Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 16 May 2011 (46th General Assembly, 4th Session, Vol. XLVI No. 25)
2011-05-16
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
May
16, 2011 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS
Vol. XLVI No. 25
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!
Admit strangers.
Today the Speaker would like to welcome some special guests. The Chair would
like to welcome sixty-seven Grades 7 and 8 students from Stephenville Middle
School. The students are from the District of St. George's-Stephenville East and
the District of Port au Port. They are accompanied today by their Principal, Mr.
Truman Greenham, teacher Paul Harris, a number of chaperones and their bus
driver.
Welcome to the House of Assembly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would also like to welcome thirty, Grades 7 to 11
students from Dunne Memorial Academy from the District of Placentia-St. Mary's.
The students are accompanied today by Vice-Principal, Arlene Fagan; teachers,
Josephine Squires and Clair Guest, as well as their bus driver.
Again, welcome to the House of Assembly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: The following members' statements will be heard: the hon.
the Member for the District of Exploits; the hon. the Member for the District of
Grand Falls-Windsor-Green Bay South; and the hon. the Member for the District of
Lewisporte.
The hon. the Member for the District of Exploits.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FORSEY: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to congratulate
Botwood Collegiate on their success at the Skills Canada Competitions in St.
John's.
Mr. Speaker, on April 1, the Senior Robotics team from Botwood Collegiate
came in first place receiving a gold medal. Members of the team were: Amber
Best, Tyler Mills, Ryan White, and Cody Diamond. They will now travel to Quebec
City May 31 to June 3 to represent Newfoundland and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, on April 15 and 16, Botwood Collegiate Junior Robotics team
finished first in the Robotics Skills Competition at the Marine Institute
competing in a field of twenty-six schools and scored full points for their work
underwater.
Mr. Speaker, team members were: Daniel Pope, Glen Dawe, Benjamin Hoyles,
Patrick Loder, Joshua Chippett, Brandon Pelly, and their coaches Brian Antle and
Brian Ball.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating the
Senior and Junior Robotics team of Botwood Collegiate on winning gold at this
year's provincial Skills Canada Competitions.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Grand
Falls-Windsor-Green Bay South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate Woodland Primary
in Grand Falls-Windsor for winning the honour of a visit from famous author and
illustrator Ms Jan Brett.
The favourite American author among Kindergarten to Grade 3 students posted a
contest on her Web page. The winners would receive a visit from Ms Brett, who
would meet with the children, read from her books and conduct a workshop on
illustrations.
Woodland Primary won out over 5,700 schools and libraries from over twenty
countries worldwide. They won with 2,241 votes and Ms Brett will be visiting in
the 2011-2012 school year.
I am very proud to stand here today to congratulate Woodland Primary with 410
students, thirty-seven teachers and staff who outvoted the world on their quest
to have Ms Brett visit. It just goes to show how rural Newfoundland and Labrador
can do anything.
I ask my hon. colleagues of the House of Assembly to join with me in
congratulating Woodland Primary for being a little school in Grand
Falls-Windsor, Newfoundland, who could and who did.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Lewisporte.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to recognize a
very talented Grade 12 student, Andrew Gale, son of Brian and Cheryl Gale of
Lewisporte. Andrew recently participated in the forty-sixth Annual Central
Newfoundland Kiwanis Music Festival in Grand Falls-Windsor.
Amazingly, Andrew brought home six major awards from the festival. The awards
Andrew won are: the Bernice Edwards Memorial Award for Best Piano Performance;
the Cater Memorial Rose Bowl for Best Solo Performance; Kiwanis Club of Grand
Falls-Windsor Scholarship; Transcontinental Media Award for most outstanding
performance of the whole festival; the Windsor Pharmacy Award; and the Kelly
Family Award. Mr. Speaker, along with trophies and plaques, Andrew's monetary
winnings totalled $3,850.
Mr. Speaker, hard work pays off. Andrew's dedication, through thousands of
hours of practice, paid dividends and, as such, he is a very worthy recipient of
these awards.
I ask all Members of the House of Assembly to join with me and with Andrew's
family in congratulating Andrew on these tremendous musical accomplishments.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, with the Victoria Day long weekend upon us, I
rise before this hon. House to recognize Canada Road Safety Week which runs May
16 to May 23.
For many, this coming weekend marks the official beginning of summer and
people across the Province will hit the highway headed for their favourite
weekend getaways with families and friends.
During Road Safety Week and always, motorists are encouraged to be mindful of
their surroundings. With warmer weather, those of us driving passenger and
commercial vehicles must remember that we are sharing the road with other users
such as pedestrians and cyclists. Motorists are reminded to keep a watchful eye
out for wildlife that might enter the roadway unexpectedly.
The provincial government and our various enforcement agencies work hard to
keep the motoring public safe through building and maintaining road
infrastructure, inspecting vehicles, enforcing the rules of the road, and
through public education.
Mr. Speaker, drivers must do their part as well through such measures as
driving defensively and according to road conditions; avoiding unnecessary
distractions; keeping both hands on the wheel; and reducing speed at night,
during other times of reduced visibility, and when road surfaces are wet.
Through Budget 2011 Standing Strong: For Prosperity. For Our
Future. For Newfoundland and Labrador. , $216.4 million in provincial
government funding is provided for road and bridge improvements throughout
Newfoundland and Labrador. This amount will be supplemented by an additional
$35.2 million in federal government funding, providing for a total road and
bridge investment for 2011-2012 of $251.6 million. This funding includes $2
million for the Province's brush clearing program which helps to enhance
visibility along our highways.
In addition, Mr. Speaker, the Department of Transportation and Works will
spend more than $20 million this year on summer maintenance activities including
line painting, the installation and maintenance of highway signage, and guide
rail and road repairs.
Mr. Speaker, I am sure all hon. members will join me in imploring motorists
across our Province and, indeed, our entire country to be safe on our roads, not
just during Canada Road Safety Week but every time we get behind the wheel.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advance copy his statement. We certainly join
with the government in marking Canada Road Safety Week, which is a national
campaign to make all Canada's roads the safest in the world.
Mr. Speaker, believe me, on this side of the House, we know important it is.
Over the past weekend, my colleague, the Member for The Straits & White Bay
North, was coming home Friday night from Conche, from an event in his district,
and he ended up with two flat tires on the Conche highway because it is in bad
condition. My colleague, the Member for Burgeo & La Poile, was in Burgeo this
weekend, came out of Burgeo, you cannot even drive the speed limit on that road
because there are so many potholes. In my own district, in the Labrador Straits,
there are some potholes once you hit them, you do not know when you are going to
surface again, that is how bad it is.
So, Mr. Speaker, we are happy to see the government committing to safety on
our highways because safety starts with having good highways to drive over. It
starts with ensuring that when people put themselves on the highway, they have a
good highway, a safe highway in which to be able to travel over.
I am sure there are many members in the House of Assembly who have road
issues in their own district, and there will be lots of competition for the
money that you have announced in the Budget, and we certainly hope that it will
be spent to ensure that the best possible, the best and safest highways can be
done all across the Province.
Mr. Speaker, whether you are a driver, a pedestrian, or a cyclist, road
safety is an important issue that faces all of us. In 2008, there were 559
pedestrians and cyclists who were killed and 3,275 seriously injured in traffic
crashes all across Canada. So, Mr. Speaker, it is imperative that no matter how
you travel over our highways, that you do so in the safest manner as you
possibly can, and we will look forward to seeing how the money is going to be
distributed for roads in Newfoundland and Labrador.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. It is especially
important to be speaking about road safety going into one of the busiest long
weekends of the year and all the points that minister made are good points, Mr.
Speaker. One of the most important things that have to be said is that people,
when they are out in the vehicles, are on roads and highways and those roads and
highways need to be kept in good condition, Mr. Speaker.
After Hurricane Igor, there is still a lot of damage around our highways and
our roads that need ongoing maintenance and constant repair work. We should be
enhancing this year the maintenance of our roads because they are in such poor
condition in many places, especially in the areas where Igor hit badly, Mr.
Speaker.
The other thing that I think I have to say is that we also need a 911
emergency service in this Province throughout the Province so that when people
are involved in accidents, as much as we hate that to happen that, they have
access to the emergency help that they need immediately.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. F. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this House of Assembly to recognize May 15 to
May 21 as National Police Week.
Both the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Royal Newfoundland
Constabulary will be hosting a series of events across the Province dedicated to
increasing community awareness of policing services while at the same time
strengthening the close bond between policing and communities. These events
include a National Police Week showcase being held at Canadian Forces Station
St. John's, where the public are invited to talk to a police officer and learn
about careers in policing and the military. Other events such as open houses and
displays will be held at various venues during the week.
On Wednesday, the annual International Police and Peace Officer Memorial
Service will take place at the Seventh Day Adventist Church in St. John's. This
is a moving ceremony that remembers and honours those officers who have died in
the line of duty. This service recognizes the role peace officers have in
keeping all of us safe and acknowledges that they often work in dangerous
situations.
Mr. Speaker, just a couple of weeks ago, I attended the graduation ceremonies
of Troop 11 at the RCMP "Depot" Division in Regina, Saskatchewan. This was my
first time attending this graduation and it certainly will be one that I will
not soon forget. It was my pleasure to review the troops on parade and offer the
new members best wishes as they embark on their new careers. In addition, I had
the opportunity to visit the RNC headquarters and annex a couple of weeks ago to
look at the renovation work which is ongoing there. This work will provide the
RNC with much needed space as they provide valuable service to our constituents.
Mr. Speaker, the provincial government is committed to the support of our
police forces in Newfoundland and Labrador. Since 2004, we have added 144
uniformed police officers to the police forces and have increased policing
budgets by almost $47 million . Budget 2011 Standing Strong: For Prosperity.
For Our Future. For Newfoundland and Labrador., provided funding for an RCMP
crime analyst in the Crime Reduction Strategy to be located in the
Trinity-Conception District and a Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Officer for
the Child Exploitation Unit in Corner Brook to build on the force's capacity to
address the exploitation and harassment of children.
Mr. Speaker, the Department of Justice proudly supports the men and women of
the RCMP and the RNC. I want to take this time to thank them for the difficult
work they do every day and encourage everyone to participate in the many
activities planned for National Police Week.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. It is indeed a
pleasure. We also would like to recognize National Police Week and we extend our
thanks to both police forces, the RNC and the RCMP in this Province, of course,
for the hard work their members undertake.
These officers are, of course, an integral part of our communities and it is
important that they be recognized as such, not only between themselves and
community members. There are groups in society as well I was at Burgeo this
Saturday night and noticed the close links between the RCMP in that particular
community and the fire brigade. They are all there for protective purposes of
course, maybe from different angles, but it was great to see how closely they
work together.
It is also good to see that the RNC has greatly increased its recruiting
efforts and that the training is now done here at Memorial University through
the Diploma in Police Studies. Years ago, most of our recruiting and training
was done in PEI, but it is great to see that it is being done here. Of course,
our police men and women exemplify some of the soundest characters to be had in
our communities and we all should be very proud of the work that they do.
We look forward as well to taking
part in the events that they are hosting
this week as part of National Police Week, and we hope that these occasions and
these events that they are sponsoring will both raise awareness of the fine work
that they do as members of our police forces, but also will continue to
encourage our young people to become involved in police services as a worthy
profession.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. I am happy to join
with him and the House Opposition Leader in congratulating the Royal
Newfoundland Constabulary and the RCMP on the efforts they have put into
National Police Week and thank them for their ongoing work in the Province.
Holding career awareness sessions to give students an opportunity to find out
about the work that is involved in policing is a really important thing to do.
For the most part, young people very often only see the police through the media
and what they see may not always be the full picture of what the work is all
about. One of the things the RNC has been able to do with more money and staff
is implement more aspects of community policing which benefits everybody.
I would, though, urge government to consider something that has been
established in many places in the country and that is foot patrols for the RNC,
especially in urban centres. It obviously would not work in the rural centres so
much but in the urban centres. We see the positive effect of the Mounted Police,
the police who actually ride the horses, when they are around; it really draws
them into the community. Foot patrols do the same thing, Mr. Speaker. They are
one of the best ways to establish community relations and they are also having
been proven elsewhere in the country to be extremely effective in deterring drug
and property crimes.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
Oral Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, this past weekend I attended the Newfoundland and Labrador
annual Breast Cancer Retreat. There were over 200 women and one of the key
concerns at the conference was breast screening for women under the age of fifty
in Newfoundland and Labrador. Mr. Speaker, just last week Ontario moved their
screening age from age fifty to thirty. This is the seventh province in Canada
to have reduced the screening age to less than fifty years of age.
I ask the minister: What is the status of reducing the screening age below
fifty and are you prepared to reduce it for the residents of Newfoundland and
Labrador?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As the hon. member knows we have invested approximately $125 million in
cancer prevention and treatment over the last seven years. In fact, Mr. Speaker,
earlier this year the member opposite brought forward on Private Members' Day,
March 23, a motion to lower the age for breast screening. At that point in time,
Mr. Speaker, the motion was amended so that we would send it to the cancer
advisory council and they would look at the recent reports and scientific data
and make a determination as to how we should proceed.
Mr. Speaker, I indicated at that point in time that the Canadian Task Force
on Preventive Health Care had outlined certain guidelines. I am aware of the
recent Ontario report and we are waiting for the further details to come out and
we will make a decision then.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
There are 378 women in Newfoundland and Labrador diagnosed with breast cancer
each year. We still have one of the highest mortality rates in the country, and
we are one of the provinces that have not committed to screen early.
I ask the minister: What is preventing you and your government from making
this commitment to the women in Newfoundland and Labrador?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
During the debate on Private Members' Day it was recognized there is
conflicting evidence and literature out there as to the age for breast
screening. Mr. Speaker, in this Province, if a women under the age of fifty
feels the need to have a mammogram, she will discuss the request with her family
physician, and he will assess her health status and potential risk factors, and
make a recommendation.
Utilizing our model of screening in this Province, almost 60 per cent of the
women between the ages of forty and forty-nine have had at least one mammogram.
Mr. Speaker, in provinces where they are self-referring and these are BC, Nova
Scotia, and PEI for example, statistics for the uptake of their annual
screening programs are at 33 per cent, 34 per cent, and 19 per cent,
respectively, lower than what we have in this Province.
So, Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated to the member opposite, this is
something we take very seriously, and considering all the steps we have made in
cancer prevention and treatment, we will do whatever is in the best interests of
the public of this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In the House last week, the Minister of Finance said that Nalcor will make
$500 million a year off Muskrat Falls. At the joint review panel, they have
noted, and as Nalcor has admitted, there is no revenue from the free block of
power going to Emera, as well, there are no forward contract sales that have
been signed with other customers, and the only identified paying customers are
the people in Newfoundland and Labrador.
So I ask the Premier today if she can clarify exactly where the $500 million
in profit will come from, and will she confirm that it is going to come directly
out of the pockets of electricity users in Newfoundland and Labrador?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I think everyone in the Province knows that
for any hydroelectric project, the power is paid for by the people that use it.
The ratepayers will pay to the company, for Muskrat Falls, the costs of
operating, the cost of the debt, and the interest on the debt, and will pay a
regulated return, all of which will go to Nalcor. Nalcor being owned by the
people of the Province, profits therefore being owned by the people of the
Province. The government of the day will utilize those profits and put the money
back to the people of the Province through things like possibly lowering the
hydro rates, possibly building hospitals, possibly introducing progressive
social policies, but the money will go back to the people of the Province. Just
as it did when the hon. leader opposite was in government and they went to
Nalcor and took the profits out of Nalcor to use to spend on the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador through general government programs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Under the Muskrat Falls scheme that your government is proposing people will
pay double the cost of electricity. Can you explain how this is going to be a
benefit to the people of the Province, to the businesses of the Province, all so
that Nalcor can earn a profit of $500 million a year?
I ask you, Minister, to explain to the House why it is acceptable for
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to foot the bill to ensure that Nalcor earns a
profit.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, again, the member opposite has indicated what I would consider
to be erroneous information, the fact that the rates are going to double. That
is not correct. We have said in this House before that the rates have been
increasing about 37 per cent, 38 per cent over the last ten years or so. We
anticipate between now and 2017 that the rates will continue to increase,
somewhere around 36 per cent, 37 per cent, between now and 2017.
What the Lower Churchill project, Muskrat Falls will do is it will stop that
steady increase in rates as we move past 2017. That is the point that the
members opposite do not seem to get. The rates are increasing, nothing to do
with Muskrat Falls. What Muskrat Falls will do is it will level out and decrease
the amount of increase from 4 per cent to 6 per cent a year to less than 1 per
cent per year.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I stand to be corrected, because the rates will probably more than double, I
say to you, Minister, under this scheme. They will probably more than double so
that you can ensure that Nalcor gets a profit of $500 million as opposed to
putting that money back to subsidize the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador.
If the only paying customer that you have identified for Muskrat Falls power are
the people living in the Province and we know that Nalcor will make $500 million
a year off the backs and out of the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians,
well we also know that Emera Energy, a private corporation in Nova Scotia, has
one-third of the cuts of all the power sales to the Island.
I ask you to tell us today, how much will Emera Energy make out of the
pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians on this Muskrat Falls deal?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SKINNER: Mr. Speaker, let's talk about the rates, because I think it
is important for the people of the Province to have an opportunity to understand
what has happened to our rates over the last ten years, what is going to happen
between now and 2017, and what will happen after 2017.
Mr. Speaker, I went to the power company and got my rate for the last ten
years to see what the increase was. I happen to be in the same residence for
over the last ten years, in the same house, and with the same number of children
in my family. So, I looked at what my rate was. It increased 37 per cent. We
have been saying 36 per cent to 38 per cent. My personal bill increased 37 per
cent. I encourage every other member in the House to do it; I encourage the
people of the Province to look at what their increase has been.
Rates are going up without Muskrat Falls. We anticipate, based upon what
happened in the past, they are going to continue to go up between now and 2017.
If you are currently paying, for instance, $291 per month, you will pay up to
$400 a month in 2017. If we do not do Muskrat Falls, people will continue to pay
ever-increasing rates. Muskrat Falls is the solution, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the minister likes to predict things, as if he has a crystal
ball in terms of knowing what is going to happen.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, when we stand in the House of Assembly and we
question the government on their numbers, the first thing they say is: We do not
have a crystal ball and we cannot really define that.
Well, Mr. Speaker, I think there is a lot of Dunderdale economics in this
deal and that is the reason, Mr. Speaker
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS JONES: that what we are going to see is a deal that is going to see
money out of the pockets of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians go to Emera Energy
simply because they have shares in our transmission capacity.
I ask the Premier today: Tell us how much money Emera Energy will make as a
result of the shares that they have in this deal.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SKINNER: Mr. Speaker, I will finish my thought that I did not get to
finish the last time.
If the rates are going to continue to increase, as they will if we do not
bring Muskrat Falls on-stream and it is not a crystal ball, Mr. Speaker, that
I am using.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. SKINNER: I am using past history. The past history has shown us what
has happened, and we use that to help us predict the future. That is what we are
doing, Mr. Speaker.
The bill that you are paying $291 a month now will be up to $400 in 2017,
nothing to do with Muskrat Falls. After Muskrat Falls, Mr. Speaker, if we do not
build Muskrat Falls, by 2025 your $291 bill will be up to $455. If we do Muskrat
Falls, Mr. Speaker, that bill will be $415, a decrease of $40 a month.
That is what Muskrat Falls is doing for the people of the Province. It is
keeping their power bills reasonable, keeping money in the pockets of the
people.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
People in the Province can look at their own light bills and they can see
that in the last five years, Mr. Speaker, their average increase has been around
2.5 per cent annually in the rates they pay. It has not been a 50 per cent
increase in the rates that they pay, which is what your government is proposing
to do, 50 per cent, 100 per cent, and even more. Mr. Speaker, more importantly
as well, the government has given away 29 per cent of the shares in the
transmission capacity in Newfoundland and Labrador.
I ask you today: How much will Newfoundlanders and Labradorians pay to Emera
Energy as a result of that giveaway of shares?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SKINNER: Mr. Speaker, let me say it again, Emera Energy is putting
money into this project. There is nothing being given away. There is $1.2
billion being put into this project to help with transmission costs, there is
$600 million being put into it in terms of upgrades of infrastructure, $1.8
billion in total. It is a $6.2 billion project, Mr. Speaker. The people of the
Province and the government of the day are investing in the future of the
people.
As I have indicated, and I encourage - as the hon. member has said by the
way, across the way people to look at their bills because I am telling you, I
have looked at mine and it has gone up 37 per cent in the last ten years. I hope
people who are out listening to us will do what I did, just to verify the
numbers.
What we are doing is investing in the future of the Province to ensure that
people have long-term, stable, least-cost power. That is what we need to heat
our homes, that is what we need to run our businesses, and that is what we need
to attract people.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The government refuses to answer the question because they know it is a
sweetheart of a deal for Emera corporation. They know, Mr. Speaker, that Emera
corporation will earn a profit out of the pockets of Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians, just like Nalcor corporation will. They will not stand in the
House today and provide the people of the Province with that answer. Mr.
Speaker, last week the Minister of Finance would not say how much the interest
charges are going to cost on Muskrat or whether that will be in addition to the
$6.2 billion construction cost.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister to confirm for the House today that the cost
will be some-$900 million and that it is on top of the construction costs. I ask
the minister why he would not provide the information to the House of Assembly
because Nalcor did confirm it about a month ago.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I can tell the Leader of the Opposition that
interest rates change every day; they change every hour. We will not know what
interest rates we are going to pay until we go to market, and then I will be
able to tell you exactly what the interest is going to be.
If the federal government gives us the guarantee, as the Prime Minister has
committed, the interest rates will go down approximately by about 2 per cent,
that will lead to an 8 per cent decrease in electricity prices to the people of
the Province.
Mr. Speaker, we are doing this project for one reason and one reason only: to
lower the electricity costs to the people of the Province. If we do not get off
oil - electricity costs are going through the roof and if we listen to what the
Leader of the Opposition has said, our people are going to have to freeze in the
dark and we are not going to let that happen, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
They are going to freeze in the dark, Minister, because they are not going to
be able to afford to pay for this power. That is the reason they are going to
freeze in the dark. Their income is not going to double up but their cost of
electricity is going to double up, that is the difference, Mr. Speaker.
This deal is not about guaranteeing fair prices and low energy to consumers
in Newfoundland and Labrador, it is about guaranteeing a profit to Nalcor
corporation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS JONES: At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker the only people who are
going to make money is Nalcor and Emera Energy.
Mr. Speaker, the estimates of $900 million in interest charges comes from
Nalcor and is based on an interest rate of 7 per cent on borrowing
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member if she has a question if she would pose it now.
MS JONES: Yes, indeed I will. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is based on an interest rate of 7 per cent on borrowing and I ask the
minister
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member to pose her question.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I ask the minister if he can confirm that this is the cost that Nalcor is
basing the deal on and if that rate is higher, how will that affect rates.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, what has been happening in the market is that
we can see rates going from 4.5 per cent to 7 per cent. Again, we will not know
what the rate is until we actually go and draw down the funds. They change
daily, they change every hour. When the funds are booked, that is when we will
know exactly what the interest rate is going to be.
Mr. Speaker, Emera are putting $1.2 billion into this project to build a
Maritime Link and all we have to give them is one terawatt hour of power. We are
going to have five terawatt hours of power. We are going to give Emera one. We
are going to pump the other two into Nova Scotia, free. We are going to send it
through Nova Scotia into New Brunswick and down in the United States, and we are
going to sell it for the benefit of the people of the Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White
Bay North.
MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, in the House last Thursday I provided photos to the Minister of
Fisheries
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. DEAN: - to expose the fact that the plant in New Ferolle was not even
close to being ready for processing as he was misled to believe. On Friday, the
minister stated on The Fisheries Broadcast he would have an update on his
attempt to get the facts straight on this important issue.
In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, the fishing season is in full bloom. I ask the
minister today: Has he had his staff visit New Ferolle, can he update us on what
is taking place there now, and when can we expect to see the plant in operation?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I have indeed had staff follow up. Just to give
a little chronology of where it was: On March 30 we spoke to the owner; April 4
we visited the site; April 6 we spoke with Mr. Mullowney; again on April 11, we
visited the site; April 14 we were at the site; April 20 - and, Mr. Speaker, I
have recent photos and I am certainly willing to sit down and share them with
the member opposite that shows that work is progressing. We have not been given
a definite time frame when the plant will open, but we expect that the plant
will be in production.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White
Bay North.
MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, condition six in the agreement between the government and Mr.
Mullowney states that the snow crab licence shall be cancelled if the facility
is not fully operational for crab processing by April 1, 2011. I suggest to the
minister that it cannot get much clearer than that.
I ask the minister: Now that six weeks has passed since that deadline, when
will you announce that for this particular valuable licence that it will be
rescinded?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, that statement has been the most threatening
and damaging potential to the operations of New Ferolle. Mr. Speaker, the crab
licence, officially, could have been rescinded as of the end of March. We have
given the operator the opportunity to do that. Mr. Speaker, we have a licensing
board that is independent of government. If I were to go and retract that
licence, it has to go back to the licensing board, and if we follow the trend of
the licensing board, that statement has put the final nail in New Ferolle as it
relates to crab processing. We do not want to go there, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White
Bay North.
MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, probably he can tell us why that would be the
case. I am assuming he has the power to put the licence back into the community
and give it to the people. I am not suggesting the licence leave New Ferolle; I
am suggesting that it go operational.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, he is playing games with the people of New
Ferolle, as he has been doing here in this House for the last number of weeks.
Given the two-year use it or lose it regulation that is in place respecting a
licence, can the minister clarify what other species besides crab are currently
attached to that licence in New Ferolle? Also, can he tell us what the
thresholds are for each of these species?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, he just again repeated the exact fact. The
reason we established the licensing board was that we remove government from it,
that political decisions would not be made, and that decisions would be made by
a licensing board in the best interest of the industry.
Mr. Speaker, if we follow what the hon. member just outlined for us, we would
have taken that crab licence back and as of this point it would be inactive. We
have been working
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. JACKMAN: We have been working with the operator, Mr. Speaker,
attempting to get him to have processing going on there. Attached to that
facility are also licences around pelagics and groundfish. The exact thresholds,
I cannot be certain of; but if need be, I will provide that, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White
Bay North.
MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, these are very simple questions that are being
asked and questions that I would think the Minister of Fisheries should be able
to answer in this House. Again, I come back to the point that we are not talking
about taking the crab licence out of New Ferolle, we are talking about making it
available to someone who wants to use it, someone who wants to put workers to
work in New Ferolle. Mr. Speaker, that is a totally different thing.
Yes, I would ask the minister if he could table for us or provide me,
whatever the case might be, with the species that are attached and the
thresholds also that are attached to these particular licences as well.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask him this: Can he inform the House if any species
have lapsed from the licence - that is very important - that is owned by Mr.
Mullowney at this point?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Not that I am aware of, Mr. Speaker, but I will certainly
check into that.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White
Bay North.
MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Again, the people of New Ferolle are trying to get work. Government is
raising expectations. We really do not where it is going.
I would ask the minister: Is he willing to go and sit down with the people in
the community and to really, once and for all, try to resolve this issue? Mr.
Speaker, a visit to the plant and a visit to the site and so on just is not
doing it any more. Will he commit today to visiting with the people and sitting
down trying to understand what a path forward is here in this case?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, the photos would indicate that people are in
the plant getting the plant ready, and we would hope that this facility will be
operational.
I want to make it very clear, from a legal perspective, we cannot expropriate
the facility. Mr. Mullowney owns it, and thus, we cannot do anything with the
particular facility. Mr. Speaker, I would like to give Mr. Mullowney another
little while just to see if he can get that up and operational.
In regard to meeting with the people, I met with a delegation from the
Northern Peninsula just a little over two weeks ago. I have no issue with
meeting with them again, but in terms of somebody by the name of Mr. Payne, who
intends to play politics with this, I have absolutely no interest in playing
politics with it, nor will I meet with him because of political grounds, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In March, the Minister of Environment and Conservation denied that the number
of moose-vehicle accidents in the Province last year was in the range of seven
hundred. He called those numbers, and I quote, totally inaccurate, and said the
problem was that they were generated by an RCMP computer search of accident
reports. At the time, the RCMP said the only way to be sure of the numbers was
to do a manual search. That search has been done, and indeed, it has proven to
be more than was originally anticipated. The number came in at 783. In order to
make your decisions, Mr. Speaker, you need facts, and the minister obviously
does not have the facts.
I ask the minister: Why do you have no idea how many moose-vehicle accidents
occur in the Province each year? Now that the numbers have been proven accurate,
what actions do you intend to take to curb this most serious problem?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: The member will recall my comment in the House that day. I
had indicated very clearly the source of the information was the RCMP
themselves. The RCMP had said, and had written us, actually, as a government,
and said that the information they had supplied earlier was inaccurate. What I
was doing in the House, Mr. Speaker, was clarifying something on the strength of
a letter from the chief superintendent of the RCMP in Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. WISEMAN: His numbers were inaccurate, so what I had said, Mr.
Speaker, was we did not know at that particular time. We were relying on
information that was provided by both police forces in the Province, and now we
had one major police force saying that information we had disclosed publicly was
inaccurate, and we now need to correct that piece.
So, my comment earlier was, we cannot act on information that is not
accurate. I was clarifying for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador that the
information was in fact accurate, as reported by the RCMP, Mr. Speaker. They are
not my facts, they are not my survey results; they are the RCMP's own figures.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, on May 11, the Phase II report from the Voisey's Bay Industrial
Inquiry Commission was released to the public. Workers at Voisey's Bay have said
they are disappointed there was no mention of anti-scab legislation in the
report. This type of protection legislation would have prevented the strike at
Voisey's Bay from going on as long as it did. Mr. Speaker, a worker's right to
strike is fundamental to any collective bargaining process and by allowing the
use of replacement workers government undermine that right.
I ask the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment: Will government
finally introduce anti-scab legislation as it promised during the 2007 election
campaign to prevent long drawn out strikes such as the one in Voisey's Bay from
ever happening again?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I think first of all on the Voisey's Bay inquiry, I was very clear last week
in my comments to the public that we have received the report and I, as
minister, reserve any comment on whether we will accept or reject any or all of
the recommendations. I do await public feedback and I look forward to what
people have to say.
The member opposite would also be aware that we did bring forward some
legislative changes not long ago respecting labour in this Province and we also
talked about the points she has raised today. She will be well-aware, having
participated in the debate, that the matter is now before a committee that is
doing a piece of work for us on that. We will speak to it further when they
finish their work.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
The minister is talking about getting public input with regard to the
recommendations in this report. As he has indicated there is a tripartite
committee in place that is reviewing the Labour Relations Act.
The minister seems to be talking about consulting with the public as well.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister to please clarify what he is talking about. Is
he going to be holding public meetings to discuss these labour relations issues?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and
Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KING: Maybe, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite might want to clarify
on a follow up question whether she sees it as a good thing to consult with the
public or whether she shares the view of the Opposition Leader who does not
think it is worth the time and the money to consult with the public on issues of
such significance to the Province.
Mr. Speaker, what I have said very clearly is that I am prepared to listen to
the public. I am not engaging in a public consultation process, but I have said
now that I have the report I will take some time to read it. My officials will
do an assessment of the report and we will also listen to what people have to
say, Mr. Speaker. Unlike many of the members opposite, we want to hear what the
public has to say and how they feel about views such as this that are so
important to the Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I wish the minister would make up his mind about who is important when it
comes to talking about labour relations. When I bring these issues up I am told
there is a tripartite committee and now that is not enough, now he wants to go
out to people who are not directly involved. Mr. Speaker, I would like to know
where the minister stands.
Mr. Speaker, Vale was able to refuse
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS MICHAEL: - to settle with Voisey's Bay
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS MICHAEL: workers for eighteen months because there was no provision
in the Labour Relations Act to impose a collective agreement when the
traditional collective bargaining model broke down. The recommendations for
strengthening the Labour Relations Act are very important for workers who strike
against multinational companies especially in remote areas.
Will the minister, without any nonsense, stand and commit himself to
accepting these recommendations like they do with other reports that come to
this floor, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, there is no need for the member opposite to be
insulting and derogatory in her comments towards me. I answered the question as
she asked it. If she does not like the answer that is unfortunate but I am
prepared to say again that the report has been tabled. I think I have said it
three times in the last thirty-six hours; the report has been given to me. I
will take some time to review it and I will do due diligence, Mr. Speaker. I am
not prepared to stand up in this House and get on with theatrics like the member
opposite just for politics. That report has a number of significant
recommendations, Mr. Speaker, that have great consequences should we adopt them
in this Province. I am not prepared to rush and to make a public statement on
that today for that member or any other member in this House until I give it due
diligence.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The time allotted for questions and answers has expired.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Tabling of Documents.
Tabling of Documents
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, in fulfilling government's commitment of being transparent and
accountable to the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador, it is my pleasure to
table the audited, Consolidated Financial Statements for Newfoundland and
Labrador Hydro for the year ended December 31, 2010.
Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to table the Business and Financial Report for
Nalcor Energy. This report provides an overview of key activities of Nalcor and
its subsidiaries during the year 2010.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I am pleased to give the following notice of motion as part of the private
member's motion for Wednesday, May 18. I will be moving that:
WHEREAS 47,000 people in Newfoundland and Labrador have a diabetes diagnosis
as of 2010, which is 9.3 per cent of the population, the highest rate in Canada;
and
WHEREAS the number of people with diabetes in the Province may double in the
next ten years without effective prevention; and
WHEREAS unless properly managed diabetes leads to kidney and heart failure,
disability and early death; and
WHEREAS dialysis machines are in demand because more diabetes cases are
progressing to kidney failure, but if the disease is properly managed people do
not end up on dialysis; and
WHEREAS diabetes costs our health care system about $41 million a year for
doctor visits, hospitalization, drugs, and medical supplies, a cost that could
double in ten years without better prevention and management; and
WHEREAS diabetes requires frequent daily glucose testing with expensive
testing strips, which is a hardship for most people who do not have private
insurance or government assistance; and
WHEREAS many people who need glucose testing strips are going without because
they cannot afford them, thus endangering their future health and placing an
added burden on our health care system;
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that this House urge the Government of Newfoundland
and Labrador to cover the cost of glucose testing strips for all diabetics in
the Province under MCP;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that government place the highest possible priority on
releasing the chronic disease prevention and management strategy.
Seconded by the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?
Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I stand today to present a petition on behalf of women in the Province. It
reads:
WHEREAS breast cancer is the most common cancer amongst Newfoundland and
Labrador women, excluding non-melanoma skin cancer, with approximately 370 women
to be diagnosed with breast cancer in Newfoundland and Labrador this year; and
WHEREAS we have one of the highest mortality rates from breast cancer and
breast cancer in young women tends to be more aggressive; and
WHEREAS the benchmark for Newfoundland and Labrador's organized breast
screening program is age fifty; and
WHEREAS women aged forty to forty-nine are not eligible to participate in
Newfoundland and Labrador's organized breast screening program, while women aged
forty to forty-nine are eligible in the provinces of British Columbia, Alberta,
Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Northwest Territories, and the Yukon; and
WHEREAS there is evidence that routine mammography screening of women in
their forties can reduce mortality from breast cancer by at least 24 per cent,
but Newfoundland and Labrador still does not have women in that age group to
self refer into their breast screening program;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to allow women aged forty to forty-nine to be eligible for
breast screening to begin at age forty and that all women be able to self refer
through Newfoundland and Labrador's screening program.
Mr. Speaker, I present that petition on behalf of women from all across the
Province. There will be other petitions coming in that they have made me aware
of. As they come in, I will be presenting them in the House of Assembly.
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important petition because it is one that could
save the lives of people in Newfoundland and Labrador if government was to enact
this legislation. It is relative. Just last week the Government of Ontario came
forward to be the next Province in Canada to reduce the benchmark for breast
screening of women. Mr. Speaker, they not only reduced it to age forty, they
reduced it to age thirty, which is very different and, actually, one of first
provinces across the country to do that.
Mr. Speaker, they are calling upon the government. They are well aware of the
fact that government has referred this to a committee to look at, but most
people feel there is already a lot of evidence out there, a lot of studies that
have been done. One of the most recent studies by a Dr. Yaffe, a renown
scientist out of Toronto General Hospital who is recommending, very strongly,
that the benchmarks for Canadian women be reduced from age fifty to at least age
forty. There are all kinds of evidence there that already supports this
particular request.
Mr. Speaker, I attended a conference this weekend and it was astounding to be
in the room to realize how many women in this Province, who were in that room
were diagnosed this year, but more importantly, the number of young women, the
number of women under the age of fifty and even under the age of forty.
Actually, one of the youngest women there was twenty-nine years old and being
diagnosed with breast cancer. I think it is a small measure; it is a small
commitment for any government to make to ensure that we can save lives of people
in Newfoundland and Labrador, and they are asking the government to strongly
consider this.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Before the Chair calls further petitions; petitions are
delivered here as part of our Standing Orders daily routine. I think we have
made a decision in the past that we would read the prayer of the petition and we
would vet all of the petitions to the Table before they are presented. The Chair
is reluctant to get up and interrupt when important petitions are delivered, but
I ask all members for their co-operation in the future.
The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.
MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am pleased again to be able to stand and present a petition in the House of
Assembly. I would like to read that petition into the House for the record.
To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in
Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:
WHEREAS the shrimp industry is in crisis for both harvesters and processors;
and
WHEREAS previously there was protection for Gulf shrimp plants and plant
workers through a regional processing restriction mechanism called ("the cap")
which prevented landed shrimp from being trucked for processing beyond the
region where it was landed; and
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the
House of Assembly to urge the government to:
Reinstate the regional processing restriction ("the cap") in order to
preserve the principal of adjacency for shrimp processing, and to ensure that
employment opportunities are protected for plant workers and the overall
viability of communities in the region.
And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.
Mr. Speaker, this petition covers a very important topic, one that has great
significance to, I would suggest, the people of the Northern Peninsula, but
also, I am sure, people of other regions of the Province as well, where they see
their raw material, the raw resource, the fishery and different species coming
into their communities. It is a very common sight to see a vacuum truck, if we
want to call it that, or a vacuum operation that basically just removes all the
fish from the particular vessels. It is put in fish tubs, it is put on trucks,
and within a very short time, what can be a great employment opportunity in the
area is now leaving and heading into another plant. As Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians, certainly none of us have an issue with sharing wealth, none of us
have an issue with each other getting gainful employment, but the problem comes,
Mr. Speaker, when it is leaving a town where there is no employment.
I see that first-hand on the Northern Peninsula, in my district and in the
district adjacent to mine, where these fish plants are located, where these
petitions are coming from. The difference between driving into Anchor Point and
seeing a fish plant processing shrimp, or driving into Anchor Point and seeing a
plant shut down, Mr. Speaker, it is the difference between life and death, so to
speak.
I spoke with a lady just yesterday who last week worked sixty-six hours in
the fish plant, made herself $900-and some odd, was very excited to have gotten
that type of week's work, all because the raw resource was kept in the region.
It is not to suggest that none went out as well, but certainly, if this
restriction is not put back in place, if there is not some control so that
regionalization of the raw resource, of the material is brought into play, then,
Mr. Speaker, we are uncertain from one week to another as to what employment
opportunities there will be.
We are in the heart of this fishing season. The crab fishery is going well,
the shrimp fishery is going well in the Gulf, in particular, and it is just so
important that it is managed properly and that no more leaves the region than
absolutely needs to, to secure the well-being and the financial well-being of
the residents.
So, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to stand again today to put this
forward. It is not my petition; I am presenting it on behalf of members, some in
my district - quite frankly, most of them are in the Member for St. Barbe's
district, yet they are asking me to come in here today and present this petition
in this House. I know that as of yesterday many more signatures were being
gathered on the highway, I saw it. Two RCMP vehicles were providing escort to
two ladies, standing in the rain, gathering signatures to go with this petition.
Mr. Speaker, it is an issue and I trust it is one that we will see action on
very soon.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?
The hon. the Opposition Leader.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I stand today to present a petition on behalf of the people in Labrador. It
says:
WHEREAS the Trans-Labrador Highway is a vital transportation lifeline for the
Labrador communities, providing access, generating economic activity, and
allowing residents to obtain health care and other public services; and
WHEREAS Route 510 and connecting branch roads of the Trans-Labrador Highway
are unpaved, in deplorable condition and are no longer suitable and safe for the
traffic volumes that travel this route; and
WHEREAS Labrador cannot afford to wait years or decades for upgrading and
paving of their essential transportation route;
WHEREUPON the petitioners call upon the House of Assembly to call upon the
government to provide additional funding for much-needed improvements to Route
510 and connecting branch roads of the Trans-Labrador Highway.
Mr. Speaker, this
section of highway - as I have been saying day in, day out
in this House of Assembly - is critical to the people of Labrador, it is
critical to the people who have to travel that highway right from Labrador West
right to Blanc-Sablon. People have to travel there for work, for personal
reasons, for a hospital, for all of the things that you require transportation
for of goods and services; it all happens over this
section of road.
So why is it that the government is not taking seriously the fact that
sections of this road desperately need to be repaired? At the very minimum, Mr.
Speaker, they need to have crushed stone. At the very minimum, they need to have
some resurfacing. That is the bottom line if you are going to expect people to
transport over that road for the next number of months.
Mr. Speaker, the ideal thing for people in that area is to have a paved road.
Everyone else in the Province who has to travel over a Trans-Canada Highway has
a paved Trans-Canada Highway. Well, not in Labrador; our Trans-Canada Highway in
Labrador is a gravel road and it is a road that the government is not committing
to pave. That is what has people so irate. That and the fact that every day they
are hitting potholes, they are losing tires, they are beating up their vehicles
trying to get to work, trying to get to a hospital, trying to deliver goods into
the communities. That is unacceptable.
Mr. Speaker, this road is going to be critical in more ways than one. Just
this last week, the Quebec government announced $300 million over the next five
years to complete the road on the Lower North Shore joining the road from
Montreal, Quebec City right on into Blanc-Sablon. In five years, we will be able
to drive from Labrador directly into that part of the country, yet the
government in Newfoundland and Labrador does not see fit to start laying
pavement to bring that highway to the standard that it needs to be. Well, that
is not good enough. Thousands of people use that road every day - thousands of
people. Thousands of people depend upon it and it is not good enough when you
have grader operators out there saying: Yes, we have the graders on the road,
but you can hardly sit in the machine because you are hitting so many rocks that
it is protruding through the gravel road that you are getting jolted. I have
talked to grader operators who have been off work with bad necks and bad backs
trying to maintain that road because it is in such a deplorable state at this
time.
They are asking the government and the minister to take their issues
seriously and to address those roads sooner rather than later.
MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?
Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The main business we will do today will be the Budget again; however, before
that, we will do some first readings.
Mr. Speaker, with that, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Finance and
the President of Treasury Board, for leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act
To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000, Bill 31, and I further move that the said
bill be now read a first time.
MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded that the hon. the
Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To
Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000, Bill 31, and that Bill 31 be now read a first
time.
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to
introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000", carried. (Bill 31)
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act, 2000. (Bill 31)
MR. SPEAKER: Bill 31 has now been read a first time.
When shall Bill 31 be read a second time?
MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 31 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Finance
and President of Treasury Board, for leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act
To Amend The Revenue Administration Act No. 2, Bill 33, and I further move that
the said bill be now read a first time.
MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded by the hon. the Government
House Leader to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The
Revenue Administration Act No. 2, Bill 33, and that Bill 33 be now read a first
time.
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to
introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Revenue Administration Act No.
2", carried. (Bill 33)
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Revenue Administration Act No. 2.
(Bill 33)
MR. SPEAKER: Bill 33 has now been read a first time.
When shall Bill 33 be read a second time?
MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 33 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to call from the Order Paper under
Motions, Motion 1.
MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1, the sub-amendment as put forward by the hon. the
Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
It is my understanding that the hon. the Leader of the Opposition has already
spoken and moved the sub-amendment.
Is the House ready for the vote on the sub-amendment?
AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.
MR. SPEAKER: All those in favour of the sub-amendment as put forward by
the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.
MR. SPEAKER: The sub-amendment is lost.
On motion, sub-amendment lost.
MR. SPEAKER: The House is now ready for a debate on the amendment, the
non-confidence motion, as put forward by the hon. the Opposition House Leader.
If there are no further speakers, is the House ready for the vote on
non-confidence motion as put forward by the hon. the Opposition House Leader?
AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.
MR. SPEAKER: All those in favour of the amendment, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.
MR. SPEAKER: The amendment is lost.
On motion, amendment lost.
MR. SPEAKER: Now we will revert to the main motion.
The hon. the Opposition Leader.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am rising today to speak to basically the Budget, which is the main motion
we are talking about on the Order Paper in the House of Assembly today. Mr.
Speaker, there are a couple of points I want to make. There may be a little more
than a couple, but I will see how many I can make in the amount of time I have.
Mr. Speaker, one of the first things I want to talk about is the actual
Budget itself. There have been a number of issues raised around the actual
Budget in terms of where government is going with their spending, what has been
happening in the Province, and so on.
I remember, Mr. Speaker, on Budget Day or the day after there was an
editorial actually in The Telegram . In the editorial, it compared the
Tory Administration in terms of what they have spent and how they have increased
the cost of programs and services to the people of the Province and, indeed,
increased the cost of other things. Mr. Speaker, they talked about the fact that
overall government cost has increased by $3.56 billion, which is an increase of
83 per cent in just eight years.
They were talking about the fact that this year's Budget was called,
Standing Strong: For Prosperity. For Our Future. For Newfoundland and Labrador .
Mr. Speaker, the editorialist took the opportunity to point out to the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador that with the kind of spending that you are seeing
from the Administration across the way, and where they are putting this money,
Mr. Speaker, where they are laying down the money belonging to the people of
this Province, that you are going to see some very different titles on the
Budgets in the years to come.
For example, they said in 2013 you are going to see a Budget Speech that
says, "We can't afford all this." That will be a sad, sad day, Mr. Speaker. It
will be a sad day to know that the government currently has mismanaged and
wasted so much of the money that we have earned as a Province at a time when we
have earned the greatest revenues in our lives. To know that they would have
wasted and misspent so much of it that in 2013 we would have to have a Budget
that basically says we cannot afford everything that we have today.
Mr. Speaker, in 2015 they said the title of the Budget would be, "Too bad we
spent like drunken sailors back then." Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of people
out there in the Province who are saying that today. There are a lot of people
out there in the Province today who are saying that the current government is
spending like drunken sailors. There are a lot of people out there saying that,
Mr. Speaker.
In addition to that, you know what else they are saying? They are saying that
even though the government is spending like drunken sailors we are not feeling
the wealth; we are not feeling the benefit. Why is that, Mr. Speaker? It is
because the spending is not balanced and the spending is not necessarily on
people, it is not necessarily on you. That is why you are not feeling it.
They said the 2017 Budget will probably say, "It's their fault." Mr. Speaker,
again unfortunate unfortunate that today at a time when we are supposed to be
a have Province, at a time when we are earning the greatest return on our oil
industry deals done by previous governments in the oil industry when we are
earning a profit on deals that previous governments did with mining companies.
When we are seeing a greater rate of return in both of those particular
industries and we are designated as a have Province, Mr. Speaker, the commentary
should be a whole lot different.
In fact, people should be leaving a different message, and not a message that
we cannot afford where this government is going. Not a message that the
government is spending like drunken sailors. Not a message of blame and whose
fault it is. It should be one that is more optimistic. It should be a prediction
on the positive things that can be inflicted on communities and people all
across Newfoundland and Labrador. It should be on growing the industries,
growing our renewable industries. It should be on bringing our debt down. It
should be on Newfoundlanders and Labradorians feeling more wealth than they ever
have in their lives.
Well, Mr. Speaker, those are the kind of things that we want to see. We want
to see a greater return for the people of the Province, and we want to see that
return in their bank accounts. We want to see it in their homes. We want to see
them have the opportunity to be able to decide for themselves where they invest
that return. Whether it is into their children, into further education, into
building their families and building their properties, into building businesses,
Mr. Speaker, that should be their prerogative to make those decisions.
and what government would do with the reserve. The reserve, I think, is at $1.9
billion right now, and maybe that is a little lower, I am not sure, but it is
somewhere in that vicinity. What is happening with the reserve? Mr. Speaker,
where is government going to direct that, or are they going to keep it in
reserve for the people of the Province, or are they going to invest it
somewhere? Are they going to put it all down on the Muskrat Falls project? These
are the things we do not know. We do not know that. Did the government take any
money out of the reserve this year to go into the Budget? Was there money that
came out of the reserve to prop up the Budget. Did they use $200 or $300 million
to be able to that?
We would like to know that. We would like to know whether that is the case,
because we live in a period where there are windfall revenues. We live in a
period where there are windfall revenues, and Mr. Speaker, we are wondering if
we need to even be dipping into reserves at this stage. I do not know if the
government calls it reserves, I call it reserves, Mr. Speaker. I call it a
reserve. So, we will see what title they have on it, but I am sure the minister
knows exactly what I am talking about.
Mr. Speaker, we certainly do not believe
MR. SPEAKER (T. Osborne): Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.
MR. MARSHALL: I say to the hon. Leader of the Opposition, I do not know
what she is talking about the $1.9 billion in reserves. I am not familiar with
the concept. Maybe if the hon. the Leader of the Opposition would elaborate then
I could properly respond when it is my opportunity.
I apologize for interrupting but I would like to know. I would really like to
know.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Maybe the Minister of Finance should ask the Premier. She made the comment in
the media that they have something like $1.9 billion and they could possibly use
that revenue to invest in the Muskrat Falls Project, or they could leave it in
reserve. I do not know what bank account it comes out of or where it falls, but,
Mr. Speaker, I am sure the Minister of Finance could talk to the Premier and
find out what her statement was in the media, and what pot of money she was
alluding to. Maybe when he is doing that, he could also let me know if any of
that money was drawn down this year towards the current Budget, because it would
be interesting to know if there was any money drawn out of that pot. Also, Mr.
Speaker, we think that is important.
Mr. Speaker, also I wanted to speak about the unfunded pension liabilities. I
know that the government says: oh well, we invested money in the unfunded
pension liabilities. Yes, and they did and that has been recognized. Does that
fix the problem? No, it does not. It is still an issue out there. Maybe, Mr.
Speaker, when we were a Province that was generating budgets of $2.5 billion and
$3 billion a year, before we had the oil industry, before we had the cash cow,
the big lottery, Mr. Speaker, maybe then it was excusable, but now it is not, it
is not excusable any longer, because now we need to ensure that we protect
pension funds for the public service in this Province, and we need to do it at a
time when we have the revenue to do it. Again, it becomes making decisions, Mr.
Speaker, around where monies need to be invested. Mr. Speaker, we see these
things as issues that the public are concerned about.
Last week, in the House of Assembly, I asked the Minister of Finance about
increasing the net provincial debt. He stood in the House and he said: oh, we
have not increased the provincial debt in the Province. We have not increased
it. We are the government that paid it down. Mr. Speaker, the provincial net
debt increased by $400 million from last year to this year. That happened in a
year, again, when we had windfall royalties. Mr. Speaker, to say that we are
bringing the debt down is not good enough. It is leaving a false picture for the
people in the Province, because people know the difference. People know that in
the last year, even though you had a surplus Budget, even though, Mr. Speaker,
we had a record amount of money coming in to the people of the Province, that
your government still increased the net debt by $400 million. That is
unacceptable, Mr. Speaker. People expect more fiscal prudence. They expect it
because they know the oil revenues are not going to be there forever, and that
is the fear that is out there.
It is all right for the government currently, Mr. Speaker. It is okay for
them to spend like drunken sailors. It is okay for them to be able to go out and
toss money wherever they want. It is okay for them to write cheques for nearly
$400 million out of this Budget, $378 million and march it down to Nalcor Energy
and pass it over the desk to the people down there. It is okay, Mr. Speaker, for
the government to go out and spend $20 million and $30 million to drill a hole
in the ground to look for oil and come up with nothing on behalf of the people.
It is okay to spend money on trying to organize parties and celebrations so they
can showcase themselves in the Province and they never go ahead with the party.
Mr. Speaker, this is where the people's money is going. If you combine that
with other things - look at the Department of Business, a department that their
Administration created to do what, Mr. Speaker? The Department of Business has
never seriously contributed to business growth and opportunity in this Province.
It has contributed to an extra ministerial salary for an MHA in the Tory caucus.
It has contributed to another travel budget, for another minister to travel
around and see the country and see the world, but what has it really delivered
in business? It has not delivered, Mr. Speaker.
You have the Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development or
industry trade and technology, or renewal and technology, whatever they call
themselves these days, so why do you need the Department of Business? Tell me
why you need it, other than to make space for one of the many caucus members you
have to sit in the Cabinet. Go back through the record over all the years and
see the money that you have spent in that department on behalf of the business
people of the Province, in addition to what you have brought in for business.
Let's talk about the Rural Secretariat, Mr. Speaker, which probably could
have been a great idea, which probably was a concept within itself that had some
real opportunity to flourish in Newfoundland and Labrador, but what have we
seen? We have seen $1 million, $1.5 million a year, probably about $10 million
now under your Administration, going into a board and a committee to do what? No
one out there in rural Newfoundland and Labrador knows what they do. No one out
there today knows what they do. The people in Port Union whose plant has closed
down do not see the Rural Secretariat as an option to be the launch pad for
their new economy, I can tell you that.
Where has the money gone? Other than the fact that they have spent some time
in Humber Valley Resort in the big cottages holding meetings, Mr. Speaker, where
has the money gone? Where has it been spent? How are the people in rural
communities benefitting as a result of it? How is it, Mr. Speaker, that the
people down in Summerford are seeing something drastically progressing in their
community because of the work of the Rural Secretariat? How is it in Lewisporte
that they are seeing that? They are not, Mr. Speaker, they are not.
Most people in the Province - I would say 75 per cent, 80 per cent of the
people today in rural Newfoundland and Labrador do not know there is a Rural
Secretariat, do not know what they do, and do not know how much money they
spend. I can almost, Mr. Speaker, say that with tremendous, tremendous
certainty. That is the kind of stuff you have seen, and I could go on and on
but, Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about some other issues for a minute.
I want to talk first of all about the Muskrat Falls piece for a minute. Today
I think it was very revealing in the House of Assembly, and I guess I get a
little bit irritated, I get somewhat irritated that we are giving a private
corporation in Nova Scotia ownership of a transmission capacity in Newfoundland
and Labrador. Something I never thought I would see, Mr. Speaker, after the 1995
revolution, I will call it, in Newfoundland and Labrador where people were
totally against the privatization of hydro. I thought I would never see the
government giving away shares in our transmission capacity to a company from
Nova Scotia.
Mr. Speaker, I suppose the reality really hit home for me when I read the
annual report for Emera Energy. I looked in the annual report, and one of the
key planks in their annual report is their new partnership in Newfoundland and
Labrador, their new partnership with Nalcor and how they are going to make money
for the shareholders of Emera Energy. That is what they talk about, Mr. Speaker.
They talk about making money out of the pockets of Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians for an energy corporation in Nova Scotia.
Now, Mr. Speaker, why is it that someone on the other side of the House,
someone in the Dunderdale government, does not see that there is something wrong
with that picture? Why is it they do not see that it is not acceptable for a
family in Appleton, Burlington, or Baie Verte to have to pay more for their
electricity so that Emera Energy can derive a profit for their shareholders on
the backs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians? I see something wrong with that,
Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair was hesitant to interrupt the hon. the Leader of the Opposition
while she was in the thrust of her speech, but I would remind all hon. members
that it is unparliamentary to refer to a member by their name. You should refer
to them by either their portfolio or their district.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am just a Newfoundlander and Labradorian. I am just a person
who wants to see benefits, Mr. Speaker. I am just an ordinary person in this
Province. I do not expect anything more or less than anybody else, Mr. Speaker.
I do not expect that there should be more privilege for one than there is for
the other, but I can tell you, when I pick up this report from Emera Energy, I
say to the Member for Grand Falls-Windsor, because you should pick it up and
read their annual report, the key plank is about their new deal with
Newfoundland and Labrador. It is about how they are going to make money for the
shareholders of Emera corporation in Nova Scotia.
How are they going to make that money? This is the key point and this is what
we were asking the government today in Question Period and nobody wanted to
answer. The Minister of Natural Resources did not want to answer, the Minister
of Finance did not want to answer, and the Premier did not answer. Why? Because
not one of them wants to stand up and admit that Emera corporation is going to
make money off the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is the problem.
They do not want to stand up and admit it. They know it is true. They know that
when you give somebody 29 per cent of something and you are going to charge a
rate for that, you know there is going to be a return. That is how it works.
That is exactly how it works.
Mr. Speaker, what we would like to know is: How much is that profit going to
be to Emera Energy? The government has already admitted now that the profit that
is going to be paid to Nalcor is going to be $500 million. We would like to know
now what the profit is going to be to Emera corporation. We want to know how
deep Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are going to have to dig into their
pockets to pay those bills to ensure that two corporations in this country,
Nalcor and Emera Energy, earn a profit because that is the only thing that is
guaranteed under this particular deal; the only thing that is guaranteed.
The government likes to talk, Mr. Speaker, with a lot of fancy language when
they speak about the profits that are going into Nalcor. Now, they ridiculed us
as a government because we took some profits and dividends out of Newfoundland
and Labrador Hydro, which leads me to believe that they will not be taking any
profits or dividends out of Nalcor Energy. How can you talk out of both sides of
your face, Mr. Speaker? How do you talk out of both sides of your face? How do
you stand up in the House and say it was wrong for one government to take
dividends and revenues out of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, but to think that
for you, as a government, it is perfectly alright, and whatever profits we make
we are going to take them out of Nalcor?
So, Mr. Speaker, I can only draw the assumption that that is not on, and that
is not the case. Unless someone over there stands up and says: oh yes, we are
going to take dividends and revenues out of Nalcor, just like other governments
did in the past. We do not see any problem with that. Well, we have never heard
that, we have heard a very different story. We have heard a story, Mr. Speaker,
and the story is like this: as a result of the people's money that today is
being invested in Muskrat Falls, and as a result of that project, the people in
this Province will pay double the cost for their electricity. I would go as far
as to say, maybe more than double, Mr. Speaker, because we do not know what the
overhead costs are going to be. We do not know what the interest rates are going
to be. We do not know all of those variables, Mr. Speaker, so we are only just
making a prediction based on what we do know. So it may even be more than that.
The other thing we know is that two companies will make a profit, and while
they are making a profit, the people in the Province will pay dearly. We have
said to the government before, this is not a good deal. It is not acceptable to
do that. If you are going to develop a resource in this Province, you need to
ensure that the people of the Province get fair treatment. They get fair
treatment. They get priority in terms of what needs to be paid.
I listen to members opposite, because I doubt if very few of them have even
read the agreement to date. There might be a half a dozen over there who have
actually read the agreement, because I have never heard any of them talk about
it.
Mr. Speaker, when you look at it in this context and I have raised this
before because many of them think it is okay for other people in other parts of
Atlantic Canada to buy their power cheaper than us. They think it is okay for
them to sell the power cheaper into the US markets than they sell it to
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Well, I have a problem with that. I am going
to tell you, you cannot justify that by saying that the rates are going to go up
anyway.
It was only a few months ago when the Premier was speaking up in Goose Bay
and I had the newspaper clip there earlier, I was reading it when she said it
is too early to tell. It is too early to tell what the rate is going to be. Now,
all of a sudden, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources has a crystal
ball and he is forecasting where the price of gasoline and diesel is going to go
over the next twenty-five years. Based on that, Mr. Speaker, he can justify a
project for power development in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Well, that is not good enough. That is not good enough, Mr. Speaker, nor
should it be good enough for the people of the Province. The only thing the
people in Newfoundland and Labrador should accept is a deal that gives them a
reasonable rate in the same context of every other buyer of Muskrat Falls power,
which gives them a reasonable rate. Mr. Speaker, there is nothing wrong with
asking for that.
How does government achieve that? How do they make that happen? They have to
make some changes in their deal for one thing; secondly, Mr. Speaker, they have
to make sure that any return on other power purchase agreements goes back to the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador to offset their cost of electricity.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance referred to that today. He is the first
one, the only one to ever refer to that on the government side in the House of
Assembly, because the Premier will not say those words. She will not say those
words. What she has said is: it will be up to the governments of the future. She
says that the money will be used for schools and hospitals. I guess, Mr.
Speaker, they are going to take money from Nalcor as well, although they
criticized other governments for doing it but we will have to wait and see.
Mr. Speaker, there has been no commitment on behalf of the government
opposite to ensure that the rates are maintained at the lowest rate possible for
the people in the Province. That is a fundamental problem with this deal.
There are many other issues as well. The fact that we are giving away free
power to Nova Scotia through Emera Energy, the fact that we are giving away
nearly 30 per cent of the ownership in the transmission capacity, and the fact
that there are no benefits in this for the people of Labrador. Mr. Speaker,
these are all huge issues and they need to be dealt with as well.
If the government wants to do a deal that is successful, the success of any
deal starts with ensuring that you protect the people of the Province first and
that you serve them right and that you do right by them in this deal. That is
what is omitted here, that is not what is included. Government needs to take a
long hard look at where they are going in terms of the fairness to
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and a good hard long look at the fact that they
are setting a precedent by selling off and giving away a portion of our public
utility in this Province.
Mr. Speaker, the people in Labrador to my knowledge have never been against
the development of the Muskrat Falls project. Maybe some people who have
individual issues or maybe some people who have some concerns around the river
which of course I have gotten e-mails and heard from as well. Generally, people
have never been opposed to that development. Labradorians are very
pro-development, by the way. In fact they are very pro-development. In fact if
they see opportunity to create jobs, if they see opportunity for future growth,
if they see opportunity for new industry they are all for it. They are all for
it, Mr. Speaker.
As you know they have been a strong component, Mr. Speaker, of seeing the
mining industries developed in the Province and so on. Mr. Speaker, they also
believe and they know a fair deal when they see one. They also know that there
is more that they could see coming out of Muskrat Falls for Labrador than the
government is currently prepared to give.
Even the Member for Lake Melville, Mr. Speaker, would support that. He made a
big speech back a few years ago saying that more had to be given to the people
of Labrador. Well now today you do not hear him open his mouth on the issue, Mr.
Speaker, he does not talk about it now. He does not talk about the fact that he
felt that more should go to the people of Labrador. Today he is just prepared to
say: we will take the jobs, we will take the business opportunities, that is
great, that is perfect for us. Why is he not out saying we need a rate on
industrial power for Labrador? Why is he not saying that we need protection for
industrial customers in Labrador? Why is he not saying that we need to build the
transmission capacity for Northern Labrador and Southern Labrador to ensure that
they have fair, cheap, competitive power like the rest of the Province? Why is
it, Mr. Speaker, that the Member for Lake Melville, who is today the minister,
has taken a whole different turn, a whole different turn, Mr. Speaker? He has
switched around 380 degrees in terms of what his position used to be and where
it is today.
MR. WISEMAN: Three hundred and eighty degrees? (Inaudible).
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I think I went a bit overboard on the degrees. I went a bit overboard on the
degrees, but he spun around that quick, I tell you, I thought he went that fast.
Anyway, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the Member for Trinity North there for
his attentive listening skills in correcting me today on that point.
Mr. Speaker, to get back to the serious point that I was trying to make
before I did the spin with the Member for Lake Melville: If you believe in
something and you believe that there is a better way, a stronger position and
that more can be gained, why would you not carry forward with that? I believe
that is the case. Do you know something? I believe that the government can
deliver. I believe that they can deliver in the context of this deal. It is a
matter of wanting to; it is a matter of establishing it as a priority. If they
do that, Mr. Speaker, they can deliver and they can ensure that all the people
in the Province, no matter where they live, get a fair benefit under this
regime.
No where in the world, Mr. Speaker, are people expected to get 40 per cent of
something and pay 80 per cent of the cost. That is what the government is asking
the people of this Province to do today. They are saying that if we develop this
project, we will bring 40 per cent of the power to the Newfoundland Island grid,
40 per cent of the electricity that is if we use that much because the
argument is that we will only use 20 per cent of it. Even if we use the 40 per
cent of it, why should we have to pay for 80 per cent of the cost?
That is the fundamental question. Why is it that the deal has to be paid for
and balanced on the backs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians alone? Why is it
that we are not going to just pay for what we use? Why is it we have to pay 80
per cent of the cost for a project that we are only going to use maybe 20 per
cent of the power, a maximum 40 per cent of it, over the term of the agreement?
Those are a couple of the points that I wanted to make. I think they are very
critical points, Mr. Speaker, because they affect a lot of people in this
Province, they affect a tremendous amount of people. The other issue I want to
talk about today is what is happening out around the Province. I want to talk
about the unemployment rate. I think that this is a government that has gotten
themselves wrapped up in what has been happening with the economy in St. John's
and they have failed to see what is happening right across the Province. They
have failed to see what is happening in all of the other areas.
Mr. Speaker, it is easy to do. I am sure it is easy to do. They are not the
first government to have their heads locked inside the overpass. They are not
the first government to have experienced that particular syndrome.
Mr. Speaker, what we are seeing today should be a cause of tremendous concern
for every single member in this House of Assembly. Do you know what is happening
today, Mr. Speaker?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS JONES: What is happening today is that while the unemployment rate is
being reduced in St. John's and the metropolitan area, the unemployment rate is
soaring everywhere else across the Province. They talk about an 8.2 per cent
unemployment rate on the Avalon Peninsula. Well, let's compare that with
everywhere else across the Province. What you will find is that the average rate
in every other region is 19.5 per cent and over, as high as 23.1 per cent.
In every other region, what you are seeing is an unemployment rate of over 20
per cent in Newfoundland and Labrador. Now, surely the members opposite, the
members of the government, must see this in their own districts. They must see
this when they are travelling around the Province and when they are out there
talking to people. They must see that the unemployment rate in almost all of
their districts, bar none, outside of the Avalon Peninsula is over 20 per cent.
That should cause them to be concerned because it is obvious that the
industries that are fundamental in these regions of the Province are not able to
grow. It is obvious that the opportunities are not being felt on the doorsteps
of all of these communities. It is obvious, Mr. Speaker, that people in these
areas of the Province are not providing a better living for themselves today
than they were yesterday. That is what is unfortunate about this.
When you look at the fact that the statistics should be going down, they are
going up and that is not acceptable. Mr. Speaker, maybe there are members here
who think that is fine. Maybe they think that is perfectly acceptable for their
districts, but I certainly do not see it as being perfectly acceptable. What I
see is a government who does not have a vision for industry development and
survival of areas right across this Province. What I am seeing is a government
that has no solutions for those areas. I see a government that is not investing
in those particular regions, and that is why their lot in life is not improving
at the same rate that it is on the Avalon Peninsula and in the St. John's area.
I think government needs to be concerned about that.
In addition, Mr. Speaker, people need infrastructure. If you are going to
build industry, you need to have the infrastructure to do it. That means
transportation and information technology. These are key components to the
twenty-first century industry in this Province - very key components.
Why is it today, in Newfoundland and Labrador, that there are still
communities that do not have high-speed Internet? Why is it today, in this
Province, that you have communities on the main highway that still do not have
services, communities that cannot ring a credit card through in their businesses
because they have a dial-up Internet service? This government came into power
with a commitment that they were going to bring Newfoundlanders and Labradorians
into the information technology age; they were going to look at things like
high-speed Internet and broadband services.
Mr. Speaker, what did they do? They went out and spent millions and millions
and millions and millions and millions - and I can say it fifteen times. They
spent millions and millions into fibre optics in the Province. That was supposed
to be the solution. The sell on fibre optics was this: Government is going to
put the money in with a private company. We are going to get a fibre line. We
are going to get a line. We are going to get one line of fibre or so many lines
of fibre - I cannot remember now. I know it was the former Member for St. Barbe
who used to be up talking about it every day; he even talked about keeping the
fibre lines together with duct tape. So, it is no wonder they never got any
further than where they did.
Anyway, so much of this fibre was going to be allocated for Newfoundland and
Labrador. This was the sell job. This was the sell job that the government put
on the taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador. Once the fibre optic cable is
done, we are going to connect all of the communities; we are going to make sure
everybody is going to be connected. We are going to do a study now, Mr. Speaker,
and we are going to see how much it is going to cost to bring this line into all
the communities so that people are coming into the twenty-first century, so that
people have the technology they need in their communities to be able to grow and
develop the regional economy.
Mr. Speaker, that was the big sell job. Do you know how long it took to do
the study? It took well over two years; well over two years. I think they had it
for a year after that before they even released it. I do not even know if they
ever released it, but they turned it down. They did turn it down at the end of
the day. They turned it down, saying: Oh, too much money, we cannot do anything
with it. That is where it is today. That is where it is today; yet, there are
communities out there all over the Province that are still on dial-up services.
There are communities, Mr. Speaker, with high-speed Internet that has run out
of capacity. Large centres, even like in Happy Valley- Goose Bay, where they ran
out of capacity. It is happening in communities all over my district. It is
happening in communities all over the Province, small communities, but even in
larger communities they are running out of capacity. If you are moving into a
community today in this Province and you are asking to get high-speed Internet,
you are being told by the provider: Sorry, we cannot help you. We cannot help
you; we are maxed out. We cannot connect anybody else in your community. That is
what people are being told.
This is what we are dealing with in the Province today. How can you have a
vision for Newfoundland and Labrador going forward that does not include having
people connected with the technology that they need to be able to grow? It does
not work that way, Mr. Speaker.
The minister likes to stand up and say we are 70 per cent this and we are 80
per cent that, and we have connected this and we have connected that. Well, that
is all fine, it is all numbers. There is a reality check that the minister
needs, too, Mr. Speaker. It is a reality check. It is the reality today of
moving into a community in Newfoundland and Labrador and being told: Sorry,
there is no Internet access; or going into a community and being told you can
only get on a dial-up service. That is the reality.
Where are the broadband initiatives, Mr. Speaker? Where are the broadband
strategies that are supposed to bring communities into fast, zoom kind of
technology that gets us there in a minute and gets us there in seconds that
makes us connected with the world in a flash, Mr. Speaker? Where is all of that?
All of that, Mr. Speaker, went out the window with a study that the government
did and every now and then they will sink a few dollars into broadband if they
can partner with the federal government or partner with industry federally, Mr.
Speaker, or partner with a local provider. Is there a plan? No, there is not. Is
there a strategy? No, there is not. Is there a time frame when Newfoundlanders
and Labradorians are going to be able to click their fingers and launch
themselves into the world of technology as we know it today? No, there is not,
Mr. Speaker, and that is where the government is lacking. You can pay lip
service to it but you need to see results.
In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, let's look at transportation. The minister
today talked about $270 million going into roads in the Province this year. That
is great. It is great, Mr. Speaker, because we need it. I can tell you that I
have a district today that needs it probably more so than ever before. I am
going to explain it to you now because every day I present a petition here in
the House of Assembly talking about the roads in Southern Labrador. I tell you,
the roads up there are so bad right now, the main highway itself, that as I said
before there are now Facebook sites, there is Twitter going on, there are
pictures being documented all over the Internet, Mr. Speaker, of people who are
travelling that road and what they have had to go through.
Mr. Speaker, let me tell you some more about it. Let me just start in a
couple of communities. You talk about spending money and balancing where money
is invested in different areas of the Province. There are certain communities in
this Province today that have gravel roads that have not seen a cent of money
spent on their roads in the last eight years that this government has been in
power. They have never once put a cent of money into roads in certain
communities in this Province.
Mr. Speaker, I do not have a list of all of them but I know some of them
because one of them I know very well, it is in my own district in Black Tickle.
There has not been any money spent on the local road in that community since
this government came into power. Then you talk about balancing things out, it is
a gravel road. It is only going to be maintained for so long and that is the way
it is.
Look at other sections of the highway, like the Labrador Straits, for
example, Mr. Speaker. I want to talk about this because we hear of all these
paving and resurfacing programs. You are looking at pavement in this area that
is like thirty years old. After a while things start to wear out. Do you know
something? What we have done is it not 3,000 people in that area using this
section of road anymore; it is 20,000 and 30,000 people using this
section of
road. Now that should cause some members to start thinking, well, when you put
that kind of traffic on a road that is already thirty years old, it is going to
need to have some real work done. Real work does not mean patching the potholes,
Mr. Speaker. It means resurfacing the road in sections where it is very, very
bad. That is what people are asking the government to do and that is what they
expect them to do.
More importantly, Mr. Speaker, the people of Labrador expects the government
to make a firm commitment on paving the entire
section of the highway. So they
should make that commitment, they should make that commitment. These people in
Labrador who use this road are as important and their safety is as important as
anywhere else in this Province. They need to be able to know that there is a
strategy; there is a vision for our road and somebody is going to make a
commitment to look at this and to deal with it in the long term. That is what
they want to see, Mr. Speaker. That is the kind of commitment they want to see
that they are not getting. Why is that? It is because the government opposite
does not have a real vision for that part of the Province. That is the problem,
Mr. Speaker. If they did, they would be out there today reconfiguring the marine
services in those areas.
We are in a situation right now on the Strait of Belle Isle, Mr. Speaker.
This is the situation we are in. We are moving into our peak period of
operation, we are moving into a period where we are going to have the most
traffic that we have in the run of a year on that service, and what is going to
happen? The ferry has to come out of commission. The ferry has to come out, it
is going to have to go back on dry dock, and it is going to leave 25,000 people
in Labrador who depend upon that service stranded. Stranded, to do what? Like
they did a few weeks ago, having to put their vehicle on a cargo boat and hope
that it is not too foggy to get a flight across to pick up their vehicle? That
is unacceptable in this day and age.
The government knows we are going into our peak period. They know the
Apollo is going to have to come out service again. People are expecting to
see a solution that will work for the area. How can you build industry? How can
you bring people in? How can you promote a region?
Those are great tourism ads on Labrador, by the way; great tourism ads right
across the Province. One thing I have to say is the marketing firm put their
heads to work and did some good advertising in tourism. When people come to
those areas of the Province, Mr. Speaker, they do not want to land in St. Barbe
and find out there is no ferry for them to get on. That is not what they want.
They want something long term. They want a commitment from the government. This
was a government that one time committed to even build a fixed link across the
Strait of Belle Isle.
They do not talk about that any more, but they should be talking about it
because that is the reality of what is to come for this Province. That is the
reality of what is to come for this Province. Even now, you have the Quebec
government committing to spend $300 million over the next five years to bring
the road down the Quebec North Shore and into the Labrador Straits. That is the
kind of traffic that we are going to add in the next few years to this
section
of road, and we have a government that does not see it. We have a government
that does not have the vision for it, does not understand what the real
contribution to the Province can be if you do this right and you do it properly.
Mr. Speaker, we will keep talking, we will keep trying to bring them there,
where they need to be.
It is just like on the North Coast of Labrador. We have been talking for
years about ferries that are inadequate and not working to address the needs of
the people in Northern Labrador. What has the government done about it?
Absolutely nothing. Absolutely nothing is what they have done about it. Where
was all the talk from the members that there was going to be a new configuration
of marine services in Northern Labrador, that we were going to look at a ferry
that could transport people and cargo and all the rest of it? It never ever
happened. Eight years later, and what are they doing? They are still out
scrounging to find a ship to be able to meet the needs of the people in Northern
Labrador. Ships that is inadequate and falling far short of the kind of service
that the people on the North Coast of Labrador should be able to get and should
be entitled to.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I know that the members do not want to hear this. It is all
right for most of them, they do not use that service on a daily basis like other
people have to use it. They do not have to depend upon that service like the
people in Makkovik, Hopedale, Black Tickle, Nain, Natuashish, Rigolet,
Postville, and all these communities that have to depend upon it. They do not
have that kind of dependency. They do not have to get on that coastal boat and
go to the Northern region of Labrador. They do not have to try to get their
goods shipped in and out of there, Mr. Speaker. That is the fundamental
difference. It is just like the ferry on the Strait of Belle Isle. They do not
have to get aboard of it. They do not have to use it. That is why they are not
making it the same priority, the priority that it should be for the people of
that area, to give the people real opportunity to grow their regions and to be
able to do something concrete.
No, Mr. Speaker, that is not the kind of priorities that this government is
choosing. This government is choosing priorities where they are wasting money,
choosing priorities where money is just going out the door, and nobody knows
where it is going.
Let's talk about the chronic disease management plan that the government has
been committing to do. We live in a Province where we have the highest rate of
chronic disease in Canada. When you talk about things like cancer, diabetes and
heart disease, we have the highest of anywhere else in the country. We live in a
Province today, not only do we have the highest rate of disease but we also have
a very high mortality rate. We also live in a Province where all of the
dependency on health care and those health services is happening right here in
the capital city. We have people all over Newfoundland and Labrador who are
being referred here for health treatments every single day. We need to ensure
that they can afford to access those services.
I have heard so many horror stories, I would not even be able to stand here
and repeat them because there are just too many. Too many stories of people who
cannot afford to access our health care system at the current rate because it
has become all centralized in St. John's. Mr. Speaker, maybe that is the best
thing for the providers, maybe it is the best thing for quality care, but it is
very difficult for the people who have to access it here.
Do any of them mind coming here? Absolutely not. They do not mind going
anywhere they have to go to get the treatment they need for the kind of illness
they have, whether it is cancer, or heart disease, or diabetes, any of those
things, respiratory disease or whatever the case may be. They do not always have
the ability to do it financially and that is where the tough
part comes in. I
get calls all the time, Mr. Speaker, from people who are in here and cannot
afford to get home. They need to be able to fly back to especially in Labrador
West, I have had a number of calls from Labrador West from people who end up in
here in hospital, they get discharged, they have to go home, and not everyone in
Labrador West have medical coverage, not everybody have insurance programs to
take care of it. It is a pretty hefty airline bill to do that.
I get the same thing from my own district in Labrador where they are raising
money all the time to get people out to hospital and get them back. Not only
there, Mr. Speaker, all the other areas of the Province as well. There is not
one area of this Province that you will go into today where you will not see
communities trying to raise money for people who have to go to hospital. That
should not be the case, Mr. Speaker. It is a matter of where the money is going
in health care. It is a matter of spending priorities and that is why this
government has to get a handle on what has been happening. The health of the
people is too important to be neglected. The health of the people needs to be
first and foremost in the government's platform, and we are not seeing that.
So, why is there not being a full review in health care? Why are we not
looking at how to get a better bang for the money we are spending? Why is it
that even people all across Canada and reports are pointing out to us that we
are spending the most money per capita and we have the worst health outcomes of
anywhere else in the country? That is critical. That should be a wake-up call
for the government opposite. When you get that kind of statistic that we have
the worst service of any other health care providers in the country, it should
be a wake-up call. When people in their communities have to be raising money to
get themselves to a hospital, that should be a wake-up call. When people are
being put on wait-lists for critical services and they cannot get them, it
should be a wake-up call.
I dealt with a case today, Mr. Speaker, of a person who flew from Labrador
into St. John's yesterday for a doctor's appointment this morning. They get here
and it is cancelled. Guess what? This is the third time the appointment was
cancelled. People do not have that kind of money to jump on an airplane to come
to a doctor's appointment, get here and find out that the specialist had to
cancel the appointment on them.
Mr. Speaker, these things should be a wake-up call for the government that
there needs to be changes in our health care system. Nobody out there today
should have to be on these long wait-lists. I talked to someone yesterday who
had a family member who is diagnosed with prostate cancer. They cannot even get
on the list in Newfoundland and Labrador. They have to go to Nova Scotia now.
They have to go to Nova Scotia to get some kind of treatment because we are not
able to handle them here in the Province.
We are talking about the health of people. When we are talking about the
health of people, we are talking about ensuring that people have longer lives,
that people can battle the illnesses they have, and that they have every
opportunity at the first opportunity to be able to do so. Mr. Speaker, these are
things that need to be looked at and they should be on the very top and front of
government's radar. When they hear statistics like we are spending the most
money and have the worst outcomes of health care in the country if that is not a
wake-up call, then nothing ever will be for the government members opposite in
dealing with our health care system today.
In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, look at the growing population of seniors
in Newfoundland and Labrador. By 2025, one in every four will be of senior's age
in Newfoundland and Labrador. Already today we are dealing with critical issues
around personal care, around long-term care, around home care. We are already
dealing with critical issues in trying to provide for our senior population and
we are not able to do it. We are not able to do it. You look at where the
predictions are going; we are an aging province and we cannot ignore that but we
do have to deal with it.
It is not being dealt with right now. In fact, Mr. Speaker, when we asked the
government in Estimates about the long-term care strategy, the minister said:
well it is complex, it is not finalized. We are doing things but we do not have
a plan yet. This is the kind of stuff that we are getting back. That is not good
enough. You have had eight years, you have had eight years and you know where
the trend has been going. You know where the trend has been going for seniors in
our Province and you have not dealt with it.
The minister stood up today and he said: people are going to be in the dark
in the Province if we do not do Muskrat Falls. Well, Mr. Speaker, there are a
lot of seniors in our Province today who are already in the dark. There are many
seniors out there today on fixed incomes in this Province who cannot afford, Mr.
Speaker, to keep going their homes and pay their electricity bills.
In fact, the other day when I was in the House of Assembly and I raised this
issue I had two or three seniors call me after and even a couple sent me e-mails
and they told me about their own personal situations. I would say they are a
small fraction of what is out there in terms of being able to meet all of their
costs and their commitments.
We all have seniors in our districts; look at all the seniors who have been
in the House of Assembly this year through the seniors clubs. I think it is
great that they are out and they are active and they are involved, but do not
ignore the fact that they still have a lot of critical issues that they are
dealing with. Many of them are on fixed incomes and many of them are seeing
their cost of living going up.
It is the same, Mr. Speaker, for families out there that are seeing their
cost of living g