April

30, 2012 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVII No. 23

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today we have members' statements from the Member for the

District of Bonavista South; the Member for the District of Port de Grave; the

Member for the District of Signal Hill Quidi Vidi; the Member for the District

of The Straits White Bay North; the Member for the District of St. John's

East; and the Member for the District of St. John's South.

The Member for the District of Bonavista South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, hon. colleagues, I would like to recognize and congratulate the

members of the Boys Volleyball Team at Catalina Elementary School for their

recent victory. The team brought home the gold medal in Tier 2 at the

14-and-Under Provincial Tournament held in Clarenville on March 23 and March 24

of this year. Even more rewarding, it is the first time a banner was won and

brought to Catalina Elementary since 1999-2000.

The boys' volleyball team was picked from an after school volleyball club

that ran for students in Grade 6, 7, and 8. The team started playing and

practising together last year; and due to hard work and dedication, went from

winning only one set in a tournament they attended last year, to bringing home

gold just one year later. Coach Janice Hayward and Assistant Coaches Kyle and

Grant Johnson are to be commended for their help and commitment to this team.

Mr. Speaker, members of the House, please join me in congratulating Catalina

Elementary Boys Volleyball Provincial Champs: Nathan Butt, Adam Cullimore,

Zachery Duffett, Tyler Gould, Gavin Hart, Bradley Hiscock, Adam Lodge, Daniel

Lodge, Nathan Lodge, Nicholas Lodge, and Evan Peddle.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for the District of Port de Grave.

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today in this hon. House to recognize the recent passing of Mr. Nigel

Mercer of Upper Island Cove. Mr. Mercer was well known throughout Trinity

Conception for his work and involvement with the Trinity Conception Shrine Club.

Mr. Mercer was recognized as the 2011 Shriner of the Year by the provincial

organization last fall. I had the privilege to know Mr. Mercer through our

involvement with the Trinity Conception Placentia Health Foundation. He was a

dedicated volunteer representing the Shriners and the Royal Canadian Legion at

this event.

He has served as the Right Worshipful Master of the Masonic Lodge of

Newfoundland and Labrador, served on many boards like the Anglican Parish

Council, Helping Hands Goodwill Centre, the Royal Canadian Legion, and the

Trinity Conception Placentia Health Foundation.

In paying tribute to Mr. Mercer a friend said "he will be remembered not only

for his contribution to the Shrine Club, but also for his dedication to all

fraternal organizations and worthy causes in which he was involved."

Mr. Mercer was person whose true wish was to make life a little bit better

for those in need.

I ask that all members of this hon. House join me in recognizing a gentleman

of distinction who will be sadly missed by his family, friends, and the causes

he served so well for so many years.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I rise today to extend congratulations to a young actor from my district, who

I have known since her birth. Marthe Bernard made her film debut at ten in Mary

Lewis' award-winning short film, When Ponds Freeze Over. Theatre

audiences may remember her from the Avalon East High School Drama Festival as a

Holy Heart student, or her two years at Grenfell College in the theatre program.

Her studies were, of course, interrupted when she landed the role of Tinny on

CBC's Republic of Doyle . She has continued doing film and theatre work.

Last year, she starred in local filmmaker Deanne Foley's feature film, Beat

Down.

On Wednesday last week, Marthe won the Best Actress award at the FirstGlance

Hollywood Film Festival for her work in that film. Deanne won Best Director.

This week, Beat Down is at the prestigious Newport Beach Film Festival

with screenings last Friday and tomorrow.

I am sure nobody is more delighted to see the international success of Marthe

than her parents, the well-known actors Andy Jones and Mary-Lynn Bernard.

I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating Marthe Bernard on her

successes to date, and wishing her many more in the future.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend an invitation to all hon. members in this

House and to everyone in the Province to come and share some festive times

this summer in my district.

From July 20 right through to August 18, I ask people to mark their

calendars. Each week will be a come home year celebration in this order: St.

Anthony, St. Lunaire-Griquet, Main Brook, and Anchor Point-Deadman's Cove.

Thanks to the tireless dedication of dozens of volunteers, we will see

thousands of people flock to The Straits White Bay North to relive their

memories, catch up with old friends, and make new ones.

In all, it will be a four-week celebration of life past and present in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador. I am sure I do not need to add the benefits for the

local economy will be significant.

The planning is well underway, and I can promise you, Mr. Speaker, that from

what I have seen, this will certainly be one of the most memorable summers on

record for the Great and I emphasize Great Northern Peninsula.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate a remarkable woman. On Friday I had

the pleasure of attending the one hundredth birthday party for Ethel Miller, who

has been living at the Salvation Army's Glenbrook Lodge since 2002.

Mrs. Miller has had a long and eventful life, Mr. Speaker.

Born Ethel Pretty on April 27, 1912 in St. John's, she married William Miller

in December 1940. They moved to Dildo, Trinity Bay. She taught school there for

a few years. Ethel and William had five children: David, Jim, Roy, Judy, and

Kay.

Just ten year later, William died, leaving Ethel to raise five children on

her own. It was a challenge that she met more than successfully, teaching piano

lessons from her home to subsidize the family income. She also played the piano

for years at the Salvation Army Citadel in Dildo.

Ethel moved back to St. John's some seventeen years later, and at the age of

fifty-three went back to school to train as a nursing assistant. She worked at

the Veteran's Pavilion until 1977, when she retired.

I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating Ethel Miller on her

milestone birthday, and in wishing her many more to come.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the Jimmy Pratt Memorial Kitchen for

the contribution they make to the men and women in the downtown and inner city

areas.

The Jimmy Pratt Memorial Kitchen, which is located at the George Street

United Church, provides hot meals to those who need nourishment and a place to

feel connected to others in the area.

Four years ago when I first volunteered at the soup kitchen, they were

serving about sixty individuals every Friday morning. Today they serve upwards

to 200 people with a hot meal, a warm smile, and friendly surroundings.

The clients of the soup kitchen are always appreciative of the company and

the feeling of acceptance.

I congratulate the individuals who operate the kitchen, the community

business partners who donate to the kitchen, government who has provided

funding, and the volunteers who give so freely of their time so that others may

have a warm place to go and nourishment that they need.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to highlight the expanded cultural

programming offered at the Province's six Arts and Culture Centres.

Residents in more communities throughout the Province are now getting the

opportunity to enjoy performances on tour. For example, the award-winning

Dying Hard, about the plight of the St. Lawrence miners, has been performed

in twenty communities by St. John's native Mikaela Dyke.

Also ongoing is a partnership with Theatre Newfoundland and Labrador to bring

Tempting Providence to an astounding seventy-one communities. This story

of courage and strength about nurse and midwife Myra Bennett will arguably be

the largest theatre tour ever to take place in Newfoundland and Labrador.

In addition, the Arts and Culture Centres are building Shakespearean

productions in-house and presenting them to audiences of high school students.

This classroom project is linked to the school curriculum.

A commitment to enhancing artistic direction is evident through such

productions as Rig , which is an adaptation of Mike Heffernan's book,

Rig: An Oral History of the Ocean Ranger Disaster . The show commemorated the

thirtieth anniversary of the disaster last winter, and featured local talent,

such as Andy Jones and Pamela Morgan. It ran for five nights to sold-out houses.

The Arts and Culture Centres have teamed up with the Marine Institute's

Centre for Marine Simulation to present the 100-year commemoration of the

Titanic sinking. The work, titled Calm Air , is a unique experience in

which theatre meets technology.

Local talent and stories continue to be celebrated through such as Artistic

Fraud's Oil and Water , written by Robert Chafe and directed by Jillian

Keiley. The show tells the story of the recently deceased Lanier Phillips, who

was shipwrecked aboard the USS Truxton , near St. Lawrence.

Mr. Speaker, this provincially owned network, the only one of its kind in the

country, directly supports the work of artists as they build and showcase their

talent. I encourage everyone to get out and see the incredible shows offered by

the Arts and Culture Centres in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement.

Certainly, the work of the six Arts and Culture Centres across the Province

this year adds a lot to the development of tourism. We hear remarks about the

positive events that have been seen at the Arts and Culture Centres across the

Province. I know, in my case, as the minister mentioned about Tempting

Providence and how that is going across the Island and outside of the

Island as well; I saw that show in Deer Lake just a few weeks ago on the way to

Nova Scotia. It was well-attended; I would say that even outside the official

Arts and Culture Centre the production was fantastic and well-attended, and the

response was great to all of it. I would like to add, too, of course, that is

the grandmother of the Member for St. Barbe. Of course, all of us who live on

the West Coast are very familiar with that story. Many of us have seen it many

times.

What I did not realize, however, was that Shakespearean productions would now

be included in the school curriculum. I think this is absolutely a wonderful

idea. When you think of all the events around the Arts and Culture Centres, and

that gets complemented with the many festivals and events that are going on, I

think we are in for a wonderful year. It is something that we are very happy to

see because what it does, it highlights through our cultural community and it

gives people an opportunity to come together, especially tourists and people who

visit our area during the summer.

I compliment the minister on the work that has been done in this particular

area. I will say that bringing the reservation system online, I think it has

been great and it made it all much easier.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS ROGERS: I too would like to thank the minister for an advance copy of

his statement. I applaud the new commitment of Arts and Culture Centres to

bringing performing arts, including our own local plays, to more communities and

schools around the Province. Our Arts and Culture Centres are a provincial

treasure, providing wide access to the arts. It is the way to build both future

audiences and future artists.

The cut to the Arts Council on the other hand was short-sighted, making it

harder for the council to support artists. The Arts Council is the only place

where there is funding available for ideas, where artists can start work on a

project. Oil and Water and Tempting Providence each started with a

small Arts Council grant. Without strong support to the Arts Council there will

be nothing to put in our Arts and Culture Centres.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to stand to provide an update on an important

program offered at Her Majesty's Penitentiary. The Justice Project is operated

by the Newfoundland and Labrador branch of the Canadian Mental Health

Association and helps inmates diagnosed with mental illness make a successful

transition to the community. This innovative program, Mr. Speaker, has been in

operation now for two years and receives $280,000 from the provincial

government.

The Justice Project was born out of the release of Decades of Darkness:

Moving Towards the Light which was an independent review of adult corrections in

this Province. The Justice Project provides a continuity of mental health

services from the prison to the community. Through intensive case management,

individuals have been able to secure and maintain appropriate housing and

receive specialized support and interventions upon their release. By working

closely with other community organizations clients are linked with individuals

and agencies offering further specialized support. This is particularly

important, Mr. Speaker, to those returning to other areas of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, the department recognizes the important progress that

participants have made. To date, thirty-two people have received this service.

Many individuals have been able to remain out of further trouble with the law

for longer periods of time or return for lesser charges. Some, through the

support of the mental health association program, have for the first time in

years, maintained a healthy and crime-free lifestyle.

Mr. Speaker, the Justice Project has become recognized nationally for having

inmates diagnosed with mental illness make a successful transition to the

community. The Department of Justice is pleased to support and work with the

mental health association as they operate this ground-breaking program. This

relationship is a clear indication, Mr. Speaker, that change is possible and our

correction service is moving in the appropriate direction.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

I am very familiar with the Justice Project, recently when I took an

extensive tour of the HMP the program was frequently mentioned in very glowing

terms. It is highly regarded by inmates, as well as by the employees. It is an

excellent program that helps people who really need this help. Following up on

mental health issues for prisoners even after they leave the Penitentiary means

more effective services, and that means a safer society for us all.

I applaud the minister on such a useful and effective service; however, this

seems to be a good program delivered in a miserable environment. Report after

report indicates that we need to have a new Penitentiary. The current pen is too

old and too overcrowded, and at least safety issues for both the employees as

well as the inmates. I look forward to the day when I can congratulate the

minister on taking the initiative of announcing a new and safe penitentiary for

this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS ROGERS: I thank the minister as well for an advance copy of his

statement.

This certainly is a good step; however, $280,000 is but a drop in the bucket

when addressing the rehabilitation of inmates. Crime prevention must be worked

on. Our long promised youth addiction centres are still not built, and this is

where we can really see prevention. There must be more programs in the prisons,

and the long-standing concerns regarding psychiatric care at Her Majesty's

Penitentiary must be addressed. A lot more work has to be done to ensure that

recidivism can be minimized.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Nalcor has hired SNC-Lavalin for millions of dollars of work on Muskrat

Falls. This same company recently had its headquarters raided by the RCMP, the

CEO resigned, $56 million is gone missing, a top executive arrested in

Switzerland, and a consultant in prison in Mexico.

I ask the minister: How much money has Nalcor committed to this company, and

have you brought your officials together with SNC and Nalcor to discuss these

ongoing issues?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can assure the member opposite that shortly after this matter came into the

news that I made immediate contact with the CEO or President of Nalcor and we

discussed whether or not this ongoing what we expected to be an ongoing issue

affected the Muskrat Falls Project. He assured me that it did not, Mr.

Speaker, that there was a team from SNC-Lavalin working with Nalcor on-site,

doing extensive engineering. As for the actual amount, I cannot tell the member

opposite the actual amount that has been spent to date, but it is part of the

engineering work. That is certainly a number that I can find out and provide to

him.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is a serious issue, as Nalcor signed multi-million dollar contracts with

a company that is currently facing allegations of fraud and money laundering.

I ask the minister: Since the SNC vice-president under investigation was the

head of the construction division, did he have any involvement with the Lower

Churchill project and will you disclose which SNC officials have lobbied the

provincial government?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

I am not aware of the individual in question having any involvement with the

Muskrat Falls Project. As for the lobbying, Mr. Speaker, that is not the way it

is done. I think, if I am correct, SNC-Lavalin would have been involved in many

major projects, both Hydro and other projects throughout the world; I think they

would have built the line for the Olympics that connects the airport to downtown

Vancouver.

I think they are a large company, a multi-national company. Again, I am not

aware of any involvement with this individual. In fact, my information is that

the person did not and that the procurement, or the way that contracts are

awarded, Mr. Speaker, are in line with the way government business and Nalcor

business is done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On Friday, the Premier of Nova Scotia abruptly cancelled a public event in

this Province to fly to St. John's for a private meeting with the Premier and

Nalcor.

I ask the minister: What was the purpose of this meeting?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not aware of the Premier of Nova Scotia abruptly cancelling any

meetings. I do know that the Premier of Nova Scotia, the NDP Premier, is very

supportive of the Lower Churchill and Muskrat Falls Project.

Mr. Speaker, I was present at the meetings. We had a very good discussion

about the status of the Emera-Nalcor agreements. We talked about the project in

general. I can tell the Third Party opposite that the NDP in Nova Scotia are

very committed to this project and it shows that Premier Dexter possesses some

of that visionary scope that is possessed by this government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BALL: Mr. Speaker, it is surprising that Premier Dexter would

be in Newfoundland and Labrador for an urgent meeting on Muskrat Falls, as the

Province of Nova Scotia is not a signatory to the project.

I ask the minister: Was there a meeting with Premier Dexter and was Emera

also present at the meeting?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The President of Nalcor and the President of Emera were both present at this

meeting. It was a wide-ranging discussion, Mr. Speaker, about the benefits of

this project. Premier Dexter emphasized for us, Mr. Speaker, the importance of

Muskrat Falls power to his province. Even though there could be power available

from Quebec, Mr. Speaker, Nova Scotia does not want to be held hostage by Quebec

anymore than this Province. What Muskrat Falls allows us to do, Mr. Speaker, is

build that alternate route that will allow us again to develop our resources to

their fullest potential.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this government announced a mere $1 million for the $750-million

Corner Brook hospital. Meanwhile, last year during an election year, no less

the site was prepared, cement was poured, and concrete connector roads were put

in the site, giving the impression that construction would begin soon.

Apparently the design work for this major project announced in 2007 is holding

up the construction.

I ask the minister: What firm is doing the design work for the hospital? When

did the design work begin? Will this $1 million be sufficient to complete the

design work for the hospital?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we are very committed to the hospital in Corner Brook, as we

have stated time and time again in this House and in other venues as well. The

$1 million that is in this particular Budget for the Corner Brook hospital has

to do with completing a functional design for the hospital.

What we had in the past was a replacement design. Mr. Speaker, we are much

more progressive than that. We do not want a replacement of the Corner Brook

hospital; we want a hospital that is going to see us into the future. Therefore,

we have asked them to go back, and with this $1 million we will look at a

hospital that will meet the needs of the future in terms of essential services

that are going to be in that hospital, Mr. Speaker. When that is done, then we

will move forward with a design concept for the facility itself.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: I say to the minister, I hope it is not like the wing in the

long-term care with $3 million announced for three years in a row.

Mr. Speaker, publicly the city council of Corner Brook, Councillor Leo Bruce,

and Israel Hann, seniors' advocate on the West Coast, like many others on the

West Coast are disgusted with this year's Budget and announcement and thinks the

lack of funding and progress is a disgrace. It shows a lack of commitment to

this project.

I will ask the minister: When were the consultants hired for the new

hospital? How were they selected? How many more years do you anticipate the

planning before the construction of this hospital begins?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the people of Corner Brook know when this

government commits to putting up a building it delivers on its commitment,

unlike the hon. member opposite when he was in power.

When we first took office, there was a need for an MRI machine. That is

there. Also, we had to build the space to put it there. There was need for a new

high school. That is there. We did it. There was a need beyond all for a

long-term care facility, and we built that as well. In addition, we built a

courthouse. In addition, we built a new Newfoundland and Labrador Housing

building. In addition, we built an addictions centre. We built a courthouse.

Mr. Speaker, the biggest priority for Corner Brook right now is a new

hospital. Eighteen million dollars has been spent so far. There is going to be a

lot of roadwork leading to that hospital this summer. We will deliver on our

commitment to build a hospital because we want to see one there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is the same minister who stood up in the 2010 Budget and promised

autonomy for Grenfell College, the same person we have to listen to here now.

Mr. Speaker, several highway depots are scheduled to close for the summer

months, mostly in rural areas. This comes at a time when several of our roads

have been identified as the worst in Atlantic Canada.

My question is to the Minister of Transportation and Works: Why don't we use

these very valuable resources our workers to provide maintenance on our

substandard highways and roads, such as clearing culverts to prevent flooding?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the hon. member knows, really since 1996, under a former Administration of

which he was a part, they did look at how to better allocate the resources

within the structure of depots throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. A decision

was made to basically muster a headquarters, get the workers to follow a work

plan, and match up the resources that are necessary in order to carry that out.

That has worked well back in the 1990s, and it is working well now, Mr. Speaker.

We are doing everything we can to match up human resources with money so that we

can get the job done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: I should remind the minister the depots were closed in 2004,

not 1996, just in case you were not aware of that.

Mr. Speaker, it has been proven that if proper preventative maintenance had

been done on our highways, the damage from serious storms, like Igor, would have

been less severe. Mr. Speaker, storms will continue to occur and work such as

culvert clearing, guiderail damage, potholes, and road shoulder washouts will

not be done.

My question to the Minister of Transportation and Works: Will the

preventative maintenance and repair program be compromised because of the

closing of the highway depots?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, to continue on in the light of my last

response, again I say to the member opposite that in 1995-1996 depots did close

under that Administration, and in 2004 they were reconfigured, again, to match

up human resources with the maintenance budget to carry out the needed work that

needed to be done in any particular area. It is working well; we are addressing

it. Again, when you talk about this government making sure that at least, over

the last six years, we have invested something in the tune of a quarter of a

billion dollars every year, Mr. Speaker, to get the roads up to a standard

addressing the deficit that was given to us by the previous Administration.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, early reports from 3K fishermen are that the

crab season is shaping up to be a disaster with very low catch rates. These

fishermen already agreed to a 22 per cent cut in quota. Fishermen are very

concerned that there are no concrete answers as to why the resource is in such

sharp decline. We must act now, rather than wait a few years before it is too

late.

I ask the minister: Has he had discussions with the federal government on

what they are doing to urgently address this ecological disaster?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The topic raised, indeed, is a very serious one. We have had a number of

discussions but I would say to the member opposite, it is a little premature

to be raising thoughts of a catastrophic season. I had discussions just this

morning with one of the fishermen in the area and understand fully the impact

the ice is having. They are urging all of us not to panic and to give it a few

more days and see how things transpire. I certainly want to tell people that we

are top of that and we will do what we can to support the harvesters, but I

would not want to jump the gun and be a little premature in calling it a

catastrophic season when we are only a week or so in.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, while the federal government is responsible for

fisheries research, the Province has invested money into our own research

activities, including establishment of a Centre for Fisheries Ecosystem

Research.

I ask the minister: Has he requested the centre to help find answers to this

critical resource issue?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, the short answer is no. The member opposite stood

in this House last week and practically condemned me and this government for

taking on responsibilities that ought to be carried out by the federal

government. Hansard would show that if you take the time to go back and look.

Today he is standing and asking if we are going to put federal money at an issue

that he describes as a catastrophe when we are only a week into the fishing

season. Certainly, you can come up with something a little more credible than

that. We are seven or eight days into the season, harvesters are at work trying

to determine if in fact they are going to need assistance, number one; number

two, it is not the role of the provincial government to provide resources. The

member acknowledged that in the

preamble to his statement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, the short answer of no was actually complete.

Mr. Speaker, in last year's Budget the government allocated $25 million for

the Business Attraction Fund, of that amount they spent less than $400,000, a

mere 1.5 per cent.

I ask the minister: What went off the rails with this program? Were there any

attempts to attract business to this Province last year?

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

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, again, in the Budget this year we have a suite of programs for

business and economic development totalling almost $200 million. One of those is

Business Attraction. Over the past number of years we have entered into

partnerships with companies for $20 million. Over $16 million of that have been

sent out to those employers. It is based on meeting labour targets with those

agreements, but outside of that we do other programs. Recently, I had an

opportunity to - St. Lawrence Fluorspar Mine - partner with the private sector,

a $100 million project. We are in for $17 million, 375 jobs during construction

stage, 250 at the time it is operational. It is a great project. We are

partnering. We are there to partner, Mr. Speaker, when it is in the best

interest of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, since 2004 government has allocated over $132

million to the Business Attraction Fund. Over that time the department placed

just $19 million, or 7 per cent. A lot of that money went to businesses that

closed down, went bankrupt, or laid off staff.

I ask the minister: Isn't it time to declare the Business Attraction Fund to

be a failure and to use the money to grow businesses already based here in our

Province?

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

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUTCHINGS: Mr. Speaker, the negativism and the pessimism of the hon.

member is unbelievable.

In this Province, all parts of the Province, we are seeing growth, we are

seeing innovation, and we are seeing economic development in all regions of the

Province. Mr. Speaker, that fund was built for business attraction. When

opportunities come forward we engage with foreign investors to come to this

Province but we are only going to engage and partner when it is in the best

interest of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and we feel the risk is

appropriate but that risk is not appropriate, we are not going to have

expenditures of public money which we do not see is in the best interest of

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and we will continue on that road, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, one in 102 children in our Province are

diagnosed with autism, a significant change from just 2009 when it was one in

132. There is no cure for autism, but early diagnosis and intervention is

critical to the best possible outcomes. I am dealing with a family whose

two-and-a-half-year-old son has been diagnosed with autism. The wait-list for

him to see a speech pathologist is between twelve to fourteen months at the

Janeway.

I ask the minister: Why are children who have already been diagnosed with

autism, having to wait for over a year before seeing a speech pathologist?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, we are very concerned about autism in this Province and that is

why we continue to invest in initiatives to try to better the system. We have

spent to this point $144 million, and that is an annual expenditure, Mr. Speaker

- $144 million and $18.3 million more in this particular Budget to try to

address the issues around autism in this Province.

Autism is a growing issue right across Canada, Mr. Speaker, not simply here

in Newfoundland and Labrador. We keep apprised of what is happening across the

country. We will continue to invest and continue to make differences for the

children of Newfoundland and Labrador, and for the adult population who also

suffer from autism, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Time for a very quick question.

The hon. the Member for Burgeo - La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: The government announced $2.7 million for autism services

last year. You would expect enhanced services but that is not the case. This

boy's family was told last month that they have to wait two years to see an

occupational therapist, contrary to the minister's claim that it was fifteen

months. There are over 100 children on the wait-list.

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the member to get to his question, please.

MR. A. PARSONS: I ask the minister: With all the money your government

has invested in autism, why are we not seeing improved wait times for these

children?

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

brief answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, as I have said in the previous answer to the

question, we are continuing to invest and we are continuing to make differences.

Our wait times are an issue of concern for us and oftentimes that has to do with

the number of people who are added to the list year over year within this

Province because it is an increasing problem in Newfoundland and Labrador. It is

a very complicated issue, Mr. Speaker, but it is one that we have turned our

attention to, it is one that we will continue to support.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

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

In her January board of trade speech the Premier warned of austerity and lean

times in her upcoming Budget. When her Finance Minister did table the

government's budget, we saw instead a small amount of growth and a few lay-offs.

Then last week we heard her Finance Minister say the Province was flush with

cash.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: Would she give this House a definitive

statement of the state of this Province's finances which will not change and

which people can rely on in the future?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, as we said in the Budget address, the economy

of this Province is very, very strong and our fiscal position is strong as well.

If the hon. member would take time to read some of the bond rating analysis of

the financial situation of the Province, you would see that we have been lauded

for our prudent fiscal management, for paying down debt, and for accumulating

liquidity.

We have liquidity. When we started this year, there was about $2 billion in

our bank accounts, which would be used not for program expenditures, but also to

be used to pay for tangible capital assets, which are the hospitals and the

long-term care facilities that we build (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

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

I am sure the minister is going to want to continue his list there when he

stands again.

Mr. Speaker, in pre-Budget comments to the media, the Premier talked of

layoffs and budget cuts coming to the public service this from a government

which the Minister of Finance is admitting has $2 billion in cash and the

strongest economic position they have ever been in. Her Budget showed, however,

a smaller number of contract worker layoffs than feared. In her comments since

the Budget was tabled, the Premier speaks of pending job cuts next year.

My question is: Why?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: Then last week the Premier referred in this House to the

wonderful people who work in the Province's public service.

So, Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: What does she have to say to these people

who she has now given a full year to worry

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, we all know that a lot of the wealth that has

come to this Province has come from the revenues of non-renewable resources: oil

and minerals. One day they will be gone. We have to be prudent in the management

of fiscal affairs. We have to make sure we live within our means.

The way you do that more than anything else is that you run surpluses as

opposed to deficits, because if you have a surplus, you have some money you can

now use to fund your capital investment and to build your hospitals and

long-term care facilities. So we have done that and accumulated cash to be able

to do that. By running a surplus, you also have an opportunity to pay down some

debt.

We are going to have some good years, Mr. Speaker, but over the long-term, as

the oil revenues go, we will have less revenue. We have to take advantage while

we can to diversify our economy

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I have a very direct question to ask: With all of that flux that is going on

I fully understand that flux why at this moment is the Premier putting fear

into the public service sector, giving them a whole year to worry whether or not

they will have jobs next year?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the Premier is leading the government and is

going to do the right thing for the future of the people of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: We have set a plan. We have set a target so that we are not

reacting to events. We are going to work towards that plan; if we can do that,

we are going to reach a point where we are going to have lots of new capital

things built in this Province, and we are going to live within our means and be

in a very strong fiscal position, but most importantly of all, to diversify the

economy so that we have renewable revenues for when the oil and gas is gone.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Third Party.

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

Mr. Speaker, as we know, members of NAPE are in Placentia today protesting

the annual summer closure of highway depots. Between eighty-five and 100 people

are laid off each year, leaving important work like cleaning out ditches and

culverts, grading dirt roads, and filling potholes to be done by a reduced

workforce.

I ask the Premier, Mr. Speaker: What is her government's justification for

the reduction in service while people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador deal

with dangerous roads and damaged vehicles?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, to continue in the vein today, responding to

questions from the Opposition, once again I can assure the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador that this government is investing their money wisely

into roads, making sure at this time of year, as we prepare for our summer

maintenance, that we match up the workers that we have with the dollars that are

required to put our roads in the shape that they should be in to ensure safe

driving for the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Again, we have invested significantly, as I just pointed out in a previous

answer, Mr. Speaker; we are running close to $250 million every year, making

sure that we are doing what we can to ensure the safety of our driving public.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KIRBY: Mr. Speaker, government's decision to cut Job Creation

Partnerships funding will seriously hinder community organizations and

businesses across the Province this summer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. KIRBY: Cuts and delays in JCP funding will mean that tourist sites

and cultural festivals could be in danger of closing. This will be damaging to

the small businesses all around Newfoundland and Labrador who rely on them for

customers during the tourist season.

Mr. Speaker, why has this government suddenly decided to cut this important

funding to groups who have relied on it for decades?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, let me clear that there have been no cuts to the

JCP budget, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the first round of JCPs has a budget of $6.1 million. We

received 297 applications, which would have totalled $17 million in requests for

JCPs. Mr. Speaker, the due diligence was done, the evaluations were done on the

application, and there was an approval rate of 38 per cent. So, Mr. Speaker, the

budget for the JCPs has not been cut. What has happened is that this has become

a very popular program within Newfoundland and Labrador because it has some very

positive results.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. John's North.

MR. KIRBY: Mr. Speaker, that comes as no consolation to groups that have

had their funding cut this year.

With government projecting tens of thousands of new jobs in the coming years,

many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are looking to the Department of Advanced

Education and Skills for retraining opportunities. Unfortunately, many

individuals are being refused funding and opportunities of retraining because

this government believes they already have so-called marketable skills.

Can the minister tell us how her department defines marketable skills, so

that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who have been denied an opportunity for

retraining and upgrading will finally have an answer as to why they have been

denied funding.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Advanced Education and Skills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, this government is committed to ensure that the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador have every opportunity available to attach

to the labour market. How we develop programs and services is to assist the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador. That may be through the Job Creation

Projects. It could be through skills development. It could be through the

apprenticeship or the wage subsidy program that we have, Mr. Speaker.

We look at all the individuals who come in who apply for funding and

determine if they have marketable skills, whether they have past training, and

whether or not their training and their skills match the labour market skills

that we need today and the gap that we are experiencing in the Province. Each

and every individual will have a time to look at their skills and have the

evaluation done, and based on the budget we will certainly fund as many people

as we can (inaudible)

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Member for St. John's Centre.

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, since we do not have a housing division in

government, my question has to be for the Premier.

In the last election campaign, this government promised a program to help

families with incomes up to $60,000 purchase a modestly-priced home. They

promised to provide a grant to partially or fully fund a 5 per cent down

payment.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: When can we expect to see the promised

low-income home ownership program in this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: As the Minister Responsible for Newfoundland and Labrador

Housing, I thought we were taking care of housing, but from what I hear from the

other side is that they want to develop another division of housing. I would

have to go back with a question: What the heck would that division do?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, I know that the people of the Province would like

to know when the promised grant to help low-income home ownership will happen.

In the last call, the federal-provincial Affordable Housing Initiative had

proposals to build affordable units, more proposals than money it had to fund.

They were strong proposals addressing the crucial housing needs of seniors and

people with complex needs. They will not be any more money in this program for

another two years, if ever.

Will the Premier provide the resources and authorize the Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing Corporation to have a unilateral proposal call to move forward

with the projects that did not get funded through this initiative?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Again I say, Mr. Speaker, let's go back to the original

question, because it is an important one: You can get up on your feet and you

can criticize but if you cannot come back with something positive and some

solutions, what is the purpose of you getting up?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Leader of the Third Party; the member has time for one ten-second

question.

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

Mr. Speaker, last week Canada's Budget watchdog noted government cutbacks

have a negative effect on the economy. The opposite is true: Program spending

boosts economic performance. So I ask the Premier: Why isn't this government

(inaudible)

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Minister for Child, Youth and Family Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In ten seconds or less: Where were you last Tuesday when we announced our

ten-year Child Care Strategy?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The time for Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees

MR. SPEAKER: In accordance with

section 43(4) of the House of Assembly

Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act, I am informing the House that

the Audit Committee has not recommended an external auditor to the Management

Commission. Therefore, pursuant to subsection 43.(5) of the act, the Auditor

General shall audit the accounts of the House of Assembly and Statutory Offices

for the 2011-2012 fiscal year.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo - La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, as required by Standing Order 63.(3), I

hereby give notice that the private member's motion to be debated on Wednesday

will be the private member's motion placed on the Order Paper by myself, and

seconded by the Member for the Bay of Islands, related to having a fixed

schedule for the sittings of the House of Assembly.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand here today to offer a petition on behalf of the family caregivers. I

will read the petition:

WHEREAS home care allows the elderly and people with disabilities to remain

within the comfort and security of their own homes, home care also allows people

to be discharged from the hospital earlier; and

WHEREAS many families find it very difficult to recruit and retain home care

workers for their loved ones; and

WHEREAS the PC Blue Book 2011, as well as the 2012 Speech from the Throne,

committed that government would develop a new model of home care and give people

the option of receiving that care from family members; and

WHEREAS government has given no time commitment for when government plans to

implement paying family caregivers;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the

House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to

implement a new home care model to cover family caregivers in the 2012-2013

Budget.

Mr. Speaker, as we know, this has been a big issue all across Newfoundland

and Labrador. This issue has been brought to attention during the election, Mr.

Speaker, and there was a commitment made. A lot of people, Mr. Speaker, as you

are aware, are fully under the understanding that there will be a program

implemented where a family member can give family caregiving in the home. If

need be, they - and the assumption a lot of people had, Mr. Speaker, is that

they could receive pay if they had to quit their own job to help keep the family

because they could not get anybody.

I will give you a couple of examples, Mr. Speaker, of why this is so

important. I remember, Mr. Speaker, on a couple of occasions that I was aware of

- they are in communities where they cannot get a caregiver, they just cannot

get one. Even though because of the bureaucracy and the things that are in the

system and the stumbling blocks that are in place, they are still not allowed to

take a family member and put the family member in place, Mr. Speaker. It is

tough, and I know the minister committed to come up with a program; yet, Mr.

Speaker, we hear the Premier saying that is not the case.

Mr. Speaker, what the people hear and are petitioning me on their behalf is

that we need a clear direction. We need somebody, the Premier or whoever, to

give clear direction, to change the legislation, and to change the program where

family members can be caregivers through the family and not have to go bankrupt,

sell their homes, or whatever.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I present this petition on behalf of all the people

who are looking for care giving from a family member.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS ROGERS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland in Parliament

assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and

Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS as a result of a recommendation in the Green report about wrongdoing

in the House of Assembly, there is now legislation that protects anyone who

speaks up with evidence of financial abuse or other impropriety in the

legislative branch; and

WHEREAS it is unfair for one group of civil servants to be protected by

whistle-blower legislation when another group is not; and

WHEREAS Justice Green stated that the financial wrongdoing in the House of

Assembly might have been discovered sooner if whistle-blower legislation had

been in place; and

WHEREAS the Cameron inquiry into ER-PR testing found that problems with tests

would have come to light sooner, therefore lessening the impacts on patients, if

whistle-blower legislation had been in place; and

WHEREAS the Task Force on Adverse Events recommended an amendment to the

Regional Health Authorities Act to provide legal protection for employees

reporting occurrences or adverse events; and

WHEREAS whistle-blower legislation is in place elsewhere in Canada and the

provincial government promised similar legislation in the 2007 election but has

not kept that promise;

We the undersigned petition the House of Assembly to urge government to enact

whistle-blower legislation to protect public sector employees in provincial

departments and agencies, including public corporations, regional health

authorities, and school boards.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, we know that during the 2007 election campaign, the

Conservatives promised that whistle-blower legislation would be passed in the

first session of the House. We are in 2012. Then in 2008, in the Throne Speech,

the government promised to introduce whistle-blower legislation. Now,

recommendation number three of the 2008 report on the Task Force on Adverse

Events called for an amendment to the Regional Health Authorities Act to give

legal protection to employees who report occurrences.

Mr. Speaker, they cited Manitoba's Regional Health Authorities Act, which

states that no one should be punished or otherwise disadvantaged for complying

with the requirement to report an occurrence.

In 2008, Eastern Health asked doctors to sign a confidentiality form to stop

them from commenting on internal operations, and the Cameron Inquiry highlighted

the need for legal protections to encourage people to report occurrences in

unsafe conditions. It is time now, Mr. Speaker, for the people of Newfoundland

and Labrador to make it safe for all workers and for all people in the Province.

It is time now for our whistleblower legislation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, to the hon. House of Assembly for the Province

of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament Assembled, the petition of the

undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS home care allows the elderly and people with disabilities to remain

within the comfort and security of their own homes; home care also allows people

to be discharged from hospital earlier; and

WHEREAS many families find it very difficult to recruit and retain home care

workers for their loved ones; and

WHEREAS the PC Blue Book 2011, as well as the 2012 Speech from the Throne,

committed that government would develop a new model of home care and give people

the option of receiving that care from family members; and

WHEREAS government has given no time commitment for when government plans to

implement paying family caregivers;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the

House of Assembly to urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to

implement a new home care model to cover family caregivers.

As in duty bound, your petitions will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, in support of this petition and this is coming in from a lot

of people in small communities. To provide one example of why the home care

program is not working in some small communities: in addition to being able to

find properly trained home care providers, if a home care provider is a family

member, then that person is ineligible to receive as much home care in this

one case as if it were strangers.

In the case of a man in my district who is in his thirties, who is blind and

has other medical difficulties, he would be eligible for fifty-six hours of home

care per week if he received that home care from strangers; he would get eight

hours per day of home care. His mother is a home care provider. That is her

full-time occupation. She is in her late fifties; she cannot afford to stop

providing home care and work in a regular job so she can care for him. However,

if she cares for him, she receives only forty hours per week. Because he is

being cared for by a family member, he does not get fifty-six. That means that

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador is expecting this person to get by on

forty hours per week from a paid home care worker who is a family member, and

expect other family members to provide free home care or to go with none. It is

a complete disparity which should be addressed and addressed promptly by this

government.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament Assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS the need for cellular coverage is far reaching in the District of The

Straits White Bay North; and

WHEREAS there is limited cellphone coverage in the Route 430 from St. Anthony

Airport to St. Anthony, and there is little to no cell coverage in the

communities surrounding Route 432, Route 433, Route 434, Route 435, Route 436,

Route 437, Route 438;and

WHERAS residents of these communities require cellphone coverage to ensure

their safety and communication abilities; and

WHEREAS the residents of The Straits White Bay North district feel the

Department of Innovation, Business and Rural Development should also develop

incentives for further investments in cellular phone coverage for rural

Newfoundland and Labrador.

We the undersigned petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to

support the residents of The Straits White Bay North in their request to

obtain adequate cellular phone coverage in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, this petition currently has over 1,000 names on it, which

reflects more than 15 per cent of the people in my district over the age of

eighteen. That is quite a significant number of the people seeking the need and

showing concern that cellular coverage is certainly inadequate. This is where we

truly do need to look at an advanced telecommunication strategy that includes

not only a rural broadband initiative, but things such as cellular coverage and

things like telecommunication centres, so we can find ways to better

communicate. There can be appropriate investments made through various avenues.

Other provinces are doing it. We really should look at, as a Province, maybe

the mapping of the Province and where we do not currently have any service of

cellular coverage and see what we can do to further expand that. When we are

putting in towers for broadband, they are using fibre; I have been informed by

mobility companies that they also use fibre, but because the cellular companies

and the mobility companies are not even if they are part of one larger

corporation, they do not always work together, so we are not getting the best

bang for our buck sometimes when we are investing public dollars. We do need to

see where we can cover these areas and where we can really extend a few towers.

That is something that will be continuously pressed, because it is so imperative

that we have public safety when it comes to cellular coverage on our highways.

How can we ever institute a 911 strategy across the Province if we do not have

cellular coverage on all the highways across Newfoundland and Labrador? It is

something that other governments are making a priority, and I certainly ask that

this government make this a priority as well.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise again today to present a petition on needed changes to the Department

of Education school bus transportation policies.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS school district restructuring has resulted in longer bus travel times

and more hazardous winter travel for rural students of all ages; and

WHEREAS due to recent school closures, children living within 1.6 kilometres

of school face increased barriers of congested streets and busy intersections in

the walk to school, and parents without cars are having more difficulty getting

children to different schools on foot; and

WHEREAS only those child care centres outside the 1.6 kilometre zone and

directly on bus routes are included in kindergarten noontime routes, causing

hardship for working parents; and

WHEREAS the 1.6 kilometre policy has been in place since 1975 and student

transportation policies have not been reviewed through public consultation since

1996; and

WHEREAS parents are expressing the need for more flexible policies for

student transportation and school restructuring to meet the current needs of

school children.

We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to urge the government to

conduct a review of school bus transportation policies and school restructuring

to ensure safe and quality education for all school children in the Province.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Maybe some of the members opposite remember me presenting this petition a

couple of times since the Legislature has convened since the election. I do want

to go back to something the Minister of Education has said previously. He talked

about how busing is structured in other provinces. I think one thing I would

suggest to the Department of Education is to maybe create a graduated system,

whereby children of different age groups have different busing policies applied

to them.

I have had a number of open houses and public meetings around my district

since the election, and students continually raise this with me. This petition

has residents from my district in Wigmore Court and Eagle Court, Keane Place and

Sinnott Place. Then I also have a petition here that was kindly collected by the

Town of Gambo, and it has parents and concerned Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

from all over that region.

Incidentally, I think part of the solution to this problem may actually be

all-day kindergarten, because that way we do not have a situation whereby

parents are trying to find transportation for a portion of the day for children

only in school for a portion of the day and in child care for the other portion.

I hope the government will finally see the light on this one before it is all

over.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Motion 1, the Budgetary Policy of the

Government. I assume we will continue with the Leader of the Opposition's speech

from where he left off the other day.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We finished up on Thursday, and what I would like to do is take a few minutes

just to recap on where I was when we finished off. We started up the Budget

Debate a few days ago discussing a number of the charts and indeed the Budget

Speech itself.

What we learned there was that in 2012-2013 we are expecting a total revenue

of $7.2 billion and a forecasted surplus of around $258 million, that goes

against net expenses of about $7.5 billion. The figure that jumped out, as I

mentioned on Thursday, was the unfunded liability and the interest charges being

$830 million. I will highlight this again for the sake of people who are

watching, so we can understand where it is indeed we left off last week.

The Budget outlook, however - which is something I really did not speak much

to last week - was what happens between 2012 now and 2015. 2012-2013, as I said,

a $258 million deficit; 2013-2014, the anticipated deficit being around $432

million, and hopefully back into surplus in 2014 and 2015. What we have noticed

in all of this is programming expenses year over year will increase, as well as

the debt servicing expenses, which is something I believe a lot of jurisdictions

right now are having to pay close attention to, simply because most of those

funds are underperforming and are actually not delivering to the amounts that

would be anticipated to keep pace with the expenses that are coming from those

funds.

Currently, in 2012-2013, that liability exists to be around $5.6 million. In

2011-2012, however, it is around $5.2 billion and will grow to about $5.26

billion in 2012-2013. As I said, this is a trend we are seeing within many

provinces, governments, and indeed some corporations around the world, not just

in Canada but around the world. Mr. Speaker, these are concerns when you look at

the full financial picture and where it is that we are as a Province.

The other thing I would like to go back to just for a few minutes now are

some of the selected economic statistics we have. These statistics have been

compiled since 2008-2011. For the most part, we see what I would consider to be

certainly lots of positive news through this. In some areas, we see, for

instance, our unemployment rate still at 12.7 per cent. That is down over last

year's 14.4 per cent. Back in 2008, it was at 13.2 per cent. The unemployment

rates of course in many parts of our Province, and particularly in rural areas,

we see those at extremely high numbers, in excess of 20 per cent in many cases.

When you add about a 20 per cent unemployment rate in many rural areas of the

Province and then you look at the aging demographics, you see an older

population and not so many people working in those areas. You can actually see

that the financial picture in many of our small communities is just not that

great. It is fair to say that in those areas people do not feel like they live

in a have province today.

One other thing that jumped out that I did not mention a few days ago was the

oil production in the millions of barrels per year. In 2011, that was at 97.3

million. That is actually the lowest amount that we have had in four years, down

from 100 million last year and in 2009 at 97.7 million. In 2008, we saw the

number being at 125.2 million. That goes to show, indeed, how the economy is so

much dependent on oil.

One other area that jumped out a bit as I was reviewing this on the weekend

was the whole idea of the iron ore shipments. I was surprised to see that in

2011 that declined and put us at 16.9 million metric tons; that being down from

19.2 million. In 2009, that number was at 16.9 million, and in 2008 it was at 19

million. So, these are numbers and as we know, in Labrador, we would actually

expect to see and fully anticipate that we will see significant growth there as

the iron ore industry, certainly in Labrador, will play such a significant role

in the next coming years in terms of the budgeting process and the revenue that

it generates for the Province.

Some of the other areas that we talked about last week and specifically in

terms where we get downloading to the provinces, which indeed impacts our

budgeting - some of the areas that I did mention were six or seven areas in

federal cuts; one around Employment Insurance. There were three different

programs there at different stages where we anticipate that the federal

government, some time this year, will cut out those programs. This, again, will

have a significant impact on the residents of the Province because many of those

rely on those especially on Employment Insurance, that is a big part of their

employment.

These are people who have lived in communities and right now are comfortable

where they are, their situation is indeed stable, and what they want to do, in

many cases, are at a stage in their life where they really do not need a whole

lot to live on so seasonal employment becomes a big part of what they do. I know

in my own district, for instance, we see that in the White Bay area in

particular, where many people have been working in the fish plant or working in

the forestry sector, or working even in the Department of Transportation, and in

the summertime or the wintertime they would be laid off, so they would be

relying on unemployment as a source of income. Their network, or what they do

within their family, their lifestyle, is generated around and is guaranteed by

this Employment Insurance that they depend on.

The other thing, of course, in terms of the federal cuts, one of the biggest

things that was making news was around the OAS and the changes in the OAS

program. We understand even though the marketing piece of it or the

communication around it meant that it would be pushed out and you would not be

affected if you were born after April 1, 1958, even though, when you look at

that, it seems a long ways out but if someone were in their mid-fifties right

now, this is something that would impact them and it really impacts the way that

they actually plan for their retirement.

Search and rescue is actually where we did end up on last week. Of course, we

all know the impact that search and rescue is having in our Province. Now with

the closure of the Maritime Search and Rescue Sub-Centre, that becomes part of

our history now, that centre no longer existing.

One other thing that is having significant impact in even our schools and our

libraries would be the CAP, Community Access Program. This allows people in

particular, in smaller communities who really do not have access to high-speed

Internet. On one hand you get the federal government saying that we should be

doing more and more on-line, and on the other hand you are getting programs like

community access not available anymore.

I spoke to one librarian over the weekend and they were very concerned that

this program would not be available. We would encourage government it is only

a small number, I know, when you look at the overall budget for this, but yet

the importance of this is very significant. It is something that as a Province,

I would encourage the Province to stay involved in and to continue to lobby the

federal government to come up with their share. If not, I believe that this is a

particular program that as a Province we need to take a serious look at and see

that we should take ownership of this.

Mr. Speaker, those were some of the federal cuts. There were others the

Marine Atlantic and the ACOA offices, they being at a significant impact on our

Province. One other one that we spoke about was the Health Accord. In 2016 and

2017, we will see significant changes and downloading of the health care dollars

for instance, money that the federal government would have paid for in the

past. That will no longer be available from the federal government, but indeed

would be downloaded to the Province.

The magnitude of that is when you look at last year's or the 2011-2012

Budget, they would cover about 15.3 per cent of the overall Budget. This is a

big figure, and when you look at this amount of money, it goes to show once

again that the relationship with the federal government is really not working to

the extent that it should. The federal government will be very content to

download this money onto the Province and it will be left up to us then to have

to pay those bills. This is in the aftermath of an accord that was in place

since 2004 and signed for ten years. This accord by many, I believe, of the

day was seen as something that was very positive.

I will not go over all the health care things that we talked about last week,

but one in particular that I will highlight today is about the ambulance

services and the ambulance drivers. I know, speaking to some people over this

weekend, who are working in this particular industry, we realize that as of

March 31 they are without a contract. There are even some policies and standards

that they have been expecting to see put in place for now about four years that

have not been done. I believe it is timely right now; this was fully anticipated

to be in the last contract and it is still not done.

The big thing that I am hearing from most operators right now is the

recruitment and the retention. This goes back, I believe, to the number of

spaces that we have available within the Province where we can actually train

paramedics. This is very important, because in many cases, they are the first

responders, so it is important that we actually try and find a way to educate

and to train as many paramedics as possible. There is a need right now in the

Province for paramedics to support our ambulance systems.

Mr. Speaker, there was a lot of things that we covered right back to wait

times, to home care, to electronic health records, and on and on it goes; I will

not review all these, but a significant amount of time on Thursday was spent on

health care, because health care is such a significant part of our Budget

about $3 billion this year. Of course, with the demographics that we have, and

with the aging demographics and the challenges that come with even new drugs,

new equipment, this puts a burden on provincial coffers. It was said in the

Budget Speech that this would be seen as a that we would easily be able to

tell that this government was committed to health care, but I will say that when

you see what is facing us, the options that are existing for many people as they

look for appropriate health care dollars, there will be challenges in the

future, I am sure. We will need to be looking for innovative and creative ways

in particular, the use of technology; and I did mention, I will mention again

for a few minutes, the use of electronic health records and how important they

will be in the future delivery of health care.

One of the areas that I think I will start for today as response will be a

review of some of the comments that were made by the Auditor General. Again, the

debt of course is significant in the Province and has been around now for a

number of years. There is no doubt that we have been able to pay down debt, but

in doing so, when you look at the overall debt or the net debt, when you factor

in your liabilities around your pension fund and your insurance plan, the

Province's net debt is significant. It is estimated by the AG that a surplus of

$270 million would be required over the next thirty years to eliminate the $8.1

billion. That is the debt we had last year, and we can expect that this will

grow, of course, in future years simply because the surpluses will not be

available to us, at least in the short term. This goes to show that it is very

prudent on us that we do whatever we can to diversify the economy, and trying to

move away from the dependence on oil is extremely important for us as a

Province. How you do this, however, comes with its challenges, but it will mean

investment in areas like agriculture, forestry, and certainly the energy area.

The other thing we talked a little bit about last time was this per capita

debt and the commitment we have to bring our debt in line over the next ten

years. For instance, as a Province right now we are second to last, next to

Quebec, with a per capita debt of just under $18,000. That compares to around

$25,000 for Quebec. Ontario, for instance, would be around $17,000. The low one

on the end there would be Alberta, leading the way with just $3,300. I will give

you an example. A province like Saskatchewan would be at $10,000 per every man,

woman, and child, and British Columbia is just over $8,000. So we are certainly

on the low end of the scale. To get this under control, to put a strategy in

place to deal with the debt situation for us as Province is indeed challenging.

It will mean no doubt in the future there will be some decisions that will have

to be made and priorities that will have to be made. I think it is incumbent on

us that we make sure we get the priorities right so we are not passing this debt

on to the next generation.

When you look at the situation and where we have come from over the last ten

years, in 2001, for instance, we had revenues of about $4 billion, and in 2011

they were at $8.1 billion. Just to let you know, in 2006 that was at $5.6

billion. Of course, this all comes from, as we all know the offshore royalties,

and now mining is starting to play a more significant role than it has in the

past. We fully anticipate that is one area where we will actually see some

significant and substantial growth in. However, even though there has been a

considerable amount of money available to us, it has been often said that most

of the infrastructure debt, the financial debt that we

have had in the Province, and even the social debt to some degree that we have

had in the Province, has become part of an inheritance back in 2007. At that

time, too, there were some very good offshore deals that had been negotiated. We

knew in time, that as part of that inheritance, there would be some substantial

resources that would come from the offshore projects; that being Hibernia, White

Rose and Terra Nova, and, of course, the Voisey's Bay deal that today are seen

as major contributors to our overall economy and is often touted as the reason

why, right now of course, we are the have Province that we are today.

When you look at our expenses as a Province, not only has the revenue side

grown but there has been significant growth on the expense side as well. In

2001, $4.4 billion was being spent by the Province; in 2006, $5.4 billion; and

in 2011 that would go up to $7.5 billion. When you see the income side, of

course the revenue side continued to grow, and also on the expense side as

significant investments have been made within the Province.

When you factor in the aging demographics of the Province - just as an

example, Mr. Speaker, people who are over sixty years of age and over have

increased from 99,000 or 19.5 per cent to over 119,000 in 2011; the 19.5 per

cent of people over the age of sixty in 2006, in 2011 that will now be at 23.3

per cent. We know that as you get an older workforce there are more as you get

an older demographic of people who live in your Province, there are certainly

significant challenges that come with that. One of the other things we found is

that people, as they retire home - for instance, people from Alberta, as they

move back what happens is they come back at later stages in their life, either

fifty-five, sixty, sixty-five, whatever the ages are, but as they retire back

home what happens is they come back home at a point in their life when they use

the health care system more at that time. Of course, added to that is the change

in the OAS.

Mr. Speaker, I will just flip through some of these here. Some of these

things are charts that we have heard of and have seen a little bit of last week.

Where does it go? When you look at the expenditures for 2012-2013 there is no

question that health and education will certainly be taking almost 50 per cent

of the Budget, Mr. Speaker. This is similar to what we have seen in past years;

of course, with oil royalties adding significant revenue to that.

This is a new chart and one that did not get discussed last week at all. This

has to do with the consolidated

summary of financial statements and the annual

surpluses or deficits that we have seen over the years. We know back in the

early 2000s, we were consistently having deficits simply because the revenue

from the offshore resources had not really shown up yet. It was around the year

2006 before we really started to see, and started to feel, as a Province, the

impact that the offshore royalties were going to have, that would have on the

future revenues of our Province. As an example, back in 2004, we were actually

in a deficit position of $913 million. That dropped almost by half in 2005 to

$488 million. So these were significant deficits; of course, all of us at the

time were just waiting for the impact of the offshore as this royalty money

would have the impact on the Province that we knew it would at some point.

Of course, in those times it was very difficult to you really did not know

what would happen with currency; you really did not know what would happen with

the price of oil. I have talked to other people that have been around finance in

the early 2000s when we were looking at oil prices in the mid-twenties; of

course, over the last few years that has grown significantly. So not only did we

see that the price of oil, but the volume and now we can actually see today

the impact that this resource development has had, largely because of the

significant negotiations that we have seen over the years. We can go back to the

mid-eighties, when we you look at where the oil industry started in the

Province; when you fast forward some twenty years later, twenty-five years

later, we can now see the impact that it is having.

In 2006, we saw a surplus of almost $200 million. That dropped a bit in 2007,

time, too; they were a major influence in the surplus of 2006, at least

according to the AG's report here. We have seen some very volatile years since

that, and in 2008, that surplus actually went up to almost $1.5 billion. Then in

2009 it was a record year of $2.35 billion as a surplus. When you go back

probably just ten, fifteen years prior to that, that would almost be what you

would see a Budget in those times.

Then, in 2010 we went into deficit of course, a lot of this related to the

global economy and then in 2011 bounced back to $597 million. In 2011-2012,

there was the surplus that we heard about last week being finalized, and this is

consistent with the mid-year review that we had in November, that being around

$776 million. In 2012-2013, however as a result of less production, less

volume offshore, as we will see two of our platforms down we will be into a

deficit of $258 million. Forecast again for 2013-2014 of that year will be $433

million, and then back in a surplus in 2014-2015.

The reason why I raise those numbers and I draw attention to them is that it

goes to show that our economy right now is absolutely, completely dependent on

offshore resources and that it is has been now close to about eight or nine

years. The diversification of the economy really has not provided the dividends

that we once thought it would, so it is expedient on us to make sure that we do

whatever we can to get this diversification started, because if not as it was

said in the House today, we know that this oil will not last forever; indeed, we

will need to know to make sure that we have the debt under control so we are not

passing on significant amounts of debt to the next generation. There is an

economy that is somewhat diversified so that we can actually put somewhat of a

stable future and a stable economy as we pass it on to the next generation.

One other thing that I want to talk about now, this is obviously and I will

spend a bit more time on this before I move on to some of the other programs;

that is, of course, the debt expense. What we have seen here is that there is a

chart here. This comes from the AG's report again; this was totalled at $837

million for 2011, but what is important here is to really look at where this

$837 million in debt expense this is the amount that the Province has to pay

to service this debt. As I said, in 2011, this was recorded to be $837 million.

This consists of $298 million for the unfunded pension liability, $103 million

for the debt liability for group insurance, group health and life insurance

retirement, and $436 million for the Province's borrowings.

When you look at all this and you say this is the amount of debt that we have

as a Province for 2011 on the annual basis here, this is the amount that we pay

on an annual basis, and you go back and you say let us compare this. In 2002 for

instance, that number was at $942 million, and I was surprised to see that was

just about $100 million in the difference over the ten or twelve-year period.

This debt expense is anticipated to be, in 2011-2012, $790 million. In

2012-2013, this, as we have seen in the Budget last week, is to be at $831

million. It is a significant portion when you look at the overall Budget of how

we handle this debt, this being the unfunded pension liability and the

supporting of the retirement benefits.

It is difficult to be able to just say that those numbers are available, but

how do you manage this? That is the big question. You look at where do you get

the sources of revenue? Where do you go to get other sources of revenue? When

you do that from your economy you must also look at the federal responsibility

for this. Over the last ten years, this has just continued to decline. I can

assure you that with the changes in the Atlantic Accord in 2016-2017, this

number will decrease again. In 2011, that was at 21.7 per cent. For instance, in

2004, that was at 36.6 per cent. We are seeing a significant erosion of federal

government revenues to the provinces. Of course, someone else has to pay for

that, and that is us as a Province.

When you look at the offshore royalties and you compare this to your to the

Budget, when you compare the Budget to the actual in offshore royalties. Back in

2005, for instance, we had budgeted $121 million and in that year it came in to

be $265 million. It seems to me when you look at the chart, it has always been

under budgeted; some years more than others, except for 2007 when in 2007 we had

budgeted $703 million and it actually came in at $423 million. Other than that,

most years it has been under budgeted and we have been able to make more money

on the offshore royalties than we anticipated. This, of course, is because of

the volatility that is around oil prices and around production, to some degree.

There is no question and it came up in the House today about the credit

ratings of the Province. If we had to borrow, it would be a little easier for us

today because we have made significant gains with our credit rating agencies. In

most cases, we are certainly well in the Aa2 range with Moody's and Standard and

Poor's A+. From a credit rating position, at least in my opinion, we are in a

pretty good position there. When you compare this to the other provinces, we are

still pretty much in the middle of the road. Of course, Alberta leads the way

there with an AAA rating. This is as of 2011. Certainly, we are in the middle of

the pack there as it relates to other provinces.

Mr. Speaker, these are some comments that I have made from the AG's report,

but there is one other that I will just spend a few minutes on before I move on

to some of the specific programs within the Province. These are from the

Newfoundland and Labrador Pooled Pension Fund. When I went back here, I just

wanted to do some reading to figure out where this fund actually started, where

did this all come from. One of the things I did find out was it was in 1981 that

this legislation was enacted in the Province. So we had this Pooled Pension Fund

and this required both the employer, being government, of course, and the

employee to pay premiums into this fund. Prior to that, this did not exist. When

this fund was established, of course, it was important then that contributions,

we would hope, would be put in this fund to support the people who would now be

paid as pensioners.

When you look at it and you look at the active pensioners versus the active

members, or people who are actually paying into the fund, we have seen a 17 per

cent growth from 1995-2010 in terms of the people who are active members of the

pension fund. Yet we have seen a 54 per cent growth in people who are now

pensioners. When you look at it, we are seeing obviously a lot more people now

who are taking money out of this fund than are actually being contributors. This

is obviously something we need to be constantly mindful of when you look at the

overall responsibility and indeed how you keep this fund going.

This fund includes the Public Service Pension Plan, the Teachers' Pension

Plan, Uniformed Services Pension Plan, Members of the House of Assembly, and the

Provincial Court judges. As of December 31, 2010, that plan had 38,650

employees. This included Members of the House of Assembly, as I said, and the

employer paid pension contributions. The total there was at $329.1 million into

the pension fund, but during the same time the fund provided benefits totalling

$494.2 million to some 24,254 retirees. When you look at that, there is a

significant gap just in that year alone of some-$168 million. It is a

significant gap there that we need to look at. When I went through this, and I

did go back to the AG's report just to look for the comment on that, as one

would expect, this is one of the things he highlighted in his report. It is

something that we need to be very careful of as a Province as we move forward

and how we manage this pension fund.

Mr. Speaker, I want to go back to, as I said on Thursday of last week, as I

was getting ready for this response, what I did, in particular, I picked a

certain number of departments or actual areas in the Province that all of us, I

guess, have been impacted by the Budget to a certain degree, but in some of the

major issues around the Province that we hear from on a day-to-day basis. When I

finished up on Thursday I was talking about search and rescue. Certainly, that

has been a subject of much discussion around the Province and remains to be, as

last week with the Maritime Rescue Sub-Centre, we saw the closure of that in St.

John's. Of course, that has been something that has been high in public

priority, in terms of coverage and, I guess, the discussion around the Province

for many months now.

In January, we had the death of young Burton Winters. As an Opposition of

course, one of the things we have been asking for is an inquiry to clarify what

actually happened. Even now, here we are some three months later and there still

remain a lot of questions. I know in some of the contact we have had with the

family and with lots of people in Labrador, there are still lots of questions.

As part of the inquiry we were told that, obviously, it would include federal

involvement, and we understand that. What I did is I went back and looked at

some of the other provincial inquires and I did speak to some people who have

actually participated and took

part in some of those inquires, and it was their

opinion of course that this could happen. I just went through a list of some -

my goodness, there must have been twelve or thirteen or more here and I know

there have been many, many more that have been done in the Province over the

years. Indeed, in speaking to one particular gentleman, he said that was

certainly one where the federal government got involved and was quite willing to

participate in the inquiry. It was, in his opinion, something they would be

willing to do again right now if they were called upon to do so.

Just last week in Question Period, when asked about the Maritime Rescue

Sub-Centre in St. John's, the response being from Rear-Admiral Gardam that we

should be comfortable that those services would not be cut back. However, I will

say that it was the Rear Admiral who was the one who was directly involved in

the call on young Burton Winters. I am not so sure at this point that we get any

degree of comfort when you look at access to search and rescue, that we are as

safe today. The unfortunate thing is that it will probably take some event or

some tragedy, and we certainly hope that is not the case, then we will know if

that is the case, if something was to happen that you would get - that it would

ignite again what could have happened, or what if this centre were still

available to us.

Moving on from that, what I would like to talk a little bit about is the

volunteer piece, the search and rescue organizations that we have across the

Province. This is not something we spoke about on Thursday, not something that

you will hear much about in the House. Although a few weeks ago we did see where

there was an announcement made of some thermal imagining cameras, and they would

be used I think purchased some twenty-five of those. I know the feedback from

most of those volunteer associations have been very good. I know we have,

according to their Web sites, some twenty-seven teams, but in the press release

it made reference to twenty-five teams. The twenty-seven teams across the Island

that the Web site talks about would be nineteen on the Island of Newfoundland

and some eight in Labrador, for a total of twenty-seven teams.

They have a mission statement that the Newfoundland and Labrador Search and

Rescue Association assists the GSAR, the ground search and rescue teams, in

their effort to provide superior and dedicated level of service to the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador. They do, Mr. Speaker; I can tell you a lot of

examples over the years where these volunteer associations have assisted in

many, many searches for individuals.

They have done so with evacuations around fire season, we have seen that. We

have often seen them get directly involved in the recovery of drowning victims.

As I mentioned about the Maritime Search and Rescue Sub-Centre earlier, it is

not unusual at all to see volunteers. I know I have seen them in my own

community. We have a fantastic group of individuals there as they participate in

many of those searches.

The other thing that they do is they use the opportunity to volunteer at many

of our events and festivals across the Province. You see those young men and

young women as they use their time to help communities in many, many different

ways. There is a great structure in place; it has been in place now for about

forty years and in excess of 1,000 volunteers helping in our communities, and

always there when called upon to participate in a search and rescue mission.

One other group that I will mention here, because it is simply one that we

have been close to and I know many people in the Province, would be the Stephan

Hopkins Foundation. They have participated in a number of searches. This is a

group that even though not formally part of the volunteer search and rescue

organizations across the Province, they have done a significant amount of

fundraising to buy side-scan sonar equipment. These are typically used now,

unfortunately, in recovery of drowning victims. All this came in place because

of the use of side-scan sonar a few years ago with a drowning victim in Bonne

Bay Pond, of a young man by the name of Stephan Hopkins. The family and

volunteers had spent seventy-three days looking for that body, and in less than

thirty minutes this equipment was used to locate the body.

Mr. Speaker, as I move through a number of areas that have been impacted by

the Province, I want to speak for a few minutes now in terms of what has taken

significant debate within the Province and here in this House. I know since the

House opened in March, it has led off Question Period on many, many days. This,

of course, is the Muskrat Falls project, the project being to develop on the

Lower Churchill in Labrador, being 824 megawatts.

There is significant cost to it: the generating station of $2.9 billion, the

Labrador-Island Transmission Link of $2.1 billion for a total of $5 billion

and then the link to Nova Scotia, which is the responsibility of Emera, being

$1.2 billion. So, it is a $6.2 billion project; this agreement, of course, is

something that is seen by many people right now as our first mega-development

for many years within the Province.

Our question as Opposition, what we have always asked, is consideration for

detailed analyses on all the other options. It has been unfortunate, at least

through the process so far, that we have seen the Public Utilities Board what

they have been asked to do is discuss two options, one being the isolated

island; that would mean the development of some small hydro in certain areas of

the Province, and then use of wind, the replacement of Holyrood, and some

turbine technology that would be used to satisfy the energy needs of the

Province this being for the next fifty years, starting in 2017.

So, in concept, Muskrat Falls being 40 per cent use on the island, 40 per

cent for export, and 20 per cent given to Emera for the construction of the

Maritime Link, and with capacity on that of some 500 megawatts; we would be able

to use the remaining portion of that, obviously, for export power. We have

always been led to believe that if this power needed to be pulled back for

development in Labrador, well, of course, that would be available there.

There has been a significant amount of questions about the Muskrat Falls

project, one around the forecasted need, the demand. I have been on record and

have been quoted that I do not have a problem with the demand side of this

because I believe, given all the activity that is going on in Labrador, that

somewhere there will be a demand for power, either on the island or in Labrador.

So, having this power available for industrial development in Labrador certainly

could be more important than this.

I think in 2010, when this deal was put together, it was actually a much

different environment than we actually live in today. In 2010 there was not a

whole lot of discussion about much of this power being used in Labrador, and

there is still some significant challenges that exists there simply because of

some of the problems around transmission. I have spoken to a number of people

who are very close to this in Labrador, just to get their impression, and I must

say what I have been always told is we have to be very careful because the

transmission ability in Labrador right now I guess to repeat the words of one

man

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER (Verge): Order, please!

MR. BALL: who has been very close to a lot of this, he said: In some

cases, the transmission is considered to be just held together. He said duct

tape, but I would not want to be an alarmist. We all know that there are certain

challenges within the transmission ability within Labrador and if indeed we were

to use much of that there, do we have the transmission ability to be able to get

it to where the customers are.

We have asked lots of questions in the House over the last few weeks around

financing. We have been told that there is about $2 billion that is available

from government to support the equity position into Nalcor and Nalcor would then

go out and borrow some $3 billion. When you look at this, even though we own

Nalcor this is a company that we own as individuals in the Province so we are

indeed the shareholders it is important to us, if you are going to enter into

that kind of relationship, you have to make sure that the cash, number one, is

available to support the equity. We have been told by the Minister of Finance

that we do have the $2 billion, but there is no question there are going to be

other demands on that amount of liquidity as we look at some of the other major

projects that we will need to be doing in terms of infrastructure within the

Province that being hospitals, continuing roadwork, bridges, and so on. There

will be lots of people who will be coming looking for other infrastructure

programs. When you consider that in the next two years, at least from a surplus

position, we will probably not be in a position to actually add much to that

surplus simply because of the deficit position that we will be facing within the

next two years. In three years, hopefully, we will return to surplus.

When you look at the partnership arrangement here and with the declining

surplus I have not seen the cash flow analysis beyond 2016-2017; these are

numbers that I would absolutely like to see. A few weeks ago, one of the things

we did hear about, and this was coming from the CEO of Nalcor when you talked

about the equity position is that if you had to go to the market looking for

money soundings I think was the word that he used they were looking at the

time of about a 57 per cent to 43 per cent equity. This is a huge amount of

equity that you would have had to raise, and you would have to do this. Of

course, the one thing that you need to be very cognizant of a major

megaproject the size of this is indeed the budget itself. How do you make sure

that you do not get yourself into overruns? Right now, what we do know is that

Decision Gate 2 numbers, we are in the position where we could be 30 per cent

lower or, indeed, we could be 50 per cent higher.

That level of variance, I believe, for anybody who is going out to look for

financing is certainly something that we have to tighten up. I do understand

that once we get access to Decision Gate 3 numbers this will change. From what I

have been told about Decision Gate 3, there will still be a significant variance

in terms of where we would be in overruns in that this project, getting this to

a degree of comfort that many people would be used to in the routine business.

Because I will agree it is important that we do as much work upfront in terms of

budgeting at least. I am not talking about roadwork here, I am not talking about

ordering turbines or those sort of things, what I am talking about is the work

in preparing the budget and the engineering, it is essential in getting this

project right.

At 57 per cent to 43 per cent equity, based on keeping it on budget, that is

a significant challenge in this environment, especially when you are doing a

project over five years or more in Labrador and coming down the Northern

Peninsula with a transmission line. The cost overruns are something that are

very concerning because it could have significant impact on us as shareholders

on this project. We have seen lots of examples of cost overruns Hebron itself.

We have seen our own local hospitals, and we have even seen the work that was

done in Parsons Pond and the difficulty of even keeping that on budget.

Mr. Speaker, we are very familiar, with most of the construction that we have

seen within the Province, both either private or public, we have seen many cost

overruns. One other thing is that when you look at partnerships, one of the

things about this whole agreement that I found to be a little unusual was we

have assumed 100 per cent cost of overruns on the transmission line from

Labrador to the Island; then we take 50 per cent of the Maritime Link. Based on

a certain per cent, Emera would participate in there; I believe it is 5 per cent

and then it rotates. The 100 per cent overrun we absorbed on the Labrador to the

Island link, yet the amount of ownership, 71 versus 29 71 per cent for us and

29 per cent for Emera just does not change. Regardless of what the cost, we

take all the risk in terms of the overrun; in this case, Emera will get the same

amount of return, and that is a regulated line.

Now, one of the things we have been continually asking for is indeed what the

cost is. We have heard numbers around 23.9 cents. That is the cost to bring this

to Soldiers Pond. Then I went back through some of the debate that has been

happening in Nova Scotia and what it is to their cost. We know that Nova Scotia

has a goal of about 20 per cent renewable energy by 2020. In their debate I am

not so sure about the cost structure and how they price up their energy in Nova

Scotia one of the things they said, and I did read this, was that at more than

sixteen cents, they would not be interested in power at that level.

The concept of Muskrat Falls in itself is, no question, an expensive one for

us. I have tried to figure out using my own experience here; given the level of

investment, and when you take this project out, say, ten or twelve years, at

what point will this project under the current Budget actually make money

and return the dividend to the Province? We do not have that information yet.

The other thing about the Island forecasting that we have noticed, and this

has been public in recent days, is that the forecasting for the last ten years

is certainly not something we can be proud of in terms of the accuracy of it. We

have not seen within the last ten years where the forecasting has been correct

at all. Therefore, when you do your forecasting out fifty years, it obviously

makes it that much more difficult. There will be lots of questions around

forecasting.

What was the forecast, for instance, in 2011? What is Newfoundland Hydro

forecasting for the Island demand in 2012? These are still questions that we do

not have. Then we need to know and do the thorough review on what the other

options are. We have been told now for months that these options are not

options, but yet we have not really seen the report, the studies, or the

detailed information that I think Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will need to

make that decision.

I think it is important regardless of the politics not to be the naysayer to

any project. I think it is important no matter what it is we are considering.

This is about the future of the Province; it is a significant investment and it

is a significant responsibility that we are about to take on here to satisfy

those energy demands.

What about those other options? We have not seen and I am hoping that in

the debate, we will have the level of detail on natural gas, on things like

imported LNG. Again, 2041: do we really have any serious options of taking this

Province into 2041 so that we can actually get this resource back from the Upper

Churchill demand management and wind, adding wind to the overall Energy Plan.

In 2007, when the Energy Plan was released, there was no question that there

was a lot of celebration about how great this warehouse is. You know what? When

you read it, there is a significant amount of opportunity in there. It is

important that we make the right decisions here and that we also know that there

are many I spoke a few minutes ago, and I want to just highlight this again;

when it comes to demand management, there are many, many opportunities around

the world and many, many examples around the world that we can see where

countries and other people have made significant power changes, or use of power,

or power savings, as they focus on demand management.

We are looking for the best option and this is a necessary part of the

debate. It is important because we are looking at putting significant resources

to this. In doing so, if we do not get it right, there will certainly be a lot

of other things, a lot of other programs that the next generation will have to

pay for and will be left to do without if we do not get this decision right.

I would also like to draw attention to the debate in the House of Assembly

that will happen sometime in the fall. It is important that we will have all the

information that would be available, the complete analysis of the power purchase

agreement with Nalcor and Newfoundland Hydro. That is such a significant part of

this debate on how this will work for us as a Province, the agreement with Emera

and time for review; we have been told we were getting that. This will be an

historical decision.

As I have looked at the obligations of Nalcor as a company because as I

mentioned earlier, it is important that we know that your partner is in a

position that it has enough cash to support the debt that it is at right now,

we have Nalcor's share of Hebron being at 4.9 per cent, Nalcor's share of

Hibernia South being at 10 per cent, and White Rose at 5 per cent. So, these are

investments; we are part owner in those companies. Nalcor's shares are around

$1.5 billion. So, what we have to do is that we will have our own obligations

for those projects, and it is anticipated that this could be as high as $1.5

billion between now and 2020. This is one of the reasons why I have been looking

for the cash-flow analysis of Nalcor just to see that if these numbers are

accurate, well, then, this would mean whether we are into a partner here that

has the liquidity and the ability to pay their way.

Mr. Speaker, we are getting close to my three hours, and I do have a

non-confidence motion to the Budget that I would like to present. That would be:

I, as the Member for Humber Valley, move, and seconded by the Member for

Burgeo La Poile, that all the words after that be struck out of the Budget

motion, and be replaced with the following:

That this House condemns the government for its failure to present a fiscally

responsible program which addresses the immediate economic problems of rural

areas of the Province as well as the serious social needs that exist in this

Province and its failure to create a climate of sustainable economic growth

within the Province, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

We have an amendment put forward by the Leader of the Official Opposition,

seconded by the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

This House will now take a brief recess to consider whether the amendment is

in order.

Recess

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

We have considered the amendment as put forward by the Leader of the Official

Opposition and the amendment is in order.

The Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We finished up prior to the non-confidence motion talking about Nalcor's

obligations through to 2020. The information we have had is the $1.5 billion US

from now until 2020 is what we understand to be the obligation. That is the

reasoning behind the questions when we have been asking for the five-year cash

flow from Nalcor.

We also understand that in this year's Budget the $655 million would be used

for tree clearing, road construction, the access road to Muskrat, the

procurement of towers, insulators, as well as some hardware that goes with that,

and right-of-way. These are not something that you would actually see in a

project that is really not brought to sanction yet. Also, the ordering of four

turbine generator units, we understand that is probably as a result that there

would be long lead in. Yet, it would be a significant investment if indeed this

project never got to sanction. The engineering piece of it and the budgeting

piece of it, you would almost understand that to be legitimate expenses as you

try and develop a project to get to the budget that would be dependable. To see

turbines and towers ordered, it seems to be a little odd.

Mr. Speaker, there is no question of the significance of this project in

terms of the Budget, where we will be in the next four or five years as a

requirement and the pressure that it would put on future Budgets, there is no

doubt. When you look at that, you say: Okay, what is it? Where are the programs?

What are the programs? I just want to go back to some of the other programs that

as a Province we deliver on a day-to-day basis. I can certainly guarantee you

that within the next few weeks and coming months, there will be lots more debate

and lots more questions about Muskrat, especially as we have the debate sometime

in the fall. We will be looking forward to the information and the terms of

reference around that debate in general.

I want to talk a little bit now about one of the programs I have had some

familiarity with in terms of my district, that being supportive employment. We

have been part of this program now for a number of years. This program has been

around for awhile. It comes from the previous Administration, that being started

by the Liberal government, I am sure. This has been seen to be very, very

successful in many areas. They have a model of: Nothing About Us Without Us. So,

21 per cent of income support clients for the year ending March 31, 2010 had an

illness or a disability. Then you have to ask, I guess the big question is: What

happens in their lives? How employable are they? What about the people with

disabilities, can we in some way - how do we integrate them into the workforce?

Even though we have made significant gains, 60 per cent are still not

attached to the workforce. Almost 50 per cent more unemployment amongst this

group provincially. The national figure is 44 per cent of people with

disabilities are not attached to the labour force. So we have some work to do

here. The unemployment rate is still high, but I can guarantee you there are

certainly employers and groups out there who are willing to participate and work

with this program. It is a tremendous program.

I know in our own place of business, we have been working and have had lots

and lots of good results with individuals with disabilities. As a matter of

fact, I will tell the story of one particular person we have had there for over

twenty-five years now, who came to work with support and is there now fully

integrated into the workforce. She is certainly someone that I do not think

would have gotten the chance without this type of program being available to her

when it was. She is there now, still there as a very active employee.

Mr. Speaker, this is one particular initiative that I believe raises

awareness of disability issues and certainly promotes inclusion of people with

disabilities in all aspects of our society. It is something that we really need

to see more work done with because it makes a significant impact on individuals.

The Opening Doors program, one that we saw in a ministerial statement just a few

weeks ago, and of course the good news that came with that. These are areas that

we can make a significant impact on, and areas where we need to make sure we get

the appropriate amount of funding so that we can actually make a difference in

people's lives. The other thing is that it requires a tremendous commitment from

volunteers who provide the oversight on many of those associations, the business

partners and the association partners that we have.

One thing during the campaign that we heard a lot about was affordable

housing and it came up today again in Question Period the availability of

affordable housing units. I know in our own particular community, we have had

about thirty over the last couple of years that have been done. It is very

difficult to keep pace with the amount of calls that you get for this and the

amount of money that is spent. In recent years what we have been finding is that

the mix of those units, being a two bedroom or a three bedroom, is becoming a

problem because what it does is the three bedroom units, obviously, are most

costly to operate for many of those families. So, what people are looking for, I

believe, are the two bedroom units.

The other thing is the subsidies for low-income people and the number that

are available. Even when you can actually find housing, the number of subsidies

available to low-income families is very limited. I know in my own community of

Deer Lake, from what I understand, there is only eight available. There is

certainly much more demand for this. We have seen in recent weeks where there

have been media releases I know in particular on the West Coast where we

have had people complaining because there is just not enough subsidies available

for people.

The other thing is I heard this on our visit to Labrador, and we hear it in

the Northeast Avalon all the time and throughout the Province this whole idea

of rent protection, how do we protect the people that are actually living in

units right now from the escalating costs of rent when you get a landlord who

just really sees the opportunity and just unilaterally decides to put rent up.

This is something I really believe that we need to consider. I realize the costs

of construction are high these days, especially in residential development, and

we have not seen a whole lot of apartments being built, especially in the St.

John's area. I would expect that this is because of the cost of construction.

The units that are in place, I think rental protection, people t