PDF Version (Day)

PDF Version

(Night)

October 26, 2020

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIX No. 57

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR.

SPEAKER (Reid):

Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Before we begin today, I would like to bring to

Members' attention my commentary of September 14, 2020. In that commentary, an

attribution error was made as I inadvertently attributed particular remarks to

Speaker Sauvé and not, as appropriate, to Speaker Scheer.

In order to correct the record, the remarks: “The

sub judice convention is important in

the conduct of business in the House. It protects the rights of interested

parties before the courts, and preserves and maintains the separation and mutual

respect between the legislature and the judiciary. The convention ensures that a

balance is created between the need for a separate, impartial judiciary and free

speech.”

That quote should be attributed to Speaker Scheer in

his ruling of March 27, 2013. In that ruling, he quotes from O'Brien and Bosc,

as it was then, page 100 and so that is the correct citation for that quote.

I note that this is an attribution error and my ruling

on the matter remains unchanged.

MR.

JOYCE:

Mr.

Speaker, can I comment on that for a second?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

Speaker's ruling is not a debatable matter.

MR.

JOYCE:

(Inaudible.)

MR.

SPEAKER:

I've heard enough on this matter. The ruling is the ruling and if the Member

wishes to challenge the ruling he can, but a ruling is not a debatable matter

and we're going to move on.

MR.

JOYCE:

(Inaudible.)

MR.

SPEAKER:

No,

this is not a debatable matter. I'm going to move on now.

MR.

JOYCE:

(Inaudible.)

MR.

SPEAKER:

can discuss that later; we're not going to discuss that now.

Statements by Members

MR.

SPEAKER:

Today, we will hear statements by the hon. Members for the Districts of Lake

Melville, Ferryland, Mount Pearl - North, Labrador West and the Member for St.

John's East - Quidi Vidi.

The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.

MR.

TRIMPER:

Well thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

The Happy Valley-Goose Bay SPCA opened as Labrador's

first and, currently, only chartered location in 2000. Thanks to the vision of

Lee Hill and her group of dedicated volunteers, this busy facility serves 33

communities over a 300,000 square kilometre area. Their adoption network extends

across Atlantic Canada.

The SPCA charter is to assist abused, neglected and

abandoned animals from across Labrador. Annually, the shelter and associated

foster homes handle up to 500 animals. Each is provided necessary routine

veterinary care such as vaccinations, deworming and spay/neuters where otherwise

they would not have had a chance. It is not a stretch to say that they have

saved thousands of lives.

This registered charity enjoys private, corporate and

in-kind support. However, they are in constant fundraising mode to cover wages

for staff and other expenses. The COVID-19 pandemic and associated public health

guidelines have made both organized events and daily operations particularly

challenging when responding to the extensive need from all over Labrador.

They keep at it simply because the animals cannot help

themselves.

I would ask this House of Assembly to please join me in

thanking the Happy Valley-Goose Bay SPCA for their 20 years of compassionate

service for all of Labrador.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, I recognize the recent passing of a well-known

constituent from my district, Mr. Tom Best, who passed away March 31, 2020.

Tom Best was a fiercely proud inshore fish harvester

from Petty Harbour who dedicated his life's work to advocating for sustainable

fisheries and communities. He chaired the Petty Harbour Fishermen's Committee.

He strongly believed that fish harvesters should be actively involved in their

own affairs. He became the founding president of the Petty Harbour Fishermen's

Co-operative, and served as president for most of the past 36 years.

He, along with the Petty Harbour Co-op, hosted many

international groups in Petty Harbour to demonstrate how communities benefit

when people come together. He travelled to several parts of the world to support

sustainable fisheries and co-operative development. In 2012, he received the

Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee Medal.

In recognition of Tom's commitment to fisheries

resource management, his family has established a memorial scholarship through

the Marine Institute to continue to protect our fisheries resources.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all my colleagues of this House to

join me in honouring the life of Tom Best and the great contribution he has made

to our province.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

MR.

LESTER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Since the COVID epidemic, many businesses are

struggling to keep afloat; however, in Mount Pearl there is one business working

around the clock to keep up with the demand for their product.

Lori Wells, along with her daughter-in-law and business

partner, Kayla Wells, started their business last October, Karma's Kreations,

and began to create athletic wear.

However, upon arrival of COVID just five months later,

there was not a demand for their product, so to keep things going they decided

they would make a few masks. Lori said they started off slow, producing about 30

masks a day, but soon they were producing 500 masks a day. At one point, they

had seven seamstresses and thus far have made more than 50,000 masks.

Lori says the work is hard and she works 14-hour days,

but they enjoy seeing the popularity of their masks and says they have now

become known as the mask ladies. She said clients first bought masks for safety,

but now they look for new masks to coordinate with their outfits and different

occasions.

I ask all those present to join me in congratulating

Karma's Kreations for their ingenuity and success, and for helping us keep safe.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise to recognize the Labrador West Community

Gardens. The Labrador West Community Gardens have been around for more than 40

years, starting out as just a local club and grew to become what it is today

thanks to the generosity of community donors, volunteers and pioneers like Alex

Duffitt and the current president who just passed away, unfortunately, the past

week, Nelson Clarke.

This year is the biggest year yet, with the 176 gardens

and 135 members. Members want to learn more about growing a variety of fresh

produce in the Big Land. We have this beautiful community garden that they use

to share their passion and take on the challenges of growing different crops.

There were a few contests this year, one was for the most diverse crops grown,

and the daigon radish and corn were the result.

The Community Gardens were able to donate fertilizer

and seeds to the Green Thumbs program at our local schools, 50 bags of potatoes

to the United Church and 100 bags of potatoes to the local food bank. As well,

produced enough crops to have a successful Farmer's Market in September.

I ask all hon. Members to join me in congratulating the

Labrador West Community Gardens on a successful year and wish them continued

success as they continue to grow.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for St. John's East - Quidi Vidi.

MS.

COFFIN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in 1997 the Presentation Sisters converted

the school on Barnes Road to a community centre called The Lantern.

For 23 years The Lantern has offered programs and

events to improve personal and corporate wellness, develop individual and

collective spirituality, and pursue justice for marginalized community members.

Rental revenues from their fabulous facilities help

cover the cost of community and peer support groups that meet regularly at The

Lantern. Groups include AA, Narcotics Anonymous and other peer support groups

focused on mental health and trauma. It also includes community initiatives

focused on art and music therapy, the Ruah Counselling Centre which provides

subsidized individual and group counselling services. They also provide space to

The Gathering Place for its clothing boutique.

With only three staff, The Lantern relies on volunteers

and community support. Recent partnerships with the Community Sector Council,

the Association for New Canadians and Memorial University Centre for Social

Enterprise has given new Canadians and students valuable work experience and

training in the non-profit sector.

The Lantern recently celebrated 23 years of service and

I wish them so many more. I ask the hon. Members to join me in celebrating the

loving community that is The Lantern.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MR.

WARR:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, today I recognize Foster Families Month,

which is held during the month of October.

Currently, 600 foster families throughout our province

provide safe, nurturing homes for children and youth in care.

As the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social

Development, I want to recognize the vital role that foster families play in

helping to make children and youth in care feel protected and secure.

The role of being a foster parent is also important as

foster families support the relationship of the children and youth they are

caring for with their families. This allows for connections to be maintained and

supports reunification when it is in the best interests of the child or youth.

Mr. Speaker, foster families are truly remarkable, as

their commitment and encouragement to those in their care is truly inspiring.

From helping a child find their smile to joining the

child's parent for a doctor's appointment, foster families are making a

difference in so many lives.

Let me also acknowledge the Newfoundland and Labrador

Foster Families Association's staff and board members, as well as social workers

and many others who are part of the fostering team.

I invite my colleagues in this hon. House to join me in

thanking foster families throughout Newfoundland and Labrador for sharing their

compassion and dedication to the children and youth who need it most.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Placentia West - Bellevue.

MR.

DWYER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for an advance copy

of his statement.

It is important to recognize Foster Families Month

because we each play a role in enhancing the lives of children and youth that

are in our foster care. The connections made through a loving foster home is

essential in child development and helps encourage our young people to grow

themselves to become confident leaders in our communities. Like the minister

said, helping a child find their smile makes a difference in so many lives.

As a government, we must find more ways to support our

foster families and encourage others to consider becoming a foster family.

We join the minister acknowledging the Newfoundland and

Labrador Foster Families Association and in thanking all foster families in

Newfoundland and Labrador for all their hard work in ensuring our province's

children have a safe and loving home.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

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

MR.

J. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

statement, and I join the minister in celebrating Foster Families Month.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Foster Families

Association and the 600 foster families in our province provide supportive homes

for children and youth as they await reunification or adoption. Foster families

are an integral part of a team and operate in the best sense of the saying that

it takes a village to raise a child, and they deserve our praise for that.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Digital Government and Service

NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Mr.

Speaker, as another season of warm weather in Newfoundland and Labrador comes to

an end, I bring attention to the work my department has done to help combat a

common problem in many of our communities during the summer: loud vehicles.

Regulations made under the

Highway Traffic Act specify that all vehicles are required to be

equipped with an exhaust system consisting of pipes or chambers which ensure

that exhaust gases are cooled and expelled without excessive noise. They also

prohibit the use of a vehicle with a muffler that is cut out, defective or

disconnected; has a baffle plate or other parts removed; has the exhaust outlet

opened or widened; and has a device attached which increase the noise emissions.

These regulations apply to all vehicles, including

motorcycles, operating on any highway in our province.

Mr. Speaker, highway enforcement officers in my

department focus on commercial vehicle safety and perform roadside inspections.

They are trained specifically in detecting mechanical defects and, through a

partnership with the RNC Traffic Services division, have helped train officers

to help them determine when an exhaust has been modified or suspected of

modification.

We also updated the Official Inspection Station Manual

to include motorcycle inspections, allowing law enforcement to direct the

operator of a motorcycle to have an inspection completed when they suspect that

it does not meet road safety requirements, including for their exhaust systems.

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, my department will also make officers available to

assist with inspections during future RNC-led enforcement initiatives.

Together, we will continue to work toward peaceful

enjoyment for all.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of her

statement.

Mr. Speaker, we in the Official Opposition welcome any

and all efforts to address some noise infractions caused by some vehicles and

motorcycles operating on the roads throughout the province.

As the minister knows, my colleague has presented

multiple petitions here in the House on this very issue. I know we all would

like to see these issues addressed. It is fine to say that regulations under the

Highway Traffic Act prohibit this, but

if the laws are ignored or not enforced, then nothing will change.

We certainly appreciate the work of the highway

enforcement officers. It's a challenging job that is made even more difficult

without a full complement of officers. We encourage government to get to work

and ensure that there are an adequate number of officers on the road to enhance

safety and protect the motoring public in our province.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for the advance copy

of her statement.

Noise from motorized vehicles has been a long-standing

issue in our province, especially in urban areas. It is also a popular topic in

many town council meetings and newscasts, as towns and government grapple with

the situation.

Let us make sure that the enforcement officials have

the tools and backing required to enforce this

section of the

Highway Traffic Act .

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Industry stakeholders are reporting that the West White

Rose project will not resume in 2021.

As a shareholder in West White Rose, was the Premier

notified of the merger and has he spoken to the CEO of Cenovus?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Premier.

PREMIER FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, let me welcome Cenovus to Newfoundland

and Labrador's bright future in offshore oil and gas.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER FUREY:

think it's a good signal that they diversified their portfolio and are working

with Husky in this new joint venture, especially using our low-carbon footprint

oil to deliver to the rest of the world.

We've reached out to the executives of Cenovus to have

discussions in the oncoming days. I'm confident that we will have great

discussions about their future and how we're so supportive of the oil and gas

industry here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

Mr.

Speaker, I take it the answer is no; he didn't get notice and he hasn't spoken

to the CEO.

Husky is the operator of the FPSO SeaRose and the White

Rose oil field. Has the Premier, in between times welcoming Cenovus, received

any guarantee from them that production at the SeaRose will not be shelved in

favour of other projects, and why not?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Premier.

PREMIER FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I mentioned, we're reaching out to the executives of

Cenovus now to see. This is all new news to the markets; it's new news to Canada

in general. I take it as encouraging news that there's opportunity here with a

new operator in the system, a new believer in Newfoundland and Labrador's

offshore oil and gas.

We will be working through those details, as I'm sure

the Member opposite can appreciate, over the next few days – certainly by week's

end. I look forward to having good, healthy discussions with the new owner,

Cenovus, and the new partnership to ensure that asset is delivering the maximum

value to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

From that answer, Mr. Speaker, we can deduce that there's been no conversation

between the Premier and anyone in authority at Cenovus and no assurances given.

I have to question why the Premier is so optimistic and

welcoming when the news announcement of the merger did not mention the

Newfoundland and Labrador offshore at all. The CEO of Cenovus said that the

companies' offices will be merged.

What assurances – probably none – does the Premier have

that the Husky office in St. John's will stay open and staffed?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Premier.

PREMIER FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I'm sure the Member opposite, given his previous

profession, can understand, there are commercial sensitivities presumably

between two large companies in an acquisition and a merger of this size that are

surely commercially sensitive and not fully revealed. But these details, I'm

confident, will come over the next few days and we'll be there at the table

supporting Newfoundland and Labrador's interests and protecting the jobs of

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians moving forward.

The Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology

continues to have healthy discussions with the Husky representatives here on the

ground in Newfoundland and Labrador. I'm confident that there is a bright future

for this project.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

Mr.

Speaker, I don't think unemployed workers are going to take much reassurance

from that answer.

Earlier this month, the current owners of the Come By

Chance Refinery reserved NARL Terminal Inc. with the Registry of Companies.

What assurances can the Premier give to workers that

the refinery will not turn into a tank farm?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

MR.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I'm certainly happy to answer this important

question.

That is a topic that came up towards the end of last

week and have spoken about it publicly now. What I've said is that particular

topic of discussion has not come up in any of our conversations with Silverpeak;

although, it is an issue that has been around for some time now and it's been

rumored and discussed. It is not a part of the conversations we have. It is not

a part of any plan that we have.

Our goal is to continue to work to find a purchaser for

the refinery to keep it whole and that's the plan that we take going into the

future.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

can appreciate the Come By Chance oil refinery's fate and its workers may be

beneath the notice of the Premier, but he has said we need a change in the

culture of the House of Assembly so we can have healthy debate.

I'm asking the Premier if he would make a start on that

by answering the questions when he's asked them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

MR.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

MR.

A. PARSONS:

Again, if the Member opposite would stop heckling so I could answer the

question.

It's also a time-honoured tradition that ministers

responsible for departments, who are fully engaged in the department, can answer

questions.

I will point out for the Member's notice that I look

forward to tonight, actually, to having a teleconference with three Members of

your caucus, mayors for that area and the MP for that area. I would ask you if

you would like to join in also.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR.

CROSBIE:

Back to the subject of Come By Chance oil refinery.

A warm idle will keep the refinery saleable. The

current owners have asked for financial assistance from the provincial

government to do this.

Premier, will this assistance be provided?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology.

MR.

A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There's no doubt that this refinery is going through a

troubled time, as it has in numerous times during its past. Again, in any of the

calls that I'm on, especially, we speak to union, we speak to communities and we

speak to perspective buyers. We realize that this whole industry is going

through a tough time. We're not just seeing it here, we're seeing it all around

the world.

The reality is that our primary goal here is to help

facilitate or broker a deal between a perspective buyer and the company. We have

said that nothing is off the table. Right now, the interest is there to ensure

the continued livelihood of the refinery itself.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

MR.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Dominion strike is over two months old

and no sign of a resolution in sight. These hard working and essential employees

want to get back to the bargaining table while communities lack an important

food security option.

Will the Premier offer mediation and conciliation to

these parties?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

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

MR.

DAVIS:

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

A conciliator officer has been engaged with this

process since November 19, 2019. We'll continue to assist these parties to

finding a resolution to the outstanding issues.

The issues are not lost on us as a government. We work

very closely with those parties. The conciliator officer is actively working

with both parties to decide the appropriate time when they can bring parties

back to the table, and the best deal is a negotiated deal between the two

parties at hand.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

MR.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We all witnessed how government's hands-off approach

caused a crippling ferry strike. I note in the Premier's extensive mandate

letter to the minister responsible, there's absolutely no mention of labour

relations.

I ask the Premier: Are you using all the tools at your

disposal to get a resolution to this strike?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

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

MR.

DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I've said to the hon. Member, this conciliation

officer approach is something that we take very seriously. We're working very

closely with that to ensure that both parties come to an arrangement. We want

those parties to negotiate in good faith with each other. That's the best deal

that can come from an outcome, when both parties are together at the table.

Our conciliation officer is going to continue to

provide whatever assistance will be required to successfully find a conclusion

to this dispute, which is what we all want in this House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

MR.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Most eligible businesses that applied for the Essential

Worker Support Program have received funding; however, we've heard from some

workers that they have not received their money yet.

I ask the minister: Are the distribution of funds to

workers being tracked? If so, how many workers are still awaiting their money?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

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

MR.

DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's a very good question that the hon. Member raised

here today. I think 98 per cent of the applications that have been received have

been processed. I think $33 million has been passed out in benefits. About

25,000 essential workers have received that and there's, I think, been 2,000

applicants at the time frame there. I can get some more detailed information if

the hon. Member would like to chat after.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port.

MR.

WAKEHAM:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there are more than 30 employees at the

local Walmart in Stephenville who, during the early days of the pandemic,

volunteered to work overtime and now have been told they don't qualify for the

Essential Worker top-up because their wages exceed that of the limits.

I ask the Minister of Finance: Will she adjust the

program to base eligibility on regular wages and regular hours rather than gross

wages?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Finance.

MS.

COADY:

Thank you very much.

The Essential Workers program has been very important

to the workers of the province. I just noted in the last question how many

people have applied, over 2,000 corporations have applied. I do know there's

been over $1.3 million paid out to Walmart workers in the province and over a

thousand employees have been eligible.

I'll certainly look into the matter that the Member

opposite is suggesting. I know that the criteria was set at a maximum $3,000

monthly income, but it certainly might be something the department could

investigate further, now that he's brought it to my attention.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port.

MR.

WAKEHAM:

want to thank the minister for her answer because I think all of us know the

value of these essential workers have when they actually went into work while

many of us stayed home.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

WAKEHAM:

People had to wind up taking their vacation pay, working overtime and all of

those now, because of the way it was set up – I don't think it was intended,

it's a good program. If we could just base it on regular hours and regular

wages, then I think a lot more people would be able to apply for it.

I appreciate that. Thank you.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Finance.

MS.

COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will advise the Member that it's the federal

government who set the limits on the program. In fact, this government actually

pressed from a $2,500-per-month to a $3,000-per-month limit, but certainly we'll

take it under advisement and see if we can go further for that program.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Stephenville - Port au Port.

MR.

WAKEHAM:

(Inaudible) response. I just want to thank the minister for that and say let's

do what you did for the rent and let's get it done for this program and base it

on regular wages.

Thank you.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Finance.

MS.

COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm glad the Member acknowledged what we've been able

to do for the rent program. We've worked very hard, Mr. Speaker, with our

federal colleagues to change that program from a landlord-based to a

tenant-based program. I'm glad that the Member opposite recognizes the work that

we've done in this particular area, because it is important for all businesses

in the province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Many families and individuals in our province are

suffering the financial hardship, but government legislation is preventing them

from accessing their money.

Where do we stand on locked-in pensions?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

As I've mentioned in the House before, we just

concluded consultations on the pensions and unlocking pensions, specifically

LIRAs, not all pensions. I'm currently waiting for a recommendation from the

team. We've received feedback from engageNL.

I'd like to remind Members and the public that these

locked-in pensions, they are designed by employers as a part of an employee's

benefit package. When an employee works for a company, the pension that they

receive, the LIRA or the other type of locked-in pension, that's part of their

employment contract. The provincial legislation is simply legislation that

governs those contracts, the locked-in pensions. We are looking to change

legislation and I look forward to bringing that to the House in an upcoming

session.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I've sat here through three ministers now and haven't

gotten any answers. Christmas is coming and people are worried about their

houses, they're worried about their cars. We know you just can't take it out to

do a renovation on a house, but it's critical for these people to have answers

to get their money.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Almost all other jurisdictions in the country provide some level of pension

unlocking. A laid-off worker in Alberta can access their pension to pay their

mortgage but a laid-off worker in our province can't.

Minister: Why is the government preventing individuals

who are struggling from accessing their pensions?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As a government, in the legislation we do allow people

to access money in their locked-in pensions under two situations. The first is

if they've a shortened life expectancy, and the second is if there's a small

amount in the pension. We know that across Canada each province has slightly

different criteria for removing money from these types of locked-in pensions.

I look forward to receiving the recommendations from

the consultations and changes, potentially, will be coming forward to the House

in an upcoming session.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR.

O'DRISCOLL:

Mr. Speaker, again, I've went through this and we know how slow it is to change

the legislation. People are struggling right now and they need to get access to

their money. It's too late in December and January, when they have nothing for

their kids for Christmas. It should be looked at and it should be acted on very

swiftly.

Consultations finished a month ago. When will we see

legislation this session, in the next two weeks, to allow people to access the

money in their locked-in pension funds?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Digital Government and Service NL.

MS.

STOODLEY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly appreciate the Member's passion. I've

received many requests from my constituents and other Members' constituents

looking for access to their pension funds. I certainly empathise with the

families in the province who have a difficult financial situation, especially

coming up around Christmas.

Just to set expectations: I don't see any changes

coming, though, before Christmas, unfortunately, but in an upcoming session, we,

hopefully, will have changes to unlocking pensions.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MS.

EVANS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Even the Child and Youth Advocate has spoken out about

the unreasonable delay into the Innu inquiry into children in care.

I ask the new Premier: After more than three years of

inaction, blaming the consultation process with the Innu, when is his government

going to take action to make this inquiry happen?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Premier.

PREMIER FUREY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you for that important question.

Since taking over two months ago, I've made some good

progress with the Indigenous leadership on this file and we're moving towards a

solution. This is a priority for me and our government. Frankly, too much time

has passed. We need to move on and we need to make sure that we're doing this in

a timely fashion. I look forward to continuing to work with Grand Chief Rich and

others to get this done.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MS.

EVANS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate him talking about in a timely fashion, but

it's been three years. Innu children are continuing to die. Other children are

forced to suffer new generations of intergenerational trauma while in care of

this government.

I ask the Premier: When are you going to step up and

give us concrete timelines and make this inquiry happen?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Deputy Government House Leader.

MS.

DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Member has asked a very important question.

Certainly, our government committed to do an inquiry into the treatment,

experiences and outcome of Innu children in care. I think the Premier just did a

very good job of outlining his commitment.

The Member speaks of three years; this Premier has only

been in the portfolio since August. He's already made it very clear to us that

we are proceeding on this.

We have been working with the Innu leadership. The

Premier has sat down already with the Innu leadership and those newly elected.

Mr. Speaker, we want to complete a process. We want better outcomes at the end

of the day. There have been some issues along the way with securing the people

that we needed, but this file is progressing and a top priority.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MS.

EVANS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Since I was elected I witnessed this government blame

its failure and its inaction on delays due to consultation with Indigenous

groups. Methylmercury poisoning – Muskrat Falls is a prime example of delaying

of excuses.

When is this government going to stop blaming the Innu

and the consultation process with the Innu? How many more Innu lives are going

to be ruined before this inquiry begins, Mr. Speaker?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Deputy Government House Leader.

MS.

DEMPSTER:

Mr.

Speaker, what I will tell you is that as a minister new to this department,

Indigenous Affairs and Reconciliation since August, I was very proud and humble

to take on the portfolio. In my mandate letter from the Premier, he asked me to

build upon a principled relationship with all Indigenous groups in this province

and that is what we are doing.

The Innu inquiry is something that we have committed to

and the file is progressing. I look forward, Mr. Speaker, to a day when we see

very positive outcomes and we see less of their children in our care and more at

home with their families in communities.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

MR.

PARROTT:

Mr.

Speaker, will the Premier direct his Minister of Transportation and

Infrastructure to disclose all financial information related to the new mental

health and addictions facility, and why taxpayers will pay an extra $40 million

and it will take a year longer to build?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure.

MR.

BRAGG:

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

In due time and in due course, Mr. Speaker, we will

reveal all the transactions dealing with the new mental health facility. We will

make that public.

Right now, we're going through the process in which the

unsuccessful bidders have an opportunity to come in and review, meet and debrief

with us. After that process, there's more information that will come out to the

public.

After that time, if the hon. Member would like to come

over and have a sit-down with members in my department to further explain the

situation and how it all transpires – the Member is saying how much it would

cost. We're looking at the new mental health facility being built for the best

value, on schedule, on time to replace a facility in this province that is a

much-needed replacement to take the stigma away from mental health, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Terra Nova.

MR.

PARROTT:

don't agree with the minister. I don't think people in this province have a year

to wait for a mental health facility.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

PARROTT:

Mr.

Speaker, heavy equipment is already rolling. This is ridiculous.

When will the Premier disclose to the people of this

province why it's an extra $40 million and an extra year to build?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure.

MR.

BRAGG:

Mr.

Speaker, as I said, there's no political involvement into this decision

whatsoever of the type of building that's going to be built to replace the

Waterford Hospital.

This is being done by the professionals in our

department, the health care professionals, the professionals in mental health,

Mr. Speaker. It is easy for the Member opposite to say he don't agree with it.

If you don't agree with it, base it on some facts.

We will have the facts provided to the Members opposite

and to the public of Newfoundland and Labrador that we are doing what we

promised to do. We are replacing the mental health facility with a new facility

that will meet the needs of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR.

BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The most recent COVID case was for a non-resident

individual who came to the province after being granted a travel exemption.

What reason was he granted an exemption, Minister?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR.

HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

The challenge in answering a question like that in a

specific case is the issue of privacy, Mr. Speaker. The Member opposite well

knows that individual privacy in this province is protected and as the Minister

of Health I am responsible for the

Personal Health Information Act.

The individual concerned was granted an exemption by

the chief medical officer of Health. That is the only requirement that person

needs to fulfil to be able to visit this province under the circumstances

described. It is not for prurient curiosity and the benefits of the Members

opposite. The information that's released is based on the requirement to protect

public health and the health of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, Mr. Speaker,

not nosiness.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR.

BRAZIL:

Mr.

Speaker, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are not nosey. They don't want

to know the individual's name but they want to know if an individual is coming

here to do work as an essential worker that could be done by Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians, by minimizing the risk to people in this province by bringing the

COVID-19 virus to this province.

I ask again: Was this a work-related essential worker

who was given an exemption to come to Newfoundland and Labrador to work?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR.

HAGGIE:

Mr.

Speaker, if the Member opposite read our news releases every day, he would note

those exemptions or those reasons for travel that are associated with work, it's

stated so. This individual had a legitimate exemption from the chief medical

officer of Health.

The Member opposite is simply trying to stir the pot

and he is being a little bit disingenuous with what he knows. As a minister of

the Crown, I cannot divulge about people's personal medical information, Mr.

Speaker. He knows damn well where he's going.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR.

BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The only thing being disingenuous in this House is the

fact that certain people are not standing up for the rights of Newfoundlanders

and Labradorians, Mr. Speaker, and that's not good enough.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

BRAZIL:

Negotiations between government and its provincial road ambulances have –

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR.

HAGGIE:

Mr.

Speaker, I would point out that the people of this province, in my humble

opinion, have been very well protected by Dr. Fitzgerald and her team.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

HAGGIE:

really think it is a little unfortunate, to say the least, that the Member

opposite should cast aspersions on a small, but very hard-working and very

diligent group of individuals who kept the people of this province safe since

January of this year, and it's beneath you, Sir, to do that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier has been touting $25-a-day child care but

we continue to hear from child care providers that the current system and the

proposed system is flawed as it cannot pay a living wage.

I ask the Premier: Will he address the needs of child

care providers so they won't close their doors?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Education.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Over the last two or three years, government has

significantly increased the wage subsidy to our child care providers. As the

Premier has pointed out, the $25-a-day daycare is a solid first step.

We continue to review early learning and child care in

this province, Mr. Speaker. We have a consultation process starting early in the

new year for both regulated and non-regulated, for parents and for anybody who

wishes to participate, to look at what the future of early learning and child

care looks like in the province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Mr.

Speaker, a minimum-wage worker in this province will need to work four hours at

the current rate in order to be able to afford one day of daycare.

How is the minister going to ensure that those who need

this extra support the most are able to afford child care?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Education.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm not sure about the numbers the Member has brought

forward. Not only do we have the Operating Grant for early learning and child

care centres, Mr. Speaker, but we have a subsidy. There are a large number of

parents in this province who don't pay anything for child care based on their

wages. It ranges from nothing up to $25 based on wages. If a family earning

minimum wage is below the threshold, they are further subsidized over and above

the $25.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Mr.

Speaker, the Liberal government has assembled a task force to chart a course for

the province's future.

Will the Premier also introduce a concurrent review of

the Labour Standards Act and

Labour Relations Act to ensure that

all workers in this province are protected?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

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

MR.

DAVIS:

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

I know that labour standards, just to go to the

Member's initial question, which was dealing with minimum wage, we established a

Committee of three individuals – one from labour, one from the employment side

and one independent chairperson – that determined that there would be announced

four increases in the minimum wage to bring it to at least $12.65 by October 1

of 2021. That includes increases based on the national consumer price index,

which is an important piece.

Obviously, like any piece of legislation and any

standards, we always look at those for the best interest of the people of the

province and we'll continue to do that in the department as well.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Mr.

Speaker, on Thursday, the Premier in his budget debate talked about working

together. This weekend in a media interview he boasted about his desire for

collaboration.

I ask the Premier and his Liberal government: Are they

willing to work along with our goals towards labour legislation reforms to bring

in anti-replacement worker legislation and bring back automatic certification

legislation?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

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

MR.

DAVIS:

Mr.

Speaker, I thank the hon. Member for the question.

I go back to my previous answer, to say that we always

look at the labour standards within this province for the best interests of the

people of our province and we'll to continue to do so. I know we have highly

skilled staff in the department that look at these issues on a daily basis and

we'll bring forward those concerns and make sure that those concerns are heard

and brought forward and reflective in the labour standards as we look at those

standards in the coming weeks, months and years.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Labrador West, time for a quick question and a quick answer.

MR.

BROWN:

I'll ask it again: Will they bring in anti-replacement worker and bring back

automatic certification legislation?

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

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

MR.

DAVIS:

Mr.

Speaker, I don't want to sound like a broken record, but as I said before, we

look at all labour standards with respect to the best interests of the people of

our province, both from the balance side that has to be looked at between the

needs of the employees and the needs of the employers. We always look at the

balance.

As labour ministers, you always look at the balanced

approach. So from that standpoint, we'll always be looking at labour standards

where we can make improvements when they can be made and where they need to be

made.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. Member for Labrador West.

MR.

BROWN:

Mr.

Speaker, I give notice of the following private Member's motion which will be

seconded by the Member for St. John's Centre:

WHEREAS income inequity in Canada and in the province,

in particular, has been on the rise in recent decades; and

WHEREAS Canadians from all parties and all walks of

life, including CEOs, senators, doctors, community support workers and

economists are now championing some form of basic income program; and

WHEREAS the federal government is already pioneering a

provision of income support to those who are in most need, the Canadian

Emergency Response Benefit; and

WHEREAS the current income support system amounts to a

poverty trap and still leaves many to fall through the cracks; and

WHEREAS the Canadian data from the basic income pilot

project have shown that programs increase public health, foster improvements in

nutrition, improve mental health and well-being, lower the immense public costs

associated with poverty, encourages entrepreneurship and allows people to pursue

education and training;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the House consider truly

ending poverty in this province by establishing an all-party Select Committee on

basic income with the mandate to review and make recommendations on eligibility,

minimum income amounts, interactions with existing income supports, cost-benefit

analysis, potential models for such programs and a timeline for implementation;

and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the House ensures that the

Select Committee has the resources it needs to conduct this work.

Thank you.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

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

MR.

J. DINN:

Mr.

Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order 63(3), I advise the House that this

PMM will be the one to be debated this Wednesday.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Mount Pearl North.

MR.

LESTER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The majority of Newfoundland Housing units permit

smoking. Currently, there are only two seniors' buildings that are designated as

non-smoking.

Second-hand smoke can seep into multi-unit dwellings

from many places, including vents and cracks in walls or floors.

Exposure to second-hand smoke can lead to serious

health problems, including lung cancer, heart disease and stroke, and it can

make asthma worse in both adults and children. It is especially dangerous for

children as it can result in permanent damage to their growing lungs, and cause

respiratory and other illnesses like bronchitis and pneumonia, ear infections

and even sudden infant death syndrome.

Based on several studies, an estimated 44 to 53 per

cent of multi-unit housing residents that do not allow smoking in their home

have experienced second-hand smoke infiltration in their home from elsewhere or

around the building.

Therefore, we petition the hon. House of Assembly as

follows: We, the undersigned, call on the House of Assembly to urge the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to designate 75 per cent of Newfoundland

and Labrador Housing family units to be non-smoking.

Mr. Speaker, this is my fourth time presenting this

petition. I do appreciate the work of the previous minister as to looking into

this matter and doing a jurisdictional scan as to how this can be implemented. I

do now look for a response from the current minister as to the status of this

initiative.

As I've said in my

preamble, there should be no reason

why an individual should be subjected to the pollution of cigarette or cannabis

smoke when they choose not to smoke themselves. It is an issue that I feel very

passionate about myself, being a non-smoker, having members in my own family

with health issues that I can see are compromised and complicated by the

exposure to smoke.

I believe that we should be doing more and we need to

act faster, because once the damage is done to our children's lungs or

individuals who are subjected to smoke, unfortunately, much of it is

irreversible.

I now ask the minister to reply to my petition and

provide us with an update.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Minister of Children, Seniors and Social Development with a response.

MR.

WARR:

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

As the Minister Responsible for Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing Corporation, it's the first time really that the petition has

been placed in my lap.

Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing

Corporation owns and operates over 5,000 public units and currently 139 of those

units have a non-smoking policy in place. Province wide there are seven

smoke-free buildings and an additional two are taking a grandfathered approach

to moving to non-smoking.

Smoking cannabis is prohibited in Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing Corporation properties were smoking tobacco is also prohibited.

In those properties where smoking tobacco is allowed, smoking cannabis is also

allowed as per the federal rules and regulations.

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation is

currently analyzing information from other jurisdictions in order to develop

evidence-based policies around the use of cannabis.

I take the hon. Member's petition under advisement, Mr.

Speaker, and I'd be more than happy to work with him on that.

Thank you.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Further petitions?

The hon. the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

MR.

P. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

WHEREAS many students within our province depend on

school busing for transportation to and from school each day; and

WHEREAS there are many parents of school-aged children

throughout our province who live inside the Eastern School District's 1.6

kilometre zone, therefore do not qualify for busing; and

WHEREAS policy cannot override the safety of our

children;

THEREFORE we petition the hon. House of Assembly as

follows: We, the undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to eliminate the 1.6 kilometre policy

for all elementary schools in the province and in junior and senior high schools

were safety is a primary concern.

Mr. Speaker, I'm losing count on how many times I've

actually presented this petition on behalf of residents in the Topsail -

Paradise area. I know my colleague from Harbour Main has done the same, my

colleague from Conception Bay South has done the same, my colleague from

Conception Bay East - Bell Island has done the same and we will continue to do

it.

This past year, as we know, with the COVID pandemic put

a strain on busing but government was able to – better late than never – bring

together a number of extra buses and drivers to deal with this issue because it

is a safety issue. I can tell you, children in the areas I've already mentioned

who have to walk to and from school, who do not have buses, who are walking on

shoulders of the road, and as I mentioned in a previous petition on roads – the

roads up in the Topsail - Paradise area, I can guarantee you some of the

shoulders are gone.

We're asking school-aged children to walk along these

roads, and winter's coming, there's going to be even less of an area for them to

walk. So this is truly a safety issue.

It would be horrendous if we have a child who is killed

or injured by oncoming traffic because we did not take the initiative to bring

in busing that would accommodate them. We have courtesy busing and courtesy

seating but it is not doing what it should do. There are still children who have

to get to school and who do not have a safe way to get there.

So with this petition – and I'll continue to bring it

forward – I think the residents in these areas are very concerned and they want

to see a safe and happy route to school for school-aged kids.

Thank you.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader, for leave

to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Other Post-Employment Benefits

Eligibility Modification Act, Bill 49, and I further move that the said bill be

now read a first time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Does the minister have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Leave.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Leave.

It is moved and seconded that Bill 49 entitled,

An Act

To Amend The Other Post-Employment Benefits Eligibility Modification Act, be now

read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt this bill?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion, the hon. President of Treasury Board to

introduce a bill, “An Act To Amend The Other Post-Employment Benefits

Eligibility Modification Act,” carried. (Bill 49)

CLERK (Barnes):

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Other Post-Employment Benefits Eligibility

Modification Act. (Bill 49)

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

bill has now been read a first time.

When shall the said bill be read a second time?

MR.

CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 49 read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Deputy Government House Leader,

for leave to introduce a bill,

An Act To Amend The Auditor General Act, Bill 50,

and I further move that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR.

SPEAKER:

is moved and seconded that the hon. minister shall have leave to introduce the

bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Auditor General Act, Bill 50, and that the

said bill now be read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

Motion, the hon. the Government House Leader to

introduce a bill, “An Act To Amend The Auditor General Act,” carried. (Bill 50)

CLERK:

bill,

An Act To Amend The Auditor General Act. (Bill 50)

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

bill has now been read a first time.

When shall the said bill be read a second time?

MR.

CROCKER:

Tomorrow.

MR.

SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 50 read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Mr.

Speaker, I call from the Order Paper, Motion 15.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Deputy Government

House Leader, that under Standing Order 11(1) this House not adjourn at 5:30

p.m. on Monday, October 26, 2020.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

motion has been moved and seconded.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR.

SPEAKER:

All

those against, 'nay.'

Carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR.

CROCKER:

Mr.

Speaker, I call from the Order Paper, Order 3, Concurrence Motion, report of the

Social Services Committee.

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Bonavista.

MR.

PARDY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

For all those who are viewing at home, we're looking at

the Social Services, and a significant part of the Social Services, five

components of government operations, would be Education and Early Childhood

Development. It is from that of which I'll speak mostly in my time because that

is what the concurrence session allows us to do, Mr. Speaker.

Before I get into that, I had a revelation in Victoria,

BC and that might spark your curiosity. We were over there representing the

Legislature here in Newfoundland and Labrador, and Mr. Speaker, you were there

as well. Myself, representing the District of Bonavista, the Minister of

Environment, Climate Change and Municipalities was there as well, as well as the

Member for Labrador West.

The revelation that occurred at that time while we were

sitting down having a discussion on the proceedings that we were engaged in, he

had stated to me that we could take the whole of the Province of Newfoundland

and Labrador and transplant it in his district. I didn't speak to it at the time

because I was a little leery as to whether that was accurate.

MR.

BROWN:

Labrador as a whole.

MR.

PARDY:

The

whole of Labrador, okay. Therefore, now he's absolutely correct.

I often thought that if we were in a school situation,

we often look at things, we look on the news. A lot of us will look on the news

and we'll hear Labrador referred to as the Big Land and us here in the Province

of Newfoundland. But when we watch our newscast, we'll see that the Province of

Newfoundland on a newscast is so much larger than the Big Land.

For all intents and purposes, the hon. Member for

Labrador West is totally correct. We can place the Island of Newfoundland and

Labrador, almost three times our mass, into the Big Land. In fact, we can take

every other province in the Maritimes, PEI, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, they

will all fit in the Big Land as well.

I say that little anecdote because I know when we look

at the great physical distance we have in order to serve the needs of our

residents, it is certainly challenging. There is no doubt about that, because we

do have the Big Land in Labrador, and in Newfoundland and Labrador we certainly

have a big land as well, even though not as big as Labrador.

We always look at statistics, and when we spend –

sometimes we look at statistics, but if I may just give a few provincial

statistics from the latest census comparing populations from 1971 to the current

year, 2020. It's very significant, Mr. Speaker, when we look at education, we

look at what we do and what resources we would put into place, because the

population is very significant.

In 1971, we had 530,000, and I'll round off, 531,000 in

our province. In 2020, we have 522,000 in our province. For those between the

ages of zero and four, the population in Newfoundland and Labrador from the ages

of zero to four – in 1971, we had 62,000 youth between zero and four. In 2020,

Mr. Speaker, we have 20,000 between zero and four in that time frame.

I look at our oldest demographic, which would be 90

years and older. In 1971, where we had more population, Newfoundland and

Labrador, 587. In 2020, we have 3,594 residents. Data will show you that you

have 150 per cent chance of getting to that bracket, 90 years and older, if you

are female. That is the data which we have. Inherent in that, there are many

challenges and factors and discussions that occur due to the data that is

presented.

I would say to you, when we look at the population

between zero and four, while we have a reduction in that number and we currently

have 20,000, the significance to education is significantly greater now than

what it was back in 1971. Society is changing more rapidly. We're embracing

technology. If we're slow on rolling out curriculum, by the time it's rolled

out, you'll find that it's outdated.

The speed of which we do things is much faster in 2020

than what it was in 1971. I would state, we need now conceivably to make an

investment in education based on what we want in our society and to meet and to

keep up with the ever-changing society.

I just want to go back again. While I went back to

1972, I just want to restate again, Mr. Speaker, that the first school – and I

had mentioned this before in the House – in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador was in my district. It was in the community of Bonavista back in 1727.

A document written by Garfield Fizzard, which now can

be found at Newfoundland Studies at Memorial University of Newfoundland, I just

want to read an excerpt from a cited transcript that Mr. Fizzard had cited. When

he references the start-up of the school, here is what he had stated, quote,

from the archives: “The people finely [ sic ] are willing…to set up a Charity School…. I raised by

subscription £8 am promised more, for the teaching the poor children to read for

the year 1727, have ordered a Schoolmistress to begin to teach them early this

spring.”

Now, several things stand out to me there, 8 pounds,

and if you did a translation at 8 pounds you'll find that it equates to today's

salary of $14.29. Wonderful; $14.29 was a significant amount of money back then,

Mr. Speaker.

The other thing was the poor children they referenced.

We all know that in our history we had quite a struggle with poverty in our

province. We still struggle today with poverty in our province. The chance with

Estimates is that we get a chance to go over every budget line in every

department of which the government operates. This is what the concurrence does

here.

One thing I had mentioned before when we looked at

productivity in our education system was the wellness of the students of which

are in the system. I'm not sure if the last time I spoke to the wellness of the

education system as to the rationale why, I mentioned to the Minister of Health

and Community Services that the healthier the children that we have in our

school system, the less interventions on the health care system will be now and

into the future. So we look at it as an investment; an investment that will save

the energy and the expenses of interventions a little later.

I would also content, Mr. Speaker, that healthier

children make better learners. Generally, healthier children will make better

learners. Their attention may be better, they attend better, and the more active

they are, the better the education system would be.

I talk on wellness because the 2020 ParticipACTION

Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth – and we discussed this

in our Estimates – the benchmarks they use is that 150 minutes of physical

activity within the school systems and the provinces in Canada. So that was the

benchmark they looked at, 150.

In our schools, we have 6 per cent, which will give 120

minutes, but 18 minutes a day is what we prescribe. It is in our allocation of

time that we ask schools, when they create their timetables here is 6 per cent.

I threw out of a couple of statistics before: math would be 10 per cent,

religious education is 8 per cent, and health as a curriculum is 5 per cent. I

would say to you, if we increased the amount of physical activity in the

schools, it's quite possible that we will see an increase in the student

achievement in what we get in return from the sessions and our teaching time

because they'll be more productive.

What did the ParticipACTION Report Card find about the

children in Canada? The overall activity, physical activity, they gave a score

of D plus and that would be the percentage of children and youth who meet the

physical activity recommendation within Canadian 24-hour movement guidelines for

children and youth, at least 60 minutes of daily moderate to vigorous physical

activity.

Inactive play, we received an F. In offering physical

education, which is the quality part of skilled development, we received a D

plus and in 24-hour movement behaviours we received an F. I would say when it

comes to the wellness of children, we need to give some attention to that going

forward. My suggestion would be that we would adopt what the schools in Alberta

and British Columbia do, and they achieve the greatest, the best results in the

PISA, the international assessments in the areas of math and science, and we

adapt their curriculum. They also offer the greatest percentage of daily

physical education which is 10 per cent of the timetable.

I want to move on to the staff allocation, Mr. Speaker.

When we look at the staff wellness, it is significant, but one thing that we

don't permit in our school systems is we don't permit the staff, teaching our

children, to access the wellness rooms in our schools and that is under the

Board of Trustees. Their policy is that they don't because they contend that it

would breach the conflict of interest legislation.

The legislation that they refer to, in this case, is as

follows,

section 7: “A public office holder shall not, directly or indirectly,

accept a fee, gift or personal benefit, except compensation authorized by law,

that is connected, directly or indirectly, with the performance of his or her

duties.”

We would contend that the educational staff in a school

cannot access and utilize the equipment rooms in our schools because of a

conflict of interest. I would contend, Mr. Speaker, that if we have those

wellness rooms in our schools, we would welcome and entice the staff of those

schools, who are the role models for our children, to use those fitness rooms.

In using the fitness rooms, they would improve their wellness and, obviously,

model some good behaviour that we want modelled. That is something that I would

think we ought to be contending.

Another thing that came up in the Estimates in

Education was the fact that back in 2015-16 to 2019 the teachers' sick leave had

increased by 20 per cent; in fact, it broke over the $18 million mark of

teachers' sick leave. When we hold that alongside the fact of the conflict of

interest of not permitting staff to use fitness rooms, I would say it ought to

be a no-brainer, Mr. Speaker, that our staff, as well as our students, ought to

be able to freely and be encouraged to use the fitness rooms within our schools.

Just talking about technology in our schools in the

short four minutes remaining. We all know the importance of technology going

forward. I think the minister mentioned Kraken, but one industry he did mention

was in the Clarenville area, which was SubC. All these tech companies are moving

and addressing the needs within the society for the resources that they create.

SubC was created, I would think, out of two schools

that occurred in our district. Heritage College had an underwater robotics club.

It wasn't in the curriculum, it was an after-school activity that was held, as

did and does Clarenville Middle School and Clarenville High. Members of that

underwater robotics club are also employed now within the SubC Imaging in

Clarenville, which is a growing company.

I would say to you we need to move the underwater

robotics into the curriculum and allow those who have to travel by bus for 45

minutes in order to access the technology piece in our school program, put it

into the curriculum and have it available to everybody regardless of how close

to the school they are.

Another thing I would mention before I go on to a

couple of district points to drill down on would be the Internet connectivity. I

haven't heard much recently on the Internet connectivity within our province,

not a lot. When the schools closed, we know the significance of it, but I

haven't heard many discussions on the floor of this House as to where the

improvements would lie.

In Southern Bay, Leah Hollahan with three children

would be asking. Her Internet is just as bad now as what it was pre-pandemic.

There isn't one word as to what I can pass on to her and the other myriad of

parents within Winter Brook, Portland, Jamestown and Bonaventure. They would

like to know, when can we expect to see the Internet connectivity in those

remote areas?

Another thing district specific – and I'm sure it's in

the Estimates as well, not quite the Social Services but in the Estimates – we

were hit with a significant weather event last winter along coastal Newfoundland

and Labrador, and Bonavista wasn't spared of it. The seawall that protects

people's property and our municipal infrastructure was damaged significantly. We

had an assessment done. They went and did the assessment and said it ought to be

looked after; what was damaged by the storm will be looked after.

Here we are now in the later part of October with

another winter coming and many of these personal properties and municipal

infrastructure are more exposed than it's ever been in the past 50 years. The

early part of the summer it was checked off and it was okayed and to give. The

people constantly ask: Where are the repairs to the seawall and the trestle

that's there in Bonavista that's about to fall into the brook, that was damaged?

We haven't heard anything in relation to that.

Mr. Speaker, in the 20 seconds remaining, I shall talk

a little faster.

I look forward to this upcoming weekend where they have

the virtual Relay For Life in Bonavista. Last year it raised $54,000. They have

to do it a little differently this year, but we wish them luck. The co-chairs of

the events are stating that they are very hopeful that there will be much

success again this Sunday.

Mr. Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity to

speak.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Humber - Bay of Islands.

MR.

JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm going to speak on the district part a bit and I'm

going to read something into the record. I know I can't dispute your ruling, but

I'm going to read a few things into the record later.

First of all, it's a pleasure to represent the people

of Humber - Bay of Islands again. I look forward to the next election. Some

people say it may be in November or December – I'm not sure – or maybe next

spring. Whenever that is, I look forward to the election and I thank the people

that have supported me over so many years. It's an honour and it's a pleasure to

do that, Mr. Speaker.

I understand the situation that the government is in

financially, but there are only so many times we can say: Okay, we'll do it next

year, we'll do it next year. We have to make a plan to try to get the province

out of the financial crisis we're in, and it's going to be tough decisions. It's

going to be tough decisions no matter what government is in power after the next

election – no matter what government – but we have to try to make sure we take

the steps for that.

There's one interesting part that I noticed and it

hasn't been brought up yet. I know there's a committee gone out now – and I

thank the people for that – on behalf of the province that's going to do some

work on bringing back some way that the province can move forward and guide us

in the future. But the strange

part I find about that, Mr. Speaker, it's been in

the process for so many years, is that report is due April 30, the budget

process starts November, December, and the budget may be brought down in March.

Here it is we're setting up a process that's going to

guide us for the future and the budget is going to be tabled before we even see

the report. That hasn't been raised in this House or out in the media yet. When

the Premier and others go out and say here's our guiding document, the guiding

document is going to be after we put the budget in place.

I know one year, I think the budget was passed here on

March 27. It was introduced and read in this House on March 27. We were going to

bring the budget down in March or early April, usually before Easter, and then

the report that's going to guide the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador for

the next five or 10 years, nothing is going to be in place – without the budget

in place. So are we going to change the budget? Are we going to be waiting for

the budget?

By the time you get the report at the end of April,

you're looking at May, June that we're going to have another second Interim

Supply, so we can follow that report? That's something I noticed, and I haven't

heard a clear answer. Are we going to use that to guide the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador?

A lot of people are concerned about the deficit. We

understand – everybody understands – that the province must help out people in

this pandemic. Everybody understands that. Everybody is hurting in the Province

of Newfoundland and Labrador, but we have to start being prudent. We can't keep

saying – even the situation that we have when we came back approving the second

six months of the budget, we said we'll wait until the next budget.

Now we're going to wait for the report to come out,

which will be April, if you look at it, it's going to be May or June. So it's

something that government hasn't fully put out to the general public yet, if

it's going to be a guiding document or is it just going to be something we're

going to be working on after the budget is put into the House of Assembly.

That's just something that I throw out there as someone who understands the

budgetary process that is going to be done.

Mr. Speaker, I look at the District of Humber - Bay of

Islands and I'm going to speak about the district itself. As I said, the former

minister and the current minister – the road improvements so much this year

definitely will improve tourism in the area, and safety on the roads for the

people travelling on the north and south shore of Humber - Bay of Islands. I

know cellphone coverage for Lark Harbour and York Harbour should be coming in

the next couple of weeks; they're out there working on it. I know the minister

has an update for the people and they're very pleased.

Just that alone, Mr. Speaker, will help tourism in the

Humber - Bay of Islands. A lot of people these days, when they go on a few of

the mountain hikes out there – there are a lot of great hills – they love to

have that protection, that if anything goes wrong they can make calls. There are

only certain areas out there, when you go up Murray Mountain which is about a

three-hour hike, that you can get cellphone coverage because you have direct

range.

There are a lot of mountains in the Lark Harbour and

York Harbour area. They're pretty steep, two or three hours. People want to have

confidence that if they twist an ankle or whoever they're with gets a bit hurt,

that they can call. I know a few instances out in Lark Harbour where people came

down over Lark Harbour hill and, tragically, one trike tipped over and had no

way to call out and it wasn't a good ending.

I know other times when people go up on Lewis Hills and

Lark Harbour hills and get a bit lost and they don't have cellphone coverage.

What happens is search and rescue and the fire department put their lives in

danger to go and find these people. I know last year there was a couple of

instances that they had to go and get them but they had to track them down

instead of having the cellphone coverage.

That's going to be a big benefit. Also, business-wise,

a lot of people can carry on business while they're out there which is great.

Hopefully, that's going to improve a lot.

Mr. Speaker, I know McIver's in Cox's Cove is going to

be applying this year also for cellphone coverage in their area because there's

no cellphone coverage in their area. That area, itself, is a great improvement

for the Humber - Bay of Islands.

I know the Member for Corner Brook, the former minister

of Fisheries and agrifoods mentioned redfish. That's going to be big if the

biomass improves in the Humber - Bay of Islands. Right now, I know they're doing

an exploratory fishery on it. All signs that it's looking good. The redfish and

dealing with the Qalipu, if that could be produced in the Humber -Bay of Islands

or portions of it, it would be a great employment boost.

I don't think people realize the size of the fishery in

the Bay of Islands with three plants operating and all the fisher people

operating in Humber-Bay of Islands, it's fairly big. It's a big operation. I

know Bill Barry now, he does a great job of creating employment in the area.

There's a lot of employment in the area. There are a lot of fisher people in the

Bay of Islands itself that fish, they go out in the Port au Port area also for

lobster. The fishery is a big part.

I know also that the Kruger is stable, I know the port

authority is doing work now to ship paper out from the port authority, from the

port itself, to be able to ship it directly to the markets which is great.

Hopefully, they can start shipping fish from the port of Corner Brook, if

they're not already doing it now, which is a great benefit. It's much cheaper to

get the product there quicker and safer.

I look at the hospital again, and I've said many times

that if we can get as many local workers as we can – just to follow up, I said

last week that there was a meeting with the company from Quebec and the

carpenters union. They did have the meeting; they had a very frank discussion,

from my understanding. The people who are in Corner Brook representing the

company are going back to their owners and trying to work something out.

I don't want to jinx that one bit, so I'll just let

them work on it, but there is an open discussion on that to keep local workers

working. Safety also for that, Mr. Speaker, it's big. It's big for that.

Hopefully, that's going to work out, because it is two, 2½ years of work that

they have there that they can stay home. They don't have to travel away and come

back and go into the rotational workers where they have to isolate for so many

days. It's a great improvement. So that project is well on track itself.

Also, for the first responders around, I know the

government has worked hard and worked well with the first responders around for

this pandemic. There are a lot of people who sacrificed since February for the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador, which is great and we all thank them.

When you're dealing with the town councils, and I can

go through each one, they're still working hard for their towns and we must

recognize that. We must recognize the work of the volunteers that they're still

going to keep the towns working: the town clerks, the town managers. They are

definitely – definitely doing a lot of hard work for the towns during this

pandemic.

I know I was speaking to the Minister of Education on

the school busing. There is still one outstanding that we have to try to work

at. We're working at it, actually the measurement now, I think it's down to

1.87, I think it is or 1.89. So it's about five steps too short, but yet we

can't get on the bus. So I know the minister is working on that. I brought it to

his attention several times. We'll continue to work on that to try to get this

student to work out. I know everybody's trying the best they can to get it

worked out if there's capacity on the bus or not. So that's going to continue

also, Mr. Speaker.

I look at again if you take out the rural parts of the

district, there are a lot of seniors clubs. I know there is funding there that

we're going to try to use, Mr. Speaker, Community Healthy Living Fund. We're

trying to help a lot of seniors groups. A lot of their fundraising has dropped

off and some are having online auctions, silent auctions. Actually, I have my

basement full of stuff. I go on a lot of the sites just to drive up the prices

and I end up with the prizes themselves. It's a great way for the seniors to

raise funds because just the socialization, getting out and just being together.

They need the funds.

I know there are a few applications in to the minister

and I know the minister is working at them to try to get them approved also. I

know in Meadows there's going to be work trying to get the gable ends of the

arena done, so we're working on that.

In Gillams, I know the recreation department through

the town has done great work. Scott Blanchard and Linda and all the recreation

committee has done great work out there to build a softball field to get kids

active in the summertime. They start as soon as the snow is gone and they go

right up until – even now you go over there and there are a lot of people on the

field in the nighttime and in the daytime. Hopefully, we'll be able to help them

out in some way.

Mr. Speaker, the City of Corner Brook is where both of

those – in Humber - Bay of Islands there are certain parts, the Curling part,

and the Humber Heights

part is a big part of the City of Corner Brook. We work

well with the City of Corner Brook. It's a combination, through the last five or

six months, of their hard work of a lot of people, city staff, for the Curling,

Humbermouth area. Also, all the councillors. They're working hard also to ensure

the safety of the residents in the area.

When you go down to see a lot of the improvements that

have been done, I know – to the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure,

Lark Harbour and York Harbour still doesn't have a complete water and sewer

system, but they have $3 million ready to spend. Last year, there was an issue

with the design out the bay. They have $3 million that's going to be spent, Mr.

Speaker, to bring those services to the Lark Harbour area.

I work well with the government officials and work well

with the government people themselves. Sometimes, Mr. Speaker, they think that

you come to them and you're a bit persistent. Mr. Speaker, I think if there's

any Member in this House who's not persistent when it comes to their district –

I see the former minister of Transportation and Works looking at me and saying,

no, no, you're not persistent, you just push your point across. I agree with

that. I'm not persistent but usually when I get something –

HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

MR.

JOYCE:

Some people say I am. I guess being the youngest of 14 kids, if you see food on

the table you better get it quick. That's a part of it but, Mr. Speaker, in the

context of it, you get persistent but you get results because people know when

you're persistent with it, it's the urgency of it. The point about it is we

understand that we're all fighting for the district. We're all fighting for

issues and bringing issues forward, which we should be doing.

Then there's still the relationship there, we can

banter back and forth but yet – I'll give you a good example, Mr. Speaker,

again, it's the roadwork that we couldn't get done through the federal

government, that's finally done where the roads are safe. I know there's one

spot that was very dangerous out in Little Port Road, that's going to be done

now. That's bringing the information, and that's what MHAs should do. That's

what people expect us to do to ensure that safety and other major concerns in

the area are ….

Mr. Speaker, I'm going to get back to something you

were talking about today. I'm not disputing anybody's ruling but I always say

that your right as a Member should be adhered to. I'm just going to read – and

I'm not disputing your ruling, but I need to put this on the record, Mr.

Speaker, on the ruling that you made two weeks ago. Also, I'm going to put it on

the ruling that Madam Sauvé said, because you said today there was something

left out. I'll show you what was left out today, Mr. Speaker.

In the ruling, and this goes back – to let the people

know – when you put in a point of privilege, and the point of privilege I had

was that the information from the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, that

there were statements made in the Management Commission – which there were no

minutes taken by the way. Absolutely no minutes taken, which is unheard of; no

minutes taken in the Management Commission meeting of October 24, 2018 – no

minutes, which is unheard of. One of the reasons why there were no minutes taken

in that meeting, which affected me as a Member so much, because they said it

wasn't discussed, the body of the report.

Mr. Speaker, I don't mean to single this person out,

but the Deputy Premier of this province – she's here in this House right now –

asked a question in that meeting, did all MHAs participate? The Commissioner for

Legislative Standards said no. The minister of Justice and Attorney General at

the time said, who never? He said Eddie Joyce. So Eddie Joyce never

participated? He said no, he never.

There were no minutes taken at that meeting; yet, the

information that's given is there was no name ever mentioned. This is the point

of privilege I brought up, is that there was information came forward that the

Minister of Justice and Attorney General – I give him credit to stand up, who

has the courage to stand up for the truth; I give him credit for the courage –

went outside the House and stated it, which he wasn't allowed to state in this

House. That's why the point of privilege, because my rights – which I'm not

going to stop anyway. I'm going to work for the Bay of Islands no matter what.

I just want to read the ruling, Mr. Speaker. When

myself and the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands met with you – and the part

that was left out of your ruling. Now, I'm not disputing your ruling but I need

to put this on the record, if it's okay to put this on the record. Here's what

Madam Sauvé – because you used Madam Sauvé as a precedent setting on your

ruling. I just need to put it on the record for my own piece of mind so people

in this House don't think I'm just going off and saying something that's not

true.

Here's what Madam Sauvé said, the

part in your ruling,

Mr. Speaker, is: “… the sub judice convention to stand in the way of its

consideration of a matter vital to the public interest or to the effective

operation to the House and its Members.” There was something you added there

from another speaker which wasn't even identified, that wasn't even dealing with

this.

Here's what Madam Sauvé went on that was out of your

ruling, Mr. Speaker – I'm not disputing your ruling but I have to put it on the

record – that was not included in your ruling. This is very important, and I

know the people in this House – here's what Madam Sauvé actually said, which you

used as a precedent-setting ruling in this House but wasn't included in your

ruling.

“Given the precedents I have studied, it is clear to me

that while the Hon. Member could seek a remedy in the courts, he cannot function

effectively as a Member while this slur upon his reputation remains. The process

of litigation would probably be very lengthy and there is no knowing how long it

would take before the issue was finally resolved.

“I have therefore decided, in spite of the reservations

I have expressed, that this complaint should be given precedence as a prima

facie case of privilege in order to provide the Hon. Member with the speediest

possible route toward the re-establishment of his reputation. I am prepared to

entertain a motion to refer this matter to the Standing Committee on Privileges

and Elections.”

That's what Madam Sauvé said. So, Mr. Speaker, when you

mentioned today in this House about there was a misunderstanding in your ruling,

it wasn't even put in there, that wasn't even in there. Whoever wrote that for

you left out those two paragraphs where she allowed it.

I'm asking, Mr. Speaker, if you can go back and

reconsider your ruling, because I'm not sure if you've seen this part. I can

provide you with a copy of it.

I just want to thank the people of Humber - Bay of

Islands for their –

MR.

SPEAKER:

want to caution the Member. The Member says he is not challenging the ruling,

but if he goes on to challenge the ruling then he is negating his initial

comments.

The ruling is the ruling. The ruling I've referenced,

there was a citation error in it. When making a ruling, a Speaker has the option

of taking quotes in relation to the other ruling as he or she sees fit and for

various reasons. Sometimes it's to explore the issue and to show how the

decision-making was made.

If you look at the full ruling, it's up the Speaker to

determine when a sub judice situation exists based on the particulars of the

situation here. In this case, I outlined in the ruling that the reason was, at

that time, we had three Members of this House who were involved in a court case.

We had an independent Officer of this House who was also involved in the ruling.

The situations of this case clearly justify sub judice.

I ask the Member to confine his comments in this regard.

MR.

JOYCE:

Did you see this before you made the ruling? That's all I asked.

MR.

SPEAKER:

I'm

not going to answer in the debate. The hon. Member's time has expired.

The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR.

OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Speaking to the Social Services Committee, and in

particular relating to the Department of Education, as all Members know,

Education now encompasses everything from early learning and child care through

K to 12, through to the post-secondary, both public and private post-secondary

institutions.

Today in Question Period, Mr. Speaker, the Member for

Labrador West had asked a question about child care and subsides. I wanted to

provide some additional information based on that question.

There are 1,343 families receiving a child care

subsidy. Just to keep in mind, there are two areas where child care is made less

expensive for families. One is the Child Care Subsidy and the other is the

Operating Grant. Under the Operating Grant, there are over 8,000 registered

child care spaces in the province. Over 70 per cent of those operate under the

Operating Grant Program, so that's close to 6,000 – 5,600, 5,700. If my math is

correct, it's over 5,600 children operate under the Operating Grant or receive

the Operating Grant, Mr. Speaker, but the families receiving a child care

subsidy, there are 1,343 children in the province receiving a child care

subsidy.

Of those, there are almost 700 children who receive

free child care because the family income is less than the income threshold,

which I believe is $35,000. I'll double check that and provide that to the

Member, but I believe if the household income is less than $35,000 then they

receive, not only the Operating Grant, but the subsidy and, therefore, the child

care is no cost to the family.

Anywhere above $35,000, it's then on a sliding scale,

so they pay somewhere between zero and the $25 as of January 1 for the children

that are going to have child care under the Operating Grant Program. It will be

somewhere between zero and $25. Once you come out of that scale, obviously, the

remainder of the families would be paying the $25.

Mr. Speaker, I think that's important information,

especially for any Member who didn't realize that there are close to 700

children going to daycare in the province that pay nothing, the families pay

nothing for those children.

Mr. Speaker, in speaking about the K-to-12 system – I

should go back actually before I do that and talk about the Early Learning and

Child Care program and a little bit more about the $25-a-day child care program

before we get into the K-to-12 system.

I know that part of this, as the Premier said, it's a

very solid first step in improving early learning and child care in the

province, Mr. Speaker, $25 a day. We do have a consultation process that will be

starting early in the new year. That consultation process will look at what the

future of early learning and child care looks like in the province. We'll be

speaking to those who – operators who are registered, non-registered operators

as well. We will be looking at, starting today – in fact, starting a week or two

weeks ago, we started to look at what red tape was there, but that will be part

of the consultation process as well. Whether or not we can reduce the red tape

for the child care operators who are non-registered who are looking at becoming

registered and assisting those as well, Mr. Speaker.

We look at the Income Supplement. The Income

Supplement, which essentially is on top of the wages that early learning

educators are paid by their employer. The Income Supplement ranges from $12,900

to $16,900 for those who qualify. That is one of the best in the entire country,

Mr. Speaker, and that $16,900, based on the number of hours, if it's a 40-hour

week – and I have to do a little more research – but based on a 40-hour week,

you're looking at $7 or $8 an hour in terms of an Income Supplement.

We know that there are still challenges. We've

increased the bursaries now up to $7,500, Mr. Speaker, in terms of bursaries,

once somebody graduates from an early learning childhood program in the

province. We provide $250 per course for those who are upgrading, and $2,500 in

bursaries as well. So government is certainly looking at and trying to increase

the number of people working in early learning and child care, providing child

care to our children pre-school, pre-K-12 system. We do understand that there

are some challenges in recruitment in some areas of the province still. I know

Labrador, for example, Labrador West has had some challenges in recruitment.

Mr. Speaker, we are coming out with the casual

caregiver pilot program. I believe the operators have been informed of what's

entailed in that already. If not, you've heard it here first, breaking news. I

think the early learning and child care operations have been informed at this

stage of the pilot program to try and allow operators, if somebody is off for

one reason or another, to be able to get additional staff in.

Mr. Speaker, in looking at the Early Learning and Child

Care program itself and the pilot program, that is, as I said, to allow

organizations to get staff where there are finding challenges.

If there are areas of the province where capacity is

still a concern, Mr. Speaker – I know I spoke to the mayor of one municipality –

there is the Child Care Capacity Initiative, which is available for both

non-profit organizations and municipalities to create child care spaces in the

province. It does help with needs assessment, start-up costs, equipment,

furnishings and even building plans or renovations. That's been put in place to

try to increase the capacity in areas where capacity has been an issue. We'll

continue to look at ways that we can help with that.

There's been $62 million allocated annually for early

learning and childhood development programs in the province, Mr. Speaker. That

does include the bursary program that I talked about of $7,500, as well as the

Income Supplement for early learning and child care operations or employees.

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to talk a little bit about the

K-to-12 system. I'm trying to talk a little bit about each of the areas of

education in the province in the 20 minutes that I'm allotted to speak in this

Committee.

If you look at the K-to-12 system, under the

Education Action Plan – which is

something that our government introduced about two to three years ago – this

year there are over 350 additional teachers in schools under the

Education Action Plan . That includes

200 teacher learning assistants, 104 reading specialists, 39 resource teachers

administrative positions that we've added and the student assistant hours that

we've added as a result of COVID this year.

In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, we've added 145

additional buses in the province to accommodate the over 6,000 eligible students

for transportation that would have been without transportation. Since school

started, not only have we looked after the over 6,000 eligible students, but in

a number of areas we've been able to look after the courtesy students as well.

Mr. Speaker, the courtesy students, I'm not sure of the

total number of additional passengers on buses as a result of the 145 buses. I

can get that information in terms of courtesy. I know administrators, schools

are continuing to work on courtesy students. In some cases, Mr. Speaker, because

of the additional buses, all courtesy students have been looked after for

schools. In some cases, there are courtesy students that ordinarily, last year

and other years, would have received transportation that either still haven't or

may not.

It has been a very complex year in terms of student

transportation. We've worked through it and the vast majority of issues have

been resolved. I've worked with a number of Members of the Legislature, Mr.

Speaker, in resolving issues in their districts. We continue to work on some of

the other issues.

Mr. Speaker, also the kindergarten parents, we were

able to have them visit even though visitation to schools has been restricted

this year. I know extracurricular activities, such as school sports, have

started. We continue to work on that.

Mr. Speaker, I believe, as the sports governing bodies

in the province aligning with the ordinary or the usual start of those sports in

well are allowing the sports to happen within the schools. We continue to work

on that, on a very measured basis to ensure the safety of not only the students

but school staff as well, Mr. Speaker, whether it's custodial or other.

We've increased as well – talking about that – the

custodial hours within the schools and put in place additional protocols within

the schools as a result of COVID this year. It is an unprecedented year. There's

absolutely no question about that. We've seen some significant changes to the

school year.

The laptops; some teachers, I believe, are now

receiving laptops. Hopefully the laptops that have been ordered this year, Mr.

Speaker, will all be delivered, if they haven't already been, to teachers. We

also have the Chromebooks that are going to all students in seven to 12 in the

province to help not only with introducing the technology in the schools and the

possibilities that brings and what it's going to mean for distance learning and

the other advantages to children, but in the event of a second wave.

We have been very lucky in this province, every case

we've seen over the past couple of months has been travel related. There has

been no community spread. Hats off to the Minister of Health, the chief medical

officer of Health and those in Public Health for doing a very, very solid job in

this province, but we do have to prepare in the event there's an outbreak in a

community or in a school or in the province itself, as we've seen with other

provinces.

Part of the introduction of the laptops and Chromebooks

is to help deal with that and to deal with virtual learning if the need arises.

We've seen from last year, the challenges with students being off for

two-and-a-half or more months in terms of COVID. Trying to get ahead of that and

ready to deal with that should the need arise.

Mr. Speaker, for the 2019-20 year for Memorial, there

were 18,308 students enrolled at Memorial University. For the fall semester of

2020, we had 19,429. More than 1,000 more students enrolled at Memorial this

year. The largest year-over-year growth since 2003. We're still looking at that,

analyzing. Obviously, you don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

We've seen a significant increase in enrolment at

Memorial and we are very, very happy with that; looking at where those students

are coming from, whether the majority are local students or Canadian or

international. In terms of enrolment, we know that learning, for the most part,

at Memorial is virtual this year. There are some labs and other cases where

students have to be in class and on campus and that is the case in some cases,

Mr. Speaker, but the vast majority is distance learning.

We've seen at the College of the North Atlantic, last

year's enrolment was 5,449 students. The fall semester this year, as of

September 24, was 5,814, a 6.7 per cent increase over last year. We've seen a

significant increase in online enrolment at both Memorial, as well as the

College of the North Atlantic.

Mr. Speaker, I have had some discussions with private

institutes. I know even in some of the private training institutes enrolment is

up this year as well. Whether that's related to COVID and people having more

time or people working from home having time to sign up for courses online,

we're not sure yet.

Mr. Speaker, when we look at Memorial, whether it's the

Grenfell campus, the St. John's campus or the Marine Institute, I'm very

encouraged by the new president of Memorial, Vianne Timmons. I've had a number

of discussions with her about some of her ideas and her approach.

She is from this province, so the fact that she is at

Memorial and she's come home to run Memorial, Mr. Speaker, I think is a

tremendous asset to this province. I'm very encouraged by her and what she's

going to bring to Memorial University. Absolutely just thrilled to have her home

and running Memorial. She has an extensive background, extensive career in

post-secondary education. I feel very positive about being able to work with her

and her leadership at Memorial University.

Likewise, Mr. Speaker, in terms of the College of the

North Atlantic, Liz Kidd has been in the college system for a number of years.

She's just recently taken on the role of running the College of the North

Atlantic; I've had a number of meetings with her. I'm equally pleased with the

vision I believe she's going to bring to the College of the North Atlantic, and

some of the ideas that we're sharing and talking about in terms of growth and

the College of the North Atlantic into the future and the concept of training

students for the jobs that exist.

We all know, Mr. Speaker, of the challenges within the

tech sector. That's an area where both Memorial University, including the Marine

Institute campus and the College of the North Atlantic, have students in the

tech sector and training for the tech sector. We know there will be a deficit in

the future in terms of people to work in that sector. I know that both

institutes, as well as our private colleges, are looking at enhancing

information technology programming and offerings for students.

Mr. Speaker, I see that the 20 minutes has very quickly

run by. I appreciate the opportunity to speak on these topics today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR.

SPEAKER:

The

hon. the Member for Placentia West - Bellevue.

MR.

DWYER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like to thank, obviously, the wonderful

constituents of my beautiful District of Placentia West - Bellevue that have

given me this honour to represent them in this hon. House today.

Going through the budget through CSSD, one thing that I

think stood out to me more than anything was that we talk about CSSD as

Children, Seniors and Social Development, but there's another big portion to the

portfolio: taking care of people living with disabilities as well.

This is a very vulnerable sector. It's something that

needs the attention that it does get and does deserve. It's about inclusion and

with physical disabilities, whether they were born with it or through an

accident or anything like that, and then there are other people with cognitive

disabilities. It's incumbent on us all to make sure that this vulnerable sector

is looked after. I believe that as a province, we are doing well, but in the

meantime I think it needs to be a part of the name on the department for sure.

I'd like to thank Minister Warr and his staff for the

professional evening we had in Estimates. Like I said, I asked a lot of

questions. Some were financial questions; some were more on the social side.

They did answer my questions. I'm waiting on a couple of reports, but, for the

most part, I think we had a very successful Estimates.

I would also be very remiss if I never thanked Jackie

Lake Kavanagh, the Child and Youth Advocate, because her input and reporting to

the department is very important to this very vulnerable sector. Like I said,

that's our future and we should be taking that time to take care of our youth

and our children.

I'd also be very remiss if I never thanked Ms. Suzanne

Brake for being the Seniors' Advocate and bringing her reports to the department

as well to make sure that we're all on the same page and we understand what the

major issues are; not all the time are they presented to us without hearing it

from a report. So it's a very vulnerable sector of the province, but I think we

have a lot of proponents, including myself, that take it very seriously and

really want what's best for our Children, Seniors and Social Development and

people currently living with disabilities.

One of the things that brings this full vulnerable

sector into this, and we talk about our children and youth and our people living

with disabilities, is our students. I'm talking about secondary students from

kindergarten to 12. Something that's been bothering me since day one of coming

in here to represent the beautiful District of Placentia West - Bellevue is the

whole 1.6 kilometre busing.

I tell you what bothers me the most about it, to be

quite honest, is that we talk of our children as eligible and ineligible, which

I think is a very big disservice, because nobody needs to be known as being

ineligible. We found money for extra busing, we found for computers, we found

money for this or that and, personally, I don't think any child should have to

walk to school if they want a ride. That should be paramount to anybody that

sits in this Legislature.

I never understand why a kid that is 1.6 kilometres is

able to get their own way to school,

whereas 1.7 kilometres, it could be their

next-door neighbour, gets a ride to school. I just don't understand the courtesy

seating and stuff like that. A lot of times it's the more vulnerable in our

society that are dependent on these seats. I think it's incumbent on us all to

find a better solution to busing, and I think it would be the elimination of the

1.6 kilometre rule.

My kids have never rode the bus, other than to go on a

school outing or anything like that, because we do live within that 1.6

kilometres. But for my youngest son's school, there are no buses except for a

special needs bus. I understand that everybody's fairly close and stuff like

that. A lot of parents can probably bring their kids to class and get them to

school but there are some families out there that are not. For that reason, I

think that it should be incumbent on, not only this department, but the

Department of Education, to look at the fact of – hearing these stories,

understanding what the application is for and understanding that accommodating

somebody is life changing for most people because not every family in the

province has a car or two.

Like I said, I just don't like the whole thing of the

eligible and ineligible students, that doesn't bode well with me. It doesn't

I just think it's very important for us to make sure we're treating all students

the same, because it's not like the families within the 1.6 kilometres are

getting a tax break because they're not paying for busing. They're paying for

busing as well out of their taxes. They deserve the same access to

transportation for their kids as well as everybody else, whether it's within or

outside the 1.6 kilometres.

Just looking at the next piece, I heard the last

speaker, the Minister of Education, talk about the tech sector. When we talk

about diversifying the economy, this is really where it starts; to make sure

that we're educating people for what's coming down the road. If we have Memorial

University and we have CNA and the Marine Institute and stuff online, then

that's how we can explore innovation and technology and diversifying the

economy.

Diversifying the economy is not taking money out of the

oil business and putting money back into the oil business. It's about taking

money from one sector and starting a new sector that the province can move in

to. Like I said, I understand that we are going to be moving to more green

energy, but, unfortunately, we're not there right now. I think we need to take

advantage of the oil and gas industry here in Newfoundland and Labrador to put

our people and our province in a better financial position so that we can move

into that green economy when the world is ready for it.

I don't think the world is quite ready for it. We're

moving that way but it's not going to happen overnight. As we saw with the

electronic age, it took 20 years pretty much for that to be fully implemented

and now we see due to COVID and stuff, that we're taking on the next

section of

that and saving a lot of money on travel and stuff by having these virtual

meetings and stuff. We are moving in the right direction here in Newfoundland

and Labrador in the tech sector, but I would say that more needs to be done and

it needs to be done around the education piece.

I personally don't think we need to be doing certain

courses in high schools that don't really translate to real-life learning. I

think every child coming out of Grade 12 should be able to know how to do their

own taxes. I think they should have an understanding of that, whether that's

doing one course or doing three or two courses over the life of their high

school. I think it is incumbent on them to understand how the tax regime works

in Canada and to understand it for budgeting purposes and things like that. It

will keep our most vulnerable from making poor decisions financially.

Talking about the schools, we see they were talking

about the schools having the gymnasiums closed down due to COVID, yet we do have

some gymnasiums inside the overpass kind of thing that are offering private

lessons. These children are able to avail of that just because they live in an

area where there are private offerings.

I will contend, Madam Speaker, these gymnasiums outside

the overpass are the real meeting place of most towns, because it's the only

offering they really have to be able to have some kind of organized sports or

anything like that. I think it is incumbent on the Department of Health and the

Department of Education to realize that opening gymnasiums in some of these

smaller communities is really about healthy living and giving them that

opportunity to make healthy decisions when it comes to their physical activity.

It's not only from our children's side; it's certainly

from our seniors' side too. When we talk about inclusion, one thing I was really

happy to see in the budget this time around was the continuation of funding for

50-plus clubs. As we have an aging demographic, I know that these 50-plus clubs

are very robust. They're very involved in our community. They have community

gardens; they have little trips they plan. They meet with other seniors. They

have a head of the 50-plus, Mr. Rogers. Like I said, it's very incumbent on us

to make sure our seniors are creating and achieving social development because,

as we know, as we age we get a little bit more complacent to change.

We have a lot of seniors now that are computer

literate. We have young people that go out in the communities and help out

seniors to understand their programs and how to operate their computer. We bring

everybody into that digital age where it's an advantage to everybody. That would

be a big piece in the inclusion side, and inclusion doesn't mean exclusive

rights. It just means being involved with what's already been in place. So for

that I think our seniors' clubs and Lions Clubs and stuff like that will be able

to avail of this new small business money that just came from the federal

government as well.

It was really nice to see $400,000 in the budget to

make vehicles more accessible. That's a very important initiative, because

whether it's somebody calling for a taxi or it's on our buses or it's a family

member that has converted their vehicle to help out another family member, then

I think it's incumbent on the government that this is not found and lays upon

the feet of the person that needs it. I think we're doing some good things. Is

there more to be done? Absolutely; I mean, that's what we strive for.

The most important part of our Children, Seniors and

Social Development is really the programing we have in place, Madam Speaker. The

biggest thing for me is the kinship programs. It's very incumbent on us to make

sure that these programs are in every community, whether it's the PRIDE program

or anything like that.

We have to make sure that if children are going into

care, whether it's foster care, adoption or anything like that – these kinship

programs are very important when it comes to that, because any child that's able

to stay within their family nucleus, I think that would be more beneficial. Just

for the simple fact that they will get to stay close to their cultural heritage

and their family members for support, and to understand what they have dealt

with in the past and that they can make a better future together. I really think

the kinship programs, like PRIDE, are very important.

When it comes to the Department of Children, Seniors

and Social Development, we find that, obviously, our front-line workers, the

same as any department, are pretty overworked and they certainly need a little

bit more help. I would suggest, as I suggested in Estimates, we kind of look a

little bit more toward the front-line achievements instead of making benchmarks

on the management side because we wouldn't want the department to be failing

children while making sure that they're not failing management. We want to make

sure that the people who are meant to be helped are being helped.

One of the things I noticed within the department on

the side of housing was that we have a lot of aged infrastructure right now. One

of my questions in Estimates was, do we have a program where people that are

living in housing currently would have an opportunity to buy the house they're

in based on the age of the house or the domicile, based on the fact that they

would want to stay there and now they can afford, through a program like a

purchase or a buyout, that they would be able to not only stay in a home they've

probably enjoyed for many years, but we would also be able to get rid of some

aging infrastructure to put the money into building new accessible housing for

other clients.

Currently, there's no program in place like that. After

asking about it, it doesn't seem to be the propensity of the Department of

Children, Seniors and Social Development, and people living with disabilities,

to sell off any provincial assets in order to build and purchase new ones.

Emergency shelters: I asked a lot of questions on that

because a lot of people in the province really wonder about the money that's

being spent on emergency shelters and what the standards are for an owner to

become an emergency shelter. I asked for regular inspections to be carried out

and how often that was. They said it was annually, but, in the meantime, I think

that if you have many people that are going to be frequenting these emergency

shelters then they need to be probably inspected a little bit more often to make

sure that they're up to standard with good living conditions for people that are

in a very vulnerable sector.

A lot of times with housing there's no real expiry date

on any application and sometimes people are over housed. For example, a single

mother that's raising her child and her child consequently has a child and they

are living with that parent. Obviously, as they are able to get on