Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Oral Questions — 5 December 2001 (44th General Assembly, 3rd Session, Vol. XLIV No. 43)
2001-12-05
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
December 5, 2001 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 43
The House met at 2:00 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House of Assembly to offer my
congratulations to Carson Lambert, owner, Cynthia Reynolds, manager, and the
staff of the Carbonear A&W restaurant on being given the Employer of Merit
Award by the Newfoundland and Labrador Association for Community Living.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SWEENEY: This award is given for its outstanding contribution to the
increased employment of persons with developmental disabilities. They received
this award as a result of the restaurant's participation in the HRDC Supported
Work Program. Ms Marsha Button of Carbonear was hired and worked alongside a
support worker from the Trinity-Conception Employment Corporation. The Supported
Worker Program provided employment to 700 people with developmental disabilities
last year. The company has kept Marsha on as an employee after the wage subsidy
expired. Through the training provided and the assistance of the support worker,
Marsha has become a valued member of the staff at the restaurant for her work
and her support of the other members of the staff.
Mr. Speaker, I would like all Members of the House of Assembly to join with
me in congratulating A&W in Carbonear and Ms Marsha Button on receiving this
award.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Lewisporte.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Year after year, people are injured or killed in needless accidents caused by
drunk drivers. With the holiday season approaching, we have to step up our
efforts to remind people not to drive when they have been drinking. In that
light, I particularly want to commend Mothers Against Drunk Driving, who have
held a vigil today in the lobby of Confederation Building and have presented the
government with numerous letters from those whose lives have been devastated by
the consequences of drunk driving.
For the people responsible for the letters, drunk driving deaths and injuries
are not mere statistics. They are friends and family members whose lives have
been turned upside down or brought to an untimely end.
The members of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, especially its tireless
spokesperson in this Province, Gwen Mercer, have done tremendous work in raising
awareness and bringing about constructive changes, and I have no doubt that
their efforts have saved lives.
The members of Mothers Against Drunk Driving rightly applaud the government
for every effort it makes to take drunk drivers off the road, whether it be
through stiffer penalties or mandatory counseling.
They are also right in calling for even more action, such as ignition
interlock devices, because we cannot rest while people continue to be hurt or
killed because of the recklessness of drunk drivers.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS M. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to pay tribute to a
very special group of young people who have contributed their talents to assist
in the relief efforts in New York. These young people who range in age from
seven to thirteen, have contributed their artwork to the book, If You Could
See What I See : Works Of Art From Canada's Smallest Citizens , with
all proceeds going to the Red Cross U.S.A. appeal. The book is available at
various locations throughout the city at a cost of only $5.
These young people, Mr. Speaker, have demonstrated how it is sometimes
necessary for us as adults to see the world through the eyes of a child, because
their perspective helps us realize what is truly important. Through their
artwork, they share their hopes and fears in a post-September 11 world and give
those who us who serve in legislative bodies around the world added incentive to
strive for peace and justice.
Dr. Maria Montessori said, "A peaceful planet is every child's
birthright." It is an undeniable truth that we have been reminded of with
the terrible events of September 11, 2001. The work of these children is as
powerful as it is beautiful, and serves to remind everyone that we owe it to our
children to keep them safe and give them a world filled with peace and
happiness.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage all members of this House to pay tribute to these
young people who contributed their work to such a noble cause and, in doing so,
reminded us that looking through a child's eyes can help us see the world in a
better perspective.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to say Happy Birthday to a gentleman who is celebrating his
ninety-first birthday today, Jim Ridgley. If hard work helps you to live longer,
he is the epitome of that. Last winter, in spite of having a pacemaker in, and
much to the chagrin of his family, he shoveled snow.
Mr. Ridley has been a volunteer all of his life and, up until nine years ago
when he had a car accident, he used to deliver Meals on Wheels. If you asked him
where he was going, he would say, "I am going to deliver meals to the
seniors." He was eighty-two years of age at that time. He continues to
volunteer two days a week with St. Vincent De Paul Society. I know that later on
this evening I will be able to say Happy Birthday, but I thought I would do it
this way for this time.
Happy Birthday, Dad!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This summer eighty-one communities across the Province participated in the
Tidy Towns Program. I am pleased to inform this House of Assembly that L'Anse
au Loup in the Labrador Straits, in the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au
Clair, was selected as one of the tidiest towns in Newfoundland and Labrador.
L'Anse au Loup was selected as the winning community in the category for
places with a population between 500 and 649. A total of ten towns were named
the tidiest towns in the contest, which was sponsored by the Newfoundland and
Labrador Parks and Recreation Association. Others winners were New Perlican,
Change Islands, Old Perlican, Conception Harbour, Baie Verte, Wabush, Grand
Bank, Deer Lake and Stephenville.
Six other towns were recognized in new categories. They were: Kippens for
tidiness; Portugal Cove-St. Phillip's for environmental effort; Triton for
community involvement; Woody Point for heritage; Appleton for urban forestry;
and Hant's Harbour for landscape areas.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members to join with me in commending these winning
communities, the volunteer judges and indeed all those who participated in the
Tidy Towns Program.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits & White Bay North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pass on congratulations to an
organization for young people in my area, the 774 St. Anthony & Area Royal
Canadian Air Cadet Squadron, which was established in October, 1967, and takes
in young people from all around the St. Anthony area.
Once again this year, for the tenth year in a row, they have been the winner
of the Newfoundland and Labrador Drill Team competition. Of course, Mr. Speaker,
it is no small feat for an Air Cadet Squadron to win this one time, but they
have certainly cornered the market on this one, I would suggest, after winning
it for ten years in a row.
To the officers and cadets of St. Anthony and Area Royal Canadian Air Cadet
Squadron, I know all the members of the House would like to pass on their
congratulations and wish them all the best.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions today are for the Minister of Mines and Energy, because he was
kind enough yesterday to make our collective day. He made my day. He made the
day of the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, and the day for all of our
caucus in fact, with his straightforward, clean, forthright and honest answers;
because the position of the government that was stated in the House yesterday on
processing 100 per cent of the ore from Voisey's Bay in this Province is
something that we have argued for and that we fully support.
The Minister of Mines and Energy; I will read from Hansard exactly what you
said in the House of Assembly yesterday: "We are committed to seeing 100
per cent of all of the nickel that will come out of that ore body in Voisey's
Bay, over the life of the project, processed into a finished nickel product in
this Province, through a refinery in this Province that will do that processing.
That is our commitment..."
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. WILLIAMS: Will the minister confirm that those are his words from
yesterday? Because we will support a deal on those terms.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I will not question the reading from Hansard that the Leader of the
Opposition has just put forward, but I will confirm for him, again, because it
has been the position of this government for quite some time in terms of
fundamental to our position in trying to get a negotiated arrangement to develop
Voisey's Bay, that we will ensure, by way of guarantee, or in some fashion -
and a guarantee, essentially, is what we want - that over the life of the
project 100 per cent equivalency of every ounce of ore that is in Voisey's Bay
will go through a plant in Newfoundland and Labrador. What we have said, Mr.
Speaker, many times is if there is, and today there are both proven and inferred
reserves of about 141 million tons of ore in Voisey's Bay - that is the figure
that is used by the industry and the company - we have said, of that 141 million
tons of ore that is there, there is so much nickel and we want the equivalency
of that amount processed to a finished nickel product, through a processing
refinery type plant in Newfoundland and Labrador at the end of this project.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, in the words that I read out from yesterday's
Hansard, the term, and the word, equivalency, was never used.
I would ask the minister what he meant yesterday by 100 per cent of all of
the nickel that will come out of the ore body? Can you tell me what that means
in literal terms?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I just want to remind hon. members - and I refer them to Standing Order 26(4)
which says: "Oral questions must not be prefaced by the reading of letters,
telegrams, newspaper extracts or
preambles of any kind." Members ought not
to read from any documents when presenting questions in the House.
The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is our understanding, in trying to keep within the Standing Orders of the
House, that members in this House are, indeed, allowed to refer to, or read,
from Hansard, which is what the Leader of the Opposition did. I want to know if
we can have a clarification on that? It is my understanding that we can read
from the record of the House which is exactly what the Leader of the Opposition
did.
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair will certainly take that part under advisement,
but it is my understanding that members can refer to documents, but not read
from documents of any kind, or quote directly from documents -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Yes, can quote from documents but not read directly from any
documents. But the Hansard issue I will take under advisement.
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. WILLIAMS: Minister, what is meant by 100 per cent of all the nickel
that will come out of an ore body? Can you tell me what that means in the
literal terms?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The hon. member read from Hansard, fortunately I now have Hansard in front of
me as well. What he did, conveniently, or by accident, leave out of his
quotation were these words "...over the life of the project." That is
what I said in my answer yesterday, and that is what Hansard records.
Mr. Speaker, we will seek to ensure that the equivalent of all of the ore in
Labrador is processed over the life of the project into a full and finished
nickel product in a processing plant in the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador. That has always been our position.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MATTHEWS: If, Mr. Speaker, by way of trying to be as forthright as we
can, given that we are in negotiations - to the hon. members on the other side -
if by way of trying to be as forthright as we can, and in the process of
answering over and over and over again the same question, if by way of omission
sometime we were to slip on a word or a phrase or a verbiage, well we would take
that and seek to correct it immediately. But in this circumstance, Mr. Speaker,
it is clear that what we mean is what we have always said, that over the life of
the project the equivalent of all of that ore body will go through a plant in
this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
So your position Minister, today, is contrary to your position yesterday. You
have changed your position, is that correct?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: One hundred per cent of all of the nickel that will come
from that ore body in Voisey's Bay is very clear, it does not talk about
equivalency.
What does it mean in the straight terms that you said yesterday? Are you now
changing your position?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I really am at a bit of a loss as to what the Leader of the Opposition is
getting so exercised about.
Mr. Speaker, I had to spend about twenty minutes at the Board of Trade today
refuting speculation that is damaging in the business community that has been
spread by the Official Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, in this Legislature the Leader of
the Opposition said: Mr. Premier, tell us the details. You have the deal, come
clean and tell us what it is.
I had to spend twenty minutes, because there are people in the business
community all over Newfoundland and Labrador who heard speculative stories in
the media last night that a deal is closer. What I described was the Leader of
the Opposition asking questions about Voisey's Bay yesterday. I answered that
we have no deal, and for some reason the media speculated that a deal was closer
because the Opposition was asking about it.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I had to spend twenty minutes today -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER GRIMES: The reality, Mr. Speaker, is this: We have consistently
said for two-and-a-half years that over the life of the project we expect to get
it all. Over the life of the project.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer.
PREMIER GRIMES: I would gladly like to know what the Leader of the
Opposition finds wrong with that proposition, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Just a little reminder again to hon. members that, when presenting questions
to the House, they should be through the Chair and not directly to the members.
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am glad the Premier has risen to his feet, Mr. Speaker, because not only
did the Minister of Mines and Energy yesterday state the position, very clearly,
as to what government's position was - and the reason he stated so was that he
was acting in support of the Premier. I would ask you, Premier, these are your
words from yesterday, "I have spelled out, as has the Minister of Mines and
Energy on several occasions, these fundamental components, that all of the
nickel ore that is in ground in Labrador over the life of the project will be
turned into a finished nickel product...".
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member is on a supplementary. He ought not to have a
preamble. I ask
the hon. the member to get to his question.
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. WILLIAMS: What does all of the nickel ore that is in the ground in
Labrador mean? It is the same thing the minister said. Were those not your words
yesterday, and are you now both flip-flopping?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have heard it said - I would never these kinds of things myself, because it
is not the type of person I am, but - I have heard it said that the master of
the flip-flop in Newfoundland and Labrador is the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, the other line I have heard is that since he
has come into the Legislature all he has done is flop. Now, I would not repeat
that because it is not kind or nice to say.
Mr. Speaker, let me tell you this and let me tell the people of the Province
this: We have consistently said exactly what the Leader of the Opposition just
read, because that has been the consistent position. Over the life of the
project, however long it might be, whatever ore is in the ground in Labrador, as
the Minister of Mines and Energy has pointed out, will be turned into a finished
nickel product. Yesterday, there were two questions asked by the Member for
Placentia & St. Mary's: Will we get it all? The answer was yes, we plan to
get it all. If we do not get it all, by the way, there is not going to be a
deal. Like he said on the news last night, he hopes there is a deal. We hope
there is a deal. In order to get a deal, we need to get it all. All of us need
to get it all; not me, not the Minister of Mines and Energy. We need to get it
all and you are saying you support that. Glad to hear it.
Secondly, he said if hydromet does not work, will there be some other
process? Well, there has to be because if we are going to get it all, which is
the fundamental of the deal, and it is going to be turned into nickel, something
has to turn it into nickel. It is either going to be hydromet, which you do not
support because you do not even want to see the research and development done to
see if it can occur or it is going to be something else.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier to conclude his answer quickly.
PREMIER GRIMES: That is our position, Mr. Speaker, and always has been.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: My question again is for the Premier, and I use his words
and the words of the minister. What does 100 per cent or all of the ore in the
ground in Labrador mean? Does 100 per cent not mean 100 percent? Are you telling
the people of this Province that it now means 50 per cent or 70 per cent? What
does 100 per cent of the ore in the ground mean? Your words!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I have been a math teacher for a number of
years. I might not have been that successful all the time but I do believe that
everybody I taught in Newfoundland and Labrador understood what 100 per cent
meant. One hundred per cent means all of it. It means all of it, Mr. Speaker.
Now, I do not know: Why would anybody ever question what 100 per cent means?
One hundred per cent is all of it. Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that the Leader
of the Opposition now suggests that he is going to go around to the people of
the Province and try to portray, as he usually does, incorrectly, that the
government's position that we are going to have 100 per cent of it turned into
nickel means 50 per cent, which he just said.
One hundred per cent, Mr. Speaker, is a self-evident statement in and of and
by itself. While the Leader of the Opposition may be suggesting that he might be
confused by it, I think he is the only person in Newfoundland and Labrador who
would be confused by that particular statement.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Premier, you have stated and your minister has stated that 100 per cent of
the ore from Voisey's Bay will be processed in this Province. Are you now
telling this Chamber that some of that ore will be shipped out of the Province
and less than 100 per cent will be processed in this Province?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, he had the new critic for Mines and Energy -
I thought he was the critic for Post-Secondary Education - ask questions
yesterday.
One of the questions was: Are you going to get it all over the life of the
project? Every answer that the Minister of Mines and Energy has given says: Over
the life of the project we will get it all; 100 per cent. He asked yesterday:
Will you get it all? The answer was: Yes, we are going to have an arrangement,
over the life of the project we will get it all.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I believe that everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador
understands that. We have speculated before, the Minister of Mines and Energy
has spoken of it in this Chamber and outside, and said that one of the
arrangements, if we are going to test hydromet - which the Opposition does not
want to do; voted against it in this Legislature ten days ago. Two weeks ago
today, actually. Two weeks ago today, when the Leader of the Opposition refused
to speak to it and voted against it, Mr. Speaker. In fact, we have said, and the
question was asked yesterday: Will we get it all? Answer: We will get it all if
we are going to have a project. If we cannot get it all, we will not have a
project.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Premier to conclude his answer quickly.
PREMIER GRIMES: Some might have to leave (inaudible) get it back, we get
it all over the life of the project. That has been in the public domain for two
years.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
To clarify it for the record, that side of the House prevented me from
speaking on that issue.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Premier.
PREMIER GRIMES: A point of order.
MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Premier.
PREMIER GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker, and I really hesitate to do this
because I know the rules in Question Period are for a particular reason, that
the Opposition House Leader just rose on a point of order during Question
Period, but, Mr. Speaker, the record cannot go unchallenged.
In order to speak in this Legislature you have to stand to be recognized by
the Chair. The Leader of the Opposition sat in his seat (inaudible).
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Again, that is why in Question Period, when presenting questions,
preambles
should not be given. Statements should not lead to debate in the House. So, I
ask hon. members now to keep the rules in mind.
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Premier, will any of our Newfoundland and Labrador ore leave this Province
for processing elsewhere?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and let me give you the direct,
honest answer and everybody in the Province: I do not know that.
MR. TULK: If you get your way with research and development it will all
leave.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
PREMIER GRIMES: The direct and honest answer is I don't know that
because we do not have a deal with Voisey's Bay. What has been discussed on
the public record for over two years now - they talk about needing to have a
debate in the Legislature. It has been debated everywhere in the Province for
over two years that, in fact, one of the possibilities for having an Inco deal
go ahead is that there might be a need to have some concentrate leave the
Province for a limited time frame to be replaced later so that over the life of
the project we get 100 per cent of it done in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador understands that that is a concept.
Will it happen? I don't know because we do not have an arrangement. One of the
reasons being that the Leader of the Opposition does not even want to try to see
whether or not hydromet works, which is the process that they used in Goro for
the development that is going ahead today with the same company that we are
trying to deal with here in Newfoundland and Labrador.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Ferryland.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions today are for the Minister of Finance. The Federal Court of
Appeal has rendered a decision dealing with deductions from income of additional
voluntary contributions to the Newfoundland and Labrador Public Service Pension
Plan for non-existent service. This means that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians
who paid those costs can get an appropriate credit on their income tax for those
respective years. As a result of that court decision the federal government has
issued a remission order for all affected people and they have been receiving
refunds now and getting their money, but this government has been dragging its
feet and they cannot get the provincial portion.
I ask the minister: Is this government going to comply with the court
decision and refund the money owed on the provincial portion of that income tax?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I think that is a very important question because it certainly would be a
voluntary decision of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to do it. It
is an important question because everyday in this House of Assembly we are being
asked about priorities, about spending money, and how we spend it. We have made
it clear, our number one priority is health care. In this case particularly, for
us, it has not gone through the Cabinet process. It has been discussed at the
committee level and it is certainly something that we are considering. I think
what is important for the people of the Province to realize, it has a price tag
associated with it - $1 million to $2 million - and everybody knows at this
point in time we are factoring in all of our priorities, all of our commitments.
It will go through the process and we will look at it under those circumstances.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Ferryland.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
They have been looking at it for some time and people are being frustrated, I
say to the minister. I spoke with officials in your department. I have a letter
from an individual who has spoken to representatives in your department. It is
at the ministerial level and Cabinet level and they cannot get a decision.
I want to ask the minister: If you can use those deductions on normal
contributions and you are allowed to pay for this service, why isn't the same
applied? Will the minister tell us when she is going to have a decision so these
people can bring closure to this issue and get the money that is justly owed to
them?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is a very important issue. It is very important to us, but I would like to
keep the information accurate. I think that is the least the member opposite can
do. It has not gone to Cabinet yet. It is not setting on my desk.
It is an issue that is very important to all of us because it has a monetary
price tag. The member opposite knows. You will stand up and put a petition
forward asking for pavement for your district. Somebody else wants a ferry.
Somebody else wants a bridge. Someone else wants a tunnel, in fact, across The
Straits.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS J.M. AYLWARD: All of those things are important to us. We have to make
our decisions. We will work it in to all of our decision-making. It is a
voluntary decision that we will look at, and we will look at it very seriously.
We take it very seriously, but it is one of many priorities that this government
has to face, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question today is for the Minister of Rural Renewal. What is going on in
the Province right now with respect to its economy can be aptly described by
Charles Dickens novel, Tale of Two Cities . On one zone in the Province,
Zone 19, the unemployment rate is 7.7 per cent, and in much, if not most, of the
rest of the Province, it is much higher.
I would like to ask the minister this question: Is he aware that in Zone 6 on
the Northern Peninsula, the official unemployment rate is 36.3 per cent; in Zone
7 it is 33.2 per cent; in Zone 11 on the Baie Verte Peninsula it is 30 per cent;
in Zone 13 in the district of the Minister of Municipal Affairs it is 34.6 per
cent. If he is aware, how can he then turn around and justify in his document
the rural renewal strategy, this statement: Our economy, our economic recovery,
it is real, and our people recognize that it did not happen by accident.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TULK: First of all, Mr. Speaker, let me inform my friend, my member,
that the name of the department is Industry, Trade and Rural Development, not
development and rural renewal. It changed last spring.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, let me just say that you can very well justify what was
said in that report. The truth of the matter is that, this year in this
Province, we will reach record numbers in terms of employment; record numbers
since Stats Canada starting keeping statistics in this Province. It will average
out to be something about 211,000 if we keep going at the rate we are going now.
I believe in the month of October there were 216,000 people working in the
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, the highest since Confederation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TULK: That, Mr. Speaker, is how you justify statements like what is
in that report.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TULK: A supplementary, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, that is the tale of Economic Zone 19, but not
of the other nineteen zones.
I would like to ask the minister this: He is certainly aware of what the
report says on one hand, but the true statistics are contained in the
Newfoundland and Labrador zone profiles. Is he aware, for example, that in Zone
6, over 60 per cent of the people living in that zone got less than thirty weeks'
work last year? Is he aware that in Zone 7 over 60 per cent of the people living
there got less than thirty weeks' work last year? Is he aware that in Zone 11
less than 60 per cent of the people got less than thirty-six weeks' work last
year? Is he aware that in Zone 13, the four zones that I have talked about
today, that 60 per cent of the people in those zones got less than thirty weeks?
How can you stand and justify how great our economy is, particularly in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador, when it is not happening, Mr. Minister?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural
Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. gentleman that he knows
that I have stood in this House on a good many occasions and said that there are
parts of this Province that have not yet recovered from the shutdown of the
groundfish industry. I say it all over the Province. The zones that he just
named out correspond with - we know there is a problem on the Northern
Peninsula. The hon. gentleman knows there is a problem on the Northern
Peninsula. I suppose he does; I am not sure. We know there is a problem on
certain of parts of the Bonavista Peninsula, the tip of the Bonavista Peninsula,
for example. We know there is a problem in Ramea. We know there is problem in
Burgeo. We know there is a problem in Placentia & St. Mary's. We know
there is a problem in Trepassey. His own colleague stood in this House yesterday
and said there has been a vast improvement in the District of Ferryland. He said
that here yesterday.
Mr. Speaker, the truth of the matter is, the economy of Newfoundland has
never been better than it is today, and that is how you justify those kinds of
statements.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister this: Isn't it a fact,
witnessed by his own government's programs and policies, that this government
in rural Newfoundland and Labrador is not creating wealth but they are actually,
because of their policies, basically spreading poverty? We see that by adding
more licences to fish plants, we see it by relocating more jobs outside of
Newfoundland and Labrador.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. E. BYRNE: Why won't the minister stand and say that his Economic
Renewal Strategy for rural Newfoundland and Labrador has been completely an
abysmal failure, because that is exactly what the people are telling us, Mr.
Minister.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TULK: Why won't the hon. minister stand up and say that it is a
failure? Because it is not a failure, I say to the hon. gentleman. Yes, there
are still weak parts of this Province; we have admitted this.
Let me tell him about fish plant licences, a policy statement of which he was
a part, in which they were going to open up, under a leader that he stuck a
knife in, seventy-five more fish plants in the Province. They ended up in 1989
with 291 and in their 1996 policy book, we are going to up another seventy-five,
and he looks at me and says we are spreading poverty by giving out more
processing licences! Look in the mirror, my friend, before you look over here.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Premier and concerns the crisis in home care services
in the Province. Since a wait list was instituted on August 6 of this year, many
hundreds of people are waiting who will qualify for home care services but are
not getting them, and many dozens if not hundreds of those are in hospital beds
costing the government $1,000 or more a day because money is not there for home
care.
I want to ask the Premier, whose government is just spending $500,000 on the
consulting firm to try and save $6.5 million in health care, will he not doing
something about this crisis and find a way to let those people who are in
hospitals because they cannot get home care, get that home care, and let people
who are sick and need those hospital beds get into the hospital so they can get
that care?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BETTNEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the home care budget is one that is possibly the largest cost
driver in our health care system, as the member opposite is well aware. We have
major concerns with the escalating costs. The fact that at this present time
every region in our health care system has had to institute a wait list is one
that concerns us very seriously. We recognize that if you have people waiting in
hospital to be able to access home support services, this is not desirable.
However, at the present time, having increased the home support budget to $50
million this year, we now have a projected deficit for this year in the order of
$5 million. That is very, very alarming.
I have asked my officials to review all of the urgent and emergent wait lists
in the Province for my immediate review, and I will be taking that under
consideration within the next few days.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi,
supplementary.
MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the Premier.
Given that the Cabinet is likely meeting tomorrow morning, will the Premier,
with his Cabinet colleagues, discuss giving immediately to the home care sector
sufficient money to get those people who are stuck in hospital beds home so they
can get home care which is a heck of a lot cheaper than a $1,000 a day hospital
bed, and get them some home care so that those beds can be available to those
who need to go into hospital who are much sicker than those who are there? Will
the Premier do that to help out these people and help out the bottleneck in this
crisis?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, throughout the whole process of the health
boards, that we have had throughout the months of October and November, there
has been a consistent emphasis on evidence based decision making. This is
something that people throughout our Province, in all sectors, who attended
these forums said that it was important for government to do.
At the present time with the home care system, I have asked my officials to
review with each of the boards the emergent and urgent wait list areas, to
present that information to me so that I can take it under consideration in
order to decide what further action is required.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave
to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The Limitations Act.
I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to move the following
resolution:
Be it resolved by the House of Assembly as follows:
WHEREAS the Lieutenant-Governor in Council appointed a tribunal under
section
28 of the Provincial Court Act, 1991 to make recommendations on the salaries and
benefits of judges and the chief judge; and
WHEREAS the Minister of Justice and Attorney General asked the Tribunal under
section 28.1 of the Act to make recommendations on outstanding pension issues
for the years 1992 to 1996 in order to complete implementation of the Whalen
Report, and to make recommendations on salary and benefits issues, including
pension benefits, for the years 1996 to 2000 and 2000 to 2004; and
WHEREAS the Tribunal submitted its recommendations to the Minister on
September 14, 2001; and
WHEREAS the report of the 2001 Newfoundland Provincial Court Judges Salaries
and Benefits Tribunal was tabled in this hon. House on November 22, 2001 under
section 28.2 of the Act; and
WHEREAS the House of Assembly is required under
section 28.2 of the Act to
approve, vary or reject the report within 30 days of the it being tabled; and
WHEREAS government has decided to ask the House to accept some of the
recommendations, vary others and reject one of the recommendations;
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED THAT this hon. House accept the recommendations of
the 2001 Newfoundland Provincial Court Judges Salaries and Benefits Tribunal set
out with the necessary clarification in
Schedule A; and
THAT this House vary the recommendations as set out in
Schedule B for the
reasons given; and
THAT this House reject the recommendation set out in
Schedule C for the
reasons given; and
THAT the recommendations of the Tribunal that this hon. House accepts and
varies, as set out in Schedules A and B, be implemented effective April 1, 2002
in the manner set out in
Schedule D.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Before we proceed with the routine business, I want to
welcome to the Speaker's gallery today, a former Member for the District of
Baie Verte, Mr. Harold Small.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Answers to Questions for Which Notice has been Given
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.
MR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I rise to table information with response to the
request from the hon. Member for Waterford Valley.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I present another petition today from the residents of
Newfoundland and Labrador.
We, the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, wish to petition the House of
Assembly, with copies to the House of Commons, to oppose the bulk export of
water from this Province.
Every major resource, such as Churchill Falls, that has been developed in
Newfoundland and Labrador has resulted in the majority of benefits going outside
the Province.
It is time that we receive our full and fair share!
With water being one of the few resources remaining where we have the
opportunity to deliver maximum benefit through jobs, spinoff from secondary
processing, as well as royalties, we demand that any water sold must be bottled
and processed in this Province.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to present this petition today from the people who
have signed it. We have a number of these petitions already presented. We
continue to receive petitions, and we will do our duty in this House of Assembly
and present petitions on behalf of the people who have signed them.
Mr. Speaker, the people of this Province have concerns about the way the
resources of this Province have been managed in the past, and that is the reason
for this petition today. The people of this Province are demanding full and fair
share, their full and fair benefits from the water resources of this Province.
It is a resource that we can have full control over. It is under provincial
jurisdiction, and it is a resource that we should have full control over. It is
a resource, Mr. Speaker, that we should ensure we get maximum benefits from;
maximum benefits in terms of spinoff, maximum benefits in terms of royalties,
maximum benefits in terms of jobs.
I support the people who signed this petition. I support this petition, and I
am proud to present it today in the House of Assembly.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Private Members' Day
MR. SPEAKER: It is Wednesday, Private Members' Day, and today we are
dealing with the resolution presented by the Member for Waterford Valley.
The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased to rise to present a resolution that deals
with the incidents of child poverty in Canada, and in particular Newfoundland
and Labrador. The resolution has been communicated to all members and it says
that the child poverty rates have declined in all provinces except in
Newfoundland and Labrador in the past few years.
Over the past twenty years, our neighbouring province, Prince Edward Island,
has been able to reduce its child poverty rate from 22.7 per cent in 1981 to
12.5 per cent, according to the last stats that is available, and they would
deal with 1988. In those same years, Newfoundland's poverty rate for children
increased from 21.6 per cent to 25.3 per cent.
Mr. Speaker, longitudinal studies show that families, if they are tracked
over time, tell us that a greater number of children than those that might
appear at first glance are affected by very high child poverty rates. We also
know that the child poverty rates for single parent families are extremely high,
higher than the numbers and the statistics which I just quoted.
The 2001 report of the National Council of Welfare shows, in considerable
detail, the impact of child poverty on family lifestyles and on family
expectations.
We all know from the Williams Royal Commission, from the Canning Report, that
there is a direct connection between socio-economic status and educational
achievement. That has been demonstrated not only by those studies but by
numerous studies that have been done over the last twenty-five years.
We also note, according to the latest information available, that as many as
40 per cent of the recipients who are forced to go and get their daily food from
food banks in Newfoundland and Labrador are indeed children. We believe that we
can do more. We are calling on the House today to give a new commitment to try
to reduce Newfoundland's rate of child poverty.
The resolution asks that we would give a commitment that we will reduce the
child poverty rate in Newfoundland to national levels, or below the national
levels, by 2005. We are asking that the House pass this motion which will ask
the government to prepare a comprehensive child poverty reduction strategy and
place sufficient money into that strategy to begin the process. That is the
intent of this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, on November 24, 1989, in the Federal Parliament of Canada, the
House of Commons, the following resolution was moved unanimously. It said,
"This House seeks to achieve the goal of eliminating Poverty among Canadian
children by the year 2000."
We know that was not achieved. As a matter of fact, we know that across this
country, in the last twelve years, the rate of poverty among children has
increased, not decreased.
I quote from a statement by the Federal Minister of Finance, Paul Martin, on
November 19, 1998, nine years after that resolution was passed unanimously in
the House of Commons. He said, in 1998: "We should essentially establish
the elimination of child poverty as a great national objective, not unlike what
we did with the case of the deficit."
Mr. Speaker, Prime Minister Jean Chrtien, in the summer of 2000, said the
following, "We are a nation of unmatched diversity and tolerance,... a
nation unshakably committed to ensuring that none is left behind as we move
ahead... This means ensuring that all Canadian children have the best possible
start in life."
Furthermore, in the federal budget, and in the federal Speech From the
Throne, there were comments of commitment being made to Canadian children,
including children of Newfoundland and Labrador. For example, in the federal
Speech From the Throne in 2001, the following statement is made, "Now
Canadians must undertake another national project... to ensure that no Canadian
child suffers from the debilitating effects of poverty...".
In that same speech another sentence appeared. It says, and I quote,
"Securing a good start in life for children is the only way to ensure they
are ready to learn, to seize opportunity as adults and to contribute to the
building of their country."
Mr. Speaker, I searched the Speech From the Throne for this Province, made on
March 13, 2001, and I did not find any statements in this Speech from the
Throne, of this year, in our House, whereby similar commitments are made to the
children of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, the point I want to make is that eliminating child poverty is
not just a national strategy. I believe it is a national strategy, but we also
have to have a provincial strategy as well.
Mr. Speaker, I searched through the Speech From the Throne of this year, and
while there is a comment about the Child Advocate on page 4, I did not find any
comments that match the comments made in the federal Speech From the Throne. I
found no comments by the Minister of Finance in Newfoundland and Labrador,
matching the comments made by the federal Minister of Finance. Mr. Speaker, that
is not to say there isn't a genuine concern about poverty among all members of
this House. Today is an opportunity where we can focus on this issue in this
House. We can bring a children's agenda to this House. We can commit
ourselves, as members of this House representing the people of all of
Newfoundland and Labrador, we can commit ourselves to do what we should be
doing, and that is trying to do more to eliminate child poverty.
Across this country since 1989, child poverty from 1989 to 1998, when the
latest stats were available and they are telling us this information, child
poverty has increased by 39 per cent. Instead of going down over that period of
time, it went up by 39 per cent. In 1989 in Canada, approximately 14.3 per cent
of children lived in poverty. The most recent statistics tell us that about 20
per cent of Canadian children now live in situations that are substantially
worse than the average.
In Newfoundland and Labrador, the latest stats tell us it is 25 per cent, an
increase over the last number of years. Almost one in five children in Canada
live in poverty. In Newfoundland, that is one in four.
Mr. Speaker, let me make the point that children are not poor on their own.
Children are poor because their moms and their dads and their guardians are
poor. That is why they are poor. Children are not born poor. They become poor
because their parents cannot afford to provide for them the essentials of food
and good nutrition and clothing and housing. Mr. Speaker, that is where poverty
begins. It begins in the home; it begins with parents because parents are poor.
We need to ask ourselves: What are we doing in this Province, what are we
doing in this nation, to tackle our social deficit? For poor families, the
situation remains very bleak. Mr. Speaker, the results of the economic boom of
the 1990s did not reach the nation's poorest. When I listen today to the
government minister, the Deputy Premier, tell us that the employment rate in
Newfoundland and Labrador is the very best it has ever been, Mr. Speaker, the
stats will show us that not everybody is sharing equally in these economic
opportunities. Vulnerable children and their families shoulder a very unfair
financial and social burden during severe economic times. During the last
recession in 1990-1991, the child poverty rate in Canada climbed in those years
when we were having a recession in 1990-1991. When we got out of that recession
in 1990-1991, the rate continued to climb until 1996. Therefore, what we are
saying is that when we have poor times, the poorest of the families in our
country feel the effects first, and the effects last the longest.
Mr. Speaker, the provincial trends tend to follow the national trends. Since
1992, the rates have fluctuated up and down. In 1998, the child poverty rates
for all provinces, except in Newfoundland and Labrador, went down. I repeat, the
latest stats tell us that in all provinces, except in Newfoundland and Labrador
from 1992 to 1998, the poverty rates gradually went down with respect to child
poverty, except in Newfoundland and Labrador. For example, 1997-1998 in Nova
Scotia there was a drop of 4.1 per cent in the child poverty rate. In that same
two year period in Prince Edward Island the rate dropped 3.7 per cent. Manitoba,
in those two years 1997-1998, had a drop of 3.5 per cent, and British Columbia
saw a drop in the child poverty rate of 3.2 per cent. In Newfoundland and
Labrador however, for those two same years 1997-1998, the rate went up from 24.6
per cent in 1997 to 25.3 per cent in 1998. Mr. Speaker, these are not my
figures. They are the figures that are put forward by The National Council of
Welfare Reports Child Poverty Profiles. The data dates 1998, is the latest data
available, and it was published this past summer.
Mr. Speaker, I note as well that 40 per cent of the people who go to food
banks are children. I was listening a few days ago to a report that said the
Salvation Army expects to have to provide 5,000 Christmas hampers this year.
Yesterday I had a note from St. Vincent De Paul Society saying they were
expected to provide up to 500 Christmas hampers this year. We know that there is
a food bank that operates at our university. Mr. Speaker, we have to come to
grips with the issue of poverty in general and with child poverty in particular.
I want to compliment some initiatives of this government because they are
doing some things that are very right. I want to say to them that when they
decided to eliminate the clawback on child tax benefits, which was also done by
Manitoba and New Brunswick, that was a good idea. The Member for St. John's
West pressured this government day after day, question after question until the
government realized that it was the right thing to do, and they did it. I
compliment them for doing it. It was totally and completely wrong for the
federal government to make provisions for child tax benefits and then for this
government to say to people on social assistance that as you get that money we
are going to claw it back from you. That was a good initiative.
Mr. Speaker, I compliment the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs on
his announcement this week. They are going to do something about social housing.
There was an announcement by the minister two days ago that they are going to
put new investments into housing. That is very encouraging.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. H. HODDER: Just one moment to clue up, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. H. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I also want to compliment the Mother Baby
Nutrition Supplement that was announced two days ago by my colleague, the
Minister of Human Resources and Employment. During debate this afternoon we hope
to bring this message forward to all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that we
are going to, in this House, do whatever we can to tackle the problem of child
poverty because, Mr. Speaker, our responsibility is to our children. We want to
bring their agenda here, and nobody in this House owns a child poverty issue. It
is an issue for all of us on both sides of the House. I look forward to the
opportunity this afternoon to bring a children's agenda right to this
Legislature.
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to begin by saying the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador
recognizes that child poverty in our Province does exist as well as in the
entire country, and we recognize it certainly as a serious issue. I would like
to thank the member opposite for raising this issue for discussion in this hon.
House today.
The government welcomes every opportunity to discuss this very important
issue. The government believes that one child in poverty is one too many. I am
pleased to have this time to elaborate on the important work government is doing
to address this serious issue which concerns us all. This government remains
committed to working towards the goal of eliminating child poverty in this
Province.
Mr. Speaker, child poverty represents a much broader issue. Poor children
live in poor families. A broad range of strategies are needed to address the
factors contributing to poverty. When discussing low income families it is
important to recognize how statistics, used to determine the child poverty rates
in each of the provinces, are calculated. The approaches used to measure child
poverty are complex and the resulting information provides us only with
approximate estimates of the current status of the levels of poverty. The
information available is more accurate at the national level than for a
province, particularly of this size, because of issues associated with the size
of the sample population selected for survey. I make these points, Mr. Speaker,
to emphasis the government's concern when ensuring we have the best
information available to fully understand the problem of child poverty.
Under the Strategic Social Plan, we are investing significant resources in
developing a good information system at the community and regional levels to
gain a better appreciation of the local impacts of issues such as child poverty.
The community account system will provide local data on these types of issues.
Current information, such as measures of child poverty, are only available at
the provincial level. Without more detailed information on the disposable
incomes of families at the local level, their buying patterns and the local cost
of living, it is difficult to arrive at conclusions about the level and extent
of poverty. The work being done on the community accounts is attracting national
and international attention because of its groundbreaking work in this area.
Children and families are classified as living in poverty when a family's
annual income level falls under what is termed to be the low income threshold.
The low income threshold is calculated depending on the size of the community
and family size. This is the calculation that is used by Statistics Canada as
well as with such advocacy groups as the National Council of Welfare.
To give a better sense of how this low income threshold can vary depending on
family size in geographic area, I would like to use a few relevant examples
using 2000 Statistics Canada low-income cut off information. In a rural area,
such as one of Newfoundland and Labrador's rural communities, a family of four
would be classified as living below the poverty line if their yearly income,
before taxes, was below $23,892. The same family of four living in a larger
center, such as Grand Fall, Windsor or Stephenville, would be classified as
living below the poverty line if their yearly income was below $27,401. If that
family of four lived in a more urban setting, such as St. John's, they would
be classified as living below the poverty line if their yearly income was below
$29,653.
As you can see, Mr. Speaker, it is difficult to pinpoint a standard poverty
line for the entire Province, or the entire country for that matter. Despite the
variances in income levels, family and community sizes, the Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador takes the numbers attributed to our Province in
relation to child poverty very seriously. The poverty rate, as it presently
exists, is too high. It is also important to recognize that while income may
vary within different types of communities and different types of families, the
negative effects of low income or poverty on a family and its children are
universal.
Mr. Speaker, there is compelling evidence that family income has a major
effect on a child's well-being. Data shows that as family income rises, the
child's chances of developing to his or her full potential increases
accordingly, and the poverty cycle is thus broken. In recognition of these
trends, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador takes a two-pronged approach
to address issues of poverty: Firstly, government is seeking long-term
strategies to find long-term solutions to improve the income levels of people in
this Province. The best way to do this is through sustainable employment and
through a range of measures focused not only on social assistance recipients,
but also on low income working families. Secondly, government recognizes that
many children in our Province need necessary supports immediately. We have
implement measures to address these immediate needs through prevention and early
intervention programs.
Mr. Speaker, the broad long-term strategic policies being pursued by this
government, including the Strategic Social Plan and the Jobs and Growth report,
reflect a government's public commitment to seeking lasting solutions. These
policies reflect initiatives that benefit the people of the Province in the long
term, rather than ones that offer short-term solutions for immediate political
gain. The long-term approach is working, and we are seeking positive results
within our Province.
Mr. Speaker, employment is the real key to reducing and eliminating poverty.
The government has made economic development and long-term sustainable jobs its
number one priority. Our policies are having an impact. This is turning out to
be a record-setting year job growth in the Province. The Province has recorded
strong employment growth on a year-over-year basis for every month in this year.
Average monthly employment is up by 6,800 since the start of the year, as
compared with the year 2000. Based on year-to-year data, we expect record annual
employment of about 211,000 this year, and, Mr. Speaker, we have not seen this
level of employment growth since the early 1990s. Our economy is recovering,
growing, and diversifying. Jobs are being created.
Mr. Speaker, along with improving the economy comes improving income levels
for family and declining social assistance caseloads. In October, 1998, our
social assistance caseloads stood at 31,672. In October of 2001, this declined
to 28,423. In addition, the number of children on the social assistance caseload
is declining faster than the decline in our overall provincial child population,
suggesting there are factors at work other than demographic which lead us to
believe that our initiatives are having, indeed, a positive impact.
In the years 1998-2001, the child population declined at a rate of between 3
per cent and 4 per cent annually. During the same period, the number of children
in families receiving social assistance declined at twice that rate, between 7
per cent and 8 per cent.
Mr. Speaker, in our view, this is evidence our policies are working. Those
families with the lowest incomes have improved their circumstances. While we
acknowledge that many of these families may still be living on low incomes, they
no longer require social assistance. Their incomes are rising and the depth of
poverty is lessening.
Mr. Speaker, this improvement in the economy, along with a decrease in the
social assistance caseload, indicates that we are moving in the right direction:
government initiatives, having increased family income, as well as provided
increased opportunities for people to prepare for and enter the workforce.
In 1999, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador participated in the
launch of the National Child Benefit. This partnership between the Province and
the federal government provides additional resources directly to address the
health and well-being of our children. Through the National Child Benefit
reinvestment initiatives, the Province invests and reinvests approximately $10
million annually in initiatives that help reduce child poverty and help families
make the transition to work through prevention and early intervention programs.
In1999, the Department of Human Resources and Employment introduced the
Newfoundland and Labrador Child Benefit. Previously, low income families facing
barriers to employment were financially worse off accepting employment due to
the loss of benefits for their children. The NLCB is provided in conjunction
with the Canada Child Tax Benefit to all families whose income is less than
$21,744. The NLCB is intended to reduce barriers to employment by providing
stable benefits for children as parents move out of social assistance.
Regardless of employment status, families do not experience a loss in benefits
for their children, if they are a low income family. Approximately 21,000
families a year receive the NLCB, a significant increase over the approximate
12,300 families who availed of social assistance benefits before this program
was introduced.
Mr. Speaker, the Department of Human Resources and Employment continues to
work on a range of initiatives to remove the disincentives to social assistance
programs that interfere with people's efforts to find and keep employment.
These initiatives include an extended drug card program. Clients now maintain
their drug coverage for six months once they leave social assistance for
employment.
Other initiatives that make the transition to employment easier include an
increase in child care subsidies. Applicants for social assistance are permitted
to retain higher levels of liquid assets, and families who are successful in
finding employment are able to retain more of their earnings without seeing
social assistance benefits reduced.
Along with these initiatives, the Department of Human Resources and
Employment has also implemented programs that create labour market
opportunities. Last year, 2,400 income support clients received a range of
support through new found jobs.
This fiscal year, 2001-2002, the department will spend $3 million on this
program. We have also actively assisted 2,500 other clients to access the
benefits and services of Human Resources Development Canada by establishing
identification and referral services that ensure these clients are aware of
their eligibility for such benefits.
Indeed, Mr. Speaker, this government has been taking seriously the concerns
with regard to child poverty. As I just outlined for this hon. House, we have
initiated a number of very important and worthwhile initiatives.
Mr. Speaker, if I could just turn to the resolution under debate today, I
think the resolution itself is flawed and really does not adequately represent
the situation as it exists today. So, to the hon. member's benefit, I move,
seconded by the hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, the following
amendment to the resolution before this House. Mr. Speaker, the resolution
proposes that we strike the:
WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador
has not demonstrated a strong commitment to the reduction of child poverty in
our Province, and replace it with:
WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and
Labrador is committed to ongoing improvements to the range of programs and
services aimed at reducing child poverty in our Province.
Further, that we strike: THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that this House call on the
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to adopt social and economic strategies
that will reduce child poverty in this Province to national levels or below by
the year 2005; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this House ask the government to
present a comprehensive child poverty reduction strategy with sufficient
budgetary commitments to achieve acceptable targets in the March 2002 provincial
budget.
The amendment proposes to strike these two and replace it with: THEREFORE
IT RESOLVED that the House endorses the need for continued emphasis on
comprehensive social and economic strategies aimed at reducing child poverty
rates in this Province to national levels or below in a reasonable period of
time.
Mr. Speaker, I pass these on to Your Honour for your consideration. I suggest
that they are in order and I think they improve on the resolution before the
House.
On this side of the House, aside from what I have just outlined, initiatives
that we have undertaken, we will continue, as a government, our strong
commitment of working with our communities across the Province in finding
solutions to our economic and social challenges, as is the approach outlined in
the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador's Strategic Social Plan.
Currently, six steering committees have been established across the Province and
we will continue to work with these committees on issues of concern in their
given regions that they recognize they are priorities for the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. SMITH: Just one minute to conclude, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, we will continue to battle this serious issue on
behalf of our children; however, improving economy, improving family incomes,
thanks to key supports such as the Newfoundland and Labrador Child Benefit, and
our success rate with employment programs and supports, proves that we are on
the right track towards a future where children will no longer be in need in
this Province.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Before we proceed, I would like to have a copy of the hon. member's
amendment and recess for a minute to consider this amendment.
Recess
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair has considered the amendments put forward by the hon. the minister
and, in looking at the requirements for amendments, they meet the conditions
outlined in Beauchesn e, and therefore rules that the amendments to the
resolution are in order.
The hon. the Member for St. John's West.
MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is my pleasure to get up and speak on this resolution today on child
poverty. No subject has produced so much earnest talk and so little effective
action as child poverty. We have had committees, summits, conferences and
resolutions like the one we are discussing today. We had the Patricia Canning
report, the Select Committee on Children's Interests and the Rowe report, all
sorts of goals, and we have developed strategies like the Strategic Social Plan,
but the grim statistics remain the same. Newfoundland, to its shame, still leads
the country in the number of children who live in poverty.
When I had the honor of being elected to this House of Assembly almost five
years ago, Newfoundland and Labrador led the country in the percentage of our
children who were poor. Sadly, today we still lead the country. I heard the hon.
the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development standing up and talking
about how we are leading in statistics employment. It is good to lead in
statistics employment, but it is very, very sad when we lead in statistics such
as child poverty.
There is one thing for certain that we have learned from our studies, and
that is that poverty is bad for children. Persistent hunger, inadequate and
unhealthy housing, the absence of other basic needs and the inability to
participate in extracurricular activities, the programs that are offered outside
the school, all of this does real damage to children and prevents them from
developing to their potential.
Patricia Canning, in her report, Special Matters, said there is definitely a
relationship between poverty and a child's ability to learn. Low
socio-economic status is strongly and consistently associated with poor academic
performance. The cycle is perpetuated because children who do poorly in school
are likely to drop out, and when they drop out they are likely not to get good
employment. When they do not get good employment, they do not raise their
economic status, so the cycle is perpetuated and their children live in poverty.
There are other studies as well that link a wide range of medical problems
with poorer children. Children who live in economically and socially challenged
situations are also at risk of developing behavior problems. How often do we see
children who bear the burden of being poor acting out with their friends, acting
out in school? Mainly, that is a defense that they put up. It is their way of
masking the situation. Can we really blame them?
A couple of years ago I visited an elementary school and there was a display
of posters. Madam Speaker, you yourself referred to children's
interpretation
of things there today when you stood. A statement on one of the posters from a
young Grade 5 student was very profound, and it stuck with me. They were asked
to describe poverty. This child said: Poverty means pretending you forgot your
lunch. So, that is right from -
MR. TULK: Who said it? You are not serious.
MS S. OSBORNE: A Grade 5 child, I say to the hon. Minister of Industry,
Trade and Technology, was describing poverty and said: Poverty means pretending
you forgot your lunch. Because they don't have any lunch to take, they go to
school and pretend that they forgot it. That is out of the mouth of a child. If
we had lived in a situation like that, wouldn't we have behavior problems?
Wouldn't you act out yourself if you lived like that? Poor children are over
represented in remedial classrooms as slow learners and things, and once again,
as Patricia Canning stated in her report, it is very difficult to learn when you
have an empty stomach.
The list of fallout indicators goes on. Now, the question is: What are we
doing about it? In 1989 the House of Commons pledged to end child poverty in
Canada by the year 2000. Guess what? We are a few short weeks away from the year
2002 and the child poverty rates are up. Almost half a million more children
live in poverty now than did in Canada when that promise was made.
The National Council on Welfare in September of this year pointed out some
groups of particular concern. Families with young children are more likely to be
poor than families with older children. Young children are also more likely to
live in poverty for longer periods of time than older children. Children living
with single parents, especially single parent mothers, are more likely to be
poor. The poverty rate in 1998 for single parent mothers was 52.9 per cent
compared to 10.7 per cent for two parent families. This translates into a
disproportionate number of poor children living with single parent mothers.
Aboriginal children have extremely high poverty rates. The 1996 census reported
that three out of every five aboriginal children live in poverty. Many children
live in poverty and they live in working poor families. Even though working poor
have jobs they struggle to meet their family needs.
You know, it is a myth that all poor children live in families where the
adults don't work because they would rather stay home and collect welfare or
EI. Even with a full time job some families simply cannot earn enough to support
themselves. Getting a job does not necessarily mean, Madam Speaker, that that is
a ticket out of poverty. A good job that pays enough money to adequately support
a family is out of reach of many poor parents. There are barriers to finding,
accepting and holding a good paying job. Once again, the parents who are not in
a position to be able to find a job are probably parents who were children who
lived in poverty and therefore had to drop out of school.
Governments, when pressed on the matter, will come back with responses
describing social programs they have initiated. This happened right here in
October when the Minister of Human Resources and Employment was responding to
the 2001 Report of the National Council on Welfare. That report showed that the
poverty rate for children under eighteen in this Province is increasing, while
most other provinces are seeing declines.
In responding, instead of focusing on facts such as the rise in the child
poverty rate, the minister cited the initiatives taken by this government. He
also spoke today about how the amount of people living on social assistance is
declining, much of that is attributed to the out-migration that this Province
has seen. When we cite initiatives, a hungry six year old really does not care
what initiatives have been taken by government. A hungry six year old worries
about the pain in his belly because he is hungry.
In spite of all the programs and initiatives, the request for assistance from
food banks are higher than ever before, particularly in rural Newfoundland. We
heard the hon. Member for Kilbride today up quoting numbers from rural
Newfoundland, from the Northern Peninsula, and as well from the tip of the
Bonavista Peninsula. The Minister of Human Resources spoke of the low income cut
off. In many rural communities there is not a low income cut off, there is just
no income at all. More requests on food banks means a higher demand. How is this
for another startling fact? Forty percent of the food bank users are children.
That does not mean that children go and line up at the food banks. What that
means is that the parents who go to the food banks are representative of 40 per
cent of the users.
I remember back a couple of years ago when the general manager of the
Community Food Sharing Association, who represents food banks right across the
Province, asked for help from the government. I think it was about this time of
year. It was coming into the fall because there was a particular high demand on
food banks and the food bank shelves were empty. He came to the government and
asked for some assistance, and at that time an employee from the Department of
Human Resources and Employment said: We cannot give you help, to give you help
would be to admit that there is a problem. That was a quote that the chairperson
of the Community Food Sharing Association told me that an employee from the
Department of Human Resources and Employment said to him. They could not give
help because to give help to the food banks would be to admit that there is a
problem. Whether they choose to admit it or not, there really is a problem.
When we put the onus for filling the shelves of the food banks on the people
it reminds me of devolution of responsibility in a way, and you know the kind of
devolution that we have. We have hospital boards, community health boards,
institutional boards out there and they absorb the flack from the Department of
Health and Community Services. We have school boards out there to absorb
responsibility from the Department of Education, and it seems that we have food
banks to absorb the responsibility of feeding our hungry children. Our people,
the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, have the reputation of being very
generous but this government really should not be imposing on their generosity
by expecting them to be the one to fill the food bank shelves.
Living with hunger is not the only indicator of poverty. Our families, our
children, must have adequate housing. There is a serious lack of housing,
adequate housing, social housing, and subsidized housing here in the Province. I
know because I constantly get calls from people asking me to advocate on their
behalf. The inspector from Newfoundland and Labrador Housing has been out to
visit them. They have been approved and are on the list. They call in
week-after-week asking if I have heard anything; have they been approved?
Unfortunately, because the list is so long, I have to give them the
disappointing news from the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation: No, I
am sorry, you haven't been approved again this week. So they continue to wait,
and wait in apartments that are too small, in apartments that are cold, where
the rent is high; really in inadequate housing. The utility bills are not
subsidized. After paying those bills for the rent and things there is very, very
little money left for food.
It was only yesterday that I spoke with a young mother of a three month old
boy. She pleaded with me for help. She said: My rent is so expensive, and now
with the baby, the milk is so costly, the diapers and the other needs for the
baby, after I pay for the needs for the baby, the rent and the light bill, I do
not have any money left over for groceries. There is no food in my cupboard.
I know the list for social housing is long, but I do not know if members of
this House realize that some of the units in Newfoundland and Labrador Housing
are vacant for as long as three months. Why is this? Because there are not
enough resources. There are not enough people employed at Newfoundland and
Labrador Housing, Madam Speaker, to go out and do the maintenance on these
units, so the units are left empty for a longer period of time than they should
be. This goes really to mismanagement because private landlords would never let
their places stay vacant for three months because they did not have somebody to
go in and do the maintenance. Where there is a bottom line these apartment would
be cleaned up, painted, and a tenant in them as soon as possible. That would be
more frugal in the long run because government would be collecting rent on the
units, and these units are not owned by the government. These units are owned by
the taxpayers of the Province. So it is the taxpayers dollars that are being
wasted when these units are being left empty. In the meantime, while we have all
these vacant units out there that are staying vacant because of lack of
resources for maintenance, our families are inadequately housed.
The Strategic Social Plan looks good on paper, and is supposed to be about
various agencies partnering in the best interests of our people. I would like to
say today, Madam Speaker, how about getting government departments to partner on
behalf of our poor?
It is interesting to note that in British Columbia, between 1996 and 1998,
because of additional help for low income families and more cash for subsidized
housing, child poverty fell significantly. We have been led to believe all along
that our capacity to address social priorities has been limited by economic
forces, but evidence shows that European countries that face similar challenges
have maintained and strengthened social investments in families and people who
are vulnerable, the vulnerable populations. Their records, I would like to say,
Madam Speaker, are far better than those of North American countries. For
instance, in the United States, they are ranked highest in wealth but highest in
poverty. Canada is close to the top in terms of wealth, and ranks in the middle
of the pack in terms of poverty. Out of the seventeen countries studied, Sweden,
on the other hand, is close to the bottom as far as being a wealthy country is
concerned, but it is has the least amount of poverty of all seventeen countries.
Clearly, this is proof that it can be done. If a country with little wealth can
have the least poverty, then we should be ashamed of ourselves, where we stand
financially as a wealthy country, that we cannot.
It makes sound economic sense to invest in the well-being of our children to
break the poverty cycle, not continue to perpetuate it.
MADAM SPEAKER (M. Hodder): Order, please!
I remind the hon. member that her time is up.
MS S. OSBORNE: By leave, Madam Speaker?
MADAM SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MADAM SPEAKER: By leave.
MS S. OSBORNE: A wealth of evidence shows that more efforts put into
resources and time for parenting can markedly improve the life prospects of
children at risk. The question is: Does government have the political will to
really move on this front?
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JONES: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
I rise today to speak to the private member's motion that has been put
forward by the hon. Member for Waterford Valley, and the amendment that has been
put forward by my colleague, the Member for Port au Port.
I certainly support the amendment of this resolution. I think this is a very
important debate that is taking place in this House today. I want to certainly
commend the member opposite for bringing this particular motion to the House, to
have this important issue dealt with within the House of Assembly.
I think it is important to realize that in order to continue to fight the
issue of child poverty we also have to continue to raise the profile of the
particular issue and certainly how it affects the many children and families
within our Province and across the country as well.
Obviously, any opportunity to address this particular issue and to speak to
what government's direction and agenda has been, and continues to be, in
addressing the issues of child poverty is always good for us, and it is always
good for us to hear the perspective, the views, the opinions and the suggestions
of other members in this House and other groups in our Province as to the
direction and the initiatives that are required on such an important front.
Madam Speaker, we obviously live in a Province where we are continuously
reaching out to one another, especially those who are in need. We have a
cultural legacy in Newfoundland and Labrador in each one of our communities of
supporting one another, and I guess there have been many communities that have
demonstrated this, many families who have demonstrated this, and many people
over the years.
In Newfoundland and Labrador we can always say the doors are open, the
kitchens are open, and those in need are always guaranteed to be supported by
communities and by the people who live there, including those who suffer in
poverty. I think we have all done it ourselves on many occasions where we have
reached out to individual families, to children and to people within our
community who have certainly needed our help at one particular time or another.
I think today, in talking about child poverty, I have to think about the many
instances that I have seen in my own district where organizations and charitable
groups have organized fund-raisers in support of specific causes that are
centered around child poverty, where there have been drives for clothing that
have been orchestrated by a number of groups within the Province to ensure that
children have warm clothes, and certainly the initiatives of this government,
Madam Speaker.
This government, since 1998 in particular, have launched a number of
initiatives in response to child poverty in Newfoundland and Labrador, for
families who are living on low income and need the support mechanisms that we
can provide as a government. I think of the National Child Benefit and the
Newfoundland and Labrador Child Benefit in particular, where we were able to put
more money into the pockets of families around our Province and allowed them to
have that little bit of extra money to be able to do things. I think about the
$10 million investment in programs for children. That ranged in everything from
breakfast programs to lunch programs to family resource centres and parenting
programs, mother-baby allowances and so on. I think about the $36 million
investment for early childhood development for the improvements to children's
care to early literacy and to food supplements.
I really feel that these programs are programs that we should highlight
because they are the ones that are actually getting to people directly and are
actually benefitting people more directly. There are programs in which we have
been able to contribute to a certain degree to lessen the burden, the often
burden and stresses that families who live in poverty are faced with. I am
certainly supportive of these programs and will continue to support these
programs.
In terms of the Family Resource Centres alone, Madam Speaker, we have since
1998 established seventy-four hub and satellite resource centres around the
Province. These programs, although they focus on children ages zero to six
years, are available to all families in those communities and the program places
emphasis on reaching out to vulnerable families as a result of factors such as
low income, single parenting, isolation, disability, youth and inexperience with
parenting. I have a number of these centres in my own district. As well, there
are some in other regions of Labrador and Newfoundland and I can tell you
first-hand, having spent time at these centres and becoming familiar with the
programs and the services that they offer, that they are contributing to the
welfare of families and children. For the first time ever, in a lot of cases,
these families have the opportunity to belong to a particular centre or
particular program in which they can draw on the support mechanism of other
people that are in the situations that they are in as well. Also, it is an
opportunity for them to learn and develop in terms of a family unit, not only
their children's development needs but also their parental development needs.
We have seen this in a lot of communities that normally would never ever have
the opportunity to be able to be provided those types of support mechanisms.
These are communities that are in some of the most remote, some of the most
isolated and some of the most rural regions of our Province, as well as being in
the urban areas of our Province. We have those centres as well in this
particular region, in the Corner Brook region, in the Gander region, and these
are all serving to enhance the needs of family and children that are certainly
affected by poverty and other particular circumstances.
I also want to outline a number of the things that we have been able to do
under the Early Childhood Development Agreement. This is a new agreement and,
although it is a partnership with the federal government, we have certainly
looked to different groups around the Province, those groups that work and deal
with children and families that live in poverty, in terms of how these
expenditures should be directed. We have certainly been able to, this year
alone, introduce a number of priority programs, that have been felt by these
individuals will have an impact upon families within society.
We introduced the mother-baby nutritional benefit for low-income families
which will be incorporated with the mother-baby food allowance. We have allowed
support for early literacy and transition to school by funding the Early
Childhood Literacy Programs and pre-kindergarten orientation sessions. We have
allowed for the enhancement of existing family resource centers, as well as
allowing for the start-up of five new centers within the Province. We have been
able to invest some funding in the healthy baby clubs and to create some new
ones, which we did in various regions all around the Province that were
certainly identified by health boards and through the Strategic Social Plan
process. We were able to contribute to that. We also provide enhancements to
child care centers by increasing the number of subsidized child care spaces. We
introduced the monetary supplement for early childhood educators, and increasing
supports for family home child care. As well, we were able to strengthen the
early intervention services for children with developmental disabilities, and
children diagnosed with autism.
Madam Speaker, these were just a number of programs that we were able to add
in this particular year under that program, and over the course of the next four
or five years we will continue to build on those programs through that
particular support mechanism.
I think, Madam Speaker, it is important to note that poverty is basically the
symptom we are dealing with and the real problem is the cause of poverty. That
is where we need to focus our attention, obviously, as a government and as
society. The cause is the lack of employment. I think it has been indicated by
other speakers here today, wherever we have a lack of employment, we will always
have the symptoms of poverty. That is the issue that certainly has to be
addressed.
The level of employment growth that we are projecting this year is far lower
than what we have seen since 1990. Basically, in order to address the issues of
child poverty, we also have to address the issues of lack of employment within
our Province. That has certainly been the intention of our agenda, through the
jobs and growth strategy, through the new Department of Industry, Trades and
Rural Renewal, and in terms of being able to ensure that people in all areas of
our Province have opportunities for employment and have opportunities for good
paying jobs, not just any job. That will certainly be the key to reducing
poverty.
We have also been able to increase the minimum wage so that people who work
in low-income jobs or minimum wage jobs have access to a little more money for
the work that they do, and certainly this will, obviously, play a role as well.
In my own district, in particular, I have seen, since I was elected in 1996,
a tremendous shift in terms of the social assistance recipients who are in my
district. I go back to 1996 when many of you heard me talk, in this House, quite
often about the number of families who are living on low income or without
income, and the children who are living in poverty within my own district. I can
honestly say that the strategic programs and efforts that we have made, over the
particular period of the last five or six years, have contributed to significant
change. I can say that with a great deal of certainty, Madam Speaker, because in
1996 there were three social services offices in my district alone to address
the need of financial assistance. I cannot give you the exact number of
caseloads at that particular time, but today that job is being performed through
one office with one worker, because we have seen such a decline in the numbers
of people who are dependent upon the social services programs in that particular
area.
In one area of the district, in the Labrador Straits region alone, the last
time I checked, which was back a couple of months ago, I think there were
thirty-three people on the caseload out a population of over 3,000. I think
those are remarkable numbers. I would certainly hope that at some point we will
eliminate that entirely, and I would hope that at some point other areas in the
Province will have the luxury of seeing the growth and the progress within their
own regions that I have had the good fortune of seeing within my own region.
I will just give you a couple of examples, because, you know, sometimes it is
hard to believe that areas of the Province could make such a remarkable
transition. I go back to 1995 and 1996 when we were dealing, no doubt, with
large numbers of people who, after the moratorium, required employment. The
opportunities were not there for them. We are highly dependent upon the fishing
industry.
Madam Speaker, just in the last year alone we were able to attract private
sector investment to build and open the first ever shrimp plant in Labrador
which employed 120 people in one particular community, in the community of
Charlottetown.
I want to think back to the community of Black Tickle, which has probably
been one of the greatest challenges that I have had in my political career in
terms of being able to help this community to diversify, look at new
opportunity, and be able to overcome the great burden of social welfare and
poverty.
I remember back in 1997, when I stood in this House and talked -
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!
I remind the hon. member that her time is up.
MS JONES: By leave to clue up, Madam Speaker?
MADAM SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have time to conclude?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MADAM SPEAKER: By leave.
MS JONES: At that particular time people in this region were receiving
the same amount in social assistance benefits as all other recipients in the
Province. We were able to increase the benefits in Labrador and in the area of
Torngat Mountains, where I am sure you have heard the member for that area talk
quite often and extensively on the need as well, for different social programs.
Madam Speaker, in cluing up my comments today - I guess what I want to say is
to reiterate the comments by my hon. colleague, and that is: any child in this
Province who lives in poverty is one child too many. We always have to be
cognizant of people - each and everyone of us, as governments, as oppositions -
who live in Newfoundland and Labrador, conscious of this issue, and work towards
it collectively, because it has to be the efforts of all of us to counteract
child poverty.
In closing, I want to say that the federal government as well, has a place in
this particular program. Whenever I read of a $36 billion budget that is sitting
in the EI program in Ottawa it really frustrates me as to why investments like
this are not being made available to help us counteract the serious problems of
child poverty that we face all across the country, because as you know, one in
every five children across the country do live in poverty.
While we have implemented some wonderful programs in Newfoundland and
Labrador, which the outcomes of those programs can only be measured over time.
We have implemented significant initiatives in the last two to three years. I
think you will see the product of those particular strategies within the next
five to six years as we progress, but I think having said that, we also have to
maintain a collective action towards this issue, collective support towards this
issue, and always encourage the federal government because they have a role in
this. They have the financial investments to allow us to create new employment
in our communities and diversify our economies, which is our problem and
therefore being able to counteract the symptoms of that, which is child poverty.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.
MR. PARSONS: Point of order, Madam Speaker, with leave of the House I
would like to table in conjunction with the motion read earlier today concerning
the Provincial Court Judges Tribunal. The Clerk of the House has recommended
that schedules referencing that response ought to tabled here. So with leave of
the House, if it is okay, I will table that at this time.
MADAM SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave to table this?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MADAM SPEAKER: Granted.
MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
I would like to rise today and say a few words on the resolution that is put
forward. I would like to begin by saying that while I support the thrust of this
resolution in the THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED, I do have a little problem with the
way that reads.
It talks about the need for this House to call on the Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador to adopt social and economic strategies that will
reduce child poverty in this Province. I think, Madam Speaker, the goal should
be to eliminate child poverty in this Province and indeed across this country.
If we are going to say that we want to reduce child poverty or eliminate it over
the next five years, by 2005 as the resolution calls for, then I think we should
set targets that we have to meet each year or explain why they were not met.
That, Madam Speaker, in my opinion, is the only way that you can use a
measurement from now to the year 2005, use it as a yardstick, have a certain
number in mind each year, and that number or percentage would have to be met or
someone would have to give an explanation as to why it was not.
Madam Speaker, I listened with interest as the Minister for Human Resources
and Employment was speaking. He talked about poverty levels and the wages that
determine poverty levels throughout the different regions of this Province. He
stated that in the rural areas of this Province a family of four would need an
income of $23,892. Madam Speaker, for a person who works a full-time, permanent
job, it works out to about 2,000 hours per year. Based upon a $23,892 income,
that is $11.90 per hour for every hour worked at a full-time job.
For the urban areas of this Province, the minister stated that the number was
$27,401. That, Madam Speaker, works out to an hourly rate for a full-time
employee of $13.20 per hour. When he talked about the city and what the wage or
the income would be for a family of four, it was $29,653 or an hourly rate of
$14.80 for each and every hour worked on a full-time basis.
Madam Speaker, I say to you and I say to the members opposite, the job growth
that they continually put forward in this House, and that they brag about, how
many of those jobs are at the rates of pay that I have just described? Very,
very few. Madam Speaker, that is why last week, or the week before, when the
minimum wage was being discussed and increased, and was discussed here in this
House, I stated at that time that what we need is not a minimum wage. We need a
living wage, and that is what the people of this Province need.
In 1988 the federal government, by way of resolution, unanimously sat and
passed a resolution that they would eliminate child poverty by the year 2000. We
are debating this here today; obviously that did not happen. As a matter of
fact, things have progressively gotten worse, particularly here in this
Province. It reminds me of the Republicans in the United States when they said
they were declaring war on poverty. Some years later, when some reporter asked
them where they stood on the war that they declared on poverty, they said they
gave up the war because poverty won. That, Madam Speaker, is a sad reflection on
any government; it is a sad statement for any government to make. I do not think
that we should look at things the way that the Americans look at things, even
though there is a move in this country today to try and follow their actions on
almost every front.
Madam Speaker, child poverty in this Province certainly reflects throughout
all aspects of our society. If we look at the problems that are encountered and
the problems that are created by child poverty, and poverty in general, we will
find that our health care is affected and has a cost due to poverty. Our
education system and the education that our children receive, who are living in
poverty, has a cost. Even our justice system, I would suggest, has a cost when
it comes to poverty, but most of all poverty can be seen most in the eyes and
the faces of the children who live in poverty.
Families, particularly young families, single parent families, find it very
difficult. Most of the jobs that are available - and there are not that many, as
our unemployment rates are much, much too high in all areas of this Province,
young families in particular, young parents, single parents, particularly those
who are trying to improve their lot in life, trying to further their education,
trying to take advantage of things that are out there to be done so that they
can improve themselves and improve the living conditions that they currently
live under. It causes me a lot of concern and anger, I might say, when I see
young people, single people today, and married people in this Province who are
being denied EI benefits when they are attending post-secondary education; a
fund that has, as the previous speaker mentioned, $36 billion in surplus. Money,
I might add, that the federal government does not own. They do not rightfully
own that money. The money in that fund comes from the workers and employers of
this Province and of this country.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. COLLINS: It is not their money and yet they decide the conditions and
the regulation that apply when people are laid off and have to support
themselves and their families by applying. That, Madam Speaker, is something
that is deplorable: that you can pay into a fund, after working for years and
get laid off, and not be able to access the insurance that you paid while you
were working. What, Madam Speaker, I might ask, would be a more appropriate way
for that fund to be used than to help somebody to get on with their lives, to
improve their lives, and become a net contributor again to that fund? But that
is not the way it is, and we all know that, but I do believe that this House and
this government should be doing more in their efforts with the federal
government to make sure that happens; however, we have not seen any results as
of to date.
The other thing that happens then, Madam Speaker, if young people cannot
access any source of income that they can live on while they are going to
universities or to post-secondary education institutions, then we all know what
happens. They get student loans that they have to use to try and live on as well
as cover other expenses. That only complicates the problem. It complicates the
problem because, while they are going to school, they are living in poverty.
When they get out of school, they owe such a tremendous debt by way of student
loans that they are forced to remain in poverty. So, it is a no-win battle. The
people who are down and out and trying to get up do not get too many helping
hands offered to help them, but they get knocked back a lot, Madam Speaker,
because the supports are not in place when they are needed.
Madam Speaker, the other things that we see around us in our communities - I
remember a few years ago, I think the Federation of Municipalities put a
resolution forward, adopted at their convention, that would allow individual
communities in this Province to take action when it comes to the video lottery
machines that we see throughout every establishment, liquor establishment, clubs
and other places within our Province, and these machines are wreaking havoc on
families in this Province. People may try them. People may say, I will only put
in a loonie or a toonie and just see what it is like, just out of sheer boredom
sometimes, but the fact of the matter remains that many people get hooked. They
get addicted to this gambling machine. These machines - I have seen it many
times - can destroy individuals, can destroy families financially in a very,
very short period of time.
I believe that this government should have acted on the resolution from the
Federation of Municipalities and allowed each municipality to take action on
their own. I think they should have gone one step further than that, Madam
Speaker, in that the provincial government itself should have banned and never
permitted these machines to be here in the Province in the first place. Of
course, we know the reason why. All we have to do is look at the books and
figure that out, when they take in twice as much money each year from gambling
machines than they do from natural resource royalties. Madam Speaker, there is
much that this government can do without help from the federal government to go
along ways towards cutting down and eliminating poverty in this Province.
What we have to have, Madam Speaker, is meaningful employment. To do that, we
have to utilize our resources much more effectively than we have been doing in
the past. We all know the stories. We can go back to the Churchill Falls, go
back in history to the sixties and see what happened there. We can go back to
the iron ore industry. We can look at the Town of Schefferville, when that was
built, and all of the jobs for the main part went to Quebec. We can look at the
iron ore industry in Labrador West and we can see the pellet plant from Wabush
in Quebec. We can see the pellet plant expansion from Labrador City in Quebec,
and we can look at our offshore oil, Madam Speaker, the latest development, and
see what jobs we are deriving from that.
The employment opportunities that are arising from offshore development is
certainly limited compared to what they should be; but, in addition to that,
Madam Speaker, the benefits are mainly concentrated on the Avalon Peninsula,
within the St. John's area. I can say unquestionably that the only activity
that is taking place in this Province today to any large degree, Madam Speaker,
is in the St. John's area. In the other regions of this Province it is not
happening the way it is here. As a matter of fact, things are getting
progressively worse as we have heard from lots of speakers in this House since
the House convened two weeks ago.
I think it is a sad reflection, Madam Speaker, when we look at the usage of
food banks in this Province. No child should have to go to school hungry. No
child should have to go to bed hungry. No child should have to go out into the
cold without being properly dressed to keep them warm. When that happens, it is
a sad reflection on all of us, a sad reflection on society in general.
Many people have said to me over the past number of years that maybe, just
maybe, we should declare war. Maybe we should declare war on the inadequate
health care that we have. Maybe we should declare war on the high cost of
education. Maybe we should declare war on poverty and declare war on high
unemployment rates.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. COLLINS: Because, Madam Speaker, what the people of this Province
see, and the people of this country see, each and every time there are questions
asked of governments in these areas, each and every time the answer is: not
enough money; but, when we declare war on something that is happening miles from
our own country, there is never a question of money; it is go and do it.
I am not saying that is wrong, but what I am saying is that other areas
within our society, within our own country, within our own Province, should
receive the same amount of attention and seriousness attached to them.
Madam Speaker, there are things that this government can do to reduce child
poverty, there are things we can do to eliminate child poverty, but the
political will has to be there to do it. That is a responsibility of the
provincial government and the federal government, to get together and ensure
that happens. With the proper attention being paid to it, it can happen.
I can conclude by just saying this: Thank God we have the organizations in
this Province that we have, like the Lions Club, like the Salvation Army, like
the volunteers at the food banks. I think it is fitting that we should say that
because in this Province we are known for our generosity. I think it is only
this year - according to the news the other day - the first in many years that
we were not recognized as being the most generous per capita in the country. I
think last year it went to Manitoba, I believe. That still bodes well for us,
Madam Speaker. We have had the distinction of being number one for a long, long
time and we still are number one - there is no question about that - in many
other ways. We are a caring and giving society in this Province and I say, thank
God we are.
Madam Speaker, with that I will conclude my remarks. I hope that this
resolution is not just passed today and abandoned tomorrow, but is something
that, as I said in the opening, there will be targets set to meet each and every
year and, if they are not met, somebody will be held accountable as to why not.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER (Mercer): The hon. the Minister of Youth Services and
Post-Secondary Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to outline some of the programs in the new
Department of Youth Services and Post-Secondary Education, and to reiterate that
this government believes strongly that post-secondary education is the root to
security and full participation in society, both economically and socially. The
new Department of Youth Services and Post-Secondary Education was formed to
focus on youth, the attainment of post-secondary education, and the successful
transition to the labour market.
The priorities of my department are central to the elimination of poverty -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: - and will ensure that our future parents experience both
economic and educational success.
Mr. Speaker, this government has taken a number of steps towards ensuring
that the students of our Province have affordable and accessible post-secondary
education. I would like to point out to the Member for Labrador West that
government does lend a hand, to the tune of many millions of dollars, to
students in this Province.
First, I would like to speak about tuition, about tuition rates in our
Province. In 1998-1999 government provided the financial resources that allowed
post-secondary education institutions in our Province to implement a tuition
freeze. Further measures allowed the university to reduce its tuition levels in
2000-2001 by 10 per cent. The tuition fees at both Memorial University and the
College of the North Atlantic are among the lowest in our country.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, in 2000-2001, our Student Financial Assistance
Programs provided loans to approximately 17,000 students. Assistance with
repayment for students in need is available through a range of mechanisms, such
as our Loan Remission Program. The assistance through our Loan Remission Program
can result in high-need students who graduate in a timely manner having most of
the provincial portion of the Canada Student Loan forgiven. Since 1998-1999 over
1,800 students have received assistance through this program, with amounts
reaching almost $15 million.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: A further amount of approximately $6 million is budgeted for
this present fiscal year.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MS KELLY: Well, that is true. Many people don't recognize just how much
is being done for students through our Loan Remission Program, but we are now
putting together an initiative that will change some of this program to make it
even better.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: Mr. Speaker, the Interest Relief Program also provides
assistance to students who are encountering difficulties with repayment of their
student loans. Over 10,000 students have been served by this program since
1998-99, with amounts totaling $6.2 million.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS KELLY: This government also recognizes that further steps are
necessary to deal with high student debt.
Mr. Speaker, we have recently completed a review of student financial
assistance, and we are now developing a plan to move forward with many of the
recommendations that are contained in it. Improvements to student financial
assistance provisions will offer better support for students from low income
families and families who are living in poverty. Through acquiring a
post-secondary education, they, in turn, will be better able to support
themselves and their children financially in the future.
Mr. Speaker, in March 2001 a Student Investment and Opportunities Corporation
was established as a part of this governments overall student debt reduction
strategy, and as a means to enhance youth career and employment opportunities.
This past year, with an initial investment of $8.8 million, $4.8 million of
which was from our existing employment programs, but $4 million new dollars were
put into this program, and it helped over 3,000 students find work placements
that were created with over 75 per cent of these work placements occurring in
rural areas.
Mr. Speaker, many of our students are availing of our Student Work And
Service Program that we know as SWASP, a program that was developed in our
Province and has been copied all across this country. This program allows
students to obtain career related placements and at the same time earn tuition
vouchers to cover part of their post-secondary education costs. Over the past
two years almost 4,000 students received provincially funded tuition vouchers
cost-shared with the federal government.
Our Tutoring for Tuition Program is a peer support initiative whereby
students help other students with studies in high school and are then provided
with a tuition voucher toward their post-secondary education. Approximately 650
students have received tuition vouchers and many times that number received
tutorial assistance. So even in high school last year, we provided more than
half a million dollars in tuition vouchers to students to go on to
post-secondary education.
Mr. Speaker, we have many additional programs supporting youth at risk. This
department provides, for instance, $270,000 in core funding to the Brother TI
Murphy Centre which provides educational services to those who have had
difficulties coping in the formal high school setting. Jobs search services and
life skills training are also provided through this center.
The department of Youth Services and Post-Secondary Education contributes
$1.8 million annually to Community Youth Networks. That was an initiative
established under the National Child Benefit to develop an array of services for
youth living in or at risk of poverty. Through services, such as tutoring and
programs that promote leadership and employment skills, the CYN is designed to
increasing the employability of youth and to better prepare them both socially
and academically. The Community Youth Networks presently are in eighteen
community sites, with outreach capacity to other communities in their respective
areas.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to briefly give some background information on
educational attainment and participation in post-secondary education. While we
continue to strive for higher educational attainment, there have been
substantial gains in educational attainment in Newfoundland and Labrador during
the past two decades. As of year 2000, approximately 39 per cent of the
provincial population had completed post-secondary education compared to only 16
per cent in 1979.
Improvements in our educational attainment levels are particularly evident in
our younger age groups. In the year 2000, among our twenty-five to
twenty-nine-year-olds in Newfoundland and Labrador, 58 per cent had completed
post-secondary education compared to 60 per cent of twenty-five to
twenty-nine-year-olds nationally. So, our younger people are now keeping up with
the national average, and this is not something we were doing in past decades.
At the lower levels of educational attainment, 15 per cent of twenty-five to
twenty-nine-year-olds had less than high school education compared to 11 per
cent nationally, so we are improved vastly in this area also.
Mr. Speaker, in Newfoundland and Labrador participation in post-secondary
education has been increasing steadily in the last five years. The most recent
comparative information in post-secondary education shows that