December 6. 2006 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 35

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!

Admit Strangers.

Statements by Members

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

hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale; the hon. the Member for Port de Grave;

the hon. the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde; the hon. the Member for Burgeo

& LaPoile; the hon. the Member for St. John's West, and the hon. the

Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

The Chair recognizes the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate -

MS MICHAEL: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I believe the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi is standing on a point of

order.

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am standing to raise a point of order regarding the use of Confederation

Building grounds. Today at 1:30 there was a small news conference on the steps

of the building, the East Block. It was held by members of the Multiple

Sclerosis Society of Canada, two members, along with a woman who has Multiple

Sclerosis. They had to stand out in the snow in order to hold the press

conference.

I have a couple of concerns about what happened. First of all, they sent in

an application for use of Confederation Building grounds to hold their press

conference last week, on November 30. Initially, when they called back to find

out about their application they were told that everything was fine, that there

was nothing wrong. They would be able to hold their press conference in the

lobby of the East Block. They were later notified that, in actual fact, they

could not hold their press conference in the lobby of the East Block, that in

order to do that they should have applied, along with a ministry in order to

hold the press conference in the lobby.

Now, a couple of concerns here. Number one, I have looked at the application

for use of Confederation Building grounds and there are two conditions for use

of the grounds. The reason that was given to the MS Society for not using the

lobby, that is not listed as a condition. There is no way that they could have

known that this was a condition.

Number two, this was not a demonstration. This was just to hold a small press

conference to talk about their concerns with regard to drugs for people

suffering from Multiple Sclerosis. They were told by Transportation and Works

that -

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MS MICHAEL: Yes - that they could not do it. When they pushed with their

questions, they were told who they were speaking to had to go further, even

though the person they were speaking to was in charge. The person said: Well, I

have to consult on this and I will come back and let you know.

The long and the short of it is, these people were denied standing in the

lobby of our building instead of having to stand out in the snow as they did.

I have two concerns about that, Mr. Speaker, that I would like to put to you

to consider. One, this is the House of the people and I find it really

unacceptable that this should be a rule. If we are going to have rules, even if

they are unacceptable, I think people need to know what the rules are and

application forms should show that.

I guess I am asking, Mr. Speaker, to deal with the issue of why citizens of

our Province, or citizens in general, cannot stand in the lobby to hold press

conferences. If they do have to have somebody with them, in terms of somebody

who is working inside of this Assembly, why does it only have to be somebody

from the government side, somebody from ministry? Surely, any MHA should be able

to co-sponsor a press conference with them, but that is not what they were told.

My two issues, Mr. Speaker, one with regard to the rule itself, and then two

with regard to the fact that if the rule is there, why aren't citizens being

shown or told upfront that this exists?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair will take the matter under advisement. The Chair

is responsible for what we refer to as the parliamentary precincts, and the

lobby of Confederation Building is not included. That is the responsibility of

the executive branch of government. We will take the matter under advisement and

we will discuss it and get back to the hon. member privately.

There is no point of order because points of order have to deal with the

parliamentary procedures of the House as contained in our Standing Orders.

However, the point is well taken and we will deal with it in a different forum.

The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale who was speaking to his member's

statement.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Springdale Fire Department on

their forty-third Annual Firefighter's Ball. The annual firefighter's ball

is an event held each year to thank the hard-working firefighters who put their

lives on the line everyday.

Fire Chief Sheldon Hillier presented Deputy Chief Rennie Noremore with the

Roy Manuel Firefighter of the Year award.

The Ford Rolpe Memorial Dedicated Service Award for 100 per cent attendance

went to firefighter Kent Reid. Other awards were presented to honourary

firefighter Dean Wiseman for ten years of service. Three service pins went to

Peter Young for five years, Bernard Sheppard for twenty years and Evertt Pitts

for thirty years of service.

When these dedicated men and women are not volunteering their services to

fight a fire or assist in a traffic accident, they keep their skills sharpened

by attending training in all aspects of emergency response and firefighting.

Our firefighters are always in need of any and all donations to help with the

daily operations of their department.

Howard Wellman of Newfoundland and Labrador Vegetation Control presented

Springdale Fire Department with a portable heart start machine, to help with

cardiac arrest patients; a $5,000 donation which I am sure was very much needed.

The Springdale Co-op also donated $500 as well.

I would like all hon. members to join with me to thank and congratulate the

firefighters of the Town of Springdale for a job well done.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, on November 28, 2006 the Conception Bay North

AIDS Interest Group held its Annual AIDS Memorial Service at St. John the

Evangelist Church, Coley's Point.

To take

part in the service with representatives from family, church, youth,

caregivers, community, board members, health and individuals living with HIV was

indeed significant and the evening had a profound effect on all those in

attendance.

Mr. Speaker, the Conception Bay North AIDS Interest Group, under the

leadership of Sister Rosaline Hynes, works tirelessly to support and care for

persons living with HIV and AIDS. Their dedication and policies will protect the

human rights and civil liberties of all persons living with HIV and AIDS and

other disabilities.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to remember and make the theme of the

AIDS for 2006: Stop AIDS - Keep the Promise, become a reality.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate Dr. Otto Tucker who was appointed

to the Order of Canada on July 24. Dr. Tucker will be accepting his award on

December 15.

Dr. Tucker is a well-known educator and author who has endeared himself to

the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. He holds degrees from Memorial

University and the Universities of Alberta and Toronto. Dr. Tucker originally

hails from Winterton, Trinity Bay, a community in my District of Trinity-Bay de

Verde.

Mr. Speaker, Dr. Tucker is also a well-known advocate and is quite passionate

about preserving our history, our way of life. In recent years Winterton, his

hometown, has become known for preserving its wooden boat building tradition, an

accomplishment of which I am sure he is quite proud.

Mr. Speaker, even though I knew of Dr. Tucker's accomplishments for many

years, I had the pleasure of meeting him personally just a couple of years ago.

He is to be admired as an educator, an historian and an individual who believes

in our people and is an inspiration to all of us.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all members join with me in extending our

congratulations to Dr. Otto Tucker on his induction into the Order of Canada on

December 15.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to congratulate Sergeant David Payne, a Port aux Basques native,

who has been awarded the Governor General's Meritorious Service Medal.

Sergeant Payne is based at 9 Wing Gander where he and other members of the

103 Search and Rescue Squadron are on twenty-four-hour standby. They provide

services throughout the Province and Northeastern Quebec.

Payne and Sergeant Jason MacKinnon were part of a team that responded to a

distress call in July 2003. A thirty-four foot sailboat had lost its motor and

the vessel's mast was failing. Winds over thirty-five knots threatened to

capsize the disabled vessel.

Mr. Speaker, these conditions made it extremely dangerous for the helicopter

to get close to the vessel and its five stranded persons - two small children

and three adults. Sergeant Payne determined the best available option was to be

lowered into the water, whereby he swam to the vessel. After several attempts

the rescue was successful and the crew persons were transported to safety.

The Governor General's Meritorious Service Medal is awarded to individuals

whose "specific achievements have brought honour to the Canadian Forces and

to Canada." In this case, "Sergeants MacKinnon and Payne displayed

perseverance and outstanding professionalism in the performance of their duty as

search and rescue technicians."

Mr. Speaker, before joining the search and rescue squadron, Sergeant Payne

was an aviation technician. He wanted a change in his career and became

interested in search and rescue. He has served in the Canadian Forces for almost

twenty-five years. His parents, Claude and Kathleen Payne, reside in Port aux

Basques.

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

congratulating Sergeant David Payne upon receiving the Governor Generals's

Meritorious Service Medal.

Thank you.

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.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Gene Noftall, a resident of St.

John's West and a friend of mine, who passed away last week at age

sixty-seven.

Mr. Speaker, Gene was a wonderful individual who also happened to be one of

the top five-pin bowlers in our Province's history, with a competitive career

that spanned over thirty years.

He was a member of three provincial championship teams and on ten other

occasions bowled on teams that finished in the top three. Gene was also a member

of teams that won multiple city championships and was a devoted member of a

number of bowling committees within the community and the Province.

For his skills and dedication to the sport, Gene was inducted into the

provincial Bowling Hall of Fame.

Mr. Speaker, Gene was often described as a gentleman on the lanes, but he was

also a true gentleman within his family and within the community.

I know that Helen, his wife of forty-six years, and their children, Paul,

Karen and David, and the grandchildren, Katie, Robyn, Andrew and Reegan, as well

as his extended family and a large circle of friends have been left with many

wonderful memories to be treasured.

I ask all hon. members to join me in paying tribute to Gene Noftall, a

gentleman and a gentle man.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to congratulate Susan Chalker Browne on the release of her new

book The Land of a Thousand Whales . I was pleased to be part of her book

launch yesterday at Bonaventure College here in St. John's.

Mr. Speaker, Susan is an award-winning writer, journalist and teacher. The

Land of a Thousand Whales is her sixth book for children. Her other books

include: Marconi's Secret , The Amazing Adventures of Captain Bob

Bartlett , and At Ocean's Edge . Her other books Thomas Doucet -

Hero of Plaisance , Goodness Gracious and Gulliver Mulligan were

each named by the Canadian Children's Book Centre as Our Choice of selections.

Her newest book, The Land of a Thousand Whales , is set in the historic

community of Red Bay, on Labrador's South Coast.

Mr. Speaker, Red Bay, originally known as Butus, was first settled by the

Spanish and the French of the old Country in the 1500s. They came to discover

what became one of the most lucrative whaling industries of the century. While

many historic papers and archival information exist to document this series of

Basques events at Red Bay, few of them would be of interest in a Grade 6

classroom. Susan has used her creative energy to capture the children of the

Province in a wonderful tale of Sebastian, a young boy who discovers the

adventures of a whaling community.

The people of Red Bay and the people of my district are honoured that she has

chosen our community or one of our communities for this adventure and this

literary piece of work for children.

Mr. Speaker, it is my wish that very soon these literary works for children

depicting historic adventures around our Province from Cape Spear to Placentia

to Red Bay will be available in the classrooms all over Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my hon. colleagues today to join with me in congratulating

Susan Chalker Browne on the release of her new book, The Land of a Thousand

Whales , and wish her every success as she continues her work on the next

child's adventure in historic Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Before the Speaker calls for Statements by Ministers, we

would like to welcome some special guests in our gallery. I notice that we have

Mayor Boyd Noel from St. Anthony, and we welcome Mr. Noel.

We also have members of the Combined Council of Labrador visiting today. More

specifically, we welcome Mayor Ford Rumbolt, the President. We welcome Mayor

Nath Moores, the Vice-President for Labrador Straits. We welcome Councillor

Alton Rumbolt, Vice-President of Labrador Southeast; Mayor Arthur Williams,

Vice-President of Labrador Central; Mayor Jim Farrell, Vice-President of

Labrador West; and AngajukK k

Sarah Erickson, Vice President of Labrador North, Nunatsiavut, and Mr. Waylon

Williams, the Executive Director.

Welcome guests to our House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to inform this House of our government's commitment to our

public servants and to inform you that my department has initiated a borrowing

program which will put the Public Service Pension Plan on a solid footing. A

$400 million infusion to stabilize the plan will be made this month. A further

payment is expected before the end of the fiscal year.

This financial commitment, Mr. Speaker, is something that we have been

preparing to do for some time but we have been awaiting the results of the

Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses' Union ratification vote. We are pleased to

announce that their members have voted 76 per cent in favour to accept the

collective agreement we negotiated, and in turn we will keep our promise to the

Public Service Pension Plan to put their pension plan back on stable ground.

Mr. Speaker, just last March we invested $1.953 billion into the Teachers'

Pension Plan. Today's borrowing rates are substantially lower than they have

been historically and we felt that this is indeed the right time to move ahead

to do the same for the members of the Public Service Pension Plan.

Because of the prudent financial moves by this Administration, we have

received credit rating upgrades from all three credit rating agencies in the

past year. These upgrades allow us to borrow money at a lower rate. We have just

borrowed for a term of thirty years at a rate of 4.5 per cent. I have never

witnessed a lower rate.

I am happy to say that our public service employees will no longer have to

worry about the stability of their retirements, and this government can continue

to reap the benefits of better credit ratings by addressing our significant

unfunded liability.

I would like to take this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to say that this

government remains committed to making sound financial decisions. We have to

stop passing the burden on to the backs of our children and our grandchildren,

and look ahead to a day when this Province can be in a significantly better

financial position.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you to the minister for giving me a copy of this good news today. I

must say that I am always glad and I will compliment government when they do

good things, and it is good to see that you are using the low interest rates to

put an injection of cash into the Public Service Pension Fund; however, I have

to say to you that it was our government, the previous government, that started

to put the first money back into the pension plan. We did that in 1998, and from

1998 to 2003 there was an injection of $840 million into that plan.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS THISTLE: It is interesting that you said you were waiting for the

outcome of the nurses' vote before you decided to make this move. So, were

they threatened into the fact that they might not have gotten this if they had

not voted in your favour, a 76 per cent ratification vote? It is unfortunate

that you didn't use the same treatment for the biggest union in the Province

when you pushed them back to work. You didn't do anything for pharmacists.

They had to hide behind the boards.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's allotted time has expired.

MS THISTLE: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been denied.

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement and I, too,

congratulate the minister and the government on seeing the need to put an

infusion of money into the Public Service Pension Plan. It is obviously a step

in the right direction, but we all know there is a long way to go.

What I look forward to, and I do not know if I have to wait until the next

Budget to get this but I keep talking about it, and it is what I want to see

from government, I want to see the long-term plan. We are getting bits and

pieces. I want to see a long-term plan of where the government is planning on

going.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I am finished.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Education, and Minister Responsible for the Status

of Women.

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize December 6 as the

National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. Established in

1991 by the Parliament of Canada, this day coincides with the anniversary of the

death of fourteen young women who were tragically killed on December 6, 1989, in

Montreal.

They were targeted, Mr. Speaker, simply because they were women and had

chosen to study engineering, a field traditionally dominated by men. I was

studying Social Work in Ontario at the time and I remember that day clearly -

the shock and disbelief over the senselessness of such a crime.

While we remember this tragic event today, we must also recognize that,

unfortunately, violence against women is still all around us. In 2006, 76 per

cent of sexual assaults reported to the RNC were against women. Spousal assaults

experienced by women tend to be more severe, occur more often, and cause more

serious physical injury and psychological harm.

However, the statistics don't often reflect the real tragedy of abuse and

violence. Nellie Nippard, Mr. Speaker, is the face behind the statistics. In

1990, Nellie was stabbed by her estranged husband thirty-three times, in the

face, stomach, back, even slicing open her liver. Nellie was left for dead, but

survived to become a powerful voice for victims' rights.

She fought to get the federal government to provide money for victims to

attend parole hearings. She has been credited with winning victims the right to

read their impact statements at parole hearings. She played an important role in

the creation of a National Office for Victims within the Department of Public

Safety and Emergency. Nellie died in Gander in 2003, at the age of fifty-four,

after a ten-year battle with cancer.

Mr. Speaker, I have seen first-hand the incredible impact of Nellie's

efforts while working as a parole officer. Her actions have made a very real

difference in the lives of many women.

This is also a time to reflect on what each of us can do to prevent and

eliminate violence against women. We are now well into the first year of our

Violence Prevention Initiative, which is a six-year $7.2 million commitment by

this government to fight violence. This initiative is a community-government

partnership to stop violence. There is a lot of good work underway by many

people who are dedicated to this cause, and I have the highest confidence that

this work will make a difference.

Mr. Speaker, as a memorial to those fourteen young women, and to all those

who have lost their lives to violence, the flags outside Confederation Building

will be flown at half mast. In addition, I would like to acknowledge all those

who are wearing purple ribbons today. They were distributed. I also have extras

in case someone wanted one today. This is an important symbol of remembrance to

the lives that have been lost to violence and the work that remains to be done

to fight violence in our Province.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to take a minute to read through the names of

the fourteen women who lost their lives that day:

Genevi P ve

Bergeron, H l P ne

Colgan, Nathalie Croteau, Barbara Daigneault, Anne-Marie Edward, Maud Haviernick,

Maryse Lagani P re,

Maryse Leclair, Anne-Marie Lemay, Sonia Pelletier, Mich P le

Richard, Annie St-Arneault, Annie Turcotte, and Barbara Klucznik-Widajewicz.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly want to rise and join with the minister today in recognizing

December 6 as the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against

Women.

I think all too often in our society we see violence against women simply

because we are women, and that is unacceptable. When you look at the statistics

today, with 76 per cent of sexual assaults being reported to the RNC in our

Province against women, we know that the challenges and the battles that face us

are great and they are tremendous.

Mr. Speaker, with statistics like that, and with the blatant examples of

violence that still occur in our society today - and we have seen it just

recently in Bay d'Espoir, we have seen it in Hermitage, where there have been

homicides, suicides, against women. Mr. Speaker, as long as those statistics

exist, and as long as there is violence in the home, in the community, in the

workplace, no government, regardless of political stripe, can ever turn a blind

eye or turn their back. The investments have to be made to counteract violence

in our society, and we all have a role to do it.

I want to remind members, Mr. Speaker, that violence towards women is often

perpetuated by disrespect and dishonour, not only in the community but in the

boardrooms, in the offices, all around the world. Those kinds of examples start

with all of us setting them from this day forward.

I say to the minister, Mr. Speaker, whatever she can do, inside of her

government or outside, to counteract violence in our society, I will be there to

support her and to lobby side by side with her to ensure that we eradicate

violence against women in society once and for all.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the advance copy, and I join with my sister

colleagues in speaking in memory of the fourteen women who died, and of all the

women we know who have died at the hands of violent men.

It is really sad that we have to have a day called the National Day of

Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. I would hope to think that

some day we are going to be able to have a national day on the end of violence

against women. I fear that I will not live to see that day, unfortunately, at

the rate that we are going.

As the minister has said, and as the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair

has said, we all have a role to play in making our communities a safer place to

live, and only by speaking out and working together - and this is one place we

have to work together - can we bring awareness to this issue and help put an end

to the violence. The speaking out, the breaking of the silence, is the best

thing that we can do for our sisters who are living in violence to help them

break the violence; communities have to break the violence.

I urge all members of the House, and all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, on

this day to join forces and let our voices be heard to say, stop the violence,

because women deserve to live with dignity, respect and equality in our society.

They all go together. It is the lack of dignity, respect and equality that leads

to violence.

I would ask all hon. members to think about coming tonight to the Engineering

Building at the university and to further remember the women who died, and all

other women who died, at the vigil that will take place at 7:30 in the

Engineering Building, Room 2006.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to inform residents of our Province

that today applications are being accepted for the new Low Income Drug Program,

which will be officially launched on January 31, 2007.

Mr. Speaker, as part of our Poverty Reduction Strategy -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Sorry to interrupt the minister, but I just noticed the clock has turned to

2:30 p.m. It being Wednesday, we have to get leave to proceed beyond 2:30 p.m. I

assume leave has been granted.

MR. PARSONS: (Inaudible) Mr. Speaker, on the assumption that Question

Period will not be cut short at 3:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER: Yes, that would be the condition, that we would have a

normal Question Period. I apologize to the minister, and I will invite him to

start his statement over again. I did not want to continue without the leave

necessary to be granted.

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will start the statement again.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to inform residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador that today applications are being accepted for the new Low Income

Drug Program, which will be officially launched on January 31, 2007.

Mr. Speaker, as part of the Poverty Reduction Strategy, our government

announced in Budget 2006 that we would be expanding the Newfoundland and

Labrador Prescription Drug Program to include an additional 97,000 individuals.

We are investing $32 million annually to provide drug coverage on a co-pay basis

to residents who are in need of financial assistance in paying for their

prescription drugs.

The new program is designed to help those with low incomes. It includes

families with children with an annual net household income of up to $30,000;

couples earning up to $21,000; and singles earning up to $19,000 a year who are

not currently covered by the Newfoundland and Labrador Prescription Drug

Program.

Mr. Speaker, applications and information sheets are being mailed to all

households during the month of December to ensure that everyone who may be

eligible has the ability to apply. Additionally, the forms are now available on

our Web site, which is www.gov.nl.ca/health .

Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased to announce that the new office for the

Newfoundland and Labrador Prescription Drug Program is now open in Stephenville

to accept applications and to respond to inquiries. Our government announced the

creation of this new office to accommodate the increased demand for service with

the new program. And, in keeping with our commitment to provide economic

opportunities in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, we have created fifteen brand

new jobs for this new office in Stephenville, providing meaningful employment in

a rural area of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, we are accepting applications now so that we can process as many

applications as possible by the date of the program launch, and it is expected

that cards will be issued in the latter part of January for those deemed

eligible. However, we ask for the public's patience as we process the large

volumes of forms.

Mr. Speaker, it is a fact that one of the main determinants to health is

economic status. Through this new program, it is our intention to improve health

outcomes for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador through improved access to

prescription drug coverage.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement.

Obviously, this is not new news. I mean, this is a government initiative that

was announced in the budget last year in March. It is only now that government

is finding it appropriate to roll out these additional drug coverages to the

residents of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, what does this do for a lot of people who are out there in our

Province? I am going to talk about a couple of them. I have a lady up in my

district, for example, who is a mother of two children. She is a patient of

Multiple Sclerosis. Her medication on a monthly basis costs her $2,000 a month.

Her family income will be at $32,000 a year. What will her eligibility be for

drug coverage? Absolutely none, and the minister knows that. Where 60 per cent

to 70 per cent of her family income will be taken just to pay for medication to

be able to see her through a critical illness in her life so that she can

maintain some form of health to raise her two children.

Mr. Speaker, when you have over 600 people out there in the Province today

just looking for Multiple Sclerosis therapies alone, you need to make sure that

any program you bring in is going to be able to address what the real need is

for a lot of these people, and that is that many of them will still be left to

have to provide their own medications on a relatively low income.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to say with regard to -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the member's allotted time has expired.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I also want to raise another issue as it relates to Labrador, because people

in Labrador pay $3,000 to $4,000 on transportation and accommodations alone for

one round of chemotherapy here in St. John's, and the maximum that they get

back, besides their $500 deductible, is 50 per cent of their expenditures. Well,

Mr. Speaker, many of them who need radiation treatment have to spend up to six

weeks in St. John's doing that treatment.

This program, the minister announced last March and is prepared to implement

come January, will do nothing to be able to help these people from Labrador who

seek this chemotherapy treatment or the many Multiple Sclerosis patients out

there who are living not within the income levels prescribed by the government.

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy.

Again, I know that changes have been made and a new table is put in place and

more people will access drugs, but as with my colleague from Cartwright-L'Anse

au Clair, I, too, have stories of people for whom this is not going to a help.

A man in his eighties, for example, who has been writing me - he is not in my

district but he has been writing me as leader of the party - has an income of

$20,099. He has to live in a home because of his physical condition. He is

widowed. He has $217 left a month after he pays the $1,500 to live in the home

for senior citizens where he lives. His drugs are $476, yet he is going to be

$1,000 above the plateau.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's allotted time has expired.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave? Leave has been granted.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This man has only $217 left after he pays the home to pay for $476 in

medications, including no other expenses that he might also have, and he does

have others. The plan that is in place so far is not showing me that he is going

to be able to be helped by it. Even if he only had an income of $19,000, the

co-pay plan means that in January he would still have to pay 70 per cent of his

drugs and he still would not have enough money.

Mr. Speaker, the government has to go a much further distance to deal with

the reality of people out there in this Province. I am waiting to hear from the

Department of Health about how it is going to consider dealing with the people

who are just above the line. Accessing their liquid assets and making them

become even poorer than they are in order to get money for the drugs is not the

way to go, and that is how I see our system at the moment.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HICKEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to inform my hon. colleagues that the

Department of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs has commenced the annual Air

Foodlift Subsidy Program for Labrador for the 2006-2007 winter shipping season.

Communities in Northern Labrador became eligible to access the program

between November 23 and November 25. The communities of Black Tickle, Williams

Harbour and Norman Bay engaged in the program on November 29 and will have

another opportunity on December 10. The remaining Southeastern Labrador and

Labrador Straits communities will access the program once the marine crossing

between St. Barbe and Blanc Sablon ends for the winter season.

Mr. Speaker, the Air Foodlift Subsidy Program was developed in 1997 and

ensures the people of Coastal Labrador receive nutritious and perishable items

during the winter months.

The shipping season generally runs from early June to mid-November for the

North Coast, and from early May to mid-January in Southeastern Labrador and the

Straits. The Air Foodlift Subsidy Program begins ten days after the marine

shipping season is completed for each region, when consumers must rely on air

delivery of perishable goods.

Mr. Speaker, currently there are twenty communities involved in this program.

Since the Department of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs took over the

administration of the program we have implemented measures to make the program

more efficient, with options such as automatic bank deposits for claims and

electronic versions of the claim forms to assist retailers. We are open to

receiving input from retailers and community members on ways to continuously

improve the program.

The North Coast of Labrador has access to the Air Foodlift Subsidy for a

longer period of time since Southeastern Labrador and the Labrador Straits have

a longer shipping season and road access. In these latter areas, the subsidy

usually starts in mid-January and runs until early May.

Government is aware of these challenges and we have demonstrated a firm

commitment to the people of Labrador in the 2006 Budget.

This year, Mr. Speaker, we have increased the Air Foodlift Subsidy funding

from $300,000 to $400,000 by working in conjunction with the Poverty Reduction

Strategy.

Mr. Speaker, our government will continue to explore options for the shipment

of perishable nutritious goods to coastal communities, and we are committed to

administering the Air Foodlift Subsidy Program.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It reminds me of the VOCM broadcast, A Little Good News Today , I say

to the minister. A Liberal initiative started in 1997 -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: - ongoing in Labrador for nine years, and this is the best the

minister can come with to bring a statement into the House of Assembly.

What I would like to see, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the government opposite,

is some new good news for Labrador. How about reducing the ferry rates,

Minister, going into Norman Bay and Pinsent's Arm and Williams Harbour? How

about building a road into the community of Williams Harbour, that your

government cancelled three years ago?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the minister has made a statement, and the hon. the Member for

Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair is replying. I ask members for their co-operation.

The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What I would like to hear is an announcement from the government that they

are going to build a road into Williams Harbour, that they cancelled three years

ago. Build a regional airport in Port Hope Simpson, that they have had on hold

for three years, I say, Mr. Speaker. How about some of these initiatives? How

about some money for Black Tickle, the $15,000 they are looking for, to have

clean water in their community, that your government has put on hold right now?

Mr. Speaker, we love to have good news in Labrador, but I want to remind the

minister and thank him for bringing up another initiative for Labrador done by a

Liberal government, carried on by a Tory government. You never know, Mr.

Speaker, before his term of office finishes, he might have a little good news

for Labrador. We will wait and see.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

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

We acknowledge as well, Mr. Speaker, that this is a very important program

for isolated northern communities in order to access nutritious food for the

community during the winter months. Without the subsidy for the airlift program,

Mr. Speaker, it would impossible to buy anything in most of these communities.

I can recall just a few years ago being up in Nain and a small pack of

tomatoes in the cellophane packs, four in a pack, was $7.20, or something like

that. So, you can imagine the cost, the price, if you had to bring it in by

yourself without the help of a government subsidy to bring it in by air, which

is the only way, Mr. Speaker, during a significant portion of the year, so we

commend the government for carrying on -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's allotted time has expired.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Leave is granted.

MR. R. COLLINS: We commend the government, Mr. Speaker, for continuing on

with the airlift program because it means a lot to the communities that are

affected.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I understand that there is another group of Premiers in our

Province today meeting with our Premier. I also know that our Premier gave Ralph

Klein and his wife two fur coats in the middle of July. I was just wondering

what kind of gifts he had in mind for today. I hope he is not considering Ski-Doos.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural

Development to provide a breakdown of the investment being put forward by the

three proponents into the fibre optic deal. The minister refused to answer the

question, either because he did not know or he was trying to hide something.

I ask him today: Now that he has had the opportunity to go back to his

office, talk with his staff overnight, can he please stand and provide a

breakdown of how much Persona, MTS Allstream and Rogers each individually are

putting into this project?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I didn't need to go back to my office to have a chat with my

staff, or to spend a night reviewing the file. Unfortunately, that is probably

what the Leader of the Opposition should do because we have been talking about

this now for about three weeks and he still has not educated himself on what

this deal is all about, what it means for the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador, what it means for rural communities, what it means for the business

community, what it means for the research community.

The fact of the matter is, there is a $37 million private sector investment

in this fibre optic link with mainland Canada. The fact of the matter is, $15

million will be put in by the provincial Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador. The fact of the matter is, this is not an equity position in a

consortium; this is the purchase of an asset called fibre optics, and that will

enable us, as I said on numerous occasions, to provide government and its

various agencies with its telecommunications requirements for the foreseeable

future.

That, Mr. Speaker, is what is important in this.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister just rose and said he does not need to go back to his office to

get the information, but I suggest that he should because he obviously did not

answer the question.

I will make it even simpler for him this time. I will ask the minister the

question: Can he please tell us how much one of these companies is putting into

this deal? The company I am talking about is Persona Communications

Incorporated. Can you tell us how much they are putting in?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there is a consortium involved in building a fibre optic link

between St. John's, Newfoundland, across the Island, across the South Coast,

into Cape Breton, across Cape Breton and into Halifax. There is $37 million in a

commercial agreement between three private sector companies. The fact of the

matter is, it is irrelevant to the deal that is being put in front of

government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TAYLOR: It is irrelevant as it relates to the $15 million investment

that we are making. What is important is that we achieve what we require, we

achieve what we have been advised by independent consultants, as to the number

of fibre optic strands that we should have in this cable, and that asset that we

purchased is worth $15 million and will provide government a return on

investment. That, Mr. Speaker, is what we will achieve.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Again, Mr. Speaker, for all those out there listening, the

minister still did not answer a simple question: How much? He did not say it

once.

Mr. Speaker, all last week, and even the first two days of this week, the

minister stood on his feet and said: The answers to all of our questions are

basically in the report compiled by Electronic Warfare Associates. Well, Mr.

Speaker, with regards to the financing of this project, Electronic Warfare

Associates says the only financial information that they could get came from

Persona Communications Inc. Here is what they said about it, too, Mr. Speaker.

This report said: This information is so vague that they cannot even determine

if Persona is solvent or bankrupt, cannot even determine it with the information

that was submitted to them.

I ask the minister: If we are putting $15 million into this, are we

subsidizing Persona's investment or their share of this project?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, as usual, the Leader of the Opposition chooses

to disregard the facts of this deal.

The fact of the matter is, Electronic Warfare Associates, as he refers to

them, EWA Canada,

have done a determination as to the value of this asset. They do not need the

information from Persona, Rogers and MTS Allstream to determine the value of a

piece of fibre optic cable. You can find out how much a piece of fibre optic

cable is worth, how much a foot of it costs, and how much, therefore, 900 miles

of it costs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TAYLOR: The fact of the matter is, that is the assessment that they

did on the fibre optic cable and how much our $15 million should be able to

purchase.

The other component of it, Mr. Speaker, as for the solvency of Persona, EWA

said that there are two ways of dealing with that. Number one, we can get access

to the books, which Persona have readily agreed to provide to EWA, as I said

previously in this House, and secondly, they said in the absence of that a bond

could be posted; and they have also agreed with that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe what the minister is saying. He

is saying that the financial status of these companies is immaterial to this

project, or irrelevant. I cannot believe what I just heard.

Mr. Speaker, the minister is hiding from something, obviously. In the

financial analysis completed by the Department of Finance that you refused to

release yesterday and last week, was it determined if Persona was solvent or

bankrupt, or if they have the ability to live up to their commitments with

regards to this deal?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I said in this House before, and I will say it again, that any project that

comes before government is looked at for input by the Department of Finance,

regardless of what department originates it, if it has a financial implication.

I will say, and I said it before, my department recommended to Treasury Board

that somebody with expertise in the communications industry be hired and a CA

firm, EWA, was hired.

I went back and read the recommendation in my Treasury Board file in Cabinet

and here is what my department recommended, verbatim: Finance officials

recognize the need and note that the financial and economic benefits outlined in

the paper support this level of investment.

That is the conclusion that was recommended, that I move forward through the

department and Treasury Board. That is the gospel truth and it is recorded in

the presentation to Treasury Board and Cabinet, and Cabinet documents are not

required to be tabled (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the hon. Leader of the Opposition.

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Now we know there was a report that he refused to - now we know there was a

report.

Mr. Speaker, the Finance Minister has risen on two or three different

occasions and said that his own department recommended that government hire an

outside consulting company to do a review of this project. That is what he said.

Now, this government hired EWA, Electronic Warfare Associates, to do an

evaluation of the project. The company has stated that they did not have enough

information provided to them to determine whether or not Persona was even

solvent.

Mr. Speaker, now that we know the Department of Finance did not do the

financial analysis and EWA says that they did not have the information to be

able to do it: Can the minister, please, advise me then, who did the financial

analysis of this project, or are you saying that we are about to put in $15

million of taxpayers' money when we do not even know if the companies that we

are doing the project with are solvent?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, and as EWA said in the report - and the Leader

of the Opposition chooses to ignore it again today - the fact of the matter is,

EWA has access to all the information that they require to determine -

MR. REID: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, will you gag the Leader of the Opposition so I

can answer the question?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair asks members for their co-operation.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural

Development.

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is, EWA has no problem -

and it is in the report - documenting and evaluating how much fibre optic costs,

what the value of the asset is, and what we should get for our $15 million. It

is in the report, even though he chooses to disregard it.

As for the solvency -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, am I going to be allowed to answer the question?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the minister.

MR. TAYLOR: Shortly, Mr. Speaker, you will be stopping me from speaking

when I am not getting a chance to answer the question.

MR. REID: You haven't done that yet.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is having difficulty, not hearing the members but getting

co-operation from members. The Chair will permit the minister another ten

seconds or so to complete his answer.

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, Persona have agreed, as I have said in this

House before, to provide the financial information that is required to determine

the solvency of the company. Furthermore, and I said this in the House, EWA said

that even if they did not have the required information we could -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, the Chair is asking members for their co-operation. The Chair has no

power other than to ask members for their co-operation. You are all

parliamentarians. We are all here as colleagues and I ask you again for your

co-operation.

The Chair will, again, ask the minister to complete his answer very quickly.

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The fact of the matter is, EWA said that a bond should be posted. They said

in the report, written by EWA in black and white, Persona agreed, and they have

informed us that they agree to the posting of a bond to cover all costs

associated with the building of this infrastructure. Full stop.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There has to be respect on both sides of the House.

The Chair recognizes the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Health and Community Services.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Why did he contact the Provincial

Association of Childcare Administrators and licensees yesterday, known as PACAL,

threatening to disclose the names of child care operators and any and all

violations against them if they did not stay out of the media?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, that is absolute nonsense. I did not do

that. I did not threaten anybody, Mr. Speaker. I did not call and threaten

anybody.

What I did do, Mr. Speaker, is - the only one call that I did make was to the

president of the association yesterday. I did indicate - because she was in

Montreal - that the issue was raised on Open Line last week. I did indicate that

I had responded on Open Line and I had offered a meeting to the association, in

good faith. I had also indicted to the Open Line host that I commended him, the

show and the callers, for raising and highlighting this issue.

The call that I did make to the association president, I should point out,

was to say that I was truly hoping that we could solve some of these issues

through the meeting. I did say that, while individuals have the right to call

Open Line, it was unfortunate that while some of the callers, some of the

daycare operators, were absolutely accurate and had put forward absolutely very

positive information to help solve this issue, some of the operators were

putting forward inaccurate information and I had no other choice but to contact

Open Line to bring balance to the issue, because there were some very serious

violations against some of the daycare operators and they had to be highlighted

as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au

Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister calls up the president of PACAL, who is in a meeting with her

board, and during the conversation, as I am being told by board members, I say

to the minister, there were threats saying: I know who is calling the Open Line

show. I am going to go public. I am going to disclose these operators and what

violations they have against them.

I ask the minister: Why are you choosing to drag out forms and files in your

department, and cast negative aspersions upon child care centre operators in

this Province, simply because they bring their issues to the public forefront?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, again, this is absolute foolishness. It is

the same as other members of the Opposition who put out news releases that are

full of inaccuracies.

Mr. Speaker, again, what I did do, I said that some of the information that

was brought forward - and if there are frivolous complaints made against child

care operators, I fully intend to address that. I fully intend to address it,

and I fully intend to work with the association to make a better relationship

between the association and government.

Mr. Speaker, one side of the story could not get out on Open Line, and I did

call Open Line this morning, which very accurately reflected the conversation

that I had with the president of the association yesterday.

I would certainly be happy to table a copy of the transcript of that, Mr.

Speaker, because I did not threaten the president of the association. I did say

that I had no other choice but to bring balance, that there were some very

serious allegations and violations (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier.

When you have a minister who calls up a board or a group like this, of female

child care operators in the Province, threatening to release the names of their

companies, their child care centres, a list of violations that are against them,

and order them to back off on the issues related to child care in this Province,

I have to ask the Premier if he sees this as an appropriate behaviour for a

minister of the Crown.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, again, I did contact the president of the

association. I told her that it was a courtesy call, to giver her a heads-up

that I was going to be calling Open Line because the information that was put

forward again by some of the child care operators was very accurate information,

and I intend to address the frivolous complaints against the child care

operators, Mr. Speaker, and I intend to work with the association, but some of

the information that was put out there was inaccurate and unfair, and that had

to be corrected.

I said that I was concerned, because - by me calling in to say that there are

two sides to the issue - one side of the issue is that there are very serious

violations and I think the parents of the Province have a right to know, the

parents of children who are going to child care centres have a right to know,

that government is doing a diligent job in making sure they have a healthy and

safe environment in which they are going to.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse

au Clair.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister, it is great that you are

prepared to deal with frivolous regulations but the real problem is about the

shortage of Early Childhood Educators in the classroom of our daycare centres.

One centre in the Goulds is now being forced to close up classroom space and

turn away children who are in the program unless this operator can find an Early

Childhood Educator in the next ninety days. She can, however, recruit teachers -

who are not qualified, apparently - to work in the centre. So, this is the

beginning of what daycare operators are saying is a serious problem.

I ask you, Minister: How many more centres will be given notice when their

licences are up for renewal?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, it is not my intention, as I indicated to

the Leader of the NDP yesterday, to bring in a public system. It is not my

intention to shut down child care operators, Mr. Speaker. It is our intention,

as was outlined in the May plan that we released in this Province, to try to

improve recruitment and retention, to try to improve the subsidies that children

are receiving to attend child care centres, and to try to improve the

relationship between child care operators and children and government.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Natural Resources. To paraphrase

Shakespeare: She doth protest too much.

I heard her on Open Line this morning and, the more I hear, the more

contradictions we get regarding the Bull Arm Site Corporation security building

contract: specifications changed, contracts split, public tendering versus RFPs,

forms not filed, core certification requirements deleted.

Mr. Speaker, I have been asking for information, as you know, here in this

House for the last four or five days. I understand from the minister that she is

going to table it at the end here, so I will go on to my second question, the

first being: Did she have it? She tells me she does, so I will get that later

and have a chance to analyze it.

My question concerns the core certification. Now, it is my understanding that

virtually every contract let by the Province must have and does have the core

certification requirement as a part of it. Very, very exceptional circumstances

if it is not there. It was in the first time around in this bid; it wasn't the

second time around. This is not an oversight. Somebody says: It is not going in.

The rule is, it goes in. If it is out, it is out because somebody took it out.

I ask the minister, like I asked her yesterday: Who took the requirement for

core certification out of the Bull Arm contract, which allowed your Tory friend

to bid, which they could not do the first time around? Give us a name, please.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as I have stated in this House for the last two days, nobody

gave any instruction to anyone with regard to core certification. It is a policy

of government that construction companies have core certification. It was

overlooked in this piece because there was a request for bids under the

emergency provisions under the Public Tender Act.

There were one-on-one meetings with the site manager, with the limited call

for bids, with the three groups that were going to bid for the second piece of

work. Nobody instructed anybody other than ensure the lowest tender on the first

bid, a good friend of our friends opposite, absolutely ensure that lowest bidder

is included in the limited call for bids on the second piece of work.

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

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This smells of patriotism and cronyism all over. We know that Ms Cleary -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the Opposition House Leader, and asks members for their

co-operation.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate that.

The president of the Bull Arm Site Corporation, I would presume, is in

charge, the ultimate administrative officer. This is either a case of - somebody

took this out. Now, it is either patronage or it is incompetence. Either way,

this is unacceptable, what happened here, and this contract being awarded in the

way that it was. Either Ms Cleary was incompetent in seeing that this core

requirement did not make into the bidding, which is the normal, usual, standard

practice, or it was deliberately left out. She is ultimately responsible.

I say to the minister again: When are you going to remove this person from

this position, seeing what has happened here?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say, Mr. Speaker, I am ultimately responsible for what happens in this

department, not Ms Cleary, and I am satisfied in terms of my investigations into

this matter that there has been no impropriety. Ms Cleary removed herself once

she realized that there would be the appearance of a conflict in terms of

awarding the second number of bids.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS DUNDERDALE: Nobody took it out, Mr. Speaker. It was an oversight,

probably due to inexperience of the site manager in letting work.

Mr. Speaker, I am satisfied that the Public Tender Act was not contravened in

this case.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Health and Community Services.

Newfoundland and Labrador has the dubious distinction of being the only

Province that does not provide universal coverage for new MS drugs. These drugs

can cost a person up to $27,000 a year. In this Province, people are forced to

use up their savings, sell their homes, quit work and go on income support to be

eligible for this drug coverage.

Mr. Minister, is this government going to do the right thing and add MS drugs

to the catastrophic drug list?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, last year, or in this year's Budget, I

should say, we added $180 million of new money to the health care budget, an

increase of 10 per cent. We have put tens of millions of dollars into new drugs,

including $32.8 million into the new drug program expansion that I talked about

just earlier again today.

Mr. Speaker, we cannot do it all at once. I understand that there are

patients in the Province with cancer, with arthritis, with MS, and with other

diseases that obviously have catastrophic drug costs. I have been working with

the federal government to try to develop a National Pharmaceuticals Strategy, of

which one of the pillars is a catastrophic drug plan.

To more directly answer the member's question, Mr. Speaker, I am prepared

to consider that in this year's budget as I am other issues as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have to say, that this government had a lot more money to deal with and

make decisions about in this year's Budget than, for example, P.E.I. did, and

yet P.E.I. can cover this drug.

Mr. Speaker, MS is a serious disease. It has devastated lives. It is not fair

that people also become poorer paying for MS drugs or become sicker because they

cannot afford them, like the woman who was at the press conference today. There

are 600 known people in this Province who should be taking this medication and

are not.

Mr. Minister, I want you to tell me: Are you going to do the right thing? Don't

tell me you may be thinking about it. Are you going to do the right thing and

stop this discriminating against these people and cover these drugs?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there were a number of issues that the Leader of the NDP raised.

I will try to address them all in the short time that I have to answer the

question.

First of all, P.E.I. are not covering 40 per cent of their population under a

drug program. We are doing the right thing, Mr. Speaker, we are doing that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Secondly, Mr. Speaker, we have drug therapies in this

Province, that we are the only Province in Canada that are covering them, such

as some of the cancer drugs. We are doing the right thing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thirdly, I will not lead this department the way the

Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi would on making decisions by the seat of your

pants. I will bring it forward in the Budget process, Mr. Speaker, and we will

make an informed decision based upon the fiscal means of this Province and our

ability to pay for it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is interesting that the Minister of Health thinks he is doing the right

thing, and the Minister of Natural Resources thinks she is doing the right

thing, but the general public do not think so.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, during the last federal election, the Premier

and his caucus campaigned for the Conservative candidates in this Province. The

Premier had a commitment from Stephen Harper in a letter on January 4, 2006,

where he stated that non-renewable resources would be removed from the

equalization formula and that no province would be adversely affected by changes

to equalization. Mr. Speaker, the Premier neglected to get that pre-election

commitment put into federal government policy. It should have been priority

number one, but, Mr. Speaker, he waited for a political moment to discuss this

important issue. He waited until the Tory convention this fall, and we all know

what happened at Gander. Real problems are surfacing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MS THISTLE: I ask the Premier: Is he such a poor negotiator that he

cannot even get a deal when it is in writing?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair asks the member to put her question immediately.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Finance: It appears in

recent days that our equalization plan is in jeopardy. Would you stand up and

tell the people of this Province is it at risk?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If we had to leave that side in power any longer we would be all at risk of

surviving in this Province, I can tell you. That is where the risk would be.

They laughed at us when we were going to get the Atlantic Accord. In the

campaign they said, that is an election promise, you are not going to get

delivered on that. We built a campaign on getting more money out of the federal

government and delivered a minimum of $2 billion bucks on that issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: There has not been one bit of information -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: If they do not want to hear, I will sit down, Mr. Speaker,

and we will end Question Period.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A question has been asked and the hon. the Government House Leader is

replying. I ask all members for their co-operation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Colleagues, time is passing quickly.

The hon. the Government House Leader, a few moments to complete your answer.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

After listening to a dissertation for about a minute and a half, I want an

opportunity to answer the particular question that she posed, after over a

minute with the question being asked.

My answer to that is quite simple. I have not heard anything, or read

anything, since the last federal election that would indicate they are not going

to deliver on their promise. Absolutely, there has not been one statement made

by the federal government at this point in time.

I am going to a finance ministers' meeting, Mr. Speaker, next week in

Vancouver to sit down with the finance ministers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

We have one minute left, thirty seconds to put the question and thirty

seconds to reply.

The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.

MS THISTLE: In the government's own economic annual review dated

November, 2006, it clearly shows how dependent this Province is on oil revenue,

but you have to look twice. Construction investment this year is down $240

million, and housing starts are down 12 per cent, manufacturing and employment

is down 6 per cent.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, our equalization deal is so important, why can't

you get the commitment from Stephen Harper?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: I do not know if she wants me to talk about a commitment

from Stephen Harper or if she wants to talk about construction. The reason, on

last year, is that the White Rose project and the Voisey's Bay construction

phase had moved from construction into production phase. We have employed in our

Province, right now, the highest number of people ever working in our Province's

history at 214,900. The last three years before that were second, third and

fourth most years in the history of our Province. During their era, they sent

people out of this Province, Mr. Speaker - 11,984 one year and 10,157 another

year.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for Question Period has expired.

The Chair seeks the guidance of the House in that there are a number of other

matters under routine proceedings. Shall we continue with routine proceedings?

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, what we could do: It is now moved to 3:15 p.m.

and on private members - I know the minister wanted to table something there.

She can put it on the table and then if we could move on to the private member's

motion because we have already gone sixteen minutes over. If the minister could

just table that, with leave, and then we could move on to the regular orders of

the day.

MR. SPEAKER: That is agreed. We will move directly to Tabling of

Documents.

Tabling of Documents

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the Minister of Natural Resources.

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am tabling the documents as requested by the Opposition House Leader on

Monday of this week.

MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Day

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We now call the Private Member's Resolution submitted by my colleague from

Humber Valley.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Humber Valley

to put forward the resolution which stands in her name.

The hon. the member.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS GOUDIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It gives me great pleasure to stand here today and introduce this resolution

in support of the Poverty Reduction Strategy. I would like to point out, right

from the outset, that our government is fully committed to the vision, the goals

and the objectives of this strategy.

The 2005 Speech from the Throne signaled government's Blue Book commitment

to transform Newfoundland and Labrador, as stated here in the resolution, over a

ten-year period from a Province with the most poverty to a province with the

least poverty.

Mr. Speaker, during the last election I went door-to-door, the same as many

individuals here in this House of Assembly went door-to-door -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has recognized the hon. the member, but there are a lot of

conversations going on.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has recognized the hon. the member, but there are a lot of

conversations going on which prevents the Chair from hearing the member

adequately. I ask members for their co-operation.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the member.

MS GOUDIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, during the last election I went door-to-door, the same as many

individuals here in this House of Assembly, and we heard firsthand of many

situations out there in the community that required some change. I went

door-to-door, Mr. Speaker, with the Premier, and we knew that the problems we

were facing were not going to be changed overnight; we knew. We have said time

and time again to individuals and groups that it will take time to make the

necessary changes and see the results.

Mr. Speaker, the consensus with this poverty reduction action plan is that

the systemic causes of poverty cannot be addressed overnight. Under the

direction and leadership of the Premier, a broad-based ministerial committee was

established to ensure that poverty reduction received the highest attention

within this government.

In June of this year, our government released Reducing Poverty: An Action

Plan for Newfoundland and Labrador. As a health care professional for twelve

years working on the frontline, I took the opportunity to read through this plan

here, and everyday as a registered nurse on the frontline, Mr. Speaker, we go

through a nursing care plan, the same as a teacher does, the same as someone who

does up a business plan. We go through the proper process here and basically, as

a nursing plan, you go through, you assess your situation, you diagnose the

patients, you develop a plan, you set your short-term goals, you set your

long-term goals, and then you go through and evaluate your plan. Then, if you

need to revise your plan, you revise your plan.

Mr. Speaker, this action plan that we have here, that we have put before the

House here under this resolution, is a plan that will be constantly going

through re-evaluation. It is a long-term plan. This plan was also the

accumulation of a year of intense work that included broad consultation,

research and work by over ten departments and agencies. We heard from hundreds

of people through a series of workshops, focus groups and submissions.

Mr. Speaker, I also took the opportunity - first when I got elected as the

MHA for the Humber Valley District, I identified that there were some very

serious social issues in our society and in my district. I took the opportunity

to make a submission through the Social Policy Committee to be taken into

account when we developed our Poverty Reduction Program. I have to say, if you

look at this program - and people can take the opportunity to go on our Web site

and look at this action plan and they can certainly e-mail us at povertyreduction@gov.nl.ca

to make comments on our plan and make suggestions as we move throughout the

process of implementing this plan. We listened, we incorporated all the advice

that we were given, and we used it to strongly guide the development of this

strategy. The result is positive and progressive and I am proud to note that

Newfoundland and Labrador is only the second jurisdiction in Canada to move

forward with a Poverty Reduction Strategy.

The Poverty Reduction Strategy has been very positively received by

individuals and community-based agencies, a number of whom have met with

government to express their ongoing interests in working collaboratively with

government to meet the goals outlined in the action plan. If you look through

the plan here - take the time to look through the plan, I suggest all members do

- you can see where there is a consultation process here, where we are going to

have biannual Round Table for poverty reduction, and through the budget

consultations people will have the opportunity to have input into this strategic

plan.

Throughout the country and other provinces, groups are particularly impressed

and supportive of government's integrated and comprehensive approach and the

strong recognition it provides to the community-based sector. Community was also

very pleased with government's commitment to annually invest $30 million in

2006 and 2007, and $64 million annually. Mr. Speaker, this is the biggest

infusion of money ever into poverty reduction in our Province.

We have met, for example, our commitment to expand eligibility for the

Prescription Drug Program; eliminate school fees; increase supports within the

Income Support Program, and enhance Adult Basic Education offerings. These

investments help answer the call to make resources the strategy and enable the

initiatives to move forward.

Mr. Speaker, equally important, community recognizes that the overall

approach and guiding principles of the strategy are a solid means upon which to

move forward with a shared agenda to embark on a long-term process to

meaningfully address this very complex and multi-dimensional issue.

It is interesting to note, that other jurisdictions are paying close

attention to the work that this Province has undertaken. The other Atlantic

provinces, Quebec and British Columbia, have expressed an interest in meeting

with Minister Shelley to discuss our Poverty Reduction Strategy and approach.

Others are also taking notice. The National Council of Welfare has received a

presentation from officials and is holding their next board meeting here in the

Province to hear more about our progress in order to inform the rest of Canada

and learn from what we are doing.

As a frontline health care provider and MHA for the District of Humber

Valley, tackling poverty is essential to ensuring a healthy future for our

Province. It is about both improving the well-being and equality of life of

those living in poverty and ensuring a strong and prosperous future for all

citizens in our Province.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all members of this House offer support for this

resolution and I look forward to the remainder of this debate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

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

It is a pleasure to stand today and make a few comments with regards to the

private member's motion that was put forth by the Member for Humber Valley.

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by saying that from day to day some members

opposite, they will stand in their places and say: All we hear from the

Opposition is bad news. All you hear from us on this side is the good news. Mr.

Speaker, I want for us to take a little reality check. Let's go back to 2003

when the Blue Book came out and just see where we are today and where we stand

with this issue. In the Blue Book, the Premier stated very clearly that he felt

it was time, and he felt he was the person from a business background, to see

that each and every person in this Province had a good job and found employment.

I believe that is the essence of really eliminating poverty if we are going to

do it within ten years. Mr. Speaker, I know there are other issues that people

look at when they try to determine what poverty really is.

He also mentioned about all of our young people leaving this Province. If we

have young people - and I believe the figure is somewhere around 16,000 people

in this Province who live in poverty - if we train them, I do not think it is

good enough for them to have to go to Alberta to find a job to survive. It

should be dealt with here in the Province.

With all due respect to the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and

Employment, I remember at our Estimates last year when I asked him and his

officials to define for me what, really, poverty is. He admitted, and I

appreciate his comments that time, when he said it is very difficult to

determine what it is and to find out what position you are in if you are living

in poverty. He went on to say that I guess it has to be something that you have

to be comfortable with. He noted people probably who are living with an income

of $20,000, and if they feel they are comfortable there, well that is probably

the bracket that they live in with regard to living in poverty.

We all know that in our country back in 1988, in Canada, the government of

the day in Ottawa stated that they were going to eliminate poverty by the year

2000. We all know what happened there. We didn't get very far with it. UNICEF,

they come out from time to time, said that Canada was doing too much to define

what poverty was rather than dealing with the issue.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that is what is happening here today. I am glad that

there is a ten-year plan, but I think more has to be done to deal with the

issues as we face them today.

In the report that the minister put out, Reducing Poverty, I think it gives a

clear outline of what poverty really is. They talk about the low income cut-in

point, and they reference that a low-income household is defined as one that

spends 20 per cent of its income on food, clothing and shelter.

Then they go on the say, through the Family Expenditure Survey, FAMEX as they

are called, in 1992 they stated that an average Canadian family spends 44 per

cent, after tax income, on food, clothing and shelter. Then you add the 20 per

cent that I just noted. They claim that anyone who spends less than 64 per cent,

after taxable income, on food, clothing and shelter are low-income families.

Mr. Speaker, they go on to explain what that equates to here in the Province.

Statistics Canada, they listed in 2004 that a family of four living in rural

areas such as Baie Verte is considered to be living in low income if after tax

income is less that $20,844. If you move into Grand Falls-Windsor, that figure

is increased to $23,856. Here in St. John's and on the immediate Avalon, the

figure is $26,948.

Mr. Speaker, after reading those numbers, I can assure you, in my area and

the surrounding area - we are fairly close to St. John's - there are many

people, if that is the case, living in poverty, because many of them are below

the $26,000 bracket.

Mr. Speaker, in the Budget of 2004 the government brought in a good program,

a new tax reduction for low-income individuals and families. Just to touch on

the basis of what some families must be making here in our Province, because

they state that the provincial income tax will be eliminated for individuals

with net income up to $12,000 and for families up to $19,000, those numbers are

a far cry from the numbers I just listed, when you reference the $28,000.

Something major has to happen to get a family from this $19,000 or $20,000

bracket up to the $28,000 and $30,000 bracket, to say that they are not in the

poverty system.

In 2004, Mr. Speaker, we had 62,000 individuals in this Province in 33,000

families. Included in that were 17,000 children and 18,000 single adults. I know

the minister, last week, admitted those figures are startling and it is a major

problem, probably, to deal with, but overall in this Province in 2004, 12.2 per

cent were living in poverty but child poverty was 16.7 per cent. I believe we

have to do something to advance this major concern rather than - there is

nothing wrong with a ten-year strategy. That has to be done, and plan it, but I

believe a lot of things have to be done to take care of the issue before then.

We have the highest per capita use of any food banks in the Province. We have

one of the highest rates of child poverty; 23 per cent of Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians do not have enough disposable income to buy basic necessities.

Mr. Speaker, we saw this week the Hunger Count report that came down, and the

people who look after the food banks here in the Province cannot get over the

numbers of people going to the food banks. At first they thought it was because

the schools had just opened up, but it has continued, Mr. Speaker. Here in St.

John's alone, the two dozen food banks that look after the people here, 16,000

people every month go to food banks here in the city. I mean, let's face it,

with all of the resources that we have now, the major part of it is here on the

Avalon Peninsula. I do not know what the numbers are out in rural Newfoundland

and Labrador of people who use the food banks, but I am sure they must be

startling as well.

I have to reference a comment that the Minister of Finance made during

Question Period last week - and I know it is not in Hansard, it was just a jest

across the floor - when he said why there were so many people going to the food

banks is because, when we were in government, we forced them there. That is a

sad comment to make, regardless of what party is in power. Poverty is an issue

that is going to be very difficult to deal with, and I believe that more has to

be done.

If the Minister of Finance believes that, I just want to relate one story. I

had a call last week from a family who received an invoice after twelve years

for school tax, and there was an agreement made. The individual is on a

disability, his wife just a low-income earner. They had an agreement with the

Department of Finance on this school tax issue. The amount owing was $190-some

odd and they just could not come up with the money in the time frame, and all of

a sudden they had to pay $1,700 or $1,800. The bit of income they have coming in

goes in direct deposit to their bank account, and I guess some of their other

bills are paid the same way. About a week-and-a-half ago, they went to the

supermarket to pick up their groceries for the weekend. When they went to the

cash register, to the lady there, she checked it through and they gave her the

direct card that they had, and she said: I am sorry, we cannot do it. There is a

stop put on your bank account because of school tax.

Now, we know where that family had to go. They had to put the groceries back

on the shelf and there was nothing left for them only to go to a food bank.

Mr. Speaker, that is where I am coming from when I think more has to be done

now. Yes, there is nothing wrong with a reduction in poverty strategy, but more

has to be done. When I think about - and I know I will probably be criticized

for this again - the $200,000 that was spent recently on a convention to wine

and dine other people. Nothing wrong with it, we see that, and that is a part of

our system, but when we look at how many people have to go to a food bank,

surely goodness we can match that dollar for dollar to help those people at a

crucial time. Maybe after this year the thing might be resolved and better off

than what it is.

We talk about the gift that was given to the Premier of Alberta. I do not see

anything wrong with giving the gentleman a gift, but a pair of sealskin

slippers, $150, he probably would have enjoyed as much as the $8,000 fur coats -

and what that could have done for some young person this time of year, not only

because it is Christmas but because they find it difficult. It is not only the

people who receive social assistance, it is the low-income workers, the

low-income earners as well, who are depending now upon the food banks more than

every before.

I said it before - and I will conclude briefly, Mr. Speaker - that we cannot

wait for ten years down the road. Hopefully, we will not have to wait that long,

things will be resolved, but 62,000 individuals in this Province, including

19,000 children, cannot wait that long.

As I began with: The Premier said we have a plan. Regardless we heard the

Member for Humber Valley mention the prescription drug plan, the school fees,

the training for young people, all of that is wonderful, but you can have all of

that, it does not put the bread and butter on the table for those individuals

who have to go to the food banks. They have to have a job to go to once that

kicks in.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know what the plan could be. All I am saying is, with

regard to the strategy that the minister has put forward, and what is in that, I

can assure you, I think we on this side of the House agree that something has to

be done. What I am saying is, I think government should step in and see that

this issue is dealt with on a more immediate basis, rather than see 16,000

people lining up and going to the foods banks, just here in St. John's alone.

With those few comments, Mr. Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity and

hopefully government will see to it that something is done on an immediate basis

as well as their long-term plan.

Thank you very much.

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

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I want to start with a quote, Mr. Speaker, that was given to me by somebody

during the consultation process for this particular strategy. It says: People do

not choose to live in poverty. Mr. Speaker, this issue is so complex and so

important to every single person in Newfoundland and Labrador, not just the

people who are living in poverty but to every single group, every political

party, every part of the business community, all community organizations -

poverty is a concern for every single individual in this Province and in this

country.

Mr. Speaker, one thing about this particular strategy - and I am going to

start by saying this, Mr. Speaker: People have seen this, they have seen me hold

this up a few times, and it is on website. There are all kinds of ways. I say to

my hon. colleague who just made some comments, read it and read it again and

read it again.

Mr. Speaker, there are things in this document that we have always said. It

was stated by the member when she opened her comments on this particular issue

today, that the fact of the matter is people throughout the Province had input

into this particular strategy. One of the most important, if not the most

important, Mr. Speaker, was focus groups of people who live in poverty; people

who live in poverty to give us suggestions. One of the first overriding things

that every single group, every person that we talked to, Mr. Speaker, over the

two years preparing this document, was saying was that we understand this will

not be solved overnight. Nobody believes that, Mr. Speaker. We know it will not.

We said ten years, we set a vision, we set a strategy that would take us in the

right direction. I am certainly not going to stand here today or any time and

say what I have in my hand is going to solve those problems, but, Mr. Speaker, I

can say that it is a significant step in the right direction.

Mr. Speaker, I have been in the House fourteen years now talking about

different debates across the House, and I appreciate most of the comments my

hon. critic made today because he understands it, obviously. We deal on a daily

basis, members in this House, with people involved with poverty. I do know it

very well, Mr. Speaker. It has been probably the most major issue that I have

dealt with in my lifetime, not just as a member in this House of Assembly. So, I

understand it very well. I can say to the member, Mr. Speaker, that of all

parties in this House, all citizens in this Province, it has to be a concern for

all of us.

Mr. Speaker, the solutions are not going to come overnight. It is going to

take some time. If we believe in what is being started as a process here, a

strategy that is going to go on - and I can say to the member and all hon.

members here today that there is more to come. I understand the member when he

said more - he said it at least ten times; more. Well I can tell the member,

there will be more. This is a strategy that we will see grow and evolve.

I have talked to the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi and we have a lot of

very common concerns, I will say to the member, and have had some good

discussions to date. I can tell her, as I said to her in those meetings, that,

yes, I understand we need more. I guess, like any minister in government, I

would like to take the whole budget into my department and do the things I need

to do, but we know that is not how it works, that each minister and each member

has their own challenges and are looking for the almighty dollar, but the

almighty dollar does not go all the way. I have had it said to me in

consultations too, Mr. Speaker, that throwing money at this is not the way to do

it. It has to be strategic, it has to be well thought out, and it has to have a

vision.

Mr. Speaker, what better way to have a vision than have people, community

groups that we have dealt with, people living in poverty as I said earlier,

focus groups of people who actually live with poverty, tell you what the

solutions are to get you on the right track to put together a document like

this.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, we can even use the word brag, brag about the poverty

reduction strategy as it is, but I do not look at it as that. Yes, the member

mentioned that British Columbia has called our office to ask us - because they

have the document - if we could go to their province to talk about this

strategy. As we all know, there is only one other province in Canada, Quebec,

that has a poverty reduction strategy as all. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker,

I have had a request from Quebec to come talk about their strategy and what we

have here. I have had requests from my Atlantic counterparts, at a labour

ministers' meeting of all meetings, when I brought over some copies of the

document, to ask if we could go back there to talk. As a matter of fact, this

Friday I am speaking on a CBC show in Nova Scotia because they want to talk

about the Poverty Reduction Strategy.

Mr. Speaker, I think this is just a real indication of what this document is

doing. As I said many times; more, yes. I heard the member say a number of

times, more, more and more. I understand that, and there will be more. We will

put it in order, it will be strategic, it will be focused on what people in the

Province see as solutions to poverty, but at the same time it will not be all

done overnight. It will be strategic, it will have vision.

Mr. Speaker, I could go on and on about this and talk about the initiatives.

I am not even touching the initiatives today. I could take this booklet and go

through the initiatives, and there are some concrete ones that have happened,

like, for example, the largest increase very in Income Support, 5 per cent. Not

only that, Mr. Speaker, but for the first time in the history of this Province

an indexing of Income Support. That is direct to the people who are hurting the

most. Believe me, I know all about Income Support.

When we reduce fees; still direct help for people on low income. I could go

on. The Prescription Drug Program - and I am sure the Minister of Health and

Community Services could have a lot to say on that. There are a number of

initiatives, Mr. Speaker, and they are in the right direction. Catastrophic

drugs is another big issue that came up today. There is more and there will

always be more.

As long as we all recognize, Mr. Speaker - not just me as the minister of the

lead department and some seven ministers who took

part in this strategy, but

every single one of us, and that is my message to all members here today on both

sides of the House - the constructive, well thought out ideas that will help us

evolve and make this a reality ten years from now when we say we would like to

eliminate poverty.

Mr. Speaker, who knows who will be around in this House ten years from now? I

would say to all members, at least we can look at a year from now and two years

from now because this particular strategy is going to talk about indicators,

that in one and two and three years from now we will be able to monitor, to look

at our progress, to see what things have worked and what things have not worked.

I can say, I am very proud today of this particular strategy. I am glad to

see where it is going. Yes, I want more and there will be more. We are going to

work with all my colleagues in Cabinet. The Premier has been very supportive of

this initiative since day one. As we said in our Blue Book, we are going to

continue this.

On that note, I invite every single member here and every member of the

public, especially the business community, especially all the community groups,

to get involved and co-operate and collaborate with us as we move forward this

strategy that I think we should all be very proud of.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am happy to speak to this motion that is on the floor. I do not want, in

any way, to belittle the Poverty Reduction Strategy. You know, there are a lot

of good things in this document. As a person who has spent at least thirty years

doing socioeconomic analysis, on an academic level, on a conceptual level, as

well as on the level of community development and working with people, I look at

this document and I see a lot of good ideas and a lot of good things that are

going to happen, but I still do not see a plan for changing the number of people

living in poverty. That is what I want to talk a little bit about today.

When I look at this document, I see a plan for making life better for people

who are living in poverty, there is no doubt about that. Being sure that people

who live in poverty have full access to drugs is going to make their life

better, there is no doubt about that. Being sure that children and families

living in poverty can have dental care is going make their life better, there is

no doubt about that. Being sure that people living under the low income cut-off

have good housing is going to make their lives better, there is no doubt about

that. The bottom line is, they are still not going to have any more money in

their pockets based on this Poverty Reduction Strategy. That is how I see it.

When I look at things like the dental plan for children, if that dental plan

is not in place, it does not mean that people in poverty have more money. It

just means that their children will now have their teeth taken care of,

whereas

before they did not have their teeth taken care of. When I see that everybody,

for example, on income support gets access to free drugs, it does not mean that

gives them more money in their hands or in their pockets. It means that their

health is going to be taken care of,

whereas if they did not have free drugs,

their health would not be taken care of.

The increase in programs, for example, that were in this year's Budget, and

the things that are talked about in the Poverty Reduction Strategy, are things

that will improve lives. There is no doubt that there will be some improvement

in the lives of people living in poverty, but if our unemployment rate does not

change, if the number of people in minimum wage jobs does not change, if our

minimum wage does not go up, they will still continue to live in poverty and we

will have to be sure that we have a good social safety net. I see this strategy

as a move towards improving that social safety net, but we still will have

people who will not be able to access things that we take for granted here in

this House; things that we, as individuals, and our families can take for

granted.

For me, the bottom line for reducing poverty is putting a strategy in place

whereby we increase employment and we increase what people make for the work

that they do. When we look at the numbers of low-income families who are going

to food banks - and we learned this week from Hunger Count 2006 that those

numbers are going up across the country and here as well - when we look at those

numbers we know that our minimum wage is not working.

I have said before in the House, and I will say it again, that the

step-by-step by twenty-five cents every quarter is not going to get us anywhere.

By the time people are up to the $10 - that a lot of people in this country are

asking for at this moment, and that we promote as the NDP - by the time people

in this Province get to $10 an hour, that $10 is not going to be worth the $10

that it is now. We are saying $10 an hour now based on the needs now.

When I look at the Poverty Reduction Strategy and I see goal 3, the third

goal, and the third goal is to improve earned incomes, and when I read,

undertake policy development related to wages and benefits including ongoing

research on minimum wage to keep mandatory rates on par with the rest of

Atlantic Canada, I get very discouraged. If that is all that the Poverty

Reduction Strategy plan is going to include, is ongoing research, I do not see

any hope with regard to raising the minimum wage in this Province.

There has been untold research done in this country alone with regard to

minimum wage and the

benefits of raising minimum wage. There has been untold research done with

regard to the fact that raising the minimum wage so that people are above the

low income cut-off brings benefits back to government, because as people move

into being above the low income cut-off they now have more disposable income.

When you are in poverty you do not have any disposable income. There is

absolutely none. So, increasing the social safety net, while that is important,

making sure that programs are put in place, like the dental care for children,

like the drug program for people on Income Support - and I do not agree with a

co-pay program for low income people, I think it should be a 100 per cent drug

program for low income people - doing those things is not going to change the

fact that people will not have disposable income.

We have to start thinking in this House in a different way. We have to start

realizing that putting more money into people's hands and putting more

programs in place for people is not an expense for the government. It is an

investment in the future, and money starts coming back. If people are above the

low income cut-off, they are going to be paying taxes, income tax. Right now

they do not pay income tax because they do not have enough money to be

accountable. Money gets taken out of their cheques if they are in low income

jobs but that money comes back to them. They do not have disposable income. If

people are moved into a category where they are above the low income cut-off,

money does come back to the rest of society. Money comes back to the community.

Money comes back into the government coffers. So, it is not a loss.

It is the same way when we look at raising the minimum wage from the business

perspective. There are all kinds of studies which show that this is positive for

business. Number one, you have happier workers. Number two, again the economy

that those businesses are part of is better off because the workers are earning

more money. Number three, in spite of hearing this notion, and I hear it all the

time, that, oh, businesses are going to close down, that is not what happens,

and studies show that. Studies in this country have shown businesses do not

close down.

I remember when the City of St. John's had hearings on the minimum wage

that were part of, I guess - no, when the provincial government had the last

round of hearings on minimum wage and the City of St. John's put out this

scaremongering document. Not the city, I am sorry, I do want to correct myself,

it was the business people of St. Johns' who put out this scaremongering

document about what would happen to small businesses if the minimum wage went up

to $10 immediately. There were witnesses who came to the hearings, small

business people from the downtown of St. John's, and a number of them were

women, I have to say, who have their own businesses, who came to the hearings

and who spoke out and said: I would never pay one of my workers less than $10 an

hour. These were small business people and, as I said, for the most part that I

saw, small business women who recognized that if I cannot run my business paying

$10 an hour then I should not have the business. They were proof - because they

were small businesses, four and five staff - they were proof that yes, it can

work, that we can have a minimum wage of $10 an hour and still run a business

that works.

For me, if we really want to reduce poverty then we put our minimum wage up

significantly right away and we plan for that. We do not do more research. We do

not need more research. The proof is there. We already know.

It is the same way with the issue that I brought up today in the House with

regard to the catastrophic drugs. Somebody who, for example, requires MS drugs,

right now if that person chooses to go on social assistance, like give up a job,

sell their home, get rid of their assets in order to be able to then go on

social assistance, what have we done? We have taken a person who was in a job,

earning money, but not able to pay, say, $20,000 a year for their drugs, so we

are asking government to pay that $20,000 a year; but if the government

continues to say no and that person then has to go on social assistance through

the route that I talked about, then what is the government paying for? The

government is paying for the $20,000 for the drugs, the government is paying for

the person's income support and everything that goes with that income support:

the dental care for the children, all the other drugs that the family may

require. Because they are on social assistance, they will get those free as

well.

Government, by forcing an MS person, a person with MS, to go on social

assistance, is costing itself more money than just paying for the drugs. I mean,

it is so clear. I cannot understand why my colleagues on the other side of the

House cannot see it. It is not rocket science. It is just so clear. Putting more

people into income support and paying for their drugs makes absolutely no sense.

It seems to me that we just have a lot of confusion about what poverty is all

about.

As the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment said, and I totally

agree with him - he quoted, I think, from a document or from a witness who

appeared before them in preparing the document - nobody wants to live in

poverty. Nobody chooses to be there. So, to force somebody to live in poverty in

order to have free drugs makes no sense, because people are drained, they are

drained when they are living in poverty. Their lives are taken away from them

when they are live in poverty. People I know, whom I worked with over the years,

who live in poverty and have the ability to do so are trying to get out of it.

They are not trying to get into income support. They are trying to find a way

out of having to be on income support. Here we are saying that, in order to have

your drugs covered, the system is making you move into income support.

I ask my colleagues to realize, you have to realize, that does not fit with

what you are calling a Poverty Reduction Strategy. It does not fit on the one

hand to say, oh, we are reducing poverty because we are paying all the drugs for

people on income support, and we are putting in place a co-pay plan for

low-income people, while at the same time we have hundreds of people in the

Province who are being told to go on social assistance and then you will have

your drugs taken care of.

There are so many inconsistencies in what is going on in our government right

now, and what is going on with our policies, that I do not have a lot of hope in

the strategy, I have to tell you. Until these inconsistencies end, then I do not

see a reason for hope. Until we take seriously the minimum wage, until we take

seriously the fact that we have to put more money in people's hands, it is not

going to work. We have to put more money in their hands.

When we look at any plans that we start putting in place for diversification

of the economy, and through diversification of the economy increasing

employment, we have to make sure people are going to make enough money, because

it will not make any difference if the person has $14,000 a year, as a family,

whether they are working or not working; $14,000 a year is $14,000 a year. The

difference for the family is, if they are not working and they are on income

support they are better off. In many, many ways they are better off, but they

are not better off because not having a job is not good. Yet sometimes we are

forcing people to stay there because we are tying-

MADAM SPEAKER(S Osborne) : Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that her speaking has expired.

MS MICHAEL: May I just finish my sentence?

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave to clue up?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MADAM SPEAKER: By leave.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you.

People, whether you have $14,000 a year or $15,000 a year, I said it does not

matter whether you are on social assistance or income support or you have a job,

but it does matter because if you are on income support you do have other

programs to help you. However, nobody, as I said earlier, wants to be there,

they want to have a job. Fifteen thousand dollars a year, between $14,000 and

$15,000, is what you would make on a full-time job at our minimum wage at the

moment. We all know a family of one, two, three or four cannot live on that.

I ask the members of government, in particular, to think seriously about what

I am saying. To reduce poverty we have to put money in people's hands. The

Poverty Reduction Strategy will help with the effects of poverty and that is

fine, but we have to do more then take care of the effects of poverty, we have

to get rid of poverty.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Topsail.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS E. MARSHALL: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise in this House. I would

like to speak to the private member's motion on reducing poverty.

I would like say first that the department and the minister's officials

have done quite a bit of work on analysing the poverty issue. Madam Speaker, it

started back I think even in 2005 in the Speech from the Throne when the

government made the commitment that they would work towards a strategy for

poverty reduction. In June of 2005 the background report was presented, and

then, of course, early this year the actual strategy was released, Madam

Speaker.

Madam Speaker, we all know that poverty is a problem in this Province, and in

order to address a problem the first thing you have to do is you have to analyse

the problem, and you have to find out what exactly is this problem comprised of.

There are several documents, Madam Speaker, which do quite a thorough job of

analysing the problem of poverty. I think that we have to do that. We have to

understand the nature of poverty and we have to understand why people are poor

in order to address the problem and start working towards solutions that will

address the problem.

The first thing I would like to speak to, Madam Speaker, is the profile of

poverty and the supporting document, the background material that is provided by

the government, gives quite a good analysis of poverty in Newfoundland. As we

all know, we have the highest rate of poverty in the country. It is our

objective over the next ten years that we will become the province with the

least poverty.

Madam Speaker, I would just like to go through a few facts that would

demonstrate the issue of poverty in Newfoundland and Labrador. These numbers are

based, I believe, on 2003 figures. Those were the most current numbers available

at the time when the background material was done and when the strategy was

released. As of that time, there were 61,000 people in this Province and 33,000

families that lived in poverty. We need to know that if we are going to address

the problem of poverty.

Fifteen-and-a-half per cent of children that live in this Province live in

poverty. The issue of child poverty is, in itself, a problem. Twenty per cent of

the people in the age group, age fifty-five to sixty-four in this Province, live

in poverty. I was very surprised to learn that. That is quite a significant

number of people in that age group. Then, of course, when you look in the age

group over the age of sixty-five years, 2.1 per cent of that group live in

poverty. I think why the number is reduced in that age group, Madam Speaker, is

because by the time people reach age sixty-five they are entitled to Canada

Pension Plan and other types of pension benefits, so, of course, the percentage

drops.

Another factor that is very important is that 44 per cent of single parent

families live in poverty and most of those families are headed by women. Almost

60 per cent of those living in poverty have not completed high school. Another

issue, 55 per cent of adults with disabilities live in poverty. We need to know,

we need to have a profile of who lives in poverty in this Province if we are to

come up with a solution to address the issue of poverty and to reduce the number

of people who are living in poverty.

There are many, many reasons why people live in poverty. It is outlined in

the report. It could be attributed to your education level, it could be

attributed to disabilities, it could be attributed to poor health, but the

important thing is, to solve a problem you have to analyze the problem. If we

look at the background material, there has been an excellent job done of that.

Madam Speaker, the actual Poverty Reduction Strategy, the actual strategy,

looked at the depth that people were in poverty and the duration of poverty. It

also outlines goals and objectives for the government. One thing we are very

clear on, once you read the strategy and the background material, is that

poverty is a multi-faceted problem. There is not one solution; it is not an

issue of throwing money at a problem, Madam Speaker. It is multi-faceted, so the

solutions also have to be multi-faceted.

Before I get into the things that this government has done, Madam Speaker, to

address the issue of poverty, I would like to speak to one page in the strategy

that is very important, and that is a page that is headed up Measuring Support.

One of the things we have to do is that over the next ten years we have to

reduce the amount of poverty in this Province. Madam Speaker, if we are to do

that, we have to know where we are going and we also have to be able to measure

it. That is one thing that governments historically have not been good at. They

throw out a strategy, they throw out a plan, but there is no way to measure

whether they are making any progress. Madam Speaker, what we are trying to do is

say, we are now the Province with the highest ratio of poverty in the country;

in ten years time, we are going to be the Province with the lowest. The baseline

data has been established and the minister, in the report on Measuring Success,

has indicated that he will be coming back to the House every year annually and

making a statement of progress each year to the members of this House of

Assembly.

The other commitment, Madam Speaker, that the minister has indicated is that

every second year the report on indicators to measure progress, that this will

be released. There are many, many ways that poverty can be measured. The

strategy itself outlines three ways, but in the report, the preferred method - I

will not get into the technicalities - is indicated and it is laid out very

quickly as to how we are going to measure poverty. We will be able to see over

time, as reports come in each year, whether we are actually making progress

towards our objective.

Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity now to talk about some

of the things that this government is doing to reduce poverty in this Province.

The first area I would like to look at is a link with education. One of the

things that we do know from the background material that is being provided is

that people with a low education level have a more likely chance to live in

poverty, so one of the things that this government has done is put additional

resources into our education system. Because of the strong correlation between

education and incomes - in other words, low education low incomes - we are

trying to improve the education level of people who are living in this Province.

Now we do notice, Madam Speaker, that over the past number of years there are

some good signs that our education levels of the general population are

increasing, our achievement levels are improving, and our high school graduation

rates are increasing. We, in the last number of years, have taken a number of

initiatives to increase the education level and to encourage people to stay in

school.

One of the first things we did in last year's budget was, we increased the

instruction