PDF Version

May 5, 2020

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIX No. 35

The House

met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER

(Reid): Order, please!

Admit

strangers.

I just

wanted to let people know that we have an exemption to the health order

restricting gatherings such as this and we are practising social distancing

while we're proceeding with this session of the House. So I just wanted to table

the exemption to the order, if I could.

The Deputy

Government House Leader.

MR. CROCKER: Mr. Speaker, I give notice and, by leave and seconded by the Minister of

Natural Resources, move the following motion.

That,

notwithstanding any Standing Order of this House, Routine Proceedings of the

House of Assembly, with the exemption of Question Period, are suspended for this

sitting day; that the Orders of the Day provided for in this motion shall be

dealt with in the manner provided by it; that Notice of Motion is deemed to have

been given on the following bills:

An Act to Amend the Liquor Control Act and

the Liquor Corporation Act, Bill 34;

An Act Respecting the Witnessing of

Documents Through the Use of Audio-Visual Technology, Bill 35;

An Act to Amend

the Temporary Variation of Statutory Deadlines Act, Bill 36;

An Act to Amend the

Pharmacy Act, 2012, Bill 37; and

An Act to Amend the Public Health Protection

and Promotion Act, Bill 38; and that those said bills shall now be deemed to

have been read for a first time; and that the notice shall be deemed to have

been given under Standing Order 11(1) that this House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m.

today, Tuesday, May 5, 2020, and I so move this motion.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those in favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, ‘nay.'

Carried.

MR. SPEAKER: As pursuant the motion we just passed, we're going to move to Question

Period now.

Oral

Questions.

Oral

Questions

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

MR. CROSBIE:

Mr. Speaker, it's a pleasure to get on my feet and participate in the

proceedings of the House in these circumstances. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, this morning, CBC carried a

story about stockpiles of personal protective equipment for an H1N1 pandemic

that didn't happen and government's failure to renew them for a pandemic, the

present one, that has happened.

Does the Minister of Health dispute the

statement of the president of the nurses' union that the government did not plan

or prepare for the need for a strategic reserve of PPE?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Again, just to echo my colleague's comments

about how nice it is to actually be in a room with people; albeit, physically

distant.

It's a very good question. There were

stockpiles, common with other provinces and the feds, which were put in place in

2009. Over a period of time they were not renewed. They were either disposed of

or used in some way within the health care system, and these decisions were

taken prior to 2015.

The warehouse in which they were stored was

vacated in 2016 as surplus space when we reorganized the Special Assistance

Program. PPE has been a challenge. We propose to introduce a mechanism now where

adequate, appropriate inventory control will prevent this from happening again.

Thank you very much.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. CROSBIE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the answer begs the fact that the

program the minister refers to was brought in in July 2017 and he's had three

years to implement it.

Does the minister agree that in failing to

comply with the official pandemic plan and keep a strategic reserve of PPE

available, the government was caught with its pants down?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

This pandemic has certainly been a learning

exercise for a lot of us. We were informed that there were materials in

stockpiles across the province. That, apparently, turned out to be inaccurate

and we have found ourselves in a situation where we have some expired stock. We

have repurposed that for FIT testing. As the Member opposite is aware, we are

now in a position where our PPE supplies and deliveries match our current burn

rate.

On a go-forward basis, we will reaccumulate that

stockpile so that we have a surge capacity consistent with likely demand but

also to avoid wastage – such as this has happened – in the future.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. CROSBIE:

Mr. Speaker, I the minister's answer to be that he, in part, was misled

as to either the existence or the extent of the existence of the stockpile.

We turn to another topic. Yesterday, we learned

in the media of the need to isolate 85 health care workers after contact with a

patient who tested positive for COVID-19.

After all the sacrifices made by residents of

Newfoundland and Labrador, how could the largest hospital in our province

violate the isolation rules designed to prevent this kind of thing from

happening?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Obviously, an area of concern for all of us.

Without going into too much detail because of clinical privacy, the patient

concerned had been tested negative on two successive occasions, 48-hours apart,

prior to being transferred to that unit. When their condition deteriorated and

they were then sent back to the intensive care unit, one out of two tests showed

positive. Since then, they have tested negative on two successive occasions.

The staff were isolated out of an abundance of

precaution. Of the, actually, 93 individuals involved, all have been tested; 90

of those have proven negative, three are outstanding, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, what does the minister's answer to the question imply about

the validity and accuracy of our testing for COVID-19?

Originally, we validated the test, over 50

cases, with a central laboratory in Canada, but my question is: What quality

assurance measures have been followed since to ensure that our testing for

COVID-19 remains valid? And, indeed, what doubts about this has the information

the minister just given us cause him to have?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Our tests are validated internally. And with

reference to the national microbiological lab in Winnipeg, all of our positive

samples are sent out there anyway.

What it does raise is the fact that this is a

dynamic situation with a virus that is novel and unknown. Infectious diseases

doctors across the country are discussing this, and there is, apparently, now a

pick-up rate positive where the virus particles exist but are dead and inactive.

This is causing some challenges for our health care workers in interpreting some

of these results. Once again, this has to be a clinical decision more about the

patient than any one particular test.

The key message here is if you are tested for

COVID-19, stay home for 14 days whether the result is positive or negative.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the

Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. CROSBIE:

I thank the minister for his answer.

Could he

explain to the House when officials in his department were advised of the

incident involving the 85 health care workers, please?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much for the question.

Certainly, I

can't give a precise time. I can certainly find that out for him and report back

to the House.

Thank you,

Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. CROSBIE:

Mr. Speaker, I'm naturally interested in knowing whether it was before or

after the meeting of the pandemic committee on that morning.

Mr. Speaker,

the pandemic is a global health issue and we're facing also an economic crisis.

Many businesses in this province fear they won't survive. While the federal

rent-relief program was welcomed, it will not help businesses who simply cannot

afford the 25 per cent portion of the rent because they have no revenue.

What is the

province going to do to help these businesses find the rent?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER

BALL:

Mr. Speaker, as you know – and I agree, there are a number of businesses

within Newfoundland and Labrador that are struggling right now. We are aware of

this. It's one of the reasons why we're going out meeting with those local

businesses right now to see where the provincial government could actually

support them.

We know that

the federal programs right now, with a degree of certainty, they do have a

timeline attached to them around mid-June of this year and some of those could

potentially be extended. We've realized that some businesses, really without

revenue, cannot pay any of the rent at all, Mr. Speaker.

We're taking

this into consideration, given the financial situation of the province. Whatever

we can do to support our business community, we will be doing it, just like we

will the rest of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

I will take

this opportunity to actually answer the question that was previously asked. This

information that the minister responded to a few minutes ago about health care

workers at Eastern Health, that was not known at the time of our meeting

yesterday.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. CROSBIE:

Thank you, Premier, for that answer.

We are

hearing from businesses that relief programs that involve deferrals of fees,

loan payments and the like don't help because the revenue is not deferred,

rather it's lost for good.

Will the

government consider ways to free up cash immediately through relief in areas

like workers' compensation premiums or other utilities fees?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER

BALL:

Mr. Speaker, after spending many, many years in business, I understand

the cash flow issues that many businesses could have to deal with, given this

situation that we currently find ourselves in.

Yes, we are

looking at all the options that we have available to us, not just on a deferral

basis, but very tangible ways that we can

actually support those businesses that are struggling right now as an impact of

this COVID-19 pandemic, Mr. Speaker. When we get to find the ways that are best,

we could have the most meaningful impact, those are the kind of measures that we

will put in place to support our business community.

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

MR. CROSBIE: As the Premier and his government well know, business and industry are

the backbone of the economy and if they're not helped to get through the crisis,

our economy will not recover. This will result in mass unemployment and people

leaving the province in droves. Business and industry have told the government

what is needed.

Rather than hire individuals with ties to the

government, why doesn't the government just listen to business and industry and

take action?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL: Mr. Speaker, we are taking action. This is the reason why we go out and

consult with those industry leaders and the business community. Let's not

forget, we have some non-government organizations out there, too, that are great

job creators. We understand that it is the small business community, Mr.

Speaker, in our province that is the backbone, and they will create jobs.

We've been literally less than two months into

this situation right now. The magnitude of the impact, the industries that will

be impacted the most. Mr. Speaker, we want to put the money where the money can

work, and that is exactly the process that we're doing right now. It's important

that we put key business leaders together, facilitate that information.

Sometimes it could be money that's required; sometimes it could be changing

regulations that could actually support businesses to be able to expand.

There's one thing for sure, Mr. Speaker, going

through this health crisis, what will be equally important when we come out of

this, come safely through the health crisis, but then come out of this to

support the business community and others, the employers in our province that

will create the jobs for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

With the travel restrictions, the tourism and

hospitality sector in our province will be devastated this year. A made-at-home

solution is needed to help businesses that work in our tourism and hospitality

sector survive. The federal government programs are scheduled to end in June.

Is this government considering a relief package

to help businesses that operate in the tourism and hospitality sectors?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL: We sure are, Mr. Speaker. I know, speaking to the Minister of TCII just

this morning on this very issue – we communicate quite regularly – realizing

that the tourism industry, which is a huge job generator in rural Newfoundland,

Mr. Speaker, and throughout our province.

Mr. Speaker, we have a great tourism package

right here in Newfoundland and Labrador. So we want to make sure that – this

year will be negatively impacted, we all know that with the recent travel bans,

but coming through this year we want to support our tourism industry so that

next year, hopefully, people will be comfortable coming back to what is one of

the safest places in this world to visit.

Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, is a

great place to visit. Probably not so much this year, but next year we

want to position this province to be a place where visitors will come and

will travel here safely.

SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm glad to

hear the Premier reassure the tourism operators that they will be helped.

Camping is a

part of our culture in this province, Mr. Speaker. We get a very short window to

enjoy the outdoors. We understand the concerns of public health, but we are

hearing from those people who operate campgrounds that accommodations can be

made to ensure social distancing, that campers can enjoy the parks safely.

Will

government consider opening campgrounds earlier than originally planned, because

this is also an economic driver in our province?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER

BALL: It sure is, Mr. Speaker, and I think most people in this House of

Assembly would agree that camping is a good experience. It is a healthy

experience. It is great for families, but, Mr. Speaker, we all know that given

the current pandemic that we're dealing with, and given the cluster – and the

Leader of the Opposition just mentioned some of the challenges that we had at

Eastern Health, and it's been dealt with. We also know what happened with the

funeral home in our province, so we need to be cautious.

We will make

decisions through the advice of the chief medical officer and she will make her

decisions and put measures in place, based on the evidence that we have within

our health system. It's important that we listen to the science. I think

everyone would agree to that. It's important that we take the advice, do this

cautiously so we can protect our families.

When it

comes to a point where those alerts, I think it's Alert 2, can be changed that

will provide for overnight camping, Mr. Speaker, it will be all of us working

together to make sure that we can get there. It just requires a little patience

right now.

Camping is a

great experience, but let's be very patient in how we introduce and relax those

new measures based on the advice that comes from the chief medical officer.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the

Premier for that response, but not all campers and campsites are created equal.

There are campgrounds with a lot of space to allow for social distancing. There

are campgrounds that can keep their gathering areas, public facilities closed.

There are campgrounds that can be restricted to trailers only with their own

facilities.

Will

government explore options for some form of restricted camping season that will

allow campers to enjoy their home away from home? It's not only good for

families, Mr. Speaker, but it's also good for people's mental health?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER

BALL: It sure is good for people's mental health, Mr. Speaker. I think the

decision, when you listen to the advice that been coming from our chief medical

officer, is that you do this and you do it with caution. So when the chief

medical officer is to a point in the decision-making process, she is comfortable

giving the indicators within our province – and the Leader of the Opposition

just made note of things about relaxing measures.

What is

required, Mr. Speaker? An adequate supply of PPE in our province, making sure

that our borders are tight so that travellers coming into our province are not

reintroducing this COVID-19 virus in Newfoundland and Labrador, but also making

sure that our acute care hospitals have the capacity within the system in case

we get an outbreak, Mr. Speaker, that we can actually respond to that. One

additional thing would be we would use an app on our cellphone or smart phones

that would actually be able to trace people just in case we have another

outbreak.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker,

on April 2 the Minister of Education said: “No one student will be disadvantaged

here because of connectivity.” It's now become almost two full months since

school has closed.

How many

students have been left behind because of lack of connectivity in home learning

resources such as laptops or iPads?

MR. SPEAKER:

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

MR. WARR:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the hon. Member for the question.

Mr. Speaker,

the public school system here in Newfoundland and Labrador is based on equity

and is fundamental to our education system, one we are all working to achieve in

this extraordinary time. Teachers are expected to be checking in on their

students regularly. We've had the opportunities to reach out to some of the

teachers. I've seen it myself, where teachers have connected with their

students.

With regard

to the Member's statement on connectivity, Mr. Speaker, I've been speaking with

the district just as of lately. We've put out hundreds of devices and we will

continue to monitor that and continue to invest in other devices. Just within

the next few coming days, we expect a resource package to go out to all students

as well.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, it's a

big issue because a lot of parents are asking about it and rightfully so.

Education of our children is paramount.

Mr. Speaker,

my question is for the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development

District cancelled all school-sponsored trips; however, our office has heard

from many of the hundreds of parents who are still owed refunds in the thousands

of dollars.

Mr. Speaker,

parents are frustrated with being led from department to the school, to the

travel agent, to the insurance provider, to the underwriter.

Minister, my

question is: When are you going to step up and help the families recover the

money they are owed?

MR. SPEAKER:

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

MR. WARR:

Again, Mr. Speaker, I thank the Member for the question. It's a question

that was raised with me by a Member of his own caucus just a short while ago.

I did, Mr.

Speaker, have the discussions with my department, who in turn had discussions

with NLESD, as early as today. I can say that for most instances that I've been

given the information on, there have been travel credits issued to parents.

Mr. Speaker,

if the hon. Member wants to bring a particular incident up with regard to

someone not getting compensated for the loss, I'd be happy to address that.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The fishing

season is getting underway in this province

and there's a lot of uncertainty for plant workers, harvesters and processors.

What is the government doing to ensure that the

fishing season will be both safe and viable this year?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL: The fishery is extremely important in Newfoundland and Labrador. Mr.

Speaker, it's a big part of our history; it's a big job creator, big employer.

Mr. Speaker, the measures that have been taken

around plant workers, obviously, as they put their floor plans in place so that

people – if you work in a fish processing plant – can do so safely, and people

who do not want to go to work in that environment are encouraged not to do so.

So, it's only for people that would be comfortable and feel that their safety is

the priority and can go to work safely; then, if they see fit to go there, they

could.

Likewise, with the fishing harvesting sector,

it's no different, Mr. Speaker. People are expected, if they want to go to work,

they go to work in a safe environment. If at the appropriate time measures need

to be taken as a province to support those industries, we will do whatever we

can, but, Mr. Speaker, I think there are a lot of people right now that are

eager to go out, either through the harvesting sector or processing, but only

when it's safe.

MR. SPEAKER: The Opposition House Leader.

MR. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We've heard that there are over 50 more

out-of-province workers who are working alongside Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians at the Corner Brook hospital, long-term care facilities in Grand

Falls and in Gander, who are coming from Ontario and Quebec.

We ask the question: Who has deemed these

essential, Mr. Speaker, and why could the work not be done by Newfoundlanders

and Labradorians?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

MR. CROCKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the hon. Member for the

question.

Over the last number of days, we've certainly

reached out to our contractors in this province. I've talked to Trades NL. I've

talked to the Heavy Civil Association as recently as this morning. I meet on a

weekly basis with the Newfoundland and Labrador Construction Association as

well.

Mr. Speaker, we agree with the Member opposite.

If people are doing jobs in this province in the construction industry – right

now, under TW-led projects, there are some 24 people in this province from out

of province working, and if contractors – and we've spoken to these companies –

can't find a way to find Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to do this work, Mr.

Speaker, we will certainly work with the Department of Health and the public

health officers to – if there are loopholes here, we are certainly more than

willing to close those up, Mr. Speaker.

To his point, it's very important that if

contractors can find people in this province to do that work, this work should

be done by Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. And if need be, Mr. Speaker, we

will take further measures to ensure that.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Opposition House Leader.

MR. BRAZIL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We agree with the minister. The issue has been

who has determined these are essential workers that are necessary here and why

they couldn't be filled by those trades people we have in Newfoundland and

Labrador. That's the question we do expect to be answered in the near future.

The federal government has pledged a mere $75

million for oil industry in this province, money that is earmarked to reduce

emissions in the industry. I suggest to the minister that this money will do little

to help our industry get back up and running and get Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians back to work. Our oil industry needs more support.

I ask the

minister: What specifically have you asked the federal minister to provide in

terms of tangible support to the offshore industry?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As this is

the first time I had the opportunity to be on my feet, I want to thank the

essential workers in our province and I want to thank all of us for being here

today.

Mr. Speaker,

the Member opposite asked a very important question. We've been talking to the

federal government with CAPP and with Noia to ensure that we have supports for

our offshore.

Mr. Speaker,

the oil and gas industry offshore, we've asked specifically for supports around

preserving financial equity and, very importantly, for investments to ensure

that we have a very robust involvement in exploration. We have been speaking

almost daily with the federal government on these very issues, he is correct.

The federal government has invested, I think, $1.7 billion on orphaned and

abandoned mines in Alberta and in Saskatchewan, and allocated $75 million to

ensure that we can reduce our levels of emissions in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Exploration

is a key step to oil production.

I ask the

minister: Will she work with the federal counterparts to extend all current

licences so that exploration and discoveries can be pursued?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

The key here, Mr. Speaker, is exploration. The Province of Newfoundland

and Labrador under former governments, under this government, we've made massive

investments to understand what the opportunity is offshore and we know the

prospectivity is enormous. We know there are some 52 billion barrels of oil yet

to be discovered; we've seen that on seismic, Mr. Speaker.

The answer

to his question is absolutely. We have indicated to the operators that we're

willing to work with them on a one-to-one basis to see how we can support them

in continuing their exploration program, but very importantly we're speaking to

the federal government about investments to ensure exploration continues.

Because exploration is key, Mr. Speaker. There could be 52 other Hibernias off

our coast.

SOME HON.

MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker,

I was pleased to hear that the Pharmacy Board will be easing away the 30-day

medication supply over the next two weeks. I've raised the matter on additional

occasions with the minister himself.

I ask the

minister now: What will he put in play to reimburse those who've had to pay the

extra dispensing fee?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

This was a

decision of the Pharmacy Board which has had significant impact on seniors

particularly and those with chronic health conditions. From our point of view,

we were the first of the Atlantic governments to recognize this for

NLPDP clients, those people for whom we have a

responsibility to cover their medications. We allocated initially, I think, $3.5

million to cover up to six months of such expense.

We have negotiated long and hard with the

Pharmacy Board who have the sole jurisdiction over this. We have managed to get

them now to a place where these restrictions on prescription dispensing will be

gone within two weeks.

What we can do, as far as those people who are

self-pay or for those people who are privately insured is a different matter. We

will look to see what precedents have been set in other jurisdictions.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay East - Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

We were recently made aware of a no-bid contract awarded to Mr. Paul

Mills – a member of the Premier's transition team into office – at $150,000

annually. In 2017, this government also awarded a contract to Mr. Mills to help

develop The Way Forward at a rate of $1,500 a day for a total of almost

$200,000 over a six-month period.

Was this contract also a no bid and was he paid

the amount described?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

First of all, Mr. Speaker, as I clarified last week, there are two Paul

Mills; one that worked on the election campaign last year. There are two

different people here but, indeed, the one in question today is the one that did

work on the transition team. At the time, this was not a paid position, but he

did at the time simply because of the experience over 30 years that he had

working with the federal government.

What we were looking for there is to find out

around the bureaucracy of the federal government and how that would interconnect

with the provincial government, Mr. Speaker. It was part of gathering the

information on a transition into government in 2015, working and leaning on the

experience.

There's no question, if you look at the résumé

of Mr. Mills, it's a short-term contract right now to help us to support the

business community, as the Leader of the Opposition just clearly pointed out,

was necessary at this point in time. So leaning on and learning from the over 30

years' experience, given the experience with the federal government, Mr.

Speaker. It's a short-term contract and it's putting us in the position to

support our business community in a few months.

MR. SPEAKER:

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

MR. J. DINN:

Mr. Speaker, on February 10 the Premier and the MP for St. John's South

said they would implement a rate mitigation plan, including a cost-of-service

agreement.

I ask the Premier: When will we see this plan to

protect people from the high cost of Muskrat Falls power?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What was outlined at that point was the process

that we would follow through and take rates back to 13.5 cents. Mr. Speaker, I

think we must keep in mind too, that around this time last year we were the only

party that put in place what was a credible rate mitigation plan for people in

the province. That is one that we took to the campaign with.

Mr. Speaker, we worked throughout last year, we

put the process, we identified what the

process

would be at the announcement, Mr. Speaker. Work is continuing with the

officials, even through this pandemic.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

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

I ask the

Minister of Health and Community Services: What measures will he take to control

the expected influx of workers to Labrador this summer who could potentially

spread COVID-19 to the local communities?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I will take

my advice from the chief medical officer who has the power delegated to her

under the act and Special Measures Order. Our principles have essentially been

that only those people from outside of the province who provide skills that are

essential to critical infrastructure are really the individuals we would want to

see. We've already seen changes in the way some work is being done on projects

up there to bring in local workers to avoid out-of-province travel.

Our main

risk, once we have flattened this curve – and touch wood, it seems to be flat at

the moment – is that we will import the virus again once more from outside, and

that is the substance of our focus at the moment from public health and Special

Measures Order perspective.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

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

I ask the

Premier: Can he tell us if and how he will act on the proposal by the Third

Party to establish a collaborative, non-partisan Select Committee on economic

recovery?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER

BALL: Certainly, very interested in that, Mr. Speaker. I think from my

estimation and how I feel about the all-party Committee on public health as we

deal with this – we've been meeting every day – we've had some conversations,

some good decisions that's been based on that, and gave us an opportunity, I

think, as all parties.

Mr. Speaker,

I think we could learn lessons from that. I also believe that we could take that

kind of group into a discussion on the recovery of our economy. I'm open to

that. As you know, I've met with your party leaders about four weeks ago,

yesterday, and we're still waiting on concept and indeed if there's willingness

from all parties to participate at that level.

Mr. Speaker,

as Premier of the province, I think it's a good idea and I'd be more than

willing.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

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

We've heard

the CEO of the NLESD raise the possibility of a shift system for schools in

September. The opening of schools will require a comprehensive plan to address

the logistics of a shift system, online instruction, busing, supervision, school

cleaning, curriculum nights, courses such as physical education and the learning

deficits caused by the closing of schools in March.

I ask the

minister: Will he confirm whether or not such planning is under way and whether

we can expect to see such a plan by June of this year, well in advance of the

school year?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. WARR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the

hon. Member for the question. Certainly, the hon. Member raises some good

points, Mr. Speaker, and again, this is a moving target. We've been in

consultation with the district. Actually, the district has been very forthright

in their plans to date, Mr. Speaker. Again, we take our direction from the chief

medical officer for health. As we move forward and if we see an opening where we

think the schools are to open in September, we will make sure that the

provisions are made for students to get back to school safe and that our

learning continues, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period has expired.

The hon.

Member for Humber - Bay of Islands, I understand that he has requested leave of

the House to extend Question Period by three minutes to ask some questions.

Is it the

will of the House to give him consent to do so?

AN HON.

MEMBER: Leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Seeing no objections, the Member has leave.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My office

and the office of the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands has received many

calls regarding workers from outside the province working on the Core Science

building in St. John's and long-term care facilities in Gander and Grand Falls.

These workers were deemed essential workers for these infrastructure projects.

We have many

qualified Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that can do this work. With all the

sacrifices that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have made, people are asking

why are surgeries being postponed, diagnostic testing postponed and cataract

surgeries postponed, but these workers are being allowed in.

How can you

justify allowing workers from Quebec and other provinces where there is still a

high rate of COVID-19 infections to come to our province, to work side by side,

not self-isolate and possibly bring this home to the workers and their families

in Newfoundland and Labrador?

Can the

minister explain to us who developed these guidelines and how these workers were

put on an essential list, while medical procedures are being cancelled?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the hon. Member for the

question.

I just want

to go back to the Member for Conception Bay East - Bell Island's question

earlier about who actually puts these guidelines in place. These guidelines are

guidelines of the chief medical health officer in the province. These guidelines

were set out early on in the pandemic.

What's come

to light over the last few days – and we've had these discussions – I know I've

had it with the Premier and the Minister of Health and others – around the fact

that if we have contractors out there that are finding ways to bring people in

here, that was never the intent of these guidelines. Because it was never the

intent of these guidelines to allow people into this province who have skills

that are available in this province.

So, Mr.

Speaker, I can assure you we're reviewing that and we expect our contractors, in

this province, to do their

part in this pandemic. If they don't want to listen

to what guidelines are in place or if they want to try and find loopholes in

this, we'll certainly go beyond to plug those loopholes.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, it is going on as we speak, so there's no question about it

that it should be taken care of immediately.

Mr. Speaker, I understand the seriousness of

this pandemic. Our office has been contacted on many occasions by citizens who

are waiting for medical treatment. Private clinics can only do emergency cases.

I have one person who battled cancer, he has a

major eye problem, but is not deemed essential or deemed as emergency. Just

another, he's waiting to get a CAT scan. He's in constant pain. He can't even

stand, but it's not deemed essential. Yet, we're allowing workers from other

provinces to work side by side by our local workers without self-isolation.

I ask the minister: On behalf of the residents

who are in constant pain, can we look at some way that we can relax the issues

for surgeries for people in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador? It's so

serious that people are in constant pain.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It's an excellent question.

The issue of clinical priority is left to the

clinicians. Who is urgent or emergent is a decision only for a clinical

practice. We have left that in their hands, and my information is that these

have been proceeding. We are still operating on cancers and urgencies.

Diagnostic tests that are required for assessment of urgent or emergent patients

continue.

The question relating to specific cases is a

matter, by and large, for discussion between the referring practitioner and the

specialist. They are the ones who determine what is urgent and what is not. As

the measures relax over the course of the next two alert levels, we'll see an

opening up of the health care system in a way that's responsible, given the

requirements of surge capacity of the pandemic.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The time for Question Period has expired.

Before I recognize the Government House Leader,

I just want to advise Members and the viewing public that we're having some

technical difficulties with our satellite feed. Because of this, some television

viewers are not receiving closed-captioning. Closed-captioning is available on

the web streaming, if viewers wish to view it that way.

Orders of

the Day

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy Government House Leader.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call second reading of Bill 35.

MR. SPEAKER:

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

MR. WARR:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of

Health and

Community Services, that Bill 35,

An Act Respecting The Witnessing Of Documents

Through The Use Of Audio-Visual Technology, be now read a second time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 35,

An Act Respecting The Witnessing

Of Documents Through The Use Of Audio-Visual Technology, be now read a second

time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill, “An Act Respecting The Witnessing Of Documents Through

The Use Of Audio-Visual Technology.” (Bill 35)

MR. SPEAKER:

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

MR. WARR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and certainly a pleasure to stand and speak to

this bill today.

The proposed

bill would temporarily allow for the remote witnessing of the following

documents: wills pursuant to

section 2 of the Wills Act ; affidavits,

declarations, affirmations or certificates pursuant to the Commissioner for

Oaths Act ; an affidavit, declaration, affirmation or documents pursuant to

the Notaries Public Act ; and an instrument pursuant to

section 15 of the

Registration of Deeds Act, 2009 .

Currently,

Mr. Speaker, the legislation in this province requires in-person witnessing for

most documents used as evidence before the courts, such as affidavits;

instruments filed at the registry of deeds, such as deeds and wills.

Mr. Speaker,

as a result of COVID-19 and the challenges associated with the

physical-distancing guidelines, the Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador

approached JPS officials to discuss a temporary solution to allow lawyers in the

province the ability to remotely witness certain documents using audiovisual

technology. JPS officials determined that without legislative amendments, there

is no ability to allow for remote witnessing of documents within the province.

Mr. Speaker,

as a result of COVID-19, JPS is aware that most provinces, with the exception of

Prince Edward Island, have also introduced a temporary mechanism to allow for

remote, virtual commissioning, either by court or law society directive, an

order-in-council, ministerial order or through regulation. JPS has canvassed all

of these avenues and determined, Mr. Speaker, that none are available as an

option for this province, except for a legislative amendment.

The proposed

bill to allow for the remote witnessing of document using audiovisual technology

would be available in the following circumstances: during the COVID-19 public

health emergency only; the bill will expire when the public health emergency

under the Public Health Protection and Promotion Act is over; by a lawyer

in good standing with the Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador; lawyers are

self-regulated, Mr. Speaker, and they're subject to discipline and carry public

liability insurance. They maintain public

confidence in unprecedented times. This limitation is consistent with other

temporary measures adopted in other provinces and territories, that the lawyer

take responsible steps to verify the identity of the person or persons signing

the documents, and the lawyer must comply with all other requirements made by

the Law Society.

Mr. Speaker, JPS has consulted with the Law

Society and they will be issuing a Law Society rule and form on remote

witnessing, similar to directives issued by law societies in other provinces and

territories, and mitigated risk to ensure client identification capacity is

addressed and there is no duress.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I look forward to having

the support of the House on this particular bill, and I will take my seat.

Thank you.

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

MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to speak to that as a member of the Law Society

myself, although non-practicing. This is also being reviewed by our Justice

critic and supported by the legal community at large, to my understanding.

It's a sensible measure which is self-limiting,

and which will expire upon the expiry or withdrawal of the state of emergency

proclaimed by the Minister of Health. I am as well greatly cheered to hear the

minister say that lawyers maintain public confidence in unprecedented times. I

hope the same may be said of politicians.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, the circumstances calling for

this kind of intervention, or this kind of temporary amendment to the

legislation, are not hard to understand. Not everything received in modern

practice of the law from ancient times deserves to be preserved and continued,

but the witnessing of documents like wills and other solemn documents intended

for registration in the Registry of Deeds is one of those customs which has its

roots deeply into the evolution of common and statute law both in the United

Kingdom and in Canada, and in the legal history of Newfoundland and Labrador.

What the government has sought to do here is

preserve that guarantee on the veracity and solemnity of documents, such as

wills and other solemn documents, by way of that guarantee of

authenticity

and

intention, which is represented by witnessing of the document.

On that basis, the PC Opposition is pleased to

be able to support the intervention, including the intent that it should expire

simultaneously with another act, which would be the withdrawal or the expiry of

the state of emergency. Therefore, this is a bill that we think should be

supported and do support.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER:

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

MR. J. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We, too, will support this document. From the

technical briefing, certainly there seems to be an adequate number of safeguards

in place, not the least of which that there is an expiration on this; however,

noting that there's often a lot of discussion about the education system

entering into the 21st century when it comes to technology and e-learning and so

on and so forth, in some ways maybe this is something to look at after this

pandemic and state of emergency is over.

I'm always amazed at just how many other

professions have not really entered into the 21st century and the onus is on

education. It's something to consider towards maybe looking at this as a

permanent measure if it has some validity here. It would certainly, in a

province of our geographical size, make life considerably easier.

Again, it has a number of safeguards with regard

to the witnessing of the document and methods of verifying the identity of the

person signing the document. With that in mind, we have here, I think, plenty of

safeguards that will do a few things: make sure that it's valid and make sure

that the process of a will is signed in due course, and do it so that nothing

untoward may happen to that person so that you have those legal measures in

place.

A will, to me, is about a piece of mind,

an act

of security. So anything that would delay it could also cause greater

ramifications but, certainly, when you look at this, it's a good piece of

legislation. The only thing we would say is at a later date maybe it's worth

considering making this part of a permanent structure so that remote witnessing,

depending on the circumstances, is allowed. I think that's something that could

be adopted for future legislation.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm just going to stand for a minute and support

this bill also. Myself and the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands, with the

briefing are satisfied that this is

done a lot right now across the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, all

across Canada – with the Law Society ensuring the safeguards that are in place;

there's a sunset clause for this.

We know, Mr.

Speaker, the pandemic in Newfoundland and Labrador. Before I go any further, I

just have to recognize the work that the government is doing – Dr. Haggie, Dr.

Fitzgerald, and all that, and the Premier, doing on this also. I have to

recognize that and understand that, yes, there are always going to be issues and

there are going to be some raised here today; but, generally speaking, we may

have discussions about what we can do in the future a bit quicker, some of the

things about campsites, maybe surgeries, as I just mentioned.

But overall,

starting with the pandemic, I have to pass on a lot of the comments that I heard

from people. I know the Minister of Health is here in this House, and I just

have to say great job with it. You have the confidence of the people in the

province and now we may add on to some ideas from the general public. I have to

pass on to the minister, when you include the all-party Committee on health

care, there are two independents here, two people probably with the most

experience, except for probably one Member, the Minister of Finance, who's been

in government the longest here. So excluding two Members – now, that's just

something for the future, because our residents have a lot of concerns also on

it. But I have to recognize that from the Minister of Health and Dr. Fitzgerald.

We will be

supporting this. I will be supporting this on behalf of my colleague, the Member

for Mount Pearl - Southlands. As I said, the pandemic is going ahead as we

speak, and hopefully we're going to do better every day, every day we'll get

better, but there are things that need to be done. There are people that need

their wills just for peace of mind. There are people that need other documents

signed, Mr. Speaker. So this is just the way of the future. Maybe we can use it

in other avenues to save a lot of time, save a lot of funds for people within

the Law Society. This may be brought in as legislation later.

I will be

supporting this on behalf of the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands. We think

it's a great idea brought up by the Law Society to Justice. The minister who

brought it forth, this will help relieve a lot of anxiety for a lot of people

who need a lot of legal work done. It may be small to us, but the person who had

the anxiety over it, it's big.

So we look

forward to it and support this.

MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development speaks

now, he'll close the debate.

MR. WARR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I certainly want to

recognize and thank the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, who is a lawyer

himself and understands the bill and certainly the process that we're going

through; and, as well, my hon. colleague, the Member for St. John's Centre, and

the Member for Humber-Bay of Islands. I appreciate the support and look forward

to the bill going through Committee.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Is the House ready for the question?

The motion is that Bill 35 be now read a second

time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt this

motion?

All those in favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, ‘nay.'

Carried.

CLERK (Barnes):

A bill,

An Act Respecting The Witnessing Of Documents Through The Use Of

Audio-Visual Technology. (Bill 35)

MR. SPEAKER:

The bill has now been read a second time.

When shall the bill be referred to a Committee

of the Whole House?

AN HON. MEMBER:

Now.

MR. SPEAKER:

Now.

On motion, a bill, “An Act Respecting The

Witnessing Of Documents Through The Use Of Audio-Visual Technology,” read a

second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole presently, by leave.

(Bill 35)

MR. SPEAKER:

It has been moved and seconded that I should now leave the Chair and the

matter be referred to a Committee of the Whole.

All those in favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, ‘nay.'

Carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a

Committee of the Whole, the Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of

the Whole

CHAIR

(Bennett): Order, please!

We're now

considering Bill 35,

An Act Respecting the Witnessing of Documents Through the

Use of Audio-Visual Technology.

A bill, “An

Act Respecting The Witnessing Of Documents Through The Use Of Audio-Visual

Technology.” (Bill 35)

CLERK:

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Shall clause 1 carry?

All those in

favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, ‘nay.'

Carried.

On motion,

clause 1 carried.

CLERK:

Clauses 2 through 7 inclusive.

CHAIR:

Shall clauses 2 through 7 inclusive carry?

All those in

favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, ‘nay.'

Carried.

On motion,

clauses 2 through 7 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.'

Carried.

On motion,

enacting clause carried.

CLERK:

An Act Respecting The Witnessing Of Documents Through The Use Of Audio-Visual

Technology.

CHAIR:

Shall the title carry?

All those in

favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, ‘nay.'

Carried.

On motion,

long title carried.

CHAIR:

Shall I report Bill 35 carried without amendment?

All those in

favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, ‘nay.'

Carried.

Motion, that

the Committee report having passed the bill without amendment, carried.

CHAIR:

The Chair recognizes the Deputy Government House Leader.

MR. CROCKER: I move, Mr. Chair, that the Committee rise and report Bill 35.

CHAIR:

The motion is that the Committee rise and report Bill 35.

All those in

favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR:

All those against, ‘nay.'

Carried.

On motion,

that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, the Speaker

returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER

(Reid): The hon. the Member for Lewisporte - Twillingate, Chair of the Committee

of the Whole.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have considered the matters to

them referred and have directed me to report Bill 35 without amendment.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair of the Committee of the Whole reports that the Committee has

considered the matters to them referred and directed him to report that Bill 35

has been carried without amendment.

When shall

the report be received?

MS. COADY: Now.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

On motion,

report received and adopted.

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

MR. CROCKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call third

reading of Bill 35.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the minister have leave to do third reading of Bill 35 ?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Leave.

MR. SPEAKER:

Leave.

MR. WARR: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Education and Early

Childhood Development, that Bill 35 be now read a third time

MR. SPEAKER:

It has been moved and seconded that this bill be now read a third time.

All those in favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, ‘nay.'

Carried.

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act Respecting The Witnessing Of Documents Through The Use Of

Audio-Visual Technology. (Bill 35)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a third time and it is ordered that the bill

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

On motion, a bill, “An Act Respecting The

Witnessing Of Documents Through The Use Of Audio-Visual Technology,” read a

third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 35)

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

MR. CROCKER: Mr. Speaker, I give notice and by leave, and seconded by the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development, move the following motion: That while

the COVID-19 pandemic and required public health orders continue, the House of

Assembly Members need to fulfil their parliamentary duties as legislators and to

provide for accountability and transparency.

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED: That, notwithstanding

any Standing Order of this House, the House may wish to sit from time to time in

virtual proceedings in a manner to be determined further to this resolution;

That, with respect to a sitting of this House,

“virtual proceedings” may include a proceeding of this House with any

combination of the following: (

a) Members physically present in the Chamber; and

(

b) Members present remotely by other technological means, including by a video

conferencing or audio only platform;

That a Select Committee of Rules and Procedures

Governing Virtual Proceedings of this House of Assembly be established to

determine the manner in which the House may conduct virtual proceedings, which

proceedings must satisfy the following requirements: (

a) a virtual proceeding

must be a proceeding of parliament conducted under the authority of the Speaker

in the manner agreed to by Members; (

b) the manner of the proceeding must

protect and uphold the parliamentary privilege enjoyed individually and

collectively by this House and its Members; (

c) all Members must be able to

access and use any video conferencing or audio platform chosen by the Standing

Orders Committee; (

d) the platform chosen by the Committee must be secure for

the purpose of a public meeting of this House; (

e) the platform must be trusted

by the Members and be transparent;

That the Select Committee consist of the current

Members of the Standing Orders Committee, the Opposition House Leader, the Third

Party House Leader and an unaffiliated Member as agreed

to by the

unaffiliated Members, or where there is no agreement, an unaffiliated Member to

be chosen by the Speaker; that the Chair of the Standing Orders Committee shall

be Chair of the Select Committee; that the Select Committee may, at the

discretion of the Chair, meet using teleconference, virtual or other means to

conduct its meetings; that the report of the Select Committee shall be tabled

with the Clerk of the House of Assembly as soon as possible, but in any event no

later than July 1, 2020, and shall be deemed to have been duly presented to and

adopted by the House of Assembly on that date; that the measures recommended by

the Select Committee and adopted by the House shall apply, as appropriate, to

meetings of other Committees of the House and the Management Commission; and

that the measures recommended by the Select Committee and adopted by this House

by the passing of this motion shall remain in place until December 3, 2020,

unless earlier revised or replaced by this House of Assembly.

MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that the motion as read by the minister

should now pass.

The hon. the

Deputy Government House Leader.

MR. CROCKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This motion

is something that we've been working on, I think, through the Government House

Leader, the Opposition House Leader, the Opposition Leader and the Leader of the

Third Party and the unaffiliated Members. I think that's something we need to do

at this time.

At this

time, I'll take my seat and allow for some debate on this motion.

Thank you,

Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think that

it's a great idea. As I look in the galleries, as we look at the number of

Members that are here, you look in the galleries, the amount of space; it would

be an option. Can we put more Members in the galleries so if anybody has to

speak, we would all be here? Virtually it's great, too, but you can look at the

size of the galleries that we have here and I'm sure with spacing, there's

something we could look at also so that people could be here and if you need to

speak because something affects your district, you can come down. There's plenty

of self-distancing here in this House.

But if that

can't be accommodated, what the minister brought forth is a great idea. At least

you will be able to get your issues across and be able to support bills and

bring up concerns that you may have.

Mr. Speaker,

I thank the minister, when he said that one of the independents will sit on the

Committee. I have no problem right now saying that the Member for Mount Pearl -

Southlands will be the person sitting on the Committee in St. John's, so he can

attend the meetings. It will be less cost, if I was on the West Coast. So the

Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands will be the representative from the two

independents.

I think that

is the kind of co-operation that we need in this House . L ike

I said before, and I understand the pandemic that's happening. I understand

there's an all-party committee, but there are two people here also with a lot of

experience. I know when you talk about the finances in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, when you say we're possibly setting up an all-party

committee, there are two people here who will also add a lot of experience to

it. So you just can't take two independents and say, okay, you're elected but

you have no input here.

I think the people that served with me in

Cabinet for the two and a half years, that I have no problem bringing concrete

solutions to the table and making tough decisions, making decisions after

valuable contributions from the people of the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador. I'm also sure the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands has proven his

capabilities in this House and his ability to take feedback and present it to

the House of Assembly also.

This is a great step, because this time there

may be two independents and the next it may be four or five. So it's time now,

if you're going to include the House and have an all-party committee, you have

to understand the structure of the House now and accept it as a reality, at

least for this term. The next term things may change, who knows, but I'm just

saying it's a great decision by the minister to include us. I'm looking forward,

that if there is an all-party committee on finance to bring the province back to

stability, I hope that we're included. I know we weren't included, and I know

the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands asked to be on some of the sessions.

On this pandemic, I stood up and I said there

are some guidelines that I think we have to look at, some restrictions that we

have to look at, like the parks. I know the Member for Conception Bay East -

Bell Island brought it up, which is a great idea because we hear it all around.

The temporary workers; we hear that the workers

are coming in from outside, Mr. Speaker. That's the kind of issues that we're

hearing. If we're hearing that and we can bring it to the table, we could come

up with better solutions to help all the people. Because you have to realize,

Mr. Speaker, even with these virtual sittings, is that the Member for Mount

Pearl - Southlands and myself, representing Humber - Bay of Islands – and I

thank those people for that – that we have grave concerns also.

I brought up concerns today about health care. I

brought up concerns, and I say to the Minister of Health – and I know, Mr.

Speaker, I'm going off topic and I thank you for the leeway on this because it

is a special sitting. I say to the Minister of Health, I understand what the

Minister of Health is saying about when people are in dire straits. I understand

what he is saying, it's between your physician and the specialist. I understand

that, but restrictions that are in place, I say to the minister, there are only

a certain number

that can be

seen. You can always say that, yes, it's between your doctor and the medical

specialist, but if we can find some way to bring workers in from Nova Scotia,

from Quebec, we can definitely find a way that we can expand these services to

some so we could bring them – some might not be as severe as the top one, but to

them, when you can't walk, you can't sit and one person can't see, it is

serious.

I understand

what the minister is saying. I appreciate what he's saying but I can assure you,

Mr. Minister, that we have to find some way. It can be done, these specialists,

but I'm just passing on the concerns that I got from the residents down my way.

Also, the

Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands has brought up and has heard on many

occasions about the workers from Nova Scotia. Yet you can't go on a 50-foot plot

in your camper for mental health that you go every summer, because there's

someone within – and there's some park that they pay. Some people pay up to

$3,000, $4,000 to keep their site.

Medically, I

say to the Minister of Health and Community Services, I give you all the credit

in the world for the work that you're doing, but there has to be some

acknowledgement that if these guidelines can be stretched a bit, if they can be

done in a safe manner, we have to look at some of the medical treatment that our

residents are going through.

I say to the

Minister of Transportation and Works – and I understand that he's probably not

the one who came up with these regulations for the outside workers – if we can

give an order to stop people coming across the ferry today, why can't we give an

order that people from Quebec or people from the high-traffic areas without

self-isolation stop from coming to Newfoundland and Labrador? I just don't

understand it.

This is

what's being raised to us. This is not a criticism because I understand that

everybody is working as hard as they can. I understand that totally, Mr.

Speaker. But when you have a person who can't see and can't get in to see a

doctor and he looks on TV and here are 40 or 50 workers coming in from all

across Canada and they don't have to self-isolate – they're working just like we

are here today, side by side. They're going back to the families and they're

saying they're essential and we're saying that we're going to look into it. The

government is saying we're going to look into that. We'll look into it if

they're not essential, yet we can stop people from coming across that ferry

right now.

I ask will

someone the government, please, if they're in here, if people are in here – and

God bless them, they're only people trying to make a living like the rest of us,

but if they're coming from high provinces like Quebec – and nothing against

Quebec and nothing against Nova Scotia, because a lot of us worked in Nova

Scotia, a lot of us went to school in Nova Scotia, nothing against anybody, but

if we're going to stop the pandemic, which, again, I give full credit to the

individuals, we can't say we're going to look into it, we're going to work with

the Construction Association and we're going to go back with the civil. If we

can stop them flying in, we can stop them now and say if you're not essential,

move on, because we don't want this pandemic to come up.

Mr. Speaker,

these are the kind of issues that are being raised with myself and the Member

for Mount Pearl - Southlands. We had a great discussion today on it. He's

hearing it with the campsite issue and also with the medical. This is why we

need – if there's going to any economic recovery, everybody should be included.

This is not the Leader of the Opposition's issue. This is not the Premier's

issue. This is the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador's issue. I think

everybody in this Legislature can give a contribution – absolutely, no doubt in

my mind that we all can give a contribution.

So with the

idea of this virtual sitting of the House of Assembly where now there's an

independent in Mount Pearl - Southlands who will be a part of that, I think that

the independents should be a part of any other process that's going to happen in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

I say once

again – and I know I'm repeating myself, because I sat down with those

individuals who I'm talking about, personally. I was talking to them,

personally. I sat with them, personally. The pain that they're going through,

the suffering because they're waiting for treatment.

I say to the

Minister of Transportation and Works, and I know I'm saying it to you because

you answered the question – I've asked this to the House today and I'll ask

again – how can somebody explain to me how they were deemed essential workers

and what criteria was used? What criteria or influence was in saying we need

these 40 or 50 workers to come in, just before it started, just before May 4,

they came in, started working, no need for self-isolation?

Someone has

to have the answer. The general public, the people who are suffering in the

cases that I mentioned earlier in Question Period, in the cases I mentioned

earlier where one person can't even stand. They can't do anything until they get

an MRI – can't do nothing. Another person who battled cancer, he can hardly see.

He's trying to get in. His doctor is trying to get him in. He was told he's not

a priority. He can't see. He battled cancer just a little while ago. This is the

frustration for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I'm not

criticizing anybody, but we have to raise the

issues that we were asked to do, and I'm doing it on behalf of the residents and

I'm doing it on behalf of the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands who also

expressed a lot of concerns with that.

I'll take my seat again, Mr. Speaker, and I will

support it, but we can look at the galleries here. We have to find a way that

people can be present. There's nothing like being present. We're not like Ottawa

with 308. There are only 40 of us here; excluding the Speaker, who will be

sitting in his Chair, there are 39 of us.

I'm sure if we found some way that we can use

the galleries and then we can use other parts here, that we could find a way

that everybody could be here. If you have a concern about a bill, if you have a

concern about an issue, that you can stand up here in this House and come down.

There are ways we could do it, if not, the virtual sessions are fine again.

I'm looking forward today to answers so that I

can bring them back to constituents that I represent on how these exemptions

were put in, what criteria was used and why aren't the Members of the

government, who are hearing it loud and clear from the general public, that if

we can't do this, why can we pass an order to say: excuse me, sorry, you're

declared non-essential.

This idea of going back with the Civil

Association, this idea of going back with the Construction Association and

saying we'll check with you. I can assure you – and I know the person

personally, Darin King, I dealt with him a lot – that if Darin King is saying

the workers in Newfoundland and Labrador can carry out those duties, they can

carry out those duties. This would alleviate a lot of fear, a lot of concern.

Mr. Speaker, any time like this – and I'm sure

it's not just me, anybody understands – there's a high level of anxiety. Rightly

or wrongly, there's a high level of anxiety. Part of the anxiety is – when you

get anxiety you always find some way to get the anxiety put out. When people see

workers coming in and they can't get their operation, they can't get in to see

their eye specialist or they can't get other procedures done – which is their

knee done, their hip done – and they're in a lot of pain, they look for some way

and this is one way.

If you look at it technically, about all the

trucker drivers coming in, thank the truck drivers, thank the first responders,

nurses. Thank all the people who work in grocery stores who are keeping us all

fed, thank them all. God bless them all, because a lot of us right now, Mr.

Speaker, are in a position that we're reaping their benefits and sometimes

putting their own life in danger.

I spoke to a lot of the nurses and I spoke to a

couple of doctors on this, it's fear. Everybody that comes through the doors now

with a cough or any symptoms, you have to treat them as a possible person with

COVID-19. It's just

the

reality of it. For all those front-line workers, for all the people who are

keeping the stores open for us and for all the pharmacists – and I spoke to

several pharmacists – they are actually putting their own lives and families on

the line for us.

When we get

an opportunity like this here – and the same thing when we have virtual sittings

in the House of Assembly, Mr. Speaker – that we're asked to raise concerns, we

will. There's nothing like in person but if we can't do it, I'll be supporting

the concept of having some way to voice your concerns so that they can be

registered in the House of Assembly and registered to government.

I'll just

thank the minister for ensuring that an independent will be involved and that

will be the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands. Again, my last time. I know I'm

repeating myself but the people who are suffering today are repeating it to me,

the trials and the tribulations that they're going through, what a lot of

families are going through. When they see that they can't get their knee, hip,

eyes or MRI done and saying, well, we'll consult with the Construction

Association, we'll consult with the civil to make sure, instead of saying, boom,

we're not putting any other Newfoundlanders and Labradorians at risk for this,

Mr. Speaker.

I urge the

government to take these steps so that we, as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians,

can say we're doing our best to keep our residents safe, which I have no doubt.

I'm not saying that there wasn't a good job done. I'm definitely not saying

that, but I'm just raising the concerns that were brought to our attention.

From my

understanding, I say to the Member for Conception Bay East - Bell Island – and

to this point. Unless I'm wrong – and I'll stand to be corrected – I wrote

Minister Haggie three weeks ago, a month ago, about the workers in the acute

care hospital in Corner Brook. Last Friday I went up and I spoke to a few

workers. Their best understanding is that local workers are working at the

long-term care facility in Corner Brook.

There are

people coming in from Nova Scotia who are dropping off their steel, they're

unhooking the trucks and they're getting back in the trucks. In the Corner Brook

area, there are local workers. What I was told – and I have pictures, they even

sent me pictures – is that there are local workers.

If we could

do it for the acute care hospital – and I thank the Minister of Health for

passing on the concerns that were expressed four or five weeks ago out on the

long-term care site, out on the acute care hospital site. It was taken care of,

to the best of my knowledge. I spoke to workers on the site who said, no, all

local. There are some from the East Coast on site, that's fine, but they're all

local.

So I'll say to the Minister of Transportation

and Works, I ask you to act urgently on this, if not only to protect the

workers, but the anxiety of people in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. DEMPSTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There's a motion on the floor respecting hybrid

virtual sittings of the House of Assembly during this time of COVID-19. I'm only

going to use less than half my time, Mr. Speaker, to just speak briefly to the

motion.

These are unprecedented times, Mr. Speaker. No

one will question that. There are many firsts that we are all experiencing.

Thursday, in a couple of days, will be eight weeks since I sat here in the House

of Assembly. I miss it. Those of us who are here, we enjoy participating in the

lively, spirited debate, and I see my colleague for Conception Bay East is

smiling. I know he missed it, too. We take it seriously, carrying out the

people's work, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and we do the best job

we can, but at the end of the day we all walk out and we're friends.

Mr. Speaker, when we think about how the world

has changed over the last number of weeks, just yesterday I boarded a flight.

First, I was stopped at the border, a border that I went through for the last

seven years. I raced off to the airport, and yesterday there were a number of

QPP vehicles there. There were FLR officials there. There were Health officials

there. It took some time.

I boarded a flight with a big mask, and we

landed in St. Anthony. People walked out six feet apart and boarded the flight.

Then we landed in Deer Lake and there were a number of gentlemen. People are

well spaced on the flight. I thought about, from a business perspective,

businesses are being hard hit.

I just open with that, Mr. Speaker, to say these

are unprecedented times and there are many firsts. As we think about COVID and

as we think about the necessity to ensure that we both carry on the business of

the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, that important work, that we need to

look as well to consider new ways of doing business.

My colleague, my federal MP, just today, for

Labrador, just participated in her first virtual sitting. I did see some

coverage. There's no doubt about it, Mr. Speaker, if this motion is passed today

and we move to virtual sittings there will be some growing pains, there will be

some kinks and there will need to be some things to be tweaked.

I have been seven weeks working remotely from

home, Mr. Speaker, with my department and with Housing. Daily meetings with

executive. We started using Skype for the first time. We have not been without

some issues. Sometimes you're in the middle of important conversations and the

screens are freezing. Sometimes it looks kind of funny. I did follow federally

when they conducted their first virtual sitting and there were some pains they

were growing through, Mr. Speaker. Someone would ask a question and they would

need to repeat the question because the Speaker didn't hear it and things like

that. However, Mr. Speaker, I believe that it's very important.

The business of government, from a department,

from a ministerial view point, I can tell you has certainly been continuing;

albeit, maybe sometimes slow, but there is also another element of government

where things have to come into the Legislature, has to be open for debate and

then has to go to a vote as we pass important legislation.

I was thinking as well, Mr. Speaker, about the

necessity of connectivity. We are 40 Members in this House from across a pretty

– especially when you look at Labrador – vast land, and you may see rural MHAs

that may have more challenges. When I was first elected serving my area we were

extremely held back with connectivity, but thanks to a recent proposal over the

last couple of years, we've seen certain significant improvement in Southern

Labrador and in Northern Labrador as well, Mr. Speaker. These are the things we

would have to consider as we move forward to carry out virtual sittings of

Parliament, Mr. Speaker.

Security and privacy concerns; when we're here

we know there are some folks downstairs at the Broadcast Centre that are

watching, but everything is pretty secure and private. As we move to things

online, what are the safest apps that are out there? I know a number of us now,

as we conduct business within our departments, we're using apps like Skype.

We've used Zoom a number of times, but certainly security and privacy is

something that would have to be looked at.

I thought about also giving consideration to

imposing the rules for decorum. We all have rules of decorum that we follow in

this Legislature. What does that look like in a virtual sitting? So something

that would be necessary to follow out; and, no doubt, as Members of this House,

and we all take an oath, we would certainly have to continue to respect the

Assembly rules.

I guess some people say we would have to think

outside the box. I say we have to think like there is no box, as we find our way

through this unprecedented time.

I believe, Mr. Speaker, as well, when you think

about the travel costs of bringing Members of the House of Assembly together for

Parliament when the House resumes in the spring and in the fall, that as we're

able to do some of those sittings virtually, I believe it would save the

Treasury money, Mr. Speaker. I think never before has there been a more

important time in Newfoundland and Labrador when we look at things like the

price of oil and we look at this pandemic

that we're

working our way through, Mr. Speaker, it's incumbent upon all of us here, as

elected officials, to find ways, all ways, that we can save the Treasury money.

I believe it would also be a greener option, as it would reduce the carbon

emissions of transportation for Members travelling each week.

Mr. Speaker,

I'm just going to close now; I just wanted to chime in on the motion. We all

recognize the importance of essential travel and maintaining physical distancing

to help us get through. There's no doubt, Mr. Speaker, if we move toward virtual

sessions, there will be challenges. But when we think about ensuring the health

and safety of ourselves, our families and our communities, that needs to be the

focus as we continue through.

I will just

mention Labrador for a moment. When COVID cases began to be on the rise and

moved into double digits, people in Labrador were extremely concerned. We have

meetings every Saturday with all of the mayors, the AngajukKâks, the Indigenous

leaders in Labrador and because we're a small population spread over a large

mass, we don't have ICU capacity and things like that so there was some real,

genuine concern, a desire to lock down the borders. When I think about that and

through that lens, that just adds to me to the necessity of if we can hold

virtual Parliament during a pandemic, then it's necessary very much that we do

so.

I thank you

for the opportunity and I'll certainly be supporting the motion respecting

hybrid approach to virtual sittings of Parliament.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's a

pleasure to stand – it's always a pleasure to stand in this House to speak on

anything, I suppose. This is a different time for everybody. I guess when you

think about virtual Parliaments and this motion, I think we all kind of agree we

have to find new ways of doing business.

As an MHA, a

lot of times we get many callers calling us – and especially during this

pandemic, it's unchartered waters for everybody. Quickly I realized, the first

week in, we became the go-to people because government was basically,

essentially, in transition. There were people working from home. Everything was

changing. It was moving on the fly. Orders were coming in on a daily basis,

things were changing and the local MHA/MP turned out to be your main points of

contact. I think we can all attest – I know I was bombarded. There were

questions. No one was complaining. They were wondering how do I do this, where

do I get that, what am I going to do, who do I contact, who do I reach out to.

I reached

out to lots of ministers opposite. I give them all credit; they've all been very

receptive. Actually, it's probably one of the unique times because, politically,

I'm probably one of the more politically minded people in this Legislature, as

much as anyone else here, but you park the

politics by the door because there were bigger things at play. We were dealing

with a pandemic. We're still dealing with a pandemic; no cures, no treatments.

It's a scary time for a lot of people. In saying that – and we listen to it and

we try to offer assurances to our residents as best we can; we try to help them

out and I think we all do a good job of that – ultimately, life still has to go

on in some form or another.

When we came in here today for Question Period

and you're preparing, there was no intent – and I don't think it was portrayed

that way – to coming in here and trying to make a scene and get sound bites.

These questions we had, we had just as many more and we could have gone through

about two weeks of that. There were questions on education. There were questions

to the Minister of Transportation and Works on outside workers. We had questions

on oil and gas. We had questions on tourism, camping, health, fiscal, small

business. We could go on with that list every day for another two weeks and not

hit the points. That stuff still has to be dealt with.

We do this here today, but we have 10 or 11

Members in here. I know I can speak for our caucus, there are a lot of Members

here who want to get back in this House. They want to represent their residents.

That's what they were elected to do, to represent the district and their

constituents. They feel, even though they're accessible by phone and email and

they're doing their best to represent their areas – and they all are, everyone

is.

There's something about standing in your place

in the Legislature and speaking for the people you represent. It's something,

until you do it – I guess I couldn't relate to it until I was elected myself.

The Minister of Finance, the most experienced fellow, the longest serving person

in this Legislature, he obviously gets that too. He can attest to back me up.

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

MR. PETTEN:

Yes, that's right. We all did at one time.

That's a very important feature in our

democracy. We need to find ways around this because I live in hope. I watch the

news and I'm not getting the vibe that we're going to be back to anything normal

any time soon. That's unfortunate, but that's where we live.

We have to find a new normal. I know it's been

used a lot by a lot of people, and you hear it a lot of times, commentary when

they talk about the COVID. We have to find that new normal. Things will not be

the same again. Someone compared it to 9/11, how we made changes. Well, I think

this COVID will probably evolve into something like that. We'll look back in a

couple of years' time and say, my God, look what we used to do. It's amazing we

did that then and how we did it.

Things will change. That's society. That's the

way we live. I think we'll get some form of normalcy eventually, but in the

absence of that, we need to be legislators. We all represent 40 districts in

this province; it's $8 billion to $9-billion budgets. There are 500,000 people

out there that depend on us to make decisions, whether it's on education,

whether it's on the economy. Health, obviously, that's top of mind for everyone.

Finding ways around that and forming this

Committee to study ways to have a virtual sitting, I think it's a very good idea

and we obviously support it as well,

the things

out there – I won't go on longer because I just want to bring a few points. I

guess there are a couple of cautions that I would like to highlight.

As we've

noticed with these virtual sittings, people should wear pants; people should be

careful of who's in their house with them. They should notify people when

they're on their tablet or what have you because there have been ever so many

embarrassing moments. I only heard a few this morning – actually, brought a

chuckle, but they're not too funny if it happened to you.

Learn the

buttons on your computer. Learn your mute. I mean, there are a lot of features

that we all need to learn. I'll be honest, back when the pandemic kicked in, our

group wanted to do the Zoom or they wanted to have virtual. Now, I've had Zoom

Friday nights, but now, they're not meant for this House, but I really didn't

understand the concept. I was going with it and I said, yeah, I'll do it on the

fly. So I have had the option of learning in a better environment when you're

dealing with all your friends.

When you're

dealing with in this reality – and I watched federal Parliament and I noticed

the minister of Health, Minister Hajdu, she was there and she was missing her

volume button. Every time she was speaking, she was muted and it was pretty

funny. This one was having trouble and a lot of people were technology

challenged like me and I know a lot of people probably in this Legislature. Our

Opposition House Leader is worse than me, so that tells you something.

We all

struggle. That's something we have to work and learn on, but that's just putting

a bit of laughter to the moment.

We do

support this virtual sitting and we look forward to what's going to come out of

this Committee. Like I said, we could be like this for the foreseeable future.

All other Members of this House who are not here today, they're watching this

and they want to be here, so maybe this will give them some sort of opportunity

to represent the districts they represent so proudly.

Thank you

very much.

SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's Centre.

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

Just

reviewing some of the notes I had here.

So with

regard to this, I guess new, challenging times require measures that address

those challenges. It sort of warms the cockles of my heart in some ways because

we're about to look at how do we carry on the proceedings of the House and what

technology do we need to do that. That's the kind of question that schools have

been asking for years, so it's good to see that we probably realize the need for

the training and the technology that's going to come with it.

Yes, the key

thing, if you've been following, is that, in any of this, always wear pants.

It's going to be the key thing, I think, for everyone here. We've seen the

shares on Facebook, but I've also heard from here locally – and I won't say

where they got the information – from people who were watching their boss chair

the meeting in a housecoat that didn't cover everything totally.

So, I think there's going to be a little bit of

learning, a good humour grace and things that go with it. Certainly, we've heard

with the technology, if you look at Zoom when it comes to the security piece,

but all those things can be addressed in some way, shape or form.

I know in other organizations I've been involved

with; committees were always located in the vicinity of where the Chair was, so

that would cut down on a province-wide committee but locally based. Other

organizations I've been with, yes, we would have accommodation of both virtual

and in-person meetings, but a lot of the meetings would be done by using

technology. They would be virtual meetings because there's no way you could

bring everyone together from across the country in these organizations.

I will say this, and I don't know about anyone

else here, but working from home is not all it's cracked up to be and being on a

phone all the time, but I temper that with the knowledge, you know what, I'm

working. There's a job to be done and there are decisions to be made, and every

now and again you're able to help an individual.

I look at this, again, there is the possibility

here – and I really would like to see how, if this is actually implemented,

where we actually use it. At the end of this, I know it's sort of a sunset for

December, but if by the end of it we say, you know what, some of this can carry

on. I'm thinking of committee work in terms of the convenience and its cost

savings.

My colleague across the House has already

brought this up about a cost-saving measure, greening. So, I'm not suggesting

that maybe all meetings can be held this way. Sometimes you do need to meet in

person because part of the in-person meeting is the side conversations that one

is likely to have with his or her colleague, but I think there's a combination

here. My knowledge, in my brief experience in this House of trying to establish

a meeting with people, especially if they have to be back in their district, it

becomes very challenging if you're looking for that face to face, but technology

does allow for that and without straining the patience of people.

I think also there's an opportunity here for us

to lead by example. Certainly, what we're demonstrating is that just because we

can't meet in person in the full capacity, with full membership, we are looking

for ways to make this work and carry on the business of the province. That's the

key thing. Certainly, with regard to the mechanism by which we're going to come

up with some sort of a virtual sitting of the House of Assembly or virtual

approach is the collaborative nature and the all-party nature of the committee

itself.

I do firmly believe – again, I come from a

background where there wasn't any partisan politics. To be honest with you, in

my previous role it really didn't matter who was in power whether it was

Liberal, PC, or NDP for that matter – not that there was a chance in the NDP in

any length of time – it didn't make any difference, I was advocating for

members. I think there's a recognition that at least here we all have something

to bring to this. Regardless of party stripe, regardless of political

background, we're looking for a solution and we're looking for one that works

for everyone, and I like that approach to things.

Again, it gives a very clear time frame when we

have to have something in place, July 1. Because what else are we going to be

doing on July 1 except self-isolating anyway. There won't be any barbeques,

unless we're doing it remotely. A Skype barbeque and virtual hamburgers, it

might not be the same thing but, nevertheless.

MR. CROCKER: (Inaudible.)

MR. J. DINN: Most of us could.

With that, I think we will have something, it

may not be perfect, but I think it'll be a good approach. It's something we can

test run and modify as we go on. If by the time December rolls around we find,

do you know what, there are elements of this that do work, that we like,

especially since we'll probably have the technology in place, it will be a shame

to see it go to waste. But I would like to see this as an opportunity that by

the – and God willing, that there's an actual vaccine and we can maybe get back

to a normal life, whatever that is, sooner rather than later. I think there's an

opportunity to take some of these innovations that we've been forced to take on

by necessity and maybe incorporate them into practices.

The one thing I can say, my experience in this

House, there are an awful lot of arcane rules and procedures that take a bit of

getting used to, so here's one step towards modernizing how we do business here.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Seeing no further speakers, is the House ready for the question?

All those in favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, ‘nay.'

Carried.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy Government House Leader.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call

second reading of Bill 34.

MR. SPEAKER:

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

MR. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move,

seconded by the hon. Government House Leader, that this bill be now read a

second time.

MR. SPEAKER:

Which bill was this?

MR. OSBORNE:

Bill 34.

MR. SPEAKER:

It has been moved and seconded that Bill 34 entitled,

An Act To Amend The

Liquor Control Act And The Liquor Corporation Act, be now read a second time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill, “An Act To Amend The Liquor Control Act And The Liquor

Corporation Act.” (Bill 34)

MR. SPEAKER:

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

MR. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a

pleasure to stand and speak to this particular legislation today. This is

legislation that has been called for by a number of organizations, including the

Board of Trade, the Employers' Council, the Canadian Federation of Independent

Business, as well as Restaurants Canada.

Essentially

with this legislation, Mr. Speaker, restaurants with liquor licences, who are

regulated under the Liquor Control Act , including craft breweries

that are regulated under the Liquor Corporation Act , will be permitted to

– well restaurants, lounges, hotels, et cetera, who prepare a meal will be

permitted to deliver a bottle of wine or a bottle of beer, what have you, with

the meal.

The

breweries, wineries or distilleries would be able to provide product from their

breweries, wineries or distilleries. They would be able to deliver during the

pandemic only. This is a temporary measure that would allow at least some

additional business opportunity for these businesses who are going through a

very strained time. There will also be some regulation requirements, Mr.

Speaker, but those can be done outside the House once the House votes on this

piece of legislation. Should it pass, whether or not there are any amendments,

we can make regulations or change the regulations to suit what has been done

here in the Legislature today.

This will

temporarily lift restrictions on restaurants, as I'd said, or delivery or

take-out orders, as well as the wineries, distilleries

and

breweries. They will require age verification by

delivery drivers. The NLC will provide enforcement and will be tasked to verify

that retailers are complying with the new legislation or regulations.

Mr. Speaker,

by the way, for anybody who's wondering, who figures this is an effort get more

revenue to the NLC, the cost of their enforcement division and following through

on this, they believe, will be more expensive the additional revenue that's

gained as a result of being able to deliver from these establishments. This is

purely designed to give businesses that are suffering as a result of COVID a bit

of an opportunity for some additional revenue. It's about removing some

restrictions that are in place during a unique and challenging time.

Mr. Speaker,

small businesses, we often say, are the economic backbone of the province and

that is true. They employ some 40 per cent of people that are working in the

province. And right now those small businesses – or any small businesses –

government, both federally and provincially and I believe, to a certain degree,

municipally, are looking for ways to help small businesses as we deal with COVID

and establish new normals, Mr. Speaker. Hopefully, as we get through the five

phases that have been outlined by the chief medical officer of health and

restrictions can be lifted or eased up to a certain degree and we continue to

evolve the new normals.

We don't how

long this COVID situation is going to last. In large part, it probably depends

on when a vaccine may be produced and able to be supplied, Mr. Speaker. So, to a

large degree, we're still dealing with unknowns. While we're going through

COVID, this will help small businesses to a large degree. As I had indicated,

government continues to find ways to assist small businesses. We will continue

to work with and speak with small businesses in the province to try and

establish ways that we're able to assist, but this is one small way, Mr.

Speaker.

I don't

anticipate that this is going to bring in huge amount of revenues to

restaurants. As we know, if they're selling a bottle with a meal, the bottle

will be sold at a premium, so there will be a bit of a markup what the NLC would

normally sell that bottle of wine for. I don't anticipate that you're going to

see a big rush on this, but at least it's some additional revenue for these

businesses that are crying out for help.

Thank you,

Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This piece

of legislation, it's a good move. As the minister just said, rightly so, I don't

think it's going to be a huge revenue boost for restaurant owners. In real time,

in normal times you went the restaurant, you bought your wine or your liquor or

alcohol at the restaurant because you had no other choice. You went in there and

that was part of the full package deal. I guess now people at home will order

out and a lot of people still will pick up their own liquor – they're ordering

curbside pickup or whatever they're doing with the NLC anyway.

People will

say they'll take advantage of it because there was a demand from restaurateurs

and customers, but it's a little boost to them and it's a good thing. We have no

issue with that.

I think it's

important to highlight that bars are included in this, lounges and bars. They

are really struggling. Back when the COVID recently hit, VLTs was basically what

a lot of bar owners survived on. They sell limited foods. So this change of

being able to do takeout has no impact on them. Now, there were some changes

brought about this week, which were good, about the licensing rebate and some

returning of alcohol – which is all good.

I'm not

critical. Again, I try to always pick up the points, because we talk about the

big stuff and sometimes the little stuff gets left in the wind. We're bringing

in this to help restauranteurs. When you order a food delivery, your takeout and

they can get wine pairings, people are into letting the chef decide the meal and

the proper wine to go with it. People are into that and good for them. But we

also (inaudible) a group, and I'm glad the minister pointed out that government

gets the fact small businesses are struggling. During QP today, we highlighted

those issues as well.

It's

something we can't take our fingers off that pulse. Recently, in the CBS area

Chamber of Commerce, I sat in on a meeting with a lot of business owners. All

the federal programs, most of them are termed to medium size. Not large, but

they're more in the medium size. Most of my district is made up of small

business. Most of them have one or two employees; they don't qualify for the

CEBA, the wage subsidy. None of those federal programs really suit them.

Bar owners

fall in that same group. Most bar owners are pretty well – like I said, the VLTs

pay their wages, pay their overhead and they make whatever. None of them are

getting rich quick. Especially as time has gone on, that industry has really

struggled and there has been a dip outside of George Street and a few hotspots.

But on the

restaurant piece too, they're struggling obviously equally as well, but they

still can survive – and it's very limited. I'm not saying they're making any

money, but they have some option to be able to do takeout delivery where bar

owners don't. So bringing in the ability to do

that is a good thing. There is no issue here, and I'm not going to go on for

long on it, but I think it's important to always highlight groups that may be,

not falling through the cracks, but what we do in here, bringing their issues to

the floor of this House.

I know I speak to a lot of bar owners, and I'm

sure most Members in this Legislature, we all have them in our districts.

There's not a lot out there for them either. And restaurant owners, we hear from

a lot of them. Some of them are more vocal than others. I'm concerned about how

many restaurants will actually survive this COVID outbreak and what will be the

new normal. When we come back to reality, it's only the real vibrant, stable

restaurants, I think, will survive. A lot of them have been closed for so long,

it's a real struggle. So if this helps them stay alive and stay in business,

we're all for it, obviously.

Again, I'm glad to hear the minister reiterate

for small businesses and for other bar owners. There are some measures brought

in, but we can never forget –and we'll, obviously, as Opposition, hold

government to the fire to make sure that those issues are dealt with and we

don't forget anyone along the way. On that note, we will be supporting this.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. The Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'll just stand again and support the bill with

the minister. I just noticed on the phone there, there are no new cases again

today in Newfoundland and Labrador. I also notice now from reading it here, that

241 people now have recovered. So we're on the right track.

I'm thanking everybody again, the health care

workers and all the people involved who are keeping us safe; 241 out of 259,

leaving 18 people right now. Hopefully, the ones who had to self-isolate last

night will be safe. Our thoughts and prayers are with you and your family. I

know what happened there was a situation which no one predicted could have

happened, but it did, and the steps were taken. So that's good news again today

for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Just on this bill also, Mr. Speaker, I will be

supporting the bill, and also the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands. We

discussed this and it's good, because they are struggling. There is absolutely

no doubt. Again, as I mentioned, there are struggles. I know a lot of places in

Corner Brook, for example, who bring food, can bring some beer.

I had one person who mentioned: well, what's the

big deal of going to a corner store? There are people with a lot of anxiety of

going out in public, going to a corner store where you may bump into five or six

or seven people. This is a way that if you want to have a bottle of wine, if you

want to have something with your dinner that's being brought to you, that they

can do it.

A lot of

distilleries here in Newfoundland and Labrador also and I know, with a lot of

breweries here, they are small businesses and they work hard and now to be able

to deliver some alcohol – because you're not going to stop people from having a

few drinks; you're not going to do it. People have the anxiety.

I see some

of the relief that the minister has given to a lot of the small businesses

around, which is a good idea. Again, it's great that we're doing this, but

somewhere we should have a side plan – how are we going to recover this after?

Not recover the cost, but recover Newfoundland and Labrador. I understand people

are struggling. I don't think there's a Member in this House or any Member

that's watching outside who haven't had concerns brought to them about small

businesses struggling.

I know, Mr.

Speaker, people in my family who have small businesses, they work hard. This 9

to 5 is not the way they operate in a small business. They're worrying about

tomorrow; they're worrying about if they have everything done for today. When

you get a pandemic like they're facing now and their revenue is down, they have

to work that much harder and they can't see any light at the end of the tunnel,

this will help. It's a small step, but it's a step that they've been asking for

and it's a step that you may not be able to bring them back into profit but it

will definitely ensure that a lot of them may be able to survive until they can

get back on their feet again.

I say to the

minister, I will be supporting this bill and to the measures that the

Newfoundland and Labrador Liquor Corporation has taken to help out also. I think

there may be even some other breweries that may be looking for exemptions later

or maybe having discussions on this also. I know, from when I was with Service

NL, the amount of water, the amount that they serve, they consume or sell, that

they may be struggling with it also. I know the minister will be looking into

that somehow at a later date.

Once again,

this is something that I don't think anybody in this House expected that we

would be bringing to this House, six, seven or eight months ago, a bill to help

reduce revenue for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador because of helping

the small businesses. But when a situation like this arises, we need to step up,

and I support it.

Again, I say

to the Minister of Finance – and I understand the position you're in. Probably I

don't, actually, because I haven't got it all in front of me like you do, but we

have to try to look at some way of how we are going to put our economy back in

shape once this pandemic passes. Because it will pass – it will pass. We must

try to take the steps to ensure that we're ready for that

also. It's a tough job. It's going to be

relentless for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, like every other

province in Canada, and Canada, as a country, it will be. I feel confident that

the backbone of the economy, I always said, are the small businesses. We have to

ensure what we can to keep small businesses operating, keep them viable, to keep

them in place for when the economy does rebound, is that we have an opportunity

to let them be contributors back to the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Myself and the Member for Mount Pearl -

Southlands had a very extensive discussion on this. I know a lot of the

breweries that will help out with this, so we will be supporting this bill.

MR. SPEAKER:

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

MR. J. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We also – and by, we, I mean me – will support

this bill. That's the royal 'we' in this case.

I'll tell you, for a while there when this

started out it looked like the highlight of my week would be taking out garbage

on garbage day and wheeling the cart down and wheeling it back. I say that

jokingly because you wondered – life was upended in many ways.

I remember the last restaurant that my wife and

I and a couple of friends went to was the Green Door. That seemed so long ago.

It's easy enough to go to St. John's downtown in most of the restaurants and

they're blocked because people do like to get out.

I had read an

article about how things will be

changed as a result of COVID-19, post-COVID-19. One of the things they noted is

that people will get used to the idea of cooking at home or ordering in. I don't

think so. I think when it comes time, when people start getting back on their

feet, they're going to be looking for that option of going out because there's

the social aspect of it. We know we're paying a premium for the food, but it's

the service. It's everything that goes with it.

There's no doubt about it, a lot of small

restaurants and owners – there are a lot of small business owners who contacted

me. There was real fear and panic as to how they're going to get through this at

first. This is unprecedented. We've heard all sorts of things but there's no

road map. We're in uncharted territory and so on and so forth. We've been

gradually finding our ways through it. Hopefully, if it's like the last pandemic

in 1918, we won't have to deal with it for another hundred years or so.

Certainly here, what I've noticed is that a lot

of businesses, a lot of restaurants in town have come up with some rather

creative ways to deal with the pandemic. I think of Piatto, who gives you the

do-it-yourself pizza kits, and you go home and you make it yourself. Manna

Bakery, the same thing – they provide the kits, here it is, but they've been

giving delivery door-to-door service which, I must say, is pretty creative in

not only keeping the employees busy and on salary and on wage, but also, I think

more importantly, reminding citizens, people in the community that they're still

here.

Certainly, here is an opportunity, with the

restrictions in place, that gives restaurants one more avenue or one more way of

increasing the value added to their meals, giving people another reason to order

out.

Keep in mind, we don't go to a restaurant anyway

at the best of times because we want a cheap meal or because we can probably do

it more cheaply at home. It's everything that goes with it. The ambiance and so

on and so forth, the comradery, but here we have an opportunity to make it that

much easier for a small business, small restaurants, small business owners to

make a go of it and to get through this pandemic, this crisis.

Really, what they're asking for, they're not

necessarily looking for a government handout or financial assistance. What

they're looking for is some relaxing of the regulations to allow them to carry

on their business so they can take care of themselves and their employees.

The only concern that I heard was from some

small craft breweries about the possibility of third-party delivery of alcohol

and craft beer, that somehow it could open them up to liability or to their

product being delivered to places where it shouldn't be delivered. They wanted

to have control over the delivery so that it wouldn't go through a third-party

delivery service, like SkipTheDishes, as an example. They weren't too worried

about restaurants, but when it came to delivering their own product – because

they want to be able to make sure that the product was delivered safely and that

the people receiving the product were actually of legal age and so on and so

forth.

If I'm reading it correctly, the legislation

here seems to address that. Maybe the minister in his closing remarks can verify

that, but I'm looking through the briefing notes and the Explanatory Notes here

that there seems to be, at least here, a restriction by the licensee or an

employee of the licensee as opposed to contracting a third party which wouldn't

be. And, if not, there seems to be also the option here of revoking anyone who's

abusing this privilege, to revoke the licence.

I think there is certainly enough safeguards

here to prevent abuse. One thing about delivering alcohol to home is that you

don't have to worry, you can drink responsibly because you're not going anywhere

after anyway, you're stuck there.

All in all, this is a good piece of very

creative legislation. It's just a simple change in legislation that will allow

businesses to adapt and respond to this situation.

With that, thank you very much, and we'll be

supporting this legislation.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. The Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, if he

speaks now he'll close the debate.

MR. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The point raised by my colleague from St. John's

Centre, I know that we can have delivery by a third party. It does indicate here

that it's with the delivery of a meal, so the act doesn't indicate whether the

same would apply to a craft brewery or not, but I'm certainly – if it's the will

of the House, when we draft the regulations we can ensure that it's only with

the delivery of a meal. Again, I'd put that question to the House if that is the

will of the House. We do have to draft regulations. The regulations will reflect

what's passed in the Legislature.

It does say here that delivery by a third party,

it references with the delivery of a meal. It also indicates that whoever is

delivering has to be 19 years of age and have completed the Serve Responsible NL

program to ensure that the person who's delivering is qualified to deliver and,

as well, prohibit the delivery to anybody under the age of 19 years of age. I

hope that answers the Member's question.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Is the House ready for the question?

The motion is that Bill 34,

An Act To Amend The

Liquor Control Act And The Liquor Corporation Act, be now read a second time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt this

motion?

All those in favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, ‘nay.'

Carried.

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Liquor Control Act And The Liquor Corporation

Act. (Bill 34)

MR. SPEAKER:

The bill has now been read a second time.

When shall the bill be referred to a Committee

of the Whole

House?

MS. COADY: Now.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

On motion, a

bill, “An Act To Amend The Liquor Control Act And The Liquor Corporation Act,”

read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House

presently, by leave. (Bill 34)

MR. SPEAKER: The Deputy Government House Leader.

MR. CROCKER: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Government House Leader, that this

House now resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider Bill 34.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that I do now leave the Chair for the House to

resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole and consider the said bill.

Is it the

pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All those in

favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON.

MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, ‘nay.'

Carried.

On motion,

that the House resolve itself a Committee of the Whole, the Speaker left the

Chair.

Committee of

the Whole

CHAIR

(Bennett): The Chair recognizes the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I'm just going to for one second on –

CHAIR:

We have to put the question forward first.

Order,

please!

We're now

considering Bill 34,

An Act to Amend the Liquor Control Act and the Liquor

Corporation Act.

A bill, “An

Act To Amend The Liquor Control Act And The Liquor Corporation Act.” (Bill 34)

CLERK:

Clause 1.

CHAIR:

Shall clause 1 carry?

The Chair

recognizes the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just

thought it was going to be the point of privilege that was brought up a while

back.

I just say

to the Minister of Finance, and very briefly, be careful about putting in has to

be the delivery of food because some of those breweries don't have food at their

premises, so it would be just going in. That's all I'm saying, that if you put

in the regulations that it has to go with food, there may be some breweries that

may not be serving so they may not be delivering meals, just their brand itself.

That's all.

I just want to make the minister aware of that and he can research that before

it comes up to regulation, just so we don't exclude one or two and have to come

back to the Legislature and make the change again.

CHAIR:

The Chair recognizes the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. OSBORNE: No, that's addressed in the act. For a club, restaurant, hotel,

whatever, they have to deliver food with it. That's under the Liquor Control

Act . For a brewery, winery or distillery, it's under the Liquor

Corporation Act . They don't have to have a meal with it. They would be able

to do a home delivery. If you have a craft brewery and somebody wishes to

purchase a dozen beer from the craft brewery, for example, they don't have to

have a meal under the Liquor Control Act . It's two separate acts we're

amending.

CHAIR:

The Chair recognizes the Member for St. John's Centre.

MR. J. DINN:

Just to follow up on that, I may be jumping ahead a bit, but the issue

had a statement and a question with regard to – the concern was with third party

delivery. Not by the couple of people who contacted me from craft breweries, it

had to do with they want to be able to deliver their product, and that's allowed

here, but they're concerned with having a third party organization doing that

delivery where they would basically surrender – that company or organization

would pick up the product and deliver it to the house. What they're looking at

is they've lost control over it at that point in time.

The concern

I have, too – and I had asked – is this the same for all craft brewers? It's a

good question. Within the metro area that might not be an issue where they have

the delivery vehicles. I'm not sure how that would be for craft brewers in the

rural areas; I think of down on the Bonavista Peninsula, for example.

I want to

draw attention to it but, at the same time, I don't want something in there

that's going to basically – where people who have the wherewithal to do it,

their own delivery vehicle can do it, but now a small craft brewery in an area

where they don't have the truck, for example, or they don't have the vehicle,

they have no choice but to hire someone, they're not put at a disadvantage.

What I ask

the minister is that at least we be cognizant of that, that it be monitored and

if i