Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 30 May 2007 (45th General Assembly, 4th Session, Vol. XLV No. 21)
2007-05-30
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
May 30, 2007 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 21
The House met at 2:00 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!
Admit Strangers.
This afternoon I am very pleased to welcome in the Speaker's gallery
Monsieur Julio Custodio, President de al Federation des francophones de Terra-Neuve
et du Labrador.
Today, May 30, is the official day when we recognize the contributions of the
francophones in our Province. Earlier today there was a ceremony in the lobby of
Confederation Building and Mr. Custodio was here for that purpose, and we
welcome you, sir, to the House of Assembly this afternoon.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: Members' statements this afternoon are as follows: the
hon. the Member for the District of Grand Bank; the hon. the Member for the
District of Windsor-Springdale; the hon. the Member for the District of Port de
Grave; the hon. the Member for the District of Kilbride; the hon. the Member for
the District of Bellevue; and the hon. the Member for the District of Exploits.
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend congratulations to Judy
Cooper of Grand Bank. Judy is this year's winner of the Recreation
Newfoundland & Labrador Pitcher Plant Individual Award.
The Pitcher Plant Individual Award is presented annually to a volunteer for
outstanding effort and invaluable contribution to the development of recreation
and leisure activities, which contribute to improving the quality of life for
residents of the Province.
Judy has been a valuable and continuing contributor to a large number of
worthwhile activities in Grand Bank since 1976. Within soccer, as a coach,
assistant coach and manager, she was very active in three Atlantic tournaments
and one national under eighteen female competition. She played a major role in
one Atlantic title and two bronze medal performances. Her record as coach
includes three gold medals and one bronze medal at Newfoundland & Labrador
Summer Games, plus five provincial championships.
Judy was inducted into the Burin Peninsula Soccer Hall of Fame in 2004. She
served on the Grand Bank Recreation Commission for twenty-five years, filling
every executive position while working on a variety of committees. She was the
first president of the Grand Bank figure skating club and was selected the
community's Sports Executive of the Year for 1985, plus five selections as
Volunteer of the Year. Judy was a Sunday school teacher for fifteen years and
has been a canvasser for the Cancer Society, Red Cross, and Heart and Stroke
Foundation. She also served on the 2003 Burin Peninsula Summer Games Committee,
with the Girl Guides of Canada and with Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador's
superhost program. Judy is presently involved with the Grand Bank Come Home Year
2007 Committee.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating
Judy Cooper and thanking her for her many years of service to her community and
her Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, and fellow hon. Members of the House of Assembly, I rise with
great pride to congratulate Job Halfyard and Sunrise Fish Farms of Green Bay
South on the christening of the EDULIS, a new mussel farm barge. An edulis is a
type of mussel.
Job and his family have been involved in the mussel farming industry for the
past twenty years. The main area is at Flat Rock Tickle and the seed area is at
the Port Anson area.
This barge was constructed by Fab-Tech in Glovertown, and measures
sixty-seven feet by twenty-two feet. The pontoon barge is constructed of
aluminum and is powered by two diesel engines.
This $600,000 investment will improve the efficiency of the farm and the
quality of the mussels. Sunrise Fish Farms harvested 2 million pounds of mussels
last year and it is still increasing.
Job has earned the respect of everyone in the industry as an individual who
works endlessly to promote his business and the aquaculture industry as a whole.
So I would like to ask all hon. members to congratulate Job today on the
continued dedication to the aquaculture industry.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to extend
congratulations to a woman entrepreneur from my district, M. Wanda Dawe. Ms Dawe
is from Bay Roberts and was honoured with the Entrepreneur of the Year Award,
Eastern Region, from the Newfoundland and Labrador Organization of Women
Entrepreneurs at a special gala held at the Fairmont on Thursday, April 26.
Since 1998, NLOWE Entrepreneur of the Year awards have been awarded to the
Province's most successful female entrepreneurs for their contributions to the
economy. Seven women from around the Province were honoured this year. These
outstanding women contribute significantly to our provincial economy and serve
as role models for all women entrepreneurs.
Mr. Speaker, as owner-manager of Radiance Hair Studio and Spa Limited in Bay
Roberts, Wanda works diligently and values all that can be learned from
experience, both personally and professionally.
In 1986, Wanda pursued her education at Memorial University of Newfoundland
where she completed two degrees, including a Masters Degree in Philosophy. Wanda
also earned a Doctorate of Philosophy from the University of Ottawa in 1998.
Mr. Speaker, in 1999, she earned certification as a Philosophical
Practitioner following training in New York. Dr. Dawe combined her formal
education and her business background to open Dawe Counselling Services - a
practice which she provided for two years.
The opportunity to own and operate a hair salon presented itself in May 2004
and Wanda leads a team of five skilled employees and is proud of the fact that
they have established themselves as "top notch" in a very competitive
market.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join with me in extending
congratulations to Wanda Dawe, who was honored with the Entrepreneur of the Year
Award, Eastern Region, from the Newfoundland and Labrador Organization of Women
Entrepreneurs.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Kilbride.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, I stand in this hon. House today to congratulate
Bidgood's for recently being honoured by the Retail Council of Canada.
Bidgood's will be presented with the Ambassador Award on June 4, 2007, in
Toronto for its significant contribution to the community of Goulds and the
surrounding area.
Mr. Speaker, the award will be presented at the Retail Council of Canada's
2007 Store Conference which will bring together 760 to 800 retailers from across
Canada at the Toronto Congress Centre. The conference is a two-day event to
highlight the new trends and retail concepts in the retail industry.
Bidgood's is a business icon in Goulds, well known in the Province and even
the whole nation for its local produce and goods.
In 1949, Roger Bidgood started Bidgood's wholesale, selling products from
St. John's firms along the Southern Shore. The business expanded in a few
years to include a fleet of nineteen trucks and a new wholesale building.
Mr. Speaker, in 1963 Bidgood's Food Centre opened, becoming the first
full-service supermarket on the Southern Shore.
Today the Bidgood's business is a plaza that includes a supermarket and
twenty-seven stores, each providing services to thousands of families who reside
in the surrounding communities.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating
Bidgood's for this prestigious award.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.
MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this House today to extend
congratulations to a Level III Crescent Collegiate student, Katie Phillips, who
is this year's winner of the forty-fourth annual Knights of Columbus
Provincial Speak Off held in Bishop's Falls on April 28.
Mr. Speaker, Katie is a seventeen-year-old Crescent Collegiate student who
represented Dalton Assembly Knights of Columbus, Harbour Grace, spoke on Global
Warming. She competed against six other young people from around the Province.
Mr. Speaker, Katie's speech earned her a $500 prize, which she intends to
put towards her university tuition, a medal and a trophy which is displayed in
the showcase at Crescent Collegiate. Katie was delighted to share her trophy
with two of her public speaking teacher coaches, Jack Reid and Laurie-Ann Reid,
who have helped and supported her participation in public speaking for the last
three years.
Next year, Katie will be attending Memorial University to study for a major
in Sociology and a minor in Law and Society. Then she plans on attending law
school and become a civil rights lawyer.
Mr. Speaker, I all members of this House to join with me in extending
congratulations to Katie Phillips who is this year's winner of the
forty-fourth annual Knights of Columbus Speak Off.
Merci, monsieur le pr sident.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Order, please!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Exploits.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Order, please!
MR. FORSEY: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the 512 Exploits
Air Cadet Squadron of Bishop's Falls on their fifty-eighth Annual Review.
Mr. Speaker, this squadron has a membership of thirty cadets. Throughout the
year their program includes physical fitness training, sports, public speaking,
classroom instruction, and recently the reintroduction of flight training.
Mr. Speaker, these cadets also play an important role in other activities and
events such as raising money for the Wish Maker Parade, helping out with
catering at the Lions Club, and participating in the Santa Claus parade.
Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, May 26, the 512 Squadron held their annual review,
and during the inspection in front of many relatives and friends they had the
opportunity to perform a number of mobile displays.
This was followed by the presentation of awards for which the cadets were
recognized for their annual performances, attendance, and dedication to the
cadet movement.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating the
512 Exploits Squadron on their fifty-eighth Annual Review.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to inform my hon. colleagues about La Journ e
provinciale de la francophone, Provincial Francophone Day.
May 30 is the day we celebrate our Province's rich francophone and Acadian
history, and the more than 2,000 francophones in our Province. These
individuals, as well as the 20,000 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who reap the
benefits of speaking Canada's two official languages, ensure the survival of
French as a beautiful, enchanting and colourful language more than 500 years
after is was first spoken on our shores.
It was 20 years ago, Mr. Speaker, that the French Newfoundland and Labrador
flag was raised for the first time in Mainland, known to some as La Grand'Terre,
on the West Coast of our Province. Earlier today, I had the honour of joining La
F d ration
des francophones de Terre-Neuve et du Labrador and distinguished guests in
raising the same flag here on Confederation Hill.
Monsieur le Pr sident,
the French Newfoundland and Labrador flag encapsulates the pride and vitality of
our francophone communities. It recalls their French and Acadian origins, as
well as the maritime tradition of their ancestors. At the same time, it suggests
that our francophone communities are on the move, evolving, adapting and pushing
forward toward another 500 years of prosperity.
Today, I would also like to recognize a hard-working and dedicated segment of
our public service: the Office of French Services. This office of the Public
Service Secretariat works diligently to build the capacity of our Province's
public service to deliver services in French as was recently demonstrated with
the translation of the Provincial Court's Web site. Through its
French-language training program as well as translation, linguistic support and
liaison services, and the support it provides to me in my capacity as Minister
Responsible for Francophone Affairs, the Office of French Services enables us
all to do a better job at contributing to the development of our francophone
communities.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage all my honourable colleagues, and indeed all
residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, to reflect on the enrichment - cultural,
historical, economic and linguistic - that French-speaking Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians bring to our society.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.
MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Well, I must say that my French is a bit rusty. I was pretty good at French
one time, about thirty years ago when I worked in Labrador City, but I will
stick to the mother tongue today.
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted, as part of the Official Opposition, to be
associated with this news today. I want to say congratulations to our
francophones in this Province, especially now twenty years celebrating
Provincial Francophone Day. I cannot believe it is twenty years because in my
district, Grand Falls-Buchans, we have had French immersion for nineteen of
those twenty years in G.F.A Primary, Grand Falls-Windsor, now called Woodland
Primary. It was only in 1969 that the Official Languages Act was proclaimed. So,
in two years time we will be celebrating forty years.
I, too, want to say thank you to the Office of our French Services because
while I was President of Treasury Board, that was an office where we used quite
a bit for translation. All the public servants in our Province have an
opportunity to take French language, through that office, and that is a
wonderful thing to be able to do.
I want to say, Mr. Speaker, twenty years later and 2,000 francophones and
Acadians in our Province, I wish there were more. Our population is dwindling
and we need more.
In closing, Mr. Speaker, I want to say it has been an interesting experience,
the francophone and Acadian history in our Province, and I am delighted to offer
you congratulations on this special day.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Merci, monsieur le pr sident.
D'abord je voudrais dire que c'est un plaisir de dire, "bienvenu" B
Monsieur Custodio.
I also thank the minister for a copy of the statement.
It was a pleasure to be at the event today in the foyer celebrating the
twentieth anniversary since the francophone flag of Newfoundland and Labrador
was first raised. It is wonderful to see us at this moment being able to
celebrate that wonderful history.
It was pointed out today during the event that my colleague in the House from
Port au Port is the first francophone terreneuvien in the House of Assembly -
not the first francophone. We will all remember, the Minister of Education years
ago from Saint-Pierre et Miquelon, but we do have our colleague as the first
francophone terreneuvien and I think it is quite an honour to be able to say
that.
I have sad memories, as I am sure some of us do, of when we did not celebrate
the culture of the people on the Port au Port Peninsula, the people of Grand Le
Pierre, when that was not celebrated. I have the experience of being with people
who were francophone, who were ashamed to speak their language. I think what we
have to celebrate today is their courage that they kept going, that they did not
give up and that they recognized their rights as a people to their language and
to their culture.
I congratulate all of our original francophones of Newfoundland and Labrador
for that. I congratulate, also, the newcomers to the Province as they join with
our original francophone (inaudible) as they continue to make steps in having
their rights acknowledged.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
Oral Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the Premier.
Mr. Speaker, according to a press release issued this morning by the Premier,
the Deputy Minister of Health has been removed from his position.
I ask the Premier: With so many health related issues on the front burner
today, why was the deputy minister removed from that position?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As part of the announcement today, government also announced that the senior
civil servant, the former Clerk of the Executive Council, Mr. Robert Thompson,
had taken on special duties to ensure that we go through a full, open and
transparent process during the judicial inquiry and matters related to health
issues, which are a very serious concern to all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
We are trying to do this in the exact same manner as when we dealt with MHA's
issues in the House. We brought in the Auditor General, brought in the police to
look into matters and, as well, we brought in the Chief Justice; the highest
judge, of course, in the land.
We want to make sure that as we go through this process, the same kind of
process takes place. As a result, what we have done is we have appointed Mr.
Thompson to these positions whereby he will be a secretary, basically, on health
issues. What he will be doing, will be making sure that all the information that
is necessary, that is required, for the judicial inquiry is presented so that
everything that is necessary for complete disclosure is there. He will also
chair a task force to make sure that in the event of any adverse health events
in the Province, that there will be systems and procedures in place in order to
guarantee the public and the public has the assurance that everything has been
done properly.
We fully anticipate that, as a result of the public awareness of what is
going on now with health issues, as individual matters of perhaps negligence or
malpractice -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the Premier to complete his answer quickly now.
PREMIER WILLIAMS: I appreciate getting a little time because it is a
matter of importance.
As well, when it comes to future matters with health concerns, that we have a
senior public servant in place in order to conduct that. That is a key part of
that announcement.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I read the press release, I know what was in it. I
asked you a question: Why was the deputy minister removed from his position
today? Obviously, you did not answer the question, so obviously you fired him.
Is that why? Tell us why when you stand up, why you did that.
Mr. Speaker, the same press release states that Robert Thompson, the current
Clerk of the Executive Council, will chair a task force on the management of
adverse health issues and the dissemination of information to the public. The
task force will not only identify adverse health events but, more importantly,
how government responds and communicates information concerning these issues.
Mr. Speaker, it is obvious from this statement that was released by the
Premier this morning that government realizes, now finally realizes, that once
the false tests of the hormone receptor tests were known they should have been
communicated to the 965 women impacted directly by those tests and to the
general public at large.
I ask the Premier: Are you finally admitting that government was negligent in
not telling these 967 women who are directly impacted, and the general public,
about these faulty test results when government first learned about these faulty
test results, not a year later.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, we, in government, see what we have done
today as a very, very responsible action, an action that will give the public
and presumably the members of the Opposition the assurance and the confidence
that this is going to be done properly.
Let me say one thing, first of all, with regard to Mr. Abbott. Under no
circumstances was Mr. Abbott fired; absolutely not. That is typical of the
approach that you take when any individuals are involved in the public here in
this Province; you want to smear their reputations and you want to disparage
them - a very reputable, a very competent person. He was offered a transfer,
basically, to the Department of Tourism. He has a background in the private
health care sector. He wanted to go back to that private background, and that is
exactly what he is doing.
During this process, while there is an inquiry going on, you do not want
someone there who is constantly going to be under a barrage, a person who is
going to have to sit there through all of this when every single issue that
comes out during the judicial inquiry comes to the surface and this person has
to run a department. He was given the opportunity to move to another department.
He decided, of his own accord, to go into the private sector; but to try and
imply that he was fired is wrong. It is a terrible, terrible insinuation for you
to do that, Sir.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I say the deputy minister was replaced by Robert Thompson who happened to be,
himself, a former Deputy Minister of Health for this Province, who happened to
be the Clerk of the Executive Council, who should, by the nature of that
position, know everything that is happening in the civil service, including what
was happening in the Department of Health with the receptor tests, I say to the
Premier. By putting him in there, you are not doing anything different. You are
not doing anything different by removing the current deputy minister and
replacing him with one who knew exactly what was going in there. That does not
give me any comfort, I say to the Premier.
Mr. Speaker, the three Ministers of Health knew the information about the
faulty testing, yet made the decision to keep it from these 967 women and the
general public at large. They decided to keep this a secret.
I ask the Premier: Did you, in any way, participate in the decision not to
release the information? If not, did your ministers even advise you of the
significance of the problem?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Absolutely not, Mr. Speaker, I was not involved in
that. Nor has there been any deliberate attempt by any of the ministers to hide
information here.
Do you think for one minute that anybody in their right mind, whether they
are a minister, the Premier, or a member of the general public, would
deliberately keep information from people who were sick, or had bad health
consequences, or had a wrongful
interpretation or a wrongful diagnosis? Do you
think that anybody, for any political reasons or for any cover-up reasons, would
do that? Because, I can tell you right now, it certainly did not happen and it
will not happen.
You need to take into consideration here exactly what this is all about. This
is about the people of Newfoundland and Labrador having comfort in the system,
having known that they have the security in the system on a go-forward basis.
What we have done here is, we have taken the highest public servant in the
land, who has a background in health, who is an eminent and an exceptional
individual with a terrific career in the public service, and we have placed him
in a key role of importance to make sure that all the information gets out.
You know, Mr. Speaker, we have to understand here that this transcends this
government. We came into it late in the decade, but this goes back to 1997. This
transcends your government, and governments before it, but this is not a witch
hunt. We are not out to try and blame previous Ministers of Health for covering
up anything here, because I do not for one minute think that happened under any
circumstances.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the Premier to complete his answer.
PREMIER WILLIAMS: So, we are here to provide all the information and to
give whatever is necessary to that judicial inquiry so that proper conclusions
can be reached.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am suggesting you covered it up. I can tell you the reason. Your minister
stated publicly the reason the information was not released to the affected
individuals and to the general public. He said he agreed with Eastern Health in
that they had to weigh the cost of telling the affected individuals against the
cost of the litigation against Eastern Health. That is the reason it was covered
up, I say to the Premier.
So you are saying, Premier, that you had no knowledge of this most serious
issue when you had three ministers who knew all about it and were briefed all
the way along the way, according to Eastern Health, in the briefing they gave us
last week, and not one of these individuals came forward to you and asked for
your advice, or notified you of this in anyway whatsoever. This never happened?
Is this what the Premier is saying?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, what I am saying is that I, under no circumstances, deliberately
attempted to cover up, or was there ever any conscious decision made by Cabinet
or by any of the ministers to have any cover-up here with regard to information.
As information was made available to us, and as we were advised by the medical
profession, we disclosed information and we disclosed test results to the people
who were affected. That is exactly what we did.
Your question implied that I was involved in making some decision that kept
information from the public, and that is not true. You are going to find, Mr.
Speaker, as we delve back through this, that there is other information that is
going to come out. There are memos that were written back in 2003 when the hon.
members opposite were in government, and there is a memo that came from a doctor
that was sent to the Health Care Corporation that says: Diagnosis based on
inappropriate immunostain will surely jeopardize patient care and may even
expose the HCCBJ to litigation. Therefore, it will be ill-advised to operate
unreliable and erratic immuno procedures in our laboratory.
These kinds of pieces of information are going to come out, and they were
during your term of office, some are during our term of office, and some were
during a previous term of office. This is information that needs to be made
available to the general public, but I am not turning around here today and
accusing you of hiding any information like this. I do not think you would. I
consider you to be an hon. gentleman and I would expect the same reciprocity for
us.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, the issue of the faulty test results - I am not
talking about individuals; they were faulty test results - it is my
understanding that it was because of equipment that was used. The issue of
faulty test results was made known to your government in May 2005. The final
tests were not completed until November 2006, some sixteen or seventeen months
later. There are people in the Province today, Mr. Speaker, according to the
news last night, who were tested and still do not know the results of these
tests.
I ask the Premier the question: When were you first made aware of the faulty
test results?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, there were two briefing notes that were
prepared, which were given to me, and they were both in reaction to the media
announcement. One was in October 2005, if I remember, and the second memo was in
August 2006; I believe it was August 18. The other one was in the first week or
second week of October 2005. They were in reaction to the media stories at that
particular point in time. They were given to me for information purposes, so
that I would be advised of what the public knew, what was out in the public
domain, to tell me exactly what the situation was within government. Those were
the two briefing notes that I had.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I am amazed that the Premier just admitted that,
that he knew in October 2005. He knew about these faulty test results in October
2005, and that the final test results were not complete until November 2006, a
year later.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. REID: You sat on that information. You were part of the
decision-making process that made it, made a conscious decision not to notify
these individuals because, as your minister said, you were more concerned about
litigation than you were about the health of the individuals. I am shocked, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, my final question for the Premier -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. REID: It appears now, from what happened this morning with regard to
the press release about the firing of the Deputy Minister of Health, that you
are using that individual as a scapegoat. Well, that is not going to work, Mr.
Premier. You had three ministers who sat on that information for some eighteen
months without telling the people. Why didn't you ask for their resignations,
rather than firing the Deputy Minister of Health?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, what I did say is that I was provided with
media information on what was in the public domain, which was disclosed by The
Independent , I think, on a Sunday in October, so the Monday or the Tuesday
morning I would have been provided with a briefing note.
With regard to the firing of the Deputy Minister of Health, that is
absolutely untrue. It is absolutely unfair. It is malicious. It is defamatory.
It is libelous. It is the wrong thing to do to a very bring, intelligent public
servant who has provided great service to this Province, who was offered a
transfer to another department, did not accept it because, based on his own
decision and his family decision, he decided he was going to go back to the
private service.
That is very clear for the record, make no mistake about it, despite the
defamatory statements of the Leader of the Opposition which are absolutely
disgusting.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: A final question, Mr. Speaker.
Let's get this straight. This issue was first brought to government's
attention in May 2005. The Premier never knew anything about this issue until it
became public in October 2005, six or seven months later.
Premier, do you think that your ministers, one or all of three of them, were
acting in a competent way by not telling you about this very, very serious issue
for six months? Do you think that they should be sitting in your Cabinet today,
having not informed you of this serious issue? What other serious issues are
they not informing you of?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: I ask the hon. gentleman opposite: Was he aware of this
memo in June 2003, as a member of Cabinet, which was sent to government with
regard to a health issue? Were you aware of it? He was not aware of it.
Mr. Speaker, I receive thousands of briefing notes over a period to time. I
receive thousands of pieces of information. I rely on my ministers. Those
ministers rely on the health boards. Those matters were being dealt with by the
health boards. The ethical side and the medical side of the health boards had
already said that these matters are under review, they are in good hands.
We are not doctors. I am not a doctor. The Ministers of Health are not
doctors. We cannot provide medical advice. We have to rely on good medical
advice in order to deal with tests properly, and that is exactly what we did. We
took instructions from the people who know what this is all about.
If there was a flaw in that process, that is what the inquiry is all about.
We do not diagnose people, in this government, and we do not intend to do so. We
rely on proper medical procedures, and that is exactly what we did.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, the Premier says he relies on his minister and he
relied on his ministers. Well, I say to the Premier, one or all three of these
ministers knew of this very serious issue for six months. They never spoke to
you about it.
Do you feel confident in relying on these three same ministers today? Do you,
Premier? As the main minister for this Province, do you feel confident in
leaving those three individuals in your Cabinet when, on any given day, a very
important issue concerning the lives of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians may
come across their desk, that you may need to know about. Can you rely on them to
pass that information on to you? Because obviously you could not do it in the
past.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: I can rely on them, absolutely. Perhaps Premier Grimes
could not rely on his ministers - it might be a little different situation for
you - but I can rely on my ministers, absolutely. There are lots of matters that
are left to the ministers and they take care of them in a proper manner. This
was dealt with in a proper manner. The liaison was done with the health
authority. The tests were sent off to the best institution that we could
possibly send them off to, and the first results came back in October. When
those results came back, they were conveyed to the people who were affected.
You see, the primary purpose here is the health of the patients, the people
who were affected. It is not about politics. You need to understand that this is
not about kicking around the political football, when you are dealing with the
lives of people and their families. This is about finding out what happened.
This is about dealing with it. This is about giving the people of the Province
the assurance that best practices are being followed.
We will do that, and we will do that to the best of our ability, and they
will have full disclosure at the end of the day, unlike the previous government
opposite.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Health and
Community Services.
There is an obvious shortage of nurses in the Province, as was demonstrated
by those who walked the picket line in the rain yesterday at Clarenville. The
president of the nurses' union is pointing the finger at government, saying
this is a consistent problem all over the Province. The failure to retain nurses
in our hospitals will impact the quality of our health care services and, as
well, Mr. Speaker, many of these professionals will lose most of their summer
vacation this year.
You, Minister, made a promise in the last election to deal with recruitment
and retention, so why have you failed to address this issue and allowed it to
reach a crisis point?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As I indicated in the House yesterday, Eastern Health, as I understand it,
before the end of this week, will be posting a new revised vacation schedule.
The nurses who work within Eastern Health will have an ability not to get all of
their annual leave between now and October but, in accordance with their
collective agreement, they will have access to their annual leave provisions
between now and the end of October. As I understand it, that will be capped at
about two weeks of annual leave.
I understand also, Mr. Speaker, that Eastern Health has had some real
success, as have the other health authorities, some real success in recruiting
the most recent graduates from our Schools of Nursing in this Province. Eastern
Health, together with the other health authorities, have made a real effort to
convert many of the casual positions to permanent, which has been a major issue
for nurses in this Province to be able to have a fixed schedule, a clear
understanding of their work duties and rotations, and that sort of thing has
been done. Eastern Health, together with the northern regions, have been able to
provide some incentive, some cash incentives by way of signing bonuses -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the minister now to conclude his answer.
MR. WISEMAN: - and other financial incentives to be able to attract
people to their respective regions, I say, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the issue is far from under control.
One of the issues identified with retaining nurses, in fact, was that many of
the positions were casual and part-time only. I think the minister realizes that
nurses are the heart of health care in this Province and I would like to ask him
why he did not convert those positions to permanent positions sooner, instead of
waiting until we had lost these new employees?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Just so we have this question in some context here, the issue of having
casual nurses converted to permanent positions is an issue that surfaced this
year, yes, in 2007, and each of our health authorities have made an effort, and
have made a major effort, to convert many of their casuals to permanent. In
fact, Eastern Health, I think, had 160 some-odd people converted from casual to
permanent. This is not a new issue, Mr. Speaker.
I recall one time when members opposite were in government and the nurses
were on strike. They were out on strike as a result of - this was one of the
major outstanding issues. Members opposite let the nurses' union go out on
strike over this and other issues that have since been addressed.
The issue of conversion of casual to permanent positions is an issue that
dates back to the 1990s, the early 1990s. It is not a new issue. What is
different, though, this time, I say, Mr. Speaker, each of our health authorities
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the minister now to conclude his answer.
MR. WISEMAN: - in recognition of how significant an issue this was for
the nurses in their respective organizations, and for the nurses' union, have
taken action this year to deal with it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, it seems that there is always a failure of this
minister to recognize some very critical and essential problems that are out
there in our health care system. Let me ask him this question as it relates to
LPNs today.
We have learned that Eastern Health Corporation is looking at hiring
low-skilled workers to fill temporary positions at its nursing homes over the
summer months. The Department of Health and Community Services must know that
these patient observer attendants have no training and no experience to work in
this sector of our health care. I ask the minister if his government and he are
supportive of having these professionals replace these skilled LPNs that we now
have working in our system?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, I think it is really important when you start
asking questions, that you ask it and frame it appropriately, because, very
clearly, these personal observation staff, these individuals, are not replacing
the full functions of LPNs. That is the critical issue here, Mr. Speaker. When
you use a phrase that these people are replacing, that suggests that they are
going to walk into those same positions and do all of the exact same duties.
That is not the case, Mr. Speaker, not the case at all, and to suggest that is
going to happen is just totally irresponsible. It gives people the impression
that they will be cared for by people who are not well trained and are not
qualified to do the job, and that is not what is happening here.
Very clearly, what has happened this year is Eastern Health has made a
similar decision that Western Health made last year, that in certain
circumstances when individual patients need to have someone with them
twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, someone needs to sit there and to
observe that patient or that resident during that period of time. When care is
required -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair asks ministers to keep their responses to roughly a minute.
The Chair recognizes the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I guess my question to the minister then will be very simple, because our
understanding from LPNs is that they are being replaced by unskilled workers.
I ask the minister: Will he intervene with the Eastern Health Corporation
today to ensure that these placements of unskilled workers, untrained workers,
in our health care system does not happen?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, herein lies the problem with these questions.
They rely on their understanding, which is not always clear. Clearly, as I have
said, and I will repeat again, these individuals are hired as patient observers.
They are not carrying out the full functions of an LPN. They are not carrying
out the full functions of an RN. To suggest that they are replacing, as to imply
that they are assuming all of the full range of duties of an LPN, is an
irresponsible assertion on their part. Again, misunderstood the issue.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, my question is also for the Minister of Health and
Community Services.
Last week the minister said he directed Eastern Health to, within ten days,
carry out a review of 6,000 radiology reports done by the suspended radiologist
at the Burin Regional Health Centre.
I ask the minister, in light of the news from the head of the Newfoundland
and Labrador Medical Association, Dr. Tumilty, that ten days is unreasonable if
the reports are to be done accurately, but they will do everything possible, he
said, to complete the review.
I ask the minister: Will the radiologists involved have to put their own work
on hold to get this review completed?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in the House yesterday, as I
understand it, Eastern Health has some twenty-two radiologists who are involved
in this exercise. A couple of them are working full-time on that. The others are
doing it in between the work that they are doing.
As a part of this exercise, other day-to-day routine activities are not being
pushed aside. This has been an add-on for them. We commend them and we really
want to thank them for making the extra effort to, in fact, assist us with this
process, to assist us in what is a massive task we have before us. I really want
to thank them and commend them for the commitment that they have made to do this
in a fashion that provides quality treatment to the people of Newfoundland and
Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: I do not know, Mr. Speaker, if the minister realizes that in
his answer he just gave the impression that they are not working full-time in
their regular jobs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, even though radiologists will try and complete the
review in two weeks, Dr. Tumilty has said that rather than be forced to rush the
process to satisfy government, radiologists want to protect against error. The
minister, however, said he is not concerned that the extra workload may cause
mistakes in the retesting. Now, Mr. Speaker, the last thing we need in heath
care in this Province are even more mistakes.
I ask the minister: Is this yet another example of making decisions that are
not in our patients' best interests? When are you going to live up to your
commitment to do whatever it takes to get the job done instead of putting extra
pressure on our radiologists?
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the Minister of Health and Community
Services.
I ask him to keep his response short.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I challenge the member opposite, either in Hansard or any taped interview
ever done by this minister, that I ever suggested that I did not want to have a
safe result here; that I would put speed ahead of safety; speed ahead of having
a positive outcome. It is irresponsible to suggest it. It is one more time of
fearmongering and suggesting that this government is somehow irresponsible. I
say, Mr. Speaker, that is totally irresponsible on the member's part opposite.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
In order to meet our commitments to the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi,
the Chair must now move to that particular member.
The Chair recognizes the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Premier.
Mr. Speaker, today's announcement about the task force on the management of
adverse health events is a band-aid over the gapping wound of our health care
system. It is dealing solely with issues arising from our current crisis and
will not get at major systemic problems. Our health care system needs more than
just a task force on communications that sounds like a public relations
exercise.
I ask the Premier if he and his government have the political will to do what
the Manitoba government has done and have an external review of the regional
health systems in our Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, let me say first, I am quite disappointed
and amazed that the hon. Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi would term this to be
a public relations exercise. I cannot believe it.
The credibility that you had when this issue first arose, and the genuine
emotion that you showed, was heartfelt, but for you to play the politics that
the hon. members opposite are playing, and to play that silly, foolish,
political game that is going on over there is shameful. That is what I say to
you, the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I assure the member that we are doing -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Premier.
PREMIER WILLIAMS: I assure the hon. member opposite that this
Administration will do whatever it can and whatever it has to do to get to the
bottom of this. What we have done is the first step now. The next step will be
to appoint a judicial inquiry. The step after that will be to arm that judicial
inquiry with whatever staff is needed for that person to conduct that inquiry in
a fair and open manner. Mr. Thompson is the top public servant that I have
available in this Administration to put on this, and I think that is a good
start.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The point of my question to the Premier, and I will have a supplementary for
him, is that I think the issue is bigger than what this task force is being
given. I think the issue is the whole system.
In 2004, government restructured the provincial health boards saying, at that
time, through the then Minister of Health: Creating fewer, more accountable
health authorities is a necessary step in renewing our health and community
services system and meeting client needs. In light of what is currently
happening we have massive problems. They go, not to just the issues we are
dealing with. Over the past while we have had problems with pharmacists,
oncologists -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the member to put her question quickly.
MS MICHAEL: - hormone receptor testing, radiology review, nursing leave,
lack of staff to transcribe reports.
In light of all of that, will this government embark on an external review of
our whole health system for a full analysis with public input? That is my
question because of my concern -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, just as we have done on previous
occasions, this government will tackle every problem that comes before it, and
do it in an open, a transparent and an accountable manner.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: A request was made for an inquiry by the Opposition,
and within days we acceded to that, acknowledged that, and felt that was a good
thing and that is a good process. We have now taken another step. We have now
taken our senior public servant and actually put him as a secretary so he has
all the information that will be made available. As this process evolves, we
will deal with it.
This is not just, as I said, a problem of this Administration. Any problems
that are ours we will acknowledge and we will accept, but any problems that are
related to the hon. members opposite, or their governments or previous
governments, we will also deal with this, but we will not conduct a witch hunt.
This is all about, at the end of the day, making sure that the patients and the
people of this Province have proper health care. We will ensure that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The time allocated for Question Period has expired.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees.
Tabling of Documents.
Tabling of Documents
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
In compliance with the Public Tender Act, I am tabling today the Report of
the Public Tender Act Exceptions for the month of April 2007.
In addition, I am tabling an amendment to the Public Tender Act Exceptions
for the month of March 2007. Specifically, the amendment references file 70263.
The previous tabling indicated the department of government as the Government
Purchasing Agency, in the Department of Transportation and Works; however, the
amendment will show the appropriate department as the Department of Innovation,
Trade and Rural Development.
Notices of Motion.
Answers to Questions for Which Notice has been Given.
Answers to Questions for Which Notice has been Given
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works, and
Minister Responsible for Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yesterday, the Member for the Bay of Islands asked that I would table the
subcontractors for the long-term health care facility in Corner Brook. I will do
that today, Mr. Speaker.
I will also table today, Mr. Speaker, so the hon. member can understand the
situation, a press release by then Premier Brian Tobin of March 6, 1998:
Newfoundland and Labrador and Quebec reach Agreement on Labour Mobility.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HICKEY: I will also table for the hon. member an Agreement on
Internal Trade; that was by the hon. Clyde Wells.
Mr. Speaker, I will also table a contract to a Quebec firm, under the
previous Liberal Administration, grading Charlottetown towards Paradise River
& Charlottetown Access Road awarded December 1999, EBC Inc. of L'Ancienne,
Quebec -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair notes that, under routine proceedings, the item under the agenda at
that particular point in time was Answers to Questions for Which Notice has been
Given. Traditionally in our House this would refer to written questions that
have been tabled and printed on the Order Paper.
The minister, appropriately, should have tabled his information under Tabling
of Documents. In the future, I would perhaps suggest that he would do that.
MR. RIDEOUT: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I am forced to raise a point of order at this
point in time because I, as Government House Leader, advised the minister that
this was the appropriate head to table this matter under.
I will say this, Mr. Speaker: From my almost thirty years experience in this
place, minister after minister after minister - yes, you are right, this is a
section when you reply to questions on the Order Paper, but it is also, and the
record of the House will prove me out, I know it from experience, that ministers
who were asked a question yesterday in Question Period will use this head,
whether it is appropriate or not, but we have used it time and time again, to
give the answer to a question that was raised yesterday in Question Period, or
the day before.
I know that to be a fact, Your Honour.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Speaking to the point order, the hon. the Leader of the
Opposition.
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, under the heading of Answers to Questions for
which Notice has been Given, nobody on this side of the House gave notice or
asked a question relating to a road in Cartwright, or a Public Tender Act that
was established in 1997. Nobody asked for that information.
The Member for the Bay of Islands asked a question yesterday -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. REID: - about the long-term care facility and the contract pertaining
to that facility this year. No one asked for the questions that the minister
tried to table today.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair has already spoken on the matter. Since it says, Answers to
Questions for which Notice has been Given, the first part of the member's
statement might have been in order. The other part of it, in the Chair's
opinion, was extra information that had not been requested. Therefore, the Chair
rules that matter was not in the proper sequence at that particular point in
time.
Petitions.
Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to move Motion 3, first reading. The Minister of Municipal
Affairs asks leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The
Municipalities Act, 1999. (Bill 29)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Municipal Affairs shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend
The Municipalities Act, 1999. (Bill 29)
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Municipal
Affairs shall have leave to introduced Bill 29?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs to introduce a bill,
"An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999," carried. (Bill 29)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 29 be now read a first
time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 29 be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999. (Bill 29)
MR. SPEAKER: Bill 29,
An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999, has
now been read a first time.
When shall the said bill be read a second time?
MR. RIDEOUT: Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 29 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, Motion 4, that the hon. Minister of Tourism,
Culture and Recreation have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend
The Historic Resources Act. (Bill 30)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Tourism, Culture and Recreation shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The Historic Resources Act. (Bill 30)
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Tourism,
Culture and Recreation shall have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation to introduce
a bill, "An Act To Amend The Historic Resources Act," carried. (Bill
30)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 30 be now read a first
time.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt a motion that Bill 30 be now read a
first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Historic Resources Act. (Bill 30)
MR. SPEAKER: Bill 30,
An Act To Amend The Historic Resources Act, has now
been read a first time.
When shall Bill 30 be read a second time?
MR. RIDEOUT: Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 30 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
Private Members' Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, this being Private Member's Day, we now call
Motion 7, standing in the name of my colleague, the Member for Conception Bay
South.
MR. SPEAKER: The motion is Order 7, and the Chair will dispense, as it
usually does, with the Whereases but will read the Therefore
Be It Resolved
section.
The motion is: Therefore
Be It Resolved that this hon. House express its
support for the Poverty Reduction Strategy initiatives of the 2006 and 2007
budgets and the Strategy's objective of transforming Newfoundland and Labrador
over a ten-year period from the Province with the most poverty to the Province
with the least poverty.
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, some of my colleagues today said to me that I should start off
this debate by making a motion and have this unanimously passed because of the
significance of our Poverty Reduction Strategy, and it is something that I plan
to lay out here in a few minutes.
Speaking to the motion today on this side will be the Minister of Human
Resources, Labour and Employment, as well as my colleague, the MHA for the
District of Topsail.
Mr. Speaker, I guess the Poverty Reduction Strategy - and I will read in the
Whereases you left out in a second - but, the Poverty Reduction Strategy is
something that was developed in our policy documents some time ago, before we
ran to form government in 2003. Just let me say, Mr. Speaker, that it is
probably one of the most significant pieces of legislation and documents that we
have produced. I am honestly delighted and pleased with the direction this
government has taken to address poverty in this Province. As a government, we
hear an awful lot of talk about the different policies we have, whether it is in
the oil and gas industry, and certainly our natural resources and other
significant pieces of legislation, but there is none that I am any more proud of
than our commitment to poverty reduction in this Province.
Mr. Speaker, just to read in for the record, the private member's motion,
it starts:
WHEREAS the current Government on June 23, 2006, released its new Poverty
Reduction Strategy entitled "Reducing Poverty: An Action Plan for
Newfoundland and Labrador", following through on the Blueprint commitment
to transform Newfoundland and Labrador over a 10-year period from the Province
with the most poverty to the Province with the least poverty; and
WHEREAS this Poverty Reduction Strategy is an unprecedented action plan
combining the efforts of the Premier and his Cabinet colleagues and officials in
Human Resources, Labour and Employment, Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs,
Education, the Women's Policy Office, Finance, Health and Community Services,
Innovation, Trade and Rural Development and the Rural Secretariat; and
WHEREAS the government began to implement this new strategy with a financial
commitment in the 2006 Budget of over $60 million annually to support expanded
eligibility for the prescription drug program, the elimination of school fees,
increases to income support programs, and enhanced Adult Basic Education
offerings in a focused effort to ensure that poverty reduction occurs and that
the strategy's important objectives are met over the long term; and
WHEREAS in the 2007 Budget, the Government significantly enhanced its
commitment to poverty reduction with a total investment this year of $91
million; and
WHEREAS the government also significantly enhanced the Newfoundland and
Labrador Prescription Drug Program to cap annual out-of-pocket drug costs based
on net family income;
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House express its support for the
Poverty Reduction Strategy initiatives of the 2006 and 2007 budgets and the
Strategy's objective of transforming Newfoundland and Labrador over a ten-year
period from the Province with the most poverty to the Province with the least
poverty.
As I said previously, Mr. Speaker, there is no policy that I am more in
favour of or more supportive of than this piece, and I am certainly proud to be
part of a government that is taking the initiative to make this as important as
we have made it.
Mr. Speaker, I thought I would start off by probably just giving a little
history on the document, and I guess this goes back to our policy document of
2003. Really, the reducing poverty and action plan for Newfoundland and Labrador
was introduced in June, 2006, by the then Member for Baie Verte. It was a
significant piece, and the reasons I guess we did it at that time - and I
remember thinking, I heard some statistics first when I came to the House of
Assembly and it certainly was some of the scariest numbers that I have heard,
along with some of our financial mess, but these numbers really stood out to me
and were ones that I would not soon forget.
The reason we brought in this Poverty Reduction Strategy, Mr. Speaker, is, at
the time we had 62,000 individuals in this Province living in poverty; 33,000
families. The most startling statistic of all I guess, and the one that really
troubled me, was that 17,000 of these were children and 18,000 were single
adults. I think at the time I read something that was produced by this House,
when I was in Opposition, that we had the highest child poverty in the country,
Mr. Speaker, and obviously something had to be done about it.
I am going to talk a little bit about the history here now of how we
developed this policy, and I know my colleagues will outline many of the
initiatives that we have taken to address this very serious situation.
Mr. Speaker, the reasons, I guess, for so many people living in poverty are
certainly diverse, complex, and there are a variety of ranges of people living
in poverty. Of course, we have the working poor, just one. We have single
parents. We have Aboriginal groups, Mr. Speaker. Poverty certainly touches many
people, and is very complex. Certainly, to address it, we need to have different
mixes of responses to reduce the poverty levels in this Province.
Mr. Speaker, before the initiatives were announced, in our 2005 Throne Speech
we affirmed government's commitments to the ten-year policy whereby in ten
years we would take a Province from having the most poverty to a Province with
having the least. That is something that we are hopefully going to stay on par
for. As long as I am here I will certainly speak for it, and I know many of the
people on this side of the House will speak for it as well, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we talk about, yes, we are a Conservative government, but we are
very much a left-leaning Conservative government in many, many ways. I guess
this here is why you would class most of us as red Tories - that being because
we have a high social conscience. Hopefully, between myself and my colleagues,
we will outline some of the things we have done to address the poverty situation
here in the Province.
Mr. Speaker, for this to happen, certainly, for a poverty reduction strategy
to work, because of its diverse backgrounds and because of the diversity of the
issue, it certainly takes a large government commitment. I guess one of the
first initiatives was to establish a ministerial committee. Of course, you would
have to have the support of all of government to make this work. On that
ministerial committee, of course, is: the Minister of Human Resources, Labour
and Employment, a gentleman I work with, as his Parliamentary Secretary; the
Minister of Aboriginal Affairs; the Minister of Education and the Minister
Responsible for the Status of Women who, too often, find themselves in this
poverty equation; the Minister of Finance; the Minister of Health and Community
Services; the Minister of Justice; and the Minister of Innovation, Trade and
Rural Development. Along, of course, with a ministerial committee we have a
deputy minister's committee that also meets on a regular basis to address the
issues of poverty and come up with reasonable plans and goals to reach, Mr.
Speaker.
As well as that, Mr. Speaker, we have interdepartmental working groups who
involve many of the people in the bureaucracy in our government, who are
certainly just as concerned as we are with reducing poverty in this Province.
As I said, Mr. Speaker, it crosses many government initiatives, whether it is
education, economic development, employment generation, and it certainly has to
be part of an overall policy development in government.
Like I talked about a few minutes ago, this was not something that we
flippantly came up with. This was something that we decided to do in 2003 when
we formed the government. It was an issue before government, and certainly we
have seen those statistics that I laid out for you earlier, and it concerned me,
as a member in Opposition at the time, and I know it concerned many of us when
we sat around the table developing a policy document for our government to lay
out before the people. It was certainly something that we wanted to address.
Mr. Speaker, this goes back, I guess, to 2005, and I would just like to very
briefly touch on some initiatives that we have taken since 2005. Like I said, it
is something that, as a government, we should let people know about. It is a
significant piece of work that has happened since we came here.
I would like to go back to 2005, just before the strategy was announced, to
outline some of the things we did to show how concerned we were about poverty
reduction. In 2005, for example, we had a $1.8 million increase in income
support. Of course, when I was going around knocking on doors it was one of the
things that I ran into way too often. Knocking on people's doors, talking to
people, many of them, through no fault of their own, were on income support and,
of course, had not had an increase in a long, long time. I remember, in
particular, couples and single clients without children found it very, very
difficult. In July of that year, and in January of the next year, we saw
consecutive 1 per cent increases to help alleviate some of the poverty they were
facing.
Also, that year, we had $350,000 for improved earning exemption to allow
people on income support to keep 10 per cent of their earnings, to help make the
transition from income support to employment, to the field of labour.
We had $411,000 for a Labour Market Development Agreement for persons with
disabilities. We had $250,000, it was the first child benefit for the Child Tax
Benefit. We had $180,000 to assist single parents in receipt of income support.
What that allowed them to do was prepare for, to find and to keep, employment in
our Province.
In 2006, of course, we had the first step with the expanded drug program, an
$8.3 million increase that brought the total to $32.8 million annually, which
saw, Mr. Speaker, families below $30,000 significantly impacted and would see
some form of subsidy towards drug costs. That was the first expansion of the
Provincial Drug Program, I might note, since 1980, so that was a big step for
government - a new government coming into power - to take, Mr. Speaker. Mr.
Speaker, that initiative alone saw a 97,000 increase into the co-pay rates, and
that would range between 20 per cent and 70 per cent.
The elimination of school fees, Mr. Speaker: no longer did our kids in
school, and their parents, have to come up with the money for such things as
newspapers and magazines, which is a great program now that is offered in
schools to allow kids to be up-to-date on current affairs, one that I support
wholeheartedly. Workbooks, Mr. Speaker, the people did not have to pay for, the
students did not have to come up with the money, or other families, and
photocopying, computer paper, Mr. Speaker. In today's world, certainly,
computers play a large role and no longer was that an expense brought home by
the students to the parents.
We also increased income support in 2006 by 5 per cent to an extra $5.6
million, Mr. Speaker. That was another increase to the income support people,
and people who certainly could use it, Mr. Speaker.
There was $2.78 million to enable staff in the HRLE department, Mr. Speaker,
to deal with the specific cases on a case-by-case issue depending - because
everybody, obviously, is not the same. There are variations in people's
situations, and this allowed and gave some of the social workers in our system
the flexibility to deal with some of this work.
Of course, Mr. Speaker, one which I believe was also very significant was the
tenants of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, Mr. Speaker. If the adults or the
parents in the home were attending any kind of a post-secondary institution on a
full-time basis, they were entitled to a $25 rebate on their rent. Mr. Speaker,
again, a significant thing, a significant item. As well, Mr. Speaker, if there
were kids in the house, or children in the House, who were attending school or
post-secondary full time, they would also receive a $25 rebate. If you were a
single parent living in a Newfoundland and Labrador Housing unit, with two kids
who were also full-time in school, you would get a $75 rebate per month toward
your education and towards the children's education.
You know, Mr. Speaker, some people in this House often refer to it: we are
not putting money back in people's pockets. Certainly, Mr. Speaker, that is an
issue where I see that we are significantly putting money back in people's
pockets to allow them to live at a reasonable level.
Mr. Speaker, before I sit down I am just going to quickly touch on 2007
because I know my colleagues following behind me are going to highlight so many
of the initiatives we touched on in 2007, and certainly I will get up to say a
few words after. In particular, what we have done on an overall - the Budget in
2006 was a little over $60 million and we have now increased it this year by
$28.9 million, to bring the total to a $91 million investment this year to
reduce poverty in our Province. Mr. Speaker, it is something I am very, very
proud of, like I said earlier.
What I am going to do - I am not going to highlight because of repetition - I
am going to allow my colleagues on this side to highlight many of the
initiatives that we have brought forward in this Budget. I look forward to hon.
members opposite taking
part in the debate, and certainly I am hoping that they
will support it. I know many of them, like us - certainly, we do not have the
monopoly on the poverty issue or the relation to poverty. I am hoping that the
members opposite are going to stand with me and support this, and we will move
on from there.
Without any further ado, I will sit down now, Mr. Speaker, and give somebody
else in the House the opportunity to have a few words on our Poverty Reduction
Strategy, and I look forward to commenting at the end.
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER (Collins): The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I thank you for the opportunity to stand and speak to the private member's
motion put forward by the Member for Conception Bay South, and to say I
understand fully where they are coming from with putting forward the Poverty
Reduction Strategy.
The last part of the Therefore
Be It Resolved, is that Newfoundland and
Labrador over a period of ten years would be going from having the most poverty
in this country to the Province with the least amount of poverty.
Mr. Speaker, I say that for a reason, because over the past couple of years,
when we go through our Estimate meetings and we ask questions from time to time,
how things are going with regards to many issues, but one of them being the
poverty issue - I remember back in 2006, I think the Minister of Human
Resources, Labour and Employment at that time was the Member for Baie Verte in
2006, and I remember asking him a question with regards to poverty and how it
could dealt with, and he went on with the way that the government was looking at
it. Like he said, to define it, it is a very difficult issue to define because
it is judged on the low income cutoff by Stats Canada. Mr. Speaker, when you
look at that, like the minister said at the time, it is very difficult to deal
with.
Then I go to the 2005 year, and I think the now Minister of Education was the
Minister of Human Resources, Labour and Employment at that time. Likewise, she
expressed to us, during questions of the Estimates, that there is no poverty
level that is exclusively for every single circumstance. I mean, both ministers
admit - and I guess we on this side as well - that it is a very difficult issue
to wrap one's mind around. It is good to see that there is a strategy put in
place that, hopefully, down the road something can be done.
Mr. Speaker, I have some concerns about it, I guess, and not being too
critical. I understand there are quite a few departments involved in the
strategy reduction: Human Resources, Labour and Employment; Labrador, Aboriginal
Affairs; Education; the Women's Policy Office; Finance; Health and Community
Services, and then there is Innovation, Trade and Rural Development and the
Rural Secretariat. If I am to pick one department over them all saying where
something can be done to help solve this issue, it would be the latter, Rural
Development and the Rural Secretariat. I believe that in order for us to deal
with the main issue in poverty reduction, it has to do with the jobs that are
available for the people. I often think about what can be done in this Province
with the amount of surplus that we have today, in job development in many rural
areas of this Province and what it would do to help people to get above that
poverty line, even though it is very difficult to ascertain what that is. Still,
I guess that has to be determined.
When I look at this year, one of the issues that government has put forward
to help reduce poverty is the $60 million, and they go on with the Prescription
Drug Plan, school fees and school books, increased Income Support programs and
enhanced ABE programs. All of that is part and parcel of the larger picture, but
you have to look at it in a closer context because you have to put a dollar
value on it. The way I look at it, if it is an individual in my district who is
making between $18,000 and $20,000 a year, if you look at the stats that we hear
from throughout the country, that family is probably living below the poverty
line. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that they should not get free books
or school fees, but what I am saying: Yes, that puts extra money in their
pockets so that they can buy something, probably another bit of food for the
table or what have you. The way I look at it, it does not lift them above the
poverty line, because if the $18,000 or $20,000 is not increased, a better job
is not there for them and those who do not have a job. Yes, we are doing
wonderful things by giving them the Prescription Drug Program and enhancing
their education, but there have to be jobs to go along with it, Mr. Speaker. A
person who is between $18,000 and $20,000 - and there are a lot of people making
less than that - those programs that the government has provided this year and
last year in the Budgets will help them, but I can assure you, it will not lift
them above the poverty line.
I have major concerns. This plan was announced during the election: Poverty,
we will be the lowest Province in this country in a period of ten years. Four
years have slipped by and I think that there is a long way for us to go before
we can say that we are the lowest in this country.
When we looked at the Estimates this year, Mr. Speaker, during the income
support, we noticed that there was $5 million less this year to be paid out for
income support. We probably could look at that and say: Look, we are reducing
the poverty here, but have those people been retrained and have good paying
jobs, or have some of those people who are unable to find jobs just left this
Province and moved elsewhere? If it is at that rate, I agree that government
will probably reach that level long before the ten years are up, if people are
moving out at that rate. When we look at what was paid out last year in income
support, it is $5 million less this year.
Mr. Speaker, the other scary thing for me is to know that there are 26,000
who receive income support, and 25 per cent of those are under the age of
thirty. We were also informed that half of the applicants who apply today are
under the age of thirty and with 50 per cent of those, mainly the concern is a
lack of education. I understand when government is putting money into the
education programs, all of this down the road will help, but I think more has to
be done and it has to be done sooner.
We heard in the later part of 2006 - the figure used was that 4,900 were
after leaving this Province, and the figures that I have are accurate. They say
that the estimate of money that we will lose in this Province by people leaving
is an average of $22,000. Mr. Speaker, that is a total of $108 million by people
just moving out. We are saying that we are going to train our young people, and
that is all wonderful, but are they going to stay here or will the jobs - they
want to stay here. They want to come back home, there is no doubt about it. It
is wonderful with all the things that we are doing, but we have to make sure
that once we train them the positions are here for them.
Mr. Speaker, I look at some of the figures that we hear this year that have
been thrashed around, like the major increases in the Premier's office to
staff members. I think -
MR. REID: $10,000 to $15,000 raises.
MR. BUTLER: $10,000 and $15,000 raises, as my hon. colleague tells me.
Just imagine what that could do right now to help with poverty in this Province,
to help some lower income families. The $15 million we debate back and forth
over the fibre optic deal, just imagine if that was put into poverty reduction
this year. The $40,000 we hear that was paid out to an individual, a Ms Cleary
for a severance package - we talk about the Premier's Conference that was
here, and we all know Premiers' conferences are held, but I mean if we -
MR. REID: Two hundred thousand
MR. BUTLER: Two hundred thousand for one party, and the booze and
entertainment and the free sealskin coats and all that went with it, Mr.
Speaker. Just imagine what that can do to help reduce poverty here in this
Province. If you want to eliminate poverty, I think you have to deal with it
head on.
We all know that a few years ago the federal government - and I do not care
what political stripe they were. They were probably Liberal, and I think they
were back at that time. They were going to eliminate poverty in this country in
a time frame of ten years, I think it was, and when the ten years elapsed it was
worse. It is a very difficult issue.
MR. DENINE: (Inaudible).
MR. BUTLER: Okay. The hon. Member for Mount Pearl says it is not going to
happen here, and I hope it is not going to happen here. There would be nobody
any prouder in this Province than I would be, if someone could stand here in ten
years time and say we are poverty free. I think it would be wonderful. In order
to do that, Mr. Speaker, we have to have the jobs to go along with it.
Mr. Speaker, I also noticed that - and I will just touch on this for a second
- when we talk about the Kids Eat Smart Program, we are talking about poverty in
the Province, and this is a program that is in our schools. I know back in 2005,
I think it was, there was $500,000 in the program and $250,000 was taken out
because they felt that this organization had enough money. Just to show you that
there is still a major concern out around the Province, today that $250,000 has
been replaced and an additional $250,000. There is a major concern out there,
Mr. Speaker. The problem that I see with it -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. BUTLER: No, you would not think we would need it, but we all know,
and I guess government admits, there is poverty out there, there is no doubt
about that, but I believe that the time frame of ten years - I think that
something should be done in the situation that we find ourselves in, in this
Province at this time, and that a lot more can be done. I know there is a
strategy ongoing, and things have to be worked out and done properly. I agree
with all of that.
Mr. Speaker, in my conclusion, I want to say that I believe that more can be
done at this time. It is not in regards that I am against the strategy itself to
see that people in this Province will not have to live in poverty, but I believe
that this government is in a position that more can be done and should be done.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, we had an understanding that the Member for
Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi would speak next, and then the mover of the motion.
Perhaps, if we cannot find the hon. member, we could take a few minutes'
recess until we do.
We just cannot leave dead time and wait, unfortunately, so perhaps the Chair
could recess for a moment, or a minute or two.
Is that okay with you, Roland?
MR. BUTLER: (Inaudible).
MR. RIDEOUT: All right, thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The House will recess for a few moments.
MR. RIDEOUT: Oh, that is the fastest return I ever did see.
Mr. Speaker, I believe we can resume business.
MR. SPEAKER: The House is back in session.
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS MICHAEL: I apologize to my colleagues. It is hard playing the double
role of being the only person here, being the leader of the party, the media
wanting me, and needing to be here. I thought my colleague would speak longer,
and he did.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MS MICHAEL: That is right. I will stay clear, okay.
Thank you very much.
I am ready. I do have my notes and everything. I just did not expect to be
doing it so soon.
Thank you.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MS MICHAEL: Yes, take a breath and realize what we are talking about.
The motion that is on the floor today, brought by my colleague, I am very
happy to speak to. As I think my colleagues know, this is something that is very
close to my heart, the issue of reducing poverty, and I would hope eliminating
poverty. Eliminating poverty seems to be something that alludes us, not just in
Newfoundland and Labrador; it alludes us in Canada. Not only does it allude us
in Canada, it alludes us internationally.
For decades now, both through the United Nations, through our Parliament in
Canada, and also through provincial governments, people have been saying that we
want to reduce poverty, that we want to eradicate poverty. A lot of that has
focused on the poverty of children. You hear that we are going to eradicate the
poverty of children.
We know that we cannot eradicate child poverty in a vacuum, because children
are part of families. So, when we are talking about the eradication of child
poverty, we obviously have to be talking about the eradication of poverty
totally, the eradication of poverty. If we eradicate poverty, children will not
be poor.
In 1989, the Parliament of Canada set itself a bold goal of eradicating child
poverty by the year 2000 - that is in this country - and we know it has gotten
worse. We are not eradicating it; it is getting worse. We have to deal with the
root causes of that. We have to deal with what it is that is keeping poverty
where it is. We have to deal with why the gap between the rich and the poor is
getting wider, not narrowing. If the gap is getting wider, if more resources are
going to people at the top end, which they are, then the resources have to be
coming from somewhere. It is not just that the gap is widening; it is widening
for two reasons. It is widening because people at one end are getting richer and
people at the other end are getting poorer. If the gap remained the same and
people moved together there might be some hope, if you had widened the gap
enough, but that is not what is happening.
I think we have to take it extremely seriously. There are many things that
people recognize that can help with the eradication of poverty in this country.
If you talk to people who are doing this work right across the country, there
are some things I think we all agree upon. One is the $10 an hour minimum wage.
This is now sort of becoming the mantra of people across the country who are
looking at the eradication of poverty. They are saying it has to happen. If we
are going to really get at eliminating poverty and putting money into the hands
of people, then we have to work towards the $10 minimum wage, and we have to do
it while that $10 an hour minimum wage is still going to be the correct amount.
If we wait too long, we will probably be talking about $12 an hour minimum wage.
The faster we get to the $10 an hour minimum wage, and then index it from there
on, the better it is going to be for low-income people, for low-income wage
earners.
Another thing that gets talked about, and this again has something to do with
putting money in people's hands - I am not in total agreement on it, but it is
an issue that gets talks about as a possible way of dealing with poverty - is
having an earned income supplement for the working poor. Now, I do not see an
earned income supplement going to people who are working for major corporations,
but having an earned income supplement for the working poor could be a way of
helping small businesses. I think this is something that needs to be discussed.
I am not sure, totally, where I am on this point, but I think it is a point for
discussion, that if we are talking about getting rid of poverty then we have to
put money in people's hands.
Another way of dealing with poverty is that we have to have adequate and
reasonable income support for people who are on income assistance, that we have
to realize that a one-time 5 per cent increase in the support, which happened
here for our people last July, that one-time 5 per cent increase did bring them
up, and it has been indexed from here on in, so this year they get the extra 1.8
per cent. That is all that is in this year's Budget, the extra 1.8 per cent,
the indexation. Maybe what we needed to do - not only maybe, I think what the
government needed to do - was do 5 per cent in the Budget 2006, and 5 per cent
on top of that in the Budget of 2007, and 5 per cent on top of that in the
Budget of 2008, until the amount that people were getting for income support
brings them up to the low-income cut-off line, and the indexation should start
after they have reached the low-income cut-off line.
I want to make that point, because yesterday I spoke to this and what I was
saying did not seem to be understood, so I just want to make it more clear today
what it is I am talking about. The indexation is not going to work in a major
way to bring adequate money into low-income people's hands unless the
indexation is on top of an income that meets the low-income cut-off point. This
is the issue. This is what I am talking about.
Another thing that will help with low income and with poverty is a reformed
Employment Insurance system. Now I know this is not provincial, this is federal,
but I think provincial governments should be pushing the federal government with
regard to the employment income situation.
When we look at what is happening with our fishing people right now because
of the ice being in, the federal government seems to be taking its dead time in
dealing with it, and the provincial government is saying: Well, we do not want
to step in and take over what they should be doing. Yet, people are suffering.
This is the problem, people are suffering. So, when do we step in? When do we
say the suffering has to stop?
So, we have an Employment Insurance system that is not working. I think part
of the provincial government's strategy should be bringing ideas and pressure
to the federal government with regard to how Employment Insurance should work
for the people in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Historically, in this country, the smallest percentage of workers ever are
getting Employment Insurance. I know from many cases that I worked with, that I
have worked with in the past, that there are many, many more people out there
who I think are really eligible, should be getting Employment Insurance. They
paid into it. It is an insurance program. They should be getting that money, and
yet are finding themselves, like our fishing people right now, in dire straits.
So, I think involving ourselves in discussion around the Employment Insurance
system is an important dimension for the provincial government.
Another thing, if we are really serious about helping parents and helping
women, in particular, to be able to work, and if we are really serious about
taking care of children, then we really do have to have a public child care
system. We really do have to have a system that allows parents to be able to
work knowing that their children are being taken care of in safety and in
security. That is what has to happen.
We had, not that long ago, I suppose about a month ago, a crisis here in the
city with regard to a child care centre shutting down and the possibility of
parents having to stop working so that their children would be taken care of.
That kind of thing cannot continue. If the government really wants to deal with
the issue of poverty and deal with poverty reduction, then a child care program,
one that is under government, one that is public, one that assures parents that
they can work and their children will be safe, that is essential to the
strategy. If it isn't there, it needs to be there, or else parents are not
going to have the freedom to work. They are not going to have the freedom to do
what needs to be done to put food on the table for their children, and parents
will have to resort to income support. In the issue that I just talked about
some weeks ago, some of the parents, two in particular whom I spoke with, they
knew that in order to make it work they probably were going to have to give up
their job and revert to social assistance, which is the last thing those parents
wanted to do. So, the importance of a child care program is essential.
These are some elements of what I see to be essential in a program, a plan
for reducing poverty. I do not see these elements adequately in the plan that
government has before us - that government wants us to support today; that
government wants us to say is a really good plan.
Goal one of the program, the action plan for Newfoundland and Labrador, is
improved access and coordination of services for those with low incomes. That is
wonderful. I think it is really important. I think it is really important that
people with low incomes have an easier time to having access to programs that
will help them, that there will be a coordinated approach so that they have an
easier time dealing with the system. I think it is important that they have
tools for ongoing analysis but this is not putting more money in people's
pockets. It needs to be done. It is a social program that is needed but it does
not put more money in their pockets.
I look at goal two. Goal two is a stronger social safety net. I agree with a
stronger social safety net. I certainly agree with affordable housing. I
certainly agree that we have to have a justice system that works for vulnerable
people. I certainly agree that there have to be increased disability supports to
enable people with disabilities to participate fully in society. I agree with
all of that, but these social supports are not adequate. Now, we do have under
that goal increased income support rates, but I have just spoken to that and
indicated that a one-time increase and then indexing - if that increase does not
bring people up to the low income cut-off point, it is not adequate. That is my
concern, that it is not adequate.
So, the goal is great. The goal says increased income support rates and
examples of actions are implement Budget 2006 initiatives, including indexation
of income support rates. That is fine, but I think the second one has to be done
very seriously: Undertake annual income support rate reviews in addition to
those mandated by the Income and Employment Support Act.
I think what the government has to start doing is what it did not do in this
year's Budget, is that it is going to have to make step increases for a few
more years before the indexation is going to work. Remember, all the indexation
does - we all know this. I mean, it is a basic economic fact that we all know.
All the indexation does is keep us up with the level of the increase and the
cost of living. So, we have to get people - as I have said over and over, and I
will say it once more. We have to get people to the low income cut-off level
before the indexation works.
If the government wants to live according to its plan, then I think the
second bullet under two point five, the fifth
section of goal two, is a piece
that they have forgotten - that the government forgot in this year's Budget.
An annual review to see, are we really meeting - is the indexation is enough? If
the government did a review involving public input and involving input from
people who are affected, then I would think they would find out that what is
there is not adequate.
Another one I want to look at is goal three. Goal three of the action plan is
improved earned incomes, and three point three says: Greater supports for labour
force participation and improved earnings from employment. One of the points
under that is improved results for women's employment for medium and large
scale development projects by strengthening requirements under the environmental
approval process.
Now, that is a wonderful goal to have, and in my former life before I came
here to the House -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I remind the hon. member that her speaking time has expired.
MS MICHAEL: Oh, really? I thought I had four more minutes. Okay, Mr.
Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member by leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MS MICHAEL: I thought you were going to be kind to me, sir, and give me
those four minutes.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I will clue up.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MS MICHAEL: Oh, fifteen is it? Okay, thank you very much.
If I could have a moment to clue up, Mr. Speaker?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MS MICHAEL: Thank you.
I guess what I am saying then, Mr. Speaker, is that the government has to go
much, much further than it has in this plan to make poverty reduce. In order to
put money in people's hands, there are two things. There are some things in
the plan that could do it, if the government would take them seriously and do
what they are saying. The other thing is, there are many things missing from the
plan. I really fear, and I have lots of reasons for having this fear, that if we
continue just on the road the way we are going, then in ten years time we will
still be talking about reducing poverty just like we are now, almost twenty
years later, since 1989, still talking about it.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I guess, because of the number of speakers up opposite, and I
certainly commend them and thank them for their comments, there is nobody in
this House who is not for reducing poverty.
I guess, Mr. Speaker, what I would like to highlight, I never had a chance in
my opening to highlight the 2007 initiatives. I guess most of the people in the
general public and out there in TV land have certainly heard us reference it, if
they have been watching the Budget debate and continue to watch the Budget
debate which probably will take place again tomorrow, and hear many, many of the
initiatives that we have had in 2007.
Mr. Speaker, one of the things that I want to point out, and it is very, very
important that all members hear this - the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi in
particular - we are the second province in this country to have a Poverty
Reduction Strategy, Mr. Speaker. This Poverty Reduction Strategy is talked about
throughout the country by a variety of community-oriented groups, by a variety
of social groups, Mr. Speaker. There have been requests that come to government
on a weekly and monthly basis for us to go across the country explaining our
Poverty Reduction Strategy, how good it is working and how significant it is.
Mr. Speaker, I can only say that this is a government, a proactive government,
who is actually taking the initiative, taking the initial steps, to reduce
poverty.
I know, in 1989 - I agree with the member opposite, yes - it was something
that the federal government said they would do in 1989 and, of course, it got
worse. That is why we, as a provincial government here in this Province,
certainly saw the need to come up with our own strategy and work with it, Mr.
Speaker. That is something that I am proud to say that, as a government, we have
done. It is recognized nationally, right across the country. I know the Minister
of Human Resources, Labour and Employment, the Member for St. John's Centre,
is certainly asked about it on a regular basis when he attends national meetings
and so on.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that, as a government, we have taken these
steps. It is something that I am very proud of. I know our caucus and the team
on this side are very, very proud of it. It is something we committed to in 2003
in our Blue Book, and we have lived up to that commitment. We are going to
continue to live to that commitment, Mr. Speaker, in budgets from here on in.
That I can assure you. If the people of this Province continue to elect this
government, we will see a reduction in poverty throughout this Province.
Mr. Speaker, just to touch on the minimum wage, since we have taken
government we have increased the minimum wage from $6 and it will be to $8 an
hour before the end of our term. Mr. Speaker, also, there will be a committee
struck to see how advancing the minimum wage should continue. So, Mr. Speaker,
we are very conscientious of the minimum wage increases, as the member opposite
mentioned. Let me just say that I worked in the service industry. I owned - me
and my family - convenience stores and service stations, and I know what it is
like. I worked side by side, shoulder to shoulder, with people who were making
the minimum wage for eleven years, Mr. Speaker, and many times I worked for the
minimum wage myself. I know the significance, and how hard it can be to pay a
light bill, to buy groceries, and in particular - I was not raising a family at
the time but I can only imagine how hard it must be to raise a family with one
income on minimum wage.
Mr. Speaker, it is because of this, of course, that through HRLE we have come
up with a number of new initiatives such as the Mother Baby Supplement, and I
could go on and list them. I know many people out in TV land have heard them
over the last number of weeks, during the Budget debate, and I know they will
continue to hear them again tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, with that, I would like to clue up. I thank members opposite.
I do not know if this is a record in this House of Assembly, but it is
probably one of the earliest or quickest debates we have had on such a very,
very significant issue. It shows its importance and it shows its support,
regardless of what party you are with, with the policy initiative that this
government has taken.
Mr Speaker, on that, I will close debate.
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!
The resolution before the House is as follows, "THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED
that this Honourable House express its support for the Poverty Reduction
Strategy initiatives of the 2006 and 2007 budgets and the Strategy's objective
of transforming Newfoundland and Labrador over a 10-year period from the
Province with the most poverty to the Province with the least poverty."
All those in favour of the resolution, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: Contra-minded, nay'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.
MR. SPEAKER: The motion is carried.
Motion carried.
MR. SPEAKER: This being Wednesday, the House will - I am sorry. I note
that the Government House Leader wishes to have a comment before the Chair
adjourns the House.
The Chair recognizes the Government House Leader.
MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I know that a motion to adjourn is automatic today but I just wanted, for the
benefit of the House, to inform our colleagues and the public, I guess, that
business has been completed a little early today so we will be taking a few
minutes early adjournment.
We have agreed, I think, that we will begin the legislative day, the
parliamentary day, tomorrow with legislation. We have not exactly worked out yet
what pieces we will be working on, but my colleague and I are working on that.
After we have completed the legislative agenda that we have agreed on
tomorrow, then we will call the Budget debate and proceed with that, however
long that takes us tomorrow night.
As you said, Your Honour, a motion to adjourn is automatic at this point.
MR. SPEAKER: In accordance with the Standing Orders, this House is now
adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, May 31, at 1:30 of the clock in the
afternoon.