May 23, 2006 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 24

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have members' statements as follows: the

hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune; the hon. the Member for Terra

Nova; the hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans; the hon. the Member for

Trinity-Bay de Verde; the hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace; and the

hon. the Member for Trinity North.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the recent accomplishments of

seventeen year old Megan Buffett, a student of Bay d'Espoir Academy and

resident of St. Alban's. Megan has been awarded $38,000 in scholarships for

her tremendous musical talents and academic achievements.

Mr. Speaker, Megan competed in the Kiwanis Music Festival earlier this year

and was awarded a Kiwanis Music Festival Scholarship valued at $2,000. In

addition, Megan has received a $12,000 entrance scholarship from Mount Allison

University and an additional $24,000 music scholarship from the university.

Mr. Speaker, Megan is very dedicated to music in her school and community.

Megan directs her own private choir and a local church choir. She accompanies a

number of others including the Bay d'Espoir Academy choir, the dolce choir and

the Conne River Choir. This is just a few of her musical involvements.

At seventeen years old, Megan still finds time to study and time to spend

with her friends. As she finishes Level III this year, Megan has managed to

maintain status as an honours student. After high school, Megan will attend

Mount Allison University working towards a Bachelor of Music.

Mr. Speaker, I join her parents, Ray and Louise Buffet, staff and students of

Bay d'Espoir Academy, and all residents of the Coast of Bays region in

congratulating Megan on her tremendous musical and academic achievements. I am

certain we will hear much more about the accomplishments of Megan Buffett in the

future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Terra Nova.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ORAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This past week the winners of the School Sports Newfoundland and Labrador

Male and Female Student Athlete of the Year awards were announced. The awards

are presented to male and female students in their graduating year, who best

combine athletic and academic success and sportsmanship.

I am very proud to say that the Female Student Athlete of the Year for School

Sports Newfoundland and Labrador is Kirsten Harris of Glovertown Academy, and

Bradley McCarthy of Glovertown Academy was the runner up for the Male Athlete of

the Year.

Mr. Speaker, as one can imagine, it is a great honour just to be nominated

for this very prestigious award. To be recognized from a large province wide

group of Grade 12 students is quite an accomplishment; to win the award is even

a greater honour.

Mr. Speaker, Kirsten Harris is now the seventh student from Glovertown

Academy to win this title. Some previous winners are: Nancy Moulton, Cheryl

Brooking, Scott Moulton, Valerie Moulton, Jennifer Sparks and Kirk Bartlett.

This year's recipients will be awarded at the AGM Banquet on Friday, June 2,

in St. John's.

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

Kirsten Harris as Female Athlete of the Year and Bradley McCarthy for a terrific

second place finish, and certainly extend acclamations to all those students who

were nominated.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Royal Canadian Legion, Branch

12 in Grand Falls-Windsor who recently were presented with the national special

recognition award awarded by the Canadian Cancer Society for support they have

given the society over the years.

The hall attached to the Legion on Queen Street in Grand Falls-Windsor has

been offered to the group free of charge on numerous occasions. As a result, the

Canadian Cancer Society has been able to hold gala events that include dinners,

auctions and dances without having to worry about space and cost.

Mr. Speaker, Branch 12 also extends open arms to the Central Cancer Survivors'

Choir - the only group of its kind in the country - by allowing them to host

potluck dinners, singalongs and other social events at the Legion. As well, the

Legion has hosted the survivors' reception during Relay for Life. Legion staff

give freely of their time in setting up and dismantling decorations, tables and

chairs for the hundreds of survivors who attend the reception.

It is for these reasons that the local unit of the Canadian Cancer Society

decided Branch 12 would be a deserving recipient for the special recognition

award and decided to nominate them. The national committee of the Canadian

Cancer Society echoed the local unit's sentiments.

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

congratulating the Royal Canadian Legion, Branch 12, in Grand Falls-Windsor, who

recently was presented with the Canadian Cancer Society National Special Award.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, May 13, I attended the awards banquet of the 209

Great Eastern Sea Cadet Corps. While many awards were presented to very

deserving young men and women, I would like to acknowledge the awards presented

to Petty Officer Second Class Melissa Pynn.

Melissa is a Grade 12 student from Green's Harbour and was the recipient of

the Newfoundland and Labrador Sea Cadet of the Year, for which she was presented

a plaque and certificate and the National Medal of Excellence.

Some of the criteria to be eligible for the National Medal of Excellence are:

achieving at least 80 per cent attendance to meetings and functions, setting a

good personal example, and good citizenship. Nominations are submitted from

throughout the entire Province to the Newfoundland and Labrador Division of the

Navy League and reviewed by an awards committee. There are only five of these

medals presented each year in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, Melissa is a remarkable young lady, having been involved with

school fund-raising, youth groups, the Poppy Campaign, the Janeway Hospital, the

Kidney Foundation, and Cadets Caring for Canada. As well, she volunteers

catering with the Legion, is involved with church activities and teaches Sunday

School. Mr. Speaker, Melissa so selflessly gives of her time and energy to many

worthwhile causes.

Mr. Speaker, Melissa has also been nominated for the National Sea Cadet of

the Year. I would ask that all members join with me in congratulating Petty

Officer Second Class Melissa Pynn as the recipient of the National Medal of

Excellence.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to congratulate six youth from my area.

Victoria Ralph, Melissa Somers, Andrea Noel, Eleanor Hobbs, Mickey Hearn and

Wesley Saunders were recognized at a special awards ceremony by the Carbonear

Recreation Commission for their athletic accomplishments throughout 2005. These

youth have been involved in events such as swimming, wrestling, basketball,

soccer, badminton, and the list goes on.

Mr. Speaker, Junior Female Athlete of the Year was awarded to Victoria Ralph,

runner up Melissa Somers; Junior Male Athlete of the Year was awarded to Mickey

Hearn; Senior Female Athlete of the Year was awarded to Andrea Noel, runner up

Eleanor Hobbs; and the Senior Male Athlete of the Year was awarded to Wesley

Saunders. All of these individuals have won numerous awards in a variety of

sporting events - far too many to mention.

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

congratulating Victoria Ralph, Melissa Somers, Andrea Noel, Eleanor Hobbs,

Mickey Hearn and Wesley Saunders for their athletic accomplishments in 2005 and

wish them all the best in their future athletic and academic careers.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today I rise to acknowledge the academic achievement of Andrew Critch of

Hillview, Trinity Bay. Andrew graduated from Clarenville High in June of 2004

and, in a record-setting twenty months of study, he will be convocating from

Memorial University on Friday of this week with a Bachelor of Science degree

with Honours in Mathematics.

Upon graduating high school, Andrew received the MUN Alumni Entrance

Scholarship and the Trinity North Electoral District Scholarship and, through

scholarships, has been able to fund his entire university education to date. As

he graduates from MUN, he will be receiving the MUN Medal for Academic

Excellence in Mathematics as well as receiving the Governor General's

Undergraduate Studies Medal for having achieved the highest academic standing of

all undergraduate studies.

Mr. Speaker, Andrew is a high academic achiever as well as a well-rounded

student. I have risen in this House many times to talk about his achievements in

music and public speaking.

Mr. Speaker, I think it worthy of note that during Andrew's time at

Memorial he was one of two members of the Mathematics Team, along with Neil

McKay, and, for the first time in ten years, MUN won the Atlantic Provinces

Council on Science Competition. As well, Andrew received honourable mention for

his participation in the North American Putnam Mathematics Competition, the

largest competition of its kind in North America.

Andrew is now working as a researcher with the University of Toronto and has

received a full scholarship to enroll in the Masters Program in Mathematics

starting in September of this year, and he is expected to complete that Masters

program in less than a year.

Mr. Speaker, Andrew's future plans include the completion of a Ph.D. in

Mathematics and pursuing a career in research and in writing.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask all hon. members in this House to join with me today

in congratulating this brilliant young man on his achievements to date, and wish

him well as he goes forward into the future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Before we move to Statements by Ministers, the Chair would like to welcome

President Wayne Ruth of the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of

Municipalities, who is the gallery this afternoon.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform hon. members about the Newfoundland and

Labrador Federation of Municipalities Annual Symposium, held May 11-13 in

Gander.

The Federation of Municipalities' mission is to assist communities in their

endeavour to achieve and sustain strong and effective municipal government,

thereby improving the quality of life for all people of this Province. This

year, the NLFM focused on two themes:

(1) Municipal Government and Economic

Development, and

(2) Community Sustainability Planning.

Mr. Speaker, I commend the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of

Municipalities on such a wise choice of themes. I had the pleasure of attending

on Saturday when the theme of Sustainability was explored. Sustainability of

communities around our Province is a central focus of my department and the

entire provincial government. For this reason, I felt great pride in being asked

to address the symposium and speak of our recent initiatives, programs and

departmental successes.

Mr. Speaker, sustainability of rural communities and towns can be achieved

when funding initiatives and programs are enacted effectively and efficiently.

The Department of Municipal Affairs, together with the NLFM, continues to ensure

that funding and investments are strategically allocated in the best interests

of the provincial municipalities. Mr. Speaker, we have worked to provide the

availability of financial and administrative tools for sound municipal

government - as well, we continue to promote financial stability and viability

in all municipalities.

Mr. Speaker, aside from promoting previous departmental successes at the

symposium, I announced new funding for the CCRC. The Community Cooperative

Resource Centre operates under a mandate to research the state of a municipal

sector and encourage greater regional co-operation as a means of making

municipal governments more economically viable. The CCRC has undertaken many

worthwhile endeavours including: (1) municipal planning and sustainability,

(2) formalizing regional co-operation and (3) understanding and acting upon the

needs of ever-changing municipalities province-wide. My department has committed

$75,000 annually for the CCRC to continue its valuable work.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate the Newfoundland and Labrador

Federation of Municipalities on the success of their annual symposium. I also

wish to comment President Wayne Ruth and his organization on such hard work,

dedication and professionalism in providing for the betterment of our

communities. They continue to find great successes in their efforts of valuable

leadership and guidance for communities, councils, and people province-wide.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for an advanced copy of his statement before

coming to the House. The minister talks about the symposium that the federation

held in Gander on May 11-13, that has become an annual thing. I will say to the

minister and to the Federation of Municipalities, that if we are looking to have

sustainability of our communities, especially those in our rural communities,

then there will need to be a very strong and a vocal voice from the Federation

of Municipalities.

In the third paragraph, the minister talks about: "funding and

investments are strategically allocated in the best interests of provincial

municipalities." I am not really sure what that means. I do not think, for

a moment, the minister means that there is just going to be strategic

infrastructure in the large urban areas and the smaller rural communities not

having a part. I did not think that would be the case but it is a little bit

ambiguous as it is in the particular statement.

However, I do agree with the minister on the Community Cooperative Resource

Centre. That is a great program, and if we, in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador, especially in the rural parts of the Province, are going to succeed,

if we are going to become viable entities as communities, then there has to be

more regional sorts of things.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

MR. LANGDON: Just a minute to clue up?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave is granted.

MR. LANGDON: There will have to be more regional co-operation, not only

as far as infrastructure but, I think, also as far as administration is

concerned. We have seen that in the past. I think that in the future that

necessity will become a reality and they will have to find more ways of working

together so that these communities, as I said, can be strong and viable in the

rural parts of our Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. R. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for an advanced copy of his statement. I would

like to say, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank President Wayne Ruth and all of

the other councillors who voluntarily serve their time on municipal government

in our Province, making our communities a better place to live.

Many communities, Mr. Speaker, are faced with a serious challenge today,

particularly those that are represented by the fishing industry and others in

our natural resource sector. It is, in the future, going to require more

co-operation between municipalities as we have seen around this Province now

where communities come together to share services -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

MR. R. COLLINS: By leave to clue up, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave is granted.

MR. R. COLLINS: - and to work closer together.

So, I wish the Federation of Municipalities and President Wayne Ruth the best

success as they go forward into the future.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, hon. members, I rise today to talk about our

dynamic literary industry. I had the great pleasure of attending the tenth

anniversary of the 2006 Newfoundland and Labrador Book Awards hosted by The

Writers' Alliance of Newfoundland and Labrador last Thursday at The Rooms.

I am pleased to report, Mr. Speaker, that Joan Clark won the Fiction Award

for An Audience of Chairs and Janet McNaughton received the Children's

Literature Award for Brave Jack and the Unicorn. I would also like to

acknowledge the other finalists, Michael Crummey, Lisa Moore, Ed Kavanagh and

Kevin Major. The fine work of all these writers have placed us firmly on the

literary map.

Of course, the many accomplishments of our writers are a direct reflection of

the Writers' Alliance which has nurtured and encouraged literary talent for

the past twenty years. It is through their efforts that many of our writers are

faring so well on the literary scene. We, as a government, are proud to help

support the Writers' Alliance and their various programs and activities.

No area of opportunity, Mr. Speaker, for business growth is more exciting

than our Province's culture sector. That is why we are investing over $3

million to further develop our cultural industries under the new strategic

cultural plan. This includes a new Publishers Assistance Program, which will put

$200,000 a year into the publishing sector.

Under this program, Newfoundland and Labrador publishers will be eligible to

apply for support towards resources for editing and design work, marketing, and

professional development.

This means, Mr Speaker, our publishers will be able to reach more national

and international markets and to participate in more book fairs and trade

missions. It means publishers can hire professional editors and designers. It

also means publishing companies can participate in more educational workshops

and training programs, therefore boosting the level of local expertise in the

field.

The literary sector, Mr. Speaker, is one of the fastest growing cultural

industries. We need to build on that momentum. We want to give our writers the

opportunity to be published at home and to give our publishers the opportunity

to compete nationally and internationally. We hope that this new program will

strengthen the literary industry overall by encouraging more synergy and

collaboration between the writing and publishing sectors.

I invite all members to join me, Mr. Speaker, in congratulating Janet

McNaughton and Joan Clark, the recipients of the 2006 Newfoundland and Labrador

Book Awards.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you to the minister for providing me with a copy of his statement.

We too, on this side of the House, would like to join with government in

congratulating the Writers' Alliance of Newfoundland and Labrador for hosting

their annual awards, and particularly to congratulate the winners, Joan Clark

and Janet McNaughton, and also the finalists.

I am proud to see that I have a finalist here from my own District of Grand

Falls-Buchans, Mr. Michael Crummey, and also the other finalists Lisa Moore, Ed

Kavanagh and Kevin Major.

It is true, our writers are definitely getting on the literary map. We, as a

people, have a greater appreciation today for our own writers and that is

evident by the boost in book sales all over this Province and outside.

I do have to agree that, by putting more money into this industry, we are

definitely going to get a better return from it, and it gives writers a chance

to compete worldwide.

I would like to say to the minister, in conclusion, the other part of your

portfolio, tourism, I do hope you will convince our Minister of Finance to lower

the gas tax so we can have a better summer in tourism this year.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We, in the New Democratic Party, certainly want to join in congratulating

Janet McNaughton and Joan Clark on the receipt of these Newfoundland and

Labrador book awards, and also recognize the very important work of the Writers'

Alliance in Newfoundland and Labrador in supporting new writers and existing

writers. It is a forum where writers such as these mentioned, including Michael

Crummey, Lisa Moore, Ed Kavanagh and Kevin Major, they also help other writers

come along.

These awards are very important. They give recognition to writers, and

encourage others to do so, but also give opportunities to invite new readers to

join the growing number of fans of Newfoundland and Labrador books.

These writers, all of them, in fact, have received awards and recognition on

a regional and national level as well.

I want to also, while I am on my feet, mention the Percy Janes -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MR. HARRIS: The minister and I were both at the Arts Council Awards

recently and the award to David Hickey, who happens to reside in my district,

who received the Percy Janes First Novel Award, is another important award that

encourages the writers in this Province. As has been mentioned before, we have

an awful lot of them and they are of very high quality indeed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Premier.

Mr. Speaker, last week the Premier finally realized that we have significant

problems in our fishing industry and, as a result, he called a summit - it has

later been called a town hall or a forum - because these issues need to be

addressed. Since that time we, in the Opposition, have received numerous calls

from all over the Province asking if they could attend this summit or town hall.

I ask the Premier: What criteria was used to select the invitees? Who chose

these representatives? And, will others be permitted entrance if they show up?

For example, the Mayor of Burgeo just called us; he would certainly like to

be able to attend the summit. Who better, I say to the Premier, than the

individual who has seen quotas taken from his town and shipped to Nova Scotia

for processing, and who has watched the devastation of what happens when a

one-industry town that depends on the fishery goes down?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman opposite knows that

when those quotas left Burgeo, and left that town, they were in government. We

were not at the time, Mr. Speaker.

Having said that, this is not a week for partisan bickering, fighting and

confrontation. This is a week for trying to find solutions to the fishery.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: What we have done, Mr. Speaker, together with the

federal government who have agreed to come and join us for this particular

discussion, we have attempted to work out a list. What we are trying to do is

get as many people in the room for that meeting as time will accommodate, and

that is exactly what we have done.

We have gone to the various associations, the various groups, the Federation

of Municipalities. Even the Chair of the Federation is in a difficult spot

because, obviously, there are only limited numbers we can bring into the room.

We cannot even bring all the MHAs into the room, because we cannot ask one group

to bring a certain number and then leave it wide open for everybody else to

come. So, choices had to be made and there are representative groups from all

over the Province coming: representatives from the unions, representatives from

the processors, economists, scientists, members of the Aboriginal community,

representatives of women's groups. We have tried to be as broad in the

representation as we can.

This is not, Mr. Speaker, a public relations exercise. You know, there has

been some discussion today about the media not being invited. Well, this

basically is a genuine attempt to have good, meaningful discussion among people

who can speak frankly and openly but not in a grandstanding manner.

This week is a week about trying to find solutions for the serious problems

in our fishery.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The issue surrounding the fishery is of utmost importance to a lot of people

in a lot of regions of this Province and they want to be able to hear, or at

least see, what is happening in those meetings, if they are not invited.

I ask the Premier: Why is the session hidden from the public and the media?

Why can't the media attend so that the rest of the people in the Province who

would like to have attended the meeting will at least be able to see what is

going on there?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, there is no intent whatsoever to hide this

from the public; but, as I said before, it is not a public relations

extravaganza. It is not all about getting our faces on television and putting on

a great show, and showing how passionate we are and how much we believe in the

fishery. It is about sitting down and talking to each other to try and come up

with solutions that we can reach by consensus, or to find a direction in which

we can go long term in the Province given the very, very serious problems that

this fishery faces, which are completely beyond our control.

The fact that cameras are not in the room, that might bother the hon.

gentleman opposite; they are of no concern to me. The all-party committee went

around. I was in Marystown. You saw some of the problems that could have arose.

There was a point in Marystown where there nearly was concern that there could

have been disruption in the crowd down there, because people's emotions are

running very, very high and they want to show their emotions and everything

else, but this is about sitting down with the stakeholders in the fishery, as

many as we can accommodate in one day, with both governments present, there to

listen.

The hon. gentleman opposite, the Leader of the New Democratic Party, other

officials from parties will be there. There will be ample opportunity for them,

after the fact, to discuss with the media exactly what went on in that room.

There is nothing covert, there is no hidden agenda; but, as I have said, it

is not about public relations. It is about finding solutions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: So what the Premier is saying is that he does not trust the

average citizen in this Province to behave himself or herself in the summit

tomorrow so they are not invited.

Mr. Speaker, we had been told that plans were in the works, by the way, to

have a similar meeting in Plum Point on Friday to discuss fishery issues on the

Northern Peninsula. As a matter of fact, we have been told that the Premier and

his Minister of Fisheries have been invited.

I ask the Premier: Will you be attending a similar forum in Plum Point on

Friday?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I have no idea who told the hon. gentleman

what. The fact of the matter is that the development association up on the

Northern Peninsula commissioned a study on fisheries issues on the Northern

Peninsula several months ago. That report was presented to government, with a

recommendation that government host and co-ordinate a fisheries forum on the

Northern Peninsula. That is what is going ahead on the Northern Peninsula on

Friday, a fisheries forum that was arranged and co-ordinated by the development

association.

Yes, I am attending. I do not even know if the Premier was invited to attend,

to be honest with you, but I am certainly attending, on behalf of the

government. My colleague, the Minister of Transportation and Works, is

attending. My colleague, the Member for St. Barbe, is attending, but that has

nothing to do, nor does it flow out of or grow from, the town hall meeting that

is being held tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I take it from that answer that the Premier will not be attending that summit

on the Northern Peninsula on Friday.

Mr. Speaker, government has finally brought forward legislation for changes

to the FPI Act; changes that do not go far enough to strengthen the act, in our

estimation.

I ask the Premier: Why did you wait so long to bring forward these

amendments, when we have been watching disaster after disaster unfold with FPI

in the last two or two-and-a-half years?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman opposite is all over

the map on this, and over the course of this debate we will show what he said

over the course of the last three or four years. He is on both sides of the

argument day after day after day.

We were working to try and find solutions. We have said we are keeping all

options open. Last week he did not want us to change the act. This week he wants

us to change the act. He is saying we are too late, we are too early. When he

was in government himself, he criticized us because we were asking for changes

in the act and he was asking for time so he could work out solutions with the

company. That is exactly what we have been trying to do. We have been trying to

work out solutions with potential possible purchasers, with the company, but

there are lots of problems in the fishery. It is not just about FPI. It is not

all about FPI.

This summit tomorrow, this discussion tomorrow, is going to be about the

multiple problems that are going on in the fishery. There is more to the fishery

in Newfoundland and Labrador than FPI. What has happened with Daley Brothers is

a reflection of what is going on out there.

With regard to FPI, we are looking at the governance. We are looking at the

way that this company has behaved. We are looking at an action that they took in

their annual meeting, whereby they are continuing to restrict their Board of

Directors to gain control of the company and we are responding to that as

quickly as is necessary.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the Premier, absolute hogwash. We have been asking you for over two

years to deal with FPI and it started before they closed the plant in Harbour

Breton. It started before they closed the plant in Fortune, and it certainly

started before they closed the plant in Marystown and laid off 650 people.

Mr. Speaker, we still have not seen the legal opinion that says government

cannot control FPI's quotas and where these quotas must be processed. I ask

the Premier: Has a legal opinion been drafted on this issue and, if so, can we

see that legal opinion?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I believe the hon. gentleman has a very

selective memory. The same legal opinion that this government is operating on in

terms of amendments to the FPI Act, vis- B -vis

quota, is the very same legal opinion that hon. gentleman had in front of him

when he was Minister of Fisheries and the government he was part of brought in

the last round of amendments - the very same legal opinion. It says that the

government of the Province do not have the legal jurisdiction to deal with

quotas because, under the Constitution, that is a right of the Government of

Canada. That is what the legal opinion said when the hon. gentleman was member -

he can shake his head, Mr. Speaker, I can produce it. I can table the legal

opinion that was given to the government of the day and the same legal opinion

and the same legal advice is given to this government today and that is exactly

what we are acting on.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, your colleague, the federal Minister of Fisheries,

will be at the summit tomorrow. Are you going to ask him for his authority to

take control over FPI's quotas so that you can determine where those quotas

are going to be processed this year?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, as usual, we are miles ahead of the Leader of

the Opposition. We are miles ahead of the Opposition party. We have already been

to the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and said: We have heard you say

publicly that your policy is use it or lose it. In other words, if you do not

right to expect to keep that quota and sit on it. That is the policy that we

policy, while supported by us, cannot be implemented by us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, you may be miles ahead of us - that is what you say,

you are miles ahead of us - but we still have six fish plants in this Province

that are closed today. That is where you are, and your government.

Mr. Speaker, in the current FPI Act, it states that a company cannot sell all

or substantially all of that company. The new wording, if passed, will state

that a substantial portion of the company cannot be sold without permission of

government. In light of last years conflicting legal opinions as to what

constitutes a substantial portion of the company, why isn't government

amending the act so that no part of the company can be sold without the approval

of government?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, Mr. Speaker, in terms of the hon. gentleman's

preamble, there are fish plants in this Province today that are not operating,

that are closed. There were fish plants in the Province that were closed and not

operating when he was last Minister of Fisheries. That is not a new phenomena in

this Province, unfortunately it keeps happening.

In terms of the amendment to the act. The legal advice, Mr. Speaker, is that

we have substantially lowered the bar by this new amendment from all or

substantially all, to a substantial portion. It is the advice that we have been

given, that FPI will have a much more difficult time getting over that

definition, that wording in the act, than they would have - according to the

legal advice that was given last year - getting over the wording of all or

substantially all.

That is the advice, Mr. Speaker. The measure will be if and when the

legislation is tested, but we are very comfortable that we have substantially

lowered the bar in terms of what this company can do with its assets in this

Province and elsewhere.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: Lowered the bar?

MR. RIDEOUT: Lowered the bar, yes.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister about his

preamble, I can tell him one thing, no FPI

plant closed under our watch - not while I was minister, not while I was in the

government. FPI did not close plants under our watch.

Mr. Speaker, government is bringing forward changes to the FPI Act which

states that the company cannot dispose of a fish plant in this Province without

the approval of government.

I ask the Premier: Why isn't government including a clause which states

that the company cannot close a plant in the Province without permission of

government?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman opposite knows that it

is only so far that we can go with interfering with the management of a company.

We are trying to walk a very fine line. I must say, our officials in the

Department of Fisheries and the Department of Justice have spent a lot of time

on this, giving us very, very good advice. We have not only gone within the

Department of Justice, we have gone outside the Department of Justice to confirm

the opinions. If, in fact, we get involved with the management of the company,

then we have a situation where we are actually expropriating shareholder value,

which means that the shareholders can come back to government and seek

compensation. Now, the privative clause may cover that in Newfoundland and

Labrador but it will not cover it outside of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I also need to remind the hon. gentleman opposite of a comment that he made

on VOCM Night Line, November 24, 2004: We all agreed as a party, as an all-party

committee, that we couldn't put into the legislation that you couldn't lay

off people. That is closures. He now has changed his mind. He is directly

contradictory to a position that he took years ago. He is speaking out of both

sides of his mouth when it is convenient, as usual.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, the Premier likes to be selective in what he

quotes. Under that I said it should not be closed unless there were extensive

consultations with the union and that the union agreed to it. I do not see that

in what you have just allowed to happen in Harbour Breton, Fortune and Marystown.

Mr. Speaker, the proposed changes of FPI focus only on the assets in this

Province under clause 7. I ask the Premier: Why isn't the government including

FPI's assets outside the Province and requiring that the company receive

approval to dispose of, for example, the American marketing division, the plant

in Danvers, Massachusetts and the brand new plant that they bought for $40

million in the U.K.? Why is it, in this legislation that you are putting forward

today, the amendments to the legislation, are you only talking about plants in

Newfoundland and Labrador when they own plants and assets elsewhere?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the amendments proposed in the legislation

refers to assets of FPI, Fishery Products International. It does not say the

asset in Marystown. It does not say the asset in Burin. It does not say the

asset in Port au Choix. It does not say the asset in London. It does not say the

asset in Danvers. It says assets of the company. We, Mr. Speaker, believe that

that means all of the assets of the company, all of them in their totality.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister is putting forward legislation here this afternoon and I do not

know if he has read it, because it does talk about assets in the Province and

particularly, plants in the Province. It does not say anything about a plant in

the U.K. or a plant in Danvers, Massachusetts.

Mr. Speaker, it appears that the government is only requiring FPI to receive

approval to dispose of fish plants in the Province. I ask the Premier: Why aren't

you including other assets of FPI, such as the sale of their quotas or the

possible sale of their fleet, their boats?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I think we have clearly answered the question

as to why we are not including the sale of their quota. The quota - we just do

not have the jurisdictional authority to be able to legislate in that regard.

That was the legal advice given to the previous government when the hon. Leader

of the Opposition was minister. He knows that as well as I know it. That is the

legal advice that has been given us by our own in-house legal team and, of

course, as the Premier has indicated, we have gone outside and sought legal

advice as well.

On that particular matter, Mr. Speaker, I think it should be clear to any and

all who are listening that we are prepared to legislate in areas where we have

jurisdiction, we are prepared to tighten the Act in areas where we have

jurisdiction, but what foolishness would it be for us to legislate in areas

where we clearly don't have jurisdiction and have it all blow up and be of

naught when it is thrown out when somebody challenges it in court?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Still no mention of the boats that FPI has, the fleet that they -

MR. RIDEOUT: (Inaudible).

MR. REID: Yes, you forgot about them. I guess you forgot about them in

the legislation too, I say to the minister, because they are certainly not

mentioned.

Mr. Speaker, many people in the Province have raised concerns that John

Risley is, in essence, controlling FPI even though he is a direct competitor of

that company.

I ask the Premier: Why isn't government ensuring that no direct competitor

can sit on the Board of Directors of FPI?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that John Risley and others were

able to facilitate their entrance into FPI while other people were in power.

What we are trying to do, Mr. Speaker, is to contain this and to make this work

as best we can by amending the Act in this House, as we are up to now.

Mr. Speaker, the wording in the Act is that, where there is a conflict then

there is going to have to be a test as to whether or not those people are

allowed to sit on the board. Now, we don't want to bar people who have

expertise in the fishery or in fisheries management. We don't want to tell the

Board of Directors who they can or can't have on the board, but we want

certain defined parameters, and if certain people don't fit in those defined

parameters because of conflicts or other reasons, then obviously the legislation

speaks to that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

He talks about how we over here brought John Risley into the Board of

Directors of FPI. What I say to the minister is, at least we controlled John

Risley once he came to that board. John Risley did not close plants or sell off

assets of FPI while we were in government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: He did that since you took over, I say, Minister.

Mr. Speaker, government is expanding the Board of Directors to thirteen

people of which the majority have to be resident Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians.

I ask the Premier: Is he willing to ensure that of the thirteen members some

of these members would be appointed by government so that they can oversee the

day-to-day operations of FPI? Then we wouldn't need an investigation into FPI

to determine, for example, if they were exporting unprocessed fish out of the

country for processing and the government not even knowing about it.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman opposite has absolutely

no idea whatsoever of the legal implications of what he is talking about.

Governments cannot interfere and step in and tell shareholders who are they

going to put on the Board of Directors. There is no precedent for it in

corporate law. The same way with the whole conflict of interest situation. Under

corporate law it is done on a transactional basis; the director discloses

exactly what the conflict of interest is.

We cannot turn around and tell FPI who to put where and who they can sit

there, and if they can own a fish company or they cannot own a fish company,

because they have shareholder rights and there will be actions against this

government that will reflect on us right across the board in absolutely

everything we do across this country.

He should not be asking questions about legal matters about which he knows

absolutely nothing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say, the Premier cannot get away from attacking the person instead of the

argument.

I will tell the Premier something, in case he has not read all of the FPI

Acts. The original FPI Act had members appointed by the government on that in

1984. It was the current minister, when he was minister in 1987, that removed

them, I say to the Premier. Maybe he should read all of the acts.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier and the Minister of Fisheries touted

cross-subsidization as a way of strengthening the FPI Act. We all heard it:

opening the House, changing the legislation to force FPI to cross-subsidize its

ailing groundfish sector. This would ensure that the more profitable wings of

the company, like those in Danvers, Massachusetts, would support those on the

Burin Peninsula and along the South Coast.

I ask the Premier: If your government was committed to strengthening the FPI

Act, why was this option dropped from your agenda?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: If this government owned FPI, if it was a

government-owned company, and the government had the ability to cross-subsidize

between the marketing arm and the operational arm, then it could be done.

If this government imposed cross-subsidization on that company, this

government could be sued by the shareholders for loss of shareholder value,

which means that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador would be liable for a

lawsuit. If they could not get it under the privative clause, they would then

sue nationally and could seize possible assets of Newfoundland and Labrador on

the mainland. So, quite simply, we were not prepared to expose the people of the

Province to that solution.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe the answers I am hearing from the

Premier. It was his minister who talked about forcing FPI to cross-subsidize its

ailing groundfish sector, not us over here. It was your minister.

When you are talking about suing the government, we put a privative clause in

that act in 2002, I say to the minister, that prohibited FPI from suing the

government. That was still in there until you removed it last June when FPI

wanted the act amended, not us, but when FPI wanted the act amended.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, just to get off the topic a little bit, last week

in this House of Assembly we asked whether a company that owed $500,000 to

workers' compensation fees was receiving favourable treatment from the

government. At the time, the minister stated that all companies were being

treated fairly.

I ask the minister responsible for workers' compensation: How is it fair

and equitable treatment when one company is harassed for owing money, as little

as one penny, while others who owe $500,000 are getting away with it?

I have a letter here from a young lady on the West Coast who is being

harassed because she has a bill from workers' compensation for one cent, I say

to the Premier. Is that fair and balanced?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Government is always concerned about money being owed to government. The

Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission is a separate entity from

government. It is not reported on the books of our Province. We are not

responsible. They run their own affairs. They move to collect their own debts in

the way that independent board decides. We do not interfere. It is not an

entity. Nor do we intend to interfere with an entity that is not a reporting

entity to our Province on that basis, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

He talks about an independent board. Who selected the board of directors if

it was not the government opposite?

Mr. Speaker, how long did these two companies, namely Ice Cap and North

Atlantic Shellfish, owe workers' compensation $500,000, and what efforts were

made on behalf of workers' compensation or the government to collect those

fees?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

You are actually right, I do not know, because I did not know until the

Leader of the Opposition raised it because it is not an entity that reports to

us. It is not on the books of our Province. We have no legal obligation to

pursue and collect it. That is the prerogative of the Workplace Health, Safety

and Compensation Commission, and they will carry out their business in a manner

they see fit, independent, and collect the revenues, set fees, collect

compensation costs. They deal with those efforts here and we do not, in any way,

interrupt or take action on behalf of the Workplace Health, Safety and

Compensation Commission, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I just cannot believe what I am hearing from the

Minister of Finance. Here is an individual, along with his Cabinet colleagues,

who picked the board of directors of workers' compensation and you say you

have absolutely no control over them. I ask the minister: Who controls them, and

are they making an effort to collect that money?

Mr. Speaker, maybe he can answer this one: When employers do not pay workers'

compensation premiums, are the employees of that operation covered should a

workplace accident take place and leave them unable to perform their duties?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, it is an employer-funded organization and yes,

the employees are covered, I say to the member.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, I say. After asking it twice in the House of

Assembly, we finally got a response.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Does Daley Brothers, or any of its

subsidiaries or associated companies, owe money to workers' compensation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not aware of anybody owing money or what their debts are, or any

creditors out there. The Workplace, Health and Safety Compensation Commission is

not an entity of government. It is not under our reporting umbrella and

therefore, I would not have an answer to that; anymore than I would know what

his personal finances are or some other independent business that has no direct

dealings with government there. We set the legislation by which it operates

under and they deal with their own fees. They do their charges. They operate it

separately. I, or even the minister, do not interfere in that process

whatsoever, that is their responsibility. We honour and respect that, and we

follow the laws pertaining to it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Premier.

For the third time in four years this House has before it amendments to the

FPI Act, with both government and Opposition trying to have the proper influence

and control over this public purpose, private corporation. Will the Premier not

acknowledge that the hostile takeover of FPI has brought a different agenda to

the corporation, one that his government cannot control by merely amending the

legislation and leaving the company in private hands, hands that appear hostile

to the interests of Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the hon. gentleman opposite for that question. I would agree that the

company, in our opinion, is in hostile hands. There is absolutely no doubt about

it. That is why we are reacting the way we are. That is why we are looking at

the amendments.

The reaction of Mr. Risley today, or of course over the weekend, is

indicative, I think, of the fact that he is now smarting on the basis of the

fact that we are starting to take action. So, he is out there now and he is

starting to react because we are starting to exert control and influence on the

company. So, what we are trying to do is strike that delicate balance between

reining in the company and trying to have some influence on his Board of

Directors without crossing the line and permanently tainting the reputation of

the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is an old expression, that you might as well be hung for a sheep as a

lamb. The Premier knows that his government will already be accused of

interfering with a private company that is publicly traded. If the public

purposes of FPI are so important to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and

they are, why doesn't the Province seek a controlling interest of the company

and then do what needs to be done to ensure this company operates in accordance

with the public purpose, including the marketing needs of the Newfoundland and

Labrador fisheries?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. gentleman opposite is aware,

there has been one proposal already for the possible acquisition of the

Newfoundland assets. There now is a second proposal before our government which

would deal with the acquisition of the Newfoundland assets. Our concern then

would be that the FPI Act would have to be dropped in order to allow that and

then the marketing arm would be exposed.

What I would like to see during the course of discussions tomorrow would be a

proposal that would come from people in the industry. For example, if people in

the industry were, say, to just get together and the processors, other than FPI,

were to get together and the union was to get together and various interests in

the fishing industry in the Province were prepared to look at a cooperative to

take over that marketing arm, coupled with an acquisition, possibly of the

Newfoundland assets supported with some possible financial assistance by the

Newfoundland and Labrador Government, that would be an interesting proposal. So,

all options are open tomorrow and perhaps there is a manner or a method where

we, as a Province, can possibly take over this whole company in one form or

another. That is the kind of solution that I would certainly like to consider

and I know our government would certainly like to consider it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Some of the issues raised today, the issue of quotas, the issue of

cross-subsidy and, of course, the important issue of marketing, none of which

can be totally controlled by this government by remote control amendments to the

FPI Act. Will the Premier not acknowledge - I think he has acknowledged - that

there are options which include the takeover of FPI that would deal with some of

these issues on a permanent basis?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes that the question be repeated.

The Chair recognizes the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Some of the issues mentioned today, the issue of control of the quotas, the

issue of cross-subsidization and the important issue of marketing may not be

able to be controlled by remote controlled legislation from this Province. Will

the Premier not acknowledge that a more permanent solution may well be found in

combining FPI's interests, and particularly its marketing arm, with other

proposals that might come forth in this hearing tomorrow?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: That is exactly what I am saying. Part of the

frustration that Cabinet had, of course, when we were dealing with this matter,

and again with the sound advice from the Department of Justice and others, is

that there are certain things within the parameters of the act that we cannot do

as a government, or should not do because it will expose us to liability. A

solution to this would ultimately be, as I said before, to this being completely

a Newfoundland owned and operated company.

Now, I also said before, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador does not

want to get in the business of operating fish plants. I just do not think that

we could give the time and the attention and the expertise that would be

necessary to do proper justice to it in a very difficult market. However, having

said that, if there was a sophisticated Newfoundland operator or operators who

wanted to operate the other Newfoundland assets then the marketing division

would be kept intact. It could be used for the marketing benefit of all

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. What I would love to see would be a

co-operative that could basically take it over with the assistance. So, it could

be a form of restructuring of FPI without the Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador actively going in and running it. It could be run by people who are

proficient in the fishing industry, who could manage it properly in the best

interest of the stakeholders who are people with invested interest.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Answers to Questions for Which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, I have a different petition today. It is one by

some workers at the Duck Pond Mine site just outside of Millertown. It is a

view, I guess, contrary to what we have been hearing in the media. It is workers

who work at the mine site, and they are from all over Central Newfoundland. This

petition is signed by almost 200 people and it speaks to the permanency of work

sites at the Duck Pond Mine.

Now, that is contrary to local people in the area. Local people in

communities, and mayors, thought by this project going ahead at Duck Pond,

communities surrounding the mine site would benefit from the economic activity

and that people working in the mine site would actually live in communities like

Buchans, Buchans Junction, Millertown and Badger. So, this is exclusively from

the workers who commute each and everyday, from people in Green Bay, Robert's

Arm, Baie Verte, La Scie, and even in close proximity. There are even people

there from Buchans Junction, Millertown and a few from Buchans, but it is a view

that is contrary to local communities in the area.

I have to, on behalf of my constituents - even though they have a different

view than mine even, I have an obligation and a responsibility to bring this

petition forward because they are in a position now where they are living and

working everyday at Duck Pond and they are commuting to and from their home

areas in rural parts of Central Newfoundland. They would like to be able to stay

in their home communities and actually live in a camp at the mine site, but it

is a view that is not widely shared. In fact, when the environmental impact

statement was done, the commitment at the time by Aur Resources was that they

would erect temporary camps only at the mine site and that they would not be

permanent in nature.

So, this is a view that is entirely contrary to local communities in the

area. It is not one in fact that I favour, but as I said originally, I have an

obligation. Part of my constituents put forward this view so that government

will see this side of the issue, as well as the issue that is already in

government's purview. In fact, the Mayor of Buchans has already been to see

the Minister of Natural Resources for the government. He, on behalf of his

community, and others in Central Newfoundland have impressed upon our Minister

of Natural Resources that they do not want to see a permanent woods camp at the

mine site. In fact, they would only like to see a temporary one and they would

hope that people working in the area would take up residence in surrounding

communities. So, Mr. Speaker, what I am doing today is bringing forward a

different view, a view of the workers in that area.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder if I could have co-operation from members opposite just to revert to

Tabling of Documents? One of my colleagues needs to table a document but was

otherwise engaged with another colleague, so, just for a moment, to revert to

Tabling of Documents to provide the opportunity for a colleague to table a

document from his department.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to

Section 26.(5)(

a) of the Financial Administration Act, I am

tabling one Order-in-Council relating to funding pre-commitments for the

2007-2008 fiscal year.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: That is money that we want spent in 2007-2008, a year down

the road. You will see that in the Budget next year.

MR. SPEAKER: Reverting to petitions.

The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to speak to a petition on behalf of my constituents; in fact, on

behalf of the people on the entire Burin Peninsula. It has to do again with FPI

and what has transpired particularly in Fortune, and the closure of the plant

there. That has resulted in hundreds of people being put out of work, people who

now are trying to find employment in other parts of the country because, of

course, they need to be able to provide for their families. As much as they

would like to stay in Fortune, regrettably that is not an option for many of

them because, of course, while they sit and wait and wonder whether or not they

are going to hear from this government with respect to any kind of employment

program that would help carry them over the difficult spots, they are still

having to make mortgage payments, car payments, provide food for their families,

transportation, clothing, and everything that you and I have to do in the course

of a day. Unfortunately, their employer acted in a very callous manner and

closed the fish plant. I guess they got notification of the actual closure and

the laying off of employees with a letter in the mail on a Friday afternoon. Of

course, they all knew that I guess there was a chance that this would happen but

they continued to live in hope; hope that some of the suggestions that were

forthcoming from the government, whether it was Cooke Aquaculture or whether it

was a quota for Cooke Aquaculture to carry them over until the aquaculture part

of the company was up and running, they were living in hope that something would

happen that would enable them to find employment in their hometown, and for

those involved in communities outside of Fortune that they, indeed, would again

find employment in Fortune.

That has not been the case, and today we are seeing hundreds of people

leaving those small communities. In fact, if you were to drive through Fortune

and Point au Gaul and Lamaline and Point May and Grand Bank and Garnish and

Frenchman's Cove, you would find that there are so many homes that have been

boarded up or have for sale signs on them. What I am being told is that these

are people who are leaving and taking their families with them. In the past,

when they would go alone, they would always come back because their families

were there. That is not the case any more.

The prayer of the petition is, in fact, that the government would do

everything it can to ensure that the quota of fish traditionally processed at

the fish plant in Fortune will continue to be processed there. I guess that is

what we are discussing today in terms of who has the authority to ensure that

happens.

Because we have a summit coming up tomorrow where the federal government will

be represented, this is a golden opportunity, I think, for the federal Minister

of Fisheries to stand up and take account of and be responsible for the

authority that he has in terms of how those quotas are assigned, and ensure that

FPI is not allowed to leave with the quota that was traditionally processed in

Fortune. Those, according to Minister Hearn - in the past I have heard him say

that fish is a common resource and, in fact, they are given to companies to be

processed for the benefit of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. In our

case, our Province. What we would do today is call on both levels of government

to ensure that continues to happen, that the quotas do not remain with a company

like FPI. He can take them and -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would not want to disappoint members of government by not getting up and

giving this petition on the Buchans Highway; so, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to

stand again today and give this petition on behalf of the residents of Central

Newfoundland.

It is interesting, the petition I gave previously, about five minutes ago,

talked to the fact that workers at the Duck Pond mine site are concerned about

the highway conditions and the safety threats of driving over that highway every

day. That is only one of the reasons that we need upgrades to the Buchans

Highway.

I was encouraged last week, Mr. Speaker, when I heard the Premier announce

that he was giving additional duties to the Minister of Transportation and

Works. The Minister of Transportation and Works is now Acting Minister of

Innovation, Trade and Rural Development. Now that he is sharing those joint

portfolios, I am sure that he will be able to see, first-hand now, that works

hand in hand with Transportation and Works. I know the Premier gave him that

portfolio to try and soften him up and say: Transportation Minister, look; what

we will be doing with the Buchans Highway is, indeed, economic development now.

If you can see this by handling the two portfolios, I might be able to switch

you around now in a couple of months' time.

Really and truly, this is a serious matter and it demands government's

attention. What we are looking for is a road that we are going to feel

comfortable driving over, 100 kilometres that we can drive over with great

certainty that it is in good repair. We do not want trucks going over that

highway with the shoulders cracked and very little room there to pull off on the

side of the highway. We do not want that to happen. We do not want to see a

school bus overturned up there on the highway from Buchans Junction, or

Millertown going to Buchans. That is not what this government is all about, I am

sure.

This government has made all kinds of expenditures, and every expenditure has

a priority attached to it. It was only this afternoon that the Minister of

Tourism, Culture and Recreation stood up and said how proud he was with the

investment in the cultural industry in this Province, and I agree with that as

well, but you also have to look at the number one investment in our Province,

and that is the safety of our residents. Whether it be on our highways, on our

waterways, in the air or whatever, we have to ensure that the residents of our

Province are safe and they have a good road that they can commute back and forth

to work on. This is sadly lacking, and it is rural Newfoundland communities that

are affected here today.

Tomorrow there will be a summit in this Province and we are going to be

talking about the fishery. When you look at the road in Buchans, that is going

to be able to contribute to the Treasury of this Province of 250 permanent jobs

in goods and services, I think they have a stake in this.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will be up again tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to move to Motions first.

Motion 1, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that the House not adjourn at 5:30

p.m. today.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that this House, under Standing Order 11, not

adjourn today, Tuesday, May 23, at 5:30 of the clock.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Motion 2, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that the House not adjourn at 10:00

p.m.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is, pursuant to Standing Order 11, that this

House not adjourn today, Tuesday, May 23, at 10:00 p.m.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Order 4, to proceed with the introduction and second reading of a bill, An

Act To Establish The Council On Higher Education. (Bill 21)

MR. SPEAKER: Order 4.

It is moved and seconded that Bill 21,

An Act To Establish The Council On

Higher Education, be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Establish The Council On

Higher Education." (Bill 21)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce into the House today the

new Council on Higher Education Act. As well, I am introducing amendments to the

college and Memorial act to allow for joint appointments to each of the boards

governing these institutions.

This New Council on Higher Education Act stems from government's White

Paper on Post-Secondary Education which was released in July of 2005.

Twenty-eight directives were outlined in the White Paper as a result of thorough

consultations and research. The White Paper directives included a reconfigured

Council on Higher Education recognized in legislation, and amendments to the

legislation governing Memorial University and the College of the North Atlantic.

We want to ensure these institutions continue to work together to ensure greater

collaboration in the services they deliver as they play an important role in the

social and economic development of the Province.

Over the past several months, both Memorial University of Newfoundland and

the College of the North Atlantic have worked closely with the Department of

Education to discuss their needs and work on an appropriate legislative

framework to implement the White Paper directives. With this legislation we will

build a more robust post-secondary education system that will not only support

the level of cooperation between Memorial University of Newfoundland and the

College of the North Atlantic, but also improve the level of services available

to students throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

In these changing times, we must make strategic decisions. This New Council

on Higher Education Act is an integral part of the provincial post-secondary

plan and is consistent with government's approach to long-term planning,

accountability and sound infrastructure planning. Both institutions working

together as a united post-secondary education system will best serve the

interests of our students. In addition, the MUN and CONA Acts are being amended

to allow for three members to serve on each of these boards.

Mr. Speaker, the whole idea behind the Council of Higher Education is

something that is not necessarily new for the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador. We have certainly had councils on higher education in the past, and it

is on the experience of these councils and the role they play that we feel it is

necessary at this time to bring forward the legislation that we are looking at

in order to make sure that the Council of Higher Education is enshrined in

legislation and it does have a legitimate role to play within the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, as a Province we are blessed to have Memorial University of

Newfoundland and the College of the North Atlantic. Both of these post-secondary

institutions are shining examples of what high quality post-secondary

institutions can do to a Province. Mr. Speaker, the graduates of Memorial

University of Newfoundland are known not just in this Province and throughout

the country but throughout the world for the expertise and the high quality of

education that they bring, and they bring it to whatever they do whether it is

to work or the analysis they provide and the skills, as I said, throughout the

world.

In addition to that, the College of the North Atlantic is also a

post-secondary institution that has played a very important role in this

Province and will continue to play a very valuable role, and a heightened role,

Mr. Speaker, as we move through some labour market changes. Specifically, the

whole idea of the skill deficits that we are going to experience in the skilled

trades is something that is extremely important. The College, with its seventeen

campuses throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, needs to be able to grow, needs

to be able to expand and needs to be able to respond to the challenges that we

are going to see in the labour market.

We also have to recognize that these two highly credible and high quality

institutions need to be able to work together. They are absolutely distinct and

separate but there is certainly some overlap in services and we need to make

sure that we serve the students and the young people of Newfoundland and

Labrador in the most effective way possible that we can to ensure that they have

a high quality education.

In many communities we have the College of the North Atlantic and the

university working side by side. In many cases, particularly in St. John's, we

can see how the institutions are physically structured so that they operate in

the same city, as we can also see in Corner Brook. They are even in very close

proximity as well in Corner Brook.

Mr. Speaker, there are also other connections because there are many

university courses or first-year courses that may be offered at campuses, but in

addition to that, Memorial University has often used the campuses to be able to

offer Distance Education or teleconference courses. The links and the fact that

we use these educational institutes and we cross some of the boundaries has been

set up.

We need to be able to work together, Mr. Speaker. At Memorial University

there is a Board of Regents that governs the university, as there is a Board of

Directors with the College of the North Atlantic. In order to strengthen some of

the ties to make sure that these institutions work well together, this

legislation will ensure that there are some people who serve on the college

board who also serve on the Board of Regents. In this way, there will be some

consistency in the approach to ensure that we are able to make some links and be

able to grow these institutions or bring them together in areas that do not

affect academic freedom.

One thing that is also important to recognize as we establish the Council on

Higher Education, that there is no role more important to this council than the

role of the students. Students will be involved in the Council on Higher

Education. There will be a student from both the College of the North Atlantic

and, as well, a student from Memorial University of Newfoundland. The way that

students are often selected, and will be for the purposes of this council, is

that we connect with the Canadian Federation of Students, who then, in turn,

because they represent all students, all students in our public post-secondary

system become members of the Canadian Federation of Students. They then, in

turn, appoint people, will be able to appoint representation, both from the

college and the university onto the Council on Higher Education.

Mr. Speaker, I think that this particular year and the budget we passed,

highlighted education. This particular act and legislation continues to show how

important education is in Newfoundland and Labrador and how, as a Province, we

have a population of approximately or just over 500,000 people. We need to work

together to make sure that at whatever level we are talking post-secondary,

whether it is the college or the university, that we are able to provide the

most appropriate services and the highest quality education. In order for us to

be able to do that, we certainly need to be able to make the links between these

two institutions to allow people to work together.

Mr. Speaker, I am certainly looking forward to the debate on this legislation

because I think it is a piece of legislation, as I said before, that is not

necessarily new or unique. Some elements are, in that we are strengthening the

ties, but the Council on High Education is something that this Province has had

for quite some time. As we grow and as we change we certainly need to strengthen

this, and I think that this legislation will allow us to do just that.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to rise today and respond to the Minister of Education on Bill

21,

An Act To Establish The Council On Higher Education.

I had a chance to review this particular piece of legislation and find out

what is being removed and what is added and so on. It is interesting, when you

look back at the formation of this particular Council on Higher Education. This

was formed in 1992, the year of the cod moratorium. It was formed as a permanent

body and operates under a protocol agreement with a mandate to provide advice on

province-wide policy and planning issues and develop a mechanism and process for

enhanced coordination and articulation among and across sectors of the public

education system - not the private education system, but the public education

system. I am sure that in 1992 it was a huge concern, with the collapse of our

fishery in 1992, that we had to turn our attention more so on education and see

what we could do as a Province in educating our young people, looking at

education as being the key to a successful career and so on.

Now, there are some changes indicated that will happen with the make up of

this board. Mainly, from what I can tell from looking at the old legislation and

the new, is that formerly there was a department of youth services and

post-secondary education. That does not exist today with this new government, so

there is going to have to be a shake up in the board and a reconfiguration. The

only people I can see staying in place like they were before - the Deputy

Minister of Post-secondary Education, well, that will be the Deputy Minister of

the Department of Education now, and they will have the President of Memorial

University and the President of the College of the North Atlantic, so these

three people will stay in place, but the other people who will be on that

particular board will be different.

They were, more or less, in the past, from within government: bureaucrats,

officials, and representatives from the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of

Directors of Education and different bodies connected to education. What we are

going to see now is the College of the North Atlantic, Memorial University, and

the Department of Education; however, there is going to be an opportunity to add

more people to the board from the outside.

I am noticing that students are going to be appointed, which is a good thing,

one from Memorial University and also another one from the College of the North

Atlantic. There will also be an opportunity for three more persons as members of

the council. I am not certain what expertise these people will need to have.

That is not indicated in the piece of legislation that is before us. It says,

"...for a term that the minister may establish." I do not think that

is carved in stone yet, so I do not know whether that will be a one-year term,

two or three or five, or whether the minister will be in a position to appoint

these particular people when this legislation is enacted.

She talked about the Federation of Students. Well, I must say that the

Federation of Students were a very close and integral part of the former

government because they were used many times as the sounding board for some of

the things that we wanted to do in our Province to improve education for our

young people in this Province. In fact, the young people in this Province had

many occasions where they met with the national body of the Canadian Federation

of Students and exchanged ideas, and that would account for many of the changes

that led to the overhaul of the Student Loan Program in our Province in 2002.

Some of the new objectives, as opposed to the older ones, would be talking

about student credit transfers from among the university, the college and other

accredited provincial, national and international post-secondary educational

programs. That is a good thing. In the College of the North Atlantic in Grand

Falls-Windsor, we have a first-year university program and we have been very

successful. In fact, I would think that we take the lead in the numbers

attending for the first-year university program. Any of these credits are

transferrable to MUN, and it has worked out excellent for Grand Falls-Windsor, I

must say, this first-year university program, although I was disappointed with

the White Paper work that was done last year in 2005.

I expected to see some mention of the Central University Committee for

education in Grand Falls-Windsor. The fact that their proposal was not even

acknowledged led to a great deal of disappointment, particularly for former

Mayor Walwin Blackmore. He has been leading that charge, along with Howard

Barnes, for many years. Prior to the switch in government, we more or less had a

great understanding with Axel Meisen, the current President of Memorial

University, that we were going down a road together that would bring more status

to the College of the North Atlantic in Grand Falls-Windsor, and develop it over

a period of time into a degree-granting institution.

Now, we were always looking in Grand Falls-Windsor for some speciality that

we could excel in. Business seemed to the norm. Our Business Program in Grand

Falls-Windsor had always a huge take-up in students who wanted to go to our

university in Grand Falls or our College of the North Atlantic, so we were

looking for some centre of excellence that could attract students not only from

our Province but all over Atlantic Canada and within Canada and abroad. We were

looking for something that would be unique to our particular area and would

serve as a great attraction.

So far, we have not had the acknowledgment from this new government, hardly,

that the university committee exists, but I notice that, after seeing former

Mayor Walwin Blackmore in the paper a couple of weeks ago, in his mind it is not

dead. In his mind it is certainly not dead, and he is interested in pursuing the

matter. I hope that this government will lend an ear to the Central University

Committee and have a look at their proposal.

In fact, there was a great deal of money spent, I would think it was probably

in 2002, through ACOA and through the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador,

helping the Central University Committee develop a good proposal based on real

facts, that there was a need for building on the relationship between the

College of the North Atlantic and Memorial University, and in fact looking at

adding programs to make it a second and a third year, and finally, to a

degree-granting institution. I hope this government will not sweep the matter

under the rug and that they will give the committee a chance to hear their

proposal. I know they do have it on file, they submitted it during the White

Paper consultations. We are certainly supportive of such a move in Central

Newfoundland and I hope that the minister will consider it.

It is interesting that one of the issues discussed by the Council on Higher

Education is our math program. The math program in our K-12 school system is a

problem. You only have to turn on Open Line and you will hear parents all the

time phoning in and saying how the math in our schools is an issue. I guess it

is disappointing when you look at the money that is spent in education and still

the concept of the actual teaching of our math program is a real issue for

students across this Province. It is not only an issue in K-12, because one of

the items that came out of some of the meetings held a couple of years ago on

the Council of Higher Education was actually the failure rate of first-year math

students at Memorial University and the College of the North Atlantic, which

continues to be a major concern.

What is going wrong with math in our schools, right from K-12? If you don't

have a good base when you graduate from high school, how can you deal with math

at the post-secondary level? This is a subject that is of great contention, and

I imagine it is a nightmare for parents who try to lend help to their students

with homework.

I heard a lady a couple of weeks ago call in about having to go over math

with her student in elementary school. She said the focus was not whether the

answer at the end of the problem was right or wrong, but that the process used

was the right one. Now, anyone from the old school knows you had to make sure

that the answer was right, you had to memorize, you had to get the answer and

there was a process to go through. Apparently that is all out the window now. As

long as the process is right the answer can be wrong.

There is definitely a problem in our math in our schools, particularly when

you look at rural communities, because many of the advanced math courses in

rural communities are taught by distance education, where you sit into a monitor

and you talk to somebody who is teaching math for maybe ten or twelve, or more

than that, schools throughout our Province. So, if you are getting into distance

education and you are trying to grasp a concept of advanced math, you are

already doomed for failure unless you are particularly bright and you like that

particular subject. How can our young people succeed in the world at all if they

cannot grasp the concept of math?

This is one of the challenges that have been around for a long time, probably

as many as fifteen years - I know I have heard it - that math has been a

problem. It still has not resolved itself into making it any easier for our

students in K-12, and it is a real problem once they attend university and

post-secondary.

The Council of Higher Education meet probably three or four times a year, and

they will go over whatever issues come to the surface at that time. Their idea

of meeting like this is to give a broad overall umbrella focus of education

matters in our high schools and universities in this Province. They serve a

valuable purpose, there is no question about that. They have been around since

1992. I am pleased to see now that the original mandate of having the President,

the Chairperson of the College of the North Atlantic and Memorial University and

the Deputy Minister of Education involved is a good thing.

There are not too many negative things I can say about it, except that I

would like to leave with the Minister of Education the issue on the White Paper

study as it pertains to Central Newfoundland, in particular Grand Falls-Windsor,

and I would like for her to let his House know if there has been any success in

dealing with the issue of math in this Province.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further debate?

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would just like to say a few words on Bill 21,

An Act To Establish The

Council On Higher Education.

The public post-secondary education in this Province is extremely important

to young people and to the Province as a whole. I think the last time I had a

reason to look up some of these numbers was, I believe, that we have graduated

from our university, since it became a university in 1949, some 70,000 young

people, most of whom, I would say, probably 98 per cent of them, are from

Newfoundland and Labrador. I think it will be remember by some that the first

act of the Newfoundland and Labrador Legislature after Confederation was

an act

to incorporate Memorial University College, as it then was, as a university,

indicating the importance with which the then government and then Premier

regarded education in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I think this is an important bill. The role of the university is important,

as is also the role of the College of the North Atlantic. Now, we have had a lot

of chances in the structure of post-secondary education in the past fifty-five

years. I remember the time that there was the creation of the fisheries college.

In fact, it was across the street from where I lived that the first fisheries

college was created, and we lived across the street from the old Memorial

University campus on Parade Street. I well remember the creation of the

fisheries college. In fact, I think I can even remember the name. It was a big,

long name. It took half the building to write it, the college of fisheries,

marine - no, I can't remember.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: The College of Fisheries, Navigation, Marine Engineering and

Electronics. That was the full name of the fisheries college when it was first

created by the Liberal government back in the 1950s or probably early 1960s.

That institution, the former trades college, the district vocational schools

that we had around the province, all of these were attempts of one way or

another to provide for post-secondary education and trades training for young

people in Newfoundland and Labrador, and sometimes not-so-young people, people

who had decided that they needed a better education than they had, even thought

they were in the twenties or thirties or in some cases forties and fifties, so

these are very important institutions. They are probably as important or more

important today then they were then. It has been said, Mr. Speaker, by certain

people a few years ago, that twenty-five or thirty years ago if you had a high

school education in this Province or any other province that you had it made.

MR. BARRETT: (Inaudible) Grade 10.

MR. HARRIS: That was your entry level education for most jobs in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Member for Bellevue says Grade 10, and I know he was involved in

vocational education or adult education as well in the past and he would be well

aware of some of the programs for which Grace 9 was the entry level, Grade 10

was the entry level in some, and Grade 11, and now Grade 12, but that has

changed, Mr. Speaker. The world has changed. Technology has improved and the

expectations of young people have improved, and that is a good thing.

In order to make these two institutions, the now College of the North

Atlantic and the university work better together, this legislation is designed

to foster a level of co-operation that we have not seen before.

This is not unique to Newfoundland and Labrador, I say, Mr. Speaker, because

across this country the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada have,

together with their counterparts in various provinces, tried to devise a set of

standards and rules to allow for the transfer of credits, for example, so you

could go to the College of the North Atlantic and take certain courses in Early

Childhood Education, or whatever courses you were doing, Business Administration

courses, and then transfer some of those credits to a university. This has been

happening across the country and is being encouraged at the highest level of

governments at both the university and the public college level.

This is another element to that. I did have some concerns about it. I read

through, very carefully, the composition of the boards and the powers of the

board. The powers of the board, generally speaking, are to make recommendations.

I did have a concern, and I have a concern because of my long association with

Memorial University in particular over the years, the Faculty Association, and

the notion of academic freedom and the independence of the university.

We have had debates here in this House over the last number of years, often

about the involvement of the Auditor General in the auditing of books in the

university. I remember Steve Neary, a former Liberal Leader, who wanted to have

the books of the university on the floor of the House so he could find out what

they were spending their money on, and whether they were spending their money

properly. I think that was resisted, Mr. Speaker, for good reasons. I would

certainly resist that. I was not here when he was, but I do remember, as an

outsider to the political process, hearing those kind of debates in the House of

Assembly, and certainly we had them here. When this government was in

Opposition, certain members who are not with us any more were very anxious to

see this House dissect the books of Memorial University and, by inference, have

something to say about issues that the university felt were within their purview

as an autonomist institution.

The academics, I will say for the record, Mr. Speaker, that those in charge

of academia at the university have a strong belief in the freedom of the

institution, and a strong belief in what is known as academic freedom, and that

is the ability and the right of professors to engage in research that is of

interest to them. That is a very important freedom that the university has had

since their establishment some many hundreds of years ago.

I will say, too, Mr. Speaker, that I have criticized the university in the

past. We, as a people, spend an awful lot of money on the university. We spend,

I think now it is - the minister can upgrade the numbers - but something in the

order of $160 million, $170 million to support the university and its work, both

in the St. John's Campus and in the Grenfell College Campus in Corner Brook

and other programs that exist in other parts of the Province supporting

first-year programs in various places. That is a very good investment, I say,

and we, as a people, are entitled to have a return on that investment in the

sense that we want that university to be relevant to the needs of our young

people. We want that research to be helpful to the problems that we face as a

people and we would like to see all those brains be put to use for the

betterment of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I think I have said on previous occasions, probably in a not too

sophisticated comment, but nevertheless, I think I said we pay these people to

do our thinking for us. I say that it was a bit of tongue in cheek, that, in

fact, the university researchers have that role to do research and be involved

in the community, as well as their teaching duties. We would like to see,

obviously, some of that thinking help us out in many of the public policy issues

and challenges that we face as a Province. That is, of course, in addition to

doing the kind of things that they have been doing so well in terms of cold

ocean research and engineering faculty, the Faculty of Medicine; the Faculty of

our Arts and Science, generally, in providing and producing some of the people

that we honoured today, talking about literature and expression of our culture.

If you look at a woman like Janet McNaughton, who just got a prize for her

most recent novel, this is a person who is writing about Newfoundland culture in

a way that is extremely appealing to young people and also extremely literary in

nature and one that is deserving of the kind of awards that it is getting and

the recognition that it is getting here in this Province and across the country.

Well, these individuals, who participate and learn about our culture through the

university, are also playing an important role in that. But, it is important,

and I think it is becoming increasingly important as we see demographic changes

take place in our Province, as we see the need for training, the need for

education and the need for a compatibility between these programs to have a

greater degree of co-operation. Who better to make the recommendations about the

kind of co-operation that makes sense, than the people who are in the leadership

roles of these institutions?

I know it is fairly weighted with government involvement, as well. The

minister herself or himself, as the case may be, will sit on that board. I

encourage the minister to be active on that board, as I know she takes a great

deal of interest in her portfolios, and we will have an interesting time dealing

with these people on ongoing basis. The minister and the deputy minister is

involved, the president of both the College of the North Atlantic and the

university, as well as the chairperson of the college board and the University

Board of Regents. All of these are ex officio members, in addition a student,

one enrolled at the college and another one enrolled at the university. I do not

know if the minister dealt with this in terms of the appointment of these

people. I am hoping that those appointments will be made in the same way that

they are made to the Board of Regents that, in fact, they are more or less

nominees of the student organizations that speak in public on behalf of students

in the Province.

So, I think it is a positive step, Mr. Speaker. I hope the recommendations

that come forth from this college will be practical and sensible and it will not

be a place where we have turf wars taking place. I understand, and I spoke to

the minister privately about the whole issue of academic freedom and was

concerned that perhaps the university might see this as an encroachment. I

received assurances from her that they do not feel that way, that is not the

case. That this is something that is regarded by all those participating as a

positive step and a way for the kind of higher level co-operation to take place

in the hopes that, on a practical level, we will be able to see the kind of

co-operation that is necessary.

We do not need duplication. What we do need is more opportunities for young

people to get the kind of education and training that they need. We have seen,

when we look at any statics about education and its effects on income is very

clear, that those who have a post-secondary education, particularly obviously at

a public college - and I will not go into the private college debate again

today. I did that last week on the student aid matter, but this is a bill that

can see the strengthening of our public college system which I am glad to see

this government interested in doing.

Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I support the legislation here at second

reading.

MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. Minister of Education speaks now she will close

debate at second reading.

The hon. the Minister of Education.

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do want to speak to a couple of issues before I close debate at this stage

- certainly brought to our attention by the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi

and the issue of academic freedom. This legislation will not affect or impede

the academic freedom of Memorial University of Newfoundland and that is very

important that we do not interfere with that process. I also, for the record,

want to indicate that both Memorial University of Newfoundland and the College

of the North Atlantic are in agreement with this particular legislation.

Two other issues I want to address that were brought up by the Member for

Grand Falls-Buchans. One was: What will be the direction in the future between

the links between the College of the North Atlantic and possible university

level courses being offered in Central Newfoundland? The Council on Higher

Education came into being in 1992. Then there were recommendations that came out

of the White Paper, but in essence, the Council on Higher Education, although it

probably came as a result of the moratorium, certainly provides very valuable

input and feedback from Newfoundland and Labrador.

As we heard some questions about the future and what the plans would be in

Central Newfoundland, the whole duty and the whole purpose of the Council on

Higher Education is to - and I will go through the six points. One is strategic

directions for post-secondary education in the Province. That is particularly

important when we talk about areas like Central Newfoundland or Labrador,

because we certainly want to have a strategy as to how we are going to work

together, how we are going to offer post-secondary education and how we meet the

needs of the students in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Another duty or another function of this is to look at the priorities to

reduce the duplication of effort and expense in delivering post-secondary

education in the Province. It is very important that if we can reduce

duplication, we certainly need to be doing that. Nobody seems to be in favour of

duplicating services in the Province. We want to be able to share all areas of

student support services, whether that is library resources, career counselling,

housing, et cetera. There are areas that do not interfere with academic freedom,

but where we can come together as a Province in these institutions and certainly

improve the services that students receive.

Student recruitment is another area, both domestic and foreign. We have

duplication services in that right now as the College of the North Atlantic and

Memorial University of Newfoundland have their recruitment, particularly with

international students. We need to be able to come together because we need to

encourage people to come to Newfoundland and Labrador and show them what we have

to offer. We certainly need to be working together, rather than working against

each other.

They will also provide feedback and recommendations on credit transfer and

other related matters. Credit transfer and strategic direction will certainly

hit on some areas that Central Newfoundland has questions about with regards to

offering college level courses and transfer the credits from the college to the

university. A very important piece of this particular legislation is that if we

are able to offer some courses, and the credits can be transferred, that we

should be acknowledging that students get the credit they deserve. There are

other universities within Canada that accept credits from the College of the

North Atlantic that are not necessarily accepted at Memorial University. So we

really need to strengthen those ties.

Mr. Speaker, the only other issue I wanted to speak to is the math program

that we have in K-12. Although it is not necessarily relevant to this particular

legislation, when we look at it, they do feed into the post-secondary

institutions. I guess we can make the links that way.

The math program came in, in 1999 in Newfoundland and Labrador. It is my

understanding that it was well-researched and brought in following research

within this Province, and that we looked at other programs that were offered in

Atlantic Canada and throughout North America. It was felt that a problem-solving

based program would come in.

Mr. Speaker, the students who started the program in 1999 are in Grade 6 this

particular year, so the classes that are in Grade 6 have been the pioneers of

the math program. It is a very different approach to how math is taught in the

school system. It is very much not based on memorization or written; it is based

on problem-solving abilities. They introduce concepts at a much young age than

what we probably would have been used to in the system.

We will continue to monitor the program and, until we have some data on a

longitudinal basis to be able to look at the program, I think it would be

premature to take the program and eliminate it now. I am sure, in 1999, the

minister who was involved in bringing in this particular program did some very

thorough research and background before it was brought in. As a parent who has

followed the program, who happened to have a child in kindergarten in 1999 when

the program was introduced, I also have followed, as a parent, this year of

pioneering the program, of being the first to look at the homework and wondering

how to get through it. I can certainly understand some of the issues that

parents have, because it is a very different way. I hate using the term new

math, because I heard that when I was in school, but it seems like it is still

ongoing today.

At a certain point the students are able to integrate the skills and they do

have a better grasp at problem solving and being able to look at other areas of

the math program, as I said, rather than some of the multiplication, division,

addition and subtraction, and they get into a much broader base with regard to -

well, geometry, for example, being introduced in Grade 6, has not been

introduced for the first time but expanded on at this point.

Again, math is a very important subject. It is one that is required by all

students when they enter the school system. It is certainly one where we need to

make sure that there are skills developed at the post-secondary level because of

the fields that people go into and they need a math program.

There are going to be no changes right now. We will continue to monitor the

program as we move through it. It will be very interesting to see the group that

are in Grade 6 now, as they finish Grade 12 and enter university, because they

will have been the first class that would have done the new program from

kindergarten right up to finishing Grade 12. It will be interesting to see the

statistics as they move through university and as the students move behind them,

because every year the program is offered behind them, whether it is in Grade 2

or Grade 3 or Grade 1. The teacher, at this point, has had now a number of years

of experience of implementing the program so that the children now who are in

Grade 1 have had the benefit of this particular math program, since the teacher

has been delivering this program since September of 2000.

It will be very interesting, as we move through this particular math program,

to see what results we are going to get at the post-secondary level, but I am

confident that the previous Administration brought in this program with sound

research and with good reason to bring it in, and that we want our students to

avail of a similar curriculum that is available anywhere in North America, and

that we will continue to monitor the program.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 21,

An Act To

Establish The Council On Higher Education, be now read a second time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Establish The Council On Higher Education. (Bill

21)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 21 has now been read a second time.

When shall this bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?

MR. E. BYRNE: Now, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Establish The Council On Higher

Education," read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the

Whole House presently, by leave. (Bill 21)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to

consider matters related to Bill 21.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that the House resolve itself into a Committee

of the Whole to consider matters relating to Bill 21,

An Act To Establish The

Council On Higher Education, and that I do now leave the Chair.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr.

Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

The Committee is ready to hear debate on Bill 21,

An Act To Establish The

Council On Higher Education.

A bill, "An Act To Establish The Council On Higher Education."

(Bill 21)

CLERK: Clauses 1 to 15.

CHAIR: Shall clauses 1 to 15 inclusive carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Clauses 1 to 15 are carried.

On motion, clauses 1 through 15 carried.

CLERK:

Be it enacted by the Lieutenant-Governor and House of Assembly in

Legislative Session convened, as follows.

CHAIR: Shall the enacting clause carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

The enacting clause is carried.

On motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK:

An Act To Establish The Council On Higher Education.

CHAIR: Shall the title carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

The title is carried.

On motion, title carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report Bill 21,

An Act To Establish The Council On Higher

Education, carried without amendment?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Bill 21 is carried.

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the bill without amendment,

carried.

CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I move that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

CHAIR: The motion is that the Committee rise, report progress and ask

leave to sit again.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

Motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Mr. Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): The hon. the Member for Bonavista South and Deputy

Speaker.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have considered

the matters to them referred and have directed me to report Bill 21 carried

without amendment, and ask leave to sit again.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chairperson of Committee of the Whole reports that the

Committee have considered the matters to them referred and have directed him to

report Bill 21,

An Act To Establish The Council On Higher Education, passed

without amendment.

When shall this report be received?

MR. E. BYRNE: Now, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

When shall this bill be read a third time?

MR. E. BYRNE: Now, by leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Now, by leave. Leave has been granted.

Motion, that the Committee report having passed Bill 21 without amendment,

carried. Bill ordered read a third time presently, by leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move third reading of Bill 21,

An Act To Establish The Council On Higher

Education.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 21,

An Act To Establish

The Council On Higher Education, be now read a third time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 21 be read a third time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

CLERK (Noel): A bill, "An Act To Establish The Council On Higher

Education." (Bill 21)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 21, "An Act To Establish The Council On Higher

Education," has now been read a third time, and it is ordered that the bill

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

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Establish The Council On Higher

Education," read a third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the

Order Paper. (Bill 21)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Order 3, third reading of a bill,

An Act To Amend The Hydro Corporation

Act. (Bill 1)

MR. SPEAKER: Third reading of Bill 1.

It is moved and seconded that Bill 1,

An Act To Amend The Hydro Corporation

Act, be now read a third time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion that Bill 1 be read a

third time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

Motion carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Hydro Corporation Act And The

Electrical Power Control Act, 1994. (Bill 1)

MR. SPEAKER: Bill 1,

An Act To Amend The Hydro Corporation Act, has

now been read a third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and its title

be as on the Order Paper.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Hydro Corporation Act And The

Electrical Power Control Act, 1994," read a third time, ordered passed and

its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 1)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Order 5, second reading of a bill,

An Act To Amend The Fishery Products

International Limited Act, Bill 32.

I think we will turn it over to my colleague, the Deputy Premier and Minister

of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 32,

An Act To Amend The

Fishery Products International Limited Act, be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Fishery Products

International Limited Act." (Bill 32)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and

Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased today to rise in this House

and to bring forward this particular bill,

An Act To Amend The Fishery Products

International Limited Act.

Many of you would be aware, Mr. Speaker, that I brought forward the original

act in 1985, and I believe history has shown that it was a prudent measure then

taken by the government of the day. It was prudent, Mr. Speaker, because FPI

have served our Province well for twenty-one years, as the flagship company of

our Province's seafood processing sector. However, during those past

twenty-one years the world has changed and the fishing industry has changed with

it.

I had often said, when I was Minister of Fisheries back in the 1980s, that

the biggest, single challenge I experienced on a daily basis was attempting to

manage gluts. Mr. Speaker, that is no longer the challenge facing a Minister of

Fisheries and Aquaculture in this Province today. Today we are operating in an

increasingly challenging environment, with growing interest rates, a Canadian

dollar that continues to increase in value, rising fuel costs and low labour

costs in other jurisdictions that we simply cannot compete with in a North

American economy.

During the last two decades, Mr. Speaker, our Province has weathered a cod

moratorium, the impacts of which we are still seeing. There is a declining

seafood resource, leaving less and less raw material to be processed in our

plants. Truly, Mr. Speaker, we are facing a situation in which government has to

act. In fact, it is not unlike the situation government was facing in the early

1980s when it was determined that it was in our best interest to create Fishery

Products International Limited. At that time our Province had a number of large

scale international, offshore seafood producing companies. Many of them went

through difficult times in the early 1980s. Many proud Newfoundland companies

suffered financial collapse. Some very substantial entities among them fell upon

hard times and could not survive. We all remember the sky rocketing interest

rates, for example, which was the big problem in those days. Interest rates, I

believe, that peeked at something over 22 per cent. So this was the environment

that we found ourselves in when FPI was created.

Mr. Speaker, FPI was started as a Crown corporation of the government. It was

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador had the next largest share and the Bank

of Nova Scotia was the other third shareholder, but it was set up in the initial

stages in 1984 as a Crown corporation. It was later deemed, as I said, in 1985

to be in the best interest of the Province to take FPI public. It was taken

public only after the FPI Act was structured to protect the Province's

strategic interest in the company.

For two decades, Mr. Speaker, that company served our Province well. Its

sales and profits grew. The company diversified and provided meaningful,

long-term employment for up to 8,000 people at a peak. Most of them, Mr.

Speaker, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. As a true testament to the spirit of

both the company and the people of our Province, FPI weathered the storm that

was the cod moratorium. The company diversified. It survived and continued to be

a profitable, global seafood company, despite the moratorium. Mr. Speaker, this

is no l