Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Oral Questions; Statements by Ministers — 25 March 2002 (44th General Assembly, 4th Session, Vol. XLIV No. 4)
2002-03-25
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
March 25, 2002 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 4
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!
On Thursday, March 14, the hon. the Minister of Justice rose on a point of
order concerning remarks attributed to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition
during Oral Questions. The minister stated: I heard the Leader of the Opposition
make a statement that three of the prosecutors involved in the investigation and
prosecution of the Gregory Parsons' matter may have since gone to the Bench.
I also heard the Leader of the Opposition make a statement that it would not
be of any benefit to have a current sitting judge of our Supreme Court make an
inquiry. The Chair did not hear those comments to which the minister alluded,
and took the matter under advisement.
I reviewed Hansard, of course, and the words were not recorded in Hansard.
Then I listened to the tape, and I replayed the tape a number of times, but
certainly could not heard the context of the comments that the minister had
referred to.
The Chair therefore rules that there was no point of order.
As well, on Wednesday, March 20, the hon. the Premier rose on a point of
privilege concerning comments made by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition
about the Report of the Auditor General. The hon. the Premier stated that the
remarks of the hon. the Leader of the Opposition amounted to abuse to the Office
of the Auditor General.
Under reviewing Hansard, the Chair has concluded that there is a difference
of opinion between the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition about the
interpretation of comments made in the Report of the Auditor General, and
therefore rules that there is no prima facie case of breach of privilege
established.
The Chair would like to welcome today, sixty Grade 5 students from St. Kevin's
Elementary. The students are from the Kilbride district and the Ferryland
district, and they are accompanied by teachers, Ms Davis and Ms Beaupertuis, as
well as chaperones, Christine Burke, Peggy Mercer, Christine Shaw, Theresa Gale,
Diane Rice, Yvonne Whelan, Michelle Downey, Ken Best, Jim O"Neill, Ron
Ershler, and Andrea Kavanagh.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is with much pride that I rise to inform members of this hon. House that
this past weekend Marble Mountain hosted the 2002 Canadian Freestyle Ski
Championships.
This is the second year in a row that Marble Mountain, in conjunction with
the Marble Mountain Event Management Group, has hosted a Canadian National
Freestyle Championships. My colleagues may recall that last year Marble Mountain
hosted the Canadian National Junior Freestyle Championships.
This event attracted athletes from six Canadian provinces and members of
Canada's World Cup Team and Moguls Development Team, and a group of
free-stylists aptly called Flight School.
Included in the athletes were several Canadian National Champions, two World
Champions in the aerial event and Salt Lake City Olympic Medal winners, Veronica
Brenner and Diedre Dionne.
While high winds on Saturday and Sunday resulted in the cancellation of the
men's aerials, all aspects of the course layout, organization and facilities,
drew high praise from Joe Fitzgerald of the International Ski Federation, who
hinted that Marble would be the site of the 2003 World Junior Championships.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MERCER: I ask all members to join with me in congratulating Sean
Dolter, Chair of the Marble Mountain Event Management Group, and his team of
volunteers for making Marble Mountain better known to Canadian skiers, and
Newfoundland and Labrador better known to the world.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.
MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts representing 10 million
members has singled out the Senior Branches of the Springdale Girl Guides for an
extremely rare award. The association meets once every four years, at which time
it hands out just four Olave awards to cover all of its 140 member countries.
Springdale has been distinguished because of its community service project in
which eight girls and three leaders spent nine days in Guatemala working on
construction projects and with the country's children. To pay their way, they
held forty-seven fundraising projects, found sponsors, and collected $36,000
from a town of less than 4,000.
The girls were profoundly affected by the project, Mr. Speaker. They said,
"[the Guatemala people we helped] had so little, yet they were so happy. It
helped us understand that happiness is not based on what you have."
These are fine words indeed, Mr. Speaker.
The girls who attended were: Melanie Turner, Tia Normore, Kylee Russell,
Mandy Miller, Leslie Earle, Holly Rolfe, Jessica Warford, and Meagan Hounsell,
and the three alternates were: Kristen Hewlett, Heather Halfyard and Laura
Robertson.
Mr. Speaker, I ask this hon. House to join me today with congratulation to
all the girls, to the branch leaders, Marion Smith, Maud McCarty and Kathy
Bixby, and to the Town of Springdale for their tremendous support.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The inaugural Snow Safari was recently held in Labrador and I am sure this is
the start of something that over time will become a major event.
This trans-Labrador trek involves snowmobiles leaving from three regions of
Labrador: Nain, in the north; Labrador West, in the west, of course; and L'Anse
au Clair in the south. These groups travelled through the 1,500 km in Labrador
winter trails and met in Happy Valley-Goose Bay for the kickoff of Snow-Break
Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to participate, along with my colleagues,
the Minister for Labrador & Aboriginal Affairs, and the Minister for
Tourism, Culture and Recreation. We participated in this snow trek as well by
snowmobiling from Northwest River into Happy Valley-Goose Bay. This was also the
kickoff of the opening of the Access North-Labrador 2002.
Mr. Speaker, winter tourism and snowmobiling in Labrador is becoming an
important industry, and events like the Snow Safari add to the growth of this
sector. I want to commend the organizers and the participants in the first ever
Snow Safari and I would encourage others to consider participating in this event
next year.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.
MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to offer hearty congratulations to a very multi-talented and
accomplished young girl. Maria Philpott, a Grade 5 student at St. Matthew's
Elementary, recently received a Medal of Excellence with the Conservatory of
Music Canada in London, Ontario. Maria received a mark of ninety-two in Grade 2
Piano, and in turn received the highest marks in Newfoundland and Labrador for
this level.
Maria is a member of her church choir at St. Teresa's and she is also a
member of the Newfoundland and Labrador Symphony Youth Choir.
As well as being an accomplished musician, Maria is a very active participant
in sports, both in basketball and soccer. She was, as well, one of three
students at St. Matthew's chosen to represent her school at the Regional
Science Fair.
I ask Members of the House of Assembly to join me today in congratulating
this very talented young lady and in offering her all the best in future
endeavors.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay East & Bell
Island.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WALSH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Recently the Newfoundland and Labrador Youth Parliament Association held
their Provincial Conference at the Holiday Inn, here in St. John's. Delegates
were selected to attend this conference from various Regional Youth Parliaments
across the Province, which are held twice each year.
I had the great pleasure to attend the 37 th Session of the
Provincial Youth Parliament, and observe first hand the quality debate of these
fine young people. During the debate, they discussed many issues, including a
change to the legal driving age, and a resolution concerning Voisey's Bay.
Mr. Speaker, it is apparent from the youth that I saw attending this
conference that many of them will undoubtably be members of this Legislature in
time to come, if not the Parliament of Canada.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join with me in
congratulating all delegates from across the Province who attended this year's
Model Parliament and wish them well in their future involvement in the
democratic process.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, Hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits & White Bay North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Englee Guitar Group attended the Kiwanis Music Festival in Grand
Falls-Windsor on Friday, March 22. The group, made up of eighteen boys and girls
ranging in ages from ten to sixteen, along with their teacher Ms Diane Arthur,
put off a tremendous rendition of Ron Hynes' Sonny's Dream. The performance
on Friday morning earned the Englee Guitar Group the Best Instrumental Group
Award. The adjudicator of the festival praised the group's performance and the
distinguished manner in which they represented their community.
The group's performance, and the ability of the communities and
organizations to come together to ensure that the financial resources were found
to enable these young people to travel to Grand Falls-Windsor, is a testament to
the determination and talent found in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.
On Friday night, the Englee Guitar Group performed in the Stars of the
Festival. They are to be commended on their performance and their award. A
tremendous feat for the group, once again demonstrating that small communities
nurture some of this Province's greatest assets and when given the chance they
can rise to great heights.
I ask all members to join me in congratulating the Englee Guitar Group and
their teacher, Ms Diane Arthur, on this great accomplishment and wish them every
success in the future.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to inform hon. colleagues in this
Legislature about some very encouraging news regarding our efforts to get
changes to the equalization program. In particular, I refer to the results of a
report released last week by the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance.
The report, titled The Effectiveness of and Possible Improvements to the
Present Equalization Policy, included eight recommendations to the federal
government on changes to improve the current equalization program.
The recommendations in the report, Mr. Speaker, include many of the arguments
this Province has been advancing to the federal government on behalf of the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador. In October of last year, I personally made
a presentation to the Senate Committee and brought forward our case for a better
deal on equalization. The Senate report confirms that our case for a better deal
is legitimate and should be acted upon by the federal government. Among other
things, Mr. Speaker, the recommendations include: removing the ceiling on
equalization payments; restoring the ten-province standard; changing the 30:70
generic solution so as to increase the share of the Province's entitlements
that are protected when its non-renewable resource revenues increase; and
undertaking an evaluation of the equalization provisions of the Atlantic Accords
to determine if they have met the intent for which they were designed. These
last two points recognize that the existing arrangements do not give this
Province a fair share of the benefits of our offshore resources.
Mr. Speaker, as hon. members may recall, on December 6, 2000, this House of
Assembly unanimously passed a resolution to seek changes to the equalization
program to make it more responsive to the needs of Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians. I would like to take this opportunity today to thank the Members
of the House of Assembly for their continued support in seeking a fairer deal
for the people of this Province.
Mr. Speaker, the fact that a Senate Committee recognizes the need to improve
the current equalization program is indeed a positive step for the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador. While we fully recognize that this Committee cannot
force the hand of the federal government to implement these important
recommendations, we believe that this report validates the position of this
Province and points clearly to the need for positive changes to the equalization
program. We remain fully committed and even more determined to move this issue
forward and we call upon the federal government to act on the Senate Committee's
recommendations.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, this is one of those rare occasions when the Premier and I, and
our caucus, fully agree. This is indeed a very, very positive step for the
Province. I appreciate the Premier's thanks to all members on this side of
this House for their co-operation. I can assure him, it is something that myself
and my caucus have been pursuing for some time.
In December of 2000, at my leadership candidacy, we spoke of this very issue.
In April, at the leadership convention, we spoke about it again. I was invited,
at the invitation of Premier Hamm, to go to Nova Scotia to attend an event in
June of last year during the by-election in Humber West, and at that point in
time I emphasized the importance of this, and the importance of the fairness
initiative in Atlantic Canada. As well, I have spoken to the Board of Trade, I
have spoken to NAPE and, I can assure the Premier, I have spoken to the other
Atlantic Premiers. I have spoken to Premier Binns about it, I have spoken to
Premier Lord about it, I spoke to Premier Harris before he stepped down, and I
spoke to Premier Klein about it. So we are doing absolutely everything we can to
foster this initiative, and this is good news coming from the Senate Committee.
My only concern - and I do have to express that concern - is the concern
that, I think, was expressed by Peter O'Brien of the Federation of Independent
Business. His concern is that we are perceived as the least accountable
government in the country - and statements in the national papers that we are in
a fiscal mess. It is the increasing of our debt and our deficit, I think, that
portrays us, possibly, as a -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. WILLIAMS: - that has sort of cast us in a negative light. I think it
is very, very important that we show that we are very responsible and can handle
the funds with which we are entrusted in a responsible manner.
I think if that gets cleaned up and if we can enhance our image across the
country, then hopefully the federal government can look upon us in a much more
favourable light.
I do have some concern, of course, that the Finance Minister, Paul Martin,
has indicated that he is not going to do anything until 2004, and we need
something before that.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is good news that the Senate of Canada, or at least its Committee, has
recognized some of the problems facing places like Newfoundland and Labrador
with respect to the equalization formula. I appreciate the words of the Premier
in recognizing that all parties in this Legislature supported the effort to
change the equalization formula. We have a formula, Mr. Speaker, as has been
pointed out - I think I pointed it out a couple of years ago, at least beginning
a couple of years ago - that the Voisey's Bay deal, as presented last time,
$4.9 billion, while this Province would only receive $411 million, less than 10
per cent, in revenues for this Province.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. HARRIS: That one number alone underscores the great difficulty that
we face in pursuing economic development with a formula like that going against
us. This national body, the Senate - a Committee of the Senate, I suppose, not
the whole Senate itself - it is important that they recognize it. It is
important also, I think we should let members of the House know that another
national body, the New Democratic Party, in their convention, supported a motion
made by me in August, 1999, calling for a review of the equalization formula so
that resources and resource development in the Province of Newfoundland and
other provinces can be recognized so that we can achieve maximum results from
our own economic development.
It is an important step, Mr. Speaker, and I hope we can work together in the
future to get the rest of the people in Parliament, particularly the House of
Commons, and the Finance Minister, Paul Martin, to recognize our problems.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, on Friday, March 22, the members of the
Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers Association ratified a collective agreement
that provides improved benefits for teachers and students.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, this new agreement has several components that
demonstrate government's ongoing support of a quality education system in our
Province. It offers essential conditions necessary for teachers to continue
their important role in the education and development of the youth of
Newfoundland and Labrador.
This Province has the shortest school year in the country. We must insure
that our students have every advantage that will allow them to be competitive
nationally and globally. Therefore, the school year will increase by five days
to 195, and teachers will be compensated for this additional instructional time.
Additionally, the length of the school day for grades one to three will be
standardized across the Province to five hours beginning in September 2002. The
retention of 218 teachers in the system, despite the decline of 7,000 students
over the past two years and an anticipated decline in excess of 3,000 this
September, continues to permit one of the best pupil/teacher ratios in Canada.
In recent years school boards have experienced challenges in attracting
teachers to administrative positions in schools. Enhancements in allowances for
principals and vice-principals will encourage more teachers to aspire to these
important roles. As well, the increase in starting salaries for new teachers
should attract more young people to the profession, thereby assisting school
boards in their recruitment efforts.
This government recognizes the importance of providing teachers with
opportunities to become more familiar with new teaching strategies and the
content of new courses and programs which are introduced in our schools. This
new agreement will insure every teacher is provided with three days each year to
engage in professional development and in-service activities as recommended in
the report of the Ministerial Panel on Educational Delivery in the Classroom,
which was released in 2000. These initiatives are supported by the $4.4 million
in the recent budget for professional development.
Education will always remain a priority of this government, Mr. Speaker. We
continue to support an education system that encourages the best possible
education for the youth of this Province. The 15 per cent increase combined with
the other benefits outlined in this agreement are necessary changes for our
teachers. This parallels the increments given to other public servants.
Mr. Speaker, the education of our youth is their key to achieving personal
success and becoming full participants in the continued development of this
Province. I join with my colleagues to congratulate the members of both
negotiating teams in reaching an agreement that provides benefits for teachers
while improving the educational opportunities of our students.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement. Like
many teachers, parents, students, and in light of the disruptions of a strike
earlier on in the year for support staff, we are very pleased to see that a
strike has been averted with regard to the teachers.
With regard to the agreement, teachers reluctantly signed the agreement,
ratified the agreement. I have to compliment the teachers for certainly placing
students first and making sure that there was no disruption, Mr. Speaker, in
this particular school year.
Let's not be led to believe that everything is going to be okay, because
there are still many outstanding issues that need to be resolved. Clearly,
larger class sizes, poor working conditions, lack of adequate resources,
preparation time, workload issues that were taken off the table, certainly need
to be addressed even though the agreement is in place.
Maintaining a qualified workforce, a teacher workforce, is very, very crucial
to future demands. We must not see this agreement as stopping the necessity of
going forward and addressing that issue very, very diligently.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. HEDDERSON: By leave?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. HEDDERSON: Just in cluing up, Mr. Speaker, we need to make sure that
there is an adequate substitute pool out there, so that we can attract
professionals, especially to the isolated northern areas.
I certainly join with the minister in complimenting the negotiating teams for
bringing this to a head, getting the agreement through, but again, I say, Mr.
Speaker, that this agreement is only a starting point. Many of the issues that
were dropped have to be addressed if we are to make sure that our educational
system in Newfoundland and Labrador is, indeed, the best in this country and the
world.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We, too, rise and congratulate the minister on this positive announcement. A
good educational system in our Province obviously requires good teachers, and to
have good teachers, Mr. Speaker, we not only have to be in a position to attract
them, we also have to be in a position to retain them. The three days a year
that are set aside for professional development is certainly something that is
worthwhile. The teaching profession, as other professions, have changes that
take place on a regular occasion and it is important that we keep abreast of
those changes to be able to offer our students the finest quality of education.
We also congratulate both sides on the negotiating committees for reaching a
successful conclusion; one that, we hope, is a start that will certainly -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. COLLINS: - enhance the educational standards in our Province.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Youth Services and Post-Secondary
Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform my hon. colleagues of
changes to the provincial student loans program which will make post-secondary
education in this Province more affordable, accessible and accountable.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, these changes include the introduction of debt
reduction grants that will allow students to receive, in the form of a
non-repayable grant, up to 100 per cent of the provincial student loan portion
of the Canada Student Loan.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: The program will be more generous, will benefit more students
and be easier to access. In addition, there will be grants for Early Childhood
Education students, a greatly enhanced interest relief program, an increased
commitment to career and financial counseling and a flexible process that takes
into consideration extenuating circumstances, especially those surrounding
single parents and students with disabilities.
Mr. Speaker, these changes reflect the principle of shared responsibility,
and therefore the need for students and parents to plan and choose programs
wisely and to complete their studies in a timely matter.
Mr. Speaker, together with the money allocated for tuition reductions at
Memorial, these changes represent an additional investment of $7.5 million of
new funding directly for students.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: This past week we have announced $3.5 million for tuition
reductions and today another $4 million for these new student debt reduction
initiatives.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: These changes are the result of an extensive process in which
government consulted with students and other key stakeholders and listened to
the advice that we received.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the minister for a copy
of her statement prior to the House opening.
It is great to see that we have another minister who has also read the 1999
Progressive Conservative Policy Document.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MANNING: It must be a criteria for being in the Cabinet, I say, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MANNING: But we, on this side of the House, are very glad to see
anything of a positive nature to help the students in this Province. There is
certainly no doubt about it, some of the things that were raised this morning at
the news conference by the minister, which I attended, are positive for the
students of the Province. We are going to reserve judgement on the total package
because on Thursday we stood here in this House and heard $3.5 million being
announced for tuition reduction. Many students in the Province were concerned
that it was going to go for 10 per cent reduction. Then we had the President of
MUN, Dr. Meisen, coming out on the weekend basically saying that it is up to the
Board of Regents how this $3.5 million is going to help the students of the
Province.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. MANNING: So we are not sure if there is going to be a 10 per cent
reduction in tuition fees or not, Mr. Speaker, and that concerns us. The
openness and transparency - sometimes you can drive a truck through the
openness. So we are very concerned about that with this government. Anything
that comes out for the students is a positive aspect -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. MANNING: - but at the same time we reserve judgement -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quid Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Finally this government has listened to the problems that students have been
facing since they cancelled the grants program in 1994. I do not know who
finally got to the minister, but I know that the Canadian Federation of Students
are working very hard to convince the minister that her program was not working.
We now know that the changes that have been made have recognized the
inadequacies of the program. It is a very positive step, there is no question
about that, but I am concerned about the thousands and thousands of students who
have been forced to incur huge debts since 1994 as a result of the inadequacies
of this program. How many of them have been forced to leave the Province as a
result of this to get jobs to pay for these debts?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. HARRIS: It is a positive change, Mr. Speaker, finally the minister
has listened.
MS KELLY: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Minister of Youth Services
and Post-Secondary Education.
MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, a comment was made by the Member for Placentia
& St. Mary's about what he read in the paper this weekend about the Board
of Regents not necessarily accepting a 10 per cent reduction in tuition. We have
announced a round table and, Mr. Speaker, I can let the hon. House know that
this $3.5 million, whether it goes to tuition reduction or not, will be going to
student debt reduction, whether it is done through the Board of Regents or not.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, last week the government announced its Budget for 2002 and I sat
here with the hon. members and watched hon. members opposite laugh all the way
to the Labrador piggy bank. In just twelve months this Premier has tripled this
deficit, from $30 million to $93 million. He has used cash grabs, smoke and
mirrors, and creative accounting to get that number.
The Canadian Federation of Independent Business says it is a $440 million
deficit and not the $93 million that they pretend it is. This government
continues to mislead the people and not provide a true picture, as the Auditor
General has previously stated.
Mr. Speaker, my question for the Premier is: Premier, what is the real
deficit number, and what is the likely deficit number for next year? Tell the
people of this Province what a financial mess you have them in.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I believe many people in Newfoundland and Labrador, through the auspices of
live television coverage, listened for about an hour or so as the Finance
Minister read the Budget Speech a few days ago, on Thursday. It is clear that on
a cash basis, which is the same way that the deficit and the surpluses from time
to time - although they have been very rare, few and far between - have been
dealt with in Newfoundland and Labrador since 1949, on the same basis that the
information has been reported to this Legislature every year since 1949. The
deficit clearly is $93.3 million, I think, as was read last week. We were quite
proud to present a Budget that, in our view, strikes the right balance between
fiscal restraint and the appropriate levels of needed and necessary expenditures
for health care, education, municipal operating grants, basic infrastructure and
so on.
There is no mess in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker. There has been
very good, prudent management over the last number of years and we will see it
displayed again next year at Budget time.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we now have an independent auditor and an independent federation
indicating that the true picture is being hidden from the people of this
Province. Mr. Speaker, we warned the people of this Province two weeks ago that
government was preparing to raid the Labrador Transportation Initiative Fund.
The Minister for Labrador, in response to my question, said: We will see what is
in and what is not, and we will see who is right and we will see who is wrong.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. WILLIAMS: Well, we certainly did, Mr. Speaker. This government broke
the piggy bank and ran off with the money for its own purpose.
MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. member now to get to his question; he is on a
supplementary.
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, my question for the Premier is: Now that you
have broken the trust of Labradorians, and must break your own law to get at
that money, how do we know that you won't, in future, raid public service
pension funds, as you did when you were the assistant to Premier Wells in a
former government?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I understand that, in the meetings that were held in Labrador on Friday and
over the weekend, there was some concern expressed with respect to the issue.
Mr. Speaker, the basis of the concern is this - that the Liberal government that
I lead has laid out clearly our plan for the development of Labrador over the
next ten years -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: - and has given a full commitment as to what we will do
if we are the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.
The concern is this, and it was raised by the Member for Labrador West, who
basically indicated that if we not the government they are afraid that another
group, namely the members opposite, might not honour the commitments that we
gave. That is what the concern is in Labrador, that a group opposite, who will
talk about a $2 billion tunnel, will not give a commitment to a $100 million
road. That is the concern that we heard raised in Labrador over the weekend, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, some people in Labrador are, in fact, concerned. As a matter of
fact, the MP, the Member of Parliament for Labrador, is quite concerned. He is
outraged over the shameful raid one the Labrador Transportation Initiative Fund.
In fact, he has indicated his displeasure on numerous occasions and said that
the actions of this government were nothing short of fraudulent - the term he
used - his words. That man is working hard for his people, and is hoping to
co-operate with this government, and says he cannot get any co-operation from
this government.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Premier: How can his government, and his
Labrador MHAs, work in the best interests of the people of Labrador if their
irresponsible actions have soured the relationship with the Member of Parliament
for Labrador?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We appreciate the efforts, as we always do, of the federal MP for Labrador,
who has worked hard and partnered with us on many occasions to perform certain
functions and develop and proceed with initiatives that are in the best interest
of Newfoundland and Labrador. He has a somewhat slight difference of opinion
with us at this point in time.
Mr. Speaker, what the people of Labrador are looking for is a re-statement of
the commitments given by the Leader of the Opposition who had said this on
February 11, this year, that in the list of major priorities of myself and my
colleagues, Labrador is a huge priority. They are waiting for a re-statement of
that kind of a commitment to Labrador.
Also, in August of last summer, Mr. Speaker, when the Leader of the
Opposition said the lack of transportation infrastructure, which is what we are
committing to in Labrador to finish Phase III, is the only real impediment to
economic development in Labrador that will greatly benefit the whole Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the Opposition would stand
up today and say today in the Legislature what he has said outside the
Legislature, there will be no concern in Labrador about using the money to
develop infrastructure in Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I didn't hear the Premier say anything about
me stealing their money and breaking their trust. I didn't hear that in the
release.
Let's talk about squandering money for a minute. Mr. Speaker, when we look
back over the last year, this government has squandered away millions and
millions of dollars: chartered flights all over the world; plane tickets to
Montreal for Liberal fundraisers, $10,000 a table; snow clearing of at least one
private residence -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary; I ask him now to get to his question.
MR. WILLIAMS: - and the Premier's takeout from one of the finest and
most expensive restaurants in the Province. The rest of us go to Ches's and
Leo's.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. WILLIAMS: Sure we do, because we love the fish and chips!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member now to get to his question quickly.
AN HON. MEMBER: What about Scampers?
MR. WILLIAMS: I forgot to mention Scampers and the Big R, which I also
frequent, which I use my own money to pay for.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member now to get to his question.
MR. WILLIAMS: My question for the Premier, Mr. Speaker: Does the Premier
think that more fiscal control and restraint in those areas would have been
better off than raiding the Labrador Transportation Initiative Fund, a fund and
a trust which was set up for the people of Labrador? Lead by example, Premier!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I find it difficult to answer because my mouth was watering at the thoughts
of Ches's and Leo's and other types of places that I visit frequently.
Mr. Speaker, what we are seeing clearly again today is an issue whereby the
Leader of the Opposition speaks quite freely about what he would not do. He says
he would not have taken the money from the Labrador Transportation Fund. We
believe that, in striking the balance, it was better to take that money as
revenue this year and commit the kinds of monies that were in the fund to
infrastructure, for transportation in Labrador, Mr. Speaker, which is what we
have done.
Mr. Speaker, every single penney that is in the Labrador transportation fund
has been spent on Labrador transportation initiatives to date, and the $97
million and more, that will be taken into revenues this year, will be spent on
transportation initiatives in Labrador by this government.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: So, the facts of the matter, again, Mr. Speaker, are that
while the Leader of the Opposition suggests quite freely what he would not do,
the people of Labrador are waiting for him to stand up today and say what he
would do for transportation initiatives in Labrador.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer.
PREMIER GRIMES: We played out our plan. We are waiting to hear what his
plan is, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General last year indicated that our total borrowing
was $548.1 million. Our debt now, in fact, has gone from less than $6 billion
five years ago to an estimated $7.5 billion in 2002. The real number, in fact,
by the end of next year will exceed $8 billion. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the
Premier: Isn't it true that if your expenses are going up, and your mortgage
is going up and your salary isn't, then eventually you could lose your home?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, again, the point is in what the people of the Province are
looking for is a real debate about these issues. We have laid out our plan and
we have struck the balance, as we see it, Mr. Speaker, and we recognize that we
are going to spend, on a cash basis, less than $100 million more this year than
we will take in, but the tone of the questioning is that we cannot afford what
we are doing and we might lose our house. That is what I just heard in the last
question. Just on this one weekend alone, while the official line of the
Opposition from the Leader, as expressed today, is that we are overspending, we
cannot afford it. We have had the Member for Baie Verte talk about needing extra
money for road work this weekend. We have had the Member for Trinity North
saying there is not enough money in for health care this weekend. We have had
the Leader of the Opposition, himself, saying that in Humber West we did not
benefit from this year's Budget. Funding is desperately needed in the areas of
job creation and health care. So, again, we have three of them, even more, Mr.
Speaker, saying we need more money. The Member for Lewisporte is saying we need
a development fund for the town of Lewisporte provided by the provincial
government.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER GRIMES: So, on one weekend alone, we have had at least
half-a-dozen requests for even more expenditures by the same Opposition group in
which their Leader is now standing up today saying -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer.
PREMIER GRIMES: - we might lose our house because we are spending more
money than we are taking in. We would like to know what their real position is,
Mr. Speaker. Are they for spending or they are for restraint, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, my question today is for the Minister of
Health and Community Services.
Mr. Speaker, this Province is experiencing about 3,200 to 3,500 new cancer
cases per year. Every year the rate of cancer is increasing by 3 to 5 per cent,
but in about half an hour from now we are going to have a group of oncologists
at a press conference telling us that we are no longer able to work with the
excessive workloads that we have in this Province, sometimes double the standard
of the rest of Canada. Mr. Speaker, this is going to be, I think, just one in
the first of a number of examples we are going to see where specialists are
going to be making that same cry.
My question today to the minister is: What is she going to do today about the
crisis we are going to be facing in the treatment of cancer patients for this
Province?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, medical oncology is an area of medicine that has
grown considerably in the last decade. The Member for Trinity North would
probably realize that in this Province, in the last eight years, we have gone
from having zero medical oncologists to having seven positions funded; from zero
to seven in eight years.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, medical oncology is an extremely highly
specialized area. It is very, very difficult to get oncologists in this area.
Currently we have four positions that are filled. We have our cancer treatment
research centre actively recruiting for the other three positions. I would like
to inform the House on that score, that in fact one of those positions has been
arranged for, and we are hoping that the position will be filled and the person
will arrive in October. There are interviews taking place for the second
position within the next week or so, and, Mr. Speaker, the third position they
will be acting on as soon as possible.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Trinity North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, I am glad the minister used an eight-year
time frame, because in that same eight-year time frame, twenty-three oncologists
have left this Province. We have a major problem in retention.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. ROSS WISEMAN: We can talk about interviews and we can talk about
recruitment initiatives, but unless we are able to retain the positions that we
recruit to the Province, it is never going to end.
The crisis that we have today, Mr. Speaker, was predictable.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary, I ask him to get to his question.
MR. ROSS WISEMAN: The oncologists and the medical association have been
telling the minister for months that this was going to be a problem. I think,
Mr. Speaker, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Other specialists are going to
follow.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. ROSS WISEMAN: My question today to the minister is: Is she prepared
today to table her human resource plan that she has been talking about for a
number of months? Let the Province see her plan for a future for the medical
community of this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, this government has been working very hard to
try and recruit and retain medical specialists in the Province. One of the
statistics, again, that the Member for Trinity North may not be aware of is the
fact that we have had success in recruitment, that, in fact, we do have more
specialists per capita than the Canadian average. I shouldn't say, than any
other province in the country, but we do have more specialists per capita than
the Canadian average. That is not to say that we do not need to recruit in this
area, that we do not need to do a better job of retaining in this area of
oncology. That is certainly the case. We are doing everything that we possibly
can. I know that the Cancer Treatment Research Foundation is actively recruiting
for these positions. As I say, we are expecting success on two of the three
within the very near future, and I would hope that the seventh position will be
filled.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the minister now to conclude her answer.
MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, when that happens we will be well
within the range of the norms for caseload across the country because the
operational review for the Cancer Treatment Foundation recommends seven
positions.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions today are to the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board. In March, 2001, during the last few days of the last fiscal year, and
when this House was in session, the minister allowed special warrants totalling
$33 million to be issued, the very day that this House sat last year. According
to the Auditor General, this was contrary to the Financial Administration Act in
that they were not urgently required; and, further, she indicated that it was
contrary to present them when the House was sitting.
The Auditor General has said that additional requests for funding should have
been included last year in the Supplementary Supply Act or included in the
2000-2001 Budget for approval. I want to ask the minister: Why did she
contravene the Financial Administration Act and break the very laws of the
Province that she has sworn to uphold?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, we make no apologies for the monies that we
have allocated for special warrants in health care. We just sat through Question
Period and we are still in the middle of Question Period where we are getting
asked every other day for more money for health care, urgent needs for health
care. We saw them as urgent needs. It was the lowest allocation, I might add,
that has been allocated through special warrants in the last number of years,
but we make no apologies for paying for extra money for reclassification of
nurses, nursing assistants, and equipment, and neither would the people of the
Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Ferryland.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
That is not the question. The question is: Is the minister trying to hide the
special warrants from this House the very day the House sat? It is contempt for
this House, Minister, and it breaks the laws of the Province!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. SULLIVAN: In the Financial Administration Act, it states that a
special warrant cannot be issued. In case the minister does not know, it states:
A special warrant cannot be issued when the House is in session, and if it is
adjourned for thirty days or more then the reason for issuing one must be urgent
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary; I ask him to get to his question.
MR. SULLIVAN: - where grave damage to the interests of the Crown or the
public will result from delaying this expenditure.
I want to ask the minister: Have any special warrants been issued so far this
month, that we are not aware of, and is it government's intent to issue any
before the end of this month?
AN HON. MEMBER: Absolutely!
MR. SULLIVAN: Well, it is breaking the law if it is.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if I got the whole question
because the volume dropped a little bit towards the end of his questioning. I
think I got it all.
The question was answered by the member opposite when he asked the question
about a definition of urgent. Mr. Speaker, we saw the need for issuing the
special warrants to meet the urgent needs associated with health care.
Already in this House, when we read the Budget Speech last week, we
identified that we would be allocating money this year to offset some of the
costs. We read it right in the Budget Speech. We have done it every year. It is
very important for the people of the Province to hear.
Mr. Speaker, there is nothing hidden here. The members opposite would love to
think that we have a clandestine operation going over here. It was read in the
Budget Speech. Every person in the Province heard it on Thursday, what we are
planning to do. It is there for all to read, for all to hear. There is nothing
hidden, and we believe the allocation of money for health care in an urgent
manner was an appropriate allocation that we make no apology for doing.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Ferryland.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
That is not the issue, I say to the minister. The issue is that, when this
House sits, there is nothing but contempt for the House and it breaks the law of
this Province when you hide a special warrant.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. SULLIVAN: I ask the minister: Will she comply with the laws of this
Province, and will she bring such expenditures to a Supply Bill before this
House so we can debate it, or include it in next year's Budget where it should
get approved, and not try to hide it under a special warrant that breaks the
laws of this Province?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, it is important to say again, for the
people of the Province to hear, there is nothing hidden here. Everything that we
have done when we push monies forward, when we are able to look at how we spend
the money, has been identified either in the Budget Speech - Mr. Speaker, I
listened to the Member for Ferryland in his question. I really did. I appreciate
his questions and I hope he can appreciate the answer, that there is nothing
hidden here, that the urgent requirements that the government has identified in
meeting the health care needs are well within the Financial Administration Act.
There was no violation. It is in our definition; and you ask me, or anybody else
- we just heard the Member for Clarenville up asking for more money for health
care. We made a conscious decision that money could be spent, should be spent,
and was spent for health care needs in this Province, and we are totally within
our right.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. minister now to conclude her answer.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: There is nothing hidden. There is no clandestine
operation, much to the chagrin of the member opposite.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Premier. Mr. Premier, the government is contravening
its own legislation, namely the Labrador Transportation Initiative Fund, that
clearly states payout from the fund is for three purposes: (
a) marine freight
and passenger service and the maintenance of wharves and other related
facilities; (
b) the construction of the Trans-Labrador Highway; and (
c) other
Labrador initiatives related to transportation.
The $97 million that is taken from the Labrador Transportation Fund is not
being used for these sole purposes, but put into general revenues to offset the
Province's deficit. I ask the Premier: Why is his government contravening its
own legislation, and why are they stealing $97 million from people in Labrador
that was earmarked for transportation, and transportation only?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I expect that the hon. member will, as he has done, go back and explain to
the people in Labrador West as to why it is that he has some concern or fear of
a government that has committed to spend every single cent that is in the
Labrador Transportation Initiative Fund, and more besides, as an absolute
provincial priority to finish Phase III of the Trans-Labrador Highway, which I
understood he supported. Because I know the people of Labrador West certainly
support it, Mr. Speaker. It is a matter of again striking the right balance, as
I answered earlier: that we have a greater need for the actual cash in a budget
circumstance this year, but this government is the first one and the only one to
go on record. I am sure that the Member for Labrador West would stand up say
that if we form the next government - highly unlikely, but if they do - that we
would indeed honour the commitment because it is a commitment that Labrador
deserves, and the only question then is: What about the Official Opposition, Mr.
Speaker?
If the Official Opposition and the NDP will say they support the government
in the plan that we announced, then the people of Labrador have absolutely
nothing to be concerned about. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, to the
contrary; they have every reason to celebrate having the money spent on
infrastructure development in Labrador, which is exactly what the fund was for,
Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Labrador West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I say to the Premier that you may be the first government to promise the
construction of Phase III; you are also the first government to steal $97
million from Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. COLLINS: The people in Labrador are not jumping and celebrating in
the streets, I say to the Premier. They are certainly not dancing in the streets
over this news, because the money was there prior to last Thursday for that
Phase III to be constructed.
I say to the Premier: The people in Labrador West, the people throughout
Labrador, Mr. Premier, are not looking at you as a modern day Robin Hood.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member to get to his question.
MR. COLLINS: I ask the Premier: In the future, where is the money going
to come from to keep up the constant upgrade that a gravel road requires? Where
is that money going to come from in the future when you cannot properly service
the road transportation system that you have on the Island portion of the
Province now?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to point out to the hon. member, because I know he would not
want to be stating information that is factually incorrect, there has never, Mr.
Speaker, never was, never has been, any money in the Labrador Transportation
Initiative Fund or anywhere else for Phase III of the Trans-Labrador Highway.
That was never part of the fund's development in the first place and is not
part of it today. That is why it is significant and important that this
government is saying, as a provincial priority, we have seen the necessity and
the good sense of establishing this as a priority for Newfoundland and Labrador,
Mr. Speaker - what we have said - even if we have to do less work on roads on
the Island in future years, the future belongs to Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, the challenge as I see it for the federal MP, Mr. O' Brien and
might partner with us for Phase III because they never ever did before. There is
still a job to be done, and just like everyone has pledged to join with us in
looking at the equalization issues, if there is no federal partnership, we
believe in it strongly enough to do it as a provincial priority. That is the
whole issue. There is nothing being done here except assuring the people of
Labrador what the plan is from this government because they have no idea what it
is from the Official Opposition, and I am sure they are puzzled as to why the
Member for Labrador West would be opposed to finally -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER GRIMES: - for the first time ever, getting an absolute commitment
that phase III will be done, will be completed, will be paid for as a provincial
priority in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Question period has ended.
MR. COLLINS: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to point out to the Premier's answer to the last question,
that other Labrador initiatives related to transportation would be a proper
expenditure of that $97 million, not the way the Premier puts it across as if it
could not be used for that.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
MR. MANNING: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
On a point of order, the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.
MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, a point of order on a news release put out by
the Department of Youth Services and Post-Secondary Education on March 21, 2002,
if I could: "Sandra C. Kelly, Minister of Youth Services and Post-Secondary
Education, announced today that government has earmarked a further $3.5 million
in additional funding to Memorial University of Newfoundland to enable an 10 per
cent reduction in tuition fees."
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, I just want -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
Before Presenting Reports I would like to acknowledge the presence today of
two former Members of the House of Assembly; Mr. Efford for the District of Port
de Grave, and Mr. Dumeresque for, I think his constituency was the former Eagle
River.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Select Committee appointed to draft the reply
to the Speech of His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor, I am pleased to present the
Report of the Select Committee as follows:
To His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor,
The Honourable A.M. House, CM.,M.D., FRCPC.
May It Please Your Honour:
We the Commons of Newfoundland and Labrador in Legislative Session assembled,
beg to thank Your Honour for the Gracious Speech which Your Honour has addressed
to this House.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment.
MR. RALPH WISEMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a
bill entitled -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
We are still on Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RALPH WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask
leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act Respecting The Control And
Management Of Water Resources in the Province." Bill 4.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I give notice that I will on tomorrow present the following Private Member's
Motion:
WHEREAS the Constitution of Canada commits the Parliament and Government of
Canada to make equalization payments to provinces to ensure Canadians have
access to reasonably comparable levels of public service at reasonably
comparable levels of taxation; and
WHEREAS the current equalization program does not meet this constitutional
requirement and there is evidence that we are moving further away from
satisfying this commitment; and
WHEREAS the treatment of non-renewable resource revenues in the present
equalization system is unfair;
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly call upon the federal
government to enhance the current equalization formula with a fairer system and
re-establish the fundamental principles on which this program is based; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Honourable House go on record of supporting
the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador and Premier of Nova Scotia in
campaigning for fairness as it relates to offshore resource royalties.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I am pleased today to rise to present the first of many petitions that you
will seen in this House again this year, Mr. Speaker. It becomes an annual
ritual. I will read the petition first and then make a few comments.
To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador,
in Legislative Session convened. We, the undersigned residents of the District
of Baie Verte, do hereby petition the House of Assembly to upgrade and pave our
roads. The deplorable and unfit conditions of the roads in our area make
travelling to and from school unsafe for school children, as well as jeopardize
the safety of the travelling public, hurt economic growth opportunities, and
betray a lack of commitment to rural areas of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, I am presenting another petition, as I say to the members
opposite. Year after year, myself and other members on this honourable side of
the House, bring forward petitions on behalf of people in this Province who are
asking for some common decency. These people here are from Little Bay,
Beachside, St. Patricks, Little Bay Islands. Even people in Springdale, in the
adjacent district, Mr. Speaker, are supporting people in this petition. Hundreds
of people have signed this petition. It was delivered to me this weekend because
it is as simple as this: people in rural parts of Newfoundland and Labrador are
sick and tired of being reminded every spring - although they like to see the
warm weather coming, they do not like to see what is under the ground, Mr.
Speaker. My colleague for The Strait & White Bay North referred to it as
winter pavement. The time is up, the winter pavement is melting, and they are
seeing the reality again. The reality is this: Thousands of kilometres of
pavement in this Province is twenty-five years or older. The government talks
about spending. We are talking about this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador,
in the year 2002, when they are sending space ships to Mars, we still have a
thousand kilometers of road that is not even paved for the first time in this
Province. That is how embarrassing this is, Mr. Speaker. That is why people in
rural parts of Newfoundland and Labrador have to take the time to go around door
to door to get people to sign petitions, not for a double-lane highway, not for
a museum to be built, not for anything that is extravagant, but for the simple
basic need of a decent road to drive over. That is what they are looking for.
That is why they are wondering what this government's priorities are. Decent
drinking water and decent roads. People in Little Bay, Beachside and St.
Patricks and in Little Bay Islands are now seeing again this spring that they
are going over waves of pavement. They have school children who get on a bus
every morning to go over a state of road that makes them sick before they get to
school. That is downright despicable, Mr. Speaker.
Every single year we, and Members in this House of Assembly, get these
petitions, there will be protests on the roads again, and why? Because this
government has ignored what is a basic necessity in this Province: a decent road
to travel over. That is all they are asking for. They are not asking for the sky
is the limit. They are just asking for a bit of respect when it comes to basic
infrastructure of a road. Year after year, the same government, the same group,
and in all due respect -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. SHELLEY: - to the hon. the Minister of Transportation who is here
today, Mr. Speaker, the most current one, I have dealt with five ministers in
this House (inaudible) the same thing.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. SHELLEY: By leave, Mr. Speaker, to clue up?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the time to clue it up.
I say to the current minister: I have talked to five different ministers in
this House in the last seven or eight years, with the same situation every year.
All they are saying is, to not wait until the last minute, to April, to see who
is going to protest, to see who is going to send petitions. Let people in this
Province know that there is a plan, that you are actually going to address their
concerns, and give a long-term plan so people in Little Bay and Beachside can
have some common decency and a decent road to drive over.
I support this petition, Mr. Speaker, and I hope that we can see something
done to this road in the very near future.
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the people from
the Clarenville area. I will just read the prayer. It says:
WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador announced in its
2001-2002 Budget that there will be a long-term care facility constructed in
Clarenville, and that the Department of Health and Community Services was given
$500,000 to start the engineering and design work; and
WHEREAS on August, 2001, the then Acting Minister of Health and Community
Services further commited in a letter to the Town of Clarenville that a
forty-four bed long-term care facility would be built in Clarenville.
Mr. Speaker, as I have said in previous petitions that have been presented in
this House on behalf of some of these same people, this has been an issue that
has been outstanding for some time in the Clarenville area, and in last week's
Budget there was an announcement of $500,000 to be going towards planning and
continued planning of the long-term health care facility in Clarenville.
I think the message I got this past weekend, while in the district, was that
when the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board announced her
Budget last week, what she failed to say was that in last year's Budget, the
one she delivered twelve months ago, she followed up with that Budget by telling
the people of that area that she was going to put another amount of money into
this year's Budget for the start of construction. What they were really
surprised with was the fact that when the Budget came out this time there was a
press release that said: We are continuing with the $500,000 commitment. We saw
in this Budget last week a re-announcement of the same $500,000 that was
announced last year. Two years in a row we get the same announcement for the
same $500,000. Mr. Speaker, it begs to question about how committed this
government is to, in fact, providing for long-term care services to the people
of that area.
In fact, this past weekend I had some people question whether or not the
Premier had been sincere in his commitment to providing long-term care services
in Clarenville, and questioned whether or not he was trying to, in some way,
punish the people of the Clarenville area.
What I have said to the people in response to that question is: I believe
that the Premier is an honourable person. I believe that the Premier will, in
fact, live up to the commitment he made to the people of that area last year. I
said, Mr. Speaker, that by September of this year I was confident that the
Premier was going to ensure that his government lived up to the commitments they
made in last year's Budget, the commitment that was reiterated in this past
Budget, the commitment that his former minister has made, the commitment that
his current minister has made, to the people of the Clarenville area -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. ROSS WISEMAN: - and I have expressed confidence that the Premier
would not be as vindictive, or vindictive enough, to withhold that kind of
service from the people.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. LUSH: Motion 1, Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Minister of Finance to move
that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on Supply.
MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1.
The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have received a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor.
MR. SPEAKER: All rise.
The message is addressed to the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of
Treasury Board:
I, the Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador,
transmit Estimates of sums required for the Public Service of the Province for
the year ending March 31, 2003. By way of Interim Supply and in accordance with
the provisions of the Constitution Act, 1867, I recommend these Estimates to the
House of Assembly.
Sgd.: ___________________________
A.M. House, Lieutenant-Governor
The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I move that the message, together with the
bill, be referred to the Committee of Supply.
On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr.
Speaker left the Chair.
Committee of the Whole
CHAIR (Mercer): Order, please!
Bill 2, "An Act For Granting To Her Majesty Certain Sums Of Money For
Defraying Certain Expenses Of The Public Service For The Financial Year Ending
March 31, 2003 And For Other Purposes Relating To The Public Service."
The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The 2002-2003 Interim Supply Bill which is being presented here to the House
of Assembly today makes provision for three months supply, with a total
allocation of $1,214,081,000, representing approximately 30 per cent of the
2002-2003 Budget, the gross current and capital expenditure accounts.
It is basically intended to provide for the continuation of ongoing
government programs and projects, and included in this Interim Supply Bill are
general ongoing housekeeping expenditures which include six pay periods, ongoing
program and project funding requirements which are applicable to the year
2002-2003. This, of course, includes social assistance pay periods as well. This
provides departments with the sufficient cash flow it requires to manage both
the current and capital expenditures for the period of April 1, 2002 through
until June 30, 2002.
The Interim Supply Bill is not normally intended to fund new services,
however, it is possible for the bill to authorize new expenditures if such items
were spelled out for the House of Assembly. The 2002-2003 Interim Supply Bill
includes funding for several new expenditure initiatives. The first one, of
course, is the domestic Fuel Tank Replacement Program of $2 million.
This was an initiative that was announced just a few weeks ago and this will
be implemented or come into effect on April 1, 2002. It works like this, Mr.
Chair: households with family net income of less than $22,397, and who use home
heating fuel as their primary source of heat, will be eligible for the grant
upon replacement of a domestic fuel tank, 2,500 litres or less. The amount of
$22,397 is the same amount at which the Newfoundland and Labrador Child Tax
Credit is fully phased out. Family net income would include the net income of
the home owner and his or her spouse.
Households that qualify will be eligible for a grant of 50 per cent of the
install cost of the new tank to a maximum of $300. All of these new
installations, of course, must be in compliance with the heating oil storage
tank regulations. Individuals who wish to apply for a grant must forward the
completed application form to my department, the Department of Finance, along
with an invoice verifying the cost of tank replacement.
Again, we see this, Mr. Chair, as a very good initiative and I would like to
commend my colleague, the Minister of Environment, for this initiative, and it
will be financed through my department. The new tank, of course, would be
certified by a licensed inspector and it would be registered with the Department
of Environment. That is a $2 million allocation.
In addition to that, there is a Strategic Highway Infrastructure Program, or
commonly referred to as a SHIP program. This is for an allocation of $2.1
million. Mr. Chair, these two components of the Strategic Highway Infrastructure
Program will cover the cost of infrastructure on the roads in Port aux Basque
and also Corner Brook. It is $2.1 million. This, of course, is contingent on the
federal government signing this agreement. As you know, we have an $80 million
allocation. This $2.1 million will be contingent on the federal government
signing off on this fund. We anticipate it will happen. We do not expect that it
will not be signed off. However, it is a new expenditure and therefore would
have to be part of this Interim Supply Bill. Again, this is very important
because we recognize the ongoing needs for our roads and for the upgrades that
are required. This particular program focuses strictly on the Trans-Canada
Highway, and this initiative, our share of it, amounts to $2.1 million.
The third component, under the Interim Supply, is in reference to our Natural
Heritage Stewardship Secretariat of $429,600.
All of these three programs were previously identified in the Budget. This is
not new information but it is new to this bill because they are new expenditures
and by law, are required to be included in the Interim Supply Bill.
The Natural Heritage Stewardship Secretariat is one that I want to commend my
colleagues, in both the Department of Industry, Trade and Rural Development and,
specifically, my colleague from the Department of Tourism, Culture and
Recreation. This will serve our Province in many ways. I think it has been
identified as finding the balance between environmental protection and also
growing our economy and our industry in this particular area. The aim is for
long-term goals such as increased funding for natural resource research and
establish the body of scientific expertise, and also an operational program to
ensure that our outdoor resources in Newfoundland and Labrador will be
successfully managed. This is really part of a long-term plan surrounding
resource management capacity and it demonstrates our government's priority in
terms of maintaining the natural resources and prioritizes that for us, and for
the people of the Province.
It also will allow the best and most effective programs of research and
scientific inquiry. In other words, it will allow best practices to guide us as
we move into the coming decades to ensure that we have maximized benefits,
increased relevance, and we also enhanced the educational program of the
Province's wildlife and natural areas through research and inventory programs.
I think the key here is on the inventory program because it is important for us
to know exactly what our inventory is, particularly of our game, and other forms
of the environment which we are very interested in protecting.
Again, these three components: the Domestic Fuel Tank Replacement Program for
$2 million; the Strategic Highway Infrastructure Program for $2.1 million, to
cover roads in both Corner Brook and Port aux Basques; and our Natural Heritage
Stewardship Secretariat for $429,000, which really speaks to only a portion of
the money because there was an annualized amount of $2.8 million. This portion
is the new portion of that amount of money because we will continue to build on
existing components of the departments that are already in place under the
Wildlife Division. We will continue to grow that sector so that we are able to
enhance our wildlife and natural areas, particularly as it relates to numbers
and enhancing the research base.
The timing of Interim Supply, Mr. Chair, is very important and really has to
receive Royal Assent by March 26, 2001. The reason for this is so that we are
able to have our social assistance cheques released on that day in order for
them to be sent to Labrador so that they can meet the pay period and payday of
April 1, 2002. A Notice of Motion was given to the House last week on March 19,
with the Interim Supply Bill to be tabled in the House on Monday, March 25,
Mr. Chair, as well, there is a breakdown of each of the various departments
for the amount of money that they will require to carry on the operations of
government for the next three months. It includes all the departments. It also
includes monies that will be transferred out to our health boards and to our
school boards so that they can continue to provide health care services and
school services, educational programs in our Province. As well, it identifies
allocations that will go to the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation,
our Human Resources and Employment Department, which is the department
responsible for the release of our Social Assistance cheques; which will have to
be out in the mail by March 26, again, to meet the pay period deadline of April
1, 2002.
Mr. Chair, that is a
summary of the Interim Supply Bill which is, again, a
normal component of our operations. It is broken down in proportion to allow for
the next three months of operations of government to allow to happen with
respect to housekeeping initiatives, mostly around six pay periods and providing
necessary services for government, for the Legislature, and for our boards.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Ferryland.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It is the same old story, I might add, the same old story. Introduce a bill
today and it needs approval right away, within a couple of days for $1.2
billion; that's all.
MS J.M. AYLWARD: (Inaudible)
MR. SULLIVAN: Oh, don't approve it, the minister says, if we don't
want the cheques out. She brings in a bill today and wants it approved tomorrow;
$1.2 billion, that is what she is talking about.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SULLIVAN: That's right. Why didn't you have the Budget earlier?
Why didn't you get the Interim Supply out before that, I say to the minister?
Because your procrastination and your delay in giving us a bill now - you want
$1.2 billion approved tomorrow, I say to the minister. That is the type of
fiscal responsibility we are seeing from this minister here. Then on top of
that, gave us a false figure on what the deficit is.
Our own Comptroller General, Mr. Williams, published a report in each
(inaudible) and shows what, basically, the Province owes; what our overruns were
for the current year; what our deficit is.
The minister stood here in this House last Thursday and told us that we owe -
and this current Budget is going to be a $93 million deficit, when she knows
fully well they have manipulated, they have misled, they have moved pots of
money around and deferred revenue. They give the impression now that we are in
better shape than we are, and it is a fantastic economy. Then, when it turns
around, to put on a poor face. They do a good job of doing that. I can't see
how they can talk out of both sides of their mouth at the one time.
Now, if you look at the $93 million deficit; they robbed $97 million from the
Labrador Fund, that would be $190 million. They took another $44 million in
dividends from Hydro, not counting another $14 million on top of that for
guaranteeing debt. Then they took deferred revenues, another $52 million. These
deferred revenues were a certain amount from the sinking funds but also some
other amounts from other areas. For example, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing
took $10 million out of that; they took $10 million from the Liquor Commission.
They did not take that last year, and said, we will keep that to make things
look a bit better next year. Hydro from the Gull Island, they took another $3
million on top of what they took out of Hydro.
Add these up, just these three items, deferred revenues, take the Labrador
Transportation Initiative Fund, and take what we took from Hydro, and we have a
$286 million deficit right there, not counting numerous other allocations that
should be credited in. We would have a $500 million deficit.
The minister stands up and tries to tell us it is only $93 million, and then
she wants it approved almost before we get a copy. The first time I saw it was
today, the Interim Supply Bill received today. Some housekeeping, I might add,
for $1.2 billion, a pretty expensive housekeeper. Must be like the one who
arranges the luncheons and the dinners for government, and arranges their
travel, and brings seven people on a Premier's aircraft and divides it by
seven and says that is all it costs to go. Look, if the Premier did not go,
ministers did not go, do you think other people would be on that fight?
Nonsense! That is a direct cost of government and they know it full well.
This government cannot tell the truth, first of all. It cannot tell the
truth. We have seen the deficit in this Province from 1997, the last five years,
grow from $7.33 billion to almost $9 billion dollars. We have seen a $1.5
billion debt put on this Province in the last five years. Can you imagine, a
$1.5 billion debt?
Then we talk about the Labrador Transportation Initiative. I asked that
question here in the House before the Budget, and what did the minister do?
Avoid it, wait and see. Does this make sense? If someone leaves a trust to you
and your family for $97 million, and somebody comes in and takes that $97
million and spends it and tells you we will commit or promise, we will give you
$17 million a year for the next six years, no legal agreement, nothing in
writing, just verbal nonsense, and tell you that, that is utter nonsense.
Then they go around crazy, some of the members, the Minister for Labrador
& Aboriginal Affairs, the Member for Cartwright- L'Anse au Clair, she was
like a hen with her head cut off running around, twist peoples arms, and to tell
them it is a great deal for Labrador. It is a great deal! Labrador does not need
great deals, if that is a great deal, to take $97 million out of a fund that is
committed, that this very government and the very Minister of Finance stood -
and here is what she said: It doesn't make sense to leave that money in a fund
getting no interest.
If it did not make sense to have it in a fund, it did not make sense to put
it in the fund in the first place, that she supported. That logic is gone. That
does not wash, and people are not silly enough to believe that, I can tell you.
They are not ready and willing to believe that utter nonsense.
I am sure the minister - yes, I heard there were sparks flying. There were
sparks flying in the Liberal caucus with the Labrador members. There were sparks
flying, I can guarantee you, before this Budget, and they said: We have to do
something. We will promise something six years down the road; that is what we
are going to do. We are going to promise you something for giving us $97 million
dollars.
I ask questions, as Leader of the Opposition, back in 1997. I asked the then
Premier of the Province, Brian Tobin, when that agreement was signed: Are there
sufficient funds to do all of the highway in Labrador? I said there is not
enough money in that fund to do all three phases and maintain a ferry service.
He would not answer. He would not tell the truth. He gave the impression there
was enough in it, until a year later when the Minister of Labrador &
Aboriginal Affairs stood up and admitted there was not enough to do Phase III,
what I have been saying all along, and the Premier of the Province denied that
back when this fund came down.
In the fall of 1997, he took that $347.6 million and decided - that was when
they got it from the federal government. That was the interest accumulated up to
that time from the $340 million. They give it away for $340 million. Then, in
December of 1997, they decided - this was enacted in January, when it became
law, the Labrador Transportation Initiative Fund that this Legislature brought
forward, and we supported it. We supported it, along with that side of the
House, to set up a fund dedicated for Labrador initiatives. The law of this
Province indicates how that fund could be used. I asked that in Question Period
last week or the week before. I asked in this House and I said: Here is the
reason where this fund could be used. It told about putting it into safe
investments and how you can use that money to generate interest, and one of the
areas was not to spend it on education, health care and roads and environment
and mines and fisheries and everybody else in Newfoundland and Labrador. That
was not one of the purposes of that fund. The purpose of that fund was solely
dedicated to the Labrador Transportation Initiatives and that was spelled out in
that act. I quoted that act, and the Member for Labrador West quoted that act
today. It is a whitewash.
If this government was commited to doing something for Labrador, they would
leave that fund there, and then they stand up and say: This fund is going to be
set aside to maintain the ferry service and we will commited $17 million a year
for six years to do Phase III, if there is a real commitment there. This
government knows, through their mismanagement - and just read the Auditor
General's report - they projected the Labrador ferry service would cost $7
million a year forever after 2004. It is going to cost us now - the projections
are revised - double that, $14 million and beyond. They were projecting it was
going to be $11 million when it cost $21 million. They were way off on their
projections and now they are doubled. The fund was going to be depleted
basically some time around 2010 or 2011 depending on how much these costs could
be contained on the ferry service. That is what they did. They played smoke and
mirrors with the people and tried to give them something on one hand, and they
came around and pulled it away with the other.
If anyone tells me that I inherited a trust of $97 million for our use and
nobody else's, and they go out and give it to everybody else, and then tell us
they are going to pay it back over six years, on a promise. That commitment to
the people of Labrador will only come when you stand in the House on an annual
basis and look at what is in the Budget for transportation for Labrador and then
it gets approval. That is the commitment that is going to be done. They are
committing something into the year 2007-2008. They are giving a commitment for
2007 in this House. It is easy to commit money five and six years down the road
when they might not even have the authority to spend it. They might not even be
there to spend it. It is smoke. It is throwing up something. It is utter
nonsense.
Then the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair out to try to tell what a
fantastic deal it is. No wonder Danny Dumaresque, the former member, was here in
the Speaker's gallery today looking over her shoulder to see how she sold out
Labrador, knocking on the door the next time, that is what will happen. He was
down there today. I said before, the reason they booted him out before is
because he did not serve the interest. He was too closely tied in to the former
Premier, chased him around, neglected the people in Labrador. He went south in
the midst of an election, rushed home a week later, and that is what is
happening now. The Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair sees him knocking on
the door today because they sold out. They took a trust, they took
an act, they
took a fund dedicated for a promise. You can cut it any way you like, that is
what they did. Nobody can stand up here in this House and say any different
because they tried to pull one over. They knew when they were going to take the
money.
There was fuss raised by some members in Labrador, by some of the members,
and they swallowed. They said ,we will go on this promise. We think we could
push that by the people of Labrador. We will go down and make an announcement.
When did you ever hear tell of people leaving the day after a Budget and
flying down to Labrador with big announcements? The last time I heard that,
Brian Tobin spent $150,000 to get a flatbed, stand up with a big map of Labrador
behind him and announce a transportation initiative when this fund was there,
and spent another $20,000 for a speech, another $20,000 for a speech he never
even got to give properly.
That is the type of commitment - nonsense! Tens and tens of millions of
dollars thrown out haphazardly there. Get fiscal control, do accountability,
stop wasting piles of money to create an impression, and you will have more
money to run the affairs of this Province. That is one of the major concerns.
We are told by this minister, a $93 million deficit. How do you figure this
one out? We are going to grow 3.7 per cent, we have the best economy in the
country, we have led the country three of five years in GDP, we are going to
increase it 3.7 per cent this year, jobs are going to go up, personal income is
going to increase, disposable personal income is going to increase, but we are
going to collect $1 million less in income tax and the same rate we are using
this year as next year. Tell me how that is going to happen.
Employment is going to reach its highest level in history, this Budget says;
personal income is going to be the highest, disposable income is going to be the
highest, and we are going to take in $1 million less in income tax. If things
are so great, the population, there are so many working out there, there are so
many paying taxes, the tax rate has not gone down, so why would we take in less?
In fact, it did not go down. That is another little smoke and mirror thing that
I said at this time when they changed that tax. In fact the provincial tax now,
basically, is over 70 per cent in most cases of the federal rate. What was it
before they harmonized it? Sixty-two per cent before they separated from the
federal tax. It was 62 per cent of federal tax. It was at 69, they were going to
go 62 to 55 and 49. What was it? When they found the feds were dropping theirs,
they lowered us back from 17 to 16, the middle one from 26 to 22, and the top
one at 29, and they were going to put another bracket above 29 - basically 29
per cent for those over $100,000 - this Province quickly brought in
an act and
separated the federal and provincial tax. Right now, if you take the lowest
federal rate, what was the lowest federal rate of 17 per cent, and take 62 per
cent of that, it comes to 10.54. Our rate is 10.57, the same amount, so what
they did, they took it of the higher rate and when the feds dropped theirs to
16, when you file your income tax now you are paying over 70 per cent, in most
cases, of the federal rate.
Not only did they pull a fast one there, what did they do? People on
disabilities who were getting a deduction of $6,000 federally, the Province is
at 4,233, so we get a lower deduction. Anybody trying to fill out income tax
forms this year and look at students, you get a $400 deduction for attending a
full-time post-secondary education and the Province gives you $200. You have to
fill out two separate forms, different levels of credit, and the difference is
$200 a month less, basically. You can get a credit when you apply that to your
non-refundable tax credit; on education alone. So, that is an area where they
pulled a fast one. They did it on disability.
The basic personal exemption: That is even starting to get different. There
is even a two dollar difference this year. Next year it will be higher.
What is the spousal amount? The spousal amount, federally, $6,293,
provincially, $6,055. We have nickled and dimmed and clawed the disabled,
students, low income working spouses and non-working spouses. We have clawed
that back and we have put an extra tax burden on the people of our Province.
That is what this government is doing; a government of deceit, that is playing
with numbers, that is not telling the truth, and it all comes home to roost
sooner or later.
Anybody who has followed that, tell me this. Why can a senior this year make
less income than last year and pay thirty-eight dollars more in taxes? Why? The
federal tax went down. Because the provincial tax increased. They are paying
more in provincial tax. That is what has happened.
A man I spoke with in Lewisporte just last week -
AN HON. MEMBER: What are you doing now? Looking for Tom's seat, are
you?
MR. SULLIVAN: No, not at all. People are calling me with tax matters. I
think even the outstanding Member for Lewisporte referred it to the critic; what
we do in many cases. I spoke with that gentleman who has filled out the forms on
this year's taxes, then took the same income and put it on last year's
forms, and he paid more money this year than he did on the same form last year.
That is the tax break that this government gives; gives it on one hand and pulls
back that and a little bit more on the other hand. That is the theme of smoke
and mirrors that this government advocates here.
Now, can anyone tell me how we are going to have increase in taxes, if you
just look at -
CHAIR: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. SULLIVAN: By leave, Mr. Chairman? We are in a debate on supply, I
will only get back up again if -
CHAIR: Does the member have leave?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes.
CHAIR: By leave.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you.
As the critic, I appreciate some leave, because fifteen minutes to speak on
$1.2 billion, as the critic, isn't very much time. I appreciate having leave
here because -
MR. LUSH: If you haven't struck a well after fifteen minutes
(inaudible).
MR. SULLIVAN: That is not the case at all. There are a lot of people who
dug for days here in this Province before they struck a well, I might say. You
talk to the oil companies, they have drilled for a long while before they struck
a well, I say to the Government House Leader. That is it. Maybe we might strike
a crack in their armor. That is what he is afraid of it, rather than striking a
well.
I might want to add, 40,000 less people in this Province, according to the
census. Can you imagine, 40,000 less people? That is equivalent to taking the
City of Corner Brook, Grand Falls-Windsor and Stephenville out of this Province.
That is the difference. How much less money is going to be spent on goods and
services? The biggest contributor to the GDP in this Province is the service
producing industry. The oil industry only produces a small percent of the GDP in
this Province; a small percent of it. In the billion range at about $14 billion,
about 7 or 8 per cent, ballpark. The service producing industry, over half the
GDP. So you take 40,000 people out of Newfoundland and Labrador buying cars,
buying food, buying clothing and other items, supporting the economy, you have a
major, major hole to fill in terms of revenue.
What are we doing? We are managing decline in this Province. That is
basically what we are doing, managing decline. We are into a cycle. That cycle
is going and going and going, and we can never get on an upward spiral. It is a
downward spiral that is happening here. That is shameful, because in 1997, a
$7.438 billion net debt - and there figures are taken from the government's
own records, the Comptroller General in the Public Accounts that is tabled in
the fall of each year indicates that we had debt of $7.438 billion in 1997. It
grew to $7.66 billion the next year; $7.81 billion the next year; $8.08 billion
the next year; $8.43 billion and this year it is going hit almost $9 billion.
Can you imagine increasing the debt of our Province between 20 per cent and 25
per cent in five years? Well, they found a way to do it, I can tell you. They
haven't found a way to deliver service.
I heard today saying that - in fact, the oncologists - and I raised this
issue a few years ago. All the oncologists working here have left. There are
about thirteen, I think -
AN HON. MEMBER: Twenty-three in eight years.
MR. SULLIVAN: Twenty-three left in eight years. The last time I was
critic, just a year before I - everyone of them left. What do we do? They left
because their workloads were enormous. Their pay was way below the Canadian
standard. What was the alternative? It came out that we could not treat these
people in a safe period of time -
MR. JOYCE: (Inaudible) the deficit, boy; the deficit.
MR. SULLIVAN: I am getting to the deficit, I say to the Member for Bay of
Islands. I am going to explain to you.
They were getting way underpaid. They were overworked with enormous
workloads, unsafe workloads, and they found that they could not treat patients
in a reasonable period of time, so we shipped them off to private clinics in the
United States, down in Cleveland. We paid for skilled labour, skilled jobs in
the United States. We invested money into skilled jobs in the United States.
Millions of dollars was spent to send people down in the United States. Why don't
we invest on the front end to reduce workloads to be able to deal with these
people in a reasonable period of time? I do not agree with sending people when
we have an alternative. Creating jobs anywhere - in Halifax. Creating jobs
across Canada. We have created jobs across Canada in heart surgery at the
expense of people here in our Province.
This government is penney-wise and pound foolish in what they are doing;
penney-wise and pound foolish. They spent a million to a private clinic in the
U.S. but they will not spend a million to bring oncologists in here and pay them
reasonably to keep them here within a reasonable framework. We do not expect to
be paying oncologists or anybody the highest in Canada. We do not expect that.
We do not expect you to compete with the United States. I have always said,
within these professions we have to able to compete, at least, with Atlantic
Canada. If not, we have to accept the fact that we are going to relegate our
system to a second-class service; a second-class system if we are not prepared
to be competitive, at least, with Atlantic Canada. When you can cross the Gulf
and go to Halifax and other areas, and there have been discrepancies in many
medical areas. Some got resolved through an extent with some reclassification,
is what they called it but it was really a salary increase in most cases. They
just used another name because they did not want everybody else looking for
reclassification and so on or salary increases. I mean they cut it how they like
and maneuver it around.
I will not debate that point but whatever it is, the gap has closed in
certain areas but there are other areas we have to look at addressing more
efficiently. When you keep putting out fires - when you leave things to a point
where it is extreme and you have to start putting out fires, when it has gone
too far you lose the whole building. You have to rebuild it. You have to start
from the bottom. If you could deal with these earlier before it gets too large
you can have more economies. You can get results without going to that extent.
This government has not found that out.
When you look at this Budget, and they are looking for extra money here in
Supply, when you look at this Budget, there are over 600 less jobs going to be
in this fiscal year, 600 less jobs; 208, they have admitted, in education. They
stood up and told us two weeks ago, under this new agreement we put forth for
teachers, there is $170 new million going to be on the salary scale at the end
of this period, at the end of three years. That is wrong, that is outright
wrong. That was based on the number of teachers and people who were going to be
in the system then, but they announced it within days. The Budget was being
printed. I guess it was gone to print probably, probably gone to print, when
they knew there were 208 less. That figure that the minister gave, adding to the
education after three years, is not going to be there because I am saying it is
not including the 208. The previous figure they mentioned, with the increase,
included 208. The Budget on Thursday did not include that, and that is between
$10 million and $11 million a year, I say to the Minister of Education. That is
$10 million to $11 million a year for three years. Then, if you compound that on
other ones, we are looking at about $40 million more that is not going to be
there in this Budget, if you look at it.
Just look at the education budget in salaries in your own budget you put
forth this year and see what I am talking about. Just look at it, $24 million
less. How are we going to get $170 million more in salaries if there is $24
million less in the Budget? That math does not add up. That does not add up
because it was never, never, never correct in the first place; and at the same
time they were telling us what they were adding in percentages, they knew they
were going to be 208 less. The decision was already made. They did not give us a
true figure; it was a false figure.
MR. MATTHEWS: I thing your biggest disappointment is that a $300 or $400
million deficit was not a reality. (Inaudible).
MR. SULLIVAN: I can tell the former Finance Minister, who is shouting
across the House now, the Member for St. John's North, the former Finance
Minister here, that his deficits were not very much better. They were a bit
better. He started - is there a trend going on, I say? He got in and destroyed
the Department of Health, he brought it to its knees. Then the new Minister of
Finance, when she was Minister of Health, crumbled the system; she decimated it.
Now they are gone into Finance. Can you imagine? Destroy the Department of
Health, destroy health in the Province, and take them out of Health and put them
in Finance? That is what they did with both of them. What do they want? Do they
want us to go on the rocks, completely on the rocks, and be destroyed,
self-destruct? I would like to catch by the neck the person who appointed them
to those positions. I would like to get a hold of him and have a chat with the
person who made those decisions, because it was not a decision - maybe because
they could put forth a false budget, maybe they can sort of throw out a few
figures and hide figures, but they do not fool the people of the Province. I can
tell you, we are not going to fool the people of the Province.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) hit him over the head with a mallet.
MR. SULLIVAN: Maybe I should. If I thought it would do any good, but I am
not so sure. I am not so sure hitting him with a mallet might get any better
result. I am just half afraid that if I hit him with a mallet, the result might
be even worse. That is why I would not take the chance on hitting them with a
mallet over the head, I might add.
Talk about this Budget, talk about the deficit.
AN HON. MEMBER: Is your time up yet?
MR. SULLIVAN: My time is never up, unlimited time when I speak on the
Budget debate. I know this is not Budget debate, but if my colleagues are
waiting, or somebody there, I do not mind sharing time.
CHAIR: Order, please!
The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. LUSH: Mr. Chairman, to get the thing straight on the time, the hon.
member is allowed fifteen minutes and we have allowed him to go overtime now. I
do not know by how much. I just wonder whether he plans to carry on or whether
he plans to recognize that other people, other members, may like to speak. When
we are given leave of the House there is a courtesy that we just do not carry on
in an unlimited manner. I thought the member was going to say a few things and
sit down and give someone else a chance to speak.
CHAIR: To the point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. E. BYRNE: Easy, I say to the Minister of Mines and Energy, you will
get your opportunity.
To the point of order, the Government House Leader makes a good point but the
Member for Ferryland and the Finance critic could go on for hours and hours and
hours. That is how well prepared he is, I say to the Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: In his role as Opposition Finance critic, that is part and
parcel of his responsibilities, to go on dealing with all of the Estimates that
you are dealing with. Now, let's be clear. The government is not looking for
$1 million; they are looking for $1.2 billion. He has been up on his feet for
fifteen or twenty minutes and now they are complaining about it. Let's be
clear; you are not looking for small change, I say to the Government House
Leader. We are involved in Committee. If you want to withdraw leave, it is your
absolute right, parliamentary right, to go ahead and withdraw leave to let some
other members up. Certainly we have other members and we have a long afternoon,
maybe all night, maybe all tomorrow night, who knows?
The fact of the matter is, he is operating on leave, no requirement for a
point of order, I say to the Government House Leader. If you want him to sit
down, withdraw leave and he will sit down. He will wait out the Minister of
Mines and Energy, and then he will get up and enlighten us again, which I am
sure he will.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
CHAIR: To the point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. LUSH: Mr. Chairman, the House could have done without that
pontificating and that lecturing.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. LUSH: Mr. Chairman, there are people on this side of the House who
could speak for hours as well, hour on hour, but, Mr. Chairman, we have rules
and it is only right and proper that we should follow them. The hon. member was
speaking with fifteen minutes and I allowed him to go on. I just wanted to find
out, without the lecturing and the pontificating from the hon. Opposition House
Leader, I just wanted to see -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
CHAIR: Order, please!
MR. LUSH: I just wanted to see if we could not straighten out matters on
the time. We do not just want to stand up and withdraw leave, but when you give
leave to an hon. member usually he winds up so other members can speak; but I do
not think the hon. member gave any indication that he was winding down. He was
winding up.
CHAIR: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
CHAIR: Could we have order please?
Thank you.
There is no point of order, but the Chair simply reminds members that in the
rules of Interim Supply, the minister introducing the debate has fifteen
minutes, the Opposition critic has fifteen, and any member thereafter has ten
minutes and they can rise as often as they wish.
The hon. the minister, the hon. the Opposition House Leader, the hon. the
Member for Ferryland.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The third try, they say, is always lucky.
I do not know, to be honest with you, if I am winding up or winding down,
because there is so much to say. What I will say is that, if that side of the
House is waiting, and they are eager to jump up in here and try to defend the
Budget, I do not mind sitting down. I am entitled, when they speak, if no member
on this side wants to get up, I can get up every second ten minutes for the rest
of today and tomorrow, if I want to. I am aware of that, that it is not only
debate. So what I will do is, I will have my couple of comments now. If they
want to withdraw leave, they may do so, Mr. Chairman, and I will sit down and
then we will hear the counter-argument to what I said; what is wrong about what
I said. I would like to hear someone stand then and tell me what I said was
wrong, based on what I have said here in this House, if they can contradict
that. If they can, I would love to hear it. I do not think it can be
contradicted because there is no contradiction for the truth.
This Budget you look at - and I have said not only did they play the game on
this Budget, they did it with teacher contracts. When the minister said $170
million added to it when she knew at the time that 208 teachers were coming out,
that is over $10 million a year for three years, that is over $30 million,
compound that with the different increases and we are looking at in the $40
million range, we are finding out, that is coming out by having less teachers in
the system.
Look at her Budget! The department budget shows $24 million less in salaries
this year. When that announcement was made on the contract - that is why I think
I expected it would drop probably 10 per cent in acceptance when they found that
out, and had they waited another week I think it probably would be down another
10 per cent (inaudible). I sincerely believe that because we did not get the
truth. We got a false figure at the beginning.
They are not the only job losses. When you look at the salaries in government
- and do not treat it as no job losses when there are. Look at the salary
budgets of government, the public service, look at the projected salary
increases and look what is budgeted, we will see 300 less jobs, people working
next year, than there are right now in the public service across. That is not
counting teachers, 208, they have admitted that.
In health care, how do you maintain the same people in health care? We had
$97 million - tabled in this House on November 21, we had tabled here the health
boards in this Province, and they listed all of them. Out of $97 million -
AN HON. MEMBER: It is up to $107 million now.
MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, I know. I say to my colleague $97 million as of March
31, 2001, and since that there is estimated another $10 million or $12 million
on top because all health care corporations did not get to cut where they were
ordered to cut. They could not find the cuts, basically, and there are a few
million there. I think, I do believe, community health boards was another $8
million or $9 million range. We are looking at $110 million that is overruns in
health corporations and health boards around this Province that is not reflected
on the books of our Province here in this Budget and is not counted. That is a
lot of money. Board are being given money and asked to try to find it. Where are
they going to find the money to carry them overruns and provide the same level
of services that they provided this year? It is not going to happen. There is
going to be a longer waiting list, there is going to be a lower quality of
service provided to the people of this Province, and I just wish that the
minister would stand up and tell the truth about it all. Don't be trying to
hide these figures. Don't be trying to mislead the public. Get up front and be
honest about it and say: Look, here is what is going to happen. We are going to
increase the waiting list by 20 per cent, or 15 per cent; we are not going to
put the money in there.
She was in Health for three or four years, brought the health system to its
knees, and now has gone over to Finance and trying to finish off this Province
now in that position. I am telling you, very serious decisions and poor
judgement in not using the finances appropriately to get the best result for the
dollar, that is the mistake that was made. Lots of times we agree on many things
on provision of services, but the waste that has gone on by government
haphazardly throwing out money in things without an intended result. What do we
have to measure - the programs, the departments, the accountability aspect; I
could go on forever.
I know we have other members here who are eager to get up and speak on this
too. I will be speaking on this again, either in the course of today or
tomorrow, and when the Budget is called they will not be able to stand up then
and tell me that I am not allowed to speak for fifteen minutes because I have
unlimited time when it comes to the Budget debate. I will have unlimited time on
responding to the Budget in this House, and I intend to take as much time as I
feel is necessary to point out areas of this Budget that we are not getting the
truth in, to scrutinize government expenditure to do that, and I will do that
job as Finance critic here and I will be not be forced to sit down in my seat
then to reveal something here that this government is trying to hide.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I understand that in the Interim Supply debate we have ten
minutes available to us by Standing Rules to speak on this particular debate on
the Interim Supply that we need in order to continue the running of government
after the end of the fiscal year, which is just a couple of days from now.
MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).
MR. MATTHEWS: I would ask the hon. the Member from Ferryland, who is a
descent guy in most respects and an honourable guy for the most part, to at
least allow those on this side of the House, when they get up, the opportunity
to speak uninterrupted as we generally do for him.
MR. SULLIVAN: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIR: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Ferryland.
MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Chairman, the Government House Leader was asking
questions to me across the House, and if these government members do not want to
listen to their own member there - I felt an obligation to answer his questions
and response. If they do not want to ask questions, he will not hear anything
from me. The Government House Leader initiated those questions and I was just
being cooperative in responding to him, I say to the minister.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
CHAIR: There is no point of order.
The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The fact of the matter is, while people viewing may not be able to get the
full context of what is happening here in the House, the reality is that the
hon. member on the other side had an allocated period of time in which to make
some comments on Interim Supply. The fact of the matter is, that we, on this
side of the House, out of courtesy to him as a member of the House, one amongst
forty-eight of us, and, in particular, as the Finance critic, we allowed him to
go about two or three times the length of time that was allocated to him at this
particular time in debate. To hear him give the impression that we, on this side
of the House, sat him down inappropriately, or withdrew leave inappropriately,
is blatantly and patently unfair, inaccurate and gives a distorted view of what
in fact is happening in this House.
We, on this side of the House, respect the role of the hon. the Member for
Ferryland. We respect his role as a member of the House and we respect his role
as the Opposition critic on Finance. We look forward to hearing from him,
particularly when it is that he has something beneficial and something positive
and something helpful to say. To date, in the short period of time that he has
been on his feet, he has been less than helpful, less than constructive, and
less than informative to the people of the Province in terms of his comments.
I want to make just a few comments today, Mr. Chairman, because I believe
that, fundamentally, the Minister of Finance, when she rose in her place on
March 21 to deliver the Budget for the next fiscal year, delivered one of the
finest budgets given the fiscal circumstance of the country and given the fiscal
circumstance of the Province. She delivered one of the finest budgets that you
will hear of the ten, eleven or twelve budgets that will be delivered this year
throughout the country. I speak of the ten provinces and the two territories. I
say that, Mr. Chairman, not just to applaud the Minister of Finance