PDF Version (Day)

PDF Version (Night)

October 28, 2021

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. L No. 29

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

SPEAKER (Bennett):

Order, please!

Admit

strangers.

Welcome,

everyone.

Today, I

would like to welcome Ken Clements to our public gallery. Mr. Clements is

joining us this afternoon for a Member's statement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

SPEAKER:

Today we will hear statements

by the Members for the Districts of Mount Pearl - Southlands, Placentia West -

Bellevue, Placentia - St. Mary's, Humber - Bay of Islands and Bonavista.

The hon.

the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE:

Thank you, Speaker.

October 4, government hosted the annual Premier's Athletic Awards at the Holiday

Inn, St. John's. This program recognizes athletic excellence and provides

financial support to help offset the cost incurred by our top athletes relating

to both training and competition.

I would

like to take this opportunity to congratulate all of this year's award

recipients, including the following athletes from the District of Mount Pearl -

Southlands, which I am privileged to represent: Shae LeDevehat for athletics;

Chase and Cole Tucker, baseball; Brooke LeDevehat and Matthew Pennell for

basketball; Terrie Hefford, bocce; Kaitlyn Hawco and Cecilia Martino, rugby;

Morgan Harris, soccer; Megan Holden, swimming; Sarah Dawe and Claire Whiffen,

volleyball; and, Liam Noble, hockey.

These

athletes have achieved so much in their chosen sport and, in doing so have made

their families and community very proud. I ask all Members of this hon. House to

join me in acknowledging their accomplishments and wishing them all the very

best in their future sporting endeavours.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I sit in

this hon. Chamber today to recognize October as Autism Awareness Month, Down

Syndrome Awareness Month, ADHD Awareness Month, Breast Cancer Awareness Month

and Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Month.

Many

families are affected by autism, Down syndrome, ADHD, breast cancer and

pregnancy and infant loss in our beautiful District of Placentia West -

Bellevue. Speaker, it is vital that we show our unwavering support to the

individuals and their families affected by all these diseases, disabilities and

traumas. Building supportive and welcoming communities in our province will

ensure that these individuals have access to services that can improve their way

of living and give them a chance to have a fulfilling life, regardless of their

diagnosis or experiences.

Speaker,

I ask all hon. Members to join me in recognizing and supporting Autism Awareness

Month, Down Syndrome Awareness Month, ADHD Awareness Month, Breast Cancer

Awareness Month and Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Month, not only in the

District of Placentia West - Bellevue, but in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador as a whole.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia - St. Mary's.

S. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker,

Amelia Jane Evans, fondly known as Millie, was born on October 29, 1921, to Jim

and Martha Evans in Winterton. At the age of seven, she moved with her family to

Markland and they started a vegetable farm.

In 1942,

she married Fredrick Jones. They later moved to Whitbourne and together raised

six children. In 1964, they moved to Ontario and for 11 years Millie worked in a

stationary-greeting card factory. In 1975, Millie and her husband moved back to

Newfoundland, making Whitbourne their home once again.

Mille

was very involved with the United Church. She volunteered as a Sunday school

teacher and participated in many fundraisers, preparing meals, baking and

knitting.

Millie's

husband passed away in 1996. After that, she spent her winters in Nova Scotia

with her daughter. She now resides at the Lions Manor in Placentia.

This

past August, I had the pleasure of joining Millie, her family and friends for an

early birthday celebration. When I asked her what her secret to looking young

was, her family said Oil of Olay. Millie has 14 grandchildren, 27

great-grandchildren and 4 great-great-grandchildren.

Tomorrow

Millie will be 100 years old. Please join me as I wish Mrs. Millie Jones a happy

100th birthday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Humber - Bay of Islands.

E. JOYCE:

Speaker, I'm pleased today to

recognize the boys softball team of Templeton Academy in Meadows who are the

provincial champions of the 2021-2022 3A Boys Slo-Pitch tournament held last

weekend in Botwood.

Eight

teams from across the province participated with the Templeton Tigers winning

the final game against Mobile, 17-16, the team they lost to in the round robin.

Templeton's team is made up of 14 players from Grades 9 to 12; a dedicated team

determined to do their very best and work hard to win while enjoying the game.

This

team includes Jayden Park, Jordan Blanchard, Noah Park, Gavin Lovell, Marcus

Wells, Ethan Janes, Wade Mullins, Evan Janes, Reginald Ruth, Carter Burton,

Tyson Park, Joshua Hann, Colby Christopher, Ryan Newman and coaches Fabian

Lovell and Barry Park.

Congratulations to Ryan Newman, team MVP and Colby Christopher, most

sportsmanlike player. This is the first time since 1987 a Templeton softball

team has won gold. Many of the players play in the summer program at the

Gilliams ball field under the guidance of Scott Blanchard and the recreation

members.

I ask

all Members to join me in extending congratulations to the Templeton Tigers and

wish them continued success in the future.

Great

job guys.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Bonavista.

C. PARDY:

Thank you, Speaker.

It is an

honour to celebrate the exemplary community service of George Clements who has

dedicated a significant portion of his life serving the community of Bonavista.

George

was originally from Grand Bank and came to Bonavista in 1960 as a teacher at the

Salvation Army school and eventually married his wife, Bernice Mouland, a

teacher as well. George later accepted a position as instructor at the Bonavista

District Vocational School, followed by principal at the Eastern Community

College until retiring in 1991.

George

volunteered on many committees and groups in the area, such as the Peninsulas

Health Care Board. George chaired the VISTA '97 committee and arranged

proceedings and celebrations for the 500th anniversary of the historic

trans-Atlantic voyage of John Cabot. George greeted and received Queen Elizabeth

II and Prince Philip and coordinated external visits and events.

September 1, 2020, the Sovereign's Medal was awarded to George by

Lieutenant-Governor of Newfoundland and Labrador, the hon. Judy Foote. The book

Bonavista , written by Bruce Whiffen in

2021, dedicates the prologue to George and Bernice Clements.

I ask

the Members of the 50th House of Assembly to join me in celebrating the

outstanding lifetime of service from Mr. George Clements of Bonavista.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Speaker.

I'd like

to take the opportunity today to provide an update on the five-year Adult

Literacy Action Plan, first announced in October 2019. The plan contains 30

actions designed to strengthen literacy skills within the province and build a

more empowered and skilled population.

As part

of the provincial government's ongoing commitment to improving adult literacy in

Newfoundland and Labrador, last December we announced a $195,000 investment to

support the introduction of a foundational Adult Literacy Pilot Program at The

Gathering Place, delivered in partnership with the Murphy Centre.

Speaker,

I'm pleased to inform the House that the program has already seen significant

uptake, with 27 guests of The Gathering Place enrolled. Participants are

receiving individualized training that can range from building and enhancing

basic literacy and numeracy skills to technology, time management and

organizational skills.

Speaker,

I'm also pleased to further update that our government has recently provided

more than $480,000 in total funding for three more important initiatives that

will support adult learners with learning disabilities.

These

include: an investment in The Learning Disabilities Association of Newfoundland

and Labrador to implement a one-year pilot project for adults with learning

disabilities, allowing them to receive individualized tutoring as well as

training and support in assistive technology; support for Brilliant Labs to

implement a one-year pilot project to provide hands-on experiential learning for

adults to increase digital literacy skills; and support for Newfoundland and

Labrador Public Libraries to implement a one-year pilot project to expand adult

and family literacy initiatives at libraries across the province.

Through

the Adult Literacy Action Plan, we continue to support our community partners as

they provide adult learners with meaningful literacy tools and resources.

Everyone

in our province deserves the opportunity to experience the empowering effect of

learning and improved literacy skills.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I'd like

to thank the hon. minister for the advance copy of his statement. Speaker, first

of all, I'm delighted the five-year Adult Literacy Action Plan did not fall by

the wayside like the five-year roads program. Speaker, anything we can do in

this province to increase literacy skills are to be applauded –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

B. PETTEN:

I couldn't resist.

So many

years Newfoundland and Labrador languished behind other provinces in adult

literacy; however, in so many ways, literacy is a life skill that empowers

individuals, allowing them make critical decisions about their lives.

Individuals need to be empowered, Speaker, to build self-esteem.

I'm

delighted to see government partner with Newfoundland and Labrador Public

Libraries which offer multiple literacy tools and resources and should be

partnered to improve literacy in the province.

closing, I again congratulate these organizations for leading the effort to

improve adult literacy in the province.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I thank

the minister for the advance copy of his statement and compliment his department

on its investment in the Adult Literacy Action Plan.

However,

I call on government to continue investing in these programs and expand them

across regions of the province that lack supports found in the St. John's metro

area. Also, we need to address the social determinants of health and education.

This begins by ending overcrowding in classrooms, carrying out an independent

review on teacher allocation, along with investing in families and making life

more affordable for everyone.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

Oral

Questions.

Oral Questions

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

I want

to thank the good people of Trades NL for allowing me to speak earlier today and

experience first-hand how the highly skilled, dedicated members of Trades NL

build this province every single day.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL:

On February 8, 2021, Premier

Furey wrote: “… our Government will require contractors bidding on …

infrastructure projects to prioritize the hiring of qualified workers based in

Newfoundland and Labrador.” Yet the Liberal government still has not implemented

a policy that all public infrastructure projects will require a community

benefits agreement.

I ask

the Premier: Yes or no, can the Premier promise that from this point forward all

public infrastructure projects will be subject to a Newfoundland and Labrador

benefits agreement?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, and I'd also like to thank Trades NL for offering me the opportunity to

speak this morning.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER A. FUREY:

It's an

incredible, important organization that represents, indeed, the hard-working

women and men in our province, Mr. Speaker. They are helping to build

infrastructure, they're helping to reform infrastructure, they're helping to

sustain infrastructure and, most importantly, they're building a bridge towards

a sustainable future for our province and we'll all support them.

continue to work with Mr. King and their organization to ensure that we're

developing a policy that meets the needs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to

ensure and continue to ensure that the priority goes to Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians. As I said to them this morning, over 90 per cent on the job right

now on most projects throughout the province are Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians; some up to 97 per cent, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

Since

2019 Trades NL have been asking that the taxpayers' money that is spent on

infrastructure projects in Newfoundland and Labrador should go back to be

benefits to the workers in Newfoundland and Labrador. So why are we not doing

that?

Here's

another quote from the Liberal red book: “Contractors will also be required to

demonstrate a commitment to hiring women, Indigenous Peoples, and other workers

underrepresented in the labour force.” When will the Liberal government make the

necessary requirements so that all public infrastructure spending requires

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to be put first for jobs?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker,

and I'm happy to speak to this.

I think

everybody was down speaking at Trades NL today because I was as well. But I do

think it shows you the importance of that industry and those individuals to the

future of our province. I had a great opportunity to speak about the

opportunities and the potential that we have here and, in fact, I had a question

from the membership about benefits agreements and opportunities for

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

What I

can say is that we have had a task force recommendation about transparency and

we have a working group that speaks to Trades NL regularly about benefits

agreements and opportunities for employment. When we negotiate benefit

agreements with proponents of mining or oil and gas, historically we've always

only worried about the construction phase. But I can tell you now, any benefits

agreements we do expands for the lifetime of that agreement, and after being out

to West White Rose yesterday, it was great to see men and women working back on

that project.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Speaker, so we've all come to

the realization that all speakers agree that a community benefits agreement

would be to the benefit of the taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador. So why

don't we just do it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL:

Speaker, when asked yesterday

if physicians moving to work with collaborative care teams will result in

orphaned patients, the Premier said: “ This is not about taking one doctor to

replace another one within the system ….”

Today we have heard of a family physician

that was explicitly told by Eastern Health that they would not be able to take

their patients with them if they accepted a position with the collaborative care

team.

I ask the Premier: Why was the information

given to the hon. House yesterday not accurate?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I don't

have any inside knowledge into that conversation. The aim of collaborative teams

is to provide a home for health for the individual. They will go through one

door, have one telephone number, and access the right care from the right person

in their own community, ideally.

This

will be a mix of nurse practitioners. It will be a mix of pharmacists,

optometrists, wound-care nurses, social workers – if need be – Income Support

people to address social determinants of health, as well as family physicians,

who are the ones who are best positioned to arbitrate, to decide between

competing treatment plans. This will work for the benefit of those working, as

well as those receiving care, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

Something doesn't add up here. Yesterday the Premier said this wasn't about

taking one doctor to replace another, yet today we hear that is exactly what

will happen.

I ask

the Premier: How can his statement from yesterday be a benefit to helping

patients in Newfoundland and Labrador access primary care?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

develop my previous comment a little further, the advantage of these medical or

these health homes is that everyone works to the skills they were trained to

provide. No one who is in an advanced health care role needs to be filling in

forms or filling in paper. That alone will increase efficiency and allow at

least 25 per cent more of the time they're in the building to be focused on

delivering care.

We are

using additional health care providers to magnify, to amplify the range of

services. So no one individual has to do everything for everybody, which has

been the traditional model of family medicine, Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

Our

understanding here is we're just swapping one in and one out and we're not

improving access by any way, shape or form to people when it comes to health

care.

Speaker,

survey results recently published by The

Telegram , spearheaded by Dr. Andrew O'Keefe and Dr. Monica Kidd, revealed

some troubling results. Out of approximately 300 MUN medical graduates over the

last 15-year period only 55 per cent were working here in Newfoundland and

Labrador. What is troubling is that another 68 physicians wanted to work

exclusively here in the province but were unable.

I ask

the Premier: How will you address this retention issue, as highlighted by the

physicians in this province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Speaker.

Certainly we recognize that retention is an issue here in Newfoundland and

Labrador. I've experienced it first-hand; I have seen it in colleagues, family

members and friends. It is encouraging that we have a medical school here that

produces high-quality physicians who want to stay here.

recognize that this is a problem and that is why we want to change the system to

allow a real robust health human resource plan that will involve the NLMA, the

Nurses' Union, everybody to make sure that we a re delivering the right amount

of GPs for the province, Mr. Speaker. Beyond GPs, even the right amount of

specialists to ensure that we're planning for the future to ensure that we have

this system in place that is required.

MUN has

been very co-operative and we will continue to be co-operative and we'll have

ongoing conversations to ensure we have the right recruitment and retention plan

for the future of this province, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

D. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Speaker.

Perhaps

the first step should be to sit down with the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical

Association and come up with a contract that works for all doctors in this

province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

D. BRAZIL:

Yesterday Dr. Mari-Lynne

Sinnott commented to CBC in reference to the Premier's Minister of Health by

saying, “His response has been overwhelmingly lacklustre with a concerted effort

to not address the lack of primary care physicians ….”

I ask

the Premier: How can you continue to have confidence in your minister when this

is the overwhelming opinion throughout the medical community?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER A. FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As we

said here before, we are developing a robust plan to ensure that we are

increasing the number of family physicians in the province. We recognize that it

is a gap in the system; COVID has exposed it even further. We also recognize the

significant paradigm shift in people entering the practice of medicine. They are

not going to practise the way they used to practise 10, 15, 20, 30 years ago. We

know that is a gap. We know we have to address it, not just in medicine, but in

nursing and other medical professionals in the province, Mr. Speaker.

This is

a shift that is occurring all across the country; it is a gap in employment that

we know that we need to meet. We are lucky to have a medical school here, a

nursing school here; all of which we're devoted to. I am confident that we can

use those resources to fill those gaps, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Speaker, new long-term care

homes in Gander and Grand Falls-Windsor have not opened because, first, a

staffing shortage and now building deficiencies, which we're estimating could be

in the thousands. Mr. Speaker, hospital beds are blocked with seniors waiting

for a bed.

I ask

the minister: Why are you being reactive to these issues after they arise rather

than proactive to prevent this unacceptable delay for our province's seniors?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Infrastructure.

E. LOVELESS:

Thank you, Speaker.

important question and I think it was the same question that was asked last week

and my answer will be the same. We are not happy that those buildings are not

open, but there are deficiencies and we're working diligently with a contractor

to address these deficiencies.

But, as

I said before, I would rather that for those deficiencies to be taken care of

right now before those residents are in those long-term care homes. I am looking

forward to that happening sooner rather than later.

Thank

you, Speaker

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Under an

ATIPP, we received over 100 pages of deficiencies ranging from fire- and

life-safety issues to structural defects and building code violations. These are

very serious issues.

I ask

the minister: How do you explain this situation to the families waiting for

long-term care beds in Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Infrastructure.

E. LOVELESS:

Thank you, Speaker.

The

question, again, is important because it goes to the needs – I have them in my

own district in terms of seniors, as well. But the answer around the

deficiencies is no different in terms of we are dealing with it diligently and

in correspondence with Central Health to deal with it. Again, we're not pleased

with the situation but we're holding the contractor's feet to the fire in terms

of dealing with those deficiencies that hopefully will get addressed sooner

rather than later.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Speaker, these two homes were announced with great fanfare under the

public-private partnership, or better known as P3s, as part of

The Way Forward . Now we see delays and

hundreds of pages of deficiencies that were apparently missed during

construction.

I ask

the minister: In light of these revelations, what are you doing to ensure the

same deficiencies don't cause delays and don't happen with the new adult mental

health and addictions facility here in the city?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Infrastructure.

E. LOVELESS:

Again, Speaker, the answer is, I guess, similar. We're working with the

contractor and the contractor has an obligation, as well, to meet those and

correct those deficiencies. We are working diligently and, like any project and

any progress or anything, we reflect on how we can do things better and there's

always room for improvement. I'm sure this situation won't be any different.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, to be accurate, so that everyone can see for their own eyes, these are

the deficiencies.

SPEAKER:

No props, please.

B. PETTEN:

It's not props, Mr. Speaker. These are documents I'm planning on tabling, not a

prop. This is an actual document I'm tabling to the House, which is part of my

duties.

Thank

you.

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

B. PETTEN:

It's not a prop, Mr. Government House Leader.

SPEAKER:

Move on with your question, please.

B. PETTEN:

I have the right to correct the misinformation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Move on

to your question.

B. PETTEN:

It's Question Period for me, not you. You get the answers.

Speaker,

office learned fully –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

B. PETTEN:

Our office learned fully two-thirds of schools in the province have only partial

and no mechanical ventilation at all. This includes the majority of schools in

the Marystown region, which is currently dealing with a COVID-19 outbreak.

Speaker,

proper air ventilation is an important tool to combatting the virus. Will the

minister admit government has failed to properly address air quality in our

schools?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, the cases on the Burin Peninsula are children that are unvaccinated

and, obviously, it's a concern for everybody.

We had

put air purifier systems in every classroom and several other rooms in schools

throughout the province, Mr. Speaker, in an effort to address the air quality

and so on within the schools. Mechanical ventilation is another issue. I know

that the cost of mechanical ventilation for all schools is well into the

hundreds of millions of dollars. It cannot be done in July and August; you'd

literally have to shut a school down with nowhere to send those students.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Thank you, Speaker.

It has

to be done sometime. We're going to have to find a way, I think.

Air

purifiers are one thing – we'll have to see what the Auditor General has to say

about that – but schools need fresh air, Mr. Speaker, and it's ridiculous to

suggest you open one classroom window in the middle of winter. The situation in

Marystown has shone a light on government's failure in this area, as two schools

have absolutely no mechanical ventilation at all.

Again,

when is the minister going to finally deal with the air quality in our schools?

Thank

you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Mr. Speaker, knowing the

difficulty in addressing the mechanical ventilation issue, as I said, you simply

don't do this during July and August and expect to have students back in school

in September. That's not the way it works. It takes considerably longer than

this.

There's

only so much bricks and mortar on the Burin Peninsula to house students, Mr.

Speaker. We did put air purifier systems in schools throughout the province to

help address this issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Mental

health and addictions supports are absolutely critical for people of the

province. One of the measurements that the Canadian Institute for Health

Information uses to evaluate the effectiveness of supports are readmission

rates; in other words, someone receives treatment once and needs to seek help

again.

Labrador-Grenfell Health has the highest readmission rate in the country. This

clearly shows that government is failing this region with mental health and

addictions supports.

I ask

the minister: Do you believe being ranked worst in the country is acceptable?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

recognized in 2016 that mental health and addictions was a challenge across the

province, and certainly we recognized that Labrador has its unique challenges

too. Towards Recovery laid out some

very specific recommendations, and there is indeed a specific team focused on

Indigenous requirements, needs for mental health. That meets regularly.

There is

also a regional services committee which looks at the organization of health

there. We've put Doorways into Goose Bay, into Labrador City. There is a six-bed

acute mental health unit currently on time and on budget being constructed in

Happy Valley-Goose Bay. That is part of our commitment, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

A recent

report that was just completed, commissioned by the Canadian Mental Health

Association Newfoundland and Labrador, looked at lived experiences of people

dealing with mental health. I'm taking their words right now –

SPEAKER:

Remember no props, unless

you're going to table it.

P. DINN:

I can table it, sure.

Their

words is this mental health that they're offering here in this province –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

P. DINN:

– their words: You have to

have the right kind of crazy to get help here. The right kind of crazy, that's

their words.

Speaker,

according to the Canadian Institute for Health Information, the median wait time

for community health counselling in Newfoundland and Labrador is almost double

the national average.

I ask

the minister: Are you fine with Newfoundlanders and Labradorians waiting double

the time for mental health supports than the rest of the country?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

Certainly wait times for mental health and addictions services have been a

challenge in the past. We have put in Doorways, a one-stop single-session

counselling in between 60 and 70 locations. They move to match the needs of the

community. We know that of the people who attend that, 50 per cent of them have

their needs managed satisfactorily with one visit. Those who do not are referred

on for counselling.

We have

seen since the inception, since the start of Doorways, a radical drop in both

the numbers of people waiting and the wait times that people have had to wait.

We continue to work to get to zero. We're not quite there yet but we have made

great strides, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

This

same report will tell you that it is failing those who are looking for long-term

help. It's failing them and those who have gotten help consider themselves just

lucky. That's their report, people with lived experiences, which the Premier and

the Minister of Health have said they're going to look into and listen to –

people with lived experiences.

Speaker,

specifically for children and youth, the median wait time for community mental

health counselling in Newfoundland and Labrador is over double the national

average.

I ask

the minister: Why do you allow this failure of our province's youth to continue?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

Back in

2017, I was the second Minister of Health in this country to institute a

Recovery Council. This is a group of people with lived experience who report

directly to me unfiltered.

I have

had several meetings with them. This has been suspended owing to COVID and

concerns that the members have had about their well-being. They will resume

shortly.

From the

point of view of counselling, as I have said, we are working to reduce both the

number and the length of time people have to wait. Our goal is zero. I would

argue, however, that we have made significant progress. We're not there yet, but

we're a lot better than we were five years ago.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Speaker, the Health Accord

has written that “funding consistent with our priorities are important resources

in reorienting and rebalancing our health system.” In other words they will be

asking government for more funding; yet Greene has recommended in her report

cutting health care funding by 25 per cent.

I ask

the minister: Can you outline whose advice you will take?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will

say this: It's unfortunate that we had Muskrat Falls or we'd have a whole lot

more funding to put into many different areas of this province, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

S. COADY:

I will say that we are

awaiting the report of the Health Accord; we look forward to having that. I

think it's very visionary of the Premier to have implemented that full review of

the health –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

S. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A full

review of the health system. We need to address some of the concerns within the

health system. We'll be listening and we –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I heard

the question and I want to hear the response, too, please.

S. COADY:

Sorry, Speaker. I'm getting

interrupted constantly and I thank you for your protection.

I will

say that we look forward to receiving the final report of the Health Accord so

that we can make some of the changes that are needed in order to address the

concerns that we are seeing in our health system.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Speaker, the question is whether the minister considers health care a cost or a

service. The Health Accord team certainly considers health care a service.

Speaker,

the Premier appointed two sets of hand-picked experts: the Health Accord team

and the Premier's Economic Recovery Team. Their recommendations about health

spending do not agree. Now the Minister of Finance has to make decisions about

how the money will be spent.

I ask

her to be honest with the people of the province. Whose advice will she follow

regarding health care spending?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's too

bad the former administration didn't take the advice on Muskrat Falls. Now we're

left with that legacy here in this province, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

S. COADY:

I will say this: On this side

of the House we listen to the advice of experts. As the Member pointed out, we

have engaged a number of people. I think it's –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Speaker, for your

protection again in this House.

I will

say that we are prepared to listen to the advice of those that are providing it

to us. It will be up to this administration, to this government to accept and

listen and consult and review and determine the best path forward. We look

forward to receiving the Health Accord's advice very soon.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Mr. Speaker, again, I simply

ask the minister: Will you take the advice of the Health Accord team or are you

looking at the advice of the Premier's Economic Recovery Team? Two different

approaches: one focused on cost, one focused on service.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Speaker.

I guess

they don't like the answer that I am giving to them. It is a challenge and I

know that they are chirping quite a bit about Muskrat Falls, but it is the

balance of a lot of the problems that we are having here in this province,

Speaker.

I will

say that we are informing ourselves on all sides of the debate and the

discussion, but it will be up to our administration to consider the advice, the

information that we're getting. Unlike former administrations, who just did what

they wanted – and I am, again, referring to Muskrat Falls.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Speaker, the Opposition

office ATIPPed the Department of Justice asking for the number of RCMP officers

in the province, and we were told the department did not have the information

and to contact the RCMP headquarters.

I ask

the minister: Do you know how many RCMP officers are in our province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you for the question.

As the

Member Opposite knows, we do provide funding to the RCMP and the RNC in this

province and we leave it to them to make operational decisions about who to hire

and where the officers should go. So they are the ones that know that number and

if it was suggested that she contact the RCMP for that answer, I suggest you do

that.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Speaker, that is shocking

that the minister cannot provide that number to the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

SPEAKER:

Order, please!

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Provincial funding for

RCMP has been frozen for 10 years; there is a $14-million shortfall. The RCMP is

continually being asked to do more, with less. We've already seen the RCMP

detachment in Grand Bank head toward closure. Detachments in the Port aux

Basques are going from nine to just six.

I ask

the minister: Why are you allowing RCMP numbers to dwindle in our province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety.

J. HOGAN:

Thank you for the

opportunity, Mr. Speaker.

Muskrat

Falls – oh, sorry, sorry.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

J. HOGAN:

Again, we do fund the RCMP

and we take great pride in the work they do in this province. As I said

yesterday to the very identical question, we are under physical constraints in

this province and we work with the RCMP on a weekly, monthly basis to make sure

that they have the funding that's necessary. We thank them for making efforts to

modernize the policing in this province so we can move forward under the fiscal

restraints and ensure that the people in this province are safe.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker,

yesterday the provincial government congratulated itself for its magnanimous

gesture of welcoming some 116 Afghan refugees.

I ask

the Minister of Education: What extra ESL supports and resources will be

provided to schools where the children of these families and other refugee

families attend?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have

been in discussions with the NLESD regarding the arrival of these newly welcomed

citizens to Newfoundland and Labrador. The NLESD will determine where the

individuals are living, working with the Association for New Canadians, and

determine what schools the students will be going to.

We will

provide the necessary resources, Mr. Speaker, to ensure that the students are

integrated into the school system in St. John's or any other area that they are

living.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

Is the

Minister of Education satisfied that the current level of ESL services and

allocation of ESL itinerant teachers in our primary and elementary schools is

effectively meeting the needs of our refugee students and their families?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the

Member knows, we have gone out to the IAC and have received recommendations back

for a teacher allocation review, which would include this particular set of

skills, Mr. Speaker. The teacher allocation will ensure that the proper

allocation models are being put in place. We currently operate under the

existing teacher allocation model, and those numbers are decided based on that

model.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

J. DINN:

Not the question I asked.

But I'll

ask the minister: What is the current ratio of ESL itinerant teachers to the

schools they service? Is it one ESL itinerant teacher for every school with

immigrant refugee students? Is it 1-2, 1-3, 1-6? Does he know?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

T. OSBORNE:

Mr. Speaker, I don't have

that in terms of the immigrant students, the question that the Member asked, but

I will certainly get that and provide it to the Member.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

A lot of

communities in this province need primary care. We have the ability to use nurse

practitioners to fill the gaps left by doctors.

I ask

the minister: Will he make the changes to allow nurse practitioners to bill MCP

in the interim and give necessary funding to the health authorities to get nurse

practitioners in the right place until we hear from the Health Accord?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

The

nurse practitioners we have are a crucial and very valued part of our health

care system. I think we actually employ, through the regional health

authorities, 95 per cent or thereabouts of the graduates.

The

problem with fee for service is that those people who are currently receiving

fee for service don't want to for primary care. So we have discussions ongoing

through ourselves and Treasury Board about alternate payment plans, compensation

schemes for primary care physicians.

We have

a very good salary model and I think we should wait until we get a good model

for remunerating primary care before jumping into that particular problem.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

We are

in a crisis. In Labrador West alone, we have gone from nine doctors to three

doctors in 18 months. They are burning out, working overtime hours with no rest

and it's a revolving door of patients in need. Many are concerned that if we

continue down at this rate, we'll have no doctors in Labrador West by Christmas.

Our community is not alone in this province.

What is

the plan for when our overworked doctors and health care professionals say

enough is enough and leave the province?

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

J. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

Last

week I announced a package of just over $30 million, of which $22 million is

new, annualized funding. A key piece of that is in actual fact a recruitment and

retention strategy. We will start by finding out what it is that new graduates

want to make them work in family medicine in this province and particularly in

rural or isolated areas.

Those

have always been a challenge. Labrador is a great place to live and work, but it

is also not a place that suits everybody. We will, through Labrador-Grenfell

Health, however, work to ensure that primary care is available for those people

in their communities when they need it.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling

of Documents.

Tabling of

Documents

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I table

the deficiency list for Muskrat – no, I'm sorry, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

S. CROCKER:

Mr. Speaker, I table the

Marble Mountain Development Corporation annual report.

SPEAKER:

Further tabling of documents?

The hon.

the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Speaker.

accordance with

section 60 of the

Financial Administration Act , I'm happy to table the 2020-2021 Public

Accounts, and I'm proud to say we again have an unqualified audit opinion from

the Auditor General.

SPEAKER:

Further tabling of documents?

The hon.

the Member for Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

Mr. Speaker, they're heavy to

lift, but I'm going to table these deficiencies in the two long-term care

facilities in Gander and Grand Falls. They're not a prop; it's the real deal.

Take a couple of days and read it over the weekend and report back to me next

week.

SPEAKER:

Sorry, you need consent of

the House to table the documents.

Does the

Member have consent?

AN HON. MEMBER:

Leave.

SPEAKER:

Leave.

The hon.

the Member for Conception Bay South.

B. PETTEN:

You're too good me.

But

anyway, I'll repeat: These are the deficiencies in the long-term care facilities

in Grand Falls and Gander. If the minister wants to do some reading over the

weekend, it's going to take a couple of days. We never counted them all, but I'd

like to see the actual number.

Anyway,

so tabled.

SPEAKER:

Further tabling of documents?

The hon.

the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish

to table for the House, as the answer to many of the questions that were

answered, a copy of the Commission of

Inquiry Respecting the Muskrat Falls Project –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

A. PARSONS:

– entitled

Muskrat Falls: A Misguided Project ,

compiled by the hon. Richard D. LeBlanc at a cost of about $15 million. I'd like

to table this for everybody on the other side to read.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Any other tabling of

documents?

Notices

of Motion.

Notices of Motion

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

I give

notice that on tomorrow I will move, in accordance with Standing Order 11(1),

that this House not adjourn at 5 p.m. on Monday, November 1, 2021.

SPEAKER:

Further notices of motions?

Answers

to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Harbour Main.

H. CONWAY OTTENHEIMER:

Thank you, Speaker.

These

are the reasons for this petition:

WHEREAS

individual residents in the Harbour Main District have expressed serious

concerns over the service that they are receiving or lack thereof from motor

vehicle registration; and

WHEREAS

many people are frustrated with the long and unnecessary wait times for

appointments and the switch to online services versus in-person counter service;

THEREFORE we petition the hon. House of Assembly follows: We, the undersigned,

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

Labrador to immediately take the necessary steps to review the current process

in place for Motor Vehicle, develop and implement a plan which will best suit

all people in the Harbour Main District and throughout the entire province.

Speaker,

I am hearing, like other MHAs, other Members, from many constituents about the

problems they are experiencing with motor vehicle registration. Specifically in

the Harbour Grace area, but I'm aware that it's throughout the entire province.

I had

one constituent from Clarke's Beach contact me. She said that she called motor

vehicle registration in Harbour Grace looking to book an appointment. That was

on October 20 for her to update her expired ID card. After a long period of

waiting, she finally got through to them and they advised her that it would take

several weeks to get an appointment because they are so backed up. This is just

October 20, Speaker. That same day, another constituent from the Harbour Main

District tried to book an appointment for an ID card online; the first available

was November 29 for Mount Pearl and November 26 for Harbour Grace. This is

unacceptable, Speaker.

Another

constituent wrote and said while she herself witnessed seniors lined up outside

in the cold and rain waiting to get into motor vehicle registration, they'd only

allow 10 people in the building at a time and then, once inside, they take a

number and wait again. She could not believe – and she wrote: Having these

elderly people susceptible to these rainy and cold and wet conditions during the

flu season of all times, there must be somewhere inside the building where they

can wait.

Speaker,

we need to look at changing this system. It is not working. The long lineups,

the long delays, the long waits to get through – the minister says the doors are

open, but they're not open. It's very difficult for the people who are trying to

access this service and we have to do something better here. It's not just

about, as the minister says, working on tweaking. This is hardly a case of a

tweak or two; it's just not working. It has to be changed. Let's go back to the

way it was before if you're not able to accommodate people properly.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville - Port au Port.

T. WAKEHAM:

Thank you, Speaker.

These

are the reasons for this petition:

The

long-term care facility in Bay St. George and Stephenville Crossing is 45 years

old. It is one of the oldest long-term care facilities in our province. It was

not designed for the level of care it is now providing residents. The building

has substandard bathrooms which cannot accommodate lifts, and rooms are small in

size in terms of length and width and do not meet the standard. There is a need

for a new long-term care facility for the people of the Bay St. George region

and its current residents.

Therefore, we petition the hon. House of Assembly as follows: To urge the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to replace the Bay St. George long-term

care facility so our seniors can receive the care they deserve.

Speaker,

this petition has been signed by thousands of people in the region. As I said

before, it's not just about my district; it's about the region. It's about the

Member's opposite district, and it's more importantly about the people who live

there – the dignity they deserve, the comfort they deserve. These are seniors

who worked in our province and now need our help. They live in a

government-owned facility that is substandard to their needs. It was built for

level 1 and 2 care and it now provides level 3 and level 4.

So I

urge the government to start the planning process and let's get this long-term

care facility replaced.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

background to this petition is as follows:

At this

time of crisis in health care, the government took four years to prepare to

negotiate a new contract with physicians and then came to the table with no

proposals to address the long-standing physician recruitment and retention

problem and zero investment in the Physician Services budget.

WHEREAS

most specialties have fallen below the Atlantic average and Newfoundland and

Labrador's family doctors are the lowest paid in the country; and

WHEREAS

the per capita spending on physicians in Newfoundland and Labrador is among the

lowest in the country; and

WHEREAS

99,000 people of the province do not have a family doctor;

THEREFORE we, the undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to show leadership in the negotiations

with the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association, resolve the impasse and

work to build a spirit of co-operation with physicians to resolve long-standing

physician recruitment and retention problems for the people of this province.

Speaker,

this petition actually was read yesterday in the House by my fellow independent

MHA from Lake Melville. The reason why we are concerned is because this relates

to impacting doctors. We know we have a shortage of doctors in the province. It

impacts overall health. When you can't access a doctor your overall quality of

health will deteriorate. That is something that's going to cost a lot more money

in the long run, so looking at the shortage.

This

petition also highlights that it's taken four years to prepare to negotiate, yet

they come to the table with nothing. Who should be offended by that statement?

Should it be the government? Should it be the people? Because, at the end of the

day, the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association is there, they want to be

a part of the process and to help find solutions.

We just

have to look around our beautiful province, Speaker, it's filled with

hard-working people who deserve quality of health; they deserve better. But,

right now, out there, shortage of doctors is a huge void that a lot of people

are falling into.

In my

previous life, we always looked at problems as something that has to be

prevented – prevention. I ask: Where is the commitment to prevention when it

comes to health issues? What about the commitment to being proactive? Right now,

this province, we don't even have the ability to be reactive, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

S. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

appreciate the unaffiliated Member raising this issue in the House of Assembly.

As I have said, I think repeatedly, we recognize and acknowledge that there's an

issue with pay. We absolutely want to give them a raise and that's why I've said

repeatedly that we want to have constructive and important dialogue with the

NLMA.

I look

forward to working with the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association, to

continue our dialogue on recruitment and retention. As the Minister of Health

and Community Services has said, repeatedly, I'm prepared to speak with them at

any time, Speaker, on these important issues. I believe that there are solutions

that can be found to ensure a full agreement with the NLMA.

SPEAKER:

Seeing no other petitions,

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

Speaker,

I call from the Order Paper, Motion 2.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Speaker, I move, seconded by

the Deputy Government House Leader, that under Standing Order 11(1) this House

not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. today, Thursday, October 28, 2021.

SPEAKER:

Is it the pleasure of the

House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

The hon.

the Government House Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Bear

with me one quick second. I call from the Order Paper, second reading of Bill

39,

An Act To Amend The Adoption Act, 2013.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

J. ABBOTT:

Speaker, thank you.

I move,

seconded by the Member for Placentia - St. Mary's, that Bill 39,

An Act To Amend

The Adoption Act, 2013, be now read a second time.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

Bill 39,

An Act To Amend The Adoption Act, 2013, be read a second time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill, “An Act To Amend The Adoption Act, 2013.” (Bill 39)

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

J. ABBOTT:

Speaker, it is my pleasure to

introduce a bill entitled,

An Act to Amend the Adoption Act, 2013, in this House

today. As a government, we recognize the importance of permanency planning and

ensuring loving and stable homes for children who cannot be safely reunited with

their families. It is the adoption legislation that governs the adoption process

in Newfoundland and Labrador.

When the

current Adoption Act, 2013 , was

proclaimed on June 30, 2014, there were a number of updates made to strengthen

the adoption legislation in the province at that time. The intent and design

then was to streamline the adoption process while remaining responsible and

vigilant in ensuring the safety and well-being of children involved in the

adoption process; ensuring the adoption program is progressive; clarifying and

modernizing the law respecting adoptions, as the previous legislation was

proclaimed back in 2003; and aligning the principles of the adoptions

legislation with the child protection legislation where that was appropriate.

course, the purpose of today's bill is to further build on and strengthen the

2013 legislation by introducing amendments to the current Adoption Act.

Section

77(1) of the Adoption Act, 2013 ,

requires that: “The minister shall, every 5 years, conduct a review of this Act

and the regulations and consider the areas which may be improved.” And “

(2) A

review conducted under subsection (1) shall include public consultations.”

consultation with the government's Public Engagement and Planning Division, my

department launched an engagement process to help inform this statutory

five-year review of the provincial adoption legislation. My department looked at

the adoption legislation and processes in other Canadian provinces and

territories and reviewed best practices in this area. We found that, generally,

the current act is consistent with others. We did, however, note areas for

enhancement, particularly in recognition of the unique rights of Indigenous

children.

The

engagement process focused on such areas as highlighting experiences and/or

challenges with the adoption legislation, improving the legislation in the

province to better support individuals and families and, third, recognizing the

unique needs of Indigenous children, youth and their families.

We had a

very positive response through this process and gathered input from a variety of

key stakeholders, such as birth and adoptive families, foster parents, the

Newfoundland and Labrador Foster Families Association, the Office of the Child

and Youth Advocate, all Indigenous governments and organizations and the general

public.

In fact,

we received written submissions and had telephone and virtual discussions with

36 individuals, 26 departmental staff, five external stakeholder including the

Office of the Child and Youth Advocate, the Newfoundland and Labrador Foster

Families Association, the Innu Round Table Secretariat, the Nunatsiavut

Government, the NunatuKavut Community Council, the Miawpukek First Nation and

the Qalipu First Nation.

The

adoption legislation has been found to be effective in providing a framework for

adoptions in the province; however, based on feedback from the engagement

process, we have identified several key areas where the legislation can be

strengthened and those amendments have been proposed in this bill.

The

proposed amendments also will align with the

Child, Youth and Families Act , that law became effective in June

2019, along with recent amendments approved by this House during this session.

Also, these proposed amendments will align along with this governments and my

department's commitment to ensure the unique needs of Indigenous children and

youth are considered in everything we do.

I would

now like to take this opportunity to outline the proposed amendments for all

hon. Members. Based on engagement with Indigenous governments and organizations

and review of best practices, the statutory review is recommending that the

Adoption Act, 2013 , be amended to

include legislated provisions similar to those included in the

Children, Youth and Families Act .

The

first amendment area is defining who is an Indigenous child and youth. This

amendment adds the definition of Indigenous child to the legislation, which is

not there now, which will clarify to whom the legislative amendments for

Indigenous children and youth apply. Further,

definitions to support these new

provisions include indigenous youth, Indigenous government or organization,

Indigenous representative and cultural connection plan. With the addition of

these

definitions, the adoption legislation would be consistent with those in

the Children, Youth and Families Act .

The next

amendment area is expanding best interest principles. My department and the

courts make adoption decisions based on what is in the best interest of a child

and factors to be considered are outlined in the adoption legislation. The

proposed amendments will include the importance of preserving an Indigenous

child or youth's unique cultural identity as well as the importance of the

relationship between siblings when determining the best interests of a child.

Making these updates would ensure consistency with current policy and best

practice.

The next

amendment area focuses on the needs of Indigenous children and youth. The

adoption legislation does not currently recognize the unique needs of Indigenous

children and youth. My department has consulted with all Indigenous governments

and organizations in the province, and their feedback regarding the need for

clarity around notification and collaboration is now reflected in the proposed

amendments in this bill.

The

following changes are proposed: the addition of a

Schedule of Indigenous

governments and organizations be added to the adoption legislation, similar to

the Children, Youth and Families Act ,

to list Indigenous governments and organizations who may appoint an Indigenous

representative to receive notice and be involved in adoption planning. The

Sheshatshiu Innu First Nation, the Mushuau Innu First Nation, the Nunatsiavut

Government, the Miawpukek First Nation, and the NunatuKavut Community Council

will be included in the Schedule.

Following discussions with the Qalipu First Nation, they have advised that they

will reach out to my department when they wish to be included in the Schedule.

Upon request, my department will seek approval of the Lieutenant-Governor in

Council to make such an amendment to the

Schedule at that time.

Regulations will also be developed to outline the process for Indigenous

governments and organizations to appoint an Indigenous representative to act on

its behalf in matters pertaining to the adoption of an Indigenous child or

youth. As well, following an adoption, my department will notify the Indigenous

representative that an adoption order has been granted by the court.

Furthermore, cultural connection plans, which outline the arrangements made to

foster an Indigenous child post-adoption, will now be required by the court

prior to finalizing an adoption.

The next

amendment area is related to openness orders. Post-adoption openness is the

process through which adopted persons and their birth families or others

significant to them maintain contact after an adoption has been finalized. Under

the Children, Youth and Families Act ,

a judge may place conditions such as continuation of parental access on an order

of continuous custody, and these conditions may continue to have force once an

adoption is finalized.

There

are times, however, when continuation of access is not always in the best

interests of the child and may unnecessarily delay permanency for children. At

other times, continuation of access is in the best interests of the child and a

court order would ensure this continues.

Throughout the engagement process, clarity regarding the openness was

highlighted by the Office of the Child and Youth Advocate and Indigenous

governments. Particularly the need to ensure that adoptive families maintain any

openness that was agreed to prior to the finalization of an adoption. For

Indigenous children, this was primarily related to ensuring openness with the

Indigenous organization as it relates to cultural connection and access to

benefits.

department is addressing this matter by incorporating legislative provisions to

remit openness orders that may be issued by the court in cases where a person

with access with a manager with custody wish to continue access beyond the

adoption. This decision would be made based on what is in the best interests of

the child. As well, this would clarify the matter in advance of an adoption

taking place and would provide legal clarity regarding the rights and

obligations of all parties.

Speaker,

the legislative provisions which outline the manner in which parties may

voluntarily enter into openness agreements in relation to an adopted child will

continue because this is most appropriate in some instances

The next

amendment area is regarding youth. We have identified a legislative gap that

exists between the Children, Youth and

Families Act and the current Adoption

Act, 2013 whereby a youth in care who has not been adopted by their 18th

birthday must wait to be adopted as an adult at age 19.

The

issue lies within

section 50 of the current legislation that indicates a youth,

after their 18th birthday, nor the manager is able to consent to the adoption.

Therefore, we are proposing to address this gap by adding a legislative

provision that will allow the manager's consent, signed before the 18th

birthday, to remain in effect even though the 18th birthday has intervened,

thereby allowing adoption plans to be finalized.

The

final amendment area focuses on confidentiality and disclosure. Amendments are

required to clarify the current legislative provisions in the Adoption Act

regarding confidentiality and to ensure that the intended protection of

sensitive information about adoptions is achieved while, at the same time,

effecting maximum transparency for adoptive families.

The

current act already provides direction regarding confidentiality and disclosure

of information related to finalized adoptions; however, amendments are required

to provide a direction on who may obtain information prior to its finalization.

The

proposed amendments would also include a provision for internal review and

appeal to the court for persons who are refused access to information under

section 64.1. Currently, the provincial director may disclose information to an

authority responsible for adoptions or adoption records in another province. The

reference to “province” is limiting, as there are times in practice when it's

necessary to contact and disclose information to adoption agencies in the United

States or elsewhere.

department's post-adoption program is frequently contacted by individuals born

in Newfoundland and Labrador but adopted by American families, for instance,

most likely in the 1950s or '60s, who are seeking information about their

family. It is important that the post-adoption program have authority to

communicate with adoption agencies in the United States and elsewhere to ensure

adopted persons have access to information they are entitled to receive.

We are

proposing that the word “province” in

section 68(2) of the Adoption Act be

replaced with the word “jurisdiction” to address this matter.

As well,

in accordance with

section 65(1)(a): The provincial director may disclose

identifying or non-identifying information to a person where the disclosure is

necessary for the health or safety of an adopted person, as currently written.

We are proposing to amend this

section to allow the provincial director to

disclose information where it is determined to be in the best interests of an

adopted child or adopted person. This change would be consistent with the

approach of the Children, Youth and

Families Act and allows for a more nuanced and clinical assessment of best

interest rather than meeting solely the threshold necessary for health or

safety.

Speaker,

in closing, the amendments I'm introducing today will further strengthen the

adoption process in Newfoundland and Labrador, as well as recognize the unique

needs of Indigenous children and families. Again, as a government, we are

pleased with the feedback received during the engagement process that has helped

to inform the proposed amendments of the province's adoption legislation.

I ask my

hon. colleagues to support the bill which focuses on strengthening the adoption

process throughout the province. I look forward to seeing this legislation

passed. Further, as we debate these amendments, I would ask Members to focus on

what we believe is and should be the focus of the Adoption Act and our

amendments today, which reflects on the best interests of the child. This

extends to ensuring Indigenous children being considered for adoption have their

cultural background protected and ensured through the adoption process.

Speaker,

thank you.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER:

Thank you very much, Speaker.

I'm very

pleased to have the opportunity to speak on Bill 39,

An Act to Amend the

Adoption Act, 2013.

As the

minister has stated, the purpose of this bill is to expand some sections of the

act to ensure the best interests of Indigenous children are taken into account

when they are adopted.

These

changes reflect extensive consultations with every Indigenous group in the

province. They reflect consultations with the Child and Youth Advocate as well

as the Foster Families Association and the Information and Privacy Commissioner.

These

changes also reflect the Children, Youth

and Families Act . The changes are important. They are driven by Indigenous

communities themselves, they have been studied intensively and they have our

support.

The

minister has already gone through the bill. I intend to take the same approach

and make some observations along the way.

Under

some new

definitions, the first clause of the bill amends

section 2 of the act

where various terms are defined. A couple of those new

definitions stand out.

One is the definition of a cultural connection plan. Clause 4 of the bill is

going to add a new requirement in

section 28 of the act that when an Indigenous

child is adopted a cultural connection plan must be put in place to ensure the

child maintains that important connection. This plan is one of the things that

must be placed before the court as part of the application to adopt a child when

that child is Indigenous.

The bill

says a “'cultural connection plan' means a description of the arrangements made

to foster and Indigenous child's connection with the Indigenous child's culture,

heritage, traditions, community, language and spiritually to preserve the

Indigenous child's cultural identity after an adoption order is granted.”

Indigenous child: Another definition added to the act is the definition of

Indigenous child. It will mean “(

i) an Inuit child, (ii) a Métis child, (iii) an

Innu, Mi'kmaq or other First Nations child, (iv) a child who has a parent who

considers the child to be Indigenous, or (

v) a person who is at least 12 years

of age but under 19 years of age and who considers himself or herself to be

Indigenous.” In other words, a child 12 or older may identify as Indigenous or

the parent of a child may consider that child to be Indigenous and that will be

sufficient for the child to be treated under this act as an Indigenous child.

Openness: Another couple of

definitions have to do with openness. The act

already has a definition of openness agreement. This comes into play under

Part

IX of the act in sections 51 to 53. Openness is about maintaining a link and the

prospect of future interactions or information exchanges of one sort or another.

The bill

will change the definition of openness agreement and add a new definition of

openness order. Openness agreement will now mean, “an agreement made under

section 51 or 52 for the purposes of facilitating communication or maintaining

personal relationships or cultural connections after an adoption order is

granted.” Openness order will mean that “an order made by a court under

Part IX

for the purposes of facilitating communication or maintaining personal

relationships or cultural connections after an adoption order is granted.”

As we

can see, the

definitions are expended to make provisions for the maintenance of

cultural connections. The bill recognizes that these cultural connections are

extremely important to Indigenous children and we have an obligation to ensure

the child can maintain those connections and benefit from them.

Other

definitions: Another couple of amendments will add

definitions for Indigenous

government or organization, as well as Indigenous representative.

Best

interests principle: Clause 2 of the bill adds two things to

section 4 of the

act where the best interests principle is defined. Right now, the act says, “

(1) The purpose of this Act is to create new and permanent family ties through

adoption.

(2) This Act shall be interpreted and administered in accordance with

the principle that the overriding consideration in a decision to be made under

this Act shall be the best interests of the child.

(3) In determining a child's

best interests all relevant factors shall be considered …” and then it lists

some of those relevant factors. Those include such things as: the child's

safety, health and well-being; the child's physical, emotional and developmental

needs; the importance of stability and permanency in the context of the child's

care; the quality of the relationship the child has with a birth parent or other

person significant to the child and the effect of maintaining that relationship;

and so forth.

The bill

will add two other relevant factors: “the importance of the relationship between

siblings” and “the importance of preserving an Indigenous child's unique

cultural identity.”

Youth 18

to 19:

Section 19(1) of the current act says: “A child shall only be adopted in

the province where the following persons have consented.” Then it lists those

persons.

Clause 3

of the bill fills a gap by allowing people between the ages of 18 and 19 to be

adopted. Currently, a person in their 18th year must wait until their 19th

birthday. So filling that gap is a sensible change.

cultural connection plan: Clause 4 of the bill has to do with the cultural

connection plan that was defined in clause 1. This change simply requires that a

cultural connection plan be a part of documentation submitted to court for

finalization of adoption on an Indigenous child.

Service

of documents: Clause 5 of the bill adds a new

section 31.1 regarding the service

of documents. It allows copies of documents to be provided to an Indigenous

representative in certain instances.

Notification: Clause 6 of the bill adds a new

section 36.1 to the act. That new

section will state: “A manager shall notify, in writing, an Indigenous

representative of the appropriate Indigenous government or organization of the

adoption of an Indigenous child as soon as practicable after the manager

receives a certified copy of the adoption order under” the appropriate section.

Access

order or agreement: Clause 7 of the bill makes a significant change to a

section

of the act regarding access orders or agreements. This is how the current

section 40 reads: “Where an adoption order is granted, an order or an agreement

that is enforceable under

Part III of the

Children's Law Act or

Part IV of the

Family Law Act for access to the adopted child ceases unless the

court orders otherwise under subsection (2).

“

(2) Where it is in the child's best interests the court may continue or vary an

access order or an access provision of an agreement that is enforceable under

Part III of the Children's Law Act or

Part IV of the Family Law Act .”

And this

is how the new

section 40 will read: “Where an adoption order is granted in

respect of a child, the following orders and agreements cease to have effect:

(

a) any order that grants a person access to the adopted children, other than an

openness order granted under this Act; and (

b) any agreement that is enforceable

under

Part III of the Children's Law Act

Part IV of the Family Law Act that

grants a person access to the adopted child.” In other words, any access to an

adopted child allowed under the Children's Law Act or the

Family Law Act will no longer be in effect, only the rights provided under

openness orders will have effect.

Openness: As noted earlier, clause 8 of the bill has to do with the part of the

act on openness agreements,

Part IX. The bill adds seven new sections in that

part. The purpose of these new sections is to protect the best interests of the

child. Currently, there may be continuation of access after adoption if a judge

so decides. Under these amendments, the best interests of the child, as

determined under the process laid out in this act, will prevail.

Protection of privacy: Clauses 9 to 14 of the bill amend

Part XII of the act

regarding confidentiality and disclosure. Clause 9 rewrites

section 64 in order

to enhance the protection of sensitive information. Clause 10 adds two new

sections defining who may obtain sensitive information and what shall not be

disclosed. Clause 11 rewrites

section 65 regarding disclosure when it is deemed

to be in the interest of an adopted child or person. The change will make the

act consistent with the Children, Youth

and Families Act . Without the change, a provincial director may disclose

information to a person for health or safety reasons or to allow the child to

obtain a benefit. The amendment allows for disclosure based on the best

interests of the child.

Clause

12 rewrites

section 66 regarding contact by a provincial director. Clause 13

simply changes province to jurisdiction. Clause 14 adds a new section, 68.1, to

allow for internal reviews and appeal. This, too, is consistent with the

Children, Youth and Families Act .

Other

changes: Clauses 15 to 20 make other changes, one of which adds a new

Schedule

to the act,

Schedule B, which lists Indigenous governments or organizations. The

Schedule can be amended by regulation. The bill lists five such Indigenous

governments or organizations: The Miawpukek First Nation, Mushuau Innu First

Nation, Nunatsiavut Government, NunatuKavut Community Council and the

Sheshatshiu Innu First Nation. I apologize for my enunciations on those. The

Qalipu First Nation has chosen not to be included in the Schedule.

conclusion, Speaker, this is an overview of what the bill does. As I stated at

the outset, the bill reflects the aspirations of the Indigenous communities

themselves. It is the product of extensive consultation that I personally was

part of myself. It has been extensively reviewed. Children's interests and

privacy protection concerns have been addressed.

It's a

bill we support in principle. We look forward to further debate at the Committee

stage.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Torngat Mountains.

L. EVANS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First, I

would like to thank my fellow MHA for Placentia West - Bellevue. He did

apologize for some of his pronunciations, but I really respect when somebody is

there and tries to the best of their ability to pronounce the Indigenous words,

because that's inclusion. So I thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

L. EVANS:

This bill is very, very

important because it impacts Indigenous children. Indigenous children grow up to

be Indigenous adults – the Mi'kmaq Nations, the Innu Nations, the Inuit Nations

and Inuit organizations.

Much

work must be done to keep our Innu, Inuit and Mi'kmaq children close to their

home communities. A lot of times it's impossible, if a child is being fostered

or being adopted, for them to be in their home communities, but we must be doing

everything that we can to ensure that our Indigenous children have ties to the

land and to the culture.

That not

only helps the Innu, the Inuit and the Mi'kmaq child, but also it helps their

family and it helps their communities. Without that, we will never have healthy

Indigenous communities. That's why this act is so important. It's about

protection of the child but also ensuring culture and land connection and

culture connection is being maintained. That's what was missing, I think.

Just

looking at that also, maintaining true cultural connection should not be

substituted for Ski-Doo rides and walks in the woods to have a boil up. That's

not ties to the Indigenous land use, the Indigenous culture. So we must really

make sure the connection is true to the intent.

We know

the importance of land and culture to the overall health of the child. We also

know it's important to the people. If we protect our children and our people, we

will actually be able to make bridges where we can actually end

intergenerational trauma.

I want

to commend the minister and this government for all the work that's been done to

improve this act. I really applaud your efforts and the efforts of the former

minister, as well. Thank you, Minister.

commend, also, the energy that's gone into this and the way the consultations

were done with the Indigenous groups: the Nunatsiavut, the Inuit community

governments, the different organizations, from different levels of the Innu

governments and also with the Mi'kmaq. I did hear some feedback from the Innu

and the Inuit that they were consulted with. I think that this act will bring

about change, but it's a first step.

What I

want to say now to the minister is that we also need to do more for the families

of the children. Whether we're fostering children or having our Indigenous

children adopted, we have to make sure that there's work going in to help the

families so that they can keep their children, so we don't have to deal with the

issue of adoption, so we don't have to deal with the issue of fostering.

You may

say, well, this is

an Act to Amend the Adoption Act, Lela, but in actual fact,

we have to look at all the services that apply when we come to dealing with the

protection of children. A lot of times, we need to make sure that when we are

protecting the child, we're making sure that child has a warm home to be raised

in, the child has food on the table so that they're not hungry and the child can

actually be with their family in a house. So we need affordable housing.

The

Indigenous world revolves around the children because Indigenous people know

that child is going to grow up to be an adult, to have more children and then,

later, to be an elder, to actually educate the youth and the new children that

comes after them. So, with us, it's all about everything working together.

Mr.

Speaker, I'm actually going to end there, but I really want to say that these

amendments go a long way to ensuring that the children are protected in a way

that they don't lose connection to their culture and to the land.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Burin

- Grand Bank.

P. PIKE:

Speaker, I'm quite pleased to

have the opportunity to speak to Bill 39,

an act respecting the

Adoption Act, 2013 .

required in the Adoption Act, 2013

section 77, a statutory review has to be completed and the regulations are to be

examined and areas to be improved. I think this is a good thing. I think any

plans or policies we put out there should have a review timeline and a review

process in place, Speaker, to allow for that. This also includes public

consultations, which are very important when considering such important and

sensitive legislation. I understand that consultations were given a priority

when it comes to this bill. I understand that they were quite effective and well

attended.

A bill

that provides improved adoption services, such as this bill, is the result of

experiences and concerns and is based on best practices. The expansion of the

best-interests-of-the-child principle include the “importance of preserving an

Indigenous child's unique cultural identity” and the importance of the

relationship between siblings.

This

amendment being added to the act is so important, Speaker. I am pleased to see

these principles added to

section 4 of the act and to know they are consistent

with current policies and best practices already. The significance and

importance of sibling relationships is, again, a very important consideration

and I'm elated to see this as a part of the act.

The

Indigenous children and Indigenous representative

section in the amendments

clearly outlines that the best interests of Indigenous children are best

addressed through their involvement of their Indigenous community. The premise

around this principle allows for a definition of Indigenous child which will

allow for various provisions when an adoption is being reviewed.

cultural connection plan would be required by the courts prior to getting an

order. Indigenous governments and organizations would be identified and notified

and involved in the cultural connection planning.

Openness

orders for post-adoption content: These amendments provide guidelines and

procedures to facilitate communities where it is in the best interests of a

child. The adoption of between 18 to 19 birthdays has been addressed. It

clarifies the gap that was there existing in the current legislation and in the

current bill. The act also addresses proper amendments to ensure the sensitive

adoptive information is protected, but it still says that they're going to

ensure transparency in the process.

I fully

support this bill. I congratulate the Department of Children, Seniors and Social

Development for bringing this forward and doing this great work.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail - Paradise.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Speaker.

When I

think of adoption or the birth of a child I always think of that Christmas hymn,

When a Child is Born. It's a wonderful

time, the birth of a child. It's happy; it's a miraculous time. It's no

different when you adopt a child. We're going to support this legislation, no

doubt about it.

When you

say it's in the best interests of the child, that's core. That is the core to

this legislation: In the best interests of the child. One would expect that. One

may argue that our legislation in the past probably wasn't in the best interests

of a child, but the concept, the purpose of this legislation is core with the

best interests of a child.

When you

think of a child, when they're young it's their wonder years. It's the time when

they really develop in how they're going to proceed in life. Those early years

are extremely, extremely important. I've always said in this House our greatest

resource is our people.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

P. DINN:

I take that a step further:

Our greatest resource is our youth and our babies that are being born. That's

our future. Literally, that's our future. They're our best resource. They're our

greatest resource.

But

every family, every situation is unique when you look at adopting a child. My

experience, when I worked with a number of social workers who had to deal in

adoptions, there are two sides to it: There's the adoption where a family is

taking on a child and starting their family; and there's the flip side to it,

when you're removing a child from a situation. So there are good and bad. But

the adoption is – regardless of the age of the child, it's the birth of your

child, basically, bringing into the family.

I'm

really pleased when we're talking to the engagement process here. I think when

we talk about Indigenous communities – I mean I've visited them and that's the

best I can say. I really and honestly don't have a grasp of the lifestyle and

the culture. I'm embarrassed to say so, because we really all should have a good

understanding of our province, which includes Labrador.

So I'm

glad to hear that the changes are being driven by the Indigenous communities.

It's there – and I read it here, “to foster an Indigenous child's connection

with the Indigenous child's culture, heritage, traditions, community, language

and spirituality to preserve the Indigenous child's cultural identity after an

adoption is granted.” That is so important. I mean, get past the word

“legislation,” but picture that child, an innocent child coming into a new home.

The

Member for Torngat Mountains mentioned about going into a warm home, talked

about housing, talked about food, talked about other supports, but we all hear

that saying: You have to make the house a home. So I agree with the Member in

terms of the basics but when we consider the cultural activities that you have

to bring along with that child, that's making that house, that's making that

structure a home for those children, and that is so important.

The

Member for Torngat Mountains mentioned the other day as well, talking about Red

Indian Lake just for a little side here, and talked about how that could

increase more racism or more vindictiveness towards Indigenous peoples. Well, I

hope people see this piece of legislation here that we're dealing with. This

should not, nor should any legislation, be going down that road. This is looking

at babies, youth. This is what it is looking at: Giving them a better start when

they have no home. You can't argue against this legislation. Like any child,

Indigenous or not, you want to provide an environment where that child can

flourish.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

P. DINN:

You want it there so that

child can be everything and anything they want to be. To do that, you have to

have that base; you have to know where you came from. Making sure that they

remain in touch with their culture, their customs and their traditions is a huge

part of that.

Again,

that's not going out for a Ski-Doo ride; there's more to it than that. There is

the spirituality of it. There is always room to improve on anything we put

forward. I think this is a very, very good start at this. I'm sure, down the

road, you'll find others instances where we should have changed this, should

have changed that. We talked about it is the protection of the child and that's

what it's aimed at. It's to make sure every child, and in this particular case

Indigenous children, have the best start they can have if they can't have it in

their home, if for whatever reason they have to be adopted.

Adoption

is not always because of some bad thing. It might be any kind of situation that

leads to an adoption. But you're giving that child a start. Just think about the

child going to a strange home to start with. So everything you can do to create

a familiarity for that child, to create a setting that is not so foreign to

them, can only reap benefits. It can only reap benefits.

So when

we look at this, this engagement process, and look at the unique needs – and I

would argue every child comes with unique needs. But when you're looking at

Indigenous groups, Indigenous children, there are some very obvious needs in

terms of culture that we need to deal with. The best interests' principle, I

like that. That's something we need to abide by.

You've

added in a couple of relevant factors to that. The importance of the

relationship between siblings, that is crucial – crucial. The importance of

preserving an Indigenous child's unique cultural identity, those are crucial to

this legislation.

When I

look at the bill, there's many bullets here and explanatory notes. But the ones

I highlight are the best interests of a child, the best interests of an

Indigenous child, preserving an Indigenous child's unique cultural identity and

ensuring to include a cultural connection plan. These are all great to ensuring

these children have the best start, the best opportunity to be all that they can

be.

I'm not

going to say anything more other than this is a long time coming and we really

start to address the true issues and the true challenges and come up with

solutions that ensure our Indigenous children have the best start they can and

they do not lose their culture, their identity and their traditions.

Thank

you for this and I look forward to the Q & A on this.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER (Warr):

I'm recognizing the hon. the

Member for Lake Melville.

P. TRIMPER:

Thank you, Speaker.

others have indicated, this is a very well-received piece of legislation in this

House of Assembly here today. I must say, representing the District of Lake

Melville, it's a piece of legislation that reflects so many of the issues that

we deal with.

you're going through the clauses and the technical briefing we had from staff

and then listening to the comments on the floor, it's quite revealing. Usually

in a constituency office, you're working with an individual family or individual

and they're coming to you with a problem such as around adoption, maybe it's

fostering, other issues around children and youth in care.

As they

often say, you have to step back sometimes to see the woods through the trees.

If I think of all these individual files and I start to look down at the

different changes being proposed in Bill 39 that the minister identified, you

start to see common themes running through those, underlining issues. It's very

refreshing to see just how effective the consultation was, led by the minister

and the department, to really get at the heart of what I believe are the vast

majority of so many of the issues we've been tackling, myself over the last six

years, and many others for perhaps many more years. Nothing but a compliment,

Minister, to what you have here.

I wanted

to talk, just a couple more points. One that I'm often speaking to or having

people ask me about is: What is wrong with having youth from Labrador fostered

or adopted in very loving families outside of Labrador, outside of that culture?

I feel that, as my colleague just spoke about a few minutes ago, from Torngat

Mountains, there's a real realization of the long-term consequences of being

separated from your identify, from your culture when it's so steeped in history

and so rich, and then to be separated from that. I think that the department and

officials over the years have absolutely moved in a direction which is to

essentially move a child out of harm's way.

Under

the Child Protection Act you're

really, first and foremost, trying to protect that child from whatever immediate

situation which just isn't going to help for the future of that child or

children. But, as we're coming to understand through intergenerational trauma,

you're certainly starting to see consequences, you're seeing issues manifesting

in other ways, through mental health issues, maybe medical health issues and so

on, that it's good to see legislation coming now, because I feel that it's

reflecting a realization that some moves, despite maybe the best of intentions,

are paying and challenging society and governments to respond adequately. So,

again, I compliment the minister.

One

further point I wanted to put in here – two more points. One is we've had a good

discussion in this area of the Legislature here this last hour and it's our

understanding – and I look forward to seeing exactly what this all might entail;

we have some ideas – that the Indigenous organizations, through their membership

already – and, by the way, I wanted to say that we are already seeing elements

of this rolling out as the represents have been identified, have been hired,

they're in place now starting to represent that Indigenous culture and the

context of the adoptions, I feel that's going to be very helpful, and I'm

understanding that there will be good guidance for those future families. If

they're not connected to the culture, per se, there'll be important guidance

provided. I've heard some examples here as to what one might interpret as

appropriate cultural education, versus the real understanding and thorough

ability to be able to provide very much of a nurturing, culturally enriching

environment.

My final

thought I wanted to put out there was – and it's only because it's fresh and top

of mind – helping a family this week, these last couple of days, and it's a

family we've been working with for many years. It may or may not necessarily fit

inside this act, but I did want to mention it.

Many of

the situations our office deals with are through adoptions by other family

members of those children. I can list off right now a handful of families I'm

aware of where the grandparents are now raising young children. So there's a

generation gap there. Some of these grandparents, frankly, have stepped up. They

really need to be commended. And while they enjoy the support, I'm sure there's

always so much more that can be done there. Especially as you get on in your

years and now you're tasked with this immense responsibility of providing a

good, safe, culturally relevant home for these children now that are perhaps

related to your son or daughter and now you're fully in charge.

I thank,

again, the minister; I thank the House, again, for bringing this legislation

forward. It will be well received in Lake Melville, across Labrador and across

the province. I look forward to seeing it in action.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl - Southlands.

P. LANE:

Thank you, Speaker.

I'm glad

to have the opportunity to say a few words on Bill 39,

An Act to Amend the

Adoption Act. I will be supporting this bill, I will say that for the record. I

think it's a good piece of legislation.

Obviously, we know the Adoptions Act in general, that the overwhelming principle

has always been that the needs of the child come first – as it should. Certainly

there is nothing being done to, in anyway, take away from that principle; we're

only adding to that principle today.

Speaker,

I can't speak with any great knowledge or insight as it relates to the needs or

know a whole lot about the culture of a lot of our Indigenous people. You know,

certainly in the district that I represent, I don't think that I can –I've dealt

with a lot of people in my district, know an awful lot of people, I can't say I

know anybody, to be honest with you, that comes to mind at the moment that would

be an Indigenous person in my area. I'm sure there are people perhaps that may

have status, you know, from Qalipu and so on, which I may not be aware of. But,

certainly, when I think of Inuit and so on and the groups up in Labrador, I

can't think of anybody, to be honest with you, in my district.

haven't had that exposure, like my colleagues behind me would obviously would in

their district. They would be very familiar with the culture, with the language,

with the traditions and so on. I come at this, I guess, with a very, very basic

knowledge – admittedly. I'm certainly no one to judge, in any detailed way, as

to a lot of the aspects of this bill in terms of the details of the culture and

so on.

But from

a general point of view, and I speak from a general point of view, Speaker, as I

said, it's all suppose to be about the best interests of the child. I think when

we look at anybody, whether you're a child or an adult – and we've seen in more

recent years I think a greater realization of it – that if people are truly to

be happy and truly to succeed and so on, I think the first thing that needs to

happen is that there has to be a recognition of themselves, who they are, where

they come from and what they stand for.

We've

seen a lot of people now, not just from a cultural point of view but even from

how they identify, and that wasn't always the case. Many years back people were

living their lives and really living the life of someone who they weren't, they

weren't being true to themselves. It's great to see these days that more and

more people are choosing to be very open.

SPEAKER:

I remind the Member to stay

relevant to the bill.

P. LANE:

Yes, thank you, Speaker.

point, Speaker, is the importance for people to identify with who they are.

That's my point. In this case, it's important that if children, Indigenous

children, specifically, as is being dealt with here in this piece of

legislation, they will have the best opportunity, I believe, I think we all

would believe, to success, to be happy as themselves and who they were born to

be, keeping those ties to their culture is very, very important.

From a

general sense, that's really what this bill is all about, it's recognizing the

importance of protecting children, particularly children who are in unhealthy

environments, who could be in an environment where they've sadly been harmed or

there's a high potential that harm could be done to them for any number of

reasons. That's what the child protection is all about, is to protect those

vulnerable children in those situations.

But, as

my colleague from Lake Melville said, it's also important that instead of –

while it's obviously critical that a child be removed from a harmful situation,

I think there's a realization that we can also do, I would say, unintended harm

by removing children from their culture and ties to who they are as an

individual.

So,

preferably, we would want any child in that situation who, whether they're going

to be adopted or whether they're going to be fostered and so on – ultimately, I

would assume the goal would be that they could stay in their own community. That

they could be, wherever possible, maintaining that link with family members,

siblings, friends as much as possible.

Ultimately, if there were family members that could adopt them or foster them –

that would be assuming there's no issue with the person or persons that they're

being separated from – it's not doing any harm there. Ultimately, if they could

be adopted or fostered by family members in their own community, that would be

great.

Barring

that, I think being adopted and/or fostered by other Indigenous people who

understand the culture and are living that culture, that would ultimately be

great. But there are also going to be situations, perhaps, where that may not be

possible and the child may end up having to be fostered or adopted by somebody

not in that community who may not be of that culture. Those situations may occur

as well.

That's

why I think it's talking about here, in those cases, the need to ensure that

whoever the adoptive family is, that they are going to commit – and, obviously,

there are going to have to be a mechanism in place to ensure those commitments

are kept – to maintain those ties for that child with that child's culture and

so on.

I'm not

sure of the mechanics of exactly how that would happen. I did have a little

sidebar discussion with my colleague just sort of asking about how that would

work. I just look at myself as the individual. If I were ever to decide that I

was going to adopt or foster an Indigenous child, I wouldn't know where to start

in terms of the cultural piece. As a couple of Members talked about, there's

more to it than going for a ride on a Ski-Doo and having a boil up.

That

would be about the extent of the things that I would know about, because I just

don't know the culture and understand all the traditions; I don't know the

language and so on. Obviously, somebody who was to undertake this, who was not

of that culture, there would obviously have to be a huge learning curve. Those

adoptive families would have to commit to and undertake a huge learning curve if

they truly wanted to adopt an Indigenous child.

I'm

assuming with the Indigenous organizations that are involved in this process

within the department, that there would obviously have to be significant – I'm

going to use the term “orientation”; it may not be the right term. It's one

thing for me to be committed to learn but then, obviously, there has to be

someone to teach me a lot of these traditions if I were to go down that road as

a potential foster parent or to adopt a child.

I'm sure

all these things would be covered off in the regulations. I'm sure that these

things would be covered off with the department, with the other Indigenous

organizations that are involved. If somebody not of that culture were to decide

they wanted to be an adoptive parent or even a foster parent, it would obviously

have to be a fair – along with a willingness of that person to learn, there

would obviously have to be somebody to teach. I'm sure that those resources

would have to be put in place and would in that particular case.

With

that said, Speaker, I think the intent here is great. It makes a whole lot of

sense to me. It's certainly something that I will support. I'm sure that all of

the mechanisms will be put in place by the department through regulation,

through policy and through consultation with the Indigenous organizations to

ensure that all the resources that would be required to make such adoptions,

fostering, a seamless exercise, if you will – I'm sure that those resources

would be available to make that happen. Obviously, if we're going to do these

things, it's so important to every child and it has to be done right and proper.

From the

general perspective of what we're trying to do here, I think it's a good thing.

I'm very glad to see that apparently it seems like there's been a lot of

consultation with our Indigenous people. That's key to make this successful.

With

that said, Speaker, I will conclude my remarks. I just reiterate the point that

I think it is a good piece of legislation and I will be supporting it.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

J. BROWN:

Thank you, Speaker.

I, too,

will start of by saying I do support this. It's a good start towards making sure

that Indigenous children, no matter if they're in an Indigenous community or

they're going to another community or something like that, that their culture

goes with them. That is really important.

We talk

about it, the importance of retaining one's culture and the important

connections they have to their homeland and things like that. Make sure that we

do the best we can for children that are in such situations, that they're not

with their people and their direct connection to the land. We have to make sure

that it goes with them, have to make sure that it is a part of their identity

and who they are and their spiritual being.

I look

at my own children in the sense that my wife does everything in her power to

make sure that they understand where they came from and who their family is.

They have a connection with their community and all their relatives when it

comes to their Indigenous identity. We have to make sure that even though a

child may be going into a different home, an adoptive home, it still continues

on through the rest of their life. That's a connection that is very spiritual,

it is very in depth and I almost would say it is genetic. It is something that's

a part of their being and who they are. No matter where they are in the world

they will have that connection to it.

My wife

always says she'll never leave Labrador because she's afraid that she'll lose

that little bit so she'll always stay in Labrador. But I still believe even if

she goes anywhere in the world, she will always have that spiritual connection

to the land and to their people. That's very important to Indigenous cultures

and most other cultures as well. That is important to their well-being, their

health and everything. Spiritual health is a very important thing too.

I do

applaud this move and I'm glad that they're in consultations with all the

Indigenous governments. We make sure that we address this. It's a part of the

act, it's a part of everything that is that we continue along those lines to

make sure that this well-being of Indigenous children are important, it's upheld

and to have the ability to do this. Also, it is great, too, that we have it here

but we have to make sure that the correct resources and everything is too, to

make sure that it's facilitated.

I did

listen in when the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands asked this question to my

two colleagues from Labrador about how would this work out. It's important. He

raised some good points about making sure that there are resources and education

and everything there to help people do this. We should help people do this and

give them all the opportunities to make sure, because like we said the other day

when we were discussing another act, it's about a learning process and all of us

learning together about Indigenous cultures in this province. We have to learn

together.

That's

the thing, too; the Member was honest and said that he doesn't have many

Indigenous people calling his office but he wants to learn. That brings a lot of

hope to me that he's sitting behind me saying he wants to learn, and that's the

important part.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

J. BROWN:

I recognize that we're all

here as a learning experience and we should all learn together. Things like this

helps other people in our community learn the importance of the cultures that

are around us and our well-being.

I, too,

will support this. I think it's a great first step. I hope that the department

continues to look at all these things to improve Indigenous people and improve

the lives of Indigenous children in this province.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Seeing no other speakers if

the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development speaks now, this will

close debate.

The hon.

the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development.

J. ABBOTT:

Speaker, thank you very much.

To my

colleagues in the House, I thank you for your comments. I just wanted to respond

to a couple, if I may. The Member for Torngat Mountains talked about supporting

families, among other comments. Certainly, I believe that is essential if we are

to succeed in making sure our Indigenous children and families remain together.

That's certainly something we are doing and we will build on going forward. We

have seen, I say, a significant reduction of the number of children coming into

care in Labrador because of that initiative by my department. We will build on

that because we know we have more to do.

appreciate those who recognize that the best interest of the child is

fundamental and the driving force behind the legislation and certainly these

amendments.

The

Member for Lake Melville, one of the things he commented on was in terms of

within a family where children may be raised by their grandparents or other

family members, their aunties or others. One of the things that we are working

on with the Department of Justice and Public Safety and the Indigenous

communities and governments is how we actually look at strengthening our

legislation to support those cultural adoptions within the Indigenous families

and communities. That, we know, needs to be addressed and we recognize it

wouldn't fit within the context of these amendments. That's a piece we're

working on, as we speak. So we will have more on that in the future.

To the

Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands in terms of how we make this happen, in

terms of protecting the Indigenous culture for children who are being adopted,

we will have and it's in the legislation and it will be put in front of a judge

in approving an adoption order would be a cultural connection plan. So that

would be developed by our social workers in conjunction with the Indigenous

representatives and the families involved to make sure that that is in fact in

place. We also have openness arrangements so that the connection with the

family, if it's agreed by all parties, will continue in a post-adoption period,

and for life, ideally.

So,

Speaker, that's it for now. I do appreciate, and if you look across our

community, the number of children that have been adopted, the number of children

yet to be adopted, we're working hard to make sure that the children in our care

that are identified for adoption are placed in a loving and caring family as

quickly as possible, recognizing there is a fair bit of work that has to be done

involving both our social workers, the families involved and the courts.

Thank

you, Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

SPEAKER:

Is the House ready for the

question?

The

motion is that Bill 39 now be read a second time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

CLERK (Barnes):

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Adoption Act, 2013. (Bill 39)

SPEAKER:

This bill has been read a

second time.

When

shall the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole?

S. CROCKER:

Now.

SPEAKER:

Now.

motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Adoption Act, 2013,” read a second time,

ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, be leave. (Bill

39)

SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

S. CROCKER:

Thank you, Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader, that this House resolve itself

into a Committee of the Whole to consider Bill 39.

SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of the

Whole to consider the said bill.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, the Speaker

left the Chair.

Committee of the

Whole

CHAIR (Warr):

Order, please!

We are

now considering Bill 39,

An Act To Amend The Adoption Act, 2013.

A bill,

“An Act To Amend The Adoption Act, 2013.” (Bill 39)

CLERK:

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Shall clause 1 carry?

The

Chair recognizes the hon. Member for Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER:

Thank you, Chair.

Minister, you mentioned in your address – before I get started, I guess, I would

first like to say thanks to my colleague. I appreciate the forgiveness on my

enunciations of the very important Indigenous nations that deserve these very

important changes to this bill, so thank you very much for that.

Minister, the Qalipu First Nation has chosen not to be included in the Schedule.

Did they give you any reason why?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

J. ABBOTT:

Chair, the only thing I can

respond right now is, in terms of the issues that they're dealing with within

their community, this wasn't, I'll say, high on their priority in terms of

dealing with children's issues. But they want to stay apprised of the

developments and if and when they're ready to participate then we will add them

to the Schedule.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER:

So while they're not a part of the Schedule, is the Qalipu First Nation covered

by this legislation?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

J. ABBOTT:

Yes, they are, to the extent that we can accommodate the Indigenous issues that

may arise. The only missing piece, right now, if this was passed today, is that

we wouldn't have an Indigenous representative from the Qalipu that we would

engage with. But we certainly would be engaging with the community at large.

CHAIR:

The Member for Placentia West

- Bellevue.

J. DWYER:

Minister, in your address, when we talked about the openness and openness

orders, you said just vaguely, I guess, in some instances that it wouldn't

apply. Are you able to provide an example in that case?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

J. ABBOTT:

I'm wondering if you could just repeat that last part of your question.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER:

Thank you. I appreciate the conversation back and forth.

When we

talked about openness in your address to introduce the bill, you mentioned that

sometimes an openness order or an openness agreement won't work in some

instances. Is there something that you can share with us to let us know what

kind of instances we're talking about?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

J. ABBOTT:

Thank you, Chair.

If you

think of a case of a child in protection right now, they may have an openness

agreement with a family member and others. We would then bring that to the court

to determine on a go-forward basis, in an adoption scenario, if that

relationship is still in the best interest of the child, and that would be a

determination that the judge would make and then either the openness agreement

or order that's in place now would continue or be amended. So that would be the

type of, I think, example that we could see having to be adjudicated by a judge.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER:

The Indigenous

representative, how are they appointed or put in place?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

J. ABBOTT:

Chair, they would be identified by the Indigenous government or organization and

the name presented to me.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER:

Thank you, Chair, and I apologize that I never recognized you on the last one.

Does the

child have a say in who represents them?

CHAIR:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

J. ABBOTT:

It would depend.

Now,

I'll go back – two things. The child – and, again, depending on the age, and the

legislation is clear on those age limits as to their participation and their

role in determining the adoption or not. But, in that case, the Indigenous

representative would be by the government or organization itself.

CHAIR:

The hon. the Member for

Placentia West - Bellevue.

J. DWYER:

Thank you, Chair.

My final

question is: Is the PRIDE program now as robust in