Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 1 December 2005 (45th General Assembly, 2nd Session, Vol. XLV No. 40)
2005-12-01
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
December 1, 2005 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV
No. 40
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER: (Hodder): Order, please!
Admit strangers.
This afternoon we would like to welcome to the visitors gallery, a former
Member for Labrador West, Mr. Perry Canning.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: We have members' statements this afternoon as follows: the
hon. the Member for St. John's Centre; the hon. the Member for the District of
Bay of Islands; the hon. the Member for the District of Burin-Placentia West;
the hon. the Member for the District of Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune; and, the hon.
the Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for the District of St. John's
Centre.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SKINNER: I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to recognize the one hundred and
fiftieth anniversary of the consecration of the Basilica of St. John the
Baptist. It was September of 1855 when Bishop Mullock and the congregation of
the Basilica Parish assembled and celebrated high mass in their cathedral.
The idea of the building of a church in St. John's for those of the
Catholic faith was initiated by Bishop Fleming in 1834. At that time St. John's
had a population of 19,000 people, of which 14,000 were Catholic.
It took Bishop Fleming five years of negotiating with the Queen of England,
Queen Victoria, before he was able to secure a grant of nine acres of land on
what was then known as Fort Townsend. In May of 1839 excavation of the site
began and all classes of people joined in to work. The task was estimated to
take two months, but because of the number of people who showed up it was
completed in just two days.
Men from the City of St. John's went into the woods some twelve miles from
the site to obtain the timber needed for scaffolding. In just over three hours
they returned with over 4,000 pieces of timber, each of them thirty feet in
length.
The stone for the church was secured locally, and large quantities were
transported from Kelly's Island in Conception Bay, Signal Hill in St. John's,
and several other sites near the city. Stone was also brought in from Galway and
Dublin, shipped directly from Ireland. All of the work was done voluntarily by
men and women of the local community. The Basilica stands as a landmark in St.
John's, high on the hill overlooking St. John's Harbour. It is a beacon for
all those who enter our port city, and it is a testament to the Catholic church
and the Catholic faith in our Province.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's allotted time has elapsed
Does the hon. member have leave?
MR. SKINNER: I ask all hon. members to join me in celebrating the one
hundred and fiftieth anniversary.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to
recognize a resident from my district who was recently honoured for her
contributions to improving the quality of life for Aboriginal women in Canada.
On Tuesday, November 15, Erica Samms-Hurley of Mount Moriah received the
Governor General's Award in Commemoration of the Persons Case. She received
the award for her work promoting health among the Aboriginal population,
especially among women.
Ms Samms-Hurley, a registered nurse, is one of the four youth members of the
Board of Directors of the Native Women's Association of Canada. She has
attended the federal government's Canada Aboriginal roundtable
discussion-health sectoral, sat the National Aboriginal Health Organization's
Board for a period of time, has been involved with the National Aboriginal Youth
Awards and the National Aboriginal Organization's Youth Committee.
At present, Ms Samms-Hurley is involved with the health and communications
portfolio for the NWAC's Youth Council and ensures issues affecting youth are
brought to the forefront by the NWAC. Her priorities include challenging The
Indian Act and Bill C-13 and working with the Coalition for the Stolen Sisters
which NWAC has spearheaded to deal with issues of missing Aboriginal women
across Canada.
Ms Hurley's other achievements include receiving The Native Friendship
Award and the NWAC's Corbiere-Lavell/Mary Two Axe Early Student Scholarship.
I ask all members of the House to join me in congratulating Ms Samms-Hurley
on her achievement and her continued dedication and commitment to Aboriginal
people.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the outstanding
bravery of a young man from my District of Burin-Placentia West. Sapper Perry
Rideout is, as I speak, in Pakistan working to help those in need after the
devastating earthquake that hit the region this fall. Mr. Rideout is a member of
the combat engineering squadron assigned to the Canadian Forces Disaster
Response Team, otherwise known as DART.
The first role of DART is to provide water purification so that people of
Pakistan will have clean drinking water. But they also provide a bridge to other
government and non-government organizations to set up the groundwork for
continued aid in the region.
Mr. Speaker, Sapper Rideout has been enjoying his military career for
three-and-a-half years now. Having served in Afghanistan and Haiti before
embarking on his present task, he says he loves his work.
The son of Hilary and Shirley Rideout of Marystown, Perry has and is
certainly making us all proud and is looking forward to being home for
Christmas.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to please join me in extending
appreciation to Sapper Perry Rideout and all our Canadian Military Forces for
their continued bravery.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.
MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, November 26, I had the privilege of attending the
Annual Lions Club Charter Night in Harbour Breton. This year the club reached a
milestone as they celebrated their fortieth year of Lionism in the community.
The international theme for the Lions Club is: We Serve. In a community that
is seeing difficult economic and social conditions, the Lions are fulfilling
their commitment as they support, care and serve the residents of Harbour
Breton. Although many of the local Lions are facing their own financial and
social hardships, they never turn away from their volunteer effort to support
all those around them. I congratulate each and every one of them on their
individual commitments to their Club.
Mr. Speaker, the Lions Club of Harbour Breton, through volunteer efforts, has
been making a difference in Harbour Breton for the last forty years. They
continue to support those with emergency financial needs, celebrate with the
seniors on special occasions, financially support local schools and coordinate
the annual Santa Claus Parade, just to name a few of their interests. Larger
projects for the Club includes the operation of the local ambulance service,
operate an accommodations complex for seniors and maintain the children's
playground in the community. It is important to note, that the presence of a
strong Lioness Club assist the Lions Club in making these projects a success.
Mr. Speaker, I must recognize Lion Leo Martin, a charter member of the
Harbour Breton Lions Club. Leo shared in the anniversary celebrations and has
been an active member of the Club since its inception forty years ago.
I ask all members to join me in congratulating current President Gerome
Stoodley and all members of the Harbour Breton Lions Club on their many
accomplishments over the past forty years and best wishes for much success into
the future.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to recognize Mr. Reg Hancock, a public servant in my district,
who recently received the 2004 Public Service Award of Excellence at a formal
awards ceremony held here in St. John's on September 20.
This award recognizes individuals and teams in the provincial public service
who have demonstrated exceptional performance and have positively impacted the
quality of the work environment, or the quality of service delivery to clients
in the areas of leadership, valuing people and innovation. Mr. Hancock, who is
employed with the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development in
Forteau, was one of seven provincial winners.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my hon. colleagues today to join with me in congratulating
Mr. Hancock for this well-deserved recognition for his dedication and his
commitment to the people of Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.
MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to congratulate Mr. William Stuckless
on receiving a Provincial Long-Service Award for forty years with the Badger
Volunteer Fire Department. Now, that says a lot about commitment, doesn't it,
forty years of volunteer service.
It was an honour for me to present this award to Mr. Stuckless during the
first firefighters' ball since the 2003 flood. As well, I was delighted to
congratulate members of the Badger Volunteer Fire Department for their dedicated
service, including retiring fire chief Harry Noel, who spent twenty-four years
with the volunteer fire department and ten of those as fire chief.
Mr. Speaker, this event was a time for all involved to get back into the
swing of things. The anticipation for the Badger Volunteer Fire Department to
get into their new hall, get organized and get back into a regular routine was
obvious. This banquet gave the firefighters an opportunity to thank many groups,
individuals and businesses who helped the department out during the flood.
Mr. Bill Stuckless was also represented with a Special Federal Service Award
for his outstanding volunteer service.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join with me in
recognizing Mr William Stuckless on these outstanding service awards to his
community, region and Province.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statements by ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in this House today in recognition of World AIDS Day. On this day each
year, Mr. Speaker, we are united in our support for the individuals, families
and communities affected by HIV or AIDS.
The theme for World AIDS Day 2005 is: Wise up and wear it. It encourages us
all to wear a red ribbon as a sign of support for people living with HIV and a
symbol of hope for the future.
Mr. Speaker, HIV is one of the biggest social, economic and health challenges
in the world, with over 40 million people in the world living with HIV or AIDS.
Everyday in Canada, eleven people are newly infected with HIV, reinforcing the
need for ongoing HIV prevention.
Mr. Speaker, government is proud to support the efforts of the AIDS Committee
of Newfoundland and Labrador in its efforts to support those individuals
infected with HIV/AIDS, prevent the spread of new infection through education,
network with other groups working in AIDS related areas, and to advocate for
social and political change.
As part of our commitment to engaging in preventative programming, our
government recently provided the AIDS Committee of Newfoundland and Labrador
with $50,000 to support a Needle Exchange Program. The program, titled Safe
Works Access Program, provides services and information needed to help prevent
HIV and Hepatitis B and C being transmitted from one infected person to another
through shared needles and other injection equipment.
Mr. Speaker, stigma and discrimination are major obstacles to effective
HIV/AIDS prevention and care. Fear of discrimination prevents people from
seeking testing or treatment, or from acknowledging or dealing with their HIV
status. Throughout his battle with this disease, Tommy Sexton continued to
strive to eliminate the stigma and discrimination surrounding this disease. By
confronting this stigma, as Tommy did, we can encourage individuals to join the
fight against HIV/AIDS.
Mr. Speaker, each year we celebrate Tommy Sexton's legacy in AIDS awareness
in our Province at the annual Tommy Sexton Benefit Concert. This annual
fundraiser, organized by the AIDS Committee of Newfoundland and Labrador and the
Tommy Sexton Foundation, raises money to support people living with HIV/AIDS
across the Province. This year's event will be held Saturday, December 10,
from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at the Masonic Temple in St. John's, and I
encourage my colleagues and members of the public to support this worthwhile
cause.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. colleagues to join with me in wearing a red
ribbon today in support of those living with AIDS, and in the hope that one day
there will be a cure for this disease.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.
We are pleased to recognize and honour World AIDS Day, and we would be
pleased to wear the red ribbon as part of the campaign.
Mr. Speaker, I think that AIDS is an issue and a disease in our Province that
quite often we do not always recognize and promote and educate people as much as
we should.
There was an era where we went through a great deal of promotion in
education, but it seems as a society we have been lax in latter years. It is
always good when you see more and more support for things like the Tommy Sexton
Centre. I know that Our Divas Do Broadway charity this year donated a
substantial amount of money to that particular cause. I also know that the
programs that support the prevention of AIDS are also very important.
I want to acknowledge today and congratulate the minister for the $50,000 for
the Needle Exchange Program, because that outreach service that is being
provided in our city is a valuable service. I think in the last two years the
people at that centre will tell you that the numbers have grown. The number of
people who come there to look for needle exchange is growing, because of
education and awareness, Mr. Speaker, and I think it is important that we
support those outreach initiatives that go and lend themselves to preventing
diseases such as this within our Province and in our country.
Mr. Speaker, we are proud to be associated with this today, and we certainly
congratulate the government for the money they are putting forward as part of
the Needle Exchange Program.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to invite all Members of the House of Assembly,
government employees, their families and members of the general public, to the
annual Christmas Lights Across Canada Ceremony this evening. It will take place
in the main lobby of the East Block of Confederation Building starting at 6:15
p.m.
Christmas Lights Across Canada is a national celebration as the national and
provincial capitals turn on their Christmas lights on the same day. Newfoundland
and Labrador, being the most easterly Province, is usually the first to turn on
its Christmas lights each year.
Mr. Speaker, this event originated in 1986 and has been held in this Province
since 1987. This year's display includes approximately 51,000 lights on
Confederation Hill and along Prince Philip Parkway, as well as six billboards
depicting Christmas scenes. The tree that will be illuminated this evening in
front of Confederation Building came from Salmonier Line.
Our display includes thirteen trees with white lights as a symbol of our
country's thirteen provinces and territories. The large main tree containing
multi-color lights is a symbol of the diversity of the nation.
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the event is to instill a sense of pride and
co-operation among Canadians through the display of colourful Christmas lights
to kick off the holiday season. Tonight, hundreds of thousands of lights will be
illuminated across the country, a symbolic tradition that joins all Canadians.
The event kicks off with Christmas carols by the St. Bonaventure College
Primary Choir, with further musical entertainment provided by the Salvation Army
Citadel Band. It is my pleasure to join with my son Nicolas in throwing the
switch to light the tree in front of Confederation Building at about 6:45 p.m.
Local entertainer Kelly-Ann Evans will be the Master of Ceremonies.
Refreshments will be available afterwards in the main lobby. I encourage
everyone to attend this evening's celebrations as we kick off the holiday
season.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advanced copy of the release. We, too, on this
side, would love to partake in such a national celebration. It is a celebration
for all across Canada, and for all of us to help bring Christmas back into our
lives and into our spirit. As we notice here, the multi-coloured lights
recognizes the symbol of the diversity of the nation, and in Newfoundland and
Labrador, we ourselves are becoming much more multi-cultured than before.
I say to the minister, I just hope - Nicholas is going to join you, your
eight-year-old son is going to turn on the lights and to make sure you are going
to do it right, is that Santa gives him an extra gift for doing it, to make sure
that the lights are turned on properly and in time. So, Nicholas, you will be
getting an extra gift from Santa.
This is also a time for us, as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, to be
thankful for everything that we have. It is also a time for Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians to remember the less fortunate, for which we are very famous for.
So, congratulations to all the provinces who are going to be celebrating all
across Canada.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
Oral Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, the people of Fortune and surrounding communities
are in shock today following a meeting that took place yesterday between the
Concerned Citizens Committee and Fishery Products International. The Mayor of
Fortune is adamant that the committee was told that with or without an Income
Trust, FPI would not be proceeding with a secondary processing plant in Fortune.
I ask the Minister of Fisheries or, I guess, in this case, his alternate: Was
the government aware of this decision by FPI?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Of course, in our debate back in June there was a substantial piece of the
debate on whether FPI should be allowed to go forward with their Income Trust,
were commitments made to communities throughout the Province. Of course, Mr.
Speaker, with the suspension of activity, as it related to the Income Trust,
there became some concern about whether or not those commitments would be
honoured. At this point, all I can say, based on information from the Department
of Fisheries and Aquaculture and from the company and from the minister, is that
the internal review of FPI is continuing and a final decision on the status of
Fortune and other facilities will be made once that internal review is
completed.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, the company even gave the reason at the meeting
why they were not proceeding with the processing plant in Fortune. They said
that because of the delay in establishing an Income Trust, FPI lost the
opportunity to buy three marketing companies it wanted in the U.S. Mayor
Noseworthy did not make that up. I mean, that was said at the meeting. According
to the mayor, the FPI officials at the meeting said without these companies, FPI
would not proceed with a secondary processing plant in Fortune because it did
not have the markets for additional products and that FPI's secondary plants
in Burin and Danvers, Massachusetts are not working at full capacity.
I ask the minister: Where you aware of FPI's plans to purchase these
companies?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, needless to say, we were aware that FPI did want to pursue
consolidation of seafood marketing opportunities in the U.S. market. I think
that was well known and well articulated by FPI at the time. We talked about it
here in debate in the House of Assembly last spring.
Mr. Speaker, I cannot speak to whether or not FPI have given up on those
acquisitions that they had been planning on pursuing back last spring. I think
it is fair to point out that the decision that was made by the federal
government to review Income Trust and the taxation implications associated with
that, caused a substantial delay. As well, Mr. Speaker, just trying to finalize
the contract between FPI and the government to allow the Income Trust to
proceed, to allow the FPI Act amendments to be proclaimed, caused delays. Right
now, obviously the federal government have changed their mind on the Income
Trust and, Mr. Speaker, we will see after the internal review is done how FPI
plans on proceeding. Hopefully, they will find a way of moving forward and
constructing the facilities that they have indicated that they would.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, obviously the company knew the situation in Burin
and Danvers when they made the commitment to establish a secondary processing
plant in Fortune. It now appears that that was just an empty promise made to get
an agreement with respect to an Income Trust. We know the company delayed its
plans for an Income Trust, apart from what the federal government did. We know
the company had time to put in place that Income Trust but they decided to delay
it. The question is, whether that was part of the overall plan.
Minister, this is one company in the U.K. that FPI has purchased; three in
the U.S. that they were planning to purchase. Are you away of any other
companies that FPI plan to purchase outside of the Province with an Income
Trust?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, first of all for the record, to get the facts straight, I was
not aware, and we were not aware, of what companies FPI might be considering -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, we were aware that they were looking at
companies in the U.S. and that they were looking at companies in Europe, in the
U.K.. In order to enable them to do that - I say, we spent eighteen months
asking questions on this issue, and part of the reason why the Income Trust
transaction did not go ahead, prior to the federal government making their
decisions, is because we wanted to nail down the commitments that FPI made to us
last spring in advance of the vote in this Legislature on amendments to the FPI
Act.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, until the contract is finalized, no matter what
the federal government does on Income Trust, no matter what happens with FPI,
until the contract is finalized between FPI and the government on the
undertakings that they provided to us in advance of the vote in June, there will
not be permission given to FPI. The act will not be proclaimed and FPI will be
able to go forward with an Income Trust.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I guess that is a part of the problem. You
probably should not have stopped asking questions, in light of what happened
yesterday and the commitment to Fortune now being off the table.
I ask the minister about their plans to invest in the Province. Did you ask
about that? Did you ensure with all this money they were looking to spend
outside of the Province to buy companies, did they have money put aside, in
fact? Did they plan on investing in Fortune and Harbour Breton and Bonavista?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I do not understand where the member is coming
from on her questions. The fact of the matter is, in the House of Assembly last
spring in June - I guess it was summer, in late June - we had a debate about the
FPI Act, about the Income Trust transaction, and it was clearly identified, the
commitments that were made and the monies associated with those commitments for
the development in Fortune, for Bonavista, for payment to the people in Harbour
Breton and so on and so on.
So, Mr. Speaker, all she has to do is go back to Hansard from June. She will
find the answer to all of those questions. It was well laid out that if the
Income Trust transaction proceeded and they raised the type of money that they
were talking about, or whether they raised the type of money they were talking
about or not, if the Income Trust transaction took place and 40 per cent of
their marketing arm was sold, Mr. Speaker, in an Income Trust, then the funds
from that would fund the developments in Fortune, Bonavista, et cetera, et
cetera. Now, if the Income Trust does not go ahead, obviously, we all know the
answers to the questions that she has posed, then things cannot happen in the
absence of the money. The undertakings were based on that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Interestingly enough, Mr. Speaker. Obviously, the plans were
not laid out well enough to get the Premier's support of the day, even though
we have members in government who did support the proposal.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, what FPI is doing to the people of this Province
is criminal. Criminal! They are playing games with people's lives. In fact, I
am told that at the meeting with the Concerned Citizens Committee not only did
the company say there wouldn't be a secondary processing plant going in
Fortune, they said there would be no FPI plant operating in Fortune. The
statement was made, that if someone was interested in making a good offer to buy
the plant FPI would examine it. That wasn't comforting news for the people of
Fortune and I am sure it isn't comforting for the people of Bonavista.
I ask the minister: Is the government aware that FPI is willing to sell its
fish plants in the Province if the price is right?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, it is very interesting that here we are now, on the 1 st
of December, and the vote took place on the income trust and the amendments to
the FPI Act in late June, I believe it was the 25 th of June, if I am
not mistaken. Mr. Speaker, the member who is asking the questions of the
government and me, today, about what is happening with the income trust and
Fortune and all other places, fair enough, but she needs to be reminded that she
was part of the debate, they were part of the debate, it was an open and free
vote, and she voted to allow the income trust transaction to go forward, to
allow the FPI Act to be amended, just the same as I did. That is the fact. I
stand by my decision on that day, Mr. Speaker.
There are a number of issues that took place since then, a number of
developments, including an action by the federal government, including
deterioration in income trust in the country, in North America generally, Mr.
Speaker, affecting more than just fish companies, by the way, affecting one fish
company in New Brunswick that is long established in an income trust, Connors
Brothers. Mr. Speaker, those are the fact.
As for what is happening in Fortune and the other communities, we will hold
FPI to their undertaking -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I voted for an income trust because it was a
promise to build a secondary processing facility in Fortune, and the member
knows that.
When the former Minister of Fisheries was in Opposition he said, and I quote:
It looks like the new management of FPI has a thing or two to learn about
building that sense of trust and good will in the communities in which is
operates. That was a quote you made, Sir, in the Western Star in December
of 2001. Obviously, they didn't learn the lesson, and today the company is not
only riding roughshod over its employees but over this government, and the
government is allowing it to happen.
I ask you minister: Given your own words and this latest incident with FPI,
when will this government do the right thing and agree to the request from the
Opposition for a public enquiry into the management and operations of FPI?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, my comments from December of 2001 were shared, and that view was
shared, by our government. That is why we spent the time, why we took the time,
and why we negotiated so long with FPI and the management of FPI and the board
of FPI, before we agreed to even bring legislation to the House to amend the FPI
Act. Had that Opposition, when they were government, taken half the time to ask
half the questions that we asked over the last year-and-a-half of the company,
maybe things would have been different in 2001.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Maybe, Mr. Speaker, if that government had talked to FPI to
make sure that it lived up to its commitments, the people in Fortune would not
be in shock today.
The internal review being carried out by FPI can only spell trouble in this
Province. It should be obvious to anyone that the outcome will mean fewer fish
plants and fewer jobs.
Minister, why is this government turning a blind eye to the hardship that FPI
is causing their employees and the communities, especially in rural
Newfoundland?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier - I will say it again - before the FPI Act is
proclaimed, before any latitude is given to FPI to be able to move forward with
an income trust, whether they want to or not, they will have to sign a contract
with the government reflecting the undertakings and the commitments that they
provided to government, to communities, to members on this side of the House, to
members on that side of the House, last spring.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Now, Mr. Speaker, that is it, full stop. There will not be a
proclamation of the amendments to the FPI Act. There will not be an income
trust. There will not be a sale of 40 per cent of the U.S. marketing arm. There
will not be any changes in that order until the contract is signed and the
undertakings that were provided are lived up to. That is the government's
position. It was the government's position in June, it is the government's
position today, and it will be the government's position going forward, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, it is obvious to everyone - except for this
government, it appears - that FPI has lost the right to operate in this
Province. It was established with the support of taxpayers in this Province to
create employment opportunities for our people.
With the amendments to the FPI Act, the government will lose all authority it
has. I am asking the minister to speak to the Premier and your government to
make sure that the amendments do not happen and that you come back to this House
of Assembly -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS FOOTE: - that you come back to this House of Assembly so we all have
an opportunity to make sure that FPI lives up to its commitments.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, what can you say?
The question that was asked has already been answered on about five occasions
in this Question Period, Mr. Speaker, besides all the other times that they have
been answered inside and outside this House over the past couple of weeks and
the past number of months, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, there is an internal review going on at FPI.
Government is going to be engaged; the union is going to be engaged
I assume, given that the member was a minister in government, given that she
sat in government for quite a period of time, she would know that until the act
is proclaimed, no matter what we debated and agreed to in June, it is irrelevant
until it becomes proclaimed.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions today are for the Minister of Transportation and Works.
I would like to know: Why wasn't Route 516, the
section of the Labrador
Highway from Happy Valley-Goose Bay intersection to the Town of Cartwright, not
included in the Trans-Canada Highway designation?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, at this point, that highway is not built. Right now the
Trans-Labrador Highway, as it exists, the Northern Peninsula Highway from Deer
Lake to St. Barbe, has been included in the National Highway System, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, when it is done -
AN HON. MEMBER: That has been built for ages!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. TAYLOR: Yes, Mr. Speaker, and the Trans-Canada has been built for
ages. I believe the saying was, "Finish The Drive In Sixty-Five", with
Lester B. Pearson, if I am not mistaken, so it has been built that long, and
that is part of the National Highway System, Mr. Speaker. Is he suggesting that
once we build a highway we pull it out of the National Highway System?
Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is, the Trans-Labrador Highway is a part
of the National Highway System. The Northern Peninsula Highway is part of the
National Highway System. I would hope, Mr. Speaker, now that there is a federal
election on the go, that the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair would join
us in trying to get the federal government to commit funding (inaudible).
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: I say to the hon. minister, he is on the wrong road. He is on
the wrong road all together. Route 516, Minister, is the road from the Goose Bay
intersection going into Cartwright, ninety kilometres of road, built and opened
in 2001, I say to the minister.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: I would like to ask him now: Why wasn't that
section of road
designated as part of the Trans-Canada Highway?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, the member asked the question about the road
from Goose Bay to Cartwright.
MS JONES: Goose Bay intersection to Cartwright.
MR. TAYLOR: Goose Bay intersection to -
MS JONES: (Inaudible) intersection is ninety kilometres (inaudible).
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, she is going to have to explain herself better
and maybe I can give her answer, because I am not sure -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. TAYLOR: In all fairness, I will try and give the member an answer. I
am just not clear as to the piece of highway that she is talking about, Mr.
Speaker, when she says from Goose Bay intersection into Cartwright.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. TAYLOR: Okay, I know the one you are talking about. I am sorry. I got
it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. TAYLOR: See? I try to give answers so I have to understand the
question.
Mr. Speaker, it is basically the same, as I understand it, as the piece of -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. TAYLOR: It is basically the same, Mr. Speaker, as the piece of
highway on the Northern Peninsula -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, if they want an answer, I would appreciate if
they would quiet down.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
A question has been asked by the hon. Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au
Clair. The minister is giving an answer. I ask members for their co-operation.
I ask the minister, if he has any concluding comments, if he could make them
rather quickly.
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I guess the best way to put it, Mr. Speaker, is that there is criteria
established that highways must be able to meet in order to be included in the
National Highway System, very much similar to the piece of Route 430 from St.
Barbe intersection to St. Anthony that is not included in the National Highway
System. It is not included because it is not a piece, as I understand it - this
is one of the criteria that had to be met - of an interprovincial road. It is
not an interprovincial link, as I understand it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MS JONES: Oh, I know, don't worry.
AN HON. MEMBER: She's been down that road before.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister: Is it true the
former minister, the Member for Lewisporte, traded off this
section of road,
516, to ensure that the
section of highway from Notre Dame Junction to the port
of Lewisporte was designated as part of the Trans-Canada Highway system?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am certain - I am certain - that there is no trading off of
anything as it relates to roads. The bottom line is, the minister of the day
went into the negotiation with the sole objective of getting as much of the main
trunk roads, the interprovincial roads in this Province, as possible included in
the National Highway System so that we could qualify for 50-50 funding.
At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, it really, in some respects, is
irrelevant because it comes down to how much money we get in cost-shared funding
from the federal government to enable us to spend on the Trans-Canada Highway,
the Northern Peninsula Highway and the Trans-Labrador Highway. That is
essentially where it is, Mr. Speaker.
Right now, there is no additional funding associated with the increased
kilometres that are now included in the national highway system, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the
section of highway from Norte Dame junction to
the port in Lewisporte, I will say to the minister, was designated because it
was used as a bargaining chip for marine service into Labrador.
Now, I would like to know: Why was Route 516 from the highway to the Port of
Cartwright not designated, was it because the minister traded it off for the
road in his own district or was it because they never even put it on the table
for negotiation?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Maybe the member might want to ask her federal colleagues, her federal
counterparts, Mr. Speaker, why they would not accept more of these roads. If the
issue is 516 from the Goose Bay intersection into Cartwright, Mr. Speaker, maybe
she should ask her federal counterparts why they would not accept it. I am sure
that we would dearly love to have it included. The more road that we can get
under the national highway system, the better.
The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, right now, as we speak, there is no
additional funding associated with this increase in kilometres. Right now, if we
want to do anything in Southern Labrador, in her district to upgrade the road
through L'Anse-au-Loup, for example, or the Northern Peninsula Highway from
Portland Creek to Parsons Pond, we have to fund it solely out of our provincial
roads budget, Mr. Speaker. That is why I asked her to call on her federal
colleagues to join us in 50-50 cost sharing.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister, he got the right road but
he still don't have the right information.
Let me tell him this. Mr. Speaker, the former Minister of Works, Services and
Transportation, the Member for Lewisporte, sat at a chamber dinner in Lewisporte,
just a few weeks ago, he said that the Premier knew he would take some abuse for
ignoring the recommendations in a report of Labrador marine services but he said
he did not care because he wanted to ensure that the business community in
Central Newfoundland benefited. Now, Mr. Speaker, we have a road designated in
his own district as part of the Trans-Canada Highway to service Labrador.
So, when will this government act on the transportation issues to benefit the
business community in Labrador for a change, I say to the minister?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I do not know what she is chasing. The bottom line is, no matter
what happened on the Lewisporte road, the fact of the matter is, if we want to
do anything with the Lewisporte road today, it has to come 100 per cent out of
the provincial roads budget. It cannot, will not, come out of 50-50 funding
because there is no 50-50 funding available for it.
The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, no matter what roads - I do not care
what roads we get in the Province as long as we have enough of them designated
as part of the national highway system. That will, at the end of the day, free
up more of our provincial roads budget to do, for example, the road from
Cartwright out to the Goose Bay intersection. At the end of the day, that is
what is important. The volume of highway that is under the national highway
system and the amount of money associated with that and the amount of money that
is in the provincial roads budget is what is important at the end of the day,
and how it is spent and make sure it is spent wisely, unlike it was in the past.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
AN HON. MEMBER: Sit down (inaudible).
MR. JOYCE: I will not sit down. This is a serious issue here.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, we hear about the cruel and inhumane practice of
moving seniors with very little notice, if any, to other parts of the region.
Recommendation 172 of the Hay Report. Recommendations 170 and 171:
discontinuance of elective deliveries at Sir Thomas Roddick Hospital and
discontinuance of elective surgery requiring general or regional anaesthesia
were cancelled and announced by the minister for Stephenville here in this
House. The cost savings that was attached to these recommendations was $215,000.
The Member for Stephenville East made the announcement.
I ask the regional minister for Corner Brook, the Member for Humber East,
will you now stand up and be accounted and announce an end to this inhumane
treatment of our seniors?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, this government is very concerned about
health care in the Western Region of this Province.
Mr. Speaker, the problem that the hon. member complains about is the fact
that there are not enough long-term care beds in Corner Brook. That is because,
many years ago, that government did not listen to the advice given by the
long-term care committee and Mr. Israel Hann, that there was going to be a need
for long-term care beds in Corner Brook. If they had shown some vision and had
shown some leadership and had taken action, there would be long-term care beds
in Corner Brook today and there would be no problem today. So, we are building a
long-term care facility in Corner Brook. It is being built as we speak, along
with a new high school and along with the MRI.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister once again, you have no
idea. There are two wings in that hospital not open. The Minister of Justice has
told people to give him until Friday to try to get this resolved. From his own
mouth, that is what he told people.
The moving of patients to another area was a direct result of surgeries and
elective deliveries being moved to Corner Brook from the Sir Thomas Roddick
Hospital. These recommendations were cancelled last year by the Member for
Stephenville East. Will the Minister of Justice admit that this move is nothing
more than a cost-saving directive, and will he now ensure that funds are made
available to keep these seniors near their spouses and families?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member raises issues that have
been raised Monday and Tuesday of this week, and again Thursday. This is an
issue to protect the interests of patients. It is an issue of patients' safety
and patients' interests.
Again - and I repeat, because it is important that the hon. member understand
this - it is an important principle and concept in health care, and that is:
those individuals who require acute care, who require surgery, who require
emergent care, it is critical and essential that they get it, and that is why
Western Health has made the decision. As a government, as I indicated two days
ago, we support the decision of Western Health.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.
MR. JOYCE: I thought I would never say it, but I have the say, the Member
for Stephenville East stood up for her people a lot less than the Member for
Humber East. I say congratulations, Minister.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. JOYCE: I ask the minister directly: Would the Minister of Justice and
the Member for Humber East now take a stand? You told people to wait until
Friday to see if you could get this matter resolved. It is time to be counted;
the seniors are depending on you.
Will the minister stand up for the people who elected you and announce a stop
to this cruel, unjust and inhumane policy that is continuing every day as we
speak?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, it is incredible that the hon. member would
get up in this House and tell people what I said to somebody else, that I would
do, and once again he has it wrong.
MR. JOYCE: Did you say it?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Once again, he has it wrong.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Time is passing.
The Chair recognizes the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member said in this House, the day
before yesterday, that ten beds or eighteen beds had been closed by this
government when, in fact, they had been closed ten years ago by that government
over there.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Not only did he get that wrong; he said it was going to
take two or three years for a bed to become available for a woman who got moved
to Port aux Basques to take advantage of appropriate long-term care.
Mr. Speaker, a bed for a male resident became available yesterday, and this
lady and her family have been promised that as soon as a new bed for a female
resident becomes available in Corner Brook that woman will get first priority.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Minister of Education. I ask the minister: Who sits on
the joint Board of Directors at the College of the North Atlantic, Qatar Campus,
and could the names be provided to this House?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, there are three board members from the Board of
Directors who sit on the joint board, and they would be: Allan McKinnon, Andrea
Marshall and Al Gosse.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader, time for one quick
question.
MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Minister of Finance.
Minister, on December 7, the Public Utilities Board will deal with an issue
involving Newfoundland Power, who have $24 million in surplus as a result of a
tax settlement. I am wondering if the minister is going to intervene in this
application, in addition to the consumer advocate, to ensure that this money is
returned to the rate payers of this Province rather than stay in the company
coffers? That can help the electricity users in this Province offset their
increasing energy costs, as well as what the government is trying to do for the
oil burners.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, time for a quick
response.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
A couple of quick points, Mr. Speaker.
This is an issue that the department is very much aware of. We are assessing
that right now. As the member knows, and all members should know, the PUB is a
sort of quasi-judicial process. Once that assessment is complete, whatever
action is appropriate as we decide from government's point of view, we will
take it. Once we make a decision on what that action is, we will be informing
not only the House but the people of the Province.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The time for Question Period has expired.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Tabling of Documents.
Notices of Motion.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a
bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The City Of St. John's Act. (Bill 65)
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The Public Service Commission Act. (Bill 67)
I give notice that I will on tomorrow move that the House resolve itself into
Committee of the Whole on Supply to Consider Certain Resolutions Relating to the
Granting of Supplementary Supply to Her Majesty, Bill 68.
Further, Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow move that the
House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on Supply to Consider Certain
Resolutions Relating to the Granting of Supplementary Supply to Her Majesty,
Bill 69.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The Tobacco Health Care Costs Recovery Act, Bill 66.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled
An Act To Amend The Order Of Newfoundland And Labrador Act, Bill 70.
I further give notice, on behalf of my colleague, the Minister of Fisheries
and Aquaculture, that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled
An Act To Amend The Fish Inspection Act, Bill 72.
Mr. Speaker, I give further notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to
introduce the following resolution:
WHEREAS, in accordance with
Section 3 of the Citizen's Representative Act,
the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, on a Resolution of this House of Assembly,
by Order in Council dated December 14, 2001, appointed Mr. Fraser March to the
office of Citizen's Representative, and
WHEREAS the Citizens' Representative, Fraser March, has, in accordance
with subsection 7(1) of the Citizens' Representative Act been suspended as the
Citizens' Representative, and
WHEREAS
section 6 of the Citizens' Representative Act provides that the
Lieutenant-Governor in Council may, on a Resolution of this House of Assembly,
for cause remove the Citizens' Representative; and
WHEREAS there is cause to remove Mr. March from the office of Citizens'
Representative;
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED by this House of Assembly that Fraser March be
removed from the office of Citizens' Representative.
MR. SPEAKER: Further Notices of Motion. Answers to Questions for which
Notice has been Given. Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the residents of my district
as it relates to the community of Williams Harbour.
Mr. Speaker, I say to the Minister of Transportation and Works, this is a
road that is not yet built, and that is why I am standing here on a petition
today.
The community of Williams Harbour, Mr. Speaker, is only twenty-two to
twenty-three kilometers from the main highway in Labrador. These people have
been lobbying for a road connection for the last number of years. In fact, in
2003 there was a commitment from the government to build this
section of road,
Mr. Speaker, to the extent that all the engineering work was completed, all the
routing was completed, and it was registered and looked at under an
environmental assessment. Mr. Speaker, the only thing left to do was to tender
and build the road into this community. Unfortunately, when the new government
took office in the fall of 2003 they put this
section of road on hold and
evidently, six months later, cancelled it altogether.
Well, Mr. Speaker, it is still a priority for the people of this community.
In fact, they live in an isolated region. They have to travel outside of their
community for postal services, for medical services, for all transportation
access and, Mr. Speaker, it is unfair and unreasonable that they would be left
without any road connection at this stage.
In fact, Mr. Speaker, the previous Minister of Transportation once said to me
that you cannot build roads where it is not economically feasible to do so.
Well, Mr. Speaker, I thought it was the lamest, most pitiful excuse I had ever
heard in my life, because if you were to go around this Province of Newfoundland
and Labrador, from one end to the other, there are very few sections of road
that was ever feasible to build, or economically feasible. Most of the roads
that were built in Newfoundland and Labrador, were built to improve the quality
of life for the people who lived in certain areas, and in particular,
communities. That is all we are asking for in this case.
Mr. Speaker, Williams Harbour is now designated - Gilbert Bay, right adjacent
to it - as a marine protected area; one of only four marine protected areas in
all of our country. It is a haven for the scientific and biological community
that looks at fish habitat, especially as it relates to codfish. It will be
world renown right throughout the North Atlantic rim as an area for research and
study. It is important, Mr. Speaker, that we be able to open up this area, not
just for the people who live in the region but also to those people, the
academics and the science community who want to access this renown site and be
able to research and do work there.
In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, I know the people who live in this
community. I have known them for a very long time and it always makes me
heartfelt, Mr. Speaker, when I know in the spring of the year, when this
community is going through an ice breakup and how dangerous it is to travel over
the ice to access these services. In fact, two of my good friends, last year
went through the ice coming out of the community of Williams Harbour. They were
so lucky that they even survived that accident. This will give you an idea of
how distressful -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's allotted time for her petition has expired.
MS JONES: By leave, (inaudible) just to clue up.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave is granted to make some concluding comments.
MS JONES: Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, it was actually a miracle that they survived this accident of
going through the ice. We have had a number of people, some who were not as
successful, I say to hon. members, who actually lost their lives in that area. I
think it is time for government to seriously have a look at this, and not look
at it based on the economic viability of it but look at it on the basis of
providing a quality of life and access to another community in our Province that
can be done, I say, at a very fair and reasonable cost. I would like to submit
this petition to the government on their behalf.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?
Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We will begin with Order 7, the continuing debate on second reading of a
bill,
An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000 No2. (Bill 48)
MR. SPEAKER: Order 7, Bill 48,
An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000
No 2. I do believe that at the end of the last day the hon. the Member for
Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair was standing in the House at that time.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: In fairness, if the minister speaks he closes the debate. I
do remember that the hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair was
standing when the House adjourned for the afternoon.
The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is a pleasure for me to rise and speak to the bill on Income Trust.
Unfortunately, I was going to rise on the last day of the House, but I think we
were concluding our debate for that day.
Mr. Speaker, a couple of issues that I wanted to talk about. Actually, it was
in response to some issues that were raised by my colleague, the Member for Lake
Melville, on that particular day.
Mr. Speaker, let me just say that in Labrador there is no secret. There has
been a great deal of frustration as it relates to government and as it relates
to government services. The people in that area, the only thing that they were
asking for was to have fair investment and fair consideration given to their
issues.
Well, Mr. Speaker, let's take a look at the Lower Churchill development
project because I think that is probably one of the largest developments to have
occurred in Labrador in some time and it is probably, hopefully, not the last
large development but in terms of the energy sector, it is very substantial. Mr.
Speaker, whenever you are looking at over 3,000 megawatts of power for
development to be exported into the North American market, it cannot be done and
should not be done without ensuring that there is a power availability to all
the communities in that particular region.
Mr. Speaker, my district is one of the regions in Labrador right now that is
going without the full availability of power; and, in addition to that, they do
not have affordable power. They pay the highest price for electricity than
almost anywhere in this country, I say to hon. members, and that is unfortunate.
So, whenever we talk about developing hydro development power in this Province,
and we talk about being a Province of the country that could be the largest
broker of power into the North America market, Mr. Speaker, we have to do it in
the context of ensuring that the communities and the people in the Labrador
region are going to be looked after and they are going to be protected.
Mr. Speaker, we had a public session in Goose Bay with the Premier and the
Minister of Natural Resources and others just a few weeks ago, and I was really
proud of the people of Labrador who went to the microphone that evening, because
- do you know something? - they did not go there to play politics. They went
there because they were desperately seeking inclusion in a major development
project in their territory. They went there because they want to see
improvements in infrastructure in their communities and they were willing to
give their input, to be logical and sensible in putting forward their ideas. Mr.
Speaker, I was really proud of them. I thought they had gotten their message
out, and they had gotten it out loud and clear.
We will have to see what transpires on this particular issue, and I think we
will have to watch very closely to see how the Aboriginal people of Labrador are
going to be included in all of this, especially the Metis people who, as you
know, comprise a large portion of my district. Mr. Speaker, they feel they have
a very legitimate right and a legitimate claim in this area where the hydro
development project is being proposed. Therefore, they feel they have a right to
be included in meaningful dialogue with the government. I can only say to the
government and to the minister, I hope they will be included in meaningful
dialogue and I hope their issues and their ideas and their proposals will be
given full consideration as this particular development transpires and
discussions move forward.
Mr. Speaker, I also want to talk about the good news announcement last week.
My federal colleague, the Member of Parliament for Labrador, was in Goose Bay
last week with some good news announcements, and I know that a lot of people,
including the media, sometimes, will say that all of this is just because there
is an election on the horizon. Well, I beg to differ, because what I saw last
week was a substantial investment into the long-term viability of Happy
Valley-Goose Bay.
I listened to the Member for Lake Melville speak a few days ago, and he did
not speak with much optimism over the investments that were going into his
district, which actually surprised me. What I will say is this: he got up and
talked about how the government had been active on the 5 Wing file. Well, I
think differently. The only thing I saw coming out of the government opposite
when it came to 5 Wing Goose Bay was the fact that they travelled over to
Germany, across Europe, met with a bunch of commanders of the military forces,
and talked to some of the people who were involved with international affairs.
Now, did that transpire into hundreds of millions of dollars in investments for
the base at Goose Bay? Absolutely not.
Only a few days ago, right before the announcement, I heard the member when
he stood up and said he was going to keep the federal MPs feet to the fire on 5
Wing Goose Bay. There is nothing wrong with that, but when there is an issue
like this, with a substantial announcement, with substantial investment, well,
don't be looking at the doom and gloom around it, I say to the hon. member,
just because it did not come from your government or your side of the House. In
fact, what happened was that there was a five-year renewal agreement on the base
in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. It was an opportunity to bring the allied countries
back into full operation at 5 Wing Goose Bay - the Germans, the Italians, the
British - and to be able to go out and market it. There was a $5 million
marketing program.
I say to the members opposite, in fact, if you really want to do something
for 5 Wing Goose Bay, you would have put a marketing program in place two years
ago. Two years ago there would have been a provincial marketing arm at $5
million up there, to be able to go out and promote and sell the services of the
base, but that did not happen. It was the jolly rancher trip to Europe, and that
was the end of it.
Mr. Speaker, there is a marketing division that is going to be created, and
these people will go out and solicit not just foreign military operations for
the base but also other uses for that particular base.
In addition to that, there was $30 million of new investments for (inaudible)
and other equipment at the base. There was a $20 million economic development
fund.
I would like to say this because the Minister of Natural Resources, twice in
the last week, stood up and quoted some comments that I made on VOCM with regard
to the Abitibi mill in Stephenville. Well, Mr. Speaker, do you know what made me
so upset about the proposed agreement with Abitibi? Not because the people in
Stephenville were going to get a $15 million investment a year to keep an
economic activity going in their community. What upset me, Mr. Speaker, was that
I live in a region where there is a base like there is in Goose Bay, where I
watch 1,000 people, almost, exit the community because of job loss, without any
investment from the government opposite, without any millions of dollars a year
to keep that economic base going. That was what I was upset about. I was upset
because I had a district with over 400 fishery-related workers this year put out
of work the end of June, with what? Not even a frivolous comment from the
Minister of Fisheries, I say to members opposite. It went completely unnoticed,
unacknowledged -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS JONES: The only reason it was unacknowledged, Mr. Speaker -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS JONES: - was simply because to acknowledge it meant you had to deal
with it, I say to the hon. members. That was the only reason.
Mr. Speaker, that is the reason I was upset - upset because I had over 400
people out of work in my district, hunting around for jobs, trying to grab on to
whatever they could get to keep their families and to keep their homes going -
but nobody came into my district and said: Here are millions of dollars. Go and
prop up the workforce. Go and save the industry.
That was the reason I was upset. If the hon. minister, when he stands up,
wants to misinterpret my comments as being non-supportive of an offer to Abitibi
in Stephenville, well, he can interpret it that way. All I am saying is, if the
shoe fits one it should fit all the people in the Province. If one can wear it,
everybody should wear it, I am saying to you. If there are 1,000 jobs going in
one community, or 500 or 400, they are as important as the jobs that are going
to be lost in another community.
Mr. Speaker, it was the federal Liberal government under Prime Minister
Martin that gave the new lease on life to 5 Wing Goose Bay, not the members
opposite, not the Premier who was all over the file two years ago and did
absolutely nothing. It was the federal Liberal government that came in at the
end of the day and put the money in to prop up the base in Goose Bay.
Mr. Speaker, in addition to that, there were other announcements, and one of
those I want to talk about. Well, actually, I am going to talk about two of
them. One of them I want to talk about was the $96 million investment into the
Canadian Coast Guard, the Coast Guard presence in Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, I met this morning, along with a delegation from my district,
with the Canadian Coast Guard. That is a good investment in Labrador. It will
involve transferring surveillance services to a Labrador based operation through
air surveillance. It will also include refitting a coastguard ship to be based
in Labrador come this spring. In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, this initiative
will create seventy new jobs in the Labrador region. To me, that is more jobs
that I have seen created by this government opposite in the whole Province in
the last two years. Let me point that out, Mr. Speaker: Seventy jobs being
created as part of this one initiative, and Labradorians, they assured us this
morning, would be given priority for those particular jobs in that particular
region. In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, there will be eight new conservation
and protection officers through the Department of Fisheries and Oceans that is
going to be based there.
All I can say, Mr. Speaker, is thank God the federal Liberal government is
investing in these rural areas of our Province, because the government opposite
is certainly not doing so. In fact, all I have seen in my district has been
services disappearing, HRE offices closing, transportation workers laid off -
that is what I have been seeing, Mr. Speaker - and fish plants workers displaced
with no compensation programs. That is the kind of stuff I have seen, seeing
marine services taken out of my own district and put into Lewisporte to service
Labrador. Those were the kinds of initiatives I saw by the government opposite.
When my colleague from Labrador stands in the House and pats himself on the
back for all the great things they are doing, he needs to back it up with some
information, because I guarantee you, I have not seen it. In fact, Mr. Speaker,
I have seen the tourism industry decline by over 40 per cent, I have seen retail
sales in my district down, I have seen profitable businesses become
non-profitable, I say to the members opposite, and I have seen a real slowing of
the economy, simply because of changes in tourism, in the fishery and in the
forestry development sectors.
How do we change that, Mr. Speaker? We want to change that, we want to change
it around, we want to see it grow, we want to see industry created, we want to
see people working. Do you know something, Mr. Speaker? The only way that can
happen is if there is a will of the provincial government to make it happen.
We talked about roads today. Now, the minister didn't get the road right,
but I think he figured it out after. The reality is, Mr. Speaker, if the
highways to these communities are not designated as part of the Trans-Canada
Highway system, then you cannot even apply for the money, you cannot even make
an application to get the money to upgrade and pave these particular roads. The
real initiative, I say, has to come from the government of the Province, and if
they are not prepared and they do not have the will to ensure the survival of
these communities, to ensure that they are economically viable, that they can
grow, that they can build industry, then, Mr. Speaker, it cannot happen. It
cannot happen.
Mr. Speaker, I have to say, there is a willingness on the part of some
members within the government to do the best that they can, and I will
acknowledge that. I will stand and acknowledge that, that there are some
ministers on that side of the House who will go above and beyond to do what they
can to help a community, to help a region. But, Mr. Speaker, they are not all
like that. I have been evidence of it. I have been on the receiving end of it,
Mr. Speaker, when the previous Minister of Transportation hauled the ferries
right out of my district and docked them in his own, and taking with them
millions of dollars in retail sales and millions of dollars in business
opportunity. I was on the receiving end of it, Mr. Speaker, and that is the
reason that I can't stand here today and say that I have the confidence and
the faith in all of them to do the right thing. I know that there are some of
them who are prepared. I know that there are some of them who are prepared to
work. But, Mr. Speaker, it is the tactics that they sometimes choose and the way
in which they choose to do it.
I want to talk a little bit about this letter that the Premier sent off to
the federal government; sent a copy to all the ministers up in Ottawa the first
day of the election. Now, Mr. Speaker, the issues that are contained in this
letter are the issues that are of the utmost importance to people in our
Province. They are ones that have been on their priority list for months and
months and months. When does the Premier send the letter off to Ottawa looking
for all the deals? The first day of the election. The first day a federal
election is called he walks in and says: Here is my list, now what are you going
to give me? Well, Mr. Premier, you should know by now that on the first day of
an election the government is dissolved. The government is dissolved. They
cannot give you anything. They cannot give you anything, Mr. Premier. Why weren't
you at the table seventeen months ago? Why weren't you at the table seventeen
months ago on these issues?
Look at this one: "Does your party support the efforts to develop the
hydro-power resources of the Lower Churchill River System...". Mr. Speaker,
it was over a year ago that the government opposite went out for a proposal call
for interested parties to develop the Lower Churchill project but it took them a
year later to put it on a wish list to the federal government. A year later they
get it on a wish list to the federal government, a year after they went out and
looked for proposals to develop it.
Months after, Mr. Speaker, the government went into Prince Edward Island and
invested $40 million into a wind generation project in P.E.I., only a few weeks
ago. I would say that is a little bit late in the game for that one. Maybe when
Martin forms the government again, then I am sure he will sit down and talk
about the Lower Churchill, but it should have been done a long time ago. It
should have been on the table a long time ago.
He has the foreign military presence on the base in Goose Bay. What he did
not realize, I guess, was they announced the money for it last week. He must
have forgotten they had announced the money for it last week to do the base in
Goose Bay because they put it in his letter.
Let's talk about the fisheries issues that he put in his letter, Mr.
Speaker. Let's talk about the fisheries issues; the early retirement program.
Mr. Speaker, we have been raising the early retirement program for fishery
workers in this Province in the House of Assembly for the past two years. Mr.
Speaker, for the past two years - more than that now - we have been asking the
government opposite: Go to the feds. Put a proposal on the table for an early
retirement program for our fishery workers in Newfoundland and Labrador. Well,
do you know when the first piece of written correspondence arrived in Minister
Geoff Regan's office looking for a retirement program? Friday. No, or was it
Monday morning? He got it on Monday, but it might have arrived on Friday
evening. But, Mr. Speaker, he was into a federal election. When the first piece
of correspondence for a fisheries retirement package for fishery workers in
Newfoundland and Labrador landed on the federal minister's office was this
letter from the Premier a couple of days ago, with no detail, four lines - no,
actually, two-and-a-half lines requesting an early retirement program.
Well, Mr. Speaker, where were they the last seventeen months? Why didn't
they have a proposal, and a comprehensive proposal on the table of the federal
government and the federal Fisheries Minister eighteen months ago saying we want
to have an early retirement program for fishery workers in our Province? I say,
Mr. Speaker, it is too little, it is too late. How do they expect to negotiate a
retirement program in the middle of a federal election when the government, in
essence, is collapsed and there is no governing party in power at the present
time? How do they expect to get a deal negotiated?
Mr. Speaker, I know my time is almost up, and I want to talk about custodial
management of the fishery right before I sit down. The custodial management of
the fishery has been a priority in this Province for years and years and years.
In fact, when I was the minister, it was our number one priority. Members
opposite sat on the committee that went to Ottawa to lobby for custodial
management of the fisheries in Newfoundland and Labrador. We went collectively,
united. My colleagues in the NDP were part of it. What happens? They get an
office, they take power, and what happens? They sell out on custodial
management.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's allotted time has expired.
MS JONES: By leave, just to clue up, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been requested.
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.
MS JONES: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I will make this very brief.
In my mind, back over a year ago, the provincial government sold out on
custodial management. When they were prepared to accept the measures that the
federal government was putting in place to curb the offshore fishing issue, Mr.
Speaker, that was the day they caved in. They should have stuck to their guns.
They should have played hardball, because I really do believe that custodial
management is the answer for fishery development in our Province, not only today
but for the future.
On that note, I am going to conclude my comments.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to speak to this bill, but I guess I really want to speak to
what transpired here in the House in Question Period, and this whole idea of the
government seeming to be quite accepting of what is happening with FPI and those
communities in rural Newfoundland and Labrador that rely on FPI in terms of
employment opportunities, just as a company in a small town makes a difference
to the economic base of that community.
Mr. Speaker, it is clear, having listened to the answers given by the Acting
Minister of Fisheries, or the Minister of Transportation, of course, who is now
the alternate for the Minister of Fisheries, that they seem to be quite content
with what FPI is doing, and that is what is so sad about this entire situation.
While he stands and says, you know, we are going to hold the feet of FPI to the
fire to make sure that they live up to their commitments that they were given in
exchange for the establishment of an income trust, the reality of the situation
is that there is no income trust. We wonder if FPI will ever proceed with an
income trust, given where they are today, and the fact of the matter that they
are meeting with communities like Fortune, in particular, and telling them that
no, they are not going to proceed with the plans that they committed to in
exchange for an income trust. Now, how the minister can stand and say he is not
aware of that, or he does not know that, is mind-boggling, because you would
think, given the importance of this issue to rural Newfoundland and Labrador,
that the government would be watching very closely what is transpiring within
FPI - the whole idea behind this internal review, and what we can expect to come
out of that internal review.
I know, without a doubt, having spoken to the Mayor of Fortune, Alec
Noseworthy, the comments that were made in that meeting yesterday to the
Concerned Citizens Committee left them without a doubt with the understanding
that FPI - not only will they not be putting a secondary processing plant in
Fortune - they would not be continuing with any plant in Fortune.
The unfortunate thing about that, of course, is that there are several
communities that depend on that fish plant. So, it is not just the community of
Fortune. You are talking at least half a dozen other communities. The people who
work at that fish plant, and the communities where these people live, are really
in shock today. They are reeling from the news that there is no future for them
based on the information that came from FPI officials yesterday.
Now, I know there was some discrepancy because, after, it was said that the
union actually went and met with FPI, and FPI said: No, no, we did not say that.
We did not indicate that at all. We said everything was still under review; that
no decision had been made.
I heard the Minister of Fisheries say that he had met with FPI and they had
told him the same thing. Now, I do not know what happened. I do not know if FPI
misspoke. I did not know if they realized after they had said that to the
Concerned Citizens Committee that: Oh, wait a minute, we probably should not
have said that. It is a little too early to unveil our true plans for
Newfoundland and Labrador. Let's try and reel that back in now. We will tell
the union what they want to hear, because that way we will not have them out
saying there is something wrong with this picture. We will tell the Minister of
Fisheries, who is talking to us on behalf of the government, what they want to
hear, because we are not ready yet to unveil to the people of the Province what
is, in fact, going to come out of our internal review.
It would lead one to believe, watching all of this unfold yesterday, that FPI's
master plan is clearly to get out of the groundfish fishery which, of course,
the former CEO, Derrick Rowe, said a year ago, but it also means they are not
going to live up to the commitments that they gave.
Maybe they do not want an income trust any more. Maybe they are not even
going to move forward with an income trust. Maybe the criteria that the federal
government has attached to an FPI trust does make it attractive to them any
more. Maybe they never intended to run with an income trust. Who knows? All I
know is that the message that is coming out of FPI, whether they intended to
deliver that message or not, is that there is no future in Fortune for the
people there. That, in fact, FPI does not intend to have a presence in Fortune,
and that means hundreds of people are going to be out of work, hundreds of
families affected, and they are wondering today where they are going to turn and
who is telling the truth.
Now, I know Mayor Alex Noseworthy, and I know he did not make up the answer
that he gave last night when he spoke on the Open Line show. I talked to him
after that. He also tells me that three of the four who were at that meeting had
the same understanding when they left the meeting. The fact that FPI even said
that they are quite willing to entertain a proposal if anyone is interested in
buying the plant, would lead one to believe that it is all part and parcel of
the larger plan. Why would FPI say that if, in fact, they were going to proceed
with a secondary processing plant in Fortune? It does not make sense. So, for
them to turn around and say to the union: No, that is not what we meant. I do
not know if they think people are not listening or if they can just ride
roughshod over people, like they are obviously doing with this government who is
not holding them accountable.
Today I asked the alternate minister to get this government to commit, that
before proclaiming the amendments to the FPI Act, that we all voted on here in
June - and I was one who voted for the Income Trust, but I did so because it
meant a future for the people in my district. Now, what I have asked the
minister is - with the government - to bring that back to the House of Assembly.
Before the government does anything further with respect to the Income Trust,
with respect to proclaiming the amendments, what I have asked is that you bring
it back to the House of Assembly.
Now, certainly heavens, the members opposite understand that. When they were
in Opposition, no matter what the issue was, if it was Voisey's Bay, bring it
to the House of Assembly. Let us debate it. Let us discuss it. That is what I am
saying now, and I am saying it because I do not trust the government on this
file. It is another file that the Premier has said he is all over it, and we
know what happens to the files if the Premier is all over it. They usually do
not succeed, and that this one is one that I am fearful we are going to find
that FPI is going to again be able to walk away and leave communities in
distress, that there are not going to be employment opportunities for people in
those communities where FPI traditionally have had fish plants. I have asked the
government, bring it back to the House of Assembly. You say that you are looking
at it, you are trying to make sure that FPI understands exactly what it is that
is expected of them and you are making sure all the I's are dotted and the T's
are crossed before you finalize the whole issue around Income Trust.
Well, I am asking again, contrary to what the minister - when he stood up and
obviously was not listening to the question when he said: We are going to make
sure that FPI lives up to its commitments with respect to an Income Trust or we
will not approve the Income Trust. Well, minister, I am asking you, bring it
back to the House of Assembly so we can all look at this and make sure, at the
end of the day, we are all comfortable that FPI will do what is in the best
interest of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, because I can tell you, as the
result of what happened yesterday, I have no level of confidence at all, no
level of comfort that FPI is interested in doing what is in the best interest of
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
I am saying it again, bring it back to the House of Assembly. You brought it
here in June. Now, we had to request a free vote on the matter and we all had
that free vote. I am not sure how free it was or exactly what transpired on that
day. Some will suggest it was all a scam, given the way some people voted in
this House of Assembly and given the fact that, of course, when I introduced a
private member's motion calling on the government to conduct a public inquiry
into the management and operations of FPI, that those members who voted at the
time along with members of the Opposition, with the exception of myself, that
those members on the government side who voted against the Income Trust did not
stand with us in the Opposition and support a pubic inquiry into the operations
and management of FPI. That raises a whole new set of questions. Why, if they
did not believe the Income Trust was the right thing to do and that what FPI was
proposing around the Income Trust, they had questions with all of that, why then
didn't they stand with the Opposition and request, and support the request,
for an inquiry into the operations and management of FPI?
There is something not right about what is going on here; whether it is
something that the government is doing working with FPI, or whether FPI is just
taking advantage and riding roughshod over the government and the government is
allowing it to happen. I am not sure what is going down here but I can tell you,
there is something going down here that is not right. The unfortunate thing
about all of this is that it is the people of Newfoundland who are being
adversely affected, the very people who made it possible for FPI to exist, for
FPI to exist as a viable company; and, by the way, it is a viable company. FPI
is making money, maybe not as much money as they would like to make, or their
shareholders would like for them to make. I often ask: How much wealth is enough
for shareholders?
There is nothing wrong with profit - profit is not a dirty word - but, how
much profit and to whose detriment? I think that is the question we have here
today. We need that public inquiry. We need to know exactly what it is that FPI,
under this management, is doing; because, whatever they are doing under this
management and this board of directors is adversely affecting the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador.
FPI was created by taxpayers' dollars, and it was a good investment. It
brought together struggling fish companies and we ended up with FPI. It meant
that there were employment opportunities in Newfoundland and Labrador, for
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. It was their money, and so it should be that
way. The problem is that this company, this board of directors, seems to have
lost sight of the very reason that FPI was created. Maybe they do not care.
Maybe they see that as history, and that history is not important, and they are
not going to bother to adhere to the type of policies that FPI practiced and
enforced when it was first created.
Maybe they decided that the promises and the commitments they gave when they
wanted to take over FPI - and I recall very vividly having the discussion at a
Cabinet committee meeting, a discussion with some of the members who wanted to
be members of the Board of Directors of FPI - their plan was to grow the
company, create more employment opportunities, and we were never going to have
to look back. We were going to be very proud of what transpired.
Look where we are today. We have a former CEO who said they were getting out
of the groundfish industry; there would be no groundfish plants in Newfoundland
and Labrador. What does that say about Marystown? Apart from Fortune - we know
Fortune is closed; they said no groundfish in Fortune, and now they have said no
secondary processing - what about Marystown? If we are to believe what Derrick
Rowe said, there will not be a groundfish plant in Marystown. What about
Bonavista? What about this commitment, this promise, to build a new plant in
Bonavista? Now, I know a group from Bonavista met with the officials at FPI. Did
they forget to tell them that they were not going to make the investment, that
there would not be a new plant built in Bonavista?
I am curious as to how all of this unfolded yesterday, how the officials who
were there with the Concerned Citizens Committee of Fortune managed to let it
slip somehow. Maybe the people from Fortune who were there asked the right
questions. Maybe it was the questions they asked that got the right answers,
answers later that the company tried to retract from when they met with the
union.
Again, maybe they told the union what they wanted to hear. Maybe FPI is not
ready to deal with more flak because, you know, there will be more flak coming
out of an internal review. You know and I know that internal review will result
in fewer fish plants and fewer jobs in Newfoundland and Labrador. Maybe that was
the plan all along. Maybe we were all led down the garden path. Maybe, because
we wanted to believe so badly in a future for rural Newfoundland and Labrador,
we wanted to believe the new members of the Board of Directors of FPI were, in
fact, going to ensure that the communities in which they exist will continue to
flourish. Of course we wanted to believe that. That is the future of
Newfoundland and Labrador. The fishing industry has been the industry of choice,
the mainstay, particularly of rural Newfoundland and Labrador. So, why is it
that, while other companies are doing well, some even expanding - some of the
fishing companies doing well and some even expanding - why is it that FPI finds
itself in the situation that it is, or says it is? Why is it that, when you come
into a company and there is about a $75 million debt there, all of a sudden that
grows to close to $300 million? Poor investments? Poor decisions? Isn't that
enough to warrant a public inquiry into a company that the government still has
some influence over, if it wishes to exercise it?
It is not a private sector company like most other fishing companies. It was
created to have a social conscience; and, because we have a piece of legislation
that governs FPI, that says it all in terms of what is expected of FPI by the
people of this Province and by the government of this Province. What this
government has to do is hold FPI accountable, and they have yet to do that. They
have yet to do that!
For the company to let slip yesterday, in a conversation with the Concerned
Citizens Committee of Fortune, that they will not be proceeding with a secondary
processing plant in Fortune, isn't that enough for this government to say:
Well, hold on a second now, there is something not right about this? That wasn't
the plan, that wasn't what FPI said when it wanted the income trust created,
that wasn't what FPI said when they wanted to loosen the strings, as it were,
so that government wouldn't have as much authority over the company. I am sure
they would like to be let loose totally to do their thing, but their thing,
unfortunately, is going to cause hardship for many Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians, and you are going to see communities fall by the wayside as a
result of decisions being taken by FPI.
I know, in my own district - you know, if you have a small community and you
have half a dozen, ten, a dozen people, working earning a good living at FPI,
they contribute to the survival of that community, they spend their money in
that community. When that employment opportunity is taken away these people are
left with no choice but to leave the Province, and when they do that they leave
the communities, they take their families with them, because they have to build
a future for themselves and their families elsewhere.
I ask the question again: What is going on here? What is FPI up to? Why isn't
the government more concerned about this? I listened to the minister today and
he didn't seem at all concerned with what has been said: The only thing we
know is what we have been told and that is no decisions have been made. We need
to await the outcome of the internal review and then we will make our decisions
about what we are going to do. Isn't that a little like closing the gate after
the horse has left the barn. Too little, too late, I say to the government. Now
is the time.
When FPI does the type of thing it did yesterday, that should somehow make
the hair on the back of your neck stand up. That should make you second-guess
the kind of action you have been taking with respect to FPI. That should make
you question what it is FPI is doing. Because I believe that what happened
yesterday in that meeting with FPI officials and the Concerned Citizens
Committee of Fortune was not meant to happen. It was too early, too soon,
because FPI is not ready yet to unveil what is going to be in their internal
review.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's allotted time has expired.
MS FOOTE: By leave, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been requested.
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Again I am calling on the government to acknowledge what is going down here.
Bring FPI back in, tell them you are not going to agree with what is happening
here, be satisfied with the profit you are making, and recognize that your main
shareholders are the employees, the Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, who made
it possible for you to be where you are today, made it possible for this company
to exist. Call them in, tell them that in terms of the income trust and the
amendments to the FPI Act, you are not going to approve them, you will bring it
back to the House of Assembly first, if you think that is reasonable and
something that we should all discuss, and if it is not, that you are not going
to approve them, and FPI must continue to operate in Newfoundland and Labrador
to the benefit of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to thank you for the opportunity to take just a few moments to speak
to Bill 48, and, I guess, touch on a couple of issues that are of major concern
to me. Before I get into the main reason for my standing on this bill, it seems
like even yesterday, when I was listening to hon. members opposite speaking with
regard to this bill, they seem to take a bit of time to refer to the Premier's
letter that was written on November 28.
There are a couple of issues I just want to touch on, Mr. Speaker, one of
them being the custodial management. I know that is an issue that has been
ongoing for quite some time in this hon. House and it goes back for many numbers
of years. I remember first being elected here and my first private member's
motion was on custodial management. I remember the hon. Member for Bonavista
South looking over at me across the way at that time, when he was in Opposition,
saying: Yes, it is a good motion, but that has been brought up here so often now
nobody seems to be listening to it. It was carried unanimously, I have to say,
at that time.
What amazes me with the motion, Mr. Speaker, is this - and I may be corrected
in saying what I am going to say here now, but when it comes to custodial
management I think just about everybody who has been involved on the provincial
scene are in agreement with this, even the people on the federal level, whether
it be the Prime Minister. I have heard the ministers of fisheries from time to
time. Everybody is in agreement with it, but nobody seems to be able to move it
forward. Personally, I cannot believe that it is in this letter here today,
because after going into the third year of the mandate now - and I know the
Premier put quite a bit of time into this and went to European countries and so
on to deal with it. Now all of a sudden, we see a letter where you are asking
the Prime Minister what is his stand on it. It seems as if that should have been
dealt with prior to the call of the election. As some hon. member said earlier,
now there is no government in office at this day.
He goes on to say, under the same heading: How does your party feel about the
Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Cod Recovery Strategy and not through the
listing of the cod as a species at risk. This letter was written on November 28,
and I think the hon. Minister of Fisheries, federally, had announced that cod
had been taken off of the list as an endangered species.
We go to another issue with Marine Atlantic and the concerns are expressed,
and rightly so, in the letter, that: I cannot believe that we are into the third
year of a mandate and we are asking the federal government to improve their
services to this Province as a link with regard to if it is similar to being a
highway across the Gulf.
I have to say, usually once a year I get the opportunity to travel to other
provinces and use the ferry service, and I have to say, the numbers of people
who are traveling that route have decreased. We were on the boat this past
summer and I would venture to say you would be able to take them in a very small
boat, who was on that one, when she could take a lot more passengers. To know
that the Premier now is only asking the leaders of the various parties for their
commitment to see that this is resolved in the best interests of the people of
this Province, I think is a little too late.
Mr. Speaker, the other thing I want to touch on - and I want to make it very
clear when I make those comments that I am going to make. We have heard the
questions back and forth in this hon. House over the last couple of weeks
pertaining to the conditions of our highways in the Province. The comments I am
going to make - I am not laying blame on anybody. I am not accusing the minister
or anyone else of anything. Mr. Speaker, what I want to say now are the facts
that have been presented to me by the people who drive those highway trucks, the
people who repair the highway trucks, and I can assure you they have major
concerns.
We have heard the debate back and forth about the depots, the thirteen that
closed, and I guess the debate can go on, on whether that had any affect on the
trucks not being ready this year. Maybe it did not, Mr. Speaker, but I can
assure you one thing, the people who were laid off, many of them had to leave
this Province and go outside for work this past summer. If they were outside
this Province they were not doing any maintenance work or anything else with our
roads.
Mr. Speaker, we heard the questions asked with regard to the conditions of
the highways back two or three weeks ago when unfortunate incidents happened.
Mr. Speaker, we heard the replies back from the minister and the former Minister
of Transportation, saying that the trucks went out on the road and they were
okay and so on. Mr. Speaker, I want to make it very clear, yes, there were
trucks that went out on the road - as a matter of fact, one highway truck left
Whitbourne that traveled half way out the Argentia highway and did the road and
came back. The other truck did not leave Placentia to come the other distance
for the very simple reason that truck was in the garage and in needs of major
repairs. The other incident, Mr. Speaker, an accident that happened over in
Central Newfoundland, the same thing, after the accident the truck was not in
condition and the mechanics had to travel to Bay Robert's on a Sunday morning
to go to the shop to get the parts for that truck, Mr. Speaker.
We are having wonderful weather and I hope it keeps up until all the trucks
are repaired and in condition to go on the highway, because, Mr. Speaker, if we
had a major storm today, I do not want to see it happen but I can assure you,
Sir, we are in hard shape when it comes to clearing our roads. I will give you
an example: In Bay Robert's last year, to do the highways they have to cover,
they had eight trucks that would be on the highway. Right now, if there was a
storm tonight, they have three trucks to put out on the highway. Avondale had
anywhere from six to eight trucks. They have three trucks to go on the highway,
two for the TCH and one for all the Conception Bay highway and the side roads.
Placentia, as we speak - and that was one of the depots that was in question -
Placentia, as of yesterday, had one truck and that was on loan from the depot in
Bay Robert's. Their trucks were down totally. Mr. Speaker, I have been told
that the bays at the depot in Bay Robert's are full to capacity with the
trucks and there are six or seven out in the yard lined up waiting for repairs.
Mr. Speaker, I know the minister, or the acting minister, yesterday, or the
day before, mentioned it when it came to the mechanics. The question was asked -
with overtime. I think it was the acting minister who mentioned that overtime is
never refused. Well, I can assure you, the mechanics are not working overtime.
The parts are there. They are available and we have those numbers of trucks that
still have to be repaired and not available to go on the highways, Mr. Speaker.
The other thing I want to just touch on is the maintenance throughout the
summer. I think it had a lot to do with the people who were laid off over the
summer. Some of them have not been called back yet for maintenance with regards
to the highways, the painting of the lines, the repairs of the guardrails and so
on, Mr. Speaker. I call upon the government to really take a serious look at
this. Why not give the mechanics the opportunity to go in and work overtime so
that those trucks can be repaired and sent back to their depots? Because I am
going to assure you, Mr. Speaker, if we had a storm this evening our highways
would be in very poor shape in that immediate area that I referenced.
Mr. Speaker, I said that I would only take a few minutes. I want to thank you
for the opportunity to bring those few points forward and I look forward to
speaking again, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise just for a few minutes because I cannot let some of what has been said
just recently go unchecked. For the record, the fact of the matter is, as we
speak today the department of highways, from a vehicle perspective, from a
personnel perspective, is more ready to respond to weather conditions, icing
conditions and snow conditions on the highways in this Province than they have
at any time in the past, Mr. Speaker. Now, that is based on discussions that our
senior executive have had with the regional directors throughout the Province.
Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is - and people on the opposite side
should listen to this - we have garages and we have mechanics because vehicles
break down. That is it. That is the reason why there are probably 100 garages
within twenty miles of this place, because everything breaks down, Mr. Speaker.
Things wear out. Things break down.
The Member for Bay of Islands was talking yesterday, some foolishness about a
pile of vehicles being at the Bay Roberts depot. Well, there are a couple of
issues there. First of all, right now some of the salt trucks do not have the
blades on them. Why do you need to be lugging around blades when there is no
snow on the ground, Mr. Speaker? So, they put the trucks in on fine days. They
add strobe lights to the wings. They add strobe lights to the side of the truck.
There is a safety issue now - I do not know about a safety issue, but a
requirement of Government Services that the backs of our salt trucks have to
have a big D sign on it - for danger, I suppose. So, the trucks have to have
pieces welded onto them so that these signs can drop down into. Mr. Speaker,
that is why we keep -
MR. BUTLER: There are no trucks ready yet to go on the road, though.
MR. TAYLOR: The trucks are all ready to go on the road, Mr. Speaker. Now,
the Member for Port de Grave, you know, need not be making misleading comments
like that.
MR. BUTLER: Why does Placentia not have a truck today?
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the depot in Placentia has a
truck today or not. I assume that they do. As I understand it, our fleet of
trucks are ready. All of our people are on, with the exception of about twenty
people; seven of which, as I understand it, are loader operators who we require
when snowbanks start to build up on the sides of our roads so we can push the
snow off so that the fliers can continue clearing roads.
Mr. Speaker, there are approximately twenty people who have retired or
otherwise left the department over the past year, out of a staff of over 400
people. In any department in government, I am sure, that from time to time you
can find approximately twenty positions that are not filled because people have
retired or left the department or off for various reasons, sick leave and what
have you. That is the situation. Now, the vehicles are ready. I can guarantee
you, the fleet of vehicles in the Department of Transportation and Works are
more ready right now than they were when the hon. crowd opposite were the
government.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, maybe I will say this. Maybe if when they formed
the government, when they were the government, when Mr. Wells left the
premiership, after Mr. Wells left the premiership, as I understand it, the
budget for vehicle replacement in the Department of Transportation was somewhere
around $8 million. The next year it was slashed to $2.5 million. As a result of
that, the age of the equipment in our fleet increased. It increased because they
did not replace the equipment on a timely basis as they should have while they
were the government. That is why we increased the budget back to $6.5 million.
That is why there are now thirty new vehicles, thirty new salt trucks, thirty
new fliers going into our inventory right now to replace aging equipment that
they did not see fit, did not have the foresight to look after and invest in
while they were government.
So, Mr. Speaker, we are trying to fix, once again, a mess that they allowed
to accumulate on their watch. That is what we are trying to do. We have been
here two years, and you cannot fix in two years a mess that was created in
fifteen.
MR. BUTLER: You should have a truck ready, though.
MR. TAYLOR: And we do have our trucks ready, Mr. Speaker. Today there
will be a truck go out over the highway somewhere and something will break down
and it will have to go into a shop to get repaired, and that happens
time-and-time again. That is the nature of the business that we are into. It is
the nature of the environment that we operate in. It is the nature of the
equipment, at twelve and fifteen and twenty years old, that they did not see fit
to replace while they were in the government.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, had they replaced their equipment on a ten or
twelve year cycle, like most jurisdictions do, instead of allowing the equipment
to age, maybe there would not be as much equipment breaking down today as it is.
That is why we have invested more money into replacing our fleet and that is why
we have invested more money into repairing our roads, so that at the end of the
day we can provide a better surface for the people to drive on and better
equipment for the people who go out day-after-day to try and keep our roads
clear, so that they have the equipment that they need to be able to carry out
the job that we ask them to do.
If those people opposite, who are so quick today, to all of a sudden be so
concerned - they are like Sol on the Road to Damascus. All of a sudden they have
seen the light and all of a sudden they understand. I can only assume, Mr.
Speaker, that they finally realize that the years of neglect they imposed on
this Province while they were the government, has come home to roost and now
they are begging, begging, pleading for forgiveness from all of us for the
neglect they imposed on us in fifteen years.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.
MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to have a few minutes on the bill. I want to touch on some of
the things that the Member for Grand Bank spoke about today with regard to FPI
because I think it is very, very important.
What is happening here, Mr. Speaker, is more than Fortune, it is more than
Harbour Breton, it is more than Bonavista. It goes even deeper than that. The
whole philosophy of people's trust in business and government is being
questioned. If you go to the rural parts of the Province - and this is where the
problem is - you will find that people are becoming more and more cynical of
what they see.
Last night I was at a function when I heard the Mayor, Alec Noseworthy, on
from Fortune and I just could not believe what I was hearing. The thing is,
those people came in here and said to the government members, and said to us,
that a part of the thing they were going to do, as a restructuring of
government, was they were going to do secondary processing in Fortune, because
they couldn't compete in primary production as in Harbour Breton and other
communities and so on, because of the high value of the Canadian dollar plus the
competition from China and other things. Then, when I heard it, I said to
myself: I guess, basically, what I heard is what ordinary individuals across the
Province heard, whether in Labrador or wherever, a company again that had given
its word to people in the House of Assembly, all of us on both sides of the
House, that they were making decisions that were in the best interests of the
company and in the best interests of the individuals within the Province.
Just think about it, just think about what they had done. It is unbelievable
that they would do that again after inviting the people - I am not sure if they
were invited or not, I haven't talked to Mr. Noseworthy about it. These people
came in, met with the company yesterday, and dropped a bombshell, the same way
as they did to the people of Harbour Breton on October 25 of last year, a little
over a year now, saying to the people in that particular community: We are not
going to do secondary processing here now. We don't have the markets for the
increased capacity.
When I heard it last night I thought: How secure is Burin as a secondary
processing plant? How secure are they? The thing about it is, for all of us here
noone, regardless of which side of the House you sit on or who the individual
is, can ever take, anymore, what these people tell you to be the truth, because
they change from day to day, they fluctuate back and forth. There is a problem
here.
The people, of course, going on for three years now, a little over two years,
said to us, as people who ran, that they wanted a change and they put a new
government in place. The people are never wrong, and they made that decision.
However, Mr. Speaker, the thing is, for all of us, regardless of where we are in
the Province or who represents who or whatever government it is, the people here
want the government, whoever that particular company might be, to look after
their welfare and to make sure that these people, regardless of what happens in
any circumstance, can have an assurance that things are being done well.
In this particular case, the FPI thing, if you go - and I do - to my
district, the people ask the question: Well, does the government know when FPI
is going to make these announcements? Are they aware of it? Did the government
know, for example, were they told beforehand, what they were doing in Fortune? I
guess it all goes back to the thought again that the people are doubting that
this is happening. When they see FPI making those decisions, they are
questioning it even more.
I think the Member for Grand Bank said today that the company is going to be
doing, is in the process of doing, an internal review. I would say to the
government - and I am sure that at the end of the day they will think about it -
that, before they ratify any legislation from income trust or anything else,
that they will see what FPI is. What have they brought forward? How are they
going to protect Bonavista or Fortune or any other community before the
legislation is proclaimed? That is very, very important.
It is a very serious situation when we consider what is happening because, as
I said, it is not just Harbour Breton. It is not just Bonavista. It is not just
the communities that have those fish plants there, but it is people as a whole.
I said the other day when I spoke, as far as I am concerned, and I believe it in
my own heart, it is the truth, that the people in the rural parts of the
Province are beginning to be scared; because, what is happening in many, many
instances, you have older people in many of the smaller communities who have
spent their lifetime in the fishing industry. They are fifty, fifty-five years
of age, and see no light at the end of the tunnel for them, and they are saying:
What about if I do have to leave? How do I start over anew at fifty-five or
fifty-seven or sixty years of age?
I know of people who have left Newfoundland over the last number of months
who are more than sixty and have gone to Alberta to work, and leave their family
at home, so that they can probably earn an income for the next couple of years
before they get their pension. It is a lot of uncertainty, a lot of care, and a
lot of fear too, Mr. Speaker. When they see things like this happening, they ask
the question even more: Who is there protecting me?
I find it, as I said, very, very discouraging, and I am very, very concerned
for the people who live in the area. I was in Harbour Breton on Saturday night
at the Lions Club, charter night, and I do not know how many people came up to
me and said: We are concerned. What do you know about FPI? What do you know
about what is happening to our community? What do you know about all of the
different things?
I had to say, well, you will have to wait and find out. They said: Oliver, we
have been waiting for six months and there is no certainty to it. Come January,
we will have to leave the community and we will have to go elsewhere to look for
work.
They are really concerned, because they are concerned about splitting up
their families. They will have to go and their families stay at home. It is a
concern, to say the least.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to make sure that I had it on the
record because it does concern me, and the people of the district that I
represent, but much more widespread than that, the Province as a whole. There is
a lot of concern in this Province, I am telling you that right now. People, as I
said, have apprehensions about what is happening and about the future. The
sooner we can find a particular solution or finances for these people, the
better it will be.
Like I said the other day, for me there is no politics in it. I think there
should be an inquiry held into FPI because it is not like many of the other
companies; it is a creature of this Legislature. There are so many things
happening. Regardless, if you are on this side of the House or the other side of
the House, there are questions that need to be answered, and they do not need to
be answered after the door has been shut.
One of the things they said for Fortune, they said, if an operator came along
they would sell the plant. Would they give a portion of their quota to Fortune?
Would they give a portion of their quota to a community like Harbour Breton? I
do not think so. Who would want to buy a plant if they had no quota and nothing
to process?
The direction that has been taken by the Chief Operating Officer who tendered
his resignation a little while ago is a cause for concern. I think that on the
next number of months, if something does not happen soon to bring closure to
this particular thing, it is going to unravel even more, and a lot of us will
have many more problems as MHAs in this House dealing with the ramifications of
that, the outfall of what is happening to FPI and, of course, Abitibi as well.
I represent one of the communities in my area, Seal Cove. There have always
been loggers from the time that I can remember, and they are known throughout
the Province as big wood cutters. They spent all of their lives there. There is
uncertainty with them. Many of them who are young men in their thirties and
early forties, who are silviculture workers, saw an advantage or an opportunity
for them to mo