conspiracy theory. Mr. Speaker,
members of the Opposition - let me say this - were visited months ago by this gentleman,
were given these allegations, and thought they were so incredible that they didn't ask a
single question about these allegations. Members in both parties were visited by these
gentlemen. Why did they not raise this matter? Mr. Speaker, I will tell you why not.
Because they thought the story incredible.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, for the record, the letter the Premier
refers to, nobody in my caucus has seen that letter. The Premier has indicated that
members of my caucus have met with Mr. Woodrow; not based in fact, not true. Mr. Woodrow -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. E. BYRNE: Hold on, Paul. No member in this caucus -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary, I ask him to get to his
question.
MR. E. BYRNE: No member in this caucus has ever met with Mr.
Woodrow, and that is why no member in this caucus will ever appear on a tape, I say to the
Premier, because we have had no conversations with Mr. Woodrow. We have never met with Mr.
Woodrow at all, under any time or circumstances!
I say to the Premier, while the Commissioner of Members' Interests has
the powers of a commissioner under the Public Inquiries Act - I acknowledge that - the
past practice with respect to serious allegations that involve, by implication, the
actions of one minister or more, or more than one department, or any number of officials,
is for government to commission an independent judicial inquiry with a justice of the
court, with a broader mandate, with a full and open public hearing and so forth, so the
public can have confidence that justice is done, but more importantly, that justice is
seen to be done.
Will the Premier agree that these allegations go far beyond normal
conflict of interest questions, like being a director of a company or owning shares
improperly, and warrant a full-scale, broad, open, transparent judicial inquiry, like the
Justice Steel inquiry several years ago, and will he commission such an inquiry?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I am not prepared to stand and agree
with any of the suppositions being put by the Leader of the Opposition. I am prepared to
say that the allegations are serious enough that they warrant an investigation by the
RCMP. They warrant the police authority of this country investigating these allegations to
find out what substance, if any, these allegations have.
Now, if the Leader of the Opposition and members opposite want to
suggest, because they are interested in trying to spread and smear, and through innuendo
try and capture members of the Cabinet, if they want to suggest that the RCMP are not an
independent authority, that position is one for them to defend. I think everybody in this
country knows that when the RCMP are given the job to do it will be done independently, it
will be done thoroughly, and the investigation will take them wherever they want to go.
Now I want to respond to what the Leader of the Opposition has said.
The Member for Baie Verte made clear in the House two days ago in front of a good many
members here in the front bench, as did the Leader of the NDP, that they had been
approached by Mr. Woodrow, either directly or indirectly, made aware of some of these
allegations, and dismissed them because they found them quite incredible. Mr. Speaker, I
want to make clear that the letter which was sent to me, which I have now seen, by Mr.
Woodrow has allegations that half the private sector of St. John's, landlords, officials -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier to conclude his answer quickly.
PREMIER TOBIN: - were all involved in a conspiracy. That letter
should be tested, and those allegations, by the RCMP. That is exactly what is happening.
MR. E. BYRNE: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I just want for the record, because the
Premier -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. E. BYRNE: The member can speak for himself. I am on a point of
order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: Not the Members for Baie Verte, Cape St. Francis, St.
John's West, Conception Bay South, St. John's East, St. John's South, Waterford Valley,
Bonavista South or Kilbride have ever met with Mr. Woodrow! I want to be clear, Premier.
You just indicated, sir -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: - that this member had met with Mr. Woodrow. He did
not, Premier!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!
On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Baie Verte.
MR. SHELLEY: I say to the Minister of Education that I have no
problem telling the truth. The point of order is that the Premier of this Province had a
private conversation and is trying to infer that I had conversations with Mr. Woodrow at
any time. I will say on record, zero, Mr. Speaker, zero contact!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
No point of order.
PREMIER TOBIN: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER TOBIN: The Member for Baie Verte has said: I have not
personally met with Mr. Woodrow. Then perhaps he could explain what he meant when he told
members over here that he had had information from Mr. Woodrow which he refused to act on
because he found it not credible.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
No point of order.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!
The hon. the Member for St. John's East.
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
On the same topic, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of
Justice and Attorney General. We heard yesterday about this September 8 correspondence
that was forwarded to the Premier. According to the Premier yesterday, he had no knowledge
of it, was never aware of it, and that the response was sent by a member of his staff to
the Deputy Minister of Justice.
My question directly to the Minister of Justice is this. We have heard
the Premier say he had no knowledge of the letter. There was a representative of his staff
who then forwarded it to your deputy. My question to you, Mr. Minister is: Did your deputy
relay the information with respect to the contents of that letter to you as minister?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.
MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, as you can imagine, the Premier's Office
receives hundreds of letter every day. These letters go out to various departments,
sometimes to prepare a draft for the Premier, sometimes to have the department reply to
the letter. This specific letter came down to my deputy, the deputy replied. I believe her
reply was made public.
Frankly, I cannot remember if it was brought to my attention or not,
but I have seen the letter now. Frankly, I think the letter does talk about some sort of
conspiracy. The whole public saw the letter, but I cannot remember the deputy bringing it
to my attention at the time. Maybe she did, but I see a lot letters. I cannot remember
specifically. A reply did go out, as it normally would.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
He cannot remember, maybe did, maybe did not. Mr. Minister, are you
aware of it, yes or no?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.
language, maybe he can read it. He can read Hansard tomorrow. I can only give him the same
answer, Mr. Speaker. I can only give him the answer I gave. The letter was dealt with in
the manner that hundreds of letters are dealt with. Now whether or not I saw it, I cannot
remember. Maybe I did. I will check my records.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.
MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are to the
Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
Minister, in light of the successful index fishery in area 3L on the
northeast Coast, whereby fisherman caught their quotas in just a few hours of fishing, I
ask the minister if he will be recommending to the federal minister that a commercial
inshore fishery with set quotas be allowed to take place in this particular area in 1999?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, there is nobody in the Province any more
excited about the future of the fishery in this Province -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!
MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, there is nobody in this Province any more
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. EFFORD: I will try again, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, the future of the fishery is very
exciting. We are all excited about what is happening in the fishery today and we are
excited about what the possibilities of the fishery of the future will be like. The one
thing we must do is make sure that every decision is made, in quotas of every species,
based on the best scientific knowledge available, so that we never ever again, in even the
slightest thought, come close to repeating the mistakes of the past. The index fishery
along the northeast coast did show some positive signs this year. I would like to see all
of the information gathered. I would like to be able to see the scientific information as
well as the fishermen's own information, the sentinel fishery information. The one thing
that really concerns me are the latest results from the offshore research where there is a
very low harvest in the time that they have spent researching on the Grand Banks this
year.
I will not be saying in the House today that I will be recommending an
increase in the northeast coast index fishery, a commercial fishery next year, until we
have all of the information available, and that we are absolutely sure it is all based on
the best scientific information we can get.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Bonavista
South.
MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Fishermen around the Province are frustrated by the fact that it may be
as late as next May or even June before the federal minister, your cousin, brings forward
the groundfish quotas for 1999. I ask the minister if he considers this acceptable,
considering the fact that the fishermen need this information now in order to prepare for
next year's fishery.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, no, I do not consider it acceptable. In
fact, as early as last week I went to Halifax and met with the FRCC. I made a presentation
to the FRCC on my concerns on the groundfish stocks and what measures should be taken, or
what recommendations they should be making to the minister for the future quotas.
One thing that I did talk about was that this year past, in 3Ps, we
lost the cod grow-out, the cod farming industry, because of the lateness of which the
quotas were set in the middle of the summer. We are saying that in 3Ps where there are
quotas going to be set next year - we are sure there are going to be quotas but not sure
how high there are going to be - that the season must be opened early.
It is also not acceptable to have scientific reports come down on any
stocks late in the season or early in the summer. They should be down at an early
reasonable time so fishermen can either gear up for the fishery or at least not spend any
money gearing up, knowing exactly what is going to happen in an appropriate time -
January, February, at the latest.
I agree with the hon. member: An appropriate time, an early date, so
that the information should be gathered and the fishermen should be well informed.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Bonavista
South.
MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I ask the minister if he realizes, or if he is at all concerned, with
the late time frame in bringing forward this new information on what the allowable fishery
might be, the total allowable catch in 1999, the people in Fortune Bay who would normally
carry out the hook-and-line fishery in the winter months, I ask the minister if he is
concerned at all that those people are now being bypassed and that fishery will not be
allowed to take place whatsoever?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fishery and Aquaculture.
MR. EFFORD: I just answered the question. A week ago, I went up to
Halifax and made a presentation there to the FRCC. What I said was, we know that there is
going to be a least a 20,000 ton quota next year in 3Ps and we are saying: Take a portion
of that quota, whether it be 7,000 tons or 10,000 tons of that quota - and the fishermen
who need to start early in the season - January or February - then announce that quota
early so those fishermen can get started. I said that very clearly. That is the
recommendation that we asked for the FRCC to put forward to the minister as early as
possible.
MR. DECKER: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Minister of Justice.
MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Member for St. John's East
asked me a question to which I had expressed some doubt. I could not recall whether or not
I saw the letter.
I received a note from my deputy who was listening, no doubt, saying:
Minister, I did not bring the letter to your attention until yesterday - signed by my
deputy.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
The hon. the Member for St. John's East.
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Communication shutdown, I say, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: We have a letter to the Premier that the Premier
knows nothing about, and a letter to the minister that the Minister of Justice knows
nothing about.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: I suggest an investment in letter openers and
messengers.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair has ruled that there was no point of order raised by the
Minister of Justice. The hon. the Member for St. John's East, is he asking a question?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, to the point of order.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair has ruled that there is no point of order.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER TOBIN: A new point of order.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, so that the -
MR. TULK: A point of privilege.
PREMIER TOBIN: A point of privilege. So that the facts are straight
- that is my intention today, to keep the facts straight - the letter in question was sent
to my office on September 8. The letter was sent by one of my staff to the Department of
Justice, as is normal, on September 9 for a reference. On September 11, the Deputy
Minister of Justice wrote back to Mr. Woodrow advising him that if he believed he had
matters that ought to be dealt with, he should seek remedy through the legal system.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, those are the facts. The real question
is: Why did Opposition members, having this information for months, do nothing with it if
they thought it credible?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
MR. E. BYRNE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. E. BYRNE: The Premier again said he wants to deal with facts.
Then let's deal with the facts. He has indicated: Why did the Opposition have this
information for months? The Official Opposition had no information.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Shelley, has no information. There is no -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. E. BYRNE: If the Premier wants to deal with the facts, we will
deal with them. Nobody in my caucus was in possession -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: Let me make it clear for you Premier.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) weasel words.
MR. E. BYRNE: Weasel words.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, to the point of order.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the member to get to his point of order.
MR. E. BYRNE: Nobody in my caucus has any correspondence -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. E. BYRNE: Would you like to listen? Would the Premier like to
listen?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: Would you like to listen?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: This is the Premier's stew; he can stew in it. I am
not going to jump in with him.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.
MR H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair has recognized the hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.
MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the
Minister of Education.
In the aftermath of the closure of the Newfoundland and Labrador
Paralegal Training Institute and the Career Academy, commitments were made by government
to students that they would have to pay their tuition twice. In other words, receiving
schools would complete their training by accessing the balance of the students' tuition
fees. What steps has the government taken to ensure that this commitment made by the
government has been honoured and that no students who completed their training at
receiving schools paid any more than the total of the tuition they would have ordinarily
paid at either the Paralegal Training Institute or the Career Academy?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Maybe he could check with the students themselves to find out what
steps have been taken, because I understand they are more than satisfied with the
initiatives taken. I might use the opportunity in answering the question to refer the
member as well to an item raised by the Leader of the Opposition with respect to reference
to some commentary this morning about the Paralegal Institute, since it was part of the
question that was asked, suggesting that there were changes made in policy just for the
Paralegal Institute.
We dealt with those issues in the Legislature last year. We can refer
to Hansard on page 1800, and two other pages in the week of December 11-15. No such thing
occurred. Every procedure that any institution went through was followed by the Paralegal
Training Institute. The policy on student loans in the Province was changed two weeks
before Mr. Woodrow's office wrote asking if he could have it, because he did not know it
had occurred.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. GRIMES: The exact opposite of what the Opposition is alleging
actually occurred in that instance.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.
MR. H. HODDER: In other words, Mr. Speaker, the minister has done
nothing to honour the commitments made to students that they would not have to pay their
tuition twice.
I have documentation here which shows that the tuition paid by a
particular student of Paralegal for five semesters was supposed to be $14,512.50, or
$2,102.50 per semester plus the cost of books. This student completed two semesters and
paid $5,805.00 in tuition fees, plus $400.00 in the cost of books.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. H. HODDER: However the receiving school, I say to the minister,
has assessed this student a total of $13,233.00.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the member to get to is question.
MR. H. HODDER: The student is now required to have paid $19,038.
I ask the minister: Will the government honour their commitment? This
student is paying 31 per cent higher for the total tuition than they would ordinarily have
paid if the Paralegal school had not have been closed.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am always delighted to get an opportunity to speak about the now
closed Paralegal Training Institute. Because, Mr. Speaker, the Paralegal Training
Institute in getting its license in the first instance went through every process that any
other training institution in the Province went through. The problem at the beginning was
that the owners suggested there was a difficulty in the department because of the fact
that he was a known Liberal and that the process was being deliberately slowed down. That
was checked into. It did not occur. The license was issued.
The main reason that the school closed was because the members opposite
so dragged the reputation of the institution into the mud in this Legislature on December
11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 of last year.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: In that period of time, Mr. Speaker, the same issues
that are being spoken of on CBC radio this morning as if it is new information were raised
in this Legislature a year ago.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. GRIMES: The Member for Baie Verte is asking: Will the minister
table in the House -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!
I ask the hon. minister to quickly conclude his answer.
MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Because the question asked by the
Member for Baie Verte was: Will the minister table in the House request for exemptions by
the Paralegal Training Institute? The question was answered. There were none given.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. GRIMES: The Opposition, by innuendo, suggested there was
something improper about this institution. Students lost faith in it, they stopped going,
and the business went defunct thanks to the Official Opposition.
MR. SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has elapsed.
Presenting Reports by
Standing and Special Committees
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community
Services.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, the minister said that I lied in the
House twice and I ask him to withdraw, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I did not hear what the hon. member had said, but I know if the hon.
member had said anything that is unparliamentary he would certainly withdraw.
The hon. the Minister of Education.
MR. GRIMES: Absolutely, Mr. Speaker. I would not say anything
unparliamentary.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Is the hon. member withdrawing?
MR. GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I did say that the hon. Member for
Baie Verte lied, and I would withdraw the statement because it is unparliamentary.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In accordance with
Section 35 of the Medical Care Insurance Act, I
would like to table in the House of Assembly today the 29th Annual Report of the
Newfoundland Medical Care Commission. This report describes the coverage provided under
the medical care plan and the dental health plan, and the results of the Commission's
operations for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1998.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair is going to ask for order in the House before we proceed with
any other business.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!
If hon. members wish to converse I think they should do it outside the
Chamber because they are interrupting the proceedings in the House.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Notices of Motion.
Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Orders of the day.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.
MR. DECKER: Order No. 16, Mr. Speaker, Bill No. 37. I think the
Member for Waterford Valley adjourned debate.
MR. SPEAKER: Order 16, Bill No. 37, "An Act Respecting Child,
Youth And Family Services."
The Member for Waterford Valley I believe adjourned the debate, was it?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair had called Petitions, had called all the
routine proceedings. The Chair had gone through the routine proceedings.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. E. BYRNE: We apologize, Mr. Speaker. We did not hear when you
called Petitions. The Member for Waterford Valley has just gone up to get some of his
notes for speaking on the bill. If we could revert, by leave of the House, just for one or
two petitions?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
To that point of order, the hon. the Minister of Justice.
MR. DECKER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, but I distinctly heard Your Honour
call Petitions and call the Orders of the Day. Hon. members obviously had other things on
their minds. We will certainly revert.
MR. SPEAKER: We will revert.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition from
a number of people in the Flatrock, Pouch Cove and Bauline area who are still waiting, who
have had the word from the Minister of Education, his word at least a dozen times, that a
new school would be built down there. I present this petition, a second petition, from the
people in that area. He gave me his word in this House of Assembly, he gave it to me
outside the House of Assembly, he has given it to members of the school board, he has
given it to parents in the area, for funding for a new school. It has not been forthcoming
yet and we are still waiting, although he tells me it is very close. I will get to the
petition now.
To the hon. House of Assembly of Newfoundland in legislative session
convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of Flatrock, Pouch Cove and Bauline:
WHEREAS prior to the education referendum the Roman Catholic School
Board and the Avalon Consolidated School Board, with the parents' approval, agreed to
combine St. Agnes and Pouch Cove Elementary to create a new K-IX school for our children;
and
WHEREAS our new school board approved the same proposal on July 2,
1998; and
WHEREAS the Minister of Education has made a commitment to the board,
the MHA and the parents of our area that the funding to construct a new combined school
will be forthcoming;
WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and
Labrador to ensure funding is made available as soon as possible for the construction of
our new K-IX school for the benefit of our children of our three communities.
And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, this is a second petition that I have presented here
within the past two weeks. Again, a bit of the history. Before we had the education
referendums, or referenda, whatever you want to call it, the people of those three
communities, the parents, the school boards, the teachers and the students came together
for a new school for the K-IX students in that area. It is long overdue.
We have two buildings down there. St. Agnes is not in good condition by
any stretch of the imagination. The fire departments have been called to that school a
number of times. Pouch Cove Elementary requires a lot of work also. When we get the new
school, as the Minister of Education has promised - and he has promised other members in
this House of Assembly also, and that the money would be forthcoming, that the money would
be approved. We have been waiting. The children of those three communities are the ones
who are hurting, the students in that area.
We know from public meetings with the new Avalon East Board, that they
went to that area, they have gone down there, and had public meetings in the communities.
I have attended the public meetings. They have asked that the school councils come
together, that they make a proposal to the Avalon East Board about how in the future they
want education in that area to develop. The answers came back from the school councils,
which are Holy Trinity Elementary in Torbay, Holy Trinity High, St. Agnes, Pouch Cove
Elementary and St. Francis. They have had their meetings (inaudible) councils, they have
had public meetings in their communities, and they have come back and said they wanted a
K-IX in Pouch Cove, a K-IX in Torbay, a K-IX in St. Francis, basically feeding into,
eventually, the Holy Trinity High School in Torbay.
The Avalon Board is telling us that they cannot do anything in St.
John's until the students that leave Pouch Cove, that leave Torbay, that leave Flatrock,
that leave Bauline and go to St. John's are brought back into that new St. John's north
zone. They cannot do anything until this new school is constructed. We have been waiting.
It is long overdue. The students themselves need a new gymnasium, they need computer
rooms, they need all the facilities, they need a cafeteria. They need all these new things
that will come with a new school.
Holy Trinity High School meets the same standards with respect to the
programs that are being offered in St. John's. Some of the students in St. Francis, I
think, are maybe prepared to go to Holy Trinity in Torbay. That is the feedback that we
are getting, but this is the key in the overall picture for the Avalon East Board, to get
the funding for this. I directly ask the Minister of Education here today, again: When are
we going to get the financing for the school?
I know the Member for Bellevue, I think, is waiting for funding for a
new school in his area and he has been told the same thing - that there is money going to
be forthcoming and that there are going to be a number of schools built. They have the
money for one.
Last year, by the way, the Avalon East Board, which has the most
students of any board in the Province, got the least amount of funding for capital works
in the Province. If you want to go through the Province and look at where the new schools
were built, sometimes you question why they were built in certain areas and why the Avalon
East Board did not get their proper funding on a percentage basis that they should have
had. I want the minister to stand in his place and tell us -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. J. BYRNE: By leave, Mr. Speaker, just to clue up.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. J. BYRNE: I will ask the hon. Minister of Education, if he
would pay attention here now - is the Minister of Education listening? No.
I will say it anyway, to be on record. We want a new school. I ask the
Minister of Education to stand and respond to this petition and tell us again - as he did
two weeks ago, when he alluded to us that it was going to be a short period of time when
the school will proceed - when will he announce the funding?
MR. DECKER: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Justice.
MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman knows that he has a
right to present a petition, and members of the House have a right to speak to that
petition. He has no right to demand that the Minister of Education or the minister of
anything else would reply to a petition. I suggest that the hon. gentleman be called to
order.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order. I ask the hon. member to take his seat.
The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.
MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I want to speak for a few moments to
support the petition put forward by my colleague, the Member of Cape St. Francis. The
House will recall, comments have been made in the House on many occasions that this
particular member has worked so diligently and so aggressively on behalf of his
constituents, particularly those in Pouch Cove and Flatrock, to make sure -
AN HON. MEMBER: Bauline.
MR. H. HODDER: - and Bauline, to make sure that these three
communities and their children have access to the best education possible. His work on
their behalf is certainly recognized by members of this side of the House, and I do
believe it is recognized by all members on both sides of the House.
I do have some familiarity with the communities named here. I do have
an association, through family connections, with the municipality of Pouch Cove and know
the school system there quite well, in fact. I also know that these communities and the
parents in these communities are motivated by what is best for their children. It takes a
great deal of, shall we say, dedication for parents in these communities to say that we
are going to agree to close up the two schools we now have. We are going to close up St.
Agnes, we are going to close up the school that is in Pouch Cove, Pouch Cove Elementary,
and we are going to be willing to combine our efforts.
That is the kind of initiative we want to encourage in this Province.
The member has been working now for more than three years to make this happen. He has had
community meetings in Pouch Cove, Bauline, and Flatrock. He has been able to work with the
communities to come up with a site selection. It was not very easy. It was not very easy,
given the rivalry that is traditional between those particular communities. He has done a
great job.
He has done a great job not only for the communities but also for the
Avalon East School Board and for the Ministry of Education, because right now all that is
needed here is a decision by the ministry to say: We are going to give the Avalon East
School Board the authority to go to public tender, to be able to call the tenders.
We know that it is going to take, traditionally in Newfoundland, about
six months from the time that you put the tender proposals out until you actually have the
school construction starting. There is a six-month delay. So if we were to go now, and if
we were to have the tenders called now, it would take probably until late next fall or
even later than that before this school could be opened.
Basically what we are saying to the minister is that there is a lot of
information here. It has been gathered by the member, the approvals are in place, and it
is appropriate that the ministry would now move to take action to have the school built.
It has agreement by all parties and it is time, I think, that we made some concrete
decisions and got the capital funding approved.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I appreciate the opportunity to make a few comments. The matter is
being dealt with as expeditiously as possible but unfortunately the hon. Member for
Waterford Kenmount, who used to be a mayor and I thought would know a bit more about this
kind of stuff, portrays it as a very simple matter of giving people permission to go to
tender. I guess that is because he has never run anything in government.
MR. H. HODDER: I have called many a tender, Sir.
MR. GRIMES: I guess, Mr. Speaker, if he ever lives long enough, I
suppose, to sit on the government side of the House, he might understand the Financial
Administration Act of the Province, which prohibits the government in any department from
issuing a tender unless the money is appropriated for the project.
Mr. Speaker, when the money is appropriated with proper authority for
this project and several others, the tenders will be let. He knows that we would be
violating the Financial Administration Act if we were to just go ahead and give the board
permission to let the tender today, because it takes five or six months. By the time the
tender is actually dealt with, we will have the money. You are not allowed to do it. When
we have the appropriation we will announce this school. This school is being built; it
will be announced at the earliest opportunity.
MR. H. HODDER: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley, on a point of order.
MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, what the minister is saying is not what
I said at all. I understand the process quite well. It is also within his power to make
sure that the appropriate appropriations are made, to get that done, and then you can go
to the second process. I know the process quite well.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member to take his seat. There is no point of order.
The hon. the Minister of Education.
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
He exposes again the fact that like the would-be mayor of St. John's,
the Leader of the NDP, who would like to run something sometime, he knows nothing about
it.
To suggest that any one minister on this side of the House can do an
appropriation of $5 or $6 million just because he wants to means he does not have the
slightest idea how the government of the Province runs, and he is completely out to lunch
on the issue.
The Member for Cape St. Francis is quite genuine in terms of presenting
the petition. He knows the school is going to be built. He knows that the parents are
frustrated, we are all a bit frustrated, that it is taking a period of time. The Member
for Waterford Valley was no help in supporting the petition because he didn't know what he
was talking about, and he knows nothing about how the process actually occurs.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a petition to the
House of Assembly:
To the hon. the House of Assembly of Newfoundland and Labrador in
legislative session convened:
The petition of the undersigned residents of Labrador City
WHEREAS we, the residents of Labrador City, condemn the provincial
government in supporting the Iron Ore Company of Canada's decision to process Labrador
resources in Sept-Iles, Quebec;
WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and
Labrador to reverse this decision immediately and support a policy of secondary processing
within the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador;
And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, we heard an announcement yesterday by the Minister of
Mines and Energy regarding the Voisey's Bay plant and the fact that Voisey's Bay, the
mine, mill and smelter together, would still allow Inco to recover profits in the area of
17 per cent return. I would suggest that if they were to view the smelter on its own that
the smelter itself, leaving out the combined smelter, mine and mill, probably would not
give 17 per cent return. It may not even give a high return at all on its own yet,
combined with the mine and mill, when you look at the ovoid, the minister stated that this
is the time to get a smelter while the ovoid is there. If we wait until the ovoid is mined
we will never see a smelter.
I agree with that, and I agree with the statements the Minister of
Mines and Energy made yesterday regarding Inco and Voisey's Bay, and I commend him for
making those statements, but by the same token we have to look at the fact that the pellet
plant, on its own, may not be profitable. In fact, it may be more profitable in Quebec. A
smelter for Voisey's Bay may be more profitable in Quebec, but we don't want a smelter for
Voisey's Bay being located in Quebec, nor do we want the pellet plant for Labrador West,
for the Iron Ore Company of Canada, located in Quebec.
If you combine the efforts of the pellet plant and the iron ore
operations in Quebec, I would suggest that it would be profitable. Perhaps not as
profitable as it would be by opening the pellet plant in Sept-Iles, Quebec, but it would
be profitable. As long as our resources can be secondary-processed right in this Province
at a profit, as long as it is viable to do so, it must be done here. Almost everything we
manufacture in this Province, if we looked, we could find somewhere in Canada, the United
States or somewhere in the world that it may be more viable to manufacture them elsewhere.
That is not the name of the game.
The name of the game is, whether it is more viable to do so elsewhere,
as long as it is viable to do so in this Province we should use and utilize our resources
for the people of this Province, providing the maximum benefits, the maximum jobs and the
maximum secondary and spin-off that we can get from our resources. While a pellet plant
may be more viable in Sept-Iles, Quebec, it is not Quebec's resource. That resource
belongs to the people of this Province. As long as it is viable as a combined operation,
such as the smelter, mine and mill are viable as a combined operation for Voisey's Bay,
the pellet plant should be located in this Province.
Again, I will commit that our resources should be utilized for our
people, for our Province, and the benefit of future generations, not for the people of
other provinces. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.
MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is a pleasure for me to rise on behalf of the people of Labrador
West today. These people deserve better. It is not a pleasure to have to speak about this
petition but it is a pleasure to put it forth on their behalf.
The people of Labrador West have built these communities and they have
built them around the iron ore. In the past forty years they have put their entire lives
into their community in Labrador West. This is what brought them there. This is what built
the community. This is their very lives, the iron ore.
As my colleague said, if it would be a drain on the Province or if it
would cost the Province, that is one thing. Then we would have to have a second look. It
is not. It is not even going to be a drain on the company, but the company, in their
greed, want to make more profits. They want to take our resources out of our Province and
refine them in another province, and this is not fair. It is not fair to the people of the
Province, and it certainly is not fair to the people of Labrador City who have spent their
entire lives - I think we are probably into three generations of people now who have built
that city, who have built that community. They have put their entire lives into it. A
company which has been there for forty years - and it has been profitable for forty years,
they have been making a go of it for forty years. Why now are we giving them permission
or, conversely, allowing them to take our resources out of our Province to be profitable
for another province? That could actually be the death of that community up there.
I think we really should be taking a second look at what we are doing
in Voisey's Bay and what we are doing in Labrador City. They are probably at total ends of
the spectrum. We should probably have a very good look at it, because the people in that
community and the people of this Province deserve the opportunity and the right to process
our resources in this Province.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. DECKER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we will try again. It is Order No.
16, Bill No. 37.
MR. SPEAKER: I believe the hon. Member for Waterford Valley
adjourned the debate.
The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.
MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am pleased to rise this morning to continue the debate we were having
last evening on Bill 37.
This is just to say that in general principal we on this side of the
House give approval to Bill 37. It is progressive and it is certainly much needed to
replace the antiquated legislation that covered child welfare in this Province, and also
to change the philosophy and the approach that was so evident in the previous legislation
which was inconsistent with the thought processes that are followed today.
Yesterday afternoon, when I was finishing up just before the Late Show
began, I was indicating that we may have missed an opportunity to include something here
relative to inclusion of social workers in the classroom. I had said at the time that in
1992 there had been a pilot done with the Roman Catholic School Board in St. John's and
the Avalon Consolidated School Board where they had, in consultation with the School of
Social Work at Memorial University, placed some social workers in the school system. That
pilot was eventually expanded to include schools in the Conception Bay South School Board
and in the Appalachia School Board. A total of eighteen schools participated in that
particular program. One of the schools that did participate was Mount Pearl Junior High
School, where I had served as the principal for a number of years.
Initially there was some reluctance by school guidance counsellors and
other school officials. There were some hesitation in accepting and welcoming social
workers to the school environment. However, very quickly it became quite evident that
there were tremendous benefits. Some of the initial hesitations that were stated by
guidance counsellors, educational therapists and others were quickly dissipated when they
began to see that this could be a real team approach. They abandoned their own specific
interest and their former thought processes in the interest of the children.
Unfortunately, by 1995 funding for this type of cooperative approach
was discontinued. However, the Department of Education did contract a consultant, Warren
and Rowe, to conduct a review of the pilot with the view to assessing the psychological
needs of school-aged children to determine how best to deliver programs at the school
level to meet those needs.
Warren and Rowe conducted an extensive interview process, an extensive
review of social workers in the school system, and also other social work models
throughout Canada. Their conclusions were based on interviews with school officials, with
guidance counsellors, with social work participants, with officials at the School of
Social Work at Memorial University, and also in consultation with authorities in other
Provinces.
I should say that there have been social workers in the school system
in other provinces for a long time. For example, the first social worker placed in a
school system that I could find in my research occurred in the United States, and it was
in 1901. In Quebec there has long been a relationship between the school system and the
department of social work and the department of social services.
The recommendations of the Warren and Rowe Review then were based on
extensive analysis. They included a call for a comprehensive integrated model of service
delivery that would be multidisciplinary in nature and where the philosophical approach
would facilitate direct involvement and partnership of the entire community in child
development. Sharing of resources and the sharing of mandates would be child centred.
I point out this because the philosophy that came about with this pilot
is identical to the philosophy that is found in this particular piece of legislation.
However, the minister in her wisdom, or lack of it, decided she would not include in this
act any provision to have a child centred approach and an integrated approach between the
school system in the Department of Human Resources and Employment. That I think is very
regrettable, because we are missing a golden opportunity here. As I said yesterday in the
House, we should be willing to say that where the children are, that is where the services
will be.
The review done by Warren and Rowe found the social work internship
program to be mutually beneficial, then, to both the school of social work at Memorial and
to the school system and a great learning experience for the students who were doing their
practicum.
A strong recommendation was made that the program would be continued,
and that the three major funding groups - which included the provincial Department of
Social Services, which is now Human Resources and Employment - that they, in conjunction
with the federal government, would adopt strategies to have the internship program
extended to all schools in Newfoundland and Labrador.
We believe that this particular act is missing an opportunity to do
that. We say that the pilot in Newfoundland was enthusiastically endorsed by all of the
partners, the teachers, the guidance counsellors, the educational therapists, the school
psychologists, the social worker interns, et cetera. However, I regret to say that that
approach and the recommendation of the Warren and Rowe report are not seen in this
particular piece of legislature. I do believe that it can be modified to make sure we do
adopt those strategies to make sure we integrate those programs.
In the few minutes I have left I wanted to refer to the accountability
provisions in
section 75. We, on this side of the House, believe that these accountability
provisions need to be strengthened. We believe we can make the system more accountable, so
that we don't end up with situations as happened in the recent past, where we have things
going on which do not get uncovered or discovered for some months or years later. As a
consequence, the best interest of children are not being served.
We acknowledge that the minister has put in more accountability
provisions than has been previously the case. However, if you refer to
section 75 of the
proposed act, you will find the advisory committee, as established by the minister,
basically shows some serious weakness. It says that the review of the operations of the
act will take place every two years and report to the minister concerning these operations
and whether in its opinion, the principles and purpose of the act have been achieved.
We want to have a faster review process than that. We on this side
believe that if we were to appoint a child advocate, and that advocate was to be totally
independent of the Legislature - as happens in six of the ten provinces, and indeed in one
city. There is a child advocate for the City of Vancouver. We are not keeping up with the
accountability provisions that are being followed in other province.
I believe that an advisory committee is a good thing. However, we need
to have greater powers than are mentioned here. We know what happens when reviews are
written very often. We know what happens when appointments are made to advisory
committees. The whole point of our position on this side of the House is to -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!
MR. SPEAKER (Oldford): Order, please!
MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The whole point of our position on the child advocate is to strengthen
this legislation. It is not to replace, in specific terms, the accountability provisions
contained in
section 75. However, we on this side believe we can do better. It is not good
enough that we have to wait for two years before we can have an accountability provision
set in motion. That is not fair to children. We on this side believe that a child advocate
independent of the Legislature is a very positive thing, so therefore we have misgivings.
We know what happens when appointments are made to advisory committees.
We know that the party in power will assure that these appointments, as far as possible,
will, shall we say, very often be along party lines. We are not saying that is not a
tradition of parties in power, not at all, but we are saying we want to remove children's
interests and advocacy out of any potential political forum. We are saying that children
are so important that they should not have to be subject to the whims of the party in
power in order to have their interests expressed. Because we want to have absolute
independence, this is why we are saying we should have a child advocate.
If you look at the composition of the proposed advisory committee, it
will note that there will be a representative of the minister, a legal aid lawyer, and
that there will also be, in 75 (2)(f), "those other persons, not exceeding 3 in
number, who the minister may determine." In essence the minister's direct
appointment, representing the Ministry itself, nearly makes a majority of this advisory
committee. We know what happens. People who get appointed by the minister to advisory
committees are likely to be more sensitive to the whims of the party in power than they
are to the interests of children, and that is the danger. That is what happened in other
places. The advisory committees that have been appointed to review legislation are more
interested in being attuned to the wishes of the party in power than they are to, in this
case, the interests of children. That is why other provinces have gone and appointed a
totally independent person, called either an ombudsman or a child advocate.
As the minister will know, there are many examples. If you were to look
at the example for the Province of British Columbia, the minister went to BC or talked
with or had dialogue with, either directly or indirectly, Judge Gove. I am surprised that
she did not also acknowledge the extensive dialogue with the child advocate in British
Columbia. Because the idea of a child advocate is to have this official as an absolute
officer of the House.
We believe we are missing a very good opportunity here. We believe that
if we were to have a child advocate, and also probably have the advisory committee that
the minister mentioned here in place as well, that we would then make sure that the
interests of children finally get expressed, unfettered, in this Legislature, and that
children do not become a political football, which they should never be. That is why other
provinces have moved in a direction that is not being acknowledged by the Ministry. I
think that we in this Province have missed a golden opportunity by not following the
examples of the other six provinces in this country.
Mr. Speaker, I do understand that my time has now just about expired,
but if I were to make one or two final comments, I should say that I do have misgivings
about certain pieces of the legislation. In terms of its philosophical approach, it is in
the right direction.
We can do more and we should do more to protect the interests of
children. The methodologies are there. It merely means that we have to strengthen the
legislation, and when it comes to clause-by-clause analysis, we on this side will be
making a great number of suggestions and amendments.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am certainly pleased to stand in my place today and say a few words
with respect to Bill 37,
An Act Respecting Child, Youth and Family Services. I say it is
about time that this Administration, and maybe the previous Administration and the one
before that, did something for the youth of this Province, the children of this Province.
My understanding, in listening to what has been going on here in this
House of Assembly when this was introduced, the job the Member for St. John's West did
when she was speaking to this petition, she spoke over an hour on this bill, over an hour,
and made some very, very good points. To be honest with you, I was surprised that the
Member for St. John's West went so long, but she knows this topic so well that she spoke
eloquently on all topics with respect to this bill. I would say she did a better job than
the Minister of Health and Community Services.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: The Minister of Health, that is right, introduced the
bill. I would say the Member for St. John's West did a better job than the Minister of
Health and Community Services in speaking to this piece of legislation.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Oh, I will get into the bill. I will get to the bill.
The Member for Bellevue - is it Bellevue that you are the member for? He wants me to get
to the bill. I am. This is a pretty wide-ranging piece of legislation, and from what I can
understand it has been fifty-four years since this was addressed, this piece of
legislation considering the youth of this Province. That is a long time.
Let me see, it will be fifty years of Confederation in March or April
of next year, so we are looking at four years, basically, before we joined Confederation.
That is hard to imagine, that we as a people, as a Province, would let such an important
group of people, children, child protection, in this Province, not be addressed or have
nothing done with it.
There are a lot of points to be made on this topic, there it no doubt
about that. I do not claim to be an expert, I can tell you that, in child protection. I do
have some association with it at an arm's length, to a certain extent. My wife has been
working with the Janeway for years and years, in the social work department down there, so
I do have some -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: I am not, I say to the member. I am trying to get
some advice here, not to get into any conflict. I am just making the point that I do have
some attachment, I suppose, arm's length -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: You can say what you like, boy.
The children of this Province - from what I understand, in child
protection there is somewhere around sixty social workers. That is hard to imagine in the
St. John's area, and from what I can understand they are overworked. Their caseload is an
extreme caseload, extraordinary caseload, far too much. Social workers in the area, from
what I can understand, are being stressed to the limit and they are continuing on with
their work. Maybe there should be 100 over there, from what I can understand.
The minister says that this act is something that is developed for the
system, not something for the bureaucracy, and that they will appoint a provincial
director and there will be six regional directors. That is a step in the right direction,
there is no doubt about that. I would not argue against that. Maybe there should be
sixteen or twenty regional directors, I do not know, but it is a step in the right
direction. They are talking about how they will have this integrated with the health
boards and so on. Again, Mr. Speaker, a move in the right direction.
They said that this is a bureaucracy and a complete devolution of
power. The Minister of Health and Community Services, when responding to questions from
the Member for Ferryland - he has asked questions of the Minister of Health and Community
Services oftentimes - the answer goes back to the boards, you know.
I find that this Administration is really trying to dissolve - they are
not dissolving their power, because they are putting things in place to grab more power
all the time. What they are doing with respect to certain boards in this Province is
basically trying to absolve themselves of responsibility. That is what is going on in the
Province today. All the boards are being used.
If there is good news, the Premier is front and centre, taking all the
credit what have you. Anything negative, that is the boards' fault. As an example, school
boards. Anything negative, it is the school board's fault. That is their decision.
Anything positive, front and centre. That is what is going on in the Province today.
This piece of legislation which is going through the House - and it
will be going through, I suppose. There is some negatively here but overall if something
is being addressed after fifty-four years, there has to be something positive in it, I say
to the Premier. I do not know what it is.
AN HON. MEMBER: Foundation(inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: It is a foundation. I am picking up on other
conversations in the House of Assembly, Mr. Speaker. I thought they were making comments
to me.
I have a lot of notes here on this. It says here in the area of child
protection the direct accountability to elected officials should exist. However, it is not
direct responsibility. The minister will not be directly responsible, and not directly
accountable. Now, that is the point I was making just a few minutes ago. I am just jumping
ahead of myself, I suppose, with respect to my notes. The direct responsibility is not
going to be held with the minister.
From my experience, I would think that the minister of any department
is directly responsible for what goes on in that department. We have seen it for years and
years and years that ministers had to resign over certain things that happened in their
department. As a matter of fact, we saw it this week. Here we have a situation under this
new legislation that is going through, that the minister will not be directly responsible;
the boards will be directly responsible. That to me, again, is washing your hands; but if
there is something positive I do not say the boards will be announcing it, I say to you,
Mr. Speaker.
Also, it says here the Cabinet will appoint a provincial director.
Again, the Member for St. John's West was making the point that accountability is confused
and defused. That is a point that needs to be addressed. If there is going to be new
legislation go through this House of Assembly, there has to direct accountability to the
minister. There should be no reduction of responsibility to the minister. That again, I
suppose, could be considered to be a political move.
The new committee that is going to be appointed is not granted any
power or any authority to review documents or reports. Its mandate is not spelled out.
Again, that is going to lead to confusion within the department. Who is responsible for
what? Who is going to be responsible for one thing? Then it will come back, again creating
confusion. The minister, whoever he or she may be, can wash their hands of anything that
may be forthcoming in the future.
One point that we, the Opposition, have been asking for in this House
for maybe as long as I have been here - and that is going on six years - is the
appointment of a child advocate. The department continued -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: I ask the man the relevancy of that statement, Mr.
Speaker. I will not repeat it because I do not want it on record.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, I had lots of hair when I was a child, I say to
the Member for Bellevue; do not worry about that.
A child advocate for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador; six
other provinces have a child advocate. When it was asked in the House of Assembly: Will
she appoint a child advocate? The minister got up and said: Well, we have a committee put
in place and we want to see this legislation work. Give it time, and what have you. Six
other provinces have a child advocate. The minister made a statement and said: We do not
follow, we lead.
I remember her making that statement, and I have to laugh at that one,
I really do, because when any of the ministers get up on the other side of the House,
oftentimes when we on this side of the House ask a question: Why are certain things being
done? Why are certain policies put in place? Why is certain legislation being introduced
in the House of Assembly? The first response is: Such and such a province is doing it, and
they find it to be working well and what have you. Then the minister gets up and says: We
are leaders, not followers.
We could lead maybe three or four other provinces and appoint a child
advocate. There will be seven in place then. That would encourage the other provinces who
do not have a child advocate to appoint a child advocate, if we are such great leaders, I
say to the minister.
The point of a child advocate is this. This legislation of course is
going to address the sixteen- to eighteen-year-olds that fell between the cracks in the
old legislation. I remember in my office having young people come in to see me. They were
probably seventeen- to eighteen-years-old. We all have, as members of the House of
Assembly, young people come in. I had one last week, a young girl in school, pregnant, all
concerned what they were going to do. I don't say we all have those cases, but I am sure a
number of us have. We do what we can for those people. We go to social services. We try
and help them out to try to keep them in school.
We saw last week - and I compliment the minister on this one - that
$75,000 went to two schools in the Province for daycare, for high schools. I would say
there is a number of people out there who would not agree with that, I would think. The
problem with respect to social services I think is getting people off it. They get into it
so young that they find it hard to get off social services. If there is a young woman that
is pregnant and she wants to stay in school, of course that is a good idea to try and help
them out to get their education, and keep them away from the social assistance roles.
If we have a situation where because of the process they cannot get
assistance or whatever the case may be, because of red tape and what have you, or they are
not treated fairly, or they have certain complaints about certain things, a child advocate
can maybe cut through the red tape and give some assistance to these individuals.
We have been asking here also - I think the critic for health, the
Member for Ferryland, or maybe it was the Leader of the Opposition - for an inquiry into
what went on out in Whitbourne a few years ago. We have many complaints now in the
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The number is increasing almost daily -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: The member says that there was a certain minister
before my time, long before my time, knew something about it.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: I cannot comment. I saw that individual on requesting
that an inquiry be done, that there was enough information out there now, but the Minister
of Justice refuses to do anything about it. We have been asking for it here. It is kind of
hypocritical when we have an administration bringing in legislation to protect children in
the Province, and then when something comes forward -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: He did, by the way. Why don't you ask the member? I
was not here. That is long before my time.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, the Member for Twillingate & Fogo is
in dreamland, and should be more concerned with what is going on in his district with
respect to a hospital being built out there, rather than asking me questions. I have
gotten calls from Fogo, believe it or not. Other members on this side of the House have
gotten calls from Fogo. I think he should be out there addressing that every opportunity
that he has, and maybe he is.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: He is getting his blood pressure up now. He is
getting mad at me, Mr. Speaker, telling me to take care of my own district. I work at my
own district, there is no doubt about that. We get calls from other districts. As a matter
of fact, I had a call the other day from the District of Conception Bay East & Bell
Island for an individual on social services, and I tried to help that individual out. If I
get a call from anywhere in the Province, everyone is the same to me. I do what I can. If
they are a Tory, a Liberal, an NDP or not affiliated -
AN HON. MEMBER: You will never live long enough to return as many
calls as I do.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: What kind of a dreamland is that man living in, Mr.
Speaker? I get more calls in a day than you get in a month, I say to the Member for
Twillingate & Fogo. I do more for my area, and I don't take a back seat to anybody in
this House of Assembly with respect to the amount of work that I do in my district for my
constituents. I'm not hearing that from certain members on that side of the House! I know
what is going on. We are hearing it, we are getting the reports in.
I digress again, Mr. Speaker. Back to the bill. I know the Speaker was
just going to bring back to relevancy, but sometimes when you are in this House of
Assembly and you have members on the other side of the house interjecting and making
comments that they do not have a clue of what they are talking about,, it is hard to
ignore.
Anyway, with respect to the child advocate, we have been requesting it
for years in this House of Assembly. The minister continues to refuse to appoint a child
advocate, but the point has been made. We have a consumer advocate in the Province,
appointed, looking at the power rates. Then one would have to ask: Is this legislation
being a bit hypocritical? I do not know if I can use that. I'm not calling someone a
hypocrite, I am saying the legislation can be bit hypocritical. If we appoint a person to
look after the power rates, to look after the interest of consumers in the Province with
respect to power, what are we saying? What is more important here? Is it the children of
the Province or is it the power rates, I say to the minister?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: This comment was just made across the House from the
Member for Bellevue: If you keep the power rates down we keep the children warm. That is
an important point, that children be kept warm, but there is much more to the well-being
of a child than keeping him or her warm. There is the social aspect of it, there is the
mental aspect of it. There is child abuse that has to be looked at. That is what this
legislation hopefully will address as time goes by. These are some of the things. Just to
say we appoint a consumer advocate with respect to power rates is going to help keep
children warm, I think that is oversimplifying the situation. I am sure that the member
that made that comment would agree with what I just said. It is just one of many factors
that has to be looked at when we are looking at child protection.
I have a lot of notes here, if anyone wants to see them. This is the
kind of work that we put into the legislation when we have it here. Just look at the
notes. We have members on that side of the House I would say who have not even seen the
bill yet. When we look at it, we look at it, Mr. Speaker. Now -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Pardon?
AN HON. MEMBER: Who prepared that? (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Those are so childish, immature, and simpleminded,
Mr. Speaker, the comments coming from that side of the House. Who prepared it. What
difference does it make who prepared it? We prepared it. The Opposition prepared it. We
prepared it on this side of House and we are addressing it. I will tell you one thing, I
say to the Member for Bellevue - and I appreciate his interjection there. i have to say I
really do.
This is a piece of legislation that the Member for St. John's West is
the critic for. On my legislation, the Minister of Government Services and Lands had three
pieces of legislation, four the other day, and we addressed them. When I have mine - I'm
the critic for certain departments - I know what I'm talking about, let me tell you that,
Mr. Speaker. I look at them.
PREMIER TOBIN: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
On a point of order, the hon. the Premier.
PREMIER TOBIN: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. Just out of some idle
curiosity, I wonder if the rule of relevancy applies in the House today.
MR. SPEAKER: It does.
MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, could you repeat that?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.
MR. J. BYRNE: I would say to that point of order that is no point
of order, Mr. Speaker, that when I am up speaking - you talk about relevancy? The way the
Premier gets on in this House of Assembly, and he showed it this morning, and he talks
about relevancy? The man should be ashamed to stand in his place and even utter the word.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, back to the bill. I have a lot
to say about this piece of legislation and I only have a half hour to say it.
Here is a very important point and I urge the Minister of Finance and
Treasury Board, with respect to this one, and the Premier, too, to listen. Because the
Premier likes to jump out in front of the bandwagon every opportunity he gets, jump in
front of the bandwagon and lead it. I am going to tell him one now that he can jump in
front of, if he wants to, and that is this.
We have this new Child Welfare Act going through the House of Assembly,
I say to the Premier. The point has to be made that this new bill, when it goes through
the House - I cannot say yet - won't be worth the paper it is written on if does not have
the financial backing of the government, I say to the Premier. That is where it is going
to be all important. We can make all kinds of promises, but if we do not put the bucks
behind it, it is no good. As I mentioned earlier, I say to the Premier, in St. John's I
believe we have sixty social workers working in child protection. The Minister of Justice
is looking at me. I am just totally amazed at that, I have to say, but we know the history
of certain institutions within this Province. Sixty social workers; maybe we need more.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Pardon?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Sixty social workers and they are stressed. Maybe
there should be 100. So I am saying to the Premier, if he puts in this legislation, when
it goes through the House, put the bucks with it and get the Minister of Finance and
Treasury Board to find the money for this piece of legislation.
Also with respect to the health care in this Province - and this is all
connected. If the Premier wants relevancy, I will keep it relevant. We have the Member for
Ferryland, the critic for health, on his feet in this House almost daily asking the
Minister of Health and Community Services about funding.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: What are you saying?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: Let me tell you something. The best laid plans of
mice and men, I say to the member.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: No, what?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: It should be the best laid plans of the rat packers
and men. I will say one thing, Mr. Speaker, what went on here this morning in the House of
Assembly backfired on that crowd over there, I can guarantee that. It backfired, didn't
it? Yes, and talk about -
AN HON. MEMBER: Jack, answer the question.
MR. J. BYRNE: Look, I tell you now, when I finish that, that man
will be - he thinks I do not know it, see. I am not like certain other individuals who
come up for the bug. In salmon fishing, you see the orange bug going down the river, the
salmon comes up and turns on it and it is hooked. Well, buddy, I am not like that. There
are certain people over there who got hooked yesterday, big time, didn't they? It
backfired on them today.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I have more important stuff to
talk about than the -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Anyway, Mr. Speaker -
MR. TULK: Jack.
MR. J. BYRNE: What?
MR. TULK: Did you read that book (inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: Listen here, boy. Do you know how many books I have
read in my life?
MR. TULK: Not very many.
MR. J. BYRNE: No, I do not suppose. I have read more books in my
life than how high you can count.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: I read them, too, no doubt about that, when I was a
child. As a matter of fact, I read them. Pardon?
MS J.M. AYLWARD: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Yes it is, isn't it? At least I am being honest, I
say to the Minister of Health and Community Services.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, they are trying to get me off this now.
Again, I want to get back to with respect to the social workers in this
Province, the number.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: What? Which book do you want to know? I have read
lots of books.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Can you count that high? That is good, you can count
up to seven.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, this legislation over the years,
the age group from sixteen years old to eighteen years old were dropped between the
cracks. We have known that for years.
AN HON. MEMBER: Not any more.
MR. J. BYRNE: That is the point I am making, not any more.
AN HON. MEMBER: Good job.
MR. J. BYRNE: A positive thing, there is no doubt about that. I
give credit where credit is due, but there are certain members on that side of the House
who certainly do not do it, I can guarantee you that.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I do not know about this crowd. Just
look at the notes. I am just going to speak now.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: I don't know, but there are going to be a few more
off the beaten track in the very near future, I can tell you that. There are a few more.
MR. TULK: I will get several copies for you.
MR. J. BYRNE: There have been two attempts.
MR. TULK: Two attempts at what?
MR. J. BYRNE: Figure it out now. I say to the former Government
House Leader, sit back and think about what I just said. There have been two attempts.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: What did you ask me?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: No, he asked me to do something for him.
Anyway, Mr. Speaker, this piece of legislature, I have to say -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: I had it here a minute again, Bill No. 37. I think it
is a good piece of legislation. It does not go enough. It definitely does not go far
enough. It should be appointing a child advocate. We have been preaching that here.
Another point with respect to children in the Province, that we
probably should be addressing while we are on our feet here, is this: the situation in
Davis Inlet over the past little while, over the past number of years actually. A few
years ago when we saw what happened there with the gas sniffing and so on, and there were
children taken out of the community and moved away and what have you, it was hard, no
doubt. What is going on today is hard.
When I look at the television and see those pictures of those children,
I think it is heart wrenching. Most people in this Province believe it is heart wrenching.
This legislation, hopefully, will be able to do something to address the concern in Davis
Inlet.
The announcement that we received the other day with respect to the
centre that is going to be constructed in Labrador, in Sheshatshiu - I think that is the
location - is something that we should be looking forward to. The federal government, of
course, is putting the bucks into that site. I believe it is for all Atlantic Canada, and
we have been fortunate to have that site constructed in Sheshatshiu, I say to the former
Government House Leader.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: I only have three minutes left so I have to get on
with something here now.
As I said earlier, the Member for St. John's West, when she spoke to
this piece of legislature, made pretty well all of the points that we could possibly make
on this side of the House, but the former Government House Leader said we should sit down.
We oftentimes get up. We want to be on record, on this side of the House, of supporting
certain legislation or questioning certain legislation. This legislation, of course, we
support. I do not know if we would be making any changes or proposing any changes to this
legislation as time goes by. I say to the Member of St. John's West, will we be making any
changes, or proposing?
AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.
MR. J. BYRNE: I think, from what I can understand, and the feedback
I am getting, that we are proposing some changes to even strengthen this legislation, to
even make it more powerful to look after and take care of the interests of the children of
the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Right to the bowels of her, yes.
Mr. Speaker, just before I sit down, I want to address this, and it is
important, this time last year we were sitting all night in the House of Assembly, right
through the night. I think we sat for thirty-six hours one time, non-stop.
AN HON. MEMBER: Thirty-eight.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thirty-eight hours, non-stop, and this side of the
House carried it. When I said that the other day - we left here one morning at 3:00 or
4:00 in the morning and went outside. It was -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Pardon? What did the Minister of Health and Community
Services say? I would like to hear the Minister of Health and Community Services.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: Is that what she said?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. J. BYRNE: By leave, Mr. Speaker, just to clue up.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Does the member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. J. BYRNE: I will just have leave for one point. I want to hear
the comment the Minister of Health and Community Services made because she is so witty all
of the time, I would say Mr. Speaker. She tries to be so witty. Like a block of wood.
(Inaudible).
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, with respect to this piece of
legislation, we will be supporting it. There is no doubt in my mind. The Member for St.
John's West made a good presentation when she responded to this piece of legislation. We
will probably be making some proposed changes in the legislation to strengthen the
legislation. When I spoke earlier I talked about a child advocate, and I personally think
it is a good idea. In the meantime -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. J. BYRNE: I have to keep her going, Mr. Speaker. Anyway, when I
look at -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Leave has been withdrawn.
The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I have only recognized the Member for St. John's South.
MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I just have a few comments on this, and very quickly. It is good
legislation so I anticipate the members on this side of the House will be voting in favour
of it.
In order to implement this legislation government are going to have to
look at putting some more funding into it and, as well, more social workers. Without the
money to implement the areas of the legislation that are good and are needed it will not
be able to be implemented properly. We are definitely going to have to look at putting a
few more dollars into this so that we make sure we implement the areas of the legislation
that are good and to benefit the social workers as well.
As we know, social workers are very seriously overworked, they are
stressed, they have a very high workload and a high demand. Without the extra money and
extra social workers to implement this legislation then the legislation is probably not
going to serve its purpose.
Also, with this legislation government neglected to put in place a
child advocate. That is something our Party has been advocating for quite some time now.
We have to put a child advocate in place to protect the children and the parents, and to
help the social workers who find flaws within the system so that they have somebody to
turn to. We have seen that. We have seen direct consequences here of removing the advocate
on behalf of the public, the ombudsman, when the Liberal administration removed the
ombudsman, just as an example.
People who found they were not getting the headway they wanted with
departments or with ministers at least had an ombudsman to turn to. By removing the
ombudsman they have to rely on the system, rely on - I am getting some notes here that I
am being told I should read word for word. They have to be good notes. We have to look at
putting in place a child advocate and perhaps replacing the ombudsman. Without an
ombudsman, or without a child advocate, then children who have a problem and are perhaps
old enough to at least speak on their own behalf, who feel they are being treated unfairly
or unjustly, parents who have concerns about their children or about the system, and
social workers who find flaws within the system, have nowhere really to send their
complaints.
The Opposition can listen to those complaints and we can advocate on
their behalf, both in the House and through the ministers, but a lot of times we all know
that the ministers brush off questions in the House. They don't supply proper answers,
they don't give the information we are looking for. If we write a letter sometimes we are
waiting thirty days, sixty days, ninety days, before a response. At least if there was
child advocate there, a child advocate could lobby on behalf of the child, the parents,
and social workers who find flaws within the system. The ministers and the department
officials would have to respond to the child advocate or otherwise, I guess, face certain
prosecution.
The other thing we find important here would be keeping the child with
immediate relatives. In order to do that we are certainly going to require some extra
funding, especially for families with low incomes and so on, to give them the resources
they require in order to keep the children with the family.
As I said, this is a good legislation. There are some flaws with the
legislation. There are some areas we would like to see better action on or closer
attention paid to. Overall we feel the legislation is very good. Cabinet will appoint the
provincial director. Clearly accountability is confused and defused with that. There is
the appointment by the minister or the ministerial advisory committee. We see these as
areas of concern. Secondly, the committee is not granted any power by any authority to
review documents or reports.
We have to make sure that - have included the appointment of a child
advocate, again, as I have said, so that accountability is first and foremost within the
department, accountability is first and foremost with the families and with children. What
we are looking at here is the importance of family relationships, the importance of
stability for the child, the importance of making sure that the child has somebody to turn
to and has a solid foundation, so that we are not overlooking the most important reason
why perhaps this legislation is put in place, and that is the protection of child and
family.
It was determined by the Select Committee that definitely a case
advocate could be avoided and that the duties the case advocate would fulfil are now
addressed by the MHA. Again, many times asking questions in the House, the Opposition's
questions are skirted, sometimes not answered. Without a child advocate in place the
children are the ones that are going to suffer. There is absolutely no question about
that.
A systems advocate would like at all the things that were happening not
only within the government system, but also things that were happening outside, things
that are happening out in the community, out in the world, things that would directly have
an adverse affect on children. In today's society children are perhaps more stressed.
There are more factors that would create stress on and adversity for children than have
ever been there before. In a society that one would generally think would have more to
offer children, there comes with it, as well as the advantages and high technology, peer
pressure and substance abuse and so on. Along with the advantages of a modern society come
some adverse effects, that if children are left to fend for themselves or put into a
system where they have nobody to advocate on their behalf, surely the children are the
ones to lose. We cannot allow this to happen.
The Select Committee on Children's Interests heard the majority of
presentations at the public consultations. The majority of the presentations expressed the
necessity for a child's advocate, not that it would be nice but that it is absolutely
necessary. Once again, a child advocate who would enjoy the same pleasures as does the
Auditor General. That particular clause is tailored to the child advocate. A child
advocate would, in fact, have wide-ranging authority and ability to protect the family and
protect the children.
Mr. Speaker, the committee also recommends that the advocate report to
the Legislature as opposed to Cabinet, and that the reporting would be similar to that of
the Auditor General. The advocate would be empowered to review and comment on the
operations, programs and mandate of all provincial government departments and agencies.
This would give tremendous authority not just to Cabinet, not just to legislators, not
just to high-ranking officials within the department, but to a person who is there,
designed and ready to speak out and on behalf of children who oftentimes do not have the
ability to speak out on their own or on behalf of themselves.
The problem is not with finances, but the advocate would focus on the
shortcomings of government. They would be somebody independent who could look at
everything that this government is doing or not doing that adversely affects children.
We heard the minister refer to the input of social workers. It was just
a little while ago, actually, that there was a demonstration of social workers, and that
demonstration was to protest the heavy caseloads that social workers now have to endure.
They are unable to give adequate attention to their caseloads because of the tremendous
number of caseloads and the shortage of social workers. We all know that with a high
caseload the social workers are often deterred, often swayed from the pointed and
well-decided decisions, well-thought decisions that they could make on behalf of family
and children. Because of a tremendous caseload and overbearing caseload, oftentimes,
through no fault of the social worker, cases are somewhat overlooked because of the
tremendous amount of work social workers have to look after in a working day.
Oftentimes I have heard of social workers taking home with them files,
because of their personal concern, because of their dedication to their clients, but if we
continue to overload the caseworkers and the social workers then as things get out of
hand, as they start to lose full control over each and every case, it is the families, it
is the children, and it is the clients of social workers, of social services, who are the
ones who suffer.
In fact, if the Child, Youth and Family Services Act is to fulfil what
it is meant to fulfil, then we certainly need additional resources; resources in the form
of more money into programming and resources in the form of more social workers to fulfil
the programs. At the present time there is really no avenue for social workers in the
child welfare system to voice any grievances about matters of policy within their
department. There have been numerous studies done and still within the social workers
there is an atmosphere of fear that if they speak up against policy there will be certain
ramifications back onto the social workers.
A child advocate would be a perfect vehicle for social workers to bring
any failures or shortcomings in the policy to the attention of a person who would actually
be able to implement unto the department and the bureaucrats within the department
something about it without fear of reprisal to the social workers. The social workers then
would have an avenue where they would not be penalized for speaking out,
whereas right now
if they to speak out, it is them personally that speak out, it is them raising the
concern. If it is raised through the child advocate where they could be protected, it is
the child advocate that is raising the concerns and there would be not punishment so to
speak of the social workers for speaking out.
The Child Welfare Act will not really be worth the paper it is written
on if government does not address the issue of providing enough resources to implement the
policies.
The minister refers to voluntary agreements where parents can in fact
offer that their children be placed in care without having to admit that they have done
something wrong. There are problems with that as well. Parents have come forward to seek
help, something that in the past there were afraid to do. On the other hand, perhaps there
are good things as well because in many cases we see parents in our Province who are in
stress and sometimes, though no fault of their own, cannot properly address and supply the
proper necessities to their children.
Another recommendation from the Report of the Select Committee On
Children's Interest was recommendation No. 21. The committee recommends that the
establishment of a 1-800 crisis or warming line for parents. This number would be designed
to respond to parents who have questions or who themselves are in crisis, or feel their
family or children are in crisis. Many times in rural areas of the Province we find there
is on access to social workers or to professionals, and the parents know that they have a
problem and have nowhere to take that problem or address it because there is nobody within
their immediate area.
If the 1-800 line was established then help would be as close as their
nearest telephone. The 1-800 line that was recommended by the Select Committee on
Children's Interests would actually be something that would eliminate some of this crisis.
It is something that is probably fairly easy to set up, fairly low cost, and would be of
tremendous benefit to families who are in crisis in areas where they do not have direct
access to a social worker or other professional help.
Mr. Speaker, poverty and child welfare go hand in hand. A social
assistance policy that would allow parents to adequately feed and clothe their children,
one that would see their financial assistance officers not referring to food banks, would
have far-reaching positive affects in reducing the stress that prevents adequate parenting
in today's society.
The Child Welfare Act also says, in the best interest of the child,
that he or she be kept with the family. If they cannot be kept with the parents, that they
be kept with a member of the immediate family or some distant relative.
Perhaps that is something that we as members of the House should look
more closely at as opposed to just placing children with an unknown family in unknown
circumstances and without any prejudice to foster families at all; because I know a number
of foster families, very reputable people, who do a tremendous job with the children. It
would no doubt be in the best interest of the children if they were placed with somebody
that they knew.
Mr. Speaker, while we on this side of the House feel that this is very
important, we find mocks and yawns and inadequate remarks to what we are saying here. It
is quite evident that not every member of this House of Assembly takes the child advocate
or the best interests of the children at hand, and I am rather appalled at the Minister of
Justice who should have a very direct interest in children and the children's interests,
to take a direct interest in this issue. Yet, the Minister of Justice and the Minister of
Fisheries and Aquaculture persist in mocking what is being said here in the House. That is
rather unfortunate when we are considering the best interests of the children. That is the
issue at hand.
We have to take a long, hard look at the particular
section of the act
and make sure that we have provisions there so that the children can in fact remain in
places with families where they are loved, where they are known, and where they feel
comfortable.
I would like to address the act as it pertains to the youth. A child is
a person up to sixteen years of age, and a youth is a person between sixteen and eighteen;
that is sixteen and seventeen years old.
Part II of the act applies to youth as well as to
the child; however, there is no duty by the public to report incidents of neglect or abuse
where a youth is concerned.
We can say that in many cases a youth of sixteen or seventeen years of
age is quite capable of going and reporting on their own behalf, but a lot of times a
person of sixteen or seventeen years of age faces fear: fear of personal embarrassment,
fear of what will happen if they seek help from professionals or authority. They are
wandering and sometimes afraid and uncertain of the unknown and what may happen to them if
they were to step forward and say that they are in trouble for one reason or another.
In many cases, in fact, the youth between sixteen and seventeen - other
people are well, but in particular sixteen and seventeen years of age - oftentimes have
nowhere to turn. We have to make sure that those