PDF Version

November 25, 2013 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVII No. 34

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Before we start today's proceedings, I wanted to acknowledge some special

guests in our galleries. Today we have the pleasure of being joined by members

of the Provincial Advisory Council on Aging and Seniors, together with their

Chairperson, Mr. Leo Bonnell.

Welcome to our galleries.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Thank you for the great work you do on behalf of seniors in

our Province.

We are also joined today by Mr. Ron Ryan, together with his family. Mr. Ryan

will be the subject of a member's statement in a few moments.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today, we have members' statements from the District of Cape

St. Francis; the Member for the District of Humber Valley; the Member for the

District of Lewisporte; the Member for the District of Fortune Bay Cape La

Hune; the Member for the District of Baie Verte Springdale, and the Member for

the District of St. John's Centre.

The hon. the Member for the District of Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize Mr. Ron Ryan, who has given his

whole life in helping others. On Wednesday, October 2, at a ceremony for the

Seniors of Distinction Awards, Mr. Ryan was recognized.

He is considered a silent unassuming pioneer of the Town of Torbay, because

of his strong sense of kindness and concern for others. As a young boy he would

visit the sick, and help people in his community. As he got older he cut wood

for the clergy and did chores for the Presentation Sisters of Torbay.

As a boy, Mr. Ryan worked on his father's cattle and vegetable farm. He

farmed part-time while working with the federal government until he retired in

1987. Since then, he increased his livestock and vegetable gardens.

He has held executive positions on the Board of Directors for the Department

of Agriculture and Hog Producers of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Ryan assisted in establishing the first Torbay Town Council and served as

its first Deputy Mayor. All that being said he has always held his family as his

number one priority and loves them dearly.

I ask all hon. members to join with me in thanking Mr. Ryan for all that he

has done in his life to help others.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

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

Todd Stark, a resident of Deer Lake on being recently inducted into the

Newfoundland and Labrador Hockey Hall of Fame in the Athlete Builder category.

Todd has had a renowned hockey career in our Province that has included being

a four-time Herder Memorial Champion, a member of the 1986 Corner Brook Royals,

our Provinces first Allan Cup champions, a Hardy Cup Championship in 1989 with

the Port aux Basques Mariners, along with a coaching victory with the Deer Lake

Video Juniors at the 1996 Veitch Memorial Provincial Junior Championship.

Mr. Speaker, having the prestigious honour of being inducted into the

Newfoundland and Labrador Hockey Hall of Fame is a tremendous achievement to

bestow on any individual. Along with his achievements as a player, Todd has

continued to make significant contributions to the Deer Lake Minor Hockey

system, and has played a major role in the continued success of the sport in the

Deer Lake area.

Since Todd began his hockey career in Newfoundland and Labrador he has been

an essential contributor to all teams he participated on and a key figure in the

sport.

I ask all members of this House to join me in extending congratulations to

Todd Stark on his recent induction into the Newfoundland and Labrador Hockey

Hall of Fame.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honour the life of

an Irish physician who dedicated his life to rural medicine in Newfoundland and

Labrador. Maurice Arthur McVicker was born in a little town in Northern Ireland

known as Portrush in October, 1927. He went on to medical school at Trinity

College in Dublin and graduated in 1952. In August of 1954, Maurice and his

wife, who was a nurse, migrated to Newfoundland. They first worked in Bonavista

for two year, followed by two years in Musgravetown and then thirty years in

Lewisporte.

His son, Charles, has said, "I grew up with people knocking on the door

looking for dad day and night. He worked long hours". During Dr. McVicker's

lifetime, he was many things to many people a husband, a father, a doctor, and

a friend.

Dr. McVicker retired from the medical profession at age sixty in 1988. He

suffered a stoke on August 31, 2013, and passed peacefully away a few days

later, on September 6, at the age of eighty-five.

Honourable members, please join me in remembering, honouring, and giving

thanks to Dr. McVicker and his family for their great service to the people of

our Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS PERRY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize an incredible young man, Mr.

John Jeddore. At just twenty-four years of age, he has received the national

Indspire Award for outstanding career achievement.

Along with a Bachelor of Science degree in Biochemistry, Mr. Jeddore is the

first Mi'kmaq from Conne River to attend medical school. He has participated in

Memorial's Aboriginal Health Initiative to work with elders on traditional lands

and learn about ceremony and medicine; he is an Aboriginal representative on the

Canadian Federation of Students' Newfoundland Executive; a guest curator at the

Aboriginal exhibition at The Rooms; he has written a monthly column entitled

Traditional Voice; and he is a guide, photographer, and cultural liaison with

the Mi'kmaq Discovery Centre in the Coast of Bays.

We are all so proud of Mr. Jeddore for being a tremendous role model for

indigenous youth and indeed everyone who strives to reach their fullest

potential.

I ask that all members join me in congratulating John Jeddore for his

dedication to not only preserve his language and Aboriginal culture, but to

continually strive to be the best he can be.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte Springdale.

MR. POLLARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in his hon. House today to express gratitude and to recognize the

outstanding volunteer work that husband and wife team, Everett and Brenda Butt

of Springdale have done and are doing for the Children's Wish Foundation.

For over ten years, they have been subchapter coordinators for the Green Bay

and White Bay area. Both have poured their heart and soul in working diligently

to grant wishes to challenged boys and girls who are determined to live their

dream.

Having seen a total of eleven wishes granted, including trips to Disneyland

and Hawaii, Brenda and Everett say their volunteer work is very rewarding. When

you see the smiles on the faces of each child it makes it all worthwhile.

I invite all members to join me in thanking Brenda and Everett for their

unselfish commitment to the Children's Wish Foundation and for their drive and

energy to ensure that our region maintains a vibrant subchapter, which, Mr.

Speaker, is embraced and supported wholeheartedly by the entire region. Because

of their vision and hard work, another child may have their lifelong wish come

true.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, I

call this House's attention to the Transition House Association of Newfoundland

and Labrador. THANL is a community-based organization mandated to strengthen and

support the provincially funded shelters and services for women affected by

relationship violence.

No formal statement can adequately sum up the huge different, literally

life-saving, the organizations that are THANL members make in the lives of

people escaping family violence, from providing safe places to live to helping

women through the cumbersome court process. THANL itself develops training,

education and programs for members, provides information and analysis to

government, lobbies on legislation and policies and helps with public awareness

training.

Today, THANL is involved in Project White Van literally a white van that

started the day covered with purple ribbon magnets. They will turn the van white

again, as people take purple ribbons for their own vehicles.

THANL and other organizations work with expertise against violence every day

of the year. While we acknowledge and thank them today, I ask all hon. members

to remember the year-round struggle and support them at every opportunity. I say

bravo to the work of THANL and all its members.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MCGRATH: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to recognize

the progress being made on priority issues facing Aboriginal communities

throughout our country. I was honoured to participate in the Aboriginal Affairs

Working Group Conference held last week in Manitoba, and I am pleased to share

highlights and outcomes from this conference.

The Aboriginal Affairs Working Group comprises Ministers of Aboriginal

Affairs from all provinces and territories, and leaders from the five national

Aboriginal organizations: the Assembly of First Nations, the Congress of

Aboriginal Peoples, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, the Mtis National Council, and the

Native Women's Association of Canada. Our group was joined by the hon. Bernard

Valcourt, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada.

Mr. Speaker, Aboriginal leaders and my colleagues across the country all

expressed the importance of federal engagement and a mutual commitment to a

renewed and strengthened relationship in order to improve the lives of all

Aboriginal Peoples in Canada.

Many important issues were discussed during the conference and presentations

were made on the progress taking place around such issues as Aboriginal

education, economic development, disaster mitigation, housing, and ending

violence against Aboriginal women and girls.

Mr. Speaker, we discussed options to reduce barriers to education and

increase opportunities for all Aboriginal students. We received a progress

report on efforts to bolster economic development and improve housing for all

Aboriginal Peoples on and off reserve. We unanimously agreed that the Aboriginal

housing both on and off reserve stand as a separate committee of the Aboriginal

Affairs Working Group.

As a group, we acknowledge that Parliament has agreed to reappoint a Special

Committee on the Matter of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls in

Canada. In addition, ministers supported the National Aboriginal Organizations'

call on the federal government to hold a national public inquiry into missing

and murdered Aboriginal women and girls.

Mr. Speaker, the Aboriginal Affairs Working Group will continue to promote

co-ordination and collaboration on key priority issues to further support and

ensure a stronger future for Aboriginal communities across the country. I look

forward to participating in the next Aboriginal Affairs Working Group meeting

scheduled for April 2014.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

MS DEMPSTER: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the minister for an advance

copy of his statement. I want to congratulate the minister for participating in

discussion on Aboriginal issues with other provincial, national, and Aboriginal

leaders.

I would like to focus for a minute on some issues facing Aboriginal

communities here at home, Mr. Speaker, some that have been raised in this House

by my colleague the Member for Torngat. Only last week, my colleague raised the

issue of homelessness and the need for more affordable housing in Nunatsiavut

communities.

The justice system has been failing the victims of crime in those communities

because of delays in bringing the criminals to justice. The victims are often

exposed to offenders who are often repeat offenders.

We also hear of the continuing substance abuse in communities like

Natuashish, and the need for more resources to deal with that problem. I would

be remiss also, Mr. Speaker, if I did not raise the issue of recognizing the

Aboriginal community of NunatuKavut for their struggle in Aboriginal status. I

would encourage the minister to bring some of those issues to the table when he

meets with the Aboriginal Affairs Working Group in 2014.

Mr. Speaker, answers can be found, but I believe that many of them can be

found from within. We need to work with people at the grassroots level, and we

need to have on-the-ground involvement to help facilitate a resolution to some

of those long-standing issues.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's

Centre.

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

self-government, Aboriginal leaders in Newfoundland and Labrador have achieved

so much for their communities in economic prosperity and social stability;

however, challenges do remain: housing in Nain, substance abuse and children

protection issues in Natuashish, an overrepresentation of Aboriginals in the

correction system, and continued violence against Aboriginal women.

It is essential, Mr. Speaker, that government work side by side with

Aboriginal leaders who will lead on these issues and others they themselves

identify as priorities.

In saying that, I also congratulate Chief Greg Rich in his recent election

and I am sure we will all, in this House, support his work.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for St. John's North have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Thanks to the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

I would encourage government to continue to focus on interventions to

encourage the completion of high school by persons in our Aboriginal

communities; new approaches to teacher education and collaboration through

programs at the College of the North Atlantic, like Adult Basic Education;

having a more welcoming environment in our post-secondary institutions; and more

peer-to-peer support and mentoring for Aboriginal people who go on to college,

universities, and trades.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, November is National Pancreatic Cancer

Awareness Month. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is pleased to

participate in Pancreatic Cancer Canada's Purple Lights Campaign. For the

next six days, we will flood Confederation Building with purple lights, showing

our support for the fight against pancreatic cancer and efforts in the Province

to raise awareness.

Pancreatic cancer is known as a quiet killer with a survival rate in the low

single digits. As survival rates for other cancers have improved, pancreatic

cancer has remained unchanged. There is a need to create more opportunities to

fundraise for this disease and encourage research.

Through community partnerships and strategic investment of $155 million since

2004, our government places considerable focus on the treatment and prevention

of all cancers. Guided by our Provincial Cancer Control Strategy, we are

committed to reducing the incidence and impact of cancer and improving the

quality of live for those living with cancer in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, we provide cancer screening through three key initiatives: the

Breast Cancer Screening Program, the Cervical Cancer Screening Program, and the

Colon Cancer Screening Program.

In recent years, we have expanded the Breast Screening Program to include

women aged forty to forty-nine who are referred to the program by their primary

health care provider.

We also continue to expand the Colon Cancer Screening Program that was

launched in Western Health last year and expanded to Central Health this year,

with a long-term vision of a Province-wide screening program by 2015.

In addition, through Budget 2013, we have continued to fund new cancer drug

therapies through our cancer care program and the Newfoundland and Labrador

Prescription Drug Program.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage all hon. members and members of the public to help

create further awareness around pancreatic cancer. Having a greater

understanding and knowing the impact this disease has on the lives of those

diagnosed and their families will help raise its profile and bring us that much

closer to finding a cure.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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 her statement. The Purple Lights

Campaign is a crucial one in raising awareness around pancreatic cancer, given

its very low survival rate and the desperate need for more research and

awareness. It is sad to think that there are very few survivors out there to

spread the word about the disease, but their legacies do live on in the memories

of their families and friends.

Pancreatic cancer is the least funded cancer, receiving less than 1 per cent

of all private and government funding; however, pancreatic cancer is the fourth

leading cause of cancer related death in Canada. I look forward to seeing the

purple lights illuminating Confederation Building for the next six days; we do

need to raise awareness.

At the same time while we are discussing some of the very worthwhile

initiatives that this government has undertaken, I do hope to see smoking

cessation as one of those initiatives in the future, as it is something that

will have a huge return on investment both in terms of quality of life and

dollars returned to this government in the form of less cost.

Thank you so much for the opportunity.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Third Party.

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

I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy of her statement. I am

pleased to join with her and the Opposition House Leader in recognizing National

Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month.

I am sure that many of us have either had a friend or a family member,

unfortunately, get pancreatic cancer and it just gives you an awful feeling when

you hear somebody has been diagnosed with it, because it certainly is a very

fatal disease at the moment and anything that can be done to raise the awareness

is extremely important.

I am pleased with the cancer screening and treatment that is going on in the

Province, and I know that it has improved. It is good to see colon cancer

screening expanding to another region. I am sorry that the ministry could not

find a way in which to make it move more quickly, but at least we now have a

deadline for having it throughout the Province, and that is 2015.

The one thing I would like to say is that we need to see more nurses and

nutritionists working on the ground with people in our communities to address

the causes of high chronic disease rates and also to help with education to

identify cancers earlier on, such as pancreatic cancer.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North

have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement.

Making cancer screening a priority is a vital and we must ensure that we have

the resources available, especially for pancreatic cancer. I would be remiss if

I did not mention Nurse Janet Cox and Dr. William Fitzgerald, both for their

roles in establishing the Colon Cancer Screening Program in St. Anthony. It

certainly has saved a significant amount of lives.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It has been six years since this government promised to introduce

whistle-blower legislation in response to the recommendations from the Green

report six years later, and still no blanket legislation to protect

whistle-blowers.

I ask the Premier: Why don't you just admit you have no intentions of ever

bringing in whistle-blower legislation that protects all workers in our

Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the member opposite posing that particular question. I have been

very clear and upfront on that on any number of occasions. We do not have any

intentions of bringing that forward this particular session of the House, but we

are not ruling out bringing it in the future.

We are taking some time to have a look at what is happening in other

jurisdictions, but I would remind the member that there is any number of

supporting documentation currently enshrined in provincial policy that provides

protection for workers. The Member for the Bay of Islands actually spoke last

week about one particular piece that we just passed last week in this House of

Assembly related to a health care act.

There are lots of protections currently available and we will ensure that we

support our employees, as we have often done as a government in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It has indeed been piecemeal; and I will remind the minister that just last

week with the new Food Premises Act, Bill 22, it provides whistle-blower

protection for a select few, creating essentially what is a two-tiered system.

Workers, for instance, in a restaurant who speaks out about unsafe food are

protected; while workers, say, for instance, on our highways or in health care

are not protected.

I ask the minister: Why are you creating a two-tiered, whistle-blower

protection instead of legislation that covers everyone?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, in the advances that we have made in working with

our employees, we value very much their input in decision making and in policy

development. We welcome the opportunity any time an employee wants to come

forward and to speak to government, to speak to their supervisors, about things

that are going on that ought not to be happening or about giving us suggestions

on how things can change.

I say to the member opposite, the health care bill we brought in last week

demonstrates another step forward in our commitment to ensuring people have an

opportunity to speak out. What would the Liberal Party want us to do, nothing,

until we do the entire government? Well, that is not where we are.

We are chopping away at this bit by bit and we will continue. I assure the

House of Assembly and the people of the Province that if employees with the

government have issues, there is protection for them to speak out and make it

known.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: I ask the minister, if the intentions are to do this it has

been six years later, we already know publicly what has happened to some people

in this Province who have spoken out.

I ask the minister: When do you intend to bring this legislation in?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, our government values the contribution that public

service employees make to this Province. On a daily basis, we stand in this

House and we talk about it. I submit that we hear members opposite on occasion

praise the work of public sector employees to support government and support the

people of this Province.

We will continue to respect what they do for us. We continue to invite their

input. As I said before, I cannot be much clearer; I have no intentions of

tabling all-out whistle-blower legislation in this House of Assembly this term.

That is a clear-cut answer to that question.

We will continue as we bring new legislation forward like my colleague, the

Minister of Health did last week. We will continue to try and make advances to

ensure that people have greater protection than they feel they have right now

when they want to speak out.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Government recently sold the Hamilton Sound for $214,000. A private

company made the vessel like new for approximately $1 million. Government is now

leasing the vessel back at a cost of $5,787 a day. If government had kept the

Hamilton Sound , not only would they still own it but we would be in hundreds

of thousands of dollars.

I ask the Premier: Why wouldn't government just do the repairs on this ferry

and keep it in the provincial fleet instead of giving it away and paying for it

in a leaseback?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, at the time that we sold the Hamilton Sound we felt and

still do feel that it was in the best interests of the Province where we are

renewing our fleet. As everybody knows, the marine fleet ferry system in

Newfoundland and Labrador does have many problems in maintenance.

To try and ensure good service to the people who live on the islands

surrounding our Island portion of the Province, and the Labrador portion of the

Province, we try to provide them with the ferry service to make sure that they

get the best service possible. Sometimes that will mean we will rent we have

many, many contracts with different ferry owners throughout the Province. We

will continue to do that to service the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well I understand why sometimes leasing or renting in this case ferries would

make sense but if government had to refurbish the old Hamilton Sound we

would still own it and we would be in hundreds of thousands of dollars.

I ask the Premier: Was there a complete financial analysis done on the

Hamilton Sound before it sailed? If so, would you table this report?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, again, we are having a ferry replacement strategy in place and

we are working diligently away at that. Only two weeks ago we announced a $51

million investment in a new ferry for Fogo and Change Islands, and we also

announced that we are in negotiations right now to have a second eighty metre

ferry purchased for the Bell Island run. On top of that, we are putting $10

million into improvements in the infrastructure. This is all part of the

strategy to replace the ferry system.

As I said, while we are replacing the ferries we will continue to provide the

residents of Newfoundland and Labrador with a good reliable service and at times

that will mean going into contracts with other ferry users.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the minister again: Normally when you are taking a ferry out of the

system what you would do is a financial analysis to see what the repairs would

cost.

I ask the minister: Did they do a financial analysis, a cost-benefit analysis

on the Hamilton Sound ?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we analyze every movement we make on this side of the House, not

like situations we get into like we were in with the Nonia , might I add

when we had that. We certainly did a full analysis. We do with every contract

that we move into, and we will continue to do that.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I will say that as long as we have to enter into

contracts to provide a reliable service to the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador while we are replacing the ferries we have now, we will continue to do

that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I asked the minister if he would table the report, so I guess we will expect

that report later.

Last week, we had learned that after kicking the forestry contractor off the

job, Nalcor awarded a new multi-million dollar contract on Muskrat Falls without

issuing an RFP. I asked the minister for the amount of taxpayer money that the

contract is worth. We did not get the answer.

So I ask the Premier: How much was this new un-tendered forestry contract

worth?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, we have explained in this House the reason why

commercially sensitive information cannot be put out into the public,

particularly when there is ongoing work and ongoing bids. Again, I guess in the

responsibility of Nalcor to the people of the Province is to maintain the cost

of this project, the least-cost option for to provide power into the future, Mr.

Speaker.

So those are the reasons why we cannot reveal the numbers, Mr. Speaker. In

this particular case, a contract was awarded, the contractor was non-compliant,

the work was not satisfactory, and they have been removed. As a result of that,

Nalcor went to the second place bidder in the process and made the selection to

continue on with the work.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: I ask the minister: If it is commercially sensitive, now that

this RFP now that this contractor is in place, will you at least tell the

people of the Province how much the contract was worth?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, the particular piece of work that is ongoing

right now with this contactor is the clearing of transmission lines, and there

is much, much more work to do and other bids to come in. So to reveal the

numbers, it would again influence the bidding process into the future.

We are not going to reveal the numbers. It is quite clear why we are not

doing this, but I can assure the people of the Province that a process has been

followed here. It is a legitimate process, where a contractor was non-sufficient

and through the excellent work of Nalcor and oversight for this project, they

have been removed. As a result, the second place bidder has been put in place.

Again, all with the intent on ensuring that this project is done in the best

interests of the people of the Province, with the best contractors to do the

best work, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador have some of the

highest rates of cancer in Canada. A PET scanner and a radiation unit are

important tools in the fight against cancer.

I ask the minister: Has the government committed to build a PET scanner and a

radiation unit within the new hospital in Corner Brook?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we have committed to building a PET scanner in St. John's at our

tertiary care centre at a cost of $40 million.

Mr. Speaker, there is a very good reason why we are building that PET scanner

here. It is because the PET scanner has to work in tandem with the cancer

program itself. The provincial cancer program is offered here in St. John's, Mr.

Speaker.

As well, we have to ensure that we have the people in place who are able to

run any particular piece of machinery. We are talking about people in the area

of nuclear medicine, Mr. Speaker. There are various technicians that we need.

There are various oncologists, radiology oncologists that we need, and so on.

Mr. Speaker, recruitment is very difficult in those areas.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: I assume the answer is that there will not be a PET scanner

and radiation unit in the new hospital in Corner Brook.

In 2012, there were over 500 people who had to travel from outside of St.

John's to receive cancer treatment. Given our high rates of cancer, our aging

population and the number of people travelling to St. John's for treatment, the

Western Region should be considered for the fight against cancer.

I ask the minister: What is the cost to install a PET scanner and a radiation

unit in the new hospital?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, again, for the record, the cost as we know it now is $40

million. Mr. Speaker, I just want to talk about the numbers when we talk about

the number of people needing that cancer treatment. For Central Health, the

number is 270; for Lab-Grenfell, the number is fifty-nine; for Western Health,

the number is 172; and for Eastern Health, the number is 714.

So, Mr. Speaker, it is evident that the vast numbers of people who need the

treatment reside here on this portion of the Island of the Province; therefore,

again, because the tertiary cancer care is here, it makes sense that the PET

scanner should also be here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: I say to the minister and I will ask questions later that

the cost of $40 million includes the bunker for the isotopes that is needed;

but, in Corner Brook, you would not need that. So, Mr. Speaker, the actual cost

is not for the PET scanner.

Mr. Speaker, government has spent $600,000 taxpayers' money for a land use

report by the Humber Valley regional planning authority. The report was

submitted to government over two years ago, and the government hid this report,

like it has with so many others. The minister said it is still in the draft

form. Municipalities spent a significant amount of their free time and energy

completing this report for government.

I ask the minister: Will he commit today to releasing this report to the

municipalities that worked diligently to see it happen?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Intergovernmental

Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite is well aware, the

Department of Municipal and Intergovernmental Affairs is responsible for land

use planning throughout the Province, and that includes a number of regional

plans, including the one that the member continues to ask about in this House.

We did receive a draft plan from the Humber Valley planning authority back in

the fall of 2011. The plan is broad, it involves issues that affect a number of

government departments, and it is important that we take time to do a full

review. We are reviewing that plan right now, and a response to the folks

involved in Humber Valley will be forthcoming.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, the report was completed by the Humber Valley

regional planning authority. If this report is ever released, it will be

important for them to have legislative authority in order to properly implement

recommendations within the report.

I ask the minister: Will government commit to giving them the legislative

authority that they have requested, to enact this report?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Intergovernmental

Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Our review of the draft plan is ongoing. We are involved in consultations

with the Department of Natural Resources, and the Department of Environment and

Conservation, but we are close to having a response finalized. As soon as that

response is finalized it will be shared with the Humber Valley planning

authority. We are making progress. These issues are complex and we want to make

sure we do it right, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, today Canada lost to the Europeans in the seal

products fight. These are the same Europeans this government was so good to in

the CETA deal, even giving up our minimum processing requirements.

I ask the Premier: Why did she not press to have the seal ban issue linked to

CETA negotiations to ensure the Europeans were well aware of how important

sealing is to us as a Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we view the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement that was

negotiated with Canada and the EU exceptional in terms of what we were able to

negotiate with Canada and the EU in terms of long-term access to the EU, end of

use restrictions, and certainly $400 million in the fund. Going through that,

there were a number of issues on the table, certainly Canada and all the

provinces and territories.

In regard to the WTO issue in terms of the seal ban, that process was already

started. The protocol for the WTO was in process. We saw that through. We got

the ruling today. We are certainly very pleased the federal government has taken

the position they will appeal it. We believe in the sealing industry and we have

done it for a number of years. We are going to continue to support it. I would

like to hear if the hon. member supports it because things in the fishery in

rural Newfoundland and Labrador, he seems to be against it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, DFO is currently carrying out consultations to

list our cod as endangered. Given that this government has invested over $15

million into the Centre for Fisheries Ecosystems Research over the past three

years, I ask the minister: Is our cod an endangered species?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for acknowledging the great work we have

done in research and development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: It is good he has recognized in regard to CFER in terms of

working with them and in terms of the Celtic Explorer that we have

invested $6 million in over three years in regard to overseeing our cod stocks

and looking at groundfish and the recovery of that. Certainly we have done

significant work in regard to that.

In terms of COSEWIC and in terms of what they have recommended, we understand

what they have recommended. They had also made that recommendation in 2003. I

understand the information they have put in went in 2010. Some of that

scientific data may not be up to current levels.

From our perspective in terms of what we are hearing from industry and

hearing from science, we think there are improvements in the stocks. We support

the cod industry. We will be making representation in due course.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I still did not hear if the minister considers

our cod to be endangered or not.

Given the repercussions of this listing, I ask the minister: Has he carried

out a study to determine the negative impact to our people if cod are listed as

endangered? Does he intend to respond to any federal action to declare cod as

endangered?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, all the species in our ecosystem here in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, we know how important they are and important to rural

Newfoundland and Labrador, to those who work in our processing facilities, our

harvesters, and our investors. We believe cod, just like many other species, are

very important to the improvement, to the continued building of our economy. We

have made that commitment in what we have seen in terms of CETA and the ability

to spend $400 million in a $1 billion industry to improve it, to improve what is

happening in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Again, I say to the hon. member, he is against aquaculture, he is against

CETA, and he is against a $400 million investment in rural Newfoundland and

Labrador. That is where it is being spent. Where is the Liberal Party in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

MS DEMPSTER: Mr. Speaker, last week in the House the Minister Responsible

for Poverty Reduction was unable or unwilling to tell us when the next poverty

reduction action plan would be released.

I ask the minister: Over two years have passed since this government was

supposed to implement a new action plan on poverty, when will you release this

plan?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I am quite happy to take my place in the House

in regard to the Poverty Reduction Strategy any time, any place, anywhere to be

honest with you. We have done so much in regard to the Poverty Reduction

Strategy in this Province.

The evidence is quite clear; we have less people on Income Support now than

ever in our history. We have more people working in Newfoundland and Labrador

ever in our history. People are employed. It is a work in progress, and we will

continue to improve and analyze our Poverty Reduction Strategy to make sure that

it is moving in the right direction for the people of the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

MS DEMPSTER: As a government in waiting, I am interested in more than my

district. That was a provincial question. John Noseworthy recommended changes be

made to the Income and Employment Support Act to better meet

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS DEMPSTER: the needs of people on Income Support.

I ask the minister: Will you introduce a bill to amend the Income and

Employment Support Act this session in the House?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, we have invested heavily into the people of

this Province in regard to making sure they are ready for the opportunities that

we have created over the last number of years, the big projects that have come

down the pipes in regard to Vale out in Long Harbour, Labrador West in regard to

the mining industry, as well as out in Bull Arm on the Hibernia deal and down in

Marystown in regard to the plant there as well.

We will keep investing in the people of this Province. We will keep making

sure that they have every opportunity to avail of that employment here in 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 have heard from an injured offshore worker

from my district, who will be denied their Christmas bonus because workers'

compensation will claw it back from the workers' compensation payments.

I ask the minister: Why are you allowing workers' compensation to implement

such regressive and punitive guidelines?

Mr. Speaker, it appears the Grinch has moved down to workers' compensation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Service NL.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Speaker, our government strongly advocates for the fair

treatment and compensation of injured workers in our Province. Workers'

compensation does very good work for us. They have regulations and policies to

follow. We treat every incident and every injured employee, Mr. Speaker, on a

case-by-case basis. They are doing very good work, and we are proud of the work

that they are doing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. OSBORNE: I cannot believe the minister is proud they are clawing back

the Christmas bonus.

Mr. Speaker, this worker is temporarily on workers' compensation because of

an on-the-job injury. His Christmas bonus was not used to calculate his

compensation benefits and, therefore, should not be clawed back from his

workers' compensation benefits.

I ask the minister: Will you take the initiative to change workers'

compensation guidelines so workers are not denied compensation that they have

earned?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Service NL.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there are policies and procedures in place. There are appeals

processes in place for injured workers that go through the system.

Mr. Speaker, we are going through a statutory review at this very time and I

look forward to bringing that to the House at the appropriate time.

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.

While called a mid-year financial update, the truth is government's update on

the Province's finances is regularly late in the fall eight to ten months

after the Budget Speech. This update should be released before the fall session

of the House so it can be properly debated.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Why is this most important of updates so long

in coming every year?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, in 2008 the mid-year report came out on

December 9. The following year it came out on December 17. Last year it came out

on December 13. When the Liberals were in office, one year it came out on

December 2.

Mr. Speaker, there is work to be done. When the year is up, when the six

months are up or actual results, there is time for officials, the information

comes in it comes in after the six months, sometimes as late as two months

after the six months is up. It has to come from the federal government. It has

to come from all entities, government business enterprises, all the entities out

there.

As soon as the information is put together, we are very happy to give it

because the information that we give to the people of this Province is good and

founded and prudent financial fiscal information.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. Leader of the Third Party.

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

I ask the Premier: Are we going to see the financial report before this

session of the House closes?

MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe the NDP have to listen to me when I speak in the House, because last

week in the House I said we would try to do it by next Monday; we would try to

get it in earlier if we could, but it is going to be next Monday.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Third Party.

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

Now we have a final date; I am really pleased.

Mr. Speaker, government has had ten years in power to get the Province's

finances on solid ground, yet despite surplus after surplus we were subjected

this year to a wild fiscal ride, culminating in an ill-thought-out slashing of

jobs and programs.

Mr. Speaker, can the Premier assure the people of the Province a more prudent

and professional fiscal plan in the upcoming year?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the Opposition wants a fiscal

update, I will be very happy to give it to her.

Mr. Speaker, we have accumulated surpluses in this Province, we have

accumulated liquidity and capital in this Province which has enabled us to

govern in the way we have. Employment is the highest it has ever been in our

history. We have wages the highest it has ever been in our history. We have

personal income tax the biggest personal income tax cut in our history was

given in 2008. We reduced it in 2009 again, in 2010 again, in 2011 again, and

that means people have money in their pockets to pay their bills, to save for

their retirement, to look after their children's education. This is a golden

age, Mr. Speaker, a golden age.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Leader of the Third Party.

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

It is obvious the Finance Minister cannot assure us that we will not see the

mess that we had in the Budget last year, where decisions to cut in the Budget

had to be reversed within days after the Budget was tabled in this House. So

with the answer he has given me, he does not have a plan for this coming year

either.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources has said his look at fracking

will include a balanced review of regulations, rules, and guidelines in other

jurisdictions, a technical review of the geological review in Western

Newfoundland, and public consultations.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Why is he not choosing to conduct an open

and transparent independent review as is being done in other provinces?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, time and time again the member opposite raises

things in the House and always raising what is going on in other provinces. I am

going to tell you, Mr. Speaker, me as a minister and our government, we are

concerned about what goes on right here in Newfoundland and Labrador, first and

foremost.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I have stated our position as a

government on hydraulic fracturing, a balanced review to take a look at broad

aspects of this whole issue and to look at it as it impacts Newfoundland and

Labrador, particularly the Western part of the Province. We intend to do that.

When we are informed, when I am informed, and when our government is informed we

will make a decision on how we are going to proceed.

Other than that, Mr. Speaker, I can assure the people of the Province they

will have opportunity for input.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, this government spends $1 million a day on

Muskrat Falls. It once gave luxury car company Rolls-Royce $500,000.

Government's spring trade mission to China cost $202,000, and that was for only

ten days.

Mr. Speaker, the Family Violence Intervention Court was a successful court

that helped women and children, victims of family violence, and cost only

$500,000 per year. Are the lives of women and children not worth that?

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Will he reinstate the Family Violence

Intervention Court?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, this government invests in a significant number of initiatives

every single year to attract business to this Province. The member talked about

Muskrat Falls, she is absolutely right because we are creating employment for

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and we are creating wealth for the Treasury.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: I have to say, I find it extremely offensive the last part of

her question to be phrased that government does not care about women and

children in this Province. We have invested more money and taken on more new

initiatives in this Province in support of the fight against violence against

women than any other government in history.

Just this morning, Mr. Speaker, we launched the new campaign, the Purple

Ribbon Campaign, with the ministerial committee and the minister responsible. So

I take great offense to anyone who stands in this House and suggests that

anybody on this floor does not respect women and the fight against violence.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Who in the justice system is

now keeping track of the charges, acquittals, and convictions of the family

violence cases going through the court system, and can we have those numbers?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will pick up where I left off because I said I find it offensive. I am also

going to remind the member opposite that it is this government and no other

government in the history of this Province that created the Department of Child,

Youth and Family Services.

We see the extreme challenges in this Province. We made a strong commitment

to fight those challenges to protect children, to protect families, and protect

women and Aboriginal groups, and other groups that have been targeted by

violence in this Province. It is absolutely shameful to use that kind of

language on the floor of this Legislature.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to

section 26.(5)(

a) of the Financial Administration Act, I am

tabling one Order in Council that relates to funding pre-commitments for the

2014-2015 fiscal year.

Mr. Speaker, the Order in Council relates to monies to facilitate the award

of a contract to Brook Construction Inc. for the construction of a garage and

office building at a cost of approximately $1.4 billion for the year 2014-2015.

It is for the construction of a garage and an office building at the

Trans-Canada Highway depot at Roddickton, Newfoundland.

MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I hereby give notice that on a future day I will move adoption of the

following resolution:

WHEREAS autism spectrum disorder has been estimated to occur in as many as

one in eighty-eight children; and

WHEREAS individualized and intensive early interventions are important for

improving outcomes for children with autism; and

WHEREAS long wait-lists are forcing many parents to wait up to two years

before their children receive needed pediatric assessments and diagnostic

services; and

WHEREAS a co-ordinated, multi-agency approach among key government

departments and agencies is needed to ensure that individuals with autism

spectrum disorder are provided with services that will promote independent

living; and

WHEREAS a comprehensive Province-wide strategy for autism spectrum disorder

will decrease the lifetime costs of treating and providing services for persons

with autism;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly urges the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to, in consultation with parents, advocates,

educators, health care providers, and experts in the autism community, develop

and implement a comprehensive Province-wide strategy for autism spectrum

disorder.

Thank you.

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

MR. FORSEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I plan to introduce the following private

member's motion:

BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House supports the government's decision to

provide Newfoundlander and Labrador Seniors' Benefit a refundable tax credit for

low-income seniors, which this year is providing some 42,000 seniors in our

Province with payments of up to $971 the highest amount ever.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that the motion just laid before the House by the

Member for Exploits will be the one to be debated this coming Wednesday.

MR. SPEAKER: Thank you.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice under Standing Order 11, I shall move that this

House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, November 26, 2013.

Further, I give notice under Standing Order 11, I shall move that this House

not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 26, 2013.

MR. SPEAKER: Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Thank you, 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 the offshore of the West Coast of the Island of Newfoundland is

recognized as a region containing potentially billions of barrels of oil; and

WHEREAS hydraulic fracturing could be an accepted and effective method of

petroleum discovery and exploration, and is compatible with the protection of

the natural environment and water sources when executed within the context of a

comprehensive regulatory framework; and

WHEREAS the petroleum exploration sector needs the certainty and confidence

of a stable regulatory regime; and

WHEREAS with that regulatory regime oil discovery and industry development

could provide unprecedented economic opportunity and bring people home to a

currently economically challenged area; and

WHEREAS the undersigned support properly regulated exploration and

development of oil and gas resource in the Province;

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

House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to

introduce a regulatory framework immediately under which hydraulic fracturing

could proceed safely, and move this industry forward in Western Newfoundland.

Mr. Speaker, approximately a year ago a small company started public

consultations on the Great Northern Peninsula, in my district, and they wanted

to have feedback from people on hydraulic fracturing. They explained the

process. They were very straightforward, forthright, and the people who they

engaged with were very supportive. Government failed to take any initiative, and

others who are absolutely opposed to hydraulic fracturing took charge. They

started to spread propaganda. They started to move against hydraulic fracturing.

Government, instead of introducing a proper regulatory regime, did absolutely

nothing. Now they have declared a moratorium. The people who see the benefit of

hydraulic fracturing want the government to continue to proceed with the proper

regulatory regime, and do not use the current proposed moratorium as an

opportunity to run and hide and fail to show leadership.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise again today on a petition concerning Route 450 in the Bay of Islands.

I will read the petition:

WHEREAS we are concerned over the deplorable condition of Route 450; and

WHEREAS many residents of the Town of Lark Harbour and York Harbour travel

this road on a daily basis; and

WHEREAS after repeated requests for upgrades and repairs, the road has

continued to deteriorate; and

WHEREAS there is only one road in and out of these communities and many of

our residents are of an aging population with health issues; and

WHEREAS having the road completely give way would pose a serious set of

issues; and

WHEREAS we feel the condition of this road presents an accident waiting to

happen;

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

House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to give

serious consideration to making repairs to this road.

Mr. Speaker, I was out in York Harbour this past weekend for the Lark

Harbour-York Harbour Volunteer Firefighters night. This is a major concern for a

lot of the residents. I brought it to the minister's attention, and I noticed

the minister and I have to mention it to the minister, the portion of the road

that was washed out about last March has been repaired. The guider rails that

were in a very dangerous situation, with a fall on one side of over 200 feet,

have been repaired.

There have been some minor repairs done, and I thank the minister for that.

The people have noticed it, but in the Copper Mine Brook area, I say to the

minister where the speed has been reduced from eighty to thirty kilometres an

hour, a few of the residents, many of the residents, Mr. Speaker, have mentioned

that if you can get warning signs up at the beginning.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: I also informed the residents that the minister will be

monitoring this site on a regular basis. I passed that on from the minister,

that they will be monitoring it on a regular basis.

I ask the minister, if there could be more signs put up prior to on both

sides. Because there are people who travel the highway, I say to the minister,

who are unaware of this portion of the road. There is one sign up saying thirty

kilometres. If there can be road signs put up expressing danger before you get

to the site, it would be greatly appreciated by a lot of residents because there

are people who travel the road who are unaware.

MR. MCGRATH: (Inaudible) a letter to that.

MR. JOYCE: I will put a letter to that, and I say to

MR. MCGRATH: Tell them that I (inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: Yes. I say to the minister, it is a very dangerous situation.

I informed them that you are monitoring it. Hopefully, the road will not get any

worse this year, but we need it fixed as soon as spring comes around. It is

minor repairs. People have noticed it. I have noticed it when I travelled over

it in the last five or six days. I thank the minister for that, and hopefully,

come this spring we can get this major

section

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time has expired.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

I have 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 residents of the Southwest Coast must travel the Trans-Canada Highway

between Channel-Port aux Basques and Corner Brook for work, medical,

educational, and social reason; and

WHEREAS Marine Atlantic ferries dock at Channel-Port aux Basques at various

hours on a daily basis resulting in extremely high volume of commercial and

residential travellers using this

section of the Trans-Canada Highway; and

WHEREAS the world-renowned Wreckhouse area is situate along this

section of

the TCH; and

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador initiated a twenty-four

hour snow clearing pilot project in 2008 that excluded the

section of the

Trans-Canada Highway from Channel-Port aux Basques to Stephenville;

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

House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to include

the

section of the TCH from Channel-Port aux Basques to Stephenville in the

twenty-four hour snow clearing project.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Now, Mr. Speaker, this is the fifth consecutive day I have entered this

petition. I wish I did not have to continue entering, but I will do so until

government makes the right decision here and includes this

section of the

roadway from Channel-Port aux Basques to Stephenville in the twenty-four hour

pilot project.

My colleague from District of Cartwright L'Anse au Clair just happened to

be on the flight last night with a physician from my area who was complaining

about it as well. This is someone who actually serves, I think, with the NLMA.

She also teaches with MUN. She has to travel last hours on this highway, but

after 9:00 o'clock the ploughs are gone regardless. Now that is not the same

treatment that is put everywhere else. This is a bright young person of this

Province, travelling the Province to do her duty and she gets a different road

than everyone else in the Province. That is just one of the things.

I noticed in this survey I have here, their evaluation of the first phase of

this project where they talk about the different people they surveyed and talked

to. There are fish plant workers from Arnold's Cove, oil refinery workers from

Come By Change, and truck drivers at Goobies and Pynn's Brook; however, I do not

see an ambulance driver surveyed. I do not see any long-haul truck drivers who

might be going through Port aux Basques. Most of them indicated that they drive

the entire Province.

I am going to continue entering this one until I get some action on this. The

government needs to make the right decision here; provide the snow clearing

before we have a tragic accident.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS: 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 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,

defense 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 for 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, today is the International Day for the Elimination of Violence

Against Women, which is marked all around the world. Canada has played a

leadership role in this area and the government has stood up today and talked

about its incredible programs, its Violence Prevention Initiative; yet one of

the most concrete, effective programs ever in the history of this Province to

effectively deal with a certain type of domestic violence that includes both the

offender, the victim, predominantly women and children, this government has

closed, and it closed in a knee-jerk reaction to a budget requirement.

The minister said himself it was not closed because it was not doing a good

job. This court was doing exactly what it was supposed to be doing. It was

supported by judges, by lawyers, by Child, Youth and Family Services. This court

was the embodiment of expertise, of years of research, of years of planning, of

years of expertise. This government closed it, which I say, in fact, was a waste

of money to close it at this point because of all the work that was put into it

to make it work.

Mr. Speaker, on October 25, the current Minister of Justice said on a radio

noon program that he will revisit the Family Violence Intervention Court. Mr.

Speaker, I urge the government to do the right thing and reinstate the court.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: 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 residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS government has a responsibility to ensure that Internet access is

broadly available so people have the right to be able to access the Internet in

order to exercise and enjoy their rights to freedom of expression and opinion

and other fundamental human rights; and

WHEREAS St. Carols still remains without broadband services; and

WHEREAS residents rely on Internet services for education, business,

communication, and social activity; and

WHEREAS wireless and wired technologies exist to provide broadband service to

rural communities, to replace slower dial-up services;

We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to

assist providers to ensure St. Carols is in receipt of broadband Internet

services in Newfoundland and Labrador.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, since I have been elected in this House of Assembly I have been

raising the concern of lack of broadband coverage when it comes to many rural

communities. I am a firm believer that if rural Newfoundland and Labrador is

going to survive and thrive, then it needs two key pillars: advanced

telecommunications and advanced transportation networks. They are going to be

critical to advancing rural economies and building stronger communities.

If we see a community like St. Carols on the Great Northern Peninsula, there

is a lot of opportunity there if we look at adding broadband Internet at speeds

that are acceptable. Right now, a dial-up service is completely unacceptable and

it is creating a divide when it comes to how services are being able to be

accessed.

We know that government is moving towards finding greater efficiencies in how

it delivers its programs and services. More forms are online than ever before.

Videos and information get uploaded on government Web sites. People in rural

communities without broadband Internet do not have the same opportunity to go

on, access, download, print these forms, and get information unless they take an

excessive amount of time. If they are on the old dial-up modem of 56.6 K,

twenty-eight K, or whatnot, the speeds are just not there to gain that

information.

We see that other pieces of communication are not there as well. When we talk

about looking at programming, podcasts, and all that information, these are

things we need to make available. It can be available by using wired and

wireless technologies that are more accessible. So I am looking forward to

working with the Department of IBRD and hopefully seeing this implemented in St.

Carols.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

MS DEMPSTER: 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 most communities in the District of Cartwright L'Anse au Clair do

not have cellphone coverage; and

WHEREAS residents of coastal Labrador require cell coverage to ensure their

safety and communication abilities; and

WHEREAS the opening of the Trans-Labrador Highway has increased our

dependency on mobile communication;

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 the appropriate agencies to provide cellphone coverage along the

Trans-Labrador Highway and to all communities in coastal Labrador.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, cellphone coverage and basic broadband is very important

anywhere in the Province and in our country now in terms of communication. I

feel in coastal remote communities it is absolutely paramount, especially in the

extreme weather conditions that we get.

Mr. Speaker, I will just share my experience yesterday. I was to leave my

community and drive to Blanc Sablon. There were no flights. I drove 420

kilometres to Goose Bay most of it in a snowstorm. I did not have a satellite

phone. Had I gone off the road, like two other vehicles that I came upon, I

would have been there until a snow plow or something came along. That is just

one of the reasons people like me who travel often would rely on that, if we had

it, very much so. When do you have a satellite phone, often you cannot get a

signal, so it is not reliable.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk more importantly about ambulances that are on the

road transferring sick people from one community to another. As you know, in

most of the communities in Southeast, we have community clinics; we do not have

doctors. Therefore, the nearest doctor is in Forteau over a very desolate

stretch. If you cannot get a signal, which makes it much harder in stormy

weather, which oftentimes is when these things happen, you are in a lot of

trouble.

Mr. Speaker, there is a very desolate stretch between Red Bay and Lodge Bay,

eighty-five kilometres. I have a family member who has worked there for years,

people who going through at night have been stuck in a snowbank and not found

until 6:00 the next morning. We have many incidents like that just since the

Trans-Labrador highway went through. If we had the cellphone, they would have

been able to call for help.

We are very fortunate I believe that we have not had any serious incidents

yet because of that.

Also with the broadband, Mr. Speaker, I have met with people in the

Department of IBRD. I know there is a plan in place for 2016. My message and the

message of the constituents of Cartwright L'Anse au Clair is that we cannot

wait until 2016 to have services. We need to have an interim plan right now.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS in 2006, the provincial government created a commission to review the

Individualized Student Support Plan/Pathways model and make recommendations to

improve the delivery of special education programming in the K-12 education

system; and

WHEREAS in 2007, the ISSP/Pathways Commission delivered a final report to

government outlining seventy-five recommendations for creating a better system

for the delivery of special education programming; and

WHEREAS to date, many important recommendations of the ISSP/Pathways

Commission have not been acted upon, including those related to public

disclosure of assessment and wait-list information, guidelines for comprehensive

and ethical assessment practices, procedures to address the needs of all at-risk

students, creating an effective appeals process for families, meeting the needs

of exceptionally-able gifted learners, expanding the role of student assistants

into teacher assistant roles, introducing special education department heads in

schools, and improving on special education teacher qualifications and

certification;

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

House of Assembly to urge government to fully implement the recommendations of

the ISSP/Pathways Commission in order to improve the delivery of special

education programming for all students, parents, teachers, and schools.

As in duty bound, you petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, there is no question that some of the recommendations of the

ISSP/Pathways Commission review have been implemented, but some of them have

not. Some of these would cost government to implement, and some of them would

not cost a great deal. For example, the creating of guidelines for comprehensive

and ethical assessment practices and making that freely available online and

through other media would not cost a great deal to government.

Public disclosure of assessment and wait-list information: We hear all of the

time that there are students on wait-lists for speech pathology, occupational

health and therapy services, all sorts of other assessment services. There is no

reason why the information at least about the wait-list, that that public

disclosure cannot be made freely available.

Government has made decisions to make other information publicly available,

like the restaurant inspections that it initially said it would not make

available. This information can be made publicly available, and it would be a

decent thing for the people to be able to access, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: 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 there is no cellphone service in the Town of Trout River, which is an

enclave community in Gros Morne National Park; and

WHEREAS visitors to Gros Morne National Park, more than 100,000 annually,

expect to communicate by cellphone when they visit the park; and

WHEREAS cellphone service has become a very important aspect of everyday

living for residents; and

WHEREAS cellphone service is an essential safety tool for visitors and

residents; and

WHEREAS cellphone service is essential for business development;

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

House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to partner

with the private sector to extend cellphone coverage throughout Gros Morne

National Park and the enclave community of Trout River.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, if you could, imagine people in Trout River tuning into the

evening news every evening and they see a dispute in St. John's about where a

cellphone tower is going to go: a cellphone cannot be here; it must be there.

Meanwhile, the people in Trout River would love to get a cellphone tower

anywhere close to their town.

I am certain they are not saying that government must install a cellphone

tower. What they are saying is: We want you, government, to partner with private

sector and do an RFP. The government is fine with doing Requests for Proposals,

and why should they not be? Certainly collect up, not only Trout River, but

maybe a large range of communities that do not have cellphone service, go with

an RFP to see what is available that can be put in with some sort of government

collaboration or maybe some payment by the people who would actually use the

cellphone services in those regions, and at least make it possible that these

people would get cellphone service.

Mr. Speaker, private enterprise is not going to go there at this point

because of the profit issue, and clearly that is the role of private enterprise.

The role of government is to facilitate improvement, to facilitate investment,

and to provide services. So the people of Trout River again with this petition

are calling on government to step up to the plate, move forward, do an RFP,

partner with the private sector, and help us get some cellphone service.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, Order 3, third reading of a bill,

An Act To Amend The Human

Rights Act, 2010.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment and

Conservation, that the said bill be now read the third time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a

third time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Human Rights Act, 2010. (Bill 25).

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a third time and it is ordered

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

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Human Rights Act, 2010", read a third

time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 25).

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to call from the Order Paper, Order 4, second reading

of a bill,

An Act To Amend The Pharmaceutical Services Act, Bill 10.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Health and Community

Services, that the said bill be now read a second time.

MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that Bill 10,

An Act To Amend

The Pharmaceutical Services Act, be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Pharmaceutical

Services Act". (Bill 10)

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

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise before this hon. House today to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act to

Amend the Pharmaceutical Services Act.

The Pharmaceutical Services Act establishes the Newfoundland and Labrador

Prescription Drug Program, otherwise known as NLPDP. This bill will amend the

Pharmaceutical Services Act to specifically authorize the delisting of drug

products from the Province's Interchangeable Drug Formulary that do not meet the

pricing requirements for generic drugs. These pricing requirements are set out

in the Interchangeable Drug Products Formulary Regulations, 2012.

In April of 2012, our government announced a new generic drug pricing

strategy for Newfoundland and Labrador. Under that strategy, the price of

generic drugs in this Province has been steadily reduced over the past eighteen

months. As of July 1, 2013 the maximum price that drug manufacturers may charge

for a generic drug product listed on the drug formulary in this Province is 25

per cent of the equivalent brand name drug price.

The generic pricing strategy was implemented in response to evidence showing

that the people of this Province, and Canadians generally, had been paying some

of the highest prices for generic drugs in the world. The new generic drug

pricing strategy has provided considerable savings to the provincial government

through the NLPDP. We are now paying less money for generic drugs prescribed to

beneficiaries of the NLPDP, while actually increasing the number of generic

drugs covered. In fact, in 2013-2014 we expect to see savings in excess of $40

million.

Mr. Speaker, employers, through drug benefit plans provided to employees and

residents who pay for drug products out of pocket, would have also experienced

savings on the costs of generic drugs arising from implementation of our generic

drug pricing strategy. Our government is reinvesting a significant portion of

the projected savings in pharmacy.

Over the four years of our current agreement with the Pharmacists'

Association of Newfoundland and Labrador, known as PANL, we are reinvesting $37

million into pharmacies, including $4 million in subsidies for rural and remote

pharmacies. Our government remains committed to ensuring that all residents of

this Province pay fair and reasonable prices for their generic drugs.

The bill before the House today amending the Pharmaceutical Services Act will

further assist us in ensuring that we are getting the best possible price for

generic medications for the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador. The prices

of generic drugs are set out in the Newfoundland and Labrador Interchangeable

Drug Products Formulary established under the Interchangeable Drug Products

Formulary Regulations, 2012.

The formulary is a list of commonly used generic drugs which have therapeutic

evidence to a brand product. In order for a generic drug to be added to the

formulary, a generic drug manufacturer must make an application to the NLPDP and

satisfy several important requirements. One of those requirements is that the

manufacturer must guarantee that the price of the generic drug will meet the

pricing requirements set out in the regulations. That means at this time that

the price of the generic drug cannot exceed 25 per cent of the price of the

brand name that is its equivalent unless the manufacturer is granted an

exemption to the pricing rule.

Mr. Speaker, we recognize that sometimes in order to bring a product to

market, a drug manufacturer may incur extraordinary production, manufacturing,

or development costs. Therefore, we have created a process whereby a

manufacturer can apply for an exemption from the pricing regulations. These

exemption requests are assessed on a case by case basis and usually occur in

consultation with other provinces to ensure that the management of price

exemptions is consistent across the country. Where granted, the exemptions are

reviewed on an annual basis.

There are currently over 4,200 drugs on the formulary. Over 1,100 of those

drugs have received a pricing exemption. Exemptions have been approved for

twenty-one different generic drug manufacturers.

Currently under the Pharmaceutical Services Act there are three circumstances

in which a drug may be delisted from the formulary. These include, where the

manufacturer is not complying with the price quoted upon approval for entry of

into the formulary; where removal of the drug is advisable in the public

interest; and where it is considered necessary to remove the drug. This would

apply in cases where a manufacturer can no longer meet its commitment to supply

the drug.

There is no explicit provision in the act right now that authorizes the

removal of a generic drug from the formulary in cases where it is listed on the

formulary but does not currently comply with the Province's new pricing

requirements. While most generic drug manufactures comply with the new pricing

requirements, we are aware there are some products listed on the formulary that

do not meet the pricing regulations. Allowing drug products that do not meet the

pricing requirements to remain on the formulary would weaken the overall price

setting process.

The Province will have little leverage in negotiating with generic drug

manufacturers to reduce prices. It is our hope that once this amendment is

passed, manufacturers of drugs that do not meet the pricing requirements will

adjust their prices to comply with the pricing requirements rather than have

their products delisted.

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to ensuring that the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador obtain prescription drugs at reasonable prices. This

amendment allows us to continue our work to attain reasonable generic drug

pricing for the people of the Province.

I ask that all hon. members of the House join me in supporting this amendment

to the Pharmaceutical Services Act.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

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

I am happy to stand and speak to Bill 10, Ac Act to Amend the Pharmaceutical

Services Act. I would like to thank the minister's staff for briefing us this

morning on this particular piece of legislation.

When you look at the bill itself, it is a very small change in physical size;

it is one section. Basically, just for people out there, we are taking the

existing Pharmaceutical Services Act, which

section 19, as you look at it, is

titled Formulary. What we are doing in

section 19(4) is we are adding the small

clause, "the manufacturer does not comply with pricing requirements set out in

the regulations".

Just so we know what subsection (4) actually says: a minister may remove a

drug from the formulary, and there are a number of ways we can do it. Basically,

what this is saying is if the manufacturer does not play ball with the minister,

with the department, then they are out. That is how it was put to us by the

staff. I think it is good to be able to talk in common terms, layman's terms.

This all stems from the decision by government last year when it came to generic

pricing and reducing. It went to thirty-five and then twenty-five. I understand

the regulations for that came into effect this summer.

I think if you were to read the act, I think the act as it existed allowed

the minister the ability to do that as it was but from what I can gather the

department want to be more specific with a very strong message to manufacturers

that if you do not give us the price, or if you do not want to play by these

rules when it comes to the price formulary then you are off and that is all

there is to it. I have no problem with making this legislation more specific

because there is nothing worse than vague legislation that allows the

possibility of easy challenge, which is only going to tie up solicitors in court

at a cost to this government. So that is fine by me.

I did take the time while we had this briefing to put out some more

information on why we are here, or I guess our particular position to this. I

actually asked the department that specific question. I think this legislation

before would have allowed for that. Have you had any situations since the

regulations where you have had to delist somebody?

I was told there has been one situation but it was a roundabout way in which

the manufacturer came to the Atlantic Canadian Provinces and said: this is what

we can do, if you do not like it delist us. It makes it quite easy for the

Department of Health here, along with the Atlantic Canadian Provinces to do

this. We know the manufacturer, and I think there may have been a few

medications that fell under this particular situation.

I have gone through the legislation here. I do not think there is any need to

go down through that. It is my understanding that this is not an authority the

minister is expected to use regularly. It is there if you need it, hopefully you

do not.

Just so people know out there, on our formulary there are currently 4,200

drugs. There is an exemption process that can be followed if you cannot meet the

25 per cent generic pricing of the brand value. I have been told right now that

there are about 1,100 exemptions to twenty-one different companies right now.

The purpose of that being is certain companies are able to provide that

evidence or that basis to the department and say: Look, here is what our costs

are. Here is what it is taking us to do this. Therefore - again, I am sure it is

a rigorous process here is the data you need. W cannot do this. This is what

we can do it for. The department there you cannot cut these people off. We

need these medications, and there we are.

Again, I did mention there was the one circumstance and then who knows where

this goes down the road. I am being told that one of the steps being taken, not

only by this Province but provinces across the country, we have dealt with six

of the biggest generics in the past, six of the biggest ones we have dealt with

I have a list of them somewhere, and I thank

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. PARSONS: I do have the list. Actually, do you know what? I found

the list. I will say this, at the risk of being heckled by the other side:

atorvastatin, ramipril, venlafaxine, amlodipine, omeprazole, and rabeprazole.

Again, I am glad that they are written, because they are certainly hard I

think the generic name is probably much easier, and maybe we will do a test

later and see how many government members can spell them. Again, I understand

that the provinces are working together when it comes to the generic drugs are

being used nationwide, not just within this Province.

I do have a few other points that I wanted to bring up while we are talking

about the Pharmaceutical Services Act, that I think needs to be brought up. One

of these has been brought up a number of times in this House, but mainly when it

comes to the fish side, and that is CETA. One of the things about CETA that we

are going to see, from what I have been told, is that we are seeing the

expansion, or we are making patent protection longer.

Just so we know, the people out there know, every time the government stands

up and says about the good work that was done in fishery, we are going to suffer

on the pharmacy side. Again, that is what I am being told by people that have

some know I have talked to pharmacists and people in the know about this.

MR. LANE: (Inaudible).

MR. A. PARSONS: I hear the Member for Mount Pearl South having a say.

Perhaps he can stand up and tell us about CETA after, because I am sure he was

involved in the government negotiations on CETA.

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): Order, please!

I would remind the member to be relevant to the bill that we are debating

right now.

MR. A. PARSONS: I will give the minister plenty of opportunity; she can

stand up after and talk about what CETA is going to do on this. The figure I am

being told is that it will cost us anywhere from $35 million to $40 million a

year when this comes out. So I will give the minister a chance to address this

when she wants or the Member for Mount Pearl South. Maybe we should make him

the Parliamentary Secretary for Pharmaceuticals, I do not know, or for CETA.

Again, that is an issue, and we have heard all about the fisheries side of

this. It was brought up in this House today when it came to the seal hunt. CETA

is going to have an impact on us on the pharmacy side. So, I would like to see

what that impact is and the minister will have every opportunity to talk about

it. She is going to get up and have her say; that is fine, as she should. She

can certainly educate us on that.

The other thing I want to talk about when we talk about the Pharmaceutical

Services Act is the people who deal with this, and that would be pharmacists. I

guess I would like to use this opportunity when we talk about pharmacists and

what they do for the system. The Minister for Advanced Education, the Member for

Gander, knows what I am talking about, the good work that pharmacists do.

Certainly the Leader

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. A. PARSONS: That is right; they are saying hear, hear to what I am

saying right now. That is why I say that the government should sit down with the

pharmacists, as they have asked, to expand the scope that pharmacists can play

in our system.

I know the Leader of the Official Opposition also has a pharmacy background

and he knows the good work that pharmacists do. I actually had the pleasure of

being at a press conference on September 17 where pharmacists laid out to the

media the savings that they could bring to our health care system when it comes

to the expanded role, if they were allowed to play it.

I am pretty sure actually that members of other health care groups and

associations are supportive of that as well. Again, they laid it out very

clearly, the demonstrated benefits of expanding the scope when it comes to where

we can find savings within the system. If there is one thing that I have said

when I have had an opportunity to debate the

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would ask the member to keep his comments in line with the bill in which we

are debating right now,

An Act to Amend the Pharmaceutical Services Act. The

wide range of latitude that you seem to be taking in debating the whole act is

not appropriate and I will not allow it. If the member wants to keep his

comments on the bill that we are now debating, then I will recognize him to

continue.

The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

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

Again, I wish I could talk more about the pharmacists that do the good work

that is listed under

section 19(4) of the Pharmaceutical Services Act, but I

will go back to the legislation here. I am just trying to talk about the good

work, spread the good word, but here it is.

I asked a question and I will pass this on to the minister now one of the

things I asked in the meeting today, we have not heard back yet. When it comes

to the ACDR, the Atlantic Common Drug Review, the question we asked today was:

What is our contribution to that on a yearly basis? I think that is relevant

because it deals with the formulary. The people who briefed us today did not

have that present, which is understandable, so I put that forward.

Now the minister may not have that right now and that is fine, we have the

Committee oh, she has it. I am glad to hear that the people doing the briefing

made sure that our comments were listened to and they have the answers to our

questions. I look forward to that answer.

That is one of the other situations we have when we talk about our formulary

and the drugs we have on it and not on it. There are times when I question some

of the coverage that we have on the formulary when it comes to any number of

afflictions, any number of disease or conditions that we deal with, one of them

being cystic fibrosis.

We have experts in this Province who would like to be a part of this when it

comes to what is on the formulary and what is not. They are not given that

opportunity. I put that out there; I will probably have another opportunity to

speak to that.

I am sure the minister is going to want to respond to some of my comments; I

look forward to that. I invite any other member of the government, especially

the Member for Mount Pearl South, to feel free to enlighten me about

section

19(4)(

a) of the Pharmaceutical Services Act.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I recognize the hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

It is a pleasure to rise to speak to this today. While it is true it is a

rather small piece of legislation when you look at the printed version, of

course, the ramifications are quite large when you are talking about savings to

the general public, to the provincial government, and taxpayers.

This bill will amend the Pharmaceutical Services Act to specifically

authorize the delisting of drug products from the Province's interchangeable

drug formulary that do not meet the pricing requirements for generic drugs. Last

year, Mr. Speaker, our government announced a new generic pricing drug strategy

for the Province. Under that strategy, the price for generic drugs in this

Province has been steadily reduced over the past eighteen months. This has meant

obviously a huge amount of savings.

As of July 1, 2013, the maximum price that a drug manufacturer can charge for

a generic drug product is 25 per cent of brand. You can only imagine if we were

covering a brand drug and then all of a sudden now we are back to 25 per cent of

that, the savings that you realize there are quite significant.

This generic drug pricing strategy was implemented in response to evidence

showing that people in this Province, and Canadians in general, are paying far

too much for generic drugs. That fact is rather troubling to consider how much

money is being spent in health care. We try to spend every dollar to the best of

our ability and in the most efficient manner. If you are being overcharged

drugs, obviously that takes a big hit. If we can try to rein that spending in,

for one, we can save money, but more importantly even perhaps we can provide

more drug coverage. It is a two-pronged approach and it is working.

The new generic drug pricing strategy has provided considerable savings to

the provincial government, as I had said. We are now paying less money for

generic drugs prescribed to beneficiaries of the NLPDP while actually increasing

the number of generic drugs covered. Again, we are saving money but we are also

providing more drugs. In fact, Mr. Speaker, in 2013-2014 we expect to see

savings in excess of $40 million, a huge amount of money $40 million.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS: I am sure there are a number of areas in health care we

can spend that, and make sure it is spent in the most efficient manner.

Not only is it saving government and taxpayers, it is also providing benefits

to employers who provide drug programs to their employees. Not only does it do

that for small, medium, and large business, and obviously that is saving those

businesses, it is also saving out-of-pocket expenses for people who provide

their own drugs where they are not being covered by any other plan. It is saving

not only on government side, but also business as well as people paying straight

out of pocket. Again, this touches many people, everyone I would argue.

What has this meant for us and what have the savings allowed us to do? Over

the four years of our current agreement with the Pharmacists' Association of

Newfoundland and Labrador, we are reinvesting $37 million into pharmacies, and

that is including $4 million in subsidies to rural and remote pharmacies. That

is another important piece to this because as a member from rural Newfoundland

and Labrador, pharmacies play a massive role. They are a front-line health

provider in a lot of cases in smaller communities.

It is nothing to go in and talk to your pharmacist, they are highly trained

individuals. They can provide consultation and help you with different ailments,

whatever the case is. Making sure we reinvest in rural pharmacies is an

important piece of this as well, and that is certainly what we are doing. We

committed to ensuring that all residents of our Province pay fair and reasonable

prices for their generic drugs.

The bill before the House today, Mr. Speaker, amending the Pharmaceutical

Services Act will further assist us in ensuring we are getting the best possible

price for generic medications for the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The onus is on government to make sure that is actually the case and it is

something I take great pride in. The money we are saving is being redirected and

spent very wisely. So it is very important.

The price of generic drugs is set out in the formulary, as was said by the

minister. The formulary is a list of commonly used generic drugs which have

therapeutic equivalency to a brand product. It is the same medication by a

different name. Of course, when a medication is produced, when it is discovered,

whatever the case is, they have a patent period. Once that patent period

expires, then you can get into generic drugs. As opposed to one producer, you

can have twenty people producing it and you can obviously understand how that

would affect price.

It is important to note, in order for a generic drug to be added to the

formulary a generic drug manufacturer must make an application to the drug

program that satisfies several important requirements. One of these requirements

is the manufacturer must guarantee that the price of the generic drug cannot

exceed 25 per cent price of the brand, unless the manufacturer is granted an

exemption to the pricing rule.

The Member for Burgeo La Poile touched on this a little bit, but I will

just go into a little bit more detail with that. What is a price exemption? In

some cases, manufacturers who are applying to have a generic drug listed on the

formulary can apply for an exemption from the pricing requirement so that they

can charge a higher price. If the application for an exemption is granted, the

manufacturer of a generic product can charge more than the 25 per cent

equivalent brand name price.

What would cause the price exemptions and what are some types of those? Mr.

Speaker, the criteria that must be met in order to apply for an exemption from

the pricing rules are set out in the regulations. The most common reasons

manufacturers request an exemption are there are a couple here. There are

three in particular: if the product has a high manufacturing cost. By the very

fact they have to spend a lot of money to get the medication to market they may

not be able to offer it for 25 per cent. Of course, then they would go into the

application process to negotiate a higher percentage to make sure they have to

make money at the end of the day but they also have to break even at least. That

is something that would allow them to do.

Another one; secondly, there is only one supplier of the product. So, sole

source would be another exemption; implementation of a national price that is

being applied to all jurisdictions in Canada. If it is something that is

widespread right across the country and they are getting higher than 25 per cent

due to various reasons, then of course we could certainly follow that lead as

well.

As for how the exemptions are reviewed, manufacturers are required to request

price exemptions when they submit a drug for inclusion on the formulary. The

rationale provided by the manufacturer for the exemption is reviewed by the

Pharmaceutical Services Division and that determines its validity. We also work

with other jurisdictions to ensure the management of price exemptions is

consistent across the country.

Another important piece of all of this is working with our other various

jurisdictions across the country, and that is providing to be very valuable as

well. These exemption requests are assessed on a case by case basis, Mr.

Speaker, and usually occur in consultation with other provinces to ensure that

the management of price exemptions is consistent right across the country. There

is power in numbers, and I guess that is how we can view this. Where granted,

the exemptions are reviewed on an annual basis.

Mr. Speaker, there are currently 4,200 drugs on the formulary, and this is

important to note. Over the past eighteen months, over 1,100 of those drugs have

received a pricing exemption. There have been a huge number of applications for

that. While 1,100 may seem like a huge number, there may be a number of drugs

within that 1,100 that have very strong similarities. For example, it could be a

drug came off brand and twenty versions of that drug are now applying to be a

generic of it, so they would all be viewed separately. That is probably

explaining some of why that number is so large.

The exemptions have been approved for twenty-one different generic drug

manufacturers. Each of those twenty-one drug manufacturers could be applying to

make a generic on one specific brand, so you can see how that number can bloom.

The fact is and why I mention it, is that the process is working and you have

seen those exemptions put in place. Where it has been proved to be valid, of

course that is something that is granted.

Currently, under the Pharmaceutical Services Act there are three

circumstances in which a drug may be delisted from the formulary: where the

manufacturer is not compliant with the price quoted upon approval for entry into

the formulary; secondly, where removal of the drug is advisable in the public

interest, and that is one we take very seriously; thirdly, where it is

considered necessary to remove the drug. This would apply in cases where a

manufacturer can no longer meet its commitment to supply the drug.

There is currently no provision in the act right now, Mr. Speaker, that

authorizes the removal of a generic drug from the formulary in cases where it is

listed on the formulary but does not currently comply with the Province's new

pricing requirements. What we are doing here is tightening up the legislation

and making sure the legislation has teeth where it is needed. I think that is

what this does.

While most generic drug manufacturers comply with the new pricing

requirements, we are aware that there are some products listed on the formulary

that do not meet the pricing requirements. During the briefing I had with

department officials, I think the number between twenty and twenty-five are

currently on the formulary right now that is not meeting those requirements. It

is a very small few but it is an important few.

We are hoping by the very fact of tightening up this legislation today and

giving it the teeth that will bring those back onside. We are hoping not to have

to use any powers to delist medications because we have to recognize they are in

business and this is what they do to make money. Certainly, they want to be on

our formulary. There is a huge incentive to play ball with us and this will

provide them the rules that they have to operate within. That is why this is so

important today.

It is our hope that once this amendment is passed manufacturers of drugs that

do not meet the pricing requirements will adjust their prices to comply with the

pricing requirements rather than their products delisted. If they want to play

ball, if they want to be on our formulary and that is how they pay the bills,

they are going to follow the rules. We are just setting those rules up here

today.

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to ensuring that the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador obtain prescription drugs at reasonable prices,

period. This amendment allows us to continue our work to attain reasonable

generic drug pricing for the people of our Province. I am just going to take a

few moments, if I may, to summarize some of the things I had said, because it is

not a huge piece of legislation but there are a few different facets to it.

This amendment is about ensuring the people of our Province can obtain

generic drugs at fair and reasonable prices. That is the whole reason why we are

doing this. From there we go to: this amendment to the Pharmaceutical Services

Act will specifically authorize the delisting of drug products from the

Province's interchangeable drug formulary that do not meet the pricing

requirements for generic drugs set out in the interchangeable drug products

formulary regulations 2012.

Since April, 2012, Mr. Speaker, our government has steadily reduced the

prices for generic drugs in Newfoundland and Labrador. As of July 1, 2013, the

maximum price a drug manufacturer may charge for a generic drug product listed

on the formulary in this Province is 25 per cent of the equivalent brand name

drug price.

The new generic drug pricing strategy has provided considerable savings to

the provincial government through the Newfoundland and Labrador Prescription

Drug Program. We are now paying less money for generic drugs prescribed to

beneficiaries of the drug program, while actually increasing the number of

generic drugs covered.

Government is reinvesting a significant portion of the projective savings in

pharmacies another very important piece, as I said before. Over the four years

of the current agreement with the Pharmacists' Association of Newfoundland and

Labrador, we are reinvesting $37 million in pharmacies, including $4 million

into rural pharmacies.

An additional $26 million has also been reinvested to reduce seniors' drug

costs, and we all know how very important that is. Government remains committed

to ensure that all residents of the Province pay fair and reasonable prices for

the generic drugs. This amendment allows us to continue our work and to

guarantee the reasonable generic drug pricing for the people of our Province.

That is where this all comes from, is making sure that we can provide those at

reasonable prices.

Again, to reiterate, we are going to save money and we are going to be able

to provide more drugs to more people. I do not see anybody standing in the House

today to be in disagreement with this. They may have questions, and the member

from across the way posed a few there, which is good to have that back and

forth. I think everybody in the House recognizes how important this is and why

it is needed. We are doing it in the best interests of the people, and that is

where all of this stems from.

With that being said, I will take my seat, but I hope to hear others stand

and be in agreement with this legislation.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

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

I am very pleased to stand and speak to this bill today. Though it is only

one phrase, it is an important bill and certainly one that I will be supporting,

to respond to the member opposite, because it is for the protection of the

people of the Province. I think that is what we are all here for is to make sure

that our people are treated fairly.

This slight amendment and addition to subsection 19(4) of the Pharmaceutical

Services Act, I think, became even more important after last year when a new

generic drug cost model for the Newfoundland and Labrador formulary came into

being. With the change from 60 per cent, the manufacturer being able to charge

60 per cent of the retail rate, that going down in a matter of a year to 25 per

cent, I think, would have raised the issue of are the manufacturers following

the new 25 per cent model.

I think it is certainly connected to the amendment because within a year, the

manufacturers had to go from 60 per cent of the retail price in increments

downwards to 25 per cent within one year. So monitoring that and making sure

that they are complying with the changes that have happened here in the Province

I think was extremely important. From that perspective, I am really glad to see

this put in.

When we were briefed, we were told that it is highly unlikely that a

manufacturer would go against our new price. We should assume they would not and

that they would comply with the 25 per cent of the retail rate. You always have

to deal with the possibilities. The possibility of a manufacturer not complying,

the possibility of a manufacturer trying to slip in under and charge more than

the 25 per cent of the retail rate is always there.

It is extremely important that we now have another exemption in the list of

where the minister has the power to delist a drug if necessary. One would hope

that no manufacturer would run the risk of having a drug delisted that would be

good for the people of the Province. If a drug is on the list, obviously one

would assume it is a drug that is good for people. One would hope that a

manufacturer, by going against the rules and regulations of the Province, would

not run a risk of having it delisted, but one never knows.

The ability of the minister to make sure that manufacturers are complying

with the new model is adding protection for the people of the Province. It was a

shock last year when I learned I did not realize until we started dealing with

the issue that we were paying the highest amount of money for generic drugs.

It was really good that the Province recognized that and took action.

One of the other things that are really good in the country right now is the

fact that the Council of the Federation is dealing with working together. There

have been some good things that have happened because of the Council of the

Federation working together to make sure that we are starting to get fairer

prices for generic drugs throughout Canada.

It was a good sign that the Council of the Federation realized that if the

federal government was not going to deal with a drug plan in this country to try

to get the cheaper prices for people, that the ministers and the Premiers I

think recognized we have to start working together to make this happen. There

have been some good things that have happened because of the council working

together.

In January 2013, just this year, there were six generic drugs with high

volume and high profit, and we learned this today from the ministry when we had

our briefing. I do want to thank the minister and the staff of the Department of

Health and Community Services for the briefing we had this morning. It was very

good.

They told us how in January 2013 there were six generics with high volume and

high profit. Because of the Council of the Federation, there was an agreement

reached for the manufacturers to pay only 18 per cent of the retail price rather

than the 25 per cent of the retail price for these six drugs. The volume was so

high and they were making so much money on these generics, the Council of the

Federation was able to come to that agreement.

That is what working together across the country is going to mean for us when

it comes to the cost of drugs. I do hope we are going to find other ways in

which to work together around our health care system in the country. I think we

do want to work towards having standards, that you do not have people in one

province benefiting more than people in another province, as was the case with

the generic drugs. It is extremely important that we have the Council of the

Federation dealing with this and to know that we are now part of the standard

that is trying to be set here in Canada with regard to the generic drugs.

Last year, when the new generic drug cost model came into play, there was

some concern about the smaller pharmacies with regard to the speed with which it

happened. I have a question for the minister that hopefully, if we do not get to

talk about in second reading, we could do so in Committee. I am just wondering

if there has been any evaluation of what has happened for smaller pharmacies

over the past year. Has there been discussion with them and have some of their

fears been allayed? Has there been a bit of a burden on them because of the

speed with which we reached the 25 per cent?

I am not aware whether or not there have been discussions to look at what the

impact has been. I do look forward to maybe discussing with the minister in

Committee to see what has happened because it was fast. There is no doubt about

it. I do not know if some of the issues that were raised by the smaller

pharmacies, if those negative impacts came to bear on them or whether or not

they have actually moved all right wi