PDF Version

November 27, 2014

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVII No. 47

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Verge):

Order, please!

Admit

strangers.

Statements by

Members

MR. SPEAKER:

Today we have members'

statements from the Member for the District of Exploits; the Member for the

District of Harbour Main; the Member for the District of Conception Bay South;

the Member for the District of Baie Verte Springdale; the Member for the

District of Bay of Islands; and the Member for the District of St. John's North.

The hon.

the Member for the District of Exploits.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear !

MR. FORSEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, on November 2, 2014 Natasha Penney completed a twenty-year educational

journey with a Political Science Degree from Mount Allison University; however,

this was no ordinary journey.

Natasha

was two weeks of age when she was diagnosed with congenital kidney disease.

Born in Bishop's Falls, she first enrolled at Mount Allison's Applied

Human Nutrition Program in 1994.

Less than two months into the degree she had to leave to undergo her second

kidney transplant her first lasted six years, and the donor had been her

father.

Mr.

Speaker, with much support from her family, Natasha enrolled again at Mount

Allison in 2008 in Political Studies, while still undergoing dialysis treatment.

However, her studies were interrupted by four more operations in

2010-2012, and again in 2013 she underwent her third kidney transplant.

It took eight weeks for the kidney to work and more surgery to correct a

complication, but she never felt she had to discontinue her studies.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating a woman

with tenacity and determination, on completing an unwavering twenty-year

educational journey, Natasha Penney.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Harbour Main.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, it is with great pleasure I rise in this hon. House today to

congratulate two siblings, Captain Ashley Robyn FitzPatrick and Master Corporal

Jamie FitzPatrick of a community in the District of Harbour Main, Roaches Line.

Both these siblings received military commendations for their services,

dubbed beyond the demands of normal duty.

While

deployed to Italy in support of NATO operations in Libya, then Lieutenant

FitzPatrick witnessed a civilian fall from a work vehicle.

After rushing to his aid in the middle of a four-lane highway, she

realized he was not breathing and had no pulse.

She directed a bystander to call emergency services and began performing

CPR until the paramedics arrived.

Lieutenant FitzPatrick's selfless and decisive actions contributed to saving

that person's life.

Her

brother, Master Corporal Jamie Fitzpatrick's contributions were in another part

of the world, and his contributions led to the successful implementation of

Tactical Common Data Links network and Remote Optically Viewed Enhanced Receiver

system in support of the G8 and G20 summits, and again his contribution have led

to greater security for all involved in those events.

As a

side note, Mr. Speaker, both are the children of Tom and Dale Russell

Fitzpatrick of Roaches Line and great-grandchildren, I might add, of our first

former Premier Joseph R. Smallwood.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating Captain

Ashley Robyn FitzPatrick and her brother Master Corporal Jamie FitzPatrick on

receiving these very distinguished military commendations.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Conception Bay South.

MR. HILLIER:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this

hon. House today to recognize Royal Canadian Legion Branch 50, Kelligrews.

This marks the forty-third anniversary of the branch and I am pleased to

say that in attendance at the recent anniversary dinner were three of the

founders: Mr. Gerald Greenslade, Mr. Gerry Kelly, and Ms Ida Leonard.

During

the evening the branch dedicated a new Veteran's Centre.

With pictures, memorabilia, and comfortable furniture this room is

designed as a quiet area for veterans.

Kristyn

Chaffey, a student at Queen Elizabeth High School, was the guest speaker.

She talked about her visit to Beaumont Hamel and her feelings about how

veterans are currently being treated in Canada.

She also told us that she had left the National War Memorial just moments

before Corporal Nathan Cirillo had been shot.

She would have been one of the last people to have seen him alive, in

uniform, standing guard.

Branch

President Robert Hillier presented executive pins, anniversary pins, and

certificates of appreciation. The

branch made a presentation of a cheque to the Special Olympics.

Mr.

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

recognizing the work of Royal Canadian Legion Branch 50, Kelligrews.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Baie

Verte Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. POLLARD:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It was a

milestone for the Baie Verte Volunteer Fire Department.

On Saturday, November 8, they celebrated their fiftieth anniversary.

I rise

in this hon. House today to congratulate the dedicated firefighters and the Town

of Baie Verte for their unselfish volunteer years of service, not only to their

community but to the entire region.

The

Minister of Justice and Public Safety brought greetings, along with Provincial

Fire Chief Vince MacKenzie.

Numerous

certificates were presented, along with the 2014 firefighter of the year, which

was captured by Craig Furey. Fire

Chief Lorne Head and past chiefs are to be commended for their leadership, and

Mayor Clar Brown and his council and past mayors and councils are also to be

applauded for their strong, generous support.

Fifty

years of service is a tremendous feat.

The region has reaped the benefits of unselfish efforts of the dedicated

firefighters.

Also,

the spouses and partners are to be recognized as well because they too make

sacrifices to enable the firefighters to carry out their responsibilities.

Honourable members, please join me in extending hearty congratulations to the

Baie Verte volunteer firefighters upon their fiftieth anniversary.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Bay

of Islands.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this

hon. House today to recognize the girls volleyball team from St. James All Grade

School in Lark Harbour.

Earlier

this fall, the team competed in the VolleyCentral competition winning silver and

earning the right to compete in the Division A Regional Volleyball championship

which was held last weekend at Grandy River Collegiate in Burnt Islands.

This team won gold and will now be travelling this weekend to Musgrave

Harbour to compete against nine other teams in the Girls A Provincial Volleyball

championship

Mr.

Speaker, the twelve-member team, comprised of Grade 10, 11, and 12 girls,

included Riley Pennell, Olivia Perry, Chloe Connolly, Leslie Lushman, Crystal

Sheppard, Sarah Sheppard, Brianna Murrin, Joanna Sheppard, Jessie Youden, Leah

Callfas, Courtney Pennell, and Kennedy Sheppard.

The team, under the guidance of their coaches, Suzanne Gilbert and

Heather Oates, have worked hard and are very committed to their team.

These young athletes exemplify true sportsmanship and are great

representatives of St. James All Grade School.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all members to join me in extending congratulations to the St.

James Girls Volleyball team and wish them every success as they compete this

weekend in the provincial championships.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's North.

MR. KIRBY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand

in the House today to recognize Chrissy Young and Faith Purcell, who were both

awarded the Volunteer of the Year Award by the Rabbittown Community Centre last

month. Both individuals are

exemplary community volunteers.

Chrissy

Young is a member of the Rabbittown Community Centre's Board of Directors, and

the neighbourhood Tennant Association.

She is also involved in all aspects of programming at the community

centre and is always eager to lend a hand whenever it is needed.

The

second recipient, Faith Purcell, is a student at Prince of Wales Collegiate and

an active participant in Rabbittown's youth programs.

Over the past two years, she has taken on a leadership role as a junior

youth mentor to the children enrolled in the centre's summer day camp.

She also volunteers weekly with the after school program.

Both

Chrissy and Faith regularly help out with the Rabbittown Community Centre's

special events and annual celebrations.

The staff at the centre have told me they look forward to Faith and

Chrissy's continued service to the Rabbittown community over the years to come.

I ask

all hon. members to join me in congratulating Chrissy Young and Faith Purcell on

being recognized for their exceptional volunteer work.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am

pleased to rise today in this hon. House to acknowledge November as National

Crohn's and Colitis Month.

National

Crohn's and Colitis Month provides a valuable opportunity to raise awareness of

the challenges faced by individuals and families dealing with these diseases.

It also creates an avenue for greater discussion about how we can support

and educate those who have been newly diagnosed, as well as inform the general

public who interact with those suffering on a daily basis.

Mr.

Speaker, chronic diseases impact the health of the population as a whole and

place significant demands on the health care system.

As a department, we have put a significant focus on chronic disease

management and have supported the introduction of medications and programs to

help those living with these diseases lead healthier lives.

While a cure has yet to be discovered, Crohn's and colitis research can

lead to better treatment options and support programs for people living with

this chronic disease.

The

Department of Health and Community Services works closely with organizations

such as Crohn's and Colitis Canada and other community partners that provide

support to people living with chronic diseases in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr.

Speaker, Crohn's and Colitis Canada has embarked on a new national awareness and

fundraising campaign this month. The

Make it Stop. For Life campaign aims

to educate by providing a glimpse into the realities of living with these

diseases. The campaign also helps

affected individuals learn new ways they can cope more effectively with their

diseases and thrive.

Twenty-eight Canadians are diagnosed with Crohn's or colitis every day.

Approximately 129,000 have Crohn's disease and 140,000 have ulcerative

colitis. One in every 150 Canadians

suffers from these diseases.

Mr.

Speaker, I commend Crohn's and Colitis Canada for its continued support and

awareness efforts on behalf of Canadians living with these diseases.

I encourage everyone in Newfoundland and Labrador to visit the awareness

campaign's Web site at

www.crohnsandcolitis.ca to gain deeper understanding of the challenges faced by so many across

our country.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

I, too, want to commend Crohn's and Colitis Canada for its support and

awareness efforts on behalf of people of Newfoundland and Labrador living with

these diseases. They have a

devastating impact on the overall health of one in 150 Canadians, and there is

no cure.

A 2012

report indicates they are on the rise and are costing Canada about $2.8 billion

annually. Some people mistakenly

think that they only affect our older population; however, this is not the case.

It is affecting children as well as adults.

In fact, a new study just released in October has seen a steep increase

in the rise of this disease in children diagnosed before ten years of age.

The

number of new cases in Canadian children has almost doubled since 1995.

A lot of research has been done in understanding this; however, much more

needs to be done in order to find a cure and to improve the quality of life for

those living with it.

should continue to support Crohn's and Colitis Canada, and their provincial

division, and help ensure that people living with the disease are provided the

necessary care and treatment they require.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I, too,

thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

I also commend Crohn's and Colitis Canada for their hard work raising

awareness and support for people living with these diseases, but I am sure the

people they represent are awaiting to see what government itself will do to help

people with their disease.

Government covers only colostomy supplies for people with very low fixed

incomes, leaving others to pay for these costly supplies on their own.

I continually get calls from people who say that they lack of support is

causing them real hardship and they do wish that government would take up the

cause and cover colostomy supplies.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this

hon. House today to highlight the agricultural research symposium: Our Food, Our

Future: Research that Feeds Newfoundland and Labrador which was held recently in

Corner Brook.

The

symposium was organized by the Department of Natural Resources and Grenfell

Campus, Memorial University, and brought together 120 farmers, educators,

agricultural professionals and others interested in Newfoundland and Labrador

agriculture. It was an opportunity

for these groups to hear about current research, to network, and to identify

gaps and opportunities in research.

The

comments we received after the symposium certainly expressed the positive work

being undertaken to grow this industry.

Attendees said they were impressed with the event and by what is

happening in the provincial industry.

Organizers were told the information coming out of the symposium will

help move the industry forward and that we are leading in so many ways!

The work

accomplished at the symposium is helping the agriculture industry meet its

potential. A provincial agriculture

research strategy will be developed based on comments heard at the past two

agricultural research symposia, as well as the strategic directions established

by the Agricultural Research Advisory Committee.

This committee comprises representatives from government, commodity

boards, the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Agriculture, Agriculture and

Agri-Foods Canada, Memorial University of Newfoundland, and the Institute of

Agrologists.

The

value of production from the rapidly expanding agriculture industry is

approximately $500 million per year.

The industry is a significant economic generator, employing 6,500 people.

The

provincial government is a strong supporter of Newfoundland and Labrador's

agriculture industry. We recently

announced a new $7 million initiative with the federal government to further

grow the cranberry industry in this Province.

Through Growing Forward 2, $6 million will be allocated for ninety-five

projects in Newfoundland and Labrador during 2014.

Mr.

Speaker, there is tremendous opportunity and interest in expanding research in

agriculture and agrifoods. As

stewards of this industry, the provincial government allocates $1 million

annually to support agriculture research and development.

Priorities identified by the industry are being addressed on such topics

as grain production, crop diversification, and soil improvement.

We look forward to furthering the provincial agriculture research

strategy, as well as other research and development efforts, in the months to

come.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

George's Stephenville East.

MR. REID:

I thank the minister for an

advance copy of his statement.

Agriculture is a big industry in the district I represent and I want to

congratulate the Department of Natural Resources and Grenfell Campus for hosting

the agricultural symposium.

Unfortunately, the agriculture industry is following much the same pattern as

our fishing industry. While the

value of industry is increasing, the number of farmers in this Province is

declining. The average age of a

Newfoundland and Labrador farmer is steadily rising.

According to the 2011 Census, the average age was fifty-five years, up

from fifty-two in 2006.

While we

have improved production of some products like cranberries, we continue to be in

a difficult position if we are unable to bring fruits and vegetables into this

Province for a prolonged period of time.

More must be done to encourage the younger generation to get involved in

the agricultural industry. More must

be done to protect our agricultural lands.

Most

agriculture today is limited to the areas around Goulds, Deer Lake, the

Heatherton and the Highlands area, and the Codroy Valley.

Although the farming industry is expected to post modest gains in 2014 it

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I, too,

thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement.

The NDP strongly supports the Province's growing and sustainable

agriculture industry and agree with the minister about its tremendous potential.

The

minister lists priorities identified by the industry and I would like to suggest

a few more to the minister: a provincial food security plan; promotion of local

markets and bolstering food security by creating an agency linking small

producers with restaurants, stores, and consumers; encouraging farmers

co-operators to share facilities and marketing; legislation ensuring we do not

lose any more of our valuable developed agricultural land; and, more value-added

processing of our agricultural products to name a few.

I hope the minister has taken notes.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Seniors, Wellness and Social Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to

update this hon. House on a provincial government investment which are providing

more physical activity opportunities for children and youth in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

The

provincial government, in partnership with School Sports Newfoundland and

Labrador, recently announced a $300,000 investment in Participation Nation

Unplugged.

This is

an after-school physical activity program designed to help provide inclusive,

non-competitive opportunities to increase physical activity and promote healthy,

active lifestyles in the after-school time period.

This program works with participating schools to help identify and remove

barriers to increasing physical activity.

As the

Minister responsible for wellness, I recognize the need to encourage youth to

decrease their screen time and to get up and start moving towards a more active

lifestyle. It might be a good

practice for some in this House too, Mr. Speaker.

The

provincial government's investment in Participation Nation Unplugged came about

as the result of the After-School Physical Activity Pilot Initiative, which was

implemented at twenty-five sites from 2011-2014, Mr. Speaker.

The pilot results indicated a positive impact from increasing

opportunities for students to participate in after-school physical activities.

As such, the twenty-five pilot sites will be invited to become a part of

the Participation Nation Unplugged program, and existing programs will have the

opportunity to expand their activities from one day to two days a week.

addition, Mr. Speaker, the provincial government continues to support

recreation, sport, and physical activity through various programs, such as the

Community Recreation Development Program, Community Capital Grants, Physical

Activity Equipment funding, and the Premier's Athletic Awards.

Mr.

Speaker, with the support of the provincial government, community partners and,

most importantly, parents, I believe we can encourage young people to develop

active, healthy lifestyles and habits that will serve them well throughout their

lives.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Bay

of Islands.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

As with the private member's motion yesterday, we all in this House

support active living by the kids in sports in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr.

Speaker, Participation Nation Unplugged is a great activity.

I encourage the government and I support this initiative anything we

can do to get our youth moving.

Congratulations to the parents and the sites that have been selected and to the

volunteers who will help to go from one day to two days a week, the parents and

the kids.

I just

say to the minister if you are in to a school like you did in Bay of Islands in

Sacred Heart, I would love to come along to one of your programs.

It would be nothing more than introduce the program to all the kids who

are there and help the kids promote it as you are in the school.

Mr.

Speaker, as a side note, it would be much nicer to see the Minister of Fisheries

and Aquaculture doing Zumba down at Sacred Heart school.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

Mr. Speaker, $300,000 for the whole Province for an inclusive program to

increase physical activity and promote healthy lifestyles is a mere drop in the

bucket. As a matter of fact, it

barely pays for the bucket really.

Really,

Mr. Speaker, kids need more regular, frequent gym classes in school and more

after-school programs for all kids in all schools.

After a three-year pilot program, this initiative should be a permanent

fully funded program in all 264 schools across the Province.

Shame on this government for trying to show this as something wonderful

and innovative shame on them!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Oral

Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's South.

MR. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last

November the Minister of Transportation confirmed at the announcement of a new

ferry vessel that tariffs were included in the $51 million cost.

He reconfirmed that in this House on December 2, less than a month later;

today, it is a different story.

I ask

the minister: Will you now confirm that if the federal government does not waive

the $25 million in tariffs that the contract bid for the two new ferries was

not, in fact, the lowest bid?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have

a responsibility, this Administration does, to provide vessels that provide the

service to the people in this Province safe, reliable vessels that are state

of the art. Mr. Speaker, it was this

Administration that put in the first ferry replacement strategy in this

Province's history.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

We have done that: two

vessels built servicing the great people of this Province, two more months away

to service other islands in this Province, Mr. Speaker; weeks away from

announcing an RFP to replace vessels and a service for the people of Labrador;

and in the near future also to replace services to the coast parts of this

Province.

We are

the Province that took the lead. We

are the Administration that did that, Mr. Speaker, and we are going to service

the people here with the best provided service possible.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's South.

MR. OSBORNE:

Mr. Speaker, that did not in

any way answer the question that I asked, so I will ask it again.

If the

federal government does not waive the $25 million in tariffs on these two new

vessels, will he confirm that the awarded contract is not, in fact, the lowest

bids on these two vessels?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon.

member is right; it did not answer the question there.

What it did outline is the commitment of this Administration to provide

services. What I will say to the

hon. member is we announced that we would pay $100 million to Damen Shipyards

because they have an expertise second to none in this world to be able to

provide services, and that is what we have contracted.

Mr.

Speaker, also in response to the question, we are going through a process.

We are going through a process with the federal government.

We are confident that tariff will be waived.

There is a precedent already set.

My officials and the officials in other departments are working with the

federal officials. If I feel that is

not moving fast enough, I will intercede with the federal minister.

If then it is still felt that it is not moving fast enough, the Premier

will intercede, Mr. Speaker. We will

provide that service that will be affordable to the taxpayers of this Province,

Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's South.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Mr.

Speaker, I am going to ask this again.

If the tariffs are not waived will the minister confirm that these two

contracts are not, in fact, the lowest bids?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as the previous Administration put in

place the Nonia, it might have got

them the lowest price; it did not get them the best service.

We are about service.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

BRAZIL:

are going to provide the service to the people of this Province.

We have one of the best shipyards in the world supplying vessels to us

and we are confident that tariff will be waived.

The contracted amount, Mr. Speaker, is what we will pay

Damen; that is what the taxpayers of this Province will be on the hook for.

The people of this Province will get the service they deserve.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Mr.

Speaker, with the $25 million tariff included, the price of the ferry contracts

is higher than some of the other bids.

We know that; the minister knows it as well.

The minister stated that the cost is not the only

factor and quality product is more important to the taxpayers.

I ask the minister: Are you saying that the other bidders were not

capable of providing new vessels that are quality for this Province?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What I am saying is that we have a process.

There was an RFP put out across the world and we had a number of

respondents, Mr. Speaker. We had a

process in place, very competent individuals within my department who assessed

the best service that we could provide to the people of this Province, and we

did that.

The component that will supply the services for us is

Damen Shipyards. They will supply

for $100 million two state-of-the-art vessels that will service the great

people of Fogo Island Change Islands and the people of Bell Island, Mr.

Speaker. We are very proud of that

contract that will be put in place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Mr.

Speaker, tariffs have only been waived in one exceptional circumstance by the

federal government, and that was to purchase an existing vessel quickly to

replace a vessel that sunk, never for a new build.

The same province has budgeted for tariffs on their new builds.

I will ask the minister: Why does he believe that the

federal government are going to waive the tariffs on these two new vessels when

they have never done it on new vessels of the same calibre, same size?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

BRAZIL:

Mr.

Speaker, my officials have been working very closely with the federal officials.

There is an application process that we are putting in place.

We are going through the process itself.

There is no reason to believe that the federal government would not

accept this as an exemption through tariffs.

There has already been a precedent set; BC Ferries have done it.

We feel we are in the same category, even a little bit stronger in our

argument to do that.

Mr. Speaker, we are very confident this will be done

and we will only charge the taxpayers of this Province for the ships that are

being delivered.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Carbonear Harbour Grace.

MR.

SLADE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this is very sad in the history of

Newfoundland and Labrador and the Town of Harbour Grace.

Kodiak shoes, after decades of operations in Harbour Grace, is closing

its doors for the last time today.

Eighty people are losing their jobs.

I ask the minister: What plans have government put into

place to help the displaced employees of this company as they see their

long-term employment come to an end?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the member for raising that very important

issue. Just this morning I actually

had a discussion with a couple of media outlets on it and it is very

disappointing, I say to the member opposite.

For us, as a government, we are the government that brought the company

to the community. So we have been

there from day one. We recognize the

value and the contribution that company has made to the community.

We have been engaged with not only the company, but the

community, and officials in my department have been working hard to look at

other alternatives. I pledge to the

member that if there is any way whatsoever that we can bring another company to

the Town of Harbour Grace who has been a great community to work in, by the

way, as the company tells then we will do everything we can.

In the meantime, my colleague, through the Department

of Advanced Education and Skills, has a number of funding programs that we are

going to make available, if employees would like to avail of some retraining

opportunities.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Carbonear Harbour Grace.

MR.

SLADE:

Mr.

Speaker, the Town of Harbour Grace also loses today.

The tax benefits of having a major employer like Kodiak operating in the

town meant some $50,000 annual business tax to the community.

This, too, will come to an end today.

I ask the minister: How will government work with the

Town of Harbour Grace to help replace these lost revenues?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will just continue for a moment.

As I said to the member opposite, we do have funding programs available,

and I am sure he is aware, but I would remind people through Advanced Education

and Skills to those who would want to avail of an opportunity to retrain.

We have counselling services.

We were on the ground the day the announcement was made, by the way.

If the member becomes aware of a need to have further consultations, we

will make ourselves available.

With respect to the community, we are not aware at this

point that any request or any opportunity has been exercised by the community to

reach out to the minister. If there

is a discussion that is required, if the town is having some challenges as a

result of the tax loss or they want to talk about going forward what their

challenges are, we are more than willing to sit down and have a chat with them.

I invite them to open up a dialogue with us, or write a letter, send an

e-mail, or something like that. We

are certainly there to help out.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR.

MITCHELMORE:

Mr.

Speaker, today marks the end of an era for Terra Nova Shoes.

In the media, the minister said the Department of Business is actively pursuing initiatives to attract new business.

Given

the poor track record of the Business Attraction Fund in the past, leaving 87

per cent of the funds on the table last year, I ask the minister what leads he

has for new business in Harbour Grace that matches the skills of the displaced

workers?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

appreciate the opportunity. It is an

interesting question coming from the member who only yesterday was raising

concerns and questions with an announcement that we put forward to support the

business community and support opportunities like Harbour Grace has with a

venture capital fund, I say to the member opposite.

eagerly await a clear position from members opposite so that there is not a

contradiction between the leader and that member and Mr. Antle, the candidate

for St. John's East, as to where they stand with respect to venture capital, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KING:

This is a very serious issue.

We are talking about

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KING:

We are talking about

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I ask

members for their co-operation. I

ask the minister to finish his answer.

The hon.

the Minister of Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural Development.

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a

very serious issue and I appreciate the question.

I just want to remind the member of some of the commentary he made

yesterday.

We are

pursuing all kinds of opportunities for Terra Nova Shoes and the community of

Harbour Grace, Mr. Speaker. We will

continue to pursue those opportunities.

I mentioned the venture capital fund as one avenue we have to lure

business to the community. We have

many others, and if I have a follow-up question I would be more than happy to

elaborate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for The

Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Mr. Speaker, I certainly

support venture capital. It is the

contradiction in the amount of funding that is available in the fund that they

are putting forward.

Mr.

Speaker, the minister committed to also speak to representatives to find new

occupants for the facility.

Given

the competitive nature of the industry and the loss of equipment, I ask the

minister: Does he have a commitment from the company or will we see that

building mothballed?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KING:

Mr. Speaker, the difference

between where I stand as a minister and where my critic stands is that I am

prepared to lay my vision out on what we stand for in economic development and

economic diversification in this Province.

I invite the member at some point in time to share his view, but our view

of it is that it is our role, and it is my role as minister, to create an

environment that is conducive to economic growth.

We have

to support entrepreneurs. It is not

the role of government to create business.

There is not one business I can think of created by this government or

any other government in the history of this Province that has succeeded.

It is the businesses that have been created by entrepreneurs in

communities that are locally driven and locally developed, Mr. Speaker.

We will

work with the community. My previous

colleague in this department had officials from the town in.

We have invited them to share ideas.

If they have local ideas they want to pursue, we have funding

opportunities, funding programs, venture capital, all kinds of ways to support

them if they have the interest to move forward.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Virginia Waters.

MS C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, government based

their budget on $105 oil. The price,

as of a few minutes ago, as a result of OPEC not reducing production, was $72.77

per barrel. That is a difference of

over $32 a barrel. Government's own

budget document says that a $1 drop equals a $26 million loss.

Simple math is, that is a potential loss of $832 million.

I ask

the minister: Based on today's announcement, how much larger will this year's

deficit be?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, I

acknowledge today, and I have said in the past, we would wait until OPEC had

their meeting today to be able to inform us as to what that might mean and what

kind of impact it may have on our budget.

Today,

what we had confirmed for us is that there is a tremendous amount of volatility.

We are going to see that volatility continue for the next little while.

It is one of the things that has become very apparent now, and all the

analysts are saying that we have a structural problem, both on the supply and

the demand side in the oil industry.

What we

are going to see in the next little while, I suspect she just quoted $72,

analysts are saying for the next week to ten days we are going to see a lot of

movement. A lot of changes are going

to occur very quickly over the next seven to ten days.

Until that time, we will have a better feel for how this is going to

settle out and really impact our bottom line by March 31.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Virginia Waters.

MS C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, last week I

asked the minister for the exact weighted average impact on the Province's

finances of the falling oil price, falling production, and Canadian dollar.

I understand what a weighted average is, and I am sure he does as well.

The people of the Province deserve to know if government will borrow

money, increasing the deficit, or cut programs and services.

I ask

the Premier: What is it?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN:

What the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador truly deserve, Mr. Speaker, is clear leadership, clear

understanding of the impact. People

of Newfoundland and Labrador do not need fear mongering.

They do not need speculation about what might or might not happen.

We have

a responsibility to the people of this Province.

We have a responsibility to govern responsibly, to provide good, sound

fiscal management. Speculating about

what might or might not happen because changes occur in oil prices or exchange

rates would be somewhat irresponsible to the investment community.

What we

are going to do, Mr. Speaker, we are going to take a prudent approach.

When we see the volatilities start to change and a bit of settling occur

over the next week to ten days, we will tell the people of the Province very

clearly what we know and what we understand will be the impact on this

Province's fiscal performance and what our outlook will be for March 31, 2015

and into the next fiscal year, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Virginia Waters.

MS C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, what the people

of the Province deserve is the facts.

They want to know today what the financial impact of the current oil

price is on the provincial revenue.

They absolutely want to have a government they can trust to make decisions and

not expropriate things that end up costing us over $250 million in environmental

fees.

What we

have to do is to provide the facts to the people of the Province, and I ask the

minister to provide that information today.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can

tell you that the volatility of oil prices has a significant impact, a

potentially significant impact to our Province and to our government, and we are

quite aware of that. Members

opposite are quite aware of that.

I remind

the member opposite, I remind the members of the House, and I remind the people

of the Province that in the last two weeks we have been in the House, Opposition

members, knowing all of that and the potential impacts of the volatility of oil

prices, have day after day after day rose in their place in this House and have

asked us as a government to spend millions and millions of dollars.

Day after day after day, Mr. Speaker, we have heard it from members

opposite.

Mr.

Speaker, I can tell you that effective today, and we have only had a very short

period of time to see the outcome and the results of the OPEC, is that we have

taken a position that we are adding a new layer of approval for all hiring for

government departments and agencies, and that government departments hiring will

only be based on critical need for those departments.

As well, discretionary spending is being ceased effective immediately,

Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, the Premier's

answer leads nicely into my question.

With regard to the hiring of Ms Breen and Mr. Kennedy, government is now

agreeable that government employees who potentially may have a legal issue can

choose their own lawyer and have the taxpayer foot the bill.

This is what the minister said yesterday.

I ask

the Premier: Is this indeed your new policy?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, I said quite

clearly and publicly when this matter arose earlier this week that the

circumstances are that. I have to be

very careful as well, I should say, because there is a matter before the courts

and I have to respect that process.

We all should respect that process.

We have

a circumstance where employees, who, as a result of the execution of their

duties as employees of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, require

legal advice. They require legal

advice. A union person, three

management people at Her Majesty's Penitentiary require union advice.

The union person has specifically asked to be represented by a specific

lawyer. We have granted that

request. The three management people

have asked for a specific lawyer and we have granted that request.

As I

said to the hon. member sorry, as I have said publicly before, not directly to

the hon. member if they ask for a particular person, I would be hard pressed

not to grant them the person they want to represent their own interests.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I ask the

Premier: Will other employees, as a result of the execution of their duties,

also get Mr. Kennedy as their lawyer if they ask, and will it be paid for by the

government?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This

happens from time to time where individuals require legal advice.

This is not a unique circumstance.

I have seen it in the past. I

have seen it happen over the years.

It happens from time to time, especially those who are engaged in their duties

such as people in policing and corrections.

It happens from time to time that this requirement exists, where they

require legal advice as an individual employee of government.

They need that advice and they have asked for that.

So we have granted their wishes, Mr. Speaker.

assess them on an individual basis, based on circumstances and the needs of

employees. We are here to protect

our employees, Mr. Speaker, and that is what we are doing in this case.

We have employees who require legal advice.

It is part of an ongoing court case, and we are protecting the best

interests of our own staff.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

I thank the Premier, Mr.

Speaker, for elaborating on this new government policy.

In the House yesterday, we asked about this list of hundreds of instances

that happen on an almost daily basis where this has been done in the past and

the Minister of Tourism refused.

I ask

the Premier: Given that you have just discussed it, will you release that list

to us?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just to

be clear, the Premier has not announced a new policy.

The member's

preamble to the question indicates a new policy.

There is no new policy with respect to outside counsel representing

government workers.

There

are two particular occasions in 2013 and 2014.

Officials with Transportation and Works and wildlife officers also had

outside counsel for similar instances where there were some allegations of

criminal conduct and criminal wrongdoing, Mr. Speaker.

We have an obligation when that happens to support our employees.

I would hope the member is not suggesting that we should do otherwise and

not support our employees.

To his

question, I will gladly table the document, Mr. Speaker.

It is right here and the Clerk can come and accept it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, our office made

an ATIPP request to determine the sequence of events that led to Ms Manning's

appointment to be a review commissioner for workers' comp.

We were shut down by the Cabinet confidence

section of Bill 29.

I ask

the minister: Can you please explain to us why Cabinet is involved in the

selection of review commissioners?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

member opposite would know that using Bill 29 as an excuse for every single

question that comes before this House is absolutely ludicrous.

The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that there are any number of

boards, agencies, commissioners, and appointments that happen on a regular basis

that are appointments of Cabinet.

I would

add, Mr. Speaker, that 95 per cent of those we inherited from the Liberal

government who established the protocol before we came to power.

There is nothing untoward about the fact that an appointment for this

government would have to go before Cabinet.

That is normal process.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, our Cabinet is

not involved in the selection of judges in this Province yet.

Our Cabinet is using a secretive process to determine review

commissioners. Again, we have

serious issue in the backlog of cases.

I ask

the minister: What criteria have you been following, and why is this process not

transparent?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KING:

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing

that is untoward about this process.

There is nothing out of the ordinary, there is nothing unusual.

From time to time we go seeking members to serve on boards, commissions,

and agencies. Mr. Speaker, it is a

normal part of doing business.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KING:

The member would know that,

Mr. Speaker, because it is the same process that governments before us used.

There is always criteria. In

most cases by the way, I say to the member, you might want to check the

legislation of the particular board or agency because the process for these

appointments is actually enshrined in legislation in the Province right now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, last week when I

asked about the backlog of 150 reviews at the workers' comp review division all

I heard is that government is working on the issue and we have fewer

unacceptable backlogs this year than last year.

I ask

the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador: Instead of we are working on

the problem, what specific steps are you taking to address the backlog?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Service NL.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CORNECT:

Mr. Speaker, I certainly want

to thank the hon. member across the way for his question.

In fact, Mr. Speaker, I have held meetings just this morning, had

discussions just this morning, Mr. Speaker, on how we move forward to find

solutions to the backlog.

The

Premier stated last week as well that he wants a solution found to the backlog,

Mr. Speaker. I say to the hon.

member that I am speaking with the chief review commissioner, and we will find a

solution and a way forward, Mr. Speaker, to relieving the backlog.

That I can assure the injured workers and employers of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, once again we

are hearing about how government is working on the problem, no specifics.

I ask

the minister: Given the fact that the workers' comp review division is funded by

workers' comp and requires no public expenditure, will you provide direction to

the review division to ensure proper resources are allocated in order to provide

justice for these injured workers?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Service NL.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CORNECT:

Mr. Speaker, thank you again

for the question.

As I

said earlier, Mr. Speaker, we are moving forward.

We are going to find a solution to the benefit of employers and injured

workers of the people of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl South for a very quick question.

MR. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, I ask the

Minister of Service NL: Why weren't audited statements collected from 43 per

cent of funeral homes which sold prepaid funerals in 2013?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Service NL for a quick reply.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CORNECT:

Again, Mr. Speaker, Service

NL is a very large department with over 180 pieces of legislation.

We have competent staff in the department, and, Mr. Speaker, I am sure

they are doing their due diligence to carry out this work.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Once

again, it is the season of food drives for low-income families.

Food banks are reporting minimum wage earners whose paycheques do not

last two weeks, forcing them to the food bank.

Government and the Official Opposition both voted against the NDP motion

to follow the recommendations of the minimum wage review committee.

I ask

the Premier: Why won't this government follow its own committee's

recommendations, which would keep people from having to go to food banks?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Seniors, Wellness and Social Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Mr. Speaker, this government

has invested in a poverty reduction plan that has been applauded by people from

across this country. Since 2006, we

have invested $1.6 billion. Just

this morning I was at an event where we announced $678,000 through more

initiatives to support people who find themselves in difficult situations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to

the minister, people need money in their hands, therefore I ask the Premier: Why

government will not raise the minimum wage to catch up with inflation and index

it every year so working parents can feed their families?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Seniors, Wellness and Social Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Mr. Speaker, again, I would

ask the member if she would take a look at all the initiatives that have been

implemented over the years , the things we are putting into home repair programs, the things we are

piloting now to define initiatives to support people, seniors as they find

transportation. All the initiatives

that have been applauded by so many under our poverty reduction plan are, in

fact, putting money into pockets of people.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR.

MURPHY:

Mr.

Speaker, a media report today tells us that taxpayers in this Province may be

dinged by a $25 million federal tariff for ferries that are being built outside

the country, specifically in Romania.

This government claims openness and transparency.

Why won't the minister release the unsuccessful bids to

prove that government made a good deal for the taxpayer of this Province?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I mentioned earlier, we have a process in place that

outlines exactly getting the best service for the people in this Province.

The RFP process we used ensured we did that.

We are contracting Damen for $100 million to supply two vessels, state of

the art, for the people of this Province, Mr. Speaker.

Damen has outlined all the amenities they will provide

in that, the services, and the skill set that will be associated with that.

We are very confident this is what the people of this Province want.

We are getting a good bang for our dollar.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR.

MURPHY:

Mr.

Speaker, that $25 million probably cost this Province part of a shipbuilding

industry here.

Does the minister have written confirmation from the

federal government saying that this tariff is going to be waived?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, for somebody who spent thirty-five years

fighting for a better ferry service in this Province, I can guarantee you what

we are receiving now for the people of this Province is second to none in this

country and second to none in this world.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

BRAZIL:

will guarantee you the money that is being spent is in the best interest of the

taxpayers of this Province. Mr.

Speaker, the tariffs that are being levied on this will be removed.

There will be no tariffs coming here; we are confident in that.

We are working very closely with the federal

government, Mr. Speaker. The people

will get the return on the investment.

The people serviced by ferries in this Province will benefit from that

and that means people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

As this Administration has done for the last number of years, we will

benefit from our investments.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR.

MURPHY:

Mr.

Speaker, I would like to know something.

We are talking about an extra $25 million on top of the taxpayer.

Why doesn't this government get it when it comes to a

shipbuilding policy in this Province and job creation?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh,

oh!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR.

MURPHY:

want to know why this money is being thrown away on the part of the taxpayer and

why the federal government is taking a piece of us.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have committed to providing a valued service to the

people of this Province. We are

continuing to do that. Our $100

million investment this year alone will show that.

The investments prior to that show that.

The future investments are going to show that also, Mr. Speaker.

We have contracted a $100 million contract with Damen

Shipyards to provide those two vessels.

That is what it will cost the taxpayers of this Province, Mr. Speaker,

and they will get the return on that investment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The time for Question Period has expired.

MR.

KIRBY:

point of order.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for St. John's North, on a point of order.

MR.

KIRBY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

During Question Period, the Leader of the Third Party

stated that Members of the House of Assembly, the other parties, had voted

against the recommendations of the Minimum Wage Review Panel that somehow that

Third Party had put forward.

The Minimum Wage Review Panel recommended that six

months' notice be given to small businesses before any minimum way increase

MR.

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I would ask the member to state his point of order.

MR.

KIRBY:

am getting to it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh,

oh!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

There is no point of order.

Presenting Report by Standing and Select Committees.

MR.

KIRBY:

(Inaudible) give me an opportunity to finish.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh,

oh!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I say to the hon. member, even though you were not

recognized to speak, the Speaker can still hear what you say from the floor.

What you just did was challenge the Speaker's ruling.

I would ask the member to apologize and to apologize unequivocally.

MR.

KIRBY:

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I apologize unequivocally.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday, in a back and forth between myself and the

Opposition House Leader, we had a discussion around contracts, contract

templates that government often uses when it employs outside counsel.

First of all, I would like to table a document.

This one would be a retention letter as we call it.

It is a short version that is often used in a case where counsel is

provided to support employees, as is the case we have been discussing in the

Legislature for a few days now. If

the Clerk would like to accept, I would like to table that document.

Further, Mr. Speaker, I also have a second, much longer

document. Similar, it is a retention

letter intended to confirm the retention and provide confirmation of

government's liability for fees incurred.

This document I would also like to table, Mr. Speaker.

As I said, to be clear for the record, these are

templates that I referenced yesterday in Question Period that I am now tabling

before the House.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further tabling of documents?

Pursuant to

section 8 and

section 10 of the Public

Tender Act, I hereby table reports of Public Tender Act exceptions for the

months of July, August, and September 2014, as presented by the Chief Operating

Officer of the Government Purchasing Agency.

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR.

KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Registered Nurses Act, 2008, Bill 32.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of

Treasury Board.

MR.

WISEMAN:

give notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act

Respecting The Atlantic Provinces Harness Racing Commission, Bill 33.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR.

JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today on the petition concerning the hospital in

Corner Brook.

WHEREAS we wish to raise concerns regarding the recent

delay of the construction of the new hospital in Corner Brook, Newfoundland and

Labrador;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly

pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the government to commit to the

planning and construction of a new hospital in Corner Brook as previously

committed to and in a timely manner as originally announced without further

delay or changes.

Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Minister of Health

and Community Services met with the health care committee this weekend.

They mentioned that the meeting was very positive, that there was an open

dialogue back and forth, that there will be information shared from the minister

and there will be information from the health care committee.

I encourage that dialogue.

That is one of the things that the health care committee was pushing for

was information sharing so they can inform the people of Western Newfoundland

and Labrador, the people who are working as volunteers, as citizens, that they

could help to provide information.

Mr. Speaker, I am encouraged by the meeting.

As I said to the health care committee if there is information coming

back and forth, the commitment was that the long-term care building will start

in 2015, that the actual acute care hospital will start in 2016, if there are

any changes to that the committee will be notified.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to stand here today to inform

the people of Western Newfoundland and Labrador that according to the health

care committee the meeting was positive.

I just want to offer if there is anything that I can do to help and

facilitate this process, I will certainly do.

I will help in whatever way I can to help this process along.

As I

told the health care committee, I will work with the committee and the people of

Western Newfoundland to ensure we get the facility we were committed to and get

the facility in a timely manner. I

just wanted to recognize that.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Carbonear Harbour Grace.

MR. SLADE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the

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

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

the local service district of Freshwater, Carbonear is expressing ongoing

concern regarding the need to make repairs to the beach breakwater which has

been severely damaged by storm waves and this has caused major concerns for the

local service district of Freshwater as it pertains to fire protection and

safety; and

WHEREAS

this lack of repair by government constitutes a fire and safety hazard to the

community since the residents will be trapped in if a fire ever took place; and

WHEREAS

this damaged breakwater roadway is also creating an environmental concern as the

Atlantic Ocean has washed in over the roadway and out into the fresh water pond

where the fish are in the pond; and

WHEREAS

this area serves as a capelin run area each year which attracts a great many

locals and tourists to the site; and

WHEREAS

the federal government refuses to assist with this repair as they deem there is

no associated fishing activity to justify investment;

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

of Assembly to urge government to respond to the pleas from the community

residents and their legislative representative to have this breakwater structure

repaired so it can once again properly protect the road infrastructure from

being more severely damaged and once done, to call upon government to repair the

road.

As in

duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, I am after bringing this here quite a few times.

I did speak with the Minister of the Department of Transportation

yesterday and he assured me that he is going to be out in the area within the

next week or two and have a look at that.

I would certainly appreciate the minister doing that.

Having

said that, Mr. Speaker, my biggest concern as the MHA for the Carbonear

Harbour Grace district is the safety of the people at all times.

Mr. Speaker, this is a real safety concern.

It is one that I am going to stand in the House and speak about day after

day until something gets done here.

We are forty-eight districts in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker,

forty-eight districts, and one district should not be treated any different than

the other. I will tell you, what is

going on here is absolute neglect to the people of that community and also the

people in the community of Bristol's Hope.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to speak.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

To the

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

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

the Family Violence Intervention Court provided a comprehensive approach to

domestic violence in a court setting that fully understood and dealt with the

complex issues of domestic violence; and

WHEREAS

domestic violence continues to be one of the most serious issues facing our

Province today, and the cost of the impact of domestic violence is great both

economically and in human suffering; and

WHEREAS

the Family Violence Intervention Court was welcomed and endorsed by all aspects

of the justice system including the police, the courts, prosecutors, defence

counsel, Child, Youth and Family Services, as well as victims, offenders,

community agencies and women's groups; and

WHEREAS

the recidivism rate for offenders going through the court was 10 per cent

compared to 40 per cent for those who did not; and

WHEREAS

the budget of the court was only 0.2 per cent of the entire budget of the

Department of Justice;

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

of Assembly to urge government to reinstate the Family Violence Intervention

Court.

As in

duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, I am yet standing again in this House to talk about this petition.

Petitions keep coming to my office day after day after day.

As well as the petitions, I get copies of letters that different groups

across the Province have written to the Premier, or have written to the Minister

of Justice, again urging government to reinstate the Family Violence

Intervention Court immediately, as well as to expand it.

Mr.

Speaker, I am beginning to wonder, who is responsible at this point?

Who is responsible for the pain and the suffering of families who would

have used the Family Violence Intervention Court, but who have not been able to

because it was closed so rashly in the Budget of 2013-2014.

Who is going to take responsibility for that?

Mr.

Speaker, we can talk theoretically about the court.

We can talk philosophically about the court.

We can talk politically about the court.

We can try and understand why it was closed.

We can try and understand why it is not open, why it has not been opened

immediately when there has been such an incredible lobby to government to open

that court. Who is going to take

responsibility for the fallout to the families who have not been able to use the

court, and particularly because the court was closed for no good reason?

Who is going to take that responsibility?

Mr.

Speaker, I have a letter here from the Canadian Federation of University Women.

The Canadian Federation of University Women are also urging for the court

to be reinstated.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for The

Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We, the

citizens serviced by Curtis Hospital located in St. Anthony, Newfoundland and

Labrador, petition the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and Labrador

Grenfell Health to retain midwives and allow them to continue to perform all of

their duties at Curtis Hospital.

Our

midwives offer services that cannot be duplicated and which cannot be replaced.

The level of care they offer and the knowledge and training they have in

the area of obstetrics is immense.

It will be a great disservice to the people of this area if our midwives are no

longer available to care for the people here.

Privatizing midwifery or waiting five to seven years for regulation, as

stated by government, is unacceptable.

We have an operational model of midwifery here in St. Anthony that has

been delivering outstanding care for over ninety years.

implore upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador and Labrador Grenfell Health to preserve midwifery services at Curtis

Memorial Hospital.

Mr.

Speaker, this is something that has been working quite well for decades.

In terms of providing good continuity of care, all of the other services

that provide a relationship with the mother or family members while they are

going through the process of having a baby, through delivery and then after.

We have

many situations and circumstances in Newfoundland and Labrador where midwives

could be utilized. For example, like

Stephenville and that whole Port au Port area, if somebody needs to have a baby

then they are going to be sent on an ambulance to Corner Brook, but if we had

midwives and the profession was regulated, this is a way in which we could

provide better health care services to people by having midwives in a regulated

profession.

I say,

Mr. Speaker, the announcement that the former Minister of Health made shows

where this government is in putting privatization of midwifery ahead of offering

midwifery in a publicly funded atmosphere which has been working functionally at

Labrador Grenfell Health for quite some time.

It is time to go back to the drawing board and move forward on this

issue, Mr. Speaker.

I urge

the House to support this because it is something that certainly can provide

better health outcomes for people, especially in rural areas.

My district in particular, and in Southern Labrador, has seen the

benefits of what midwives can deliver.

They are a very vital part of the health care team.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's North.

MR. KIRBY:

To the hon. House of Assembly

of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the

petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly

sheweth:

WHEREAS

the lack of services and supports in the school system is a serious obstacle to

learning for children and youth with autism spectrum disorder; and

WHEREAS

long wait-lists for pediatric assessment and diagnostic services are preventing

many children with autism spectrum disorder from receiving needed early

diagnosis; and

WHEREAS

the Intensive Applied Behavioural Analysis Program is currently not available

for children after Grade 3; and

WHEREAS

applied behavioural analysis has been shown to be effective for many adults

beyond Grade 3; and

WHEREAS

there is a lack of supports and services for children and youth with autism

spectrum disorder after they age out of the Intensive Applied Behavioural

Analysis Program; and

WHEREAS

it is unacceptable to expect parents in Newfoundland and Labrador to pay

thousands of dollars out of their own pockets to cover the cost of privately

delivered applied behavioural analysis after Grade 3;

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

of Assembly to urge government to extend eligibility for Intensive Applied

Behavioural Analysis Program beyond Grade 3 in consultation with parents,

advocates, educators, health care providers, and experts in the autism

community.

As in

duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, today the Premier got up in the House of Assembly and somehow implied

that it is a great burden on government to ask for a basic health or educational

service such as this to be covered.

No one would be recommending I would be very surprised if I heard the Premier

out calling for people to pay for their children to go to Grade 1 and go to

school. I would be very surprised if

I heard the Premier out saying that people who need a medically necessary

procedure done should have to pay that out of their own pockets.

The

Premier has no problem allowing this to continue to go on.

As I said a number of times I have constituents, and other Members of the

House of Assembly have constituents, who have to pay out of their own pockets

just because their children go on to Grade 4.

They are not allowed to have intensive applied behavioural analysis

covered after Grade 3.

It is a

completely arbitrary cut off. There

is absolutely no academic, medical, or scientific evidence to suggest that

actually makes any sense. Somebody

just said at some point, look, we are being pressured to provide this so let's

extend it out to Grade 3. It is

completely wrong.

If you

cannot have a universal system, then why not try having a means-tested system so

that people who are on Income Support, people who are below the poverty line,

people who have children and cannot afford to have that ABA therapy, can get it.

Maybe some people can, I do not know, but let's try to do something to

help the most vulnerable people in our communities ensure their children can get

this. This is really the difference

between having a job, being able to complete school or not.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I remind

the member his speaking time has expired.

MR. KIRBY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS:

Mr. Speaker, a petition to

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

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

Labrador's coastal communities already pay extremely high hydro rates; and

WHEREAS

small businesses are struggling to stay in operation against rising costs of

operation; and

WHEREAS

Nalcor, the Crown corporation, is proposing an 11.4 per cent increase to

residential hydro rates and a 20 per cent increase to business rates;

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

of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to work with

Nalcor to establish rates that are fair and consistent to the whole Province.

As in

duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, I spoke on this petition last week and I had some forwarding comments

from the Minister of Natural Resources.

It made for a healthy debate, and I respect the minister for his

comments. I would like to go on with

a couple of topics that I did not talk about last week.

We look at the hydro rate proposals that are going to the PUB.

In some areas in our Province it is 1.9 per cent.

Some areas in our Province, it goes as high as 2.9 per cent, Mr. Speaker.

coastal Labrador, which I said as I started out this petition, communities are

already paying extremely high hydro rates.

The proposed increase is 11.4 per cent for residential customers and a

staggering 20 per cent for commercial operations.

You look at some of the reasons why these costs have been going up; the

price of oil is one of the reasons why this increase is going to the PUB, as

proposed by Nalcor.

As I

said last week, Mr. Speaker, prices have gone down.

As a matter of fact they have gone down even more.

So I fail to see where the argument is, but what I am seeing is you have

the generation station out in Holyrood that is millions of dollars potentially

and months potentially behind schedule.

You have $800 million cost overrun at Muskrat Falls in the first quarter

and we are looking at more.

We look

at where some of these costs are coming from, but I maintain by the petitioners

that this government work with Nalcor to establish rates that are fairer and

across the board as opposed to regionalized, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call

from the Order Paper, Order 2, second reading of a bill,

An Act To Regulate

Child Care Services, Bill 30.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess

I will pick up where I left off the last legislative day as we were discussing

this bill. Members on both sides of

the House have gotten up and we have gone through.

I guess before I go any further, we need to do a little bit of recap.

I am speaking on Bill 30,

An Act to Regulate Child Care Services.

It is a bill to replace or repeal a bill that was brought forward in

1999, as a matter of fact, fifteen years ago.

The

previous speakers the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development

had spoken and clearly outlined basically what was in the bill.

She certainly referred to the enhanced quality this bill would ensure and

made the distinction that this bill was about one of the three pillars, the

three pillars in child care, being quality, sufficiency, and affordability.

This bill certainly hits on the quality piece and making sure that what

is happening in the child care spaces throughout Newfoundland and Labrador are

indeed in the best interests of the children which these spaces will serve.

Having

said that, Mr. Speaker, and we look at the quality piece, this bill still goes

hand in hand with the 10-Year Child Care Strategy, that was also described, and

Caring For Our Future: Provincial Strategy for Quality, Sufficient and

Affordable Child Care in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr.

Speaker, that strategy was releases some three years ago.

That really set the course in child care for the next ten years with

not an expiry date, but a date of 2022 whereby we feel, as a government, this

strategy will bring us up to the needs that are certainly evident as we have

gone around the Province and touched base with the people who are most involved

in child care spaces in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I will

say, Mr. Speaker, these are regulated child care spaces.

Of course, there were six major changes to the bill, the bill being

repealed. We are almost starting

from scratch, Mr. Speaker, but just to go down through those as well, the

exemptions were, point number 1, to licensing, and it certainly looked at the

capacity, an appeals process, provincial director of child care, an inspection

process, and a statutory review every five years.

Mr.

Speaker, the bill is pretty well straightforward, but a very important piece of

legislation. I am probably the

fourth speaker up, and I will say there was a lively debate as the various

members in the House stood up and talked about the bill.

I feel there is great acceptance on both sides of the House of the intent

of this bill and how it is laid out.

Naturally, Mr. Speaker, when you open a bill that talks about the quality of the

child care spaces, you will get some discussion and discourse as well on the

sufficient number of child care spaces that are required, the sufficiency, and

Mr.

Speaker, I will pick up there and just go back over some of the comments that

were made. I do not want to

duplicate the comments, but I must say, I feel very comfortable knowing that the

speakers were very knowledgeable about the bill, what changes were brought

about, and I might add very, very supportive.

That support is absolutely necessary.

The

Member for St. John's North, for example, went down through the bill in a very

critical style, going through every piece of it.

I just stood on this side and looked down through it, and I found he was

ticking off a lot of the same things that I had ticked off.

First of

all, the repeal of the act itself.

There was general agreement of all speakers, Mr. Speaker, that the bill needed

to be repealed, and that it was simply repealing

an act.

Many agreed that the act of 1999, Mr. Speaker, was a good act.

It suited the times. It made

acknowledgement of how important it was to ensure that the children in anyone's

charge was indeed quality spaces, that the people who were taking care of our

children had some degree of training.

There has been tremendous changes in this Province over the last fifteen

years, especially over the last decade.

The Province has literally turned around.

Mr.

Speaker, I just speak from my own experience in my own District of Harbour Main,

that I have seen now back when I entered this House as a member back in 1999,

there was a concern that there was a generation that had been lost in the 1990s

as people had moved away. The number

of children who were being born in this Province had drastically dropped.

There

was a danger that some of our schools were not surviving simply because the

numbers were not there, some of these small schools in some of our rural areas

and some of our more urban areas, but things have turned around.

I notice now in my own district that our schools are bursting at the

seams;

whereas, like I said, fifteen years ago it was the complete opposite.

I have now in my district young couples, families moving back into the

district. Not only are they moving

back in, but they are getting really great employment in the immediate area.

When we

look at this bill, we know the demand for regulated child care is continuing to

rise and will continue to rise. It

is very, very important that we allow the providers of child care and that is

a second aspect of the bill. It was

to make sure that when it came to the facilities that are available, the

situations that our regulators find themselves in, that they can have the

capacity, and not only have the capacity, but be able to build on perhaps the

capacity they have right now.

There

was a cap, I believe, of sixty that you could have under any one particular

licence. We found in some of the

places here in St. John's, like over at the MUN campus, that in actual fact the

building was supporting I think something like four licences when, in actual

fact, it would probably make more sense if it was all under the one licence.

During

the consultations and there were extensive consultations we got a good

response from the people we needed to get a response from, whether they were

service providers, whether they were parents, whether they were just interested

parties. One of the things they said

is that capacity is important.

Already you see where people have really stretched the regulations to make sure

they could have capacity. As well,

the aspect of when you have any sort of bill coming forward, providing for

inspections and so on and so forth, which we did not have before.

We have

a provincial director now who is going to be appointed by the minister, which

allows that to be facilitated very, very quickly rather than an Order in

Council. We have inspectors who are

going to be totally independent, which is absolutely necessary, and we have an

appeals process. That was not there

before.

The

appeals process; I know some of the members brought it up saying, well, it is

all right to put it on paper but is it actually going to happen?

They cited some other examples, perhaps in the courts or some other

departments. Remember, when we are

talking about this particular bill and we are talking about the quality of the

spaces, it is very obvious to all that it is pretty well straightforward.

You are over capacity, you do not have the right areas, you do not have

the right type of buildings, and that sort of thing.

The appeals process would be pretty straightforward.

It can be done very quickly, and a response gone back.

If you

are dealing with some other matters, such as criminal offences or injuries and

that sort of thing, those are much more complex and oftentimes get bogged down

simply because of different aspects of it, reports not in and so forth, but this

is about our child care and inspectors going in, looking at the child care

spaces, and can very quickly point out whether or not they are in compliance.

If they are not in compliance, for the protection of the children and

everything it so the appeal process should work fine.

The

others I believe the statutory review.

That is a common thing in legislation, as you know.

The statutory review was put in there because it was not in the original

one, and really went fifteen years without a formal review.

We all know, and we have seen as a matter of fact, if we see something

that needs to be changed, whether it is us in government or anyone in

government, whether it is our stakeholders or parents or whatever, we can make

amendments and bring it back into this House and change it.

I am to

understand that you may very well see an amendment upcoming that may indeed

point to the fact that we are always ready, as a government, to make any

necessary changes, to put in place regulations or whatever that is necessary to

ensure our child care spaces are indeed adequate.

My time

is ticking away there, but I will say, as well, these are regulated child care

spaces. We also have to take into

account the culture here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I am very pleased to say that in my district I still see a lot of family

involvement in child care. As a

recent grandparent, I realize there are many, many grandparents in this Province

of Newfoundland and Labrador who are very much involved in taking care of their

grandchildren.

So when

we talk about the numbers and that sort of thing, I still believe there are a

lot of child care spaces where children are protected, beyond a shadow of a

doubt, but again, it is taking place in their very own homes.

With

that, Mr. Speaker, I will sit down and give others an opportunity to speak on

this very important bill.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I am

very happy to stand and speak to Bill 30, the Child Care Services Act.

Mr. Speaker, part of that also is I cannot believe in 2014 that I need to

stand and speak, yet again, on a child care issue.

In 1975,

that is almost forty years ago, thirty-nine years ago, we had the Royal

Commission on the Status of Women and one of the issues we identified as crucial

in the lives of working families in the country was the issue of child care.

This is what we are speaking about again today.

presented why child care, why public child care, why affordable, universal,

accessible, high-quality child care was so important for the working families of

the Province. We did the research.

We spoke about it and we thought all we had to do was be reasonable.

We presented it in a very reasonable and very clear and concise manner.

Here we are, almost forty years later, and we are still talking about

trying to have a public, affordable, accessible, high-quality child care

program. Here we are almost forty

years later.

So in

some ways I am happy to be able to be in this House, as a woman, to stand and

talk about this issue, but I am also incredibly dismayed that almost forty years

later we are still talking about it.

Maybe we have made a few gains, but, Mr. Speaker, we are nowhere near where we

need to be.

If we

look at some of the issues of child care in the country, child care is one of

the social determinants affordable housing and child care are each really

fundamental social determinants of whether or not a working family get pushed

into poverty.

Quebec, for instance, 6 per cent of a woman's wage is spent on child care; in

Winnipeg, 15 per cent of a woman's wage is spent on child care; in Calgary, 26

per cent of a woman's wage, a working mom, is spent on child care; in St.

John's, Newfoundland, in our Province, 32 per cent of a working woman's wage is

spent on child care.

Mr.

Speaker, I was in Stephenville a few months ago and I was going door to door.

Within a period of two days, I encountered three young working moms who

each had left work, who had to quit work within that period of a week three

within a period of a week had quit their employment because they could not

afford child care.

What

does that mean to us as a society?

It means that these young working moms had to rely on social safety nets; it

means that these young working moms who wanted to be in the workforce could not.

What does that mean for them down the road?

It means that they suffer in terms of lack of seniority in their

workplace; it means also they suffer in terms of financial well-being for their

families because we know that Income Support is not enough to live on.

Child care is such a fundamental issue in terms of keeping people out of

poverty.

The

Quebec model, as we have seen it, has been the most affordable for working

families at about $7.30 a day and serves 70 per cent of children under the

school age in their province. Quebec

built a huge infrastructure, a child care infrastructure that was absolutely

resilient and it was able to serve 70 per cent of the children.

Their child care program was top of the line in terms of quality.

It was part of their educational system and it still is.

It also

provided emergency services for children up to twelve years old.

If a child had to leave school early for some reason, then that child was

able to avail of the child care services.

Or if a parent was not able to pick up the child after school, then that

child could avail of the child care services.

It was extremely flexible because it met the needs of the modern-day

family. That is what we need to look

at here, Mr. Speaker, in our own Province.

What are the needs of our working families?

One of

the members across the floor talked about how grandparents are involved in child

care. That is fabulous.

That is absolutely fabulous if you have that option, if you have that

luxury. However, I have also spoken

to grandparents who are worn out.

Their working children cannot afford child care because we know in Newfoundland

and Labrador for the most

part child care is approximately $1,000 a month per

child. That is a heck of a lot of

money. If you have two children,

that is probably $2,000, or maybe, if you get a bit of a discount, it is $1600.

If you

are a young working family with young children, you have a mortgage or rent

and we know that the housing costs have skyrocketed in our Province.

You have your rent which is at least $1,200 a month minimum or maybe you

have a mortgage of $2,000 a month minimum.

Then you have your heat and light on top of that and phone and cable,

probably a car payment. When you

have children, your expenses rise.

Then you have child care costs of $1,000 to $2,000 a month.

It is not sustainable.

We know,

the research has shown us, that our children are losing ground financially.

A lot of our young people or a lot of our young working people are living

on credit cards. They also maybe

have a car payment because you have to get around.

You have kids; you need to be able to move those kids around as well.

It is really tough. Child

care is one of the fundamental pieces that are able to keep families out of

poverty, and able to keep families working.

When we

look at the Quebec model, and there has been some discussion about whether the

Quebec model will be sustainable, for the most part the people of Quebec believe

it will be and that it is absolutely necessary, and we have seen the economic

benefits of the Quebec model. We

know that what has happened, the aims of the Quebec model were to make their

children more successful in their education through better quality of care,

through better educational opportunities.

School

tests were done before their universal, accessible, affordable child care

program. Children in Quebec before

1976 used to have the lowest school marks in the country, and now they have the

highest scores in the whole country.

That is an incredible shift, Mr. Speaker.

That

shift then also translates into not the fact that they have better school marks,

but it also means they have a higher percentage of young women going into

post-secondary education. They have,

as a result of this, an increased number of women in the paid labour market.

Another interesting thing, which I think is vital here for us in

Newfoundland and Labrador, because how much have we looked at the whole issue of

our zero population growth, that a true population growth strategy for the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador would be national child care

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I would

ask the member to make her comments relevant to the principle of the bill.

I know the member is talking about child care generally, but the piece of

legislation we are debating today is about the regulation of child care

services, and I would ask her to confine her comments to the principle of the

bill.

MS ROGERS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

So,

speaking to the bill and the Child Care Services Act, it is about how we are

able to make our child care services more accessible, more inclusive, and more

affordable, that we ensure there is also enough spaces, because we know we do

not have enough spaces for the number of children who need child care for the

number of working families we have.

We know

Mr. Speaker, I do have to try to sneak this one in that one of the benefits,

one of the absolute benefits that Quebec had was because of their great child

care, because people can afford child care

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I will

ask again that the member would make her comments relevant to the principle of

the bill which we are debating now.

That is a second warning, and if the member continues to be irrelevant, I will

have no other choice but to not recognize her any longer.

MS ROGERS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

We know

in the bill that a legislative review was stipulated in the Child Care Strategy

from 2012-2022, under the pillar of quality.

The other pillars in our bill are sufficiency and affordability.

We know that if our families have accessible, quality, and sufficient

number of spaces that it enables our young working families to be assured that

their children are cared for, which enables them to get about the business of

working, of being productive in our society.

We know,

Mr. Speaker, in terms of the whole issue of affordability that I was speaking

to one woman who said that in her working career she paid out $96,000 for child

care. The whole pillar of

affordability is so important and one that we have to look at and one that is

very important in this bill.

With the

processes that are outlined in here, again, we are trying to ensure that we have

enough spaces, that the spaces are inclusive, that all children have access

all children and that the legislation as well looks at: What are the services

that are needed? How can government

most ensure child care providers have the guidelines they need in order to

provide the service, that they have the services they need in order to provide

those services, and that we know exactly what is needed in order to provide a

comprehensive service that is affordable, sufficient, and quality for the people

of the Province and for the children of the Province?

One of

the reasons, Mr. Speaker, is that we need that clarity and we need that

transparency so our families are not scrambling because what we have seen is

that people scramble. Obtaining

affordable, quality child care is so difficult for families and there are not

enough places.

Hopefully what this bill will do is make it possible for more providers because

we know that we need more providers.

At this point, a lot of the providers are private.

We do have more community-based providers.

We want to ensure with this bill that the services are all delivered in

the same way, that any parent going to any child care facility, whether it is a

home-based child care facility, whether it is a community-based child care

facility, whether at this point it is a for-profit child care facility, that

families want to know that their children are getting the best of care, quality

care, that they can go to work with a sense of confidence because of the type of

legislation we have, because of the foundation of what our child care system is

based on, they can go to work knowing their children are well taken care of;

knowing their children are not just warehoused but, in fact, this is part of an

early childhood education process.

Mr.

Speaker, I would like to point out perhaps one of the groups most influential in

our Province around the area of helping government come to a strategy for child

care is the Jimmy Pratt Foundation.

They wrote a report I know the minister is very familiar with.

I know there has been a really good working relationship between

government and the Jimmy Pratt Foundation, coming up with the types of

guidelines and legislation that will ensure we have that type of quality child

care. Their report was The Early

Years Last A Lifetime.

I tell

you, Mr. Speaker, for so many families trying to access affordable, quality

child care, the early years sure seem to last a lifetime.

Not only does it last a lifetime in terms of what they are saying, how it

affects our children, but it feels like it is lasting a lifetime because it is

so difficult, it is so expensive, and it is so inaccessible.

Again, families have to scramble to get affordable quality child care.

Mr.

Speaker, I am glad government is moving forward on some of these issues and the

commitment to review legislation every five years because I sure hope that we

will be moving even further than where we are in our child care strategy here in

the Province because it is not far enough.

We know we need a fully public child care program that is an extension of

our education system, that it is about our early childhood education, and we

need that. This is just another

stepping stone in reaching that. Mr.

Speaker, I have every confidence we are going to be able to get there as a

Province. We know we need the

federal government on board.

I was

just slipped a little note and told that, in fact, the Royal Commission on the

Status of Women was 1970. It was not

1975 as I had thought. That adds on

another five years. That is almost

forty-five years that we have been talking in a solid, comprehensive way about

child care. That is what we need to

continue to do. We need to continue

to talk about this issue in our Province.

We have to know that although there are some very good elements here in

this bill that we can support, it is only a halfway measure.

We have to.

We have

to have a model similar to Quebec so that our young families are no longer

scrambling for child care.

Grandparents cannot do it, and a lot of people do not have grandparents to do

it. We do need these types of child

care services that are outlined here in this bill.

We know

that it is a better outcome for our children.

We know that it is a better outcome for our working families.

We know it is on the right road, but we are not there.

We have only just begun that journey here in this Province.

We do not yet even know what our full-day Kindergarten is going to look

like.

The term

that the early years lasts a lifetime, for working families who are just able to

meet their bills because of the high cost of housing, the high cost of child

care, student loans, car payments, it feels like a lifetime to them.

It feels like a lifetime to them because it is so tough.

How

unfortunate in this time of prosperity in our Province, how many young working

families have said to me, I cannot have another child.

I can only afford one. We

simply cannot. How unfortunate is

that, Mr. Speaker? I do not think

anybody in this House does not want to see another child not born because people

cannot afford it.

Mr.

Speaker, this bill is about that.

This bill is so intricately connected to our whole issue of population growth.

It is about providing services.

It is about providing quality, affordable child care to every working

family who needs it and every child who needs it.

That is what we are talking about today.

I hope

that government will acknowledge that this is just a step in the right

direction, but we have not arrived.

We so need to arrive. This would be

the best Population Growth Strategy that this Province could ever come up with

to ensure that we have a national child care program where there is a space for

every child of every working family, and also, even families who do not have

paid employment but there is a space for every child in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador to have access to quality child care.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker. I am very

happy to be able to speak to this bill.

MR. SPEAKER (Cross):

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. MCGRATH:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to be able to stand in this hon. House today and speak to

Bill 30,

An Act To Regulate Child Care Services.

As we

know, this bill I have listened to many of the speakers who have already stood

and debated this is all about enhancing the regulated child care system that

we are dealing with. I heard some of

the speakers talk about when the original act was brought it, and it is fifteen

years old. When you look at the

demographics of what has happened in our Province in the last fifteen years and

how that affects child care I myself coming from a very large family of

eleven children, we did not have to worry about babysitters.

They were built in in the family.

Today, as you heard some of the speakers comment on,

families are much smaller. Also,

today it is not uncommon at all in two-parent families to see both parents in

professional fields. A very common

thing today is single-parent families.

Twenty years ago to see a single-parent family was an uncommon thing.

It is not uncommon today at all.

This all has an effect on the child care system that we deal with.

This bill is all about enhancing that child care system to come up to

what the needs are for today.

I think in the bill it is very self-explanatory.

There are six key differences in the new act that we are suggesting.

First of all, there are the

definitions of child care service and child

care provider. This is clarified and

strengthened in the new regulations, or the new act.

The capacity limit on the regulated child care licence, that is being

removed now and licensees to determine the scope of their service.

That will impact the quality of the service for the children.

The third one is the appeals process for a licensing

decision. That is being defined now

where there are time limits put on it also.

You get thirty days to put in an appeal, and then it has to be responded

to within sixty days. We would like

to see the responses much faster, but having that time limit on there I think is

an improvement.

The minister now, rather than the Cabinet, will appoint the

provincial director of child care.

The regional managers will not be appointed as inspectors.

Before, the regional managers, I do not know

if they were appointed as inspectors but there certainly was an anticipation

there that it was, or a perception.

This will provide some transparency in the inspection process.

Also,

the statutory review, which I think every speaker who has been up so far has

commended on the fact that now a statutory review will be required every five

year. That will also include public

consultation. Now what we are doing

is every five years this will go under review.

The part of the public consultation I think is very important because

then you are finding out exactly what the general public are looking for in the

child are regulations. Their

comments, I feel through public consultation, will only strengthen the

regulations and the act from that.

The

changes to this piece of legislation from the current act, there are four main

goals we are hoping to achieve. The

first one, the new legislation will modernize, strengthen, and clarify the

current legislation. The second one

is that it will streamline policies and processes.

Thirdly, it will improve transparency and accountability.

The forth one is it will improve flexibility for service providers.

I would just like to elaborate a little bit on those.

First of

all, modernization, strengthening, and clarification of the current legislation;

as I stated earlier, it has been fifteen years since the last review of the

legislation. This here now, we were

hoping to see some changes that would modernize it over the last decade and a

half, to go along with the changes that the economy has brought over the last

decade and a half. Over the last

fifteen years we have seen a lot of changes in the way our economy has moved

ahead and in the working habits of the general populace of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

For

example, in my district, I will use my district as an example.

We have recently seen one child care centre close down.

We have another one that was actually subsidized by one of the larger

industries in the area, and we cannot get it open.

Hopefully, the changes that are being made here may see some subsidies

and changes that will bring to light the opportunities to get these centres up

and running again, or the one that did not get the opportunity to open, now with

the changes we may be able to see that be able to be opened.

In many

districts throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, jurisdictions and the

municipalities, you are seeing parents as I stated earlier, normally both

parents are working, and they are not working just eight-hour shifts now.

A normal shift in today's world, with the economy the way it is, is a

twelve-hour shift. As we know, and I

know it is a big issue in my district when it comes to child care, an employer

can force an employee to work consecutively sixteen hours.

That causes a lot of issues when it comes to child care.

Some of these changes we are going to see hopefully will reflect on that.

The

current Child Care Services Act was proclaimed in 1999.

I mentioned that earlier. The

new bill is being restructured to reflect current knowledge in the child care

field. Basically bringing people and

making them more knowledgeable as to what child care is all about today will

enhance the type of child care we are going to provide throughout the

jurisdictions.

I see

quite often that the child care providers are restricted on getting employees in

their centres quite often. As you

have heard other speakers talk about, we do not have the large families any

more. We are having smaller

families. A large family in today's

world is four children. Quite often

those four children are spaced, so finding the in-house child care is very

difficult today. Being able to

increase the knowledge when it comes to child care in the field today is what

the first goal, or part of the first main goal in this new act, will be.

The

second one is streamlined policies and processes.

The policies that we currently find today are a number of standards and

other documents. What we are going

to try to do is bring it all under one so it will be simplified.

There will be much more clarity into it, and easier to understand.

When you have policies and procedures that are easier to understand, they

are also easier to implement into your business.

If we

can bring all of them under one umbrella, that will make a big difference there.

The changes in our legislation will support the consolidation and the

reorganization of all this information making it much easier for use.

For example, if you are in the child care provider system and you are

doing the different levels of courses that can be done to move you forward, we

are going to try to simplify the regulations, bring them all together so that it

is easier to implement out in the field today.

Thirdly,

improving transparency and accountability, an appeals process is clearly

outlined; I spoke of that earlier.

This was not in the current act, so putting that appeals process in there and

the statute of times on that, the thirty days and the sixty days, I think is a

positive step forward.

Transparency to the process and the obligations and expectations for both

parties defining those transparencies in the process is very important and

understanding the

definitions of the transparencies.

I think we need to be able to understand what the processes are all about

and what the obligations and expectations on both sides, both the parents and

the child care givers, and making that clear.

Currently, eight provinces and territories have an appeals process so we have

certainly studied and looked at other jurisdictions across the country.

There are eight other provinces that already have an appeals process in

place; some of those being New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, which we have

looked very closely at. We will take

their processes and their appeals process and help that to strengthen the

appeals process that we will put in place.

Another

change will be to improve the transparency and the accountability of the

inspection process. The new act will

require that a manager is not appointed as an inspector.

This is important so you have an arm's-length inspector rather than the

manager being the inspector, which I think puts a safeguard onto the child care

establishments.

Also, as

you heard many of the other speakers talk about, the five-year review of the

legislation. If you have a piece of

legislation that is fifteen years old and it has not been changed, has not been

reviewed, but the demographics and the economy have changed, as we have

certainly seen here in our Province, so a piece of legislation that is fifteen

years old when it comes to child care certainly needs to be reviewed.

I think that putting the five-year automatic review on it is a very good

step. That gives you an opportunity

then that every five years you modernize what has been happening.

The

fourth one is improving the flexibility for the service providers.

By removing the capacity limit on a licence, what we are allowing is for

the owners to be more flexible when it comes to the service they will provide.

They can now have much more flexibility in determining what type of

service they are going to provide.

It will also ensure quality service with the requirements when it comes to the

ratios that are used, the sizes of the different groups, staff qualifications

and certainly the physical space requirements.

mentioned earlier that there was one facility in my district, which was a child

care provider, that had to close.

This fourth piece, change and a goal that we are hoping to accomplish here

that one in itself, had that been there and you could obtain that goal alone,

that particular child care service centre would still be open in my district

just in that one alone. I am very

glad to see the four main goals that we are hoping we will be able to accomplish

by making the changes to this particular act.

There

are also some key differences in the new act from the existing piece of

legislation that we have. Mainly

there are six key differences and I would like to just touch on those.

The

definitions of a child care service and a child care provider have

been clarified. It has also been

strengthened. That will outline some

of the specific exemptions to each definition.

There is

a difference between a child care service and a child care provider.

I spoke with the minister earlier today talking about child care

providers and some of the certification and courses that they have to do, and

the different levels in being a child care provider.

The type

of services in child care providers they all offer different types of child

care services. One of the key

differences in the new piece of legislation to the existing piece of legislation

will be the

definitions between the two, between the service and the provider.

One of

the second key differences is the capacity limited that is for the regulated

child care licence. We have removed

that capacity limited. That allows

the licensee to determine the scope of the service they are now going to

provide. It will be able to do this,

but it will not impact the quality of service.

Now a

child care provider can decide what type of service they are going to provide.

The quality of service, I feel, will be enhanced because they can now

decide the type of service they are going to provide in their particular care

centre.

talked about the appeals process for a licensing decision.

That is being defined. We did

not have an appeals process in the existing piece of legislation.

Having that appeals process in there now, you have thirty days to file an

appeal and then you have to receive a response to that within sixty days.

I think that is a very important addition to the piece of legislation.

One of

the other key differences is the minister of the department will appoint the

provincial director of child care,

whereas in the existing piece of legislation

the Cabinet makes that decision; it is a Cabinet decision.

Now that will be the decision of the minister who is responsible for the

department. The normal public

service competition process will apply to that position.

It will follow in with other pieces of legislation, but it will be the

minister who will make the decision and not the Cabinet themselves.

Regional

managers; we talked about regional managers will not be appointed as inspectors.

The whole purpose of this is to provide transparency in the inspection

process, because if the regional managers are the inspectors, sometimes people

feel well, there are some shaded things that are happening there.

So now the regional managers will not be appointed as inspectors.

The inspectors will be outside of the regional managers.

course, the statutory review, the sixth and final major difference in the two

pieces of legislation, the old legislation, or existing legislation, and the new

act is that this statutory review will be mandatory every five years.

What I really like about the statutory review is the public consultation

piece. With the public consultation,

I have been involved certainly as an MHA in the House of Assembly in the

provincial government, but even before that as a councillor in my municipality,

and also as a business person.

I have

been involved in many public consultations when it came to pieces of legislation

being changed. I feel it is a very

important process to have the public's opinion, to listen to the public, to have

them help us in how a piece of legislation will be enacted, how a piece of

legislation will be written. I think

it is important that we listen. That

is something that certainly this government does.

When it comes to child care, I do not think you can have too much

consultation.

As I

stated early, it has been fifteen years since there has been a review, since

there has been a change in this piece of legislation.

I think that is too long. You

look at the demographics, the changes that have been made over the last fifteen

years, certainly in our economy and in the style of living that Newfoundlanders

and Labradorians have today compared to what it was fifteen years ago.

There have been major changes in the style of life that we live as

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. I

think fifteen years is too long. The

five-year process will work much better and having the public consultation.

This is

not a complicated piece of legislation, but it is a very important piece of

legislation. It is a piece of

legislation that I think addresses the lifestyle of our future.

In saying that, I talk about the children.

In my

own family there are two or three educators.

One of my siblings actually is an early childhood educator and has been

all her life, or all of her professional life.

For the past forty years she has been an early childhood educator living

in Prince Edward Island. They, at

one time, had private schools when it came to early childhood education.

So she actually had her own school for about twenty, twenty-five years

until they brought in the Kindergarten system.

It was

amazing to see. I think every time I

went to visit her she was always upgrading.

That is so important. When

you look at the quality that the early childhood educators give to our young

children, realizing they are our future, I think this is a very important issue.

I am

certainly going to be supporting this bill.

I hope everybody else, all of my hon. colleagues in the House, will also

support it. I look forward to this

bill being implemented.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

If the Minister of Education

and Early Childhood Development speaks now she will close debate.

The hon.

the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

MS SULLIVAN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want

to say it has certainly been a lively debate.

That is not surprising when we are talking about our children.

It is something that is near and dear to everybody's hearts, I truly

believe. So everybody needs and

wants to have some opportunity to speak.

I am very pleased by that as well because it is something we ought to

recognize.

I would

like to start out by thanking the speakers.

We had the Member for St. John's North, the Member for Terra Nova, the

Member for St. Barbe, the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune, the Member for

Signal Hill Quidi Vidi, the Member for Harbour Main, the Member for St. John's

Centre, and the Member for Labrador West.

Mr. Speaker, obviously a big degree of interest shown in the House of

Assembly around this particular bill.

Mr.

Speaker, I am not going t