PDF Version

March 16, 2016

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVIII No. 6

The House met at 2 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER

(Osborne):

Order, please!

Admit strangers.

I'd like to welcome to the Speaker's gallery the hon. Sean Lyall,

Minister of Culture, Recreation and Tourism with the Nunatsiavut

Government.

Welcome.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

We'd also like to

welcome to the Speaker's gallery Crystal Snelgrove and Pauline Mouland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

In our public

galleries today we have Mayor Juanita Stone and her husband, councillor

Bob Stone, from the beautiful World Heritage UNESCO site of Red Bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Chair would

also like to recognize and welcome to our public galleries today

representatives from the Dietitians of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

Statements by

Members

MR. SPEAKER:

Today we will

have Members' statements from the Members for the District of Harbour

Main, the District of Cape St. Francis, Harbour Grace Port de Grave,

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune, Conception Bay South and St. George's

Humber.

I recognize the Member for the District of Harbour Main.

MS. PARSLEY:

Today, Mr.

Speaker, I give rise to bring awareness to this hon. House on the plight

of six-year-old Olivia Reardon, who lives with her older sister, Kayla,

and her devoted mom, Colleen, in Avondale.

Olivia was diagnosed with a very rare disease, Pearson's Syndrome. Of

the 100 known cases in the world today, there are only two in Canada.

Additional complications are bone marrow loss and Type 1 diabetes.

There is no daily routine, as each day presents new challenges. Olivia

is a warrior, strong willed and determined, who faces her challenges and

meets them head on with a smile, as only Olivia can do.

During her recent visit to the North Pole, Santa gave Olivia his teddy

bear to bring home with her. Olivia was overjoyed. Another surprise

awaited Olivia upon her arrival home. Olivia learned she was chosen to

have a

part in Santa's next new storybook release.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. Members in joining with me in saying thank

you, Olivia, for demonstrating such remarkable courage in your young and

tender years. There is no doubt, the courage demonstrated by you,

Olivia, Kayla and your mom is an inspiration to us all. Your smile

lights up our world.

Thank you, Olivia.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for the District of Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you,

Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize a very brave young lady

from Torbay, Lynelle Cantwell, who took a stand against bullying.

Recently, Lynelle discovered she was listed on an online poll that named

her one of the 10 ugliest girls at Holy Trinity. Although Lynelle

Cantwell was named to this poll, her reaction was inspiring. She did not

let theses bullies get to her.

Lynelle stood up and responded back to Facebook saying she felt sorry

for these people. I quote, Just because we don't look perfect on the

outside does not mean we are ugly. If that's your idea of ugly then I

feel sorry for you like seriously get a life.

Lynelle's response and her positive outlook have given her local and

national attention. Lynelle has become a role model for many young

people in this province. She was invited and attended the National Youth

Leadership Conference and many other events.

We all can take lessons from this modest, reasonable, compassionate

young lady and take a stand against bullying.

I ask all hon. Members to join with me in thanking Lynelle Cantwell of

Torbay for taking a stand.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for the District of Harbour Grace Port de Grave.

MS. P. PARSONS:

Thank you,

Mr. Speaker.

I am grateful to stand and recognize the Morgan family of Port de Grave:

Boyd, Gloria, Charl and Virginia. They demonstrate sheer dedication each

year by organizing what is known as the Gutsy Walk the largest

community event for Crohn's and Colitis Canada. They do this in memory

of their son and brother, Lloyd.

In June of 1997, Lloyd was diagnosed with colitis. On the 20th of

December he was rushed to hospital and had emergency surgery. The

illness destroyed his bowel and, as a result, he had to live with a

colostomy at 18 years old. It was a year to the date of his emergency

surgery, on Sunday, December 20, 1998, when Lloyd was killed in a

head-on motor vehicle collision on the Veterans Memorial Highway.

I had the honour of singing at Lloyd's funeral service and, today, it is

a true honour to stand and recognize my friend and the loving dedication

of his family who continue to keep his memory alive.

To date, the Morgan family have helped raise more than $65,000 in

Lloyd's memory, which support people who live with Crohn's and colitis.

Please join me in applauding the Morgan family.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for the District of Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House to pay tribute to Mr. Larry Hudson, our

treasured friend and media persona, who passed away last year at the age

of 89. A seasoned reporter, Mr. Hudson played an integral

part in

recording the colourful history of Newfoundland and Labrador. From the

lighthearted coverage of Christmas Spree celebrations to being one of

the first journalists on scene at the horrific Air Arrow crash of 1985,

Larry Hudson is a household name whose distinctive newscast coverage is

forever linked to recollections of our past.

Larry was a loved and valued member of our community and he will be

deeply missed. I have no doubt that his stories and reflections of our

culture, so accurately and warm-heartedly depicted with his words, will

forever be a part of Newfoundland and Labrador's unique character.

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

tribute to Larry, whose legacy of hundreds of memorable stories

portraying life in our province, particularly rural Newfoundland and

Labrador, holds a place near and dear in our hearts, as it surely did in

his.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Member for

the District of Conception Bay South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

I rise today in this hon. House to honour two army veterans, Donald

Hookey and Marc Gauci, who are both involved with VETS Canada, a

volunteer-led group that aims to help vets who are at risk of becoming

homeless, are now homeless or face some other crisis.

Mr. Speaker, these two men, in November, held a second annual 24-hour

veterans' vigil at the National War Memorial to recognize and raise

awareness of the number of Canadian veterans facing homelessness.

Over the Christmas season, this organization assisted many veterans from

Conception Bay South and surrounding areas. VETS Canada help veterans

young and old with injuries, depression, anxiety, PTSD and those simply

having trouble transitioning from military life back to what the rest of

us consider normal life.

Mr. Speaker, these individuals are bringing awareness and assistance to

homeless veterans in our communities. I want to commend Donald Hookey

and Marc Gauci for the work they have done and also bring attention to

their cause and encourage all Members to do so.

To learn more about getting help for vets check out

www.vetscanada.org .

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Member for

the District of St. George's Humber.

MR. REID:

Mr. Speaker, the

Lions Club motto is We Serve and nowhere is this motto more evident,

in practice, than in the long-term commitment to the organization of

public speaking competitions.

I recently attended the Lions Club Speak-off in Pasadena and had the

pleasure of listening to nine very interesting speeches from students on

a variety of topics. The work and practice they, along with their

families and teachers, have put into these speeches certainly showed in

the quality of all the speeches.

The first-place winner was Emily Park; in second place was Rosalina

King; and in third place was Ayana Wiseman. The other participants were:

Cole Matthews, Daymon Brake, Madison Lake, Mikyla Andrews, Sara Crosbie

and Marisa Roberts.

I would like to commend the Lions Club for organizing this event and

recognize the many volunteers who have fulfilled the role of judges,

questioners and hosts for the evening.

Public speaking is a valuable skill in today's world and very important

in any field of employment, and it's a crucial part of our democratic

society.

In conclusion, I ask all Members to join with me in congratulating all

the students and also thanking the Lions Club and all those who made the

speak-off possible.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

The Commemoration

of the First World War and the Battle of Beaumont-Hamel

MR. SPEAKER:

Today for Honour

100, I recognize the Member for the District of Bonavista.

MR. KING:

I will now read into

the record the following 40 names of those who lost their lives in the

First World War in the Royal Newfoundland Regiment, the Royal

Newfoundland Naval Reserve or the Newfoundland Mercantile Marine. This

will be followed by a moment of silence.

Lest we forget: Peter Butler, Robert Butler, Thomas Charles Butler,

William Butler, Wilson Butler, Dorman Butt, Edward Butt, Frederick James

Butt, Samuel Butt, Mark Button, John Joseph Cahill, Martin Joseph

Cahill, John Caines, William Caines, Alfred E. Cake, Rodger John

Callahan, Hugh Daniel Campbell, Charles Canning, Permanus Canning,

Daniel Carew, David Michael Carew, John Joseph Carew, John Joseph Carew,

Victor Carew, Vincent Carew, Edward Carrigan, Thomas Carrigan, Bernard

Carroll, James Carroll, Thomas Carroll, John Carsons, James Henry

Carter, Llewelyn James Carter, Thomas Carter, Joseph Cave, Ernest Leslie

Chafe, George Chafe, Jack Chafe, William Henry Chafe and Arthur James

Chaffey.

(Moment of silence.)

MR. SPEAKER:

Statements by

Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister Responsible for Forestry and Agrifoods.

I'm sorry the hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize that today is

Check Registration Day.

Check Registration Day is an initiative created by the Canadian

Securities Administrators. It provides a valuable opportunity to

increase consumer awareness about investment fraud during fraud

prevention month.

This day encourages consumers to check the licences and registrations of

individuals and companies before entering into business transactions

with them.

Mr. Speaker, protecting Newfoundlanders and Labradorians from all types

of fraud is a top priority of the Consumer and Commercial Affairs Branch

of Service NL. Residents can get information about common

investment scams by visiting the Consumer and Commercial Affairs page on

the Service NL website.

Investors can also visit the Canadian Securities

Administrators website and use the National Registration Search Engine

at www.aretheyregistered.com .

Alternatively, they can contact the Financial Services Regulation

Division of Service NL.

Mr. Speaker, my mandate letter recognizes the need

to do more to protect consumers against fraud or bad business practices.

As we pursue that work, I urge consumers to be vigilant, as falling

victim to fraud can have long-lasting, devastating effects for

individuals and families. Check Registration Day reminds us that

knowledge and awareness are a consumer's best defence.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for the District of Cape St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

I thank

the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

Mr. Speaker, we live in a different era today than we did years ago and

it's so important that people be protected from fraud. Today we realize

that the Internet and the mobile devices we use increase the risk of

fraud because people just go and order everything online. You don't go

to businesses anymore and face to face. Everything is done through

computers and mobile devices.

Mr. Speaker, in 2014, 140 people fell victim to a mass-marketing fraud

in this province and another 503 filed complaints against being

'frauded.' Mr. Speaker, there are simple little things that we look at

every day. Sometimes we go and we don't turn off our computers. It's so

easy for someone to access all the information we have there because of

a simple thing like not turning it off.

If you look at people using the Internet today, you will see it on

Facebook and everything else. They post all these different types of

pictures with personal information on it. It's so important that we make

them recognize the importance Mr. Speaker, I will finish off.

We'll just look at the lady, what she did when she posted a picture of

her Tim Hortons cup. She lost her money. Just a simple thing like that,

people can be affected today.

It's a different era we live in. It's important that we recognize this

week and make sure people be vigilant over fraud.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for St. John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very

much, Mr. Speaker.

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

Protecting the unsuspecting public from fraud is a good thing and these

are fine initiatives, but the province's growing seniors population is

especially vulnerable to fraud and scams and is less likely to access

government websites. An office of the seniors advocate would be ideally

suited to address the protection of seniors from fraud, identity theft

and other financial crimes.

I urge this government to keep its promise and to set up an office for a

seniors advocate.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further

statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Seniors, Wellness and Social Development.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr.

Speaker, I rise today to recognize March as National Nutrition Month and

today, March 16, as Dietitians Day in Canada.

The provincial government is pleased to support Nutrition Month in

partnership with dietitians of Newfoundland and Labrador and our

community partners. The theme of this year's Nutrition Month campaign

is: Take a 100-Meal Journey: Make Small Changes, One Meal at a Time.

Mr. Speaker, we consume almost 100 meals each month. Throughout March,

registered dietitians in this province have been encouraging

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to take a closer look at each of those

100 meals, with a view to making small, positive changes to their diet.

Our government is developing a new health promotion and healthy living

strategy, and healthy eating will be a key part of that strategy, Mr.

Speaker. Meanwhile, we continue to partner with community organizations

such as Eat Great and Participate, Recreation Newfoundland and Labrador,

Food First NL, the School Milk Foundation, the Kids Eat Smart

Foundation, and others, to promote healthy eating. Perhaps some of my

colleagues had an opportunity to visit representatives of those

organizations at the Nutrition Month Expo set up in the West Block of

Confederation Building today.

Mr. Speaker, I invite all Members of this House to join me in

acknowledging Nutrition Month in Newfoundland and Labrador, and in

thanking registered dietitians throughout the province for their efforts

to support the health of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for the District of Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

I'd like to thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement. We

join with the government in recognizing National Nutrition Month, as

well as Dietitians Day.

We live in a day and age where many find it increasingly difficult to

follow healthy eating regiments, largely due to increasing cost and

availability as well as lifestyles. Campaigns, such as the 100-meal

journey, are a great endeavour as it educates and encourages positive

eating choices. Simply put, we know that a healthy, nutritious diet will

lead to an overall healthier well-being a goal we must all work

towards.

Mr. Speaker, while personal health is obviously important to us all, we

have an even greater responsibility to instill knowledge and health

awareness in our young people. I'm encouraged to see government

continuing to support key programs and groups such as Eat Great and

Participate, various Rec NL initiatives, the School Milk Foundation and

the Kids Eat Smart Foundation. We, too, join with a special thank you to

our registered dietitians.

Thank you so much and thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for St. John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, I

thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement. Research shows

how important nutrition is both for physical and mental well-being. I

thank all the community groups and our dietitians who are doing amazing

work.

We have the highest percentage of seniors living on OAS and GIS. Most

are widowed or single women who didn't have paid work and now try to

live on $1,200 a month. Rent is $800; heat, $200; phone and cable, $100;

leaving $100 a month for food, transportation and more. Try feeding

yourselves with nutritional food on less than $100. And more seniors are

using food banks.

Mr. Speaker, we have a problem.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister Responsible for the Forestry and Agrifoods Agency.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Mr. Speaker, Canadian Agricultural Safety Week is taking

place from March 13 to 19. I rise today to acknowledge the important

role that Newfoundland and Labrador's farmers and producers play in

making safety a priority each and every day.

Many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians visit local

farms to purchase fresh produce or to see the animals with their

children. On-farm safety is everyone's responsibility and one our

farmers and producers take very seriously.

As part of this year's activities the Canadian

Agricultural Safety Association and the Canadian Federation of

Agriculture launched a new three-year campaign.

The Be

AgSafe Family

campaign provides farmers and producers with tools to understand the

challenges unique to keeping every generation safe. The campaign is

delivered with assistance from Growing Forward 2, a federal, provincial

and territorial initiative that has funded hundreds of

agriculture-related projects in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I encourage anyone interested in learning more to

visit

www.casa-acsa.ca .

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for the District of Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

I would like to thank the good minister for an advance copy of his

statement. It's a good statement. We, too, as the Official Opposition,

would like to recognize Canadian Agricultural Safety Week from March 13

to 19.

It's important for all of us to encourage on-farm safety. Many on-farm

accidents can be prevented with proper training and proper experience

and awareness.

We would like to congratulate the Canadian Agricultural Safety

Association on their three-year campaign, Be an AgSafe Family. According

to their website, this campaign will have something for everyone, for

every member of the family. It will have resources to help children and

families stay safe on the farm, to help adults juggle family, farm and

work life, and also resources to help the elder farmer continue to farm

safely.

I encourage everyone to visit

www.agsafetyweek.ca

where you can sign a safety contract, learn about safe agriculture

activities for children and also to learn more about Agriculture Safety

Week.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for St. John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very

much, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I'm

glad the Canadian Agricultural Safety Association has chosen the safety

of farm children in its campaign this year given that an average of 13

children die on Canadian farms each year and the recent tragedies in

Alberta.

I would have liked, though, to have heard from the minister how the

Federation of Agriculture and others here will be participating, but I'm

sure they will take full advantage of the tools and resources being

offered to help keep farm children safe.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Oral questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance is on the record as saying that the

government, our new government, has saved $100 million in discretionary

spending in just three months. Well, last week the minister committed to

providing the exact details to the House. The request for additional

details has been denied and, to be quite honest, the door has been

closed on us, Mr. Speaker, in finding out this information.

The minister has stated that the government will be extremely open and

transparent when they release their budget. The people of the province

shouldn't have to wait until the budget to find out what savings have

been already realized in this fiscal year.

I ask the Minister: Why are you refusing to provide those details from

this fiscal year?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Thank you,

Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday in this House the hon. Member, twice in his questioning,

referred to this as not about the budget. I would remind him very

clearly that this is exactly about the budget. The Estimates, as he is

aware, will clearly show, very clearly, what was budgeted, what is spent

and how much is saved.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Leader of the Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

Yesterday here in the House the questions asked were very

straightforward. The Finance Minister dodged answers yesterday and

continues to dodge those straightforward questions again today. This is

about this year's budget, budget '15-'16.

The minister rose in the House of Assembly, right here and very proudly

announced $100 million in savings over the last three months. Certainly

she just didn't pull that number out of the air. She must have the

facts. She must have the details. She went as far as to commit to

provide details to the House, to me in the House specifically and also

to the media.

Now, she also said they were going to be open and transparent on budget

day. Is that the only day we can expect this government to be open and

transparent is budget day? Is that the only day we can expect to hear

details from this government?

I ask the minister once again to provide the details on one of her three

headings: savings identified in fiscal update, $118 million. Will you

provide the details on that heading?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Thank you,

Mr. Speaker.

All the specifics of every, single expenditure that come s

in under a budget are disclosed as part of the year-end process, and

it's not a matter of hiding anything. As a matter of fact, all of the

details around exactly what ministerial offices had extra political

staff will be disclosed as part of the regular budget process, including

the Estimates discussions that we will have here in this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

Again, the minister is dodging what are very straightforward questions.

It was the minister who rose in this House and committed to provide the

details to me, as the Leader of the Opposition, and to the media.

My question is very simple: Why have you flip-flopped? Why the

contradiction and why will you not now provide those details?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr.

Speaker, quite the contrary. This is about this minister understanding

very clearly where the facts will be presented to the people of the

province, unlike the Member opposite who continues to not even

understand the process of Estimates and budgets.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Leader of the Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

We certainly expected to hear a blame game we've heard that lots from

Members opposite but leadership and governance and being a government,

being the party in power is about governance and it's about leadership.

The minister said yesterday that she'd be happy to stand on her feet and

answer all the questions about the $100 million. She also committed to

provide the exact details were her words, Mr. Speaker, her words the

exact details to me. Now we see a contradiction. A very simple question,

she will not provide the details.

Why the contradiction? Why have you changed your position?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr.

Speaker, I'm confused as to why the Member opposite doesn't understand

the Estimates process. I would expect he has participated in them

regularly, and this is not a matter of hiding anything. When people in

this House and the people of the province have a chance to look at

Estimates they're going to very clearly see the incredible work Members

on this side of the House have done to watch every single penny that's

in the public purse.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Leader of the Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, I'll

remind the Member opposite, it was the minister who stood here in the

House of Assembly and very clearly articulated she would provide the

exact details. Then she provided a sheet that had three lines, three

numbers and no details. We've made efforts and we've asked for those

details.

So we need to know, the people of the province want to know and I can

tell you, yes, the people of the province want this question answered

according to the calls and the input that we're receiving from the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

So I ask the minister: You committed to table information in the House.

You've now withdrawn that commitment. My question is very simple. Why

did you change your position?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr.

Speaker, with all due respect to the Member opposite, there's been no

change of position here. Quite frankly, the people of this province have

many questions that they're asking, including all of the questions

related to why former administrations when they had record oil

production were unable to control spending that on average increased by

it was 22 per cent to 30 per cent higher than any other province.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to presenting a budget in this House that

answers those questions very clearly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, once

again, it is very clear that the minister is not going to answer what

she claims to be factual when she came to the House of Assembly. Instead

of answering the questions, she is using her time to play the blame

game. Everyone in the province predicted that the new government would

play the blame game, but we're down to a very simple answer.

Why will you not provide the details to the House, the exact details

that you committed to provide? You made a commitment here in the House

of Assembly. You have reneged on that. You've contradicted that. Why do

we have to wait for the budget for you to finally be open and

transparent?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr.

Speaker, I'm very proud of the work that my colleagues and the Members

on this side of the House have been doing to prepare for the budget.

Mr. Speaker, we, too, are getting questions, questions like why an

administration that ran six years of surpluses and six years of deficits

could only end up with about $4 billion extra.

The people of the province expect and deserve a budget that is open and

transparent, and we intend to present that on budget day.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Leader of the Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

So what the minister is saying is that they will be open and transparent

on budget day, but not before that. That is what I believe I just heard

the minister say.

I'll let the minister know that you made a commitment to table

information here in the House of Assembly. You made that commitment very

clearly; you'd provide the exact details. Now it appears that you want

until the budget so your details, your claim of $100 million in savings

in 88 days, is going to get lost with everything else in the budget.

Well, Mr. Speaker, I can tell the Member opposite, we're going to be

asking more questions and we're going to be looking for this information

again, because the people of Newfoundland and Labrador deserve to know

what savings they've created in the fiscal year '15 and '16.

So, Mr. Speaker, how much have you saved in '15 and '16? When are you

going to give us those details? Why don't you give it? What a

contradiction.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr.

Speaker, I remind the Member opposite, as I discussed here in this House

and with media yesterday, the savings were related to reallocations that

were discontinued, parliamentary secretaries that aren't being paid,

political staff that we've eliminated, freezes on hiring, freezes on

travel.

I look forward to sharing with everybody in this House, and the people

of the province, all of the details of our budget and the work we're

going to do to get our province back on a fiscally safe ground.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Leader of the Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

So the Member opposite is saying by the initiative that we created here

in the House of reducing the number of seats has created a savings for

government. I'm glad she shares that information.

Mr. Speaker, building on our government's Close to Home strategy, our

administration implemented a very successful pilot project for enhanced

care in personal care homes. While an expanded version of this project

will not address the overall issues that have been created by the

Liberal government's decision to cancel 360 long-term care beds in our

province, it will certainly help in providing families with increased

options. This project has proven to be successful and well received by

families that are availing of it.

I ask the minister: Will he commit to continuing the expanded personal

care home services? Will he continue to commit to the continuation of

that and also the expansion of that project?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very

much, Mr. Speaker.

I welcome the opportunity to say that the enhanced home care project

has, indeed, reduced demands successfully in the three pilot sites in

Gander, St. John's and Corner Brook. Our aim is to seek funding in the

coming budget, if possible, to continue it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for the District of Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

That's good news, Mr.

Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health has first-hand knowledge of

management problems at Central Health. Just two months before being

elected, the Minister of Health wrote that Central Health had an ostrich

style of management.

I ask the minister: Rather than sticking his head in the sand, will he

order an independent review of senior management and administration at

Central Health?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very

much, Mr. Speaker.

With regard to the issues in Central Health, there has already been a

process in place to deal with issues raised by the radiologists. That's

gone down a separate route with lawyers and a quasi-judicial approach.

With regard to the more general management issues that have been raised,

the chair of the board, who ultimately has the responsibility for

Central Health management, has reached out to the physician groups

across the region and, as I speak, is holding a series of confidential

bilaterals with representatives from physicians and senior management

independently from across the district. It is their responsibility to

deal with those issues, and I have confidence that they're doing that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for the District of Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

I would remind the minister that he has a responsibility as well, in

addition to the board.

Mr. Speaker, this fall the Minister of Health wrote that Central Health

was using a Machiavellian way to resolve issues and had created a

poisoned well for doctors in Gander. The very term the minister used ,

Machiavellian ,

is defined as using clever lies and tricks in order to get or achieve

something. So now we know what the minister thinks of management at

Central Health.

I ask the minister: Now that this health authority is under your

purview, why won't you proceed with the independent review of senior

management and administration at Central Health? o:p>

MR. JOYCE:

Why didn't you?

MR. KENT:

I did (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Mr. Speaker,

there are several reviews and issues here that are being conflated

deliberately by the Member opposite to advance an agenda of his own.

The issue of the radiologist was reviewed. There were 18 recommendations

in an independent review: 13 of those have been implemented already;

five of them are in the process of being implemented. As the Member

opposite himself pointed out yesterday in his polemic during the Interim

Supply bill, this is a complicated issue and will take time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, what I'm

asking for is a full review of management and administration at Central

Health. The minister himself as a doctor in Gander is on record as

having serious concerns with management and administration and

leadership at Central Health, and now he's on record as not being

willing to do anything about it.

In August, in response to concerns from radiologists, a review of

Central Health's department of Diagnostic Imagining was conducted. The

report that the minister references by Dr. Rick Bhatia was completed

over six months ago. There were 18 clear recommendations, as the

minister points out, and these are urgent matters some of which could

affect the safety of patients.

I ask the minister: Why haven't the recommendations been fully

implemented? Some are in process; some are outstanding altogether. Will

he show leadership and direct Central Health to immediately implement

the outstanding recommendations from Dr. Bhatia's report?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Eighteen

recommendations: 13 implemented and five in the process of being

implemented. There was a conflict management specialist recruited to go

into Central Health and provide services on the direction of management.

That was done. They ran a conflict resolution, conflict management,

course for physicians and staff. That has been completed.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, 18 recommendations: 13 done and five in

process. It is a complicated matter and will take time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, what's

required is full implementation of the recommendations. The department

has not been restructured. There are major patient safety concerns that

the minister is failing to show leadership on and address.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health prefers a hands-off approach when it

comes to dealing with regional health authorities. He hasn't tackled the

ongoing crisis at Eastern Health. He's refusing to address major

concerns from doctors in his own community of Gander.

Word from within the walls of our health care system tells us the

minister has been quiet for good reason. We hear the minister, along

with his Cabinet colleagues, are working on a plan to dissolve the four

regional health authorities.

Will the minister confirm that amalgamating the four regional health

authorities is being discussed within his department and by Cabinet?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Mr. Speaker, this

is almost as entertaining as reading

Harry Potter . It's just about

that good.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. HAGGIE:

With regard,

however, to this suggestion from the Member opposite there has been any

issue around patient safety, I am quite happy to state categorically

there has not.

He referenced in his polemic yesterday some issues about recommendations

for anaphylaxis training that's done. He recommended classification of

MRIs on the basis of clinical urgency that's done. He mentioned

conflict resolution between management and physicians that's done.

There is a respectful workplace policy in Central Health that's done.

I'm not sure what other imaginings I should have to deal with in

Question Period.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

It appears that new

ministers have done training in sarcasm and arrogance, so it's

consistent at least, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I'll ask the question again: Will the minister confirm that

amalgamating the four regional health authorities has been discussed by

officials within his department or by Cabinet?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

To my knowledge,

the only time amalgamation of the health boards was discussed was by the

former premier, Mr. Williams.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

The Minister of Education has confirmed the school board elections will

not take place anytime soon. In fact, he now says they're at least a

year away, this all despite very loud and vocal objections while he sat

in Opposition.

Why the flip-flop on your stance, Minister?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

I'm pleased to get up again today and answer questions regarding the

school board election because it's very important.

During the election campaign last fall we were asked by the media if we

would have school board elections should we become the government on

November 30. We told them we would have a school board election within

12 months because it's a priority for us to restore that to the system.

When I assumed office and took the oath, the Premier sent a mandate

letter to me that said we should have the school board election within

12 months, and that's what we're going to do. I've met with the chairs

of the two boards of trustees, the directors of education, a number of

other officials, the Federation of School Councils. We're putting things

into place to have the election, but it can't be done overnight.

This previous administration made no preparation for a school board

election; now they want it done instantly. That simply cannot be done.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Mr. Speaker,

we're not asking that it be done instantly, but the minister is alluding

to the fact that it's going to take a year or more.

Mr. Speaker, let's just look at it here. This House reduced the number

of seats from 48 to 40. It established an all-party committee. It opened

the House. It held public consultations. It worked with the Chief

Electoral Office. It adopted new district boundaries and conducted an

election within 10 months.

Why the delay by the Department of Education in conducting a school

board election? I ask the minister that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Just to correct

the Member, Mr. Speaker. No one said a year or more. I just said about

five times or something, within 12 months. I've been repeating that

every time I've been asked.

One of the things, as I suggested previously, is that right now a board

are conducted differently. We have consulted with the Francophone about

changing that. It looks like they are going to want to do that. That

will require a legislative change. So we are preparing the legislation.

We'll bring it in here to the House of Assembly. I hope if we can get

unanimous consent, we can move that right through here and get that

done.

We are also looking at ways to improve voter turnout. We've had very low

voter turnout in the past. Sometimes less than 5 per cent, less than 3

per cent, and we're exploring ways to try to improve that. None of that

can be done overnight. It's complicated by the fact that the previous

administration did not do anything with this. It was not a priority for

them. I'm surprised it is now.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

The Minister of Education is quoted as saying: it's crucial that the

governance of the school board be taken out of the hands of the

Education Minister and given back to the people. It now seems that the

minister is quite comfortable having that power.

Why the contradiction, Mr. Minister?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, I

don't have that power. The power to administrate the school district is

in the hands of the board of trustees. The board of trustees, according

to the Schools Act , is

responsible for administrating primary education, elementary education

and secondary education.

I'm trying to give governance of that system back to the people of the

province, which that government decided to take away with great haste

and no consultation at all with the people, save probably one trial

balloon. If people would be patient, we'll get this done.

It may not take 12 months. It may not take 12 months at all, but we want

to put a timeline on things and not just leave it hanging out there like

the previous administration did. They made no preparation whatsoever.

This was not a priority for them. It is a priority for us. We're going

to do it and we're going to do it right.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

Mr. Speaker, the

Premier announced that he will establish a task force on education.

I ask the Premier: Who will this task force be comprised of and when can

we expect the task force to begin its work?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

Well, the Premier's task force on education, on educational outcomes, is

one that we were very pleased and is in the mandate letter of the

Minister of Education. It will be a task force that will go around this

province seeking input of people, students, educators and people who are

involved in the education system. What we're expecting here is to make

sure that we can put in place a process where we will see improvements

in educational outcomes, things like mathematics and so on.

The Independent Appointments Commission will be part of this process. If

I was to stand here today and give the Member opposite the names of the

individuals who would serve on that task force, they would be screaming

loudly saying they're not open, they're not accountable, they're not

transparent.

The Independent Appointments Commission will be part of this process. I

look forward to making sure that we get people who are keenly interested

in education in Newfoundland and Labrador, unlike the Members opposite

who had all the opportunity for so many years to do exactly this and

refused to do it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Mr. Premier, can

you reassure the Federation of School Councils they'll have a seat at

that table, keeping in mind they're the most democratically elected

representatives of all school councils in this province?

They talk about transparency and openness; what an opportunity to show

that with the appointment of a representative from the Federation of

School Councils.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

Well, the Independent Appointments Commission will look at all the

recommendations that will be put forward. I would anticipate that people

from many jurisdictions and many interest groups and stakeholders will

be interested in participating.

I can assure you that the voices of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who

are keenly interested in improving outcomes for our students in the K

to12 system, there will be a place for them to participate, to have

their input, have a meaningful input. Like I say, quite differently than

what we've seen. It was your government who refused to even help fund

those same associations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Mr.

Speaker, European nations provide subsidies in the billions to

state-owned fishing companies, which Royal Greenland is one.

I ask the Minister of Fisheries: Does this give Royal Greenland an

advantage? Can he guarantee local companies won't be disadvantaged by

state-owned fishing companies?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

I thank the Member for his question on this because it is important. The

fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador is an important piece of the

economic diversification that we see in our province.

The transfer of processing licences from Quin-Sea, which has been a

company that has employed hundreds of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians,

Mr. Speaker that transfer has been done by the minister. It's been

done with a lot of due diligence. As a matter of fact, there was quite a

bit of due diligence done, much more than, I would say, for Members

opposite who have made transfers through appointments and so on.

In this particular case, Royal Greenland is interested in investing in

Newfoundland and Labrador. Their investment here, we anticipate, will

mean there will be more Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. It will not

interfere with the harvesting sector. We look forward to working with

companies that are interested in providing meaningful jobs for

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and investing in our province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for Cape St. Francis for a very quick question.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Mr.

Speaker, I was going to ask the Minister of Fisheries, but seeing the

Premier is answering all his questions, I'll ask him. He alleges that

there's no transfer agreements in place, which has given access to the

inshore quotas to form companies.

I ask the Premier: Can you confirm there are no indirect legal

agreements in place that will give access to foreign companies like

Royal Greenland?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

We've done the due diligence on this, and the Department of Justice and

the Department of Fisheries, all those departments. Many individuals

have taken a look at this, the processing board itself. There was no

evidence at all to support the claims that the Members opposite are

saying.

On another note, I would suggest that if any Member in this House, who

was associated with the fishery at all, has any evidence to produce that

there are controlling agreements in place, well, I ask you to come

forward with that, put the information out there. Withholding that

evidence from the people of Newfoundland, in particular the fishery

you are not doing your job as a resident of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for St. John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very

much, Mr. Speaker.

Data released this week show that enrolment in Adult Basic Education has

fallen from just over 2,000 in 2011 down to approximately 1,600 so far

in this academic year. The number of graduates fell from 636 in 2011 to

407 in 2014 down to 132 so far this year.

I ask the Premier: What is this government going to do about the fact

that privatizing ABE has led to fewer people signing up for ABE and

fewer graduating?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

MR. BYRNE:

Thank you very

much, Mr. Speaker.

It's a custom I'm used to, before I answer the question, may I offer to

the Member for St. John's East Quidi Vidi my heartfelt respect for the

service you provide to the House. We'll have many exchanges in the

coming days and weeks ahead, but as someone who's a challenger and a

critic to this particular portfolio that I hold, I want to extend to you

my sincere appreciation for the service you provide to the House and to

all people throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

The question, Mr. Speaker, of the administration of the Adult Basic

Education program, let me say that one of the mandates that have been

provided to me is to review the adult literacy strategy. When this

program was first announced in 2013 there were concerns. There were

concerns about the evidence supporting the objective of the program. I

maintain those concerns. We are going to deal with stakeholders to make

sure that a proper, very functional program is put in place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for St. John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Mr. Speaker, I

ask the Premier: Will this government do a review of the impact of the

privatization of ABE before the first contract expires in 2017?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

MR. BYRNE:

Actually, Mr.

Speaker, I think the contract expires in 2016, so we are in the process

of doing a full review. As I mentioned, not only through the process of

an adult literacy strategy, but we're also looking at things how can

we make sure that we have the evidence to provide the best outcomes?

There has been no issue that has been raised with the delivery agents in

this particular process, but there has been significant question that

has been raised about the process the former administration, the former

government, did in implementing the process itself.

We're going to look at all options. We're going to review this and make

sure that we get this right for the best outcomes because at the end of

the day, Mr. Speaker, that's really what this is all about, providing a

strong foundation for literacy that's affordable, cost effective and

very, very effective to the client.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for St. John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: What's the harm in waiting till after

the school board trustees are elected if he's not going to, quote, rush

the election? Why is he rushing to close schools? This is his chance to

give power back to his people.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, I'm

not closing any schools. We opened one this morning, I think,

officially, but I'm not closing any schools. According to the

Schools Act , the school

trustees of the two districts have the responsibility, legally, to

administrate the school system. They have responsibility for primary

education, elementary education and secondary education and all of the

decisions that are involved there.

I know the Member's colleague said to the media no decision should be

made regarding money. Well, I think the people in the province would

have some issue with that. If the Member, or anybody else in the

province, has issue with what the trustees are doing, they should

contact the trustees. That's who's legally responsible for making these

decisions in Newfoundland and Labrador, not the Minister of Education or

any Members in this House.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for St. John's Centre for a very short question.

MS. ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, I

know dozens of parents from Holy Cross have written the minister.

I ask: What is he telling them?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

I don't know, Mr.

Speaker, who's telling those individuals to contact me rather than the

trustees. I think they're being misled. They'd be better served by

contacting the trustees. That's what I'm telling members of the public

who are contacting me, that it is the board of trustees who have

responsibility for the administration of education in the province.

If they have feedback and the trustees have asked for feedback. In

late January and early February they asked for feedback and they're

asking for feedback now online. There are going to be public meetings

later, next month. So I tell those people to contact the trustees, the

people who are legally responsible for making those decisions in

Newfoundland and Labrador. It's not the responsibility of any Members in

this House of Assembly. None of us are on the school board.

MR. SPEAKER:

The time for

Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of

Documents

MR. SPEAKER:

As required under

section 51 of the House of

Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act , I am

pleased to table the Annual Report of the House of Assembly Management Commission for the

2014-15 Fiscal Year .

Pursuant to

section 8 and

section 10 of the

Public Tender Act , I hereby

table reports of the Public Tender Act exemptions for May, June, July and August 2015 as

presented by the Chief Operating Officer of the Government Purchasing

Agency.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for the District of Ferryland.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I present the following petition.

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 Budget 2015 announced a new school for Witless Bay/Mobile school

system; and

WHEREAS the planning design of the new middle school is ongoing;

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

the House of Assembly to urge government to ensure that the announced

school will be built and will meet the needs of this growing region.

And as in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, this region of the province from Bay Bulls to Bauline has

seen extensive growth in the past number of years. The K to 6 school in

Witless Bay has approximately 380 students. Mobile Central High again

has a large portion of students. The region itself has seen tremendous

growth in terms of young families, people moving into the area, being

able to live outside the boundaries of the City of St. John's, but being

close enough to commute back and forth.

With that tremendous growth, we have seen the need for further

expansion. In the past number of years, we have seen classrooms being

done to St. Bernard's, as well as portables, to accommodate that

increased growth. I know the minister was up to St. Bernard's a few

weeks back to open Education Week and at that time had an opportunity to

see the full breadth and scope of St. Bernard's, the challenges in terms

of classrooms and the ability to accommodate students.

He was given a tour by the principal, and I know now has a good

understanding. As we move forward in the budget process on behalf of

those families, communities and those that attend that institution and

moving forward, I impress upon the government on their behalf the

importance that we move forward with this very worthwhile initiative.

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 humbly sheweth:

Cross Junior High school and send students to a distant school; and

WHEREAS the board has arbitrarily and without consultation reduced the

Holy Cross Junior High school's catchment area and students will have to

bused to a far more distant school; and

WHEREAS Holy Cross Junior High is an important neighbourhood school with

programs, community partnerships and extra-curricular activities

designed to meet the particular needs of the inner-city students who

attend it; and

longer accountable to the people who elected them;

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

the House of Assembly to urge government to ensure that Holy Cross

Junior High school remains open and to immediately arrange for a

And as in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, these petitions continue to roll in to my office

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you very

much, Mr. Speaker.

Orders of the Day

Private Members'

Day

MR. SPEAKER:

It being 2

o'clock on Wednesday and being Private Members' Day, I call upon the

Member for St. George's Humber to present his private Member's

resolution.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. REID:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

This is the first opportunity I have had to speak in a debate since the

return to the House of Assembly. I just want to congratulate all the

returning Members, and also congratulate the new Members to this House

and welcome them to the House.

It's a great honour, really, to be elected and selected by your fellow

citizens to serve in this type of Legislature. I know we all come here

with good intentions of bettering this province. So I want to

congratulate everyone and look forward to working with you over the next

number of years.

Also, I want to thank the people of St. George's Humber for electing

me as their Member the new District of St. George's Humber.

Mr. Speaker, this is the first private Member's resolution from the

government side of the House since the election as well. I just want to

take a couple of moments to read the resolution into the record of the

House:

WHEREAS other jurisdictions such as Norway have been more responsible

and used sovereign wealth funds which created a long-term legacy from

non-renewable resource development; and

WHEREAS the previous government failed to manage resource revenues in a

responsible manner;

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly supports the establishment of

a legacy fund in this province which will result in long-term benefits

from non-renewable natural resources.

So that's the resolution today. Mr. Speaker, private Members'

resolutions can have a big impact in this House. They're not binding

upon government, but in the past the passage of private Members'

resolutions has had an impact. For example, the establishment of the

All-Party Committee on Mental Health issues was started by the Member

for St. John's Centre through a private Member's resolution.

We've also had resolutions in relation to topics such as the fishery,

equalization and many other issues throughout the years. Resolutions can

draw attention to an issue, can create a debate and a discussion that is

useful to the future of the province. So in that sort of vein, I bring

forward this private Member's resolution.

I think this is an important issue. I believe the issue that this motion

deals with is one of our most important issues facing the province

today. There may be others that are more urgent or more immediate, but I

think this issue itself is one of the most crucial issues facing the

province today and our long-term prosperity of the province, Mr.

Speaker.

The issue at the heart of this resolution is: Are we able to find a

better way to manage the resource revenue from our natural resources,

ways that will achieve both short-term and long-term benefits from these

resources? Can we find ways that will allow us to avoid the

boom-and-bust cycles that often come with natural resources?

The question is: Can we find ways of taking a finite resource and

turning it into something that creates a benefit for future generations?

These are the issues that are at the heart of the resolution that I'm

bringing forward today.

I just want to give a quick outline on what I intend to do in the time

that I have here today, Mr. Speaker. I want to outline some of the

reasons why I think we are where we are today. I want to talk a bit

about some of the economic theories related to natural resource

development and the type of problems such resource riches can cause. And

I want to look at some strategies which other jurisdictions have

developed to deal with the problems caused by resource riches, Mr.

Speaker. I want to look at these other cases and see what we can learn

from other jurisdictions that have gone through similar circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, we are in the middle of a financially challenging time. It

is probably one of the most difficult times in our history. What's

happening in the province maybe can be compared to the financial

difficulties which we experienced in the 1930s. We've got a $2 billion

deficit. Offshore oil revenue is half of what it was projected to be. We

have not been living within our means, and we have to change the way we

manage the affairs of the province. It's quite clear.

So the questions that we should be asking ourselves are while we have

the immediate situation which government is forced to deal with on a

daily basis, we also need to be asking the questions: How did we end up

in this situation? What could we have done differently to have avoided

these problems? What can we do now to see that this does not happen

again? What can we learn from the experiences of other jurisdictions,

other places who have faced or are facing similar circumstances? Those

are the questions I think we should be asking ourselves today. These are

the types of questions we need to deal with in looking at the current

situation that we're in.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take a bit of time now to talk about the use of

theories and the application of these theories to policy and resource

development because I think this holds some clues to answering the

questions that I mentioned earlier. Theories are developed in many

areas, many social sciences and many physical sciences. Theories in

public policy good theories, anyway are developed based on the

experiences by looking at other cases, other jurisdictions. By looking

at a number of cases, you recognize similarities and you recognize rules

and the way things sometimes might happen. Good theory can be a

predictive tool in terms of what you might expect would happen in

another circumstance.

When it comes to economics and what happens when a number of valuable

resources are discovered there are a number of theories related to

this. One of the common, very popular theories related is called the

paradox of plenty, Mr. Speaker. The concept of the paradox of plenty was

developed by Terry Lynn Karl back in the 1990s. What she did was look at

places around the world where oil had been discovered and how this

discovery of oil had impacted on the economy of the jurisdictions.

What she found was surprising. It was something unexpected, Mr. Speaker.

The paradox of plenty is that in many cases, places that stumble upon

great resource wealth often end up worse off in the long run than places

that did not discover these resources. This is strange and we have to

ask: How can this be? You have a sudden influx of revenue, the way we

did in this province, but in the end you're worse off than if you never

had this revenue.

How could this happen? Why the paradox? Basically what she found was

that the influx of this huge amount of money altered the economies of

the jurisdictions and also altered the government institutions and the

political institutions in ways that were detrimental to the long-term

development of the producing jurisdiction.

It's sort of like a lottery winner, Mr. Speaker. By fate and chance in

this province, we've won the natural resource lottery. We've got oil and

gas off our coast; we've got huge mineral potential onshore. But we've

all heard the sad stories sometimes about the people who win lotteries

that end up wasting all their money and then becoming destitute and

broke, really. Why does that happen? We need to ask ourselves how best

we can manage resource revenue and what we can learn from the good and

bad experiences of others.

Another theory in economics related to huge wealth from a natural

resource development is referred to as the Dutch disease, and it's a

much narrower concept. Basically the idea there is that sometimes oil

development, huge influx of revenue, has a negative impact on the

economy because it diverts attention away from other industries in the

province. That's some of the problems there.

Mr. Speaker, we had warning signs in this province that we were maybe

having problems with overdependence on oil and gas revenue. I'm going to

refer to an authoritative document: it's the Auditor General's report

from 2012. Here's what the Auditor General said in his report at that

time:

As the significance of the offshore oil sector has impacted the overall

economy of Newfoundland and Labrador, there is a corresponding growing

reliance by Government on oil royalties to fund its programs and

services. This revenue source as a percentage of revenues has increased

substantially in recent years. In 2002-03, oil royalties were $82

million, or 2.1% of total revenues, excluding revenues from the Atlantic

Accords. In 2011-12, oil royalties were $2.8 billion, or 34.4% of total

revenues, excluding revenues from the Atlantic Accords, an increase of

$2.7 billion.

So we were seeing a huge increase and a huge dependency on the natural

resource revenue to a point where over one-third of our revenue came

from oil resources. If you look at the amount of income tax and other

revenue generated, the dependence on oil and gas would've been even

higher, Mr. Speaker. The AG certainly recommended that government take

warning of this and be aware of this overdependence on oil.

Mr. Speaker, Norway is sort of used as a model of a country that has

used its oil revenues in a very prudent manner. One of the things

they've done in their province is they've developed a petroleum fund

where 100 per cent of the oil revenue from the resources off their coast

go into this fund 100 per cent of the oil revenue goes into the fund.

Only the income from this fund can be transferred back to government.

It's seen as a very sort of responsible way and I'll give a little

more information about this fund when I conclude. There are other funds

such as the Alberta heritage fund, the Alaska fund and other similar

funds around the world. I think it's something we need to be considering

here in this province. That's the point of the resolution, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Member for the District of Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. Member for St. George's Humber

for this motion today. It's a topic that based on the past number of

years in terms of what we've seen in the development and the expansion

of our oil and gas industry. Obviously, as we know from where we are

today and some of the seismic work that has been done over the past

couple of years, we're at the very early stages of our oil and gas

industry with what will be four producing platforms in the near future;

so very early stages in terms of the development of the industry in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

The motion certainly references Norway. Obviously, the difference from

us and Norway one of the significant differences is Norway is a

sovereign state. It controls full scope in terms of what they do, in

terms of from a federal point of view, in terms of national taxation

and all kinds of national initiatives. We're fully cognizant of the fact

that Norway is a sovereign state and has significant control.

Having said that, obviously in Newfoundland and Labrador, being one of

10 provinces and three territories with the federation of Canada, we

work within the confines of that structure. We know through the Atlantic

Accord it renders us opportunities and abilities to handle the overall

development of that resource as if it was on land. That gives, and has

given us tremendous return to date. But, as I said, the vast opportunity

lies ahead in terms of the riches from the offshore. The C-NLOPB is the

joint mechanism in terms of regulating that and overseeing it. That

plays a role, too, in terms of getting the wealth from that resource

offshore.

So as I said, it's important to recognize in this, in the context, and

the motion references Norway, I think it's important to go back and look

at how Norway started. Certainly, it is a sovereign state. We have

started, and where we are in terms of our overall development of our

sector related to Norway.

Obviously, too, I certainly take exception of a more responsible I'll

just talk when I go through about some of the initiatives and the

expenditures that have evolved from the royalties from oil and gas to

date, and what we as the past administration have done in looking at

that and investing in Newfoundland and Labrador, in many facets whether

its education, whether its capital infrastructure, whether its research

and development. It is extremely important in terms of driving the

economic opportunities of the future.

Research and development is an interesting one, because in our Energy

Plan in 2007 we certainly recognized that with the creation of Nalcor.

It's one component of it, which was pretty well copied from the creation

Norway did in regard to Statoil, modelled after that. Another component

Norway did and has been very successful with was the research and

development component.

Obviously, the Research and Development Corporation that was created by

our administration in 2007 or roughly thereafter as an entity to drive

research and development in the industry, and others as well, but

recognizing there is great opportunity from the Atlantic Accord to

access revenues to be directed to areas like education and research and

development which drive the opportunity. It's almost a multiplier effect

in terms of the opportunities in the oil and gas sector. That allows for

new technology; it allows for innovation. As I said, it allows for

enhanced education and expertise to be driven. That component too was

modelled after Norway.

I know last week, the past couple of weeks the Minister of BTCRD had the

opportunity to partake in announcements related to the Research and

Development Corporation, and proudly, I would say. I think he was at

Memorial and other areas where we have invested in RDC to build that

opportunity for innovation and R&D, which is so important and it's

applied. You work with industry. The Research and Development

Corporation has much success in terms of leveraging private sector

dollars.

One of the intents of RDC was in terms of driving that revenue and

getting access to it, partnering with the private sector to find

solutions, to innovate and to find areas where you can have further

enhancements in the industry, which drive opportunities for all

concerned, whether it's companies, whether it's royalties that are paid

back to the provincial Treasury. If you can extract greater amounts of

oil, more efficiency, it's done as a better return, and it means greater

royalties back to the province that we can reinvest in all areas of the

province. That's a very important component of it, too, when you talk

about Norway and the things we have done in terms of modelling what they

did.

Norway went through in the North Sea in 1969 and started that country's

first oil field. Production started in the early '70s. I think it was

about '71 they went to production mode. In 1990, Norway's parliament

passed a law to establish the Government Pension Fund. Then in 2006 the

fund was called the Petroleum Fund, when it was renamed the Government

Pension Fund Global. The change highlighted the fund's role in saving

government revenues to finance an expected increase in future pension

costs. So you can see how they analyzed in terms of those revenues being

generated, how you extract those and where they go and what they do.

Really, when you look at Norway and a legacy fund, they were 20 years in

or 20 years plus before they got to establish a legacy fund. I think if

you go back and look at what all parties have said, if I remember

correctly, is that there's certainly an understanding that it's

somewhere we need to go, establish a legacy fund.

Much like we did when we started to receive some of those royalties, we

reinvested them in infrastructure much like Norway had done. When you

have an infrastructure deficit you need to deal with that. You need to

put them into areas to build your society, build your province so you

have a stable future long term. That's all part of doing that, Mr.

Speaker.

There have been some studies done in terms of looking at the global

crisis in terms of managing energy-based economics and economies and how

that's done. If you go back and look at Norway in the late '60s, early

'70s, again, it was not the buoyant economy and buoyant society they

have today. Obviously they built that from the riches in terms of their

natural resources, oil and gas.

A policy decision, first and foremost, just like Norway. They built

their infrastructure. They met their deficits in terms of that

infrastructure building their communities and regions. That was

important to do and very similar to what we have done, or the previous

administration had done, in terms of recognizing those royalties. A huge

deficit in terms of various aspects of society and worked on the social

and economic side to build those.

Then the other two components, one I mentioned earlier, the creation of

Nalcor to have an overall mandate to look out for energy development in

the province, much like Statoil. Publicly owned, a public asset for the

people of the province that allows it to continue to generate for

generations to come, not only non-renewable resource but renewable

resource.

You look at taking some of that investment and investing in a project

like Muskrat Falls, let alone through the construction of that, and the

significant input into the economics of the province and what it has

done, but it's meant for long-term return. So as long as the water keeps

running when that facility is built, we'll continue to generate

electricity, first and foremost for our needs, our residential,

commercial and industrial activity. It creates huge opportunities.

That's a legacy fund in and of itself.

That option is there for the future to come so it meets our needs. It

gives us capacity to sell excess energy. It generates revenue and,

through a loan guarantee and through borrowing and equity in Nalcor and

overall in a project like Muskrat Falls, brings returns back. It'll be

paid off and generate revenues and be an ongoing revenue generation for

the province for decades to come. That's part of the investment.

So to suggest that it wasn't done responsibly or wasn't done with a

vision of where we wanted to go, I mean, that's not accurate at all. It

was based on a direction of where we wanted to go in getting that return

to bring it back to the people of the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador who basically own that energy component of the province through

Nalcor.

I know some of the Members here along the way in terms of sanctioning

the project and the oversight of the project, the Minister of Finance,

the Minister of TW was involved in that through the board of Nalcor,

would share some unique experience in regard to that. And that's great

that they have that experience and the understanding and certainly to

bring that knowledge and expertise to themselves now as they sit around

the Cabinet table.

All of that means that we are directed towards long-term components of

what Norway has done and looked at several things that we have copied

and in generating those revenues as well invested very heavily in terms

of various aspects of life for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, whether

its reduction in personal income tax, putting dollars back into people's

pockets so they can certainly we have seen huge retail sales in the

past number years that drive local economies, which is so important.

Again, I talked about infrastructure. Over the past 10 years, there's

almost somewhere in the range of $800 million of government dollars

alone. If you carry in federal, it's up around $1.2 billion. That's

everything from schools, long-term care, hospitals, you name it,

throughout Newfoundland and Labrador highways. The list goes on; it is

continuous.

That's building your economy. We have very buoyant findings offshore in

terms of reserves and it's decades to come in terms of how we grow that,

and that will be part of the overall vision.

You can stand and say that you didn't agree that the expenditures should

be made; that's fine. Folks on the other side or any side can stand up

and say there were expenditures here, we invested here and you shouldn't

have invested there; that's fine. But stand and say where the money

shouldn't have been spent. That's fine. That's fair game. We can have a

policy discussion about that, but identify where it shouldn't be spent.

Again, when you look at equalization, the past 10 years roughly, as

federal dollars were pulled out, provincial dollars needed to replace

it; somewhere in the range of $10 billion would have to be put in by the

province as the federal money came out. There are other areas where the

money had gone. So it's broad ranging certainly in terms of the future

and looking back on what the intent was in terms of things like the

Energy Plan and where we are to today.

Mr. Speaker, having said that, I'd like to propose an amendment to the

motion. I move, seconded by the Member for Cape St. Francis, that the

resolution be amended in the first clause by deleting the words been

more responsible and; in the second clause by deleting the word

failed and substituting the word worked; and by adding to the final

resolution clause immediately after the word province the words when

the government returns to surplus.

The resolution, as amended, would be:

WHEREAS as other jurisdictions,

such as Norway, have used sovereign wealth funds which created a

long-term legacy from non-renewable resource development; and

WHEREAS the previous government worked to manage resource revenues in a

responsible manner;

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly supports the establishment of

a legacy fund in this province when the government returns to a surplus

which will result in long-term benefits from non-renewable natural

resources.

MR. JOYCE:

(Inaudible) do it

with a straight face.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

I'll certainly do

it with a straight face, I say to the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

I've seen first-hand in Municipal Affairs the investment we've made in

Newfoundland and Labrador with our royalties. I challenge you to stand

up and say where we shouldn't have spent that money in infrastructure,

Madam Speaker.

MADAM SPEAKER

(Dempster):

Order, please!

I just remind the Member to direct his comments to the Chair.

MR. JOYCE:

He asked me to

stand up. Can I take the last three minutes of your time?

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE:

Okay, well don't

go saying it if you are not going to let me stand up.

MADAM SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

I say to the hon.

Member, when he does have a time to stand up he can identify for us, in

his district or any district here, where that would be. I certainly

encourage him to do that.

MR. JOYCE:

(Inaudible.)

MADAM SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Madam Speaker, I

certainly put this motion forward, the amendment, and I'd ask for

consideration.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MADAM SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The Member for Ferryland has proposed an amendment to the motion, so the

House will take a brief recess to consider the motion.

Recess

MADAM SPEAKER:

Because they impose a condition, the amendments are not in order.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MADAM SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Thank you,

Madam Speaker.

It's a privilege to speak today in the House to the private Member's

resolution that the Member has put forward. I look forward to addressing

some of the items the Member opposite mentioned in his speaking notes.

It was interesting, as I listened to his comments, there is no doubt

that Newfoundland and Labrador has many similarities to Norway. It would

have, I believe, almost the same coastal line in kilometres as Norway,

or close to it. It has rich oil resources. We have a population that is

very passionate and committed, but one of the big differences is

Norway's population is 10 times the size of our population, Madam

Speaker. I think therein lies the problem with what we've seen in our

province in the last decade.

Members opposite talk about capital spending. As many people in this

House already know, and certainly those listening at home would

understand, capital money and operating money are two different things.

Investments in capital are investments that you make and you stop.

Investments in operating and responsibilities for operating continue

into the future.

Many people believe that while the former administration was spending

capital money, they ignored things like the revenue line, which I hope

to provide some examples today as to the things they ignored. They also

ignored the ongoing spending they were incurring from an operating

perspective, allowing operating costs to continue to rise. Again, in a

population of 500,000 people, not making the decision to take some of

the very valuable oil royalties that we had at our disposal to be able

to use to cushion us during future times is a premise of the private

Member's resolution today.

I'm very proud to stand in this House and discuss one of the many, many

solid commitments that have been made by our government. We promised the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador better management, real leadership

and a stronger tomorrow, and that stronger tomorrow will be built on the

realization that we have to not only celebrate the good times, but we

have to be very careful and prudently prepare for the difficult times.

These are difficult times for Newfoundland and Labrador. If the former

government had planned for the difficult times, instead of creating a

culture of spend, spend, spend within government, we may have been

better prepared for these difficult times. They didn't. So now as the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador have mandated us to do, we are

planning for the future. We are putting the provisions in place so that

our children and our grandchildren will not have to ever weather a

financial storm like the one we have inherited from the previous

government.

We know the long-term future is bright. We also know we will weather

this fiscal storm and we will persevere. Working together and addressing

our reality together, we will leverage our resources to create a legacy

of wealth for our children and grandchildren.

Without action, Madam Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador will face

mounting debt, increasing interest and borrowing costs, a further credit

rate downgrade and restricted ability to support key program spending.

We have a plan to address the current fiscal challenges facing the

province. We are currently in the first year of a multi-year Government

Renewal Initiative that will identify a combination of measures to

eliminate the province's deficit and move forward with a sustainable

budgetary framework for Newfoundland and Labrador.

As Finance Minister, I am also, along with my Treasury Board colleagues,

in the process of identifying further savings within government

departments which will be part of budget 2016. On budget day,

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will very clearly see our plan for this

province and what we have done as part of our short-term plans to start

to reshape the province's fiscal future.

Our medium-term plan and further actions will be part of our mid-year

update this year, and we will continue our actions into budget 2017. The

fiscal challenges we are facing as a province did not happen overnight,

nor will they be fixed overnight; however, we still are looking to the

future. We are looking to the legacy we want to leave our children, our

families and our communities. I am so proud of the leadership our

Premier has shown and I am proud to be part of a government that

recognizes we must plan for the future.

The Premier has mandated me, as Minister of Finance, to ensure that our

resources not only benefit the present generation, but future

generations as well. I have been mandated to, when the financial

situation improves, establish a legacy fund. At that time, a proportion

of total oil revenues will be invested in a diversified wealth fund with

a goal of compounding our oil wealth for the future.

The legacy fund will be bound by strict investment and operational rules

with a view to discipline and prudent financial management for the

long-term stability of our province. We promise the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador that revenues from natural resources their

revenues will be used to build a stronger legacy for the children of

our province and a stronger tomorrow.

Madam Speaker, I am not nave enough to think that within the next

couple of years we will be able to deposit any revenue into a fund like

this. The fiscal situation we are facing is unprecedented. It is

requiring us to balance our wants and our needs. However, what I am

committed to is to put in place a structure of which a legacy fund

enshrined and enshrine that structure in legislation so this

government and future governments will always be thinking to the future

and planning for a rainy day.

As I have said in the past, it's raining now. If the former government

had saw fit to plan for a rainy day, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

may not be facing such an unprecedented situation.

The Members opposite will say the fall of the price of oil couldn't be

predicted, that they invested the oil revenues they had wisely. The

previous administration would have you believe that the fiscal problems

are beyond our control due to the decline of oil. Well, that's not the

full story.

In 2013-14, with an assumption of $105 oil, the previous administration

was prepared to run a $564 million deficit. In 2014-15, again, with the

assumption of $105 oil, the previous government budgeted for a $538

million deficit. The actual recorded deficit for 2014-15 turned out to

be much higher at $986 million, primarily due to lower-than-anticipated

revenues during the year. In 2015-16, with a budget based on $62 oil,

the former administration was prepared to run a deficit of $1.1 billion.

So for three years in a row now, when oil price was much higher than it

is today, the previous government planned to spend a three-year total of

$2.2 billion more than it forecasted to take in. Furthermore, the rapid

drop in oil prices and production levels this year will likely add

another $695 million to the projected deficit. Clearly, the fact the

previous government planned to spend more than it took in, at a time

when oil prices were two and three times what they are today, speaks to

the real challenge.

I believe the resounding mandate that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

gave us on November 30 speaks to what they think about the former

administration's fiscal policy and investments.

Oil is not a fiscal policy. The previous administration mismanaged $25

billion in oil revenues and failed to diversify the economy. We need to

get our fiscal position restored, and when we return to surplus we must

create a legacy fund. At that time, a portion of oil revenues will be

invested in a diversified wealth fund.

I am sure when Members opposite rise in this House today to speak of a

legacy fund they will say they too as we heard previous talked about

establishing a legacy fund. The difference here is all they did was talk

about it. We're actually going to do it. If they were really committed

to establishing a legacy fund for the betterment of future generations,

they would have done something about it in 2007 when they knew they

knew oil was at its peak production. They would have done something

about it when oil prices were riding high in 2008 at over $148, at a

peak price that year. Rather, they continued to spend 22 to 30 per cent

higher than any other provinces.

What did they do? Nothing, no plans, no thought to future generations.

Stronger leadership means making the right decisions today. We need to

develop a plan based on the financial circumstances facing us today.

While I do believe the future prospects are bright, I am not prepared to

spend tomorrow's revenues today. The previous administration spent all

available funds and did not establish a legacy fund to preserve benefits

of our resources for future generations. We will act differently. We

have committed to a legacy fund and we will deliver.

We have a responsibility to use our resources to not only benefit the

present generation, but future generations as well. As part of a legacy

plan, the provincial government will restore fiscal balance to our

province and establish a diversified wealth fund once it has moved back

to surplus. We will ensure, through legislation, that no other

government will have the opportunity lost that we are faced with today

based on the actions of the former administration.

I'm confident that, working together, we will address our reality.

Together, we will leverage our resources to create a legacy of wealth

for our children and grandchildren. Madam Speaker, as Finance Minister

for this government, I can assure you the decisions we make will be

based on not only what must happen today, but with a clear eye to the

burden of debt and the burden we pass on to future generations. I'm not

prepared to pass on that burden. I, with my colleagues, intend to do

everything we can to ensure we deal with that through the introduction

of a legacy fund in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MADAM SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear,

hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Madam

Speaker.

It's indeed a privilege and an honour to get to speak in this sitting of

the House of Assembly to a private member's bill.

I'm a little disappointed the amendment didn't go through, Madam

Speaker, but we do understand here that the democratic process wins out.

The discussion will be very open and no doubt very engaging and very

informative, I hope, for our listeners and watchers at home, and I know

for my colleagues here in the House of Assembly.

This is an important discussion we're having here because it talks about

not only the future of Newfoundland and Labrador, but it talks about the

past also. It talks about where we are. There's no doubt, we all admit

we're facing some challenges in this province right now. There are a

number of reasons for that. Obviously, the big one is the price of oil.

It's a commodity that we're very reliant on. The other obvious

revenue-generating streams that are important to this province that we

have no control over are the mineral industry, other parts of that.

What this is about, Madam Speaker, is looking at how we address the

needs of the people in Newfoundland and Labrador, presently and into the

future. The legacy fund, while ideology-wise is a great thing to have,

right now it's not and shouldn't be the priority of the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador. What we have here are immediate needs.

I've heard my colleagues from the Third Party talk about poverty in this

province. We, as an administration, looked at how we address poverty

over the last decade, how we tried to put in programs and services and

find ways of inclusion to prevent people from not having a leg up.

Madam Speaker, we tried to address all of those. Were we successful in

all of them? No, we weren't. Were we successful in a number of programs

and services that gave people supports and managed to move them to the

next level? Sure we were. Were we very successful in being able to work

with the business entity, locals, provincial, national, international

entities here that would invest, so that we'd have a better society for

the people of this province, and, particularly, that we'd have a future

for the next generations? We did that, Madam Speaker.

What we did face were some challenges around catching up. Like Norway

if you look at the documentation around Norway Norway's investment

came after they took care of their infrastructure needs and the needs of

the people.

We were accused one time that we gave people everything they wanted. No,

we didn't. What we tried to do was give people what they needed, give

them the supports they would have needed, be it in health care, be it in

education, be it in infrastructure. It was giving the people back an

opportunity to take control of their own lives and their own destinies,

and be partners, not controlled by any level of government, regardless

of the political partisan and, particularly, not being reliant on a

federal jurisdiction.

We moved that along, Madam Speaker. That's because we found ways to

partner with people. We found ways to be creative in what we did. We

found ways to ensure that every part of this province got what it

needed, not particularly what everybody wanted, but what it needed to be

able to move to the next level. Particularly around the next level was

ensuring that there'd be generational support for people.

The best way to keep our young people engaged in our communities is to

make sure that those communities are vibrant. To do that, we invested.

Sometimes people who weren't familiar with those communities questioned

why you would invest millions for a small population. Because we're all

part and parcel of the bigger picture in this province, Madam Speaker,

and that's about ensuring that the longevity and the success of this

province is equally shared. We did that in a number of areas. In some

areas there was more work to be done. No doubt, in our election platform

we had plans to be able to address that, but our first responsibility

was dealing with the deficit that we were going to have and try to

minimize the impact it would have on people, particularly those who are

vulnerable.

Our leader and our caucus sat down and we designed what we felt would be

a strategy over the next five years to be able to do that. Part of our

platform was around a generation fund, that we would know we would get

to a point because we have a responsibility. Every generation has a

responsibility to ensure the next generation is better off, have more

opportunities and have to face less challenges down the road.

Now, sometimes you can control that, sometimes you can't. Sometimes it's

about ensuring the proper mechanism is in place so that when you do hit

a hurdle along the way or a bump in the road, you've got a way to deal

with it. Sometimes the old clich, step backwards to get two steps

forward, is reality. In some cases you get hit a little bit more and you

take two steps backward for every step forward.

Well, we're at that stage right now. We're at a stage where that can be

dealt with. We can still ensure people in this province that this is a

vibrant community. I'm glad the Minister of Finance outside of all the

attacks and barbs she made at the previous administration did say that

there's confidence in this province, and there should be.

I know, and our leader and this caucus here, has every confidence in the

people in this province, every confidence in the business community. We

have confidence that the international business community realizes the

benefits of investing in Newfoundland and Labrador and what that means

for their economy also, regardless of where they are.

Norway again, like us started off as one of the poorest communities

in Europe, one of the poorest countries; 10 times our populous, but

still had some very challenging situations to deal with over there

around infrastructure, around education, around health care. They first

wanted to look at what were their priorities, and they set their

priorities. If you look at the process they put in place, they first sat

down and had consultations to include the general public around what are

the needs that need to be addressed in their particular jurisdictions.

We did that over the last decade. One thing we were accused of sometimes

is too much consultation. I remember being accused, as Minister of

Transportation, because I wanted to consult with ferry users around

what's the best system we could put in place to address the needs of

communities that have to be serviced by ferries. The best way you can

solve somebody's problems is including the people who live them every

day, who face the challenges, who've seen it from a generational change

of what comes and goes within the mechanism of improving their

lifestyles.

So what Norway did and was very successful with was they identified

what they thought their revenue streams would be over the next number of

decades. They then started to look at how they would invest that money,

and invest it particularly into their infrastructure. Their

infrastructure would also grow, but also support their existing

industries. They did that. They took 20 years to ensure all those things

were in place. They did it around proper training. They did it around

investing in other parts of the world to ensure they had what they felt

was a fallback revenue stream if something happened in their own

country.

I thought it a very good strategic move, something that we, ourselves,

here have looked at and have been doing. I think we've done it very

successfully over the last 10 years and that's in Nalcor. We established

an entity that is known around the globe for being very successful,

having some of the best people in the world working on some of the top

projects in the world.

Dividing out certain aspects of how our revenue streams can be

diversified, so that if we have an impact that one is lower, we have an

ability to offset that with another part of it. Taking control,

particularly if we're doing some of our seismic work on the offshore, so

we're not relying on some other companies to come in at their leisure or

dictate to us what the costing should be or what the revenue generated

for us should be through our royalties. We changed all these things to

ensure that we had a legacy.

Madam Speaker, our legacy is still in the works. Nalcor is still part of

that. An entity that, some will say, is valued at $20 billion. That's

because we invested in Muskrat Falls, something owned by the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador. Here's part of our legacy.

Do we still believe there's a rainy day fund needed? Sure it is, but you

have to fix your roof first before you have to worry about the rain. If

the rain is coming in now, that's your first priority. That's what we've

been doing for the last decade, Madam Speaker.

With that being said, we do encourage the Members on the other side, the

ministers and their caucus to be very cognizant of the needs of people

out there. No doubt they're going to streamline spending, and there are

areas that can be done. I do encourage them to ensure that there has to

be a long-term strategy here. It can't be just about balancing the

books.

Balancing the books is not always the best thing that makes an economy,

a society, viable and very functional. There has to be a balance between

the bottom line financially, and the way citizens here are engaged and

the services that they, themselves, can provide in their own

communities, but particularly the ones they can avail of. It's more

beneficial to everybody in society if people have an ability to take

control of their own stake in life.

What we did, similar to Norway, was address what our particular needs

were. We looked at that. We were very successful in moving that forward.

Norway took to 20 years. Once it was at its 20 years, then it realized

there's X number of dollars, we're going to need to be sustainable. They

built a curve around when oil prices would be up and what their

investments would have to be.

Keep in mind the partners here in this great province of ours. They saw

benefits of partnering with other jurisdictions, and we're one of those.

So they have, obviously, a stake not only in this province, but they see

the vision of where this province is going. They spent billions of

dollars in being part and parcel of that.

We need to keep that vision. If the international world can see that

vision we can't lose sight. Our bottom line might, at times, seem

frightening because from an economics point of view we owe a fair dollar

here. We have to make sure that it doesn't go further and further in

debt. That's fine, but it's that happy balance that has to be put in

place to ensure everybody gets their fair share.

We've looked at it from a number of angles. We've looked at what our

plan would have been had we formed government. It would have been about

being sustainable through a process of encouraging, engaging and finding

ways for everybody, every part of our society, from our municipalities,

from our jurisdictions in education, our health care to our average

citizens of what role they play in us being able to, first of all,

minimize the costing of services that we provide, but also finding ways

to be more efficient, and third, also finding ways that we can generate

our own revenues. Be a little bit more creative than we have been.

Yet, we are a very creative society in this province. Again, no doubt we

got probably a little too reliant on one entity that was bringing in an

abundance of money. No doubt, the partnership with Alberta, the

thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who travel out there on a

weekly basis, working hard, using their expertise, coming back here and

putting their money back into this province was a bonus for us. It was a

bonus we didn't see coming, but was an added bonus, which made it that

much more easier to ensure that things were invested back in,

particularly rural communities in this province, and that there was some

sustainability there.

If you look at our infrastructure, while there are still needs in every

municipality, every service district and even those not incorporated

there are a lot of things that have been done here, a lot of positive

things to ensure that we're still alive and vibrant in this province,

and that it's not doom and gloom. I think that's the picture we have to

paint here.

All of us have a responsibility to let it be known to the people of this

province that it's not doom and gloom. There are some challenges. It's

going to take a partnership between everybody in this province

regardless of political stripe; if you voted, if you didn't vote, what

your income is, what category you lie in, what profession you may work

in. What it has to be here is a collaborative approach by everybody. We

need to be open and honest with people and we need to be realistic. What

are the things that we need to sustain? What are the things that we need

to change? We do encourage the government to do that.

They've got a consultation process and no doubt you'll get a lot of good

ideas. You'll get people telling you what they want. There are going to

be a lot of groups who figure they need more because their vested

interest is sincere. They've got challenges they need to face. No doubt

they feel investment in their particular program or service will benefit

everybody. In most cases, it will save money down the road, no doubt. So

all of that has to be balanced out.

Sometimes you need to invest money to save money. It's finding that

balance. That's what we'll be holding the government's feet to the fire

on. It is finding that balance. We'll criticize when we think you've

gone either too far or you're not on the right perspective when it comes

to what services need to be put in place and where you can cut. There's

no doubt, cuts can happen.

Like everybody, I was a civil servant for nearly three decades, so I

know there are programs and services that should be pumped up and

supported. There are some other ones that have outlived their legacy and

maybe should be moving on. There are other things that no longer are the

responsibility of government. They should be given to another entity or

can be done in a different way. There's no doubt about that.

What we do ask and do encourage and we'll hold you to the fire on this

is let people know what you're doing. Ask them what they really think.

Sometimes maybe you're going to have to put the harsh reality to them.

That's good. That's fine. That's reality. I've got no problem standing

up and defending when I think there's something that's real. People have

to accept there are certain things that are no longer in the best

interests of the majority here.

There's also a minority of people here who need to be taken care of.

Those who come from economic challenge, for whatever reason be it

their education situation, their health situation, the geographical,

their stake in life, things that have gone wrong or the challenges they,

themselves, face we can't forget them also.

I keep going; this will have to be about balance. I give credit: it's

been noted a number of times that there has to be a balance. I know

we've said it on this side of the House about balance. I know I've heard

a couple of your Members out saying this is about balance. It's about

not shocking people; it's about finding a way to make things work.

No doubt, over the next number of months here in the House of Assembly,

particularly as we get into debating the budget, we'll have an

opportunity to see which things that I'll be proud to stand up and give

you a nod and say, good job, keep doing that. There will be times we'll

stand up and there's no doubt we'll challenge it. We'll ask you to

explain how you think that's going to benefit the people of this

province. That's fair. That's democracy. I would hope it will all be

done with the full intention that, at the end of the day, the people of

this province benefit and the next generation will benefit because of

the investments we made.

Right now, unfortunately, Madam Speaker, as my time gets down, I can't

support this private Member's bill. At this point, I feel the government

is not ready. We need to take care of the people that are in this

province.

MADAM SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. BRAZIL:

We cannot plan

for a rainy day. We've got to take heed for the people right now.

MADAM SPEAKER:

I remind the

Member his time has expired.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Madam

Speaker.

MADAM SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Minister of Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Madam

Speaker.

I'm pleased to have the opportunity to speak to today's private Member's

motion, the establishment of a legacy fund for Newfoundland and

Labrador, a fund that will result in long-term benefits from

non-renewable natural resources. I'm surprised to hear hon. Members

opposite say they will not be supporting this motion. I'm a bit

surprised, actually, because it is something we need to ensure we have

long-term prosperity.

I think the people of the province look to us being good stewards in the

non-renewable resources and ensuring that we have what we need for our

children and for our grandchildren, and being responsible with the

finances of this province, something that I think is critically

important.

Allow me to just focus for a few minutes on the legacy fund successes in

other jurisdictions because I think you've heard a lot today about

Norway. There's Norway, there's Alberta and there are others that have

legacy fund models that have been successful. I think there is some work

to be done for us on this side of the House to make sure that we are

choosing the right model that works for Newfoundland and Labrador.

In 1990, the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund was established to counter

the effects of future declines in income and to smooth out the effects

of highly fluctuating oil prices. Doesn't that sound familiar, Madam

Speaker? As we look to the current environment, here was Norway a number

of years ago saying they needed to ensure that they have long-term

sustainability.

Surplus wealth provided by Norwegian petroleum income is deposited into

this fund. The fund is officially known as the Government Pension Fund

Global, but it's also most colloquially known as the oil fund or the

heritage fund. The fund is not actually a pension fund in the

traditional sense. It was funded by taxes and profits from the oil

sector and not from pension contributions.

The fund is financed by taxes on companies operating in the North Sea,

payments for licences to explore in the offshore area and dividends from

its partial ownership of Statoil. Currently, all the government of

Norway's oil- and gas-related income, including taxes, ownership shares

and dividends, are invested in that fund.

The Norwegian government's budget is not dependent on current petroleum

revenues. Imagine if our current budget wasn't dependent on our current

petroleum revenues. In preparing the annual government budget,

projected non-oil revenues can fall short of projected expenditures

with the gap is to be filled by the average real return on the oil

fund's investments . So because they have this wealth fund from the

offshore oil, they are able to actually have revenues generated by those

investments.

The Norwegian fund is a good example of the primary focus being on the

establishment of long-term investment funds so as to maximise the

financial wealth held in the fund. In Norway, the long-term motivation

of the fund is to create a pot of sustainable wealth that can be used to

finance the country's future social security obligations. Growing the

underlying asset wealth of the fund and ensuring that it continues to

exist on a permanent basis is to benefit future generations and is

widely seen as the best way forward.

This contrasts with the heritage fund of Alberta. Alberta initially put

a greater emphasis on using the fund to assist economic development, so

it's another way of going about utilizing these types of funds. Over

the past thirty years, nearly $30 billion CAD has been transferred from

the fund to the government's general purpose budget for spending on

government programmes and in particular to pay for investment in

infrastructure . That's how Alberta has its funds.

No restrictions were placed on withdrawals from the fund, and in fact

the opportunity to take revenues directly from the fund's asset base was

a clear objective of the fund from the offset. So what I'm trying to

point out, Madam Speaker, is there are many ways to have these types of

funds.

They restructured that fund in 1997 and now the Alberta fund has adopted

a strategy that's more comparable to that of Norway. The objective of

the fund is now 'to provide prudent stewardship of the savings from

Alberta's non-renewable resources by providing the greatest financial

returns for current and future generations of Albertans.'

At the end of 2014, the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund was about $863

billion US, only about 1 per cent of the global equity markets. It's

astounding. The Norwegian Ministry of Finance forecasts the fund will

reach $1 trillion by the end of 2019. If you think about that, Madam

Speaker, think of how Norway has invested in its future value and for

future generations.

There are other countries that have established sovereign funds as well,

including the United Arab Emirates; they have a fund that is valued in

excess of $800 billion US, Kuwait that has about $400 billion US and

even Russia has accumulated about $180 billion in their fund.

In saying all of that, let me tell you a little bit about the province's

prospectivity and tremendous opportunity in our offshore and how it can

benefit our province for future generations. Madam Speaker, as we turn

our attention to how we should manage the offshore oil and gas revenues

and wealth and future wealth, I would like to just remind us all of how

important our oil and gas industry is and how we certainly have

incredible oil and gas prospects for future generations.

We have a bright future and this government will take its responsibility

very seriously, and we'll use our resources to not only benefit the

present generation but for generations to come, ensuring a solid,

sustainable future.

Now, since the beginning of our oil gas industry, some 30 years ago,

we've come a long way. We've developed supply and service industries.

We've created some infrastructure. There's been join ventures and new

contracts have been established. We've developed the regulatory

framework. There are royalties and benefits agreements and arrangements,

and the operators have built their platforms and we've started

production. We've evolved as an industry, built our expertise and now we

are introduced to the world through our offshore.

We certainly have grown substantively and we have much success with

three producing projects: Hibernia, Terra Nova and White Rose, produced

over 1.5 billion barrels of oil. Hebron is next and is expected to

produce 700 million barrels of oil. The Bay du Nord discovery, the

Flemish Pass, is estimated to contain between 300 million and 600

million barrels of oil.

But the story just begins there. We've done extensive geoscience that

includes seismic acquisition; we have quality data on our offshore

prospects that's attracting global attention. We now have acquired more

than 110,000 line kilometres of modern 2D seismic data and the

province's seismic program is one of the largest ongoing offshore 2D

seismic programs in the world today.

Through the surveying, we have found significant new basins and, to

date, have defined over 350 new leads and prospects. Think about that,

ladies and gentleman, my hon. colleagues, to the people that are

listening: 350 new leads and prospects tremendous opportunity in our

offshore. The entire world is watching our offshore developments. It is

really material to those around the globe who are looking for new

opportunities.

A large portion of the new seismic survey has been acquired over the

slope and deepwater frontier, so it's a new area. If you think about

where Jeanne d'Arc Basin is and where our current activity is, now we

are looking at the slope and deepwater which is different, which is a

new frontier for Newfoundland and Labrador.

Newfoundland and Labrador's slope and deepwater areas represent one of

the world's last great frontiers. We are no w

assessing and quantifying the oil and gas resource potential for all

upcoming licensing rounds and delivering these findings to the global

industry prior to the bid closing. So in other words, we're going out

there and we're saying to the world, to those who are involved in the

industry and saying, look, we know that there are 350 new leads and

prospects, here's what they look like, here's where they are, and we're

attracting a great deal of attention.

In the Orphan Basin area, which is coming up in this year's licensing

round in 2016, the Orphan Basin area so if you think of the Jeanne

d'Arc Basin, which is where Hibernia is today and Terra Nova, then we

have the Flemish Pass where I just talked to you about how there's been

a discovery of between 300 million and 600 million barrels, and now the

Orphan Basin, which is another area, we're looking at a whole new,

different look to that play trend. It has recently been imaged and it's

confirmed in the new seismic data and we are creating a lot of

interest around the world today. This newly revealed play trend is

attracting global industry attention and is similar, for example the

analogues, what it looks like in the seismic data is what it looks like

off the coast of Brazil, another global basin. So when you think about

the amount of work going on in offshore Brazil, you could see that this

new basin, this new discovery, this new area that is coming up for

licensing rounds in 2016, is certainly of interest. o:p>

The sheer size of these prospects in the Or