PDF Version (Day)

PDF Version (Night)

June 16, 2015

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVII No. 32

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Verge):

Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER:

Today we will hear members' statements from the members representing the

Districts of Humber East, Exploits, Port de Grave, St. John's North, Baie

Verte Springdale, and The Straits White Bay North.

The hon. the Member for the District of Humber East.

MR. FLYNN:

Mr. Speaker, ALS is a rapidly progressive fatal neuromuscular disease that

attacks a select group of nerve cells and pathways in the brain and spinal

cord which leads to progressive paralysis of the muscles.

In any one year, up to 3,000 Canadians live with ALS and two to three

die each day.

The ALS Society of Newfoundland and Labrador, whose

head office is situated in Corner Brook, was formally established in 2006.

Prior to that, the Corner Brook

chapter was associated with the ALS

Society of Canada.

Each year in June, the ALS Society of Newfoundland and

Labrador sponsors a walk as its major fundraiser.

Every dollar raised goes to provide equipment, support services,

education for the ALS community, and fund research to find a cure.

Since 2010, the group in Corner Brook alone has raised nearly

$210,000 with the ALS Walk.

On the walk this past Sunday, more than $31,000 was

raised in Corner Brook. I want

to congratulate the staff person, Cheryl Power, the Board of Directors,

volunteers and participants for another successful ALS Walk.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all hon. members join me in

congratulating the ALS Society of Newfoundland and Labrador on their

continued efforts to support those with this terrible disease.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the District of Exploits.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. FORSEY:

Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, May 21, Brian Tremblett was inducted as the first

Lifetime Achievement recipient with the Bishop's Falls Minor Hockey.

Brian has served as President of the Bishop's Falls

Minor Hockey for ten years and has coached at many different levels, all the

way up through the minor hockey system and including the Grand Falls-Windsor

Cataracts.

Brian was selected as Volunteer of the Year, a Minor

Hockey Meritorious Award, the Joe Byrne Honour Award, and received Hockey

Canada's Junior Hockey recognition Award.

He ran Hockey Safety Clinics for trainers, facilitated Speak Out for

Hockey Canada for the prevention of abuse and harassment.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me

in congratulating Brian Tremblett on being the first recipient of the

Lifetime Achievement Award.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLEJOHN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to recognize the municipality of

Spaniard's Bay on the occasion of their fiftieth anniversary of

incorporation. The town dates

back to the 1700s and today has some 2690 residents.

Incorporated in 1965, the original town ran east to west along the CB

Highway. Through the years, the

town expanded in various directions ending the expansion with the annexation

of Tilton in 1991.

Mr. Joe Peddle, ninety-eight, was an original member of

that first council led by Mayor Calvin Gosse.

Mr. Peddle sang the blessing for the nearly 200 in attendance and was

given a standing ovation.

Present Mayor, Tony Menchions, spoke of the many

changes which have taken place in the last fifty years.

He highlighted some of the differences in cost.

The town approved fifty street lights in 1965 at a cost of $212 a

month. Today, that cost exceeds

$100,000 annually. The first

motion of council to approve road work to be completed by Transportation and

Works was at a cost of $7.20 per hour for a loader operator and the work was

not to exceed $300. A far cry

from today's costs for repairs.

I ask all members to join me in congratulating the

municipality of Spaniard's Bay on fifty years of incorporation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, I stand today to congratulate Mike and Annie Power who recently

celebrated their fiftieth wedding anniversary on May 29.

Like many couples in the City of St. John's, Mr. and

Mrs. Power first met while on a roller skating outing at Memorial Stadium.

In fact, the Powers continued to roller skate at the stadium for

years afterwards and actually took their children there to enjoy the

time-honoured tradition.

Mike grew up in Corner Brook on the West Coast and

spent his career working as an electrician.

Annie, whose maiden name is Hart, was born and raised in St. John's

and worked in the provincial public service.

In the years after the Powers were married at the

Basilica Cathedral of St. John the Baptist, they lived and raised a family

in Virginia Park. Their four

daughters all still live in the City of St. John's.

They have a very close family that includes their eight grandchildren

and three great-grandchildren.

These days Mr. and Mrs. Power enjoy their retirement

together, especially the time they have to spend with their grandkids.

I ask all hon. members to join me in wishing a very

happy fiftieth wedding anniversary to Mike and Annie Power.

Congratulations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Baie Verte Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. POLLARD:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Born at 12:39 a.m. on January 1, 2015 at Grand

Falls-Windsor hospital, Richelle Sandra Marie Bonnie Shiner made her special

debut. Mr. Speaker, four pounds

and 8.5 ounces, Richelle was not just the first baby born in Newfoundland

and Labrador in 2015, but also the first in Canada.

Her parents, Rick and Sandra, live in Springdale and

were overwhelmed and extremely grateful to have their first girl join their

family of four boys: R.J., Boyd, Brent, and Byron.

Richelle was due to arrive on February 26, but was

delivered two months prematurely by emergency C-section.

Her proud parents are hopeful that the birth is a sign that their

daughter will do something big in life.

Also special is that baby Richelle was born on her mom's birthday,

giving her mom a double blessing.

In addition, at just five days old, Richelle had her

first photo shot, as the cover girl with

Maclean's magazine.

With such a unique entrance, her mother hopes that Richelle has big

plans to impact this world.

Honourable colleagues, please join me not only in

congratulating Sandra and Rick, her parents, but also in welcoming baby

Richelle as Canada's first 2015 baby who has already warmed all of our

hearts.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday I attended the thirty-third Annual Ceremonial

Review for RCSCC 285 Leif Erickson Sea Cadets in St. Lunaire-Griquet.

It was an honour to serve as reviewing officer for the sixteen

members, inspecting uniforms, the commitment cadets took to honour their

troop, and watch their drills performed with precision.

On June 3, members of 774 St. Anthony and area Air

Cadet Squadron had their forty-seventh Annual Ceremonial Review; acting as

reviewing officer for their twenty-member squadron was RCMP Corporal Mike

Babstock. Beaumont Hamel is in

their plan for Honour 100.

Knowledge, confidence, and self-esteem are fostered as

a cadet. Each evening they learn

drills, band and technical skills, but equally important is the strong part

of the core trainings of leadership and citizenship.

They learn to be leaders, mentors, and team players.

Their dedication is immeasurable, as is the dedication of their

leaders.

I ask all members to recognize Sea Cadets Commanding

Officer Lieutenant (Navy) Debbie Humby, Lieutenant (Navy) Christopher Humby,

Sub-Lieutenant Sabrina Humby; Acting Sub-Lieutenants Diane Snow and Ida

Roberts, and Civilian Instructor Karen Bussey; Air Cadets Commanding Officer

Captain Beverly Scott, DCO and Training Officer Captain Godfrey Mitchelmore,

Assistant Training Officer Louise Reid, and Supply Officer Krista Diamond.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Acting Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to recognize and commend the

outstanding leadership of Marie Woodford, a humanitarian and Grade 9 teacher

at Crescent Collegiate. Under

her direction, students at Crescent Collegiate, the community of Blaketown,

as well as numerous schools throughout the Province helped to ensure that

105 orphans in Uganda have a new school.

In 2007, Ms Woodford travelled to Africa and spent a

semester teaching in Mombasa, Kenya.

This experience opened her eyes and left her wanting to do more for

children in Third World countries.

While teaching at Holy Trinity High School in the

2013-2014 school year, Ms Woodford's class participated in a global

initiative for children in an orphanage in Uganda.

It was here she learned more about the orphanage and the need for

them to have a school. Ms

Woodford then moved to Blaketown to teach at Crescent Collegiate, and along

with her class put out a call-to-action to schools across the Province.

Mr. Speaker, the call was answered.

Students from Crescent Collegiate, Holy Trinity High School, Roncalli

High, Amos Comenius Memorial High School, Holy Cross Elementary, Immaculate

Conception, Goulds Elementary, and pre-school students from the Little

People's Workshop made clothes, artwork, collected donations and school

supplies, all in an effort to make this school a reality.

In March of this year, Ms Woodford travelled to Uganda

to help build the school and hand-deliver the items made by students in our

Province. The children in this

small town in Uganda started a new semester in their new school just this

past May.

Mr. Speaker, the students of this Province, under the

leadership of Ms Woodford, have truly made a difference in the lives of

these children in Uganda and have also experienced the impact of this

outreach in their own lives. I

ask all hon. members to join me in thanking Ms Woodford for her leadership

and dedication. She represents

the true Newfoundland and Labrador spirit of giving and we are all very

proud.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thanks to the minister for an advance copy of his

statement. I gladly join with

all the members of the House to commend the exceptional leadership and

humanitarian spirit shown by Ms Marie Woodford.

Her teaching approach certainly underscores that education does not

always come in the form of text, and the most important teacher oftentimes a

student can have is one that inspires them.

Inspires them to reach higher, to go that extra step, to get to know

oneself better, and to open themselves to doing good in the world.

Ms Woodford is a shining example of what a great

teacher in action can be, and I cannot help but be impressed with her work,

and I am very proud to say she is one of our own teachers here in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

I would also like to congratulate the students at

Crescent Collegiate, the community of Blaketown, as well as the numerous

schools throughout the Province who have stepped up to make a difference in

the world, Mr. Speaker. There

can be no better education than that.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

statement. I am very pleased to

join him in honouring Marie Woodford for her achievements in making it

possible for students here to contribute to the building of a school in

Africa.

She is to be admired for following through on her

earlier desire to do more for children in Africa who need our help.

We are lucky to have teachers like Marie who can give children a

global experience outside of their own community, even outside of their own

country, and the opportunity to discover that every small contribution

combined with those of others helps to make things happen.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House to note that the

Town of Petty Harbour Maddox Cove recently became the seventieth

municipality to partner in BizPal.

Introduced to the Province in 2009, BizPal is a

federal-provincial-territorial online information service that helps local

entrepreneurs save time and money by simplifying the process of obtaining

permits and licences.

Mr. Speaker, the BizPal service begins by prompting

clients with a list of questions about their business venture.

Responses are then used to generate a customized list of all permits

and other regulatory approvals that must be obtained in order to operate a

specific type of business. The

process is completely confidential it is not necessary for users to

provide identifying information to access the system, and no information is

stored about the user. The goal

is to provide business owners with accurate, accessible, complete and

current information about the requirements they must satisfy at the

municipal, provincial, and federal levels of government.

The fact that municipal participation in BizPal has

grown so quickly speaks to the value of this initiative.

Statistical tracking shows that the Newfoundland and Labrador BizPal

website is accessed thousands of times each month by local businesses, as

well as potential business operators from foreign countries, which

demonstrates how this initiative supports business activity.

Service NL has been actively encouraging municipalities to join, and

to date, the department has added an average of ten municipalities a year.

I encourage municipal leaders to make contact with Service NL if they

would like more information about how they can use BizPal to support new

ventures in their community.

Mr. Speaker, Service NL has a mandate to make

government services more readily available to the people of the Province,

and our involvement with BizPal is one of many ways we are fulfilling that

mandate. Our government has

always been very supportive of the small and medium-sized firms that drive

our economy. We will continue

these efforts through BizPal, and through the comprehensive suite of

programs delivered by the Department of Business, Tourism, Culture and Rural

Development.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage business owners, prospective

entrepreneurs, and my colleagues in this hon. House to experience this great

service first-hand by visiting

www.bizpal.gov.nl.ca ,

and then spread the word about this initiative.

Fostering new business success is important, and BizPal is helping us

do that in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I once again would like to thank the minister for a

copy of his daily Ministerial Statement.

Mr. Speaker, we want to recognize the Town of Petty

Harbour Maddox Cove for getting involved with the BizPal program.

Certainly, BizPal is a good program.

It is actually one that was developed by the Northeast Avalon RED

Board. At the time I can

remember being on city council when they had actually brought this

initiative forward to government, and I am certainly glad that government

did adopt it. Anything we can do

to encourage business growth, to have opportunities as it is with BizPal for

businesses, or perspective businesses, or business wanting to expand and to

have that ability to be able to go in a very orderly way and find out the

types of permits and so on they would need to operate a business.

Anything we can do in that regard is a positive thing.

The only other comment I would make, Mr. Speaker, is

given the fact that BizPal does use information technology, I am kind of

surprised that the government did not have to hire a consultant to show them

how to use it.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for the advance copy

of his statement here today.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, this is one success I think that this side of the House

can certainly back. Surprising

though to learn that there are only seventy municipalities that have taken

advantage of this so far out of 276 municipalities here in the Province.

Being the spur to small and medium-sized business that this program

is, I am surprised other municipalities have not taken advantage of it.

So I would ask government, number one, to push this with

municipalities and encourage them to sign up because this is an employment

creator too, at the same time.

Mr. Speaker, the other thing we learned from this, of

course just playing with this we also learned a little bit about how far

the Red Tape Reduction Strategy has proceeded.

Thank you very much.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I remind the member his time has expired.

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday, when talking about the scathing report by

the Auditor General, the Premier said we have to rely on the expertise of

what is in the department, but in the next breath he said he was hiring

external consultants to draft guidelines for hiring external consultants.

I ask the Premier: This department has been around for

ten years, why are you now hiring an external consultant to now draft

guidelines on how you should hire external consultants?

Shouldn't that oversight already been available in this government?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, as I outlined yesterday, IT services

throughout government, and government being such a large entity, and IT

services are very complicated. I

talk to business people who even talk about small businesses and the

incredible investments they have to make to ensure their IT systems and

operations are up to speed so that they can continue to be competitive and

work at a vibrant pace and do their work effectively and efficiently.

Mr. Speaker, we want to make sure we are getting best

value from our IT services, which is the Office of the Chief Information

Officer, known as OCIO. I said

yesterday, I am not an expert.

The ministers here are not experts in IT and how they operate.

We want to make sure it is operating properly, and we are going to

get a consultant to do that for us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier's RFP for guidelines for hiring consultants

that he released yesterday is very basic.

It calls for a review, number one, of what the department is already

doing; number two, a jurisdictional review; and three, the recommendations

on how they could improve. The

Auditor General has already made several recommendations.

It is obvious that one of them this government should start by not

paying consultants who do not submit bills.

I ask the Premier: Response to the AG's comments about

OCIO was that you were going to hire a consultant, but what about the other

departments, Transportation and Works as an example, that the AG flagged?

Is that again hiring of more consultants?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We value the work of the Auditor General.

We have said that many times.

It is very true that we do.

The Auditor General plays a significant role in the operation of

government. It brings an outside

view, a very high-level view, a fresh set of eyes, if I can use that phrase,

Mr. Speaker, on the operations in government and how we operate.

We have a lengthy history of responding to Auditor

General's reports, which are done annually, and taking his recommendations

and turning them into improved policies, guidelines, and delivery of

programs and services of the Province.

That is what we intend to do now, Mr. Speaker.

We are still going through; we are analyzing the

information provided by the Auditor General.

We want to fully understand all of his recommendations, Mr. Speaker.

Once we understand, then we look at concepts and ways to make

improvements as recommended by the Auditor General.

It is a process that is ongoing in government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We all know this is a Premier who likes to do his own

report cards. Yesterday and he

just made those comments again.

He said we demonstrate year over year that we respond to the Auditor

General's recommendations. The

truth is government repeatedly fails to fully implement the AG's

recommendations in the required time frame, often only reaching the target

for a full completion after six years.

I ask the Premier: People expect financial oversight,

they expect accountability, why are you not strongly and decisively making

the changes you need to make as recommended by the AG that you just said you

value?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, we have to look at some of the recommendations that the Auditor

General makes require ongoing changes and ongoing actions by government

not just one time or for one year, but year after year after year.

If you look at 2009, the Auditor General had recommended a 90 per

cent implementation yes, we reached that, but not only that, we are at 97

per cent if you include implementing recommendations that are underway in

our ongoing efforts by government 2010, 92 per cent; 2011, 95 per cent.

So, Mr. Speaker, we continue, as I said there is no

argument to be made where we take the recommendations of the Auditor General

very seriously, we continue to work on them and improve efficiencies within

government, and to provide programs and services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, the Premier likes to throw around some numbers,

so we will just throw around some of them ourselves.

Government uses the phrase, like 90 per cent, and they attach that to

90 per cent completed or in progress when they boast about their success, as

the Premier just did.

Progress does not mean done, I say, Mr. Speaker.

Things like unsafe food, wasteful spending, not following the rules,

I say. Seventy-one new

recommendations, plus 176 we do not know the completion status, yet another

131 still not done from previous AGs' reports.

So I ask the Premier: When should the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador expect these 380 recommendations that would

protect public money and public safety to be done?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, we are certainly down in the weeds in Question Period today,

but I do not mind doing that; I do not mind answering the questions.

If in recent years, if the member opposite wants to look at, prior to

this report, 588 recommendations have been reviewed, 549 have been fully or

partially implemented 549 out of 588.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

The Leader of the Opposition, if you listen to my answer I know he is

talking over there again now, Mr. Speaker it was 97 per cent I said that

was fully or partially implemented, not 90 per cent.

Look, very clearly, we take these reports seriously.

The Auditor General provides a valuable service to Newfoundland and

Labrador, to our government, and to the people of the Province.

He has a role to play, and he provides benefit to taxpayers of

Newfoundland and Labrador, and we take his recommendations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This morning the Premier said that we can expect a term

sheet on Statoil's Bay du Nord oil development in the coming weeks.

He later backtracked saying that he could not say if it would be

announced before the November election.

Media are reporting that the industry was caught off guard by the

Premier's comment.

So I ask the Premier to clarify: Are you planning on

announcing a term sheet with Statoil in the coming weeks or not?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With due respect to the member opposite, I think he may

have some of his facts just a little bit confused over on this matter as

well, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, what I said this morning, and I can tell you, I speak for

members on this side of the House, we are very optimistic about the future

of oil and gas in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

While members opposite like to take a very pessimistic view, they like to

look at what has happened in the Province, they talk how bad the economy is,

they talk how bad the circumstances are in the Province, well the over 800

people this morning at Noia do not agree, Mr. Speaker.

They were at the Noia conference, the annual conference, because they

believe in the future of oil in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, as

do we.

I can tell you, Statoil is going to be a big part of

the future in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Statoil is currently on an eighteen-month drilling

program that will not finish until May of 2016, I say to the Premier.

Their vice-president said they need information from that program

before a decision can be made on the development.

However, the Premier is rushing this process and has mandated his

minister to get a deal in 2015.

That is months before the drilling program is finished.

We have seen this before.

We have seen it with CETA.

The Premier is again showing symptoms of deal fever, I say, Mr.

Speaker.

I say to the Premier: Why are you rushing this process

before the drilling program is finished, without even knowing how much oil

is there?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear for the member opposite, and let me calm his

concerns over there, because I tell you, all of the people in the room at

Noia this morning agree there is a great future in the oil business for

Newfoundland and Labrador, much like we have enjoyed over the last decade

where oil revenues have transformed our Province.

They have transformed industry and business, Mr. Speaker, right here

in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Those royalties are being used to diversify our economy, grow an economy,

and solidify our future as a Province, Mr. Speaker.

The member opposite wants to raise CETA and I will be

clear on CETA with the member opposite as well, Mr. Speaker, because we are

clear on CETA. The federal

government came to us and asked us to give up our MPRs.

They are our jurisdictional authority.

As long as I am in this seat, we will not give up those MPRs until

the federal government lives up to their obligation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I remind the Premier, he does not have to negotiate.

All he has to do is ask for them, they will just exempt him anyway, I

say to the Premier.

Mr. Speaker, we all know how turbulent the oil industry

is right now and the many unknowns around Bay du Nord discovery.

Even the company says they will not know if there can be a

development before May 2016. The

Premier went ahead and mandated his minister to get a deal before 2015.

This severely weakens the Province's negotiating position.

I ask the Premier: What other reason could you have to

rush a deal other than wanting to announce it before a November election?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we hear the member opposite raising his

voice, and we have to wonder why he is becoming nervous.

I guess he just told us why he is becoming nervous because there is

nothing he would hate to see more than us to achieve a good deal for the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

I assured the people this morning, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER DAVIS:

I also told the media this morning when they asked a similar question, this

is too important for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

This is a valuable asset, Mr. Speaker, that is going to be produced

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER DAVIS:

It is going to produce revenues for our Province for the next fifty or sixty

years, Mr. Speaker. I tell you

the one thing I will not do, I will not sign a deal and we will not do a

deal with Statoil unless it benefits Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Finance challenged me to review

Hansard because he claimed my question regarding the operation of the OCIO

had been answered. I reviewed

the record. In it the minister

talks about an RFP seeking out IT expertise.

He obviously did not understand the question.

The AG's criticism had nothing to do with IT; it had to do with

paying out $1.3 million in unsupported travel claims to consultants.

I ask the minister: Are you sure that the expertise

needed to do basic bookkeeping work is not readily available inside

government today?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN:

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted the member opposite decided to check Hansard

because he would have understood clearly the scope of the answers provided

by both the Premier and myself in response to questions from the Opposition

yesterday. He would have clearly

understood. In fact, if he had

taken the time to explore a little further if he had explored a little

further, in fact, about an hour or so after we had Question Period in the

House, Justice officials had finished the review of the RFP and it was on

the street I say, out for public view.

All he needs to do is look at the

section of that RFP

that talks about the scope of work, and there are eight or nine, or seven or

eight bullets there that lays out the scope of the work to be done.

In fact, it is on the first three or four pages.

I think it is

section 1.6 to be exact.

So I will give the member some clear direction which will clearly

point him to what it is we are looking for as we go to the street looking

for some advice.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, the minister is trying to deflect from the facts in the AG's

report, hiring consultants to review consultants, talking about IT

expertise, and trying to confuse the public with his non-answers.

It does nothing to lessen the reality.

The OCIO spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayers' dollars without

proper oversight, all done on this government's watch.

I ask the minister: Why not do your job, implement the

AG's recommendations in-house and stop wasting taxpayers' money on more

consultants?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN:

Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, and let me repeat again.

We respect the advice of the Auditor General.

In fact, we have started the implementation of many of the

recommendations in this year's report.

What I also said yesterday when the member checked

Hansard he would have seen this as well the Auditor General reviewed a

period of time from 2009 to 2011.

Since that time, we have made significant changes in our internal

processes. What we want to do

now, Mr. Speaker, is to make sure that those changes not only reflect a

satisfactory response to the Auditor General's report, we want to supplement

what he did. We want to make

sure that what we have actually instituted represents current day best

practices.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier was Minister of Transportation and Works

for a full year during the AG review.

He was also Minister of Health, which was one of the departments

involved. He was also Premier for

part of the time during which the AG conducted the review.

Mr. Speaker, almost 70 per cent of the contracts looked at during the

AG review received payments without approval.

I ask the Premier: While you were minister you allowed

payments to be made to consultants without Treasury Board approval, why?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, as the Premier has outlined, we take the Auditor

General's report very seriously, and we complement the work he has done.

In this case, there were two recommendations relevant

to Transportation and Works. One

was around the guidelines covering hiring of external consultants, and he is

asking that we follow what we had outlined as our process.

I have since written back through my officials to the Auditor General

and said, yes, we will. We

understand the process, we are complying there.

The second was that we would continue to use the evaluation process

around consultants to ensure when we hire consultants that we have the full

gamut of their professional skills, and we are continuing to do that.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. OSBORNE:

Mr. Speaker, the rules are in place.

They do not need somebody to tell them they should follow the rules.

They should know that if they were honourable as government.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. OSBORNE:

The Premier, Mr. Speaker, was minister

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. OSBORNE:

I asked the Premier, and I will ask him again: Did he allow payments to be

made to consultants without Treasury Board approval, and why?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

Mr. Speaker, we had a number of contracts with proponents here, particularly

those that are on our consultant's registry, that outline exactly needs that

were outlined in specific areas in this community.

We went to the market. We

identified people who could provide those services.

We paid exactly what we contracted for, no additional monies.

All the money spent went exactly into a service that was provided by

those individuals, a professional service that they were qualified to do.

We continue to do that.

We are now reviewing the process that we use, and we

want to adhere to the recommendations of the Auditor General.

We are ensuring that the process and the policies we follow are in

the best interest of the people of this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. OSBORNE:

Mr. Speaker, the Premier did not answer the question, but I will.

He did make payments without Treasury Board approval.

Mr. Speaker, the AG has found that the request for

expressions of interest and direct appointment process does not provide a

competitive, open, fair, or transparent procurement process.

I will ask the Premier: Have you, during your time as

Transportation Minister, directly appointed consultants?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have been following a process, Mr. Speaker, around

identifying consultants in particular areas for a number of decades here.

The multitudes of different Administrations have done that.

We have a registry in place.

It is this Administration that put in a consultant's registry that

ensured those individuals or those companies were qualified to do particular

pieces of work that we would engage them in, and we do that consistently.

What happens here is my staff will come to me; they will make

recommendations based on their professional knowledge.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. BRAZIL:

We will then assess exactly the scope of work and the company that is doing

it. We will award that contract,

Mr. Speaker, and the monies that are paid out are those relevant to that

contract and the services provided.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. HILLIER:

Mr. Speaker, in his review of select long-term facilities, the AG discovered

some residents were accidentally being underfed.

One resident was fed half portions for seven full weeks before the AG

discovered this resident should have been fed full portions all along.

Combined with the failure to weigh residents regularly, this neglect

was going unchecked.

I ask the minister: Were the families of these

residents notified of this neglect?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, I have reviewed the Auditor General's report fully.

We take all of the recommendations very seriously, and will follow up

and act upon all of them.

What I do question, though, is the suggestion that

residents in any of our long-term care facilities were neglected.

We have highly trained professionals who work in nationally

accredited facilities who deliver quality care to thousands of residents of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

When it comes to food quality, the menus in our

facilities are approved by a registered dietician.

They adhere to Canada's Food Guide.

There are high standards that are maintained.

Are there quality issues and consistency issues from time to time?

Absolutely, and we want to do everything we can to address those

issues, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. HILLIER:

Yesterday's speaking points, Mr. Speaker.

The AG employed a dietician in his review of long-term

care facilities. That dietician

identified choking hazards not being properly or consistently assessed or

supervised. The minister said in

this House yesterday that long-term care staff does provide supervision.

Similarly, Eastern Health said it believes it provides a supervised

dining experience.

I ask the minister: We are talking about a lack of

oversight endangering the lives of residents of long-term facilities, are

you saying you disagree with the AG's finding on inadequate assessment and

supervision of choking hazards?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, it does not surprise me at all that members opposite would

resort to attacking public servants who deliver high-quality care in our

homes

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KENT:

because that is who they are and that is what they do consistently, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KENT:

I find it offensive.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KENT:

That said, while the Auditor General raises some very real concerns that we

need to look at and fully address

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services,

to continue.

MR. KENT:

Thank you for your protection, Mr. Speaker.

The standards need to be followed.

Any issues at all are too many and they need to be fully investigated

and followed up on. In the

period that the Auditor General examined in our personal care homes

because I think the member is confused about which

section of the Auditor

General's report he is referring to.

In that period that was evaluated, there were millions of meals

delivered during that time period.

The incident rate was quite low, but any incidents at all are quite

concerning, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. HILLIER:

I remind the minister, Mr. Speaker, we are not talking here about personnel;

we are talking about the lack of government oversight.

Mr. Speaker, again, we speak in terms of the number of

meals involved. There were six

six occurrences in the fifty-two assessed meal trays where food was not

provided at the proper texture.

This could cause choking and risk other injury.

In addition, licensed practical nurses and personal care attendants

who are responsible for feeding and supervising the residents were often not

trained to respond to choking incidents.

In the St. John's facility, 79 per cent of the staff were not trained

according to the Auditor General

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I ask the member to quickly ask his question.

MR. HILLIER:

I ask the minister: What process will be put in place for long-term care

residents to ensure that eating is not a safety risk?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, now the Opposition is attacking licensed practical nurses and

challenging their training and qualifications.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KENT:

It is rather unfortunate that they would resort to that.

I have no problem acknowledging thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. KENT:

They are a rowdy bunch today, Mr. Speaker.

We have no problem acknowledging how important safe

quality food is to all residents in our long-term care homes.

If there are concerns raised by residents, by families, by the

Auditor General, those concerns must be addressed.

We do have processes in place to ensure that employees receive food

safety training and they receive sanitation training when they enter the

system. We also need to

implement refresher training as well, and we intend to do that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, since this government introduced its new math curriculum, we

have been told time and time again that professional development to help

teachers with the new curriculum is simply insufficient.

Now the Auditor General has identified serious deficiencies with

teacher professional development.

I ask the acting minister: You have ignored the pleas

from math teachers, you have dismissed the advice of math education experts,

are you finally willing to listen to the Auditor General?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Acting Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

Mr. Speaker, we have not ignored the need for professional development and

training for teachers, particularly with our new math curriculum.

In fact, there has been very extensive professional learning, but I

will say professional learning is a very important part of a professional

growth, a very important part of improving quality teaching, a very

important part of student achievement.

As we continue with the consolidation of the four

boards on an array of many, many issues within the education system, I can

tell you that the recommendations made by the Auditor General will be very

valuable moving forward as we implement more policies and more restrictions

around professional learning.

Rest assured, we will continue to do the professional learning in the best

interests of students of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday, the Minister of Health and Community

Services said that professionally trained staff in long-term care facilities

use their clinical judgement to decide what levels of supervision is

required for each person at meal time.

I ask the Premier: When will his government admit that

these staff are under stress because there are not enough of them to

supervise and assist people who need help?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, I would point out to the hon. member that the number of care

hours provided to residents in our long-term care facilities is among the

highest in the country. We have

well-trained, professional staff, we have LPNs, we have RNs, we have

personal care attendants, all of whom work together to provide exceptional

care to residents.

Any time there are issues, they need to be addressed.

Is the system perfect?

No, I have acknowledged many times the system is far from perfect.

We are constantly trying to improve, but all of our long-term care

homes are nationally accredited, they are held to a very high standard, our

staff is well-trained, they are hardworking and they are professional.

We will always try to improve, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL:

Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister: Is the system perfect?

No. Do we have enough

trained people to do the work?

No.

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General found that regular

assessments of long-term care residents' dietary needs are not always being

met.

Will the minister ensure that each facility has at

least one qualified dietitian on site to oversee procedures and make sure

that things are being done to help the patients?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, again, I remind the hon. member that our staffing levels, the

standards we hold our staff and our system accountable for, are among the

highest in the country. That

said, to her specific question on meal changes being approved by a

dietitian, we have nutrition services provided by a registered dietitian

based on a nutritional assessment and resident preferences as well.

The operational standards do not state that dietary

changes can only be approved by a dietitian.

There are other people like physicians and nurses who are also

involved in assessing residents' changing needs.

We take the views of all those professionals very seriously and we

want to ensure that our professionals are working together to provide the

highest quality of care possible.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

People desperate for housing cannot move into vacant

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing units because growing numbers of the units

need maintenance and repair.

I ask the minister: How many units are vacant and when

will the work be done?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL:

Mr. Speaker, we have over 5,000 units in inventory with Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing. We have a

regime that makes sure that maintenance is happening on a regular basis.

The numbers which the member opposite is referring to I certainly do

not have here in front of me, but we can make that available in the near

future.

Mr. Speaker, the great work that Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing is doing has been called out all over the country.

They have received national awards and international awards.

We are an example for the rest to follow.

I am proud of the work that we are doing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, seniors with leaking roofs and windows are waiting to proceed

with critical home repairs through the Provincial Home Repair Program, but

cannot without assessments by Newfoundland and Labrador Housing inspectors.

They are being told they have to wait at least eight weeks.

Now is the time to do these repairs.

This program is useless if people

cannot use it.

I ask the minister: What is the holdup and how long

will people have to wait?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and

Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL:

Mr. Speaker, when you have 5,000 units in your inventory, there is always

going to be rotation of units that are going to be out of service.

When people have left for whatever reasons, we have to go in and do

the work that needs to be done.

If there is a unit that is vacant and is ready to go, we will certainly find

whoever is next in the queue and move them into that unit.

Saying that, Mr. Speaker, we also have a policy where

we reserve units across the Island for emergencies.

If somebody's house burns down, we need to have a unit to move him

into, if possible. If somebody

is a victim of family violence or domestic violence, we need to have a unit

to move people into.

Mr. Speaker, there are policies in place for units to

be left out there that are vacant, but the ones that are vacant that you see

are the ones that we are renovating.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a petition.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents

humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS the Applied Behaviour Analysis ABA program

for children with autism is funded by the Department of Health and Community

Services; and

WHEREAS the program was introduced in 1999 and is in

serious need of revision; and

WHEREAS with the advances made in early diagnosis of

autism, the number of high-functioning children being diagnosed with autism

has drastically increased; and

WHEREAS the current ABA program does not take into

account that children on the autism spectrum are involved in many

educational, recreational, and social activities outside of the home; and

WHEREAS the current ABA program requires that the

therapist be accompanied at all times by another adult, which is not only

inconvenient, but can be quite costly when a parent is unable to be that

second adult due to work or other obligations; and

WHEREAS the current ABA program ends at Grade 3, but

autism is a life-long social disorder;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly

pray and call upon the House to urge the government to implement a review of

the ABA program with considerations given to alternate programming options,

and to extend programming beyond Grade 3.

As in duty bound, you petitioners will ever pray.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I ask members for their co-operation.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I have entered this petition on a number of occasions, and

obviously it is a very serious one that affects constituents in every

district that is represented by members in this House.

The good news is that there has been a lot of attention

paid to this. The bad news is

that government, like many of the things that they do and it has been

outlined by the Auditor General they measure success in the amount of

dollars that they have invested, and not in the outcomes.

This is a prime example right here.

Any time you ask a question on autism you get back that yes, we have

invested X number of dollars but the problems are still there.

The problem that we seem to have now is there does not

seem to be a recognition that this goes beyond children, and we have adults

again, this program goes to Grade 3.

I would like to see that acknowledgement made by this government,

first, that we do have an issue.

ABA is a great program, but if you talk to parents out there, if you talk to

educators, we need a review of the program.

I think everybody here could agree to that.

Beyond that and going right to the top there we need a strategy and

that is something that this government has not put in place, is a strategy

to deal with this. It is a

government that scrambles and reacts, throws money at the problem, and then

wonders why the problem is not fixed, because they do not have a plan.

So let's get a plan in place.

We need a plan, and the first thing we can do is start talking to the

parents because they are out there desperately crying out for some

attention, and we need to give it to them.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We, the citizens serviced by Curtis Hospital, located

in St. Anthony, Newfoundland and Labrador, petition the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador and Labrador-Grenfell Health to retain the

midwives and allow them to continue to perform other duties at Curtis

Hospital.

Our midwives offer services that cannot be duplicated

and which cannot be replaced.

The level of care they offer and the knowledge and training they have in the

area of obstetrics is immense.

It will be a great disservice to the people of this area if our midwives are

no longer available to care for the people here.

Privatizing midwifery or waiting five to seven years for regulation,

as stated by government, is unacceptable.

We have an operational model of midwifery here in St. Anthony that

has been delivering outstanding care for over ninety years.

We urge the House of Assembly to implore the Government

of Newfoundland and Labrador and Labrador-Grenfell Health to preserve our

midwifery services at Curtis Hospital.

Mr. Speaker, this petition is signed by residents

primarily in the Straits, Flower's Cove, Bear Cove, Shoal Cove, Sandy Cove,

as well as Port Saunders. I had

the opportunity to meet with Labrador-Grenfell Health executive and the

leadership team and raise this particular issue.

They have clearly stated that they want to see midwifery in a

publicly funded system.

Yet, the former Minister of Health has pointed out in a

news conference well over a year ago that this government is focused on

privatizing midwifery, privatizing the health care services, and taking it

from a publicly funded setting that was working extremely well.

We have a number of residents I have constituents who are actually

working in other provinces as midwives who would be able to come back and

work in St. Anthony at Curtis Hospital.

You talk about population growth.

You talk about looking at trying to retain youth and skilled

professionals. When we talk

about the important role of a health care team, one would think that the

government should be focused on looking at these options as other

jurisdictions have.

We see where British Columbia and Ontario have embraced

midwifery. It is providing some

outstanding results. If we look

at the historical context, it is something that has been working and working

well for over ninety years.

Midwives have helped a number of people out.

That Facebook group that we have when it comes to parents, families,

and members there are thousands of people who are asking for this request.

They see the government is completely focused on privatization of

those health care services.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the

undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS in 2011 the provincial government announced it

would lift the 8 per cent provincial portion of the HST off residential heat

and light by introducing the Residential Energy Rebate; and

WHEREAS heat is a necessity of life and a health

concern, particularly for seniors; and

WHEREAS the provincial government has projected oil

prices to increase in the next five years;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly

pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge government to stop taxing

home energy and to reverse its decision to abolish the Residential Energy

Rebate.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, on this occasion, I would like to thank

the people of Grand Falls- Windsor, Springdale, and Bishop's Falls for

signing this petition and sending it in and expressing their concerns as

regards to government's role in increasing the price of heating products

that people are using in the house.

Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, tomorrow, we will be going

through a private member's motion talking about the government's Poverty

Reduction Strategy. We know that

several years ago government talked about this in their Poverty Reduction

Strategy. They talked about

putting disposable income back in particularly back in seniors' pockets

and helping out those people who were in trouble when it came to paying

their heating and light costs.

This was one of the initiatives that government thought would be a great

initiative to put money back in their pockets so that people could actually

feed themselves and at the same time make heat a little bit more affordable.

This is a primary health concern, particularly among

seniors, that government needs to pay attention to.

It is also a primary concern when it comes to keeping money in the

economy and allowing people at the same time to pay for food rather than

having to pay for it all on fuel.

Mr. Speaker, the 8 per cent tax is not an easy burden for somebody on

a low income to maintain and to be paying out all the time.

Mr. Speaker, I will leave this for the government's

consideration again, to reconsider their position when it comes to the

Residential Energy Rebate.

Hopefully they will reinstate it.

If they are open thinkers, like they are thinking about when it comes

to the HST, having gone one way and thinking about putting on the HST and

taking it off again, hopefully this is one area where government can respond

and say that they will not they will pick up the charge again and not

decide to put provincial taxes back on heating and back on light again.

Thank you very much.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Before I recognize the next member to present a

petition, I would ask members if they would take their private conversations

outside. The Chamber is becoming

really disruptive. I ask all

members for their co-operation.

The hon. the Member for Carbonear Harbour Grace.

MR. SLADE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the

undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS there is no traffic signage or traffic control

devices present on the eastbound traffic from Whitbourne, or for oncoming

westbound traffic from the east end of Tilton, or exiting from either Route

73 off Veteran's Memorial Highway from Harbour Grace; and

WHEREAS due to increased residential dwellings,

residents with small children, and a resident living with hearing

impairment, inadequate signage and no visible sidewalks increase the risk of

residents being hit by oncoming traffic; and

WHEREAS the speed limit is fifty kilometres an hour;

and

WHEREAS dangerous driving motorists drive excessive

speeds beyond the speed limit; and

WHEREAS there is no traffic signage to advise motorists

they are entering a residential zone, non-confirmative drivers do not have

enough time to slow down;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly

pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to erect adequate traffic signage and traffic

control devices and revisit and reduce the speed limit from the current

fifty.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the issue is exactly the

reduction of the speed limit, I think adequate signage would probably

prevail a little bit better there.

The residents in this area, many of them have small children.

There is one lady there with a hearing impairment.

They are very concerned.

If you came across the New Harbour Barrens, the speed limit there is eighty

kilometres an hour and what is taking place, just outside as they are

entering Tilton, they are not slowing down because there is simply no

signage there or not enough signage there to allow people to drive the

proper speed there.

Mr. Speaker, it is a simple matter of the Minister of

Transportation taking the time to ask his employees to just check that area.

There are very serious concerns.

The minister also got a message from this lady there who is

presenting me with those petitions.

If there is anything that can be done there, the residents of this

area would certainly like to have it done.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Trinity Bay de Verde.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the

undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS the residents of Heart's Delight-Islington feel

that the condition of Main Road, Route 80, throughout the Town of Heart's

Delight-Islington is a major safety concern; and

WHEREAS shoulders of the road are washed out and unsafe

for pedestrians; and

WHEREAS government continues to delay the ditching and

maintenance required on Route 80 through the town;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly

pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to make the necessary repairs to Route 80 through

the community of Heart's Delight-Islington;

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to enter

this petition on behalf of the residents of Heart's Delight Islington this

afternoon, and I guess the residents of Trinity Bay de Verde as a whole.

Because one thing I hear day in and day out is the lack of summer

maintenance that has left our communities all along Route 80, 74 and 70 with

very, very poor ditching and shoulder washouts, Mr. Speaker.

I can speak from personal experience when it comes to

Heart's Delight Islington because it is where I do a fair bit of walking.

What you will find, Mr. Speaker, over time through heavy rainfalls,

the shoulders of the road have actually created ditches and small gorges

going off the road. A pedestrian

totally has to walk on the pavement itself to navigate around the towns on

Route 80.

Mr. Speaker, I understand the department has issues

with summer maintenance, but one thing I look at with summer maintenance

when it comes to highways and roads, it is a pay now or pay later.

Because, Mr. Speaker, if we do not ensure we have the proper culverts

and the proper ditching in our communities, when we have weather systems,

and we have seen an increasing severity of weather systems over the years,

we are going to have more and more problems.

A lot of these issues, I think, in the District of

Trinity Bay de Verde and Heart's Delight Islington as a community, stem

from the closure of the Heart's Content highways depot, which happened back

in the mid-2000s under the current Administration.

It was another one of those issues, Mr. Speaker, where it was cut off

your nose to spite your face.

Heart's Content is very strategically located in the district.

With the closure of that depot, crews now have a much more difficult

time getting out around the district to make the necessary repairs.

Mr. Speaker, I do call upon the department to ensure

that the proper summer maintenance and the shoulders of the road throughout

the community of Heart's Delight Islington, and throughout the entire

Trinity Bay de Verde is something that the department take a serious look

at in this coming summer maintenance season.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

At this time I would like to call from the Order Paper,

Motion 1, and ask leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To Amend The Teachers'

Pensions Act. (Bill 15)

So moved by me, and seconded by the Minister of Health

and Community Services, that the said bill be now read the first time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

It is moved and seconded that the hon. Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board shall have leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Teachers' Pensions Act, Bill 15, and that the

said bill be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion

that Bill 15 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 Teachers'

Pensions Act, carried. (Bill

15)

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Teachers' Pensions Act.

(Bill 15)

MR. SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a first time.

When shall the bill be read a second time?

MR. KING:

Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 15 read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

At this time I would like to call Order 2,

An Act To

Amend The Health And Community Services Act, Bill 11.

So moved by me, seconded by the Minister of Health and

Community Services, that the said bill be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that the said bill, Bill 11, be now read a third

time.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

The motion is carried.

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Health And Community Services Act.

(Bill 11)

MR. SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a third time and it is ordered that the bill do

pass and that its title be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill,

An Act To Amend The Health And

Community Services Act, read a third time, ordered passed and its title be

as on the Order Paper. (Bill 11)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

At this time I would like to call from the Order Paper,

Bill 13,

An Act To Amend The House Of Assembly Act.

MR. SPEAKER:

Continuing debate in second reading on Bill 13.

I recognize the hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. J. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is ironic that 800 years ago yesterday we signed the

Magna Carta; 800 years ago yesterday we signed the Magna Carta to I see

that the peons on the other side who do not have the nerve enough to speak

to this bill are speaking up already.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. J. BENNETT:

In any event, Mr. Speaker, the Magna Carta was signed 800 years ago

yesterday. By this piece of

legislation, the Premier who swore to uphold the law less than a year ago is

going to use his force, his majority to undo the law to legitimize him,

something that the barons did to delegitimize King John 800 years ago.

The Premier has not even spoken to the bill.

Mr. Speaker, when does it ever happen that this government brings in

legislation and all of the ministers run and hide because they are ashamed

to speak to it? They are so

ashamed that they will not speak to the bill that they say is good for

everybody else. It is

unbelievable. It is absolutely

disgraceful. It is absolutely

pathetic that these members will not speak to this bill that they say is

good for all of us.

If you look at the speaking chart and go across the

front row, with the exception of the Minister of Child, Youth and Family

Services, who is about to lose his seat, and who got up and ranted in his

irrelevant and puerile way, typically, yesterday for a few minutes and used

up less than his time. It is

only the Minister of Justice in the front row who even spoke to this bill.

The Minister of Justice had to speak to it because he brought it in.

He had to speak to it.

Someone had to speak to it.

Then, virtually all the other ministers ran and hid.

The Premier has not spoken to it.

The Deputy Premier has not spoken to it.

The Minister of Natural Resources has not spoken to it.

The Attorney General has not spoken to it.

The Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador has not spoken to

it. The Minister of Finance had

not spoken to it.

We will give the Minister of AES a pass for a reason we

will not discuss here, because I will be shouted down if I do.

The Minister of Fisheries has not spoken to it.

So across the front row we have two ministers who have spoken to it.

One who was bound to speak to it, and one who did not make any sense

or advance the argument when he did speak to it, and who is losing his seat

anyway unbelievable.

Mr. Speaker, how did we find ourselves in this

predicament 800 years into democracy, when someone is sworn to uphold

democracy, needs to introduce a law to legitimize himself to hang onto power

for longer than the law currently allows him?

He is going to use his power to change the law to make him a

legitimate Premier of this Province after September.

It is absolutely outrageous.

You talk about democracy watch good grief.

You should watch democracy die in this Province under this person.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, where did all of this start?

Well, this started really in January 2014 when the only elected

female Premier of the Province threw in the towel, ran out of energy after

twenty-seven months. She did not

even serve a full term; elected, and did not even serve four years.

She did not serve three years.

She served twenty-seven months and then the lights went out.

The party that campaigned on new energy, lost all the energy they

had.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I say to the hon. member, you have to make your

comments relevant to the bill.

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. J. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I understand this bill is necessitated in part because

this Premier needs a mandate. I

was talking about the last Premier who quit

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I am not asking the Member for St. Barbe to explain why

his comments are relevant. I am

telling him his comments are irrelevant and he needs to speak to the bill.

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. J. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this particular bill has been necessitated

because of a leadership convention, and I think that we can all agree that a

leadership convention was relevant.

The leadership convention that resulted in this Premier becoming the

Premier of the Province has a provision that says if you become Premier by

virtue of a leadership convention, you must go to the people within twelve

months of being sworn in. So

hopefully, that will be relevant.

Mr. Speaker, contained in the bill

section 3.1 of the

existing act is going to be set aside for this Premier in this bill by this

act.

Section 3.1 is going to be

set side; 3.1 is the Roger Grimes bill.

The Roger Grimes law which says you cannot hang on forever; you

cannot hang on for more than twelve months.

Well, you can if you change the law.

This Premier is about to demonstrate that you can hang on longer

because Bill 13, which is the one that we are debating, says for this time

and this time only the Roger Grimes law is set aside, this Premier can cling

to power until November 30. That

is another clause, in another section, and I will try to remain relevant.

I will go clause by clause and try to explain to the

people who are watching why this Province which in 2007 said every four

years you will have an election starting on Tuesday, October 2007, October

2011, October 2015 and so on; however, this bill says notwithstanding

anything in this bill it means no matter what else we said, this is what

matters. All that matters is

that

section 3.1, the Roger Grimes section, does not apply to this Premier.

That will apply to the next Premier because it is not taken out.

It is left in the legislation.

It is left in the House of Assembly Act, Mr. Speaker.

The House of Assembly Act remains unchanged in that respect right

after this Premier has his shot at clinging to power, which will be more

than twelve months after he became Premier.

Now, there are other sections in this bill that the

people of the Province may find interesting.

What they may find interesting is that there is a

section which says

and it is useful section. This

is the type of a bill where when you study it and you study it in detail you

say well, how much harm does it do how much good does it do?

Does the good that it does outweigh the harm that it does?

I would say, barely. The

good that it does outweighs the harm that it does by barely enough.

You would be worse off if you did not pass it then if you did pass

it, but not by very much.

So, Mr. Speaker, the

section that I am referring to, in

order to continue to be relevant in this case, is

section

Section 54 says that a by-election must be called within sixty days

after there is a vacancy. This

bill says that if you are within six months of an election, then you do not

have a by-election.

This is not a bad bill.

This

section is not bad.

In fact, this

section is in play in virtually every jurisdiction in Canada.

In fact, we are finally catching up with every jurisdiction in Canada

in respect of the by-election section.

However, why is it done?

Why is it being done on this occasion?

Mr. Speaker, when I read the comments on VOCM online

when people were talking about the bill, they kept referring to rats leaving

the sinking ship. This is the

rats leaving the sinking ship section.

When I look down through and I see the number of hon. members, I said

well these are not rats; they have put in their time.

They have put in their time and now they want to move on.

When I look down I see at least eight members who

clearly will not run again, who clearly will resign, who clearly Mr.

Speaker, with all due respect, including yourself, you have indicated an

indication to retire.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

It is totally unparliamentary for any member in debate

to make any reference to the Speaker in the Chair.

I ask the member to be careful.

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. J. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Member for Gander has indicated that

and Gander is a changed seat. It

is a larger seat now. He has

indicated he wants to run for another party, and that is fine.

Why wouldn't he? You

cannot really say that this is a rat leaving a sinking ship.

That is really unfair; he wants to run for another party.

He served his party well.

He is a long-term member of the party.

He is a long-term member of the government.

Quite frankly, in dealing with him, I thought that he was a pretty

good minister. No question, you

get an answer out of him, not always yes, but you are going to get an answer

pretty quick. It will be a fair

answer regardless of party stripe.

So you cannot really say it in his case.

Then, Mr. Speaker, when we look at the Attorney

General, I mean the Attorney General was literally dragged back in order to

be Attorney General because of the lack of depth on the bench on the other

side. So they did not really

have many people to go with. We

saw that they had to go outside of the government to find a Minister of

Justice and found a Minister of Justice, but the Attorney General needs to

be a lawyer.

He is a hon. gentleman.

I dealt with him personally.

He has done his time. If

he decides to resign between now and, I suppose ninety days less than

November so if he decides any time between now and the summer to resign,

we have to have a by-election, unless we have this bill.

Mr. Speaker, numerous other members have indicated that

they have really had enough.

They have really had enough.

They do not want to be here anymore.

The Premier himself has indicated yes, there may well be other

resignations long before the election comes.

This is a

section of this bill that is completely self-serving, is

introduced into this legislation by this Premier, who by the current law

that we have and the current law is the House of Assembly Act is that he

will no longer be able to sit.

He will no longer be able to sit as Premier after September 26 if he has not

called an election.

The only cure is that he can use the force of his

majority to introduce legislation and ram it through this House, and then it

makes him legal, and I suppose in a strictly legal term, it makes him

legitimate, I guess. I do not

think in the eyes of the public, if you have to use your force, if you have

to use your will, if you have to use your numbers and your mob to rewrite

the law, and you rewrite the law so that it favours you, you can hang on

longer than what the law was when you put up your hand and you took the

oath, you took the oath to be Premium and to follow the law.

Well, it is not kind of convenient any more to follow the law.

So, Mr. Speaker, it is not convenient to follow the law

because the polls are not very good.

It has nothing to do with the price of oil.

The polls are not very good, so this Premier needs to hang on for as

long as he can. Things have

changed, he is not doing so well, and now he needs to extend his time.

Mr. Speaker, there was an opening.

There was an out. He did

not need to do this, even with this committee.

The committee was struck, and if you look at the

committee that proposed this change in the boundaries, what was the

composition of the committee?

Well, we would assume that a committee is going to have the legitimacy, it

is going to be able to impose the size of our districts in this Province,

would be something that people would say well, clearly, this is an

impartial, neutral committee, this would have some gender equity well, I

guess would have some women on the committee, would we not?

Well, we do not.

Mr. Speaker, this is a committee of political hacks,

four political hacks, and if there was an opportunity, if there is any

chance whatsoever to have some gender balance by having at least one female

member, then that could have been the Chair.

We have enough judges in this Province who are smart enough to be

able to chair a committee such as this, and then we could have a female

judge who could have chaired and all parties are guilty in this respect.

My own party, we appointed a man.

The Third Party, they appointed a man.

The government appointed two men.

Is it fair to the voters who do not follow any particular party that

the three parties in the House of Assembly should basically share up the

power? What about all of the

people who do not necessarily follow any party?

Why shouldn't this committee have been representative of gender?

Why shouldn't it have been representative of geography?

When five guys sit down in St. John's and decide how to

divide up the Province for electoral purposes, it almost puts you in the

mind of the Amulree Commission.

It takes you right back to the Amulree Commission and say, well, they are

not fit to govern themselves.

That is what they said about our people.

That is what they said about us.

For fifteen years we were under a committee.

This committee then decided, well, we are going to rush this thing

through. They had no choice but

to rush it through. They were

given a timeline, and they complied with the timeline, but it was a rush

job. I think everybody would

admit it was a pretty shoddy job.

It was a very poor job, and you can see the outcry.

When first you act and then you consult, you do not

tend to get a good result. In

any event, the committee put together a package, sent it out, and said what

do you think of this? Not many

people thought very much of it.

They did not consult first, and they ought to have.

The one ray of hope, the one good thing that could have

come from this committee responding so quickly is there was time for a

September election. One person

in this Province is bound by the law, which they call the Grimes law, and

that is the Premier. This

committee did a slapped up job, threw it all together, full of political

action, and a judge who has admitted to donating to the PC Party.

A financial donor to the PC Party and four political hacks decided,

well, we are going to divide up the boundaries now and this is going to be

fair to everybody and no women on the committee, nobody in Labrador,

nobody in Western Newfoundland, and nobody in Central.

Anyway, the one thing they did bring in by bringing

this in, it is that this Premier could have been legitimized by a September

election based on this committee's report.

But, did he do it?

Absolutely, he did not do it. We

could have all been here today pushing this through without the Roger Grimes

clause being put in abeyance for this election because the Premier figures

it is good business for anybody who becomes a Premier by virtue of a

leadership convention to be forced to have an election within a year.

Oh, but not him. He is

the only one; he never wants this to apply.

If somebody else takes over the government and that

person takes off in six years, then that person is bound by the Grimes law.

So if the Premier figures he should not be bound by the Grimes, why

wouldn't he strip it out entirely?

Why is he going to leave it there like a rake left out in the fall of

the year to come up and smack the next Premier in the face if he wins an

election by virtue of a leadership?

It is absolutely hypocrisy.

It is complete hypocrisy to set aside for one time only that this law

should not apply to me, but for everybody else it is going to apply to them.

Mr. Speaker, I do not wonder why the Premier has not

spoken to the bill. He must be

embarrassed to speak to it. How

can he justify to people that he is trying to ram this through?

Not trying to ram it through, he is going to ram it through.

When you look at the very limited number of members on the government

side who have even had nerve enough to get up and speak to the bill, Mr.

Speaker, it is really unfortunate.

I have no issue with the forty members.

Forty members should be able to govern this Province, if it is done

properly. As a matter of fact,

the idea came from the Leader of the Opposition.

The Leader of the Opposition had the idea of forty members.

At least he floated the idea in 2013.

This Premier came back and said, well, we need

something new, or we need something strong or something.

I am going to go with thirty-eight.

Well, the Opposition Party and the government worked together with an

amendment which made this palatable, if barely palatable, but that did not

include six-month by-elections.

That did not include relieving this Premier of the responsibility that he

took on himself when he took the job.

When he took the job, the reason that the date is late

September is because he was not sworn in as early as he ought to have been

sworn in. Mr. Speaker, the one

area that I think most people of the Province find really demeaning is the

one that says we cannot conflict with a federal election.

All over North America, states, provinces, countries

run elections where they elect whole slates of individuals.

They elect school boards, municipal councils, they elect judges, and

they elect commissioners all in one election.

What this government is saying to the people of this Province is,

well, you are not really smart enough to figure out the difference between

Justin Trudeau, Tom Mulcair, and Stephen Harper compared to Paul Davis and

Earle McCurdy and I am sorry, I withdraw the names, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I remind the member that referring to members in the

House of Assembly by name is unparliamentary, and I ask the member to

withdraw.

MR. J. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, withdrawn.

Mr. Speaker, what this government is saying with this

bill which says we cannot overlap with the federal election because the

people of the Province are not discerning enough to know the difference

between a federal election and a provincial election.

What does that say? What

does that mean that this government is saying about our people?

They are saying: You are not smart enough to be able to figure out

whether you voted for a federal candidate or a provincial candidate.

Mr. Speaker, this is completely unnecessary.

It is absolutely unnecessary, but it provides a mechanism to avoid

the four-year fixed election date.

It means the

section of the bill that overrides 3.1, the Roger Grimes

bill, does not quite do enough.

It only carries us into October.

So that only buys the Premier another few weeks.

He needs the one which says the people of the Province are not smart

enough to figure out whether it is a federal election or a provincial

election. Then he puts it right

to the end of November.

I do not think the people will be fooled.

I do not think the outcome will be any different, but it is a real

travesty to democracy what this bill is doing.

In spite of that, I find myself compelled to support it.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can assure the Member for St. Barbe and others that

there are many, many members on this side of the House who are quite

passionate about this bill, quite passionate about the changes we are

proposing, and quite excited to stand and share their views on this

important piece of legislation that affects this very House that we find

ourselves in today.

I take some exception to the comments made by the

Member for St. Barbe, as I am sure many others do as well.

I will get to that, but I would like to share my own thoughts, just

for a few minutes, on this particular bill and why I am going to stand and

support it.

The Premier, when he commenced his term, made it very

clear that House of Assembly reform was a priority for him and for his

government. It is something that

lots have talked about for a long, long time.

As long as I have been in this House, there has been discussion

happening, informally, about whether we should reform the institution.

There seems to be lots of agreement around the fact that this is an

institution in need of reform.

Everybody seemed enthusiastic until the time came where

we were actually going to do something about it.

So rather than simply continue to talk about it, our Premier and this

government has done something about it.

That is why we are here debating this bill again this afternoon.

He has not stopped with simply reforming the House of

Assembly. He has made it clear

that we will also look at the structure of MHA pensions.

We will also look at how this House functions in terms of committees

and the opportunities that may exist to get parliamentarians more involved

in the democratic process. These

are commitments that our Premier has made and we will follow through on.

This bill is evidence of that, Mr. Speaker.

It is interesting that members opposite, at least one

of the parties opposite, seemed to be in favour of reforming the House until

it came time to actually follow through and do something about it.

We have been very consistent in our view.

We have been very consistent all along in saying that House reform is

needed and it should happen. We

do not need to wait another five years to do it.

Forty seats is an acceptable number, and this can also be achieved in

a reasonable time frame. The

amount of time we have until November 30 is quite reasonable in allowing the

Chief Electoral Officer to do his work with his team, but also allowing the

federal election to take place without having an overlapping writ period,

which I think makes a lot of good sense.

The Member for St. Barbe disagrees.

Some of the other members opposite seem to agree for one reason or

another, depending on the day, but we have been very consistent in our view.

The federal election is taking place in mid-October.

That is well known and it just makes good, practical, common sense to

avoid that election, to avoid that writ period.

As well, the Chief Electoral Officer has made it clear in writing

that he needs time to be ready if the boundaries are, in fact, changing.

For all those reasons, a slight shift in election date makes really

good sense.

Other members have taken an opportunity to talk a

little bit about their own district and I will not go on for longer than is

necessary, but I would like to talk about my great and historic district of

Mount Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

We heard about another Mount Pearl district last night, I believe, in the

wee hours, so now I would like to share a few thoughts on

AN HON. MEMBER:

That is because of the great work you did now it is a great town to live in.

Isn't it?

MR. KENT:

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

I am getting some encouragement on one side, some heckles on the other and

that is just

MR. LANE:

A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

A point of order, the hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

I say to the Minister of Finance it is not a town; it is a city.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. KENT:

It reminds me of a great Meatloaf song: You Took the Words Right Out of My

Mouth. We still agree on a few

things, not as many as we used to.

Back to my district, formerly known as Waterford

Valley, I was pleased to see the resurrection of the Waterford Valley name

in the Commission's initial report, but my district will continue to be

Mount Pearl North. I have mixed

feelings about the boundary changes, to be honest, like most members I

suspect in this House. I am not

as impacted to the extent that some members are impacted, and I acknowledge

that. I am disappointed to be

losing the

section of the Town of Paradise that I am proud to represent.

I currently represent the bulk of Elizabeth Park.

Interestingly enough, I spent the first couple of years

of my life living in Elizabeth Park, in that

section of the district that I

now represent, and had built a really strong connection to that community

over the last eight years. It

has been a real honour to represent the Town of Paradise, and particularly

the constituents of Elizabeth Park.

We have built a couple of new schools in Paradise during that time.

The town hall has been renovated, we built a new community centre,

new arena. Great progress has

been made because people have been working together.

So I am disappointed to be relinquishing that portion of my district.

Interestingly enough, as the Member for Mount Pearl

South highlighted in his remarks last night, I am also losing a little

section of Mount Pearl, that happens to be the neighbourhood I grew up in.

There is an area around Sunrise Avenue, First Street, Second Street,

Roosevelt Avenue, St. David's Avenue, Edinburgh Drive, that will now St.

Andrew's Avenue, did I say that already?

AN HON. MEMBER:

No.

MR. KENT:

Thank you.

Those streets will now find themselves in Mount Pearl

South, where there were once upon a time.

Not a big change, of course, and I got to say, regardless of

political stripe, my experience has been both municipally and provincially

that politicians in Mount Pearl, regardless of political stripe, have worked

well together and have been able to, at times, put politics aside in the

best interests of the community.

I hope regardless of what happens this fall and beyond that, that kind of

spirit of co-operation in the best interests of the citizens we represent

will continue.

I am disappointed to be losing that

section of a

neighbourhood that I have spent most of my life in, but I am gaining another

little

section of Mount Pearl that I represented municipally for ten years.

A little

section of Mount Pearl South will be coming over to Mount

Pearl North.

I recognize that the Commission must have had a really

difficult job in trying to balance all the numbers and to make an adjustment

here which will result in impacts over here.

It could not have been an easy task.

I take exception to the comments made by the Member for St. Barbe

that they did a shoddy job. I find

that offensive.

They were all very credible people who clearly worked

really hard, worked efficiently, and produced a very comprehensive report.

Not only did they do a good job producing an initial report in a

timely fashion, they then listened to what people had to say, and they

responded and came back with revisions that affected a lot of districts,

including my own. While I may

agree or disagree with certain pieces of what was decided in terms of how it

impacts my district and others around me, I definitely have great respect

for the work that was done. I am

excited about the opportunity to represent some new constituents as well, if

I am successful in the election this fall.

So I am gaining the neighbourhood that is closest to

O'Donel High School in Mount Pearl my old high school Lindbergh Crescent

and Scammell Crescent and the streets that are off both of those streets.

So I am looking forward to representing those neighbourhoods here in

the House of Assembly, if I am given the opportunity to do so.

I will also be becoming a St. John's MHA, if I am

successful this fall. There is a

neighbourhood that should be part of Mount Pearl and I fought hard to make

it part of Mount Pearl called Brookfield Plains.

I know the Member for I am forgetting his district name at the very

moment. The Member for Trinity

Bay de Verde likes to shout out about greenhouses now and then in his hon.

House.

Brookfield Plains, I can assure, you that is where

there were once greenhouses located.

In fact, having grown up in that old neighbourhood I referenced a few

minutes ago, I grew up in the orange glow, Mr. Speaker.

I do not know what impact that has had on me.

It certainly has not made me a New Democrat, thank God.

I did grow up for a number of years in that glow.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (Littlejohn):

Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Brookfield Plains, in all seriousness, that land has

always had a connection to the City of Mount Pearl and the former Town of

Mount Pearl. I know that there

are a lot of residents in that neighbourhood who are currently well

represented in the House of Assembly by the hon. Member for Kilbride.

They have a connection to our community.

Many of them come from Mount Pearl.

Their children go to school in Mount Pearl.

They attend worship in Mount Pearl.

Many of them will buy their groceries in Mount Pearl.

To get out of their neighbourhood, they have to drive through Mount

Pearl. So it should be part of

Mount Pearl. I have always been

on record as saying so. I know

the member opposite would agree with me.

I look forward to representing that neighbourhood as part of the new

District of Mount Pearl North.

Anyway I know all these changes present challenges for

all of us. I do feel badly for

some of my colleagues on both sides of the House who have tough decisions to

make about what district they are going to run, if they are going to run at

all. I am fortunate personally

that much of my district remains intact.

I feel good that Mount Pearl will still have two strong districts, as

it always has.

We have had a third MHA for the last eight years and I

think we have been well served through that structure as well.

I do think that the proposal that the Commission has made is a

reasonable one. The Town of

Paradise will once again have two MHAs, as well, who will have considerable

focus on the town's interests and needs.

I think that is an acceptable approach.

The suggestions that the Member for St. Barbe makes

about this process being rushed and the job being shoddy I think really

shows disrespect and contempt for this hon. House, for the people who were

involved in the process including a judge, and for members who have

backgrounds in various parties who are not just St. John's people as the

member suggests. Bill Matthews,

for instance, was a rural MHA and a rural MP for a good part of his career,

who would certainly have a really good understanding of the issues in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador. I

think all members of the Commission have given it a good effort.

They have backgrounds that should be respected.

I believe that the people in Newfoundland and Labrador, more

importantly than all of that, will be well represented with these proposed

changes.

When you look at the number of members in the various

Legislatures around the country and you compare to Newfoundland and

Labrador, when you do that comparison, I would argue that we will continue

to be well represented in this House.

The people of Newfoundland and Labrador will be well represented in

this House.

The Member for St. Barbe talks about September 26.

Well, the Chief Electoral Officer in this Province, who the member

has also disrespected today, has outlined why that date is impractical.

I was pleased that the new Leader of the New Democratic Party

acknowledged as well that it does not make sense to have overlapping writ

periods. It is unnecessary, it

is confusing, it is just not sensible it is nonsensical.

For that reason, I think the Chief Electoral Officer

has weighed in and provided some commentary that I do not think members in

this House should ignore. By

shifting the election date by several weeks, we avoid that conflict.

Some will say well, you could have shifted it earlier.

Yes, we could have, but the Chief Electoral Officer made it clear

that that was not practical, that it would not give him time to do the

preparation necessary in light of the boundary changes that are being

brought forth through the Commission's report and through this legislation.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, by bringing in this legislation,

we are a government that has shown leadership.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KENT:

We are prepared to make the tough decisions and we are prepared to act on

something that all political parties have been talking about for a long,

long time. I will go as far as

saying that there are more changes needed in terms of how this House of

Assembly runs, and we are committed to looking at those issues as well.

I think that most people in Newfoundland and Labrador

actually agree that fewer MHAs make sense, that reforming this institution

makes sense, and I believe we are small enough and we are agile enough that

if we work together, we could have the best model of parliamentary democracy

anywhere in the country. We do

not have it today, but I believe it is possible if we are serious about

working together, and I hope that day will come.

For members to get up, like the Member for St. Barbe

did before I spoke, and show total disregard and disrespect for the

committee, for the Chief Electoral Officer, for fellow hon. members, it is

disappointing and it is disingenuous and it is disheartening

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible).

MR. KENT:

Here we go again, Mr. Speaker

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe, on a point of order?

MR. J. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, I do not mind a personal attack (inaudible); however, I would

prefer if he do it in a money bill when he does not have to relevant to what

he speaking to.

MR. SPEAKER:

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services,

to continue.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The fresh prince of relevance.

I am surprised he did not use his twenty minutes to educate us about

the boundaries in Ontario.

In all seriousness, Mr. Speaker, his own leader

acknowledged the conflict with the September election date because of the

federal election happening in mid-October.

His own leader acknowledged that.

It is unfortunate that there has been a change in position time and

time again by the party opposite.

I feel we are doing the right thing.

I think this is a good piece of legislation.

I think thorough research has been done.

I commend the boundary commission for doing a really good job,

despite the fact that not everybody is going to be happy with the proposed

boundary changes. When you are

dealing with something like this that is so politically charged, that is

inevitable. I think we have

landed in a good place and I think we are doing what is in the best interest

of our own constituents that we represent and the taxpayers of Newfoundland

and Labrador.

For that reason, Mr. Speaker, and I hope I will have

other opportunities, I am pleased to rise here in second reading to lend my

support to this bill.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is an honour for me to stand here and represent my

constituents in St. John's North and speak to second reading of Bill 13.

I just want to start out by saying thanks to the members of the

Commission for their work. I

know that it is not satisfactory to some Members of the House of Assembly.

I am not sure that we had enough time and I am not sure if we were

given a longer period of time if everything would have worked out to

everyone's satisfaction, but I really understand where people are coming

from.

I want to talk about some of the changes in here as

they relate to the district that I represent, and then some of the political

implications coming out of this.

I also want to rebut some of the nonsensical comments that were made here

last evening by Members of the House of Assembly with respect to this bill

and positions of the political parties here in the House of Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, I really enjoyed representing the District

of St. John's North the past, almost four years.

People who know my work here in the House know that I do there is

probably not a week or a couple of weeks that go by that I am not out

knocking on doors, bugging my constituents, chatting with them about whether

it is this bill or legislation before the House of Assembly, or cold calling

people to ask them how everything is going and getting to know people at

bit. So it saddens me to be

losing I guess I should say my intention is to seek the Liberal nomination

in the District of Mount Scio.

By doing that, I will be losing a number of constituencies and

neighbourhoods, should I be successful in getting the nomination and then

being successful in getting a seat here in the House of Assembly after the

general election on November 30.

I have done a lot of door knocking.

I have probably knocked on almost all of the doors all over again

since the last election. It is

just something I enjoy doing. If

you understand St. John's North I always say the great and historic

District of St. John's North. I

am not really kidding because if you look at Mount Scio there on one side of

the Avalon Mall and you look at Mount Ken on the other side, because that is

where Kenmount Road gets its name, all that area up through the middle is

called Waterford Valley. Over

100 years ago, there were thirty-odd family farms.

Scottish and Irish settlers who came here and they farmed up that

lush valley there.

Over the years, most recently the Kelseys that is

where Kelsey Drive gets its name they had a milk farm up there, but there

were lots of farms up through that valley.

On O'Briens Hill there is still O'Brien's farm, which is a provincial

historic site, which is there to help us all remember our Irish and farming

cultural heritage in the Province.

That is a bit of the history there.

It is something I have learned just through wanting to represent that

district because I first ran in that district in 1999.

I have been studying the area since and getting to know the people

who have lived there for a long time.

One of the areas that is not going to be in the

District of Mount Scio is the area, which I would say west, that is St.

John's West, not proper west, but west of the Avalon Mall, so all of the

neighbourhoods that go up over the side of Mount Ken and over towards

Blackmarsh Road. I especially

have developed a good relationship with the people at the west heights

neighbourhood association there on New Pennywell Road and the surrounding

streets. So I will miss all of

those people: Lisa, Daphne, and Gail, and a lot of people who I have worked

with over the past four or so years.

The new District of Mount Scio is probably about 65 per

cent St. John's North. Another

area that is not in it that I currently represent is a portion of Portugal

Cove-St. Phillips. That will be

going into the new district that is Portugal Cove Bell Island, I believe

is the name. So I will not

represent those folks anymore should I be successful in what I am planning

to do.

The new District of Mount Scio adds that portion of the

District of St. John's East, bounded by Newtown Road, Empire Avenue,

Bonaventure Avenue, and Elizabeth Avenue, and also the area of Paradise

called Elizabeth Park that the Member for Mount Pearl North currently

represents. I think the

Boundaries Commission had some decent thinking when they added Elizabeth

Park to that area.

If you think about Kenmount Terrace, which is sort of

in the middle of the District of Mount Scio, a lot of those people shop at

the same places. Their kids will

inevitably be going to some of the same schools over time, participating in

a lot of the same community activities.

For me, it will be similar to my current work in that I will be

representing two urban municipalities or citizens of two urban

municipalities.

Those are the changes as I see it.

I did provide a written submission to the Commission.

I did not present in person.

I did not have a whole lot of issues with the work that they have

done. I had two emails from

people about the bill. I know

that is not the experience, Mr. Speaker, of other Members of the House of

Assembly, and some over here and some on the other side.

I got two emails, one demanding I vote for the bill and one demanding

I vote against the bill. So I

will have to keep you guessing.

I want to talk about some of the stuff, the frou-frou

that went on here last night.

One thing that surprised me last week, the Minister of Transportation and

Works got up and said something to the effect now he can stand up and

correct me if he wants. He said

something to the effect of we are all upset over here, the Liberals are

upset because you foiled our master plan.

We are taking over the world or something.

That is the job of Opposition is to try to get over on

the other side of the House.

That is the way all of this works.

That should not come as any surprise to anybody over there, because

some of the members were over there one time.

That should not come as any surprise.

I thought about it. I

said, my God I lived in residence back in the day and I thought it is like

Potsie and the Sweathogs are running the show here.

That mentality, I just cannot relate to whatsoever.

This bill, the Premier said, was about saving taxpayers

money. That is the reason why.

We can go back through the whole history.

I will not go back through the electoral history, Dunderdale

resigning, Frank Coleman resigning, the new Premier coming in, all of that.

Before the bill that enabled all of this came before the Legislature,

the PCs had two nominations done, and one of them was the Premier's.

They had no plan to do this going into the Christmas

holidays, or at least there was no obvious plan for this.

We came back after the Christmas holidays and they wanted to bring in

the pension bill, and then this came in alongside of it.

The explanation was that this was about saving money.

So that is in stark contradiction to what the Minister of

Transportation and Works was getting on with.

Another thing, the Member for Lab West got up and he

decried this whole idea that the Liberals are having a free vote.

It is like some sort of foreign object.

What is wrong with having a free vote every now and then?

I say to the Member for Labrador West, Mr. Speaker, that he might

forget the history, but I certainly do not forget it.

When the FPI Act came before this Legislature several

years ago, there was a free vote that Premier Danny Williams, who sat over

there, held in here, and basically your party voted for it and he voted

against it. He did not vote for

it, in any case. So the Premier

did not even vote for the legislation that the rest of his Cabinet and

members voted for. That was the

free vote. There were no

complaints then. It is not

unusual to have a free vote.

Political parties often run on that platform, that there will be more free

votes. That is a good thing.

We are often chastised for not having enough freedom to vote your

conscience in this Legislature.

So that is a bit ridiculous.

Now, another thing that has been said here in the House

is that the NDP has been saying this was all done under the cover of

darkness, and everybody was ignorant of what was going on.

It all just emerged in the middle of the night.

Well, as a number of members have already stated, the first thing

happened after this proposal came in is the Leader of the Liberal Party held

a press conference and talked about the three conditions that we were

willing to accept this reduction in seats under.

One of them was preserving the four seats for Labrador.

Then there was a whole process of negotiation whereby the Official

Opposition spoke to the government about how all of this could work, and

there was a process of negotiation that went over several days.

Now, the NDP never contacted anyone to find out what

was going on. It was obvious

that there were negotiations taking place, because that is the way it is

supposed to work in here. You

cannot just complain all the time and not look for solutions.

This is about negotiation.

They talk about collaboration and they never collaborate.

If you want collaboration then we have to have collaboration.

You cannot say you want collaboration and then not collaborate ever.

This whole suggestion from the NDP is that we are

disunited because we are having a free vote, we are not being whipped.

Well, I say, Mr. Speaker, if you govern your caucus with an iron

whip, then you are going to have fewer members over time, I tell you that.

That is what is going to happen.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KIRBY:

The other thing I wanted to say about all of that too, and I am glad the

Premier pointed this out because he reminded me that the Liberal Party and

the NDP supported a reduction in seats.

This story, I had to go dig it up because he said, this was March 1,

2013, and the title is: Liberals, NDP call for fewer seats in the House of

Assembly. The Leader of the NDP

at the time said, I look at places like Nova Scotia, Ontario or other

provinces, and the MLAs have many more people in their ridings than we have

in our districts. The current

Leader of the NDP is out talking about how somehow we are too incompetent to

do our jobs in representing more people and then just a couple of years ago,

that was no problem.

Now, I do not know, I was on this show

On Point , that unfortunately CBC

is not carrying anymore, and the good member, the hon. Member for St. John's

East was on representing the NDP.

I raised this point, and I said your leader sat right there in that

chair and said your party was in favour of seat reduction.

He said she did not put a number on it.

Well, let me extrapolate from this statement, that

Ontario and the MLAs there have more people in their ridings than we have in

our districts. In Ontario, the

range of population that is represented by members of the provincial

Parliament because they call them MPPs in Ontario; MPPs in Ontario

represent anywhere from 71,000 to 170,000 in Brampton West people.

So basically under that model proposed by the NDP in

that interview, this Legislature would consist of seven to three seats,

three to seven seats. You could

have a comfortable minority government perhaps with just three seats.

Look, they have just three seats.

How ironic that it works out that way.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KIRBY:

I just want to put that to rest once and for all.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KIRBY:

With respect to some of the technical aspects of the bill, Mr. Speaker, this

bill proposes to reduce the number of seats in the House of Assembly to

forty. I believe that we can get

the work done with forty. I

believe all the good Members of this House of Assembly are competent enough

to do that. You have certainly

shown that over the past almost four years and some of you have been here,

well, since it opened in some cases.

Maybe it just seems to me that is the case.

I was not talking about the Member for Bay of Islands,

Mr. Speaker. I do not know why

he is looking at me.

I believe we can get the work done with that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. KIRBY:

When the original bill came before the Legislature the Premier said

thirty-eight. Then there was a

process of negotiation whereby the Labrador seats were protected and they

arrived at this number of forty.

It also sets out the new boundaries which we have

discussed right down to the end.

There will be a little more said before we get to the end of second reading.

I am satisfied with the boundaries myself, to a large extent.

There are some problems with them.

I am not sure we can resolve the problems within the proper timeline

because we know that people in this Province want an election this year.

The Chief Electoral Officer there was correspondence

that went back and forth from the Liberal Party to the chief electoral

office. I am not sure if any of

the other parties engaged in this, but it was a process of negotiation and

finding information. We asked

the Chief Electoral Officer for some clarification on all the timelines.

There was a window whereby we could have had a

September election this year.

The government does not want to do that.

The government has a majority.

We recognize that. We

have had two lengthy filibusters in here on Bill 29 and Muskrat Falls.

We know the government can put through legislation because it has a

majority so we accept that.

The Leader of the Liberal Party said originally that he

would accept pushing the election into November.

That was the first day all this was proposed.

He did say that and he stuck by his words the entire time.

He did not back down from it at any point in time, and so I am

satisfied with that.

I do not understand one part of this and I apologize

to Legislative Counsel and I apologize to those who are responsible for

drafting this bill because I do not think it was the members who sit over

there. I have some serious

concerns about this one

section here.

I do not have an amendment, but I just want to put this on the

record.

It is clause 1 which amends

section 3 of the House of

Assembly Act. It is

section 3(4)

in Clause 1 in this Bill. It

says let's see if I can get this out now Notwithstanding subsection

(2), if, on April 1 in the year that a general election is to be held under

that subsection, the Premier is of the opinion that the day that would be an

ordinary polling day under that subsection is not suitable for that purpose

because it overlaps with a federal election, the Premier shall choose an

alternative day in accordance with subsection (5) and shall provide advice

to the Lieutenant-Governor that a general election be held on that

alternative day.

There has to be a simpler way to write that.

Mr. Speaker, I am sort of ashamed to say that I spent thirteen years

in university God love my mother and father; they have a lot of patience

but I have some difficulty understanding what is intended by this.

I think what it means is that if by April 1 in a given year that the

Premier thinks there is going to be a conflict with a federal election of

some overlap, that they will change the date to the last Monday in November

in the fourth calendar year following the ordinary polling day for the most

recently held general election is the alternative day referred to in

subsection (4).

This is really cumbersome language and I think if we

want legislation to be accessible to the general public, whereby people can

go online, read this stuff and understand what the laws of the Province are

because people are interested in this Province about when the election

date is and so on and so forth.

People are engaged. We are lucky

here somebody said the other night it is sort of like this is the end of

democracy here in the Province and that we should be ashamed of ourselves.

I do not believe that at all.

Do you know what? This

proc