PDF Version

April 10, 2019

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVIII No. 4

The

House met at 10 a.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Trimper):

Admit strangers, please.

Order,

please!

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call

from the Order Paper, Order 2, third reading of Bill 1.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Environment that Bill 1,

An Act To

Amend The Environmental Protection Act, be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

this bill be now read a third time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt this motion?

All

those in favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, ‘nay.'

The

motion is carried.

CLERK (Barnes):

A bill,

An Act To Amend The Environmental Protection Act. (Bill 1)

MR. SPEAKER:

This bill is now read a third

time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and its title be as on the Order

Paper.

motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Environmental Protection Act,” read a third

time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill 1)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I call from the

Order Paper, Order 5, second reading of Bill 4.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Service NL.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Minister of Justice and Public Safety that Bill 4,

Real Estate Trading Act, 2019 , be now

read a second time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill, “An Act Respecting The Regulation Of Real Estate

Trading In the Province.” (Bill 4)

MR. SPEAKER:

The Minister of Service NL.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, I'm delighted to

stand once again in this hon. House to introduce legislation that will have a

positive impact on the lives of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

The

current Real Estate Trading Act was

proclaimed in 1965 and has received only minor amendments since that time. Many

times I have said on the floor of this House of Assembly that it is important

that legislation be current and responsive to the people it serves.

Given

the fact that the purchase or sale of a home is perhaps the largest transaction

a person will ever make in their life, it is imperative that we have legislation

that protects consumers in our province to the greatest extent possible.

Real

estate transactions affect a large portion of individuals in every region of

Newfoundland and Labrador. A modern and robust regulatory framework is necessary

to deliver consumer protection to home buyers and sellers, while also ensuring

the needs of the real estate brokers and salespersons are taken into account.

In 2012,

government engaged industry on reviewing the act. We reinforced the view that

the current legislation is outdated and inadequate. At the time, those

discussions did not lend to any amendments of the act.

Mr.

Speaker, when our government developed The

Way Forward , our plan for sustainability and growth in the province, we made

better services and increased consumer protection, core elements of the plan.

Our Premier also included a review of this legislation in my mandate letter,

signalling its importance for both consumers and the industry. We launched

public consultations and gathered feedback through a number of sources.

Government representatives met with key stakeholder groups such as the

Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Realtors to discuss issues of

importance and potential changes to the act. Feedback was also gathered via

email and online at government's engage portal; 90 submissions were received

during the consultation period.

The

Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Realtors also held its own meetings

throughout the province and officials from my department attended these as well.

I was happy to attend a session myself, Mr. Speaker. The feedback from these

sessions was part of realtors association's submission to the provincial

government.

I want

to thank Mr. Bill Stirling and the entire Newfoundland and Labrador Association

of Realtors for their tremendous effort and their focus on helping bring out

improvements from their industry.

Through

our review of the Real Estate Trading Act ,

as well as the feedback received through the previous consultation process, we

identified several areas that merited significant amendments, as well as a need

to clarify the acts language to ensure it is modern and clear.

Mr.

Speaker, the legislation we are introducing in the House today will address

concerns raised by both industry and consumers, as well as modernize the act to

reflect today's real estate environment.

I'd like

to now specifically address the key changes. In the current legislation, an

agent is defined as the person licensed to trade in real estate and a

salesperson must act on behalf of an agent. In keeping with industry practice,

the term broker is used. This was recommended by industry and also supported by

the public consultations. Six other provinces, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Manitoba,

Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia all use the term broker when

referring to a real estate company.

We have

amended the act so that broker is now used throughout the legislation instead of

agent. Mr. Speaker, feedback from public consultations and industry both

indicated that more stringent requirements need to be in place prior to

registration as a real estate broker or salesperson.

We were

told that the application needs to be expanded to include more suitability

checks, such as criminal background checks along with three-year work and

address history.

All

provinces, except Newfoundland and Labrador, require criminal background checks

prior to licensing. The act currently allows the superintendent to modify the

application form required to be completed by a licensee. Under a new section,

the superintendent sets the form of the application. The act now contains a

requirement for a criminal background check and additional information that

needs to be provided.

Additionally,

section 48 has been added to give the Minister of Service NL the

power to set fees and establish forms. The Lieutenant-Governor in Council will

now have the authority to make regulations which prescribe the requirements,

qualifications and conditions for issuing licences.

We've

also added a

section to require licensees to notify the superintendent of

changes in the information submitted to obtain the licence, which would include

the status of a criminal record check.

Mr.

Speaker, we recognize the importance of continuous education and having a

working knowledge of the latest trends and practices in any industry. Both

public consultations and industry feedback showed strong support for continuing

education, given the industry is continually changing and evolving.

All

provinces, with the exception of Prince Edward Island, have continuing education

requirements in their legislation. Currently, the Newfoundland and Labrador

Association of Relators offers continuing education training for its members;

however, brokers who are not members of this organization do not participate.

We have

amended the legislation to give the superintendent of real estate brokers and

salespersons the authority to begin the process of developing appropriate and

modern education requirements for the industry.

Mr.

Speaker, the ability to incorporate also came to the forefront during our

consultations. The current legislation refers to an employer-employee

relationship with the brokerage employing a sales person and does not allow a

licensed sales person the ability to incorporate.

The

industry has evolved such that some salespersons operate as independent

contractors and should be afforded the ability to establish and operate a

personal real estate corporation.

There

was strong support from the real estate industry to allow salespersons to form a

real estate corporation. Salespersons requested the ability to incorporate,

similar to other independent contractors, in other industries. Seven

jurisdictions in Canada allow personal real estate corporations, including

Quebec, British Columbia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, New Brunswick and

Nova Scotia.

We added

a

section to the act which will allow for the establishment of personal real

estate corporations. This

section will be proclaimed once the IT system has been

updated to allow for the issuance and tracking of licences for such

corporations.

Mr.

Speaker, errors and omissions insurance is a type of professional liability

insurance that protects companies, their workers and other professionals against

claims of inadequate work or negligent actions. In terms of the real estate

industry, current legislation does not require the broker or salesperson to

carry this liability insurance. However, the Newfoundland and Labrador

Association of Realtors requires it for all of its members.

This

insurance protects professionals whose clients claim damages as a result of a

negligent act or an error or omission by the professional's negligent actions.

It also provides coverage for legal defence costs, if required. The coverage

provides a level of comfort for clients by ensuring that there will be adequate

funds to pay for damages incurred if the professional services are deemed to be

negligent.

It is

acknowledged that the majority of real estate licensees in Newfoundland and

Labrador already carry errors and omissions insurance, and the public

consultation process overwhelmingly supported the requirement for all brokers

and salespersons to carry it. All provinces, except Prince Edward Island,

require salespersons to purchase this insurance. There is also a requirement for

it under insurance and securities legislation in our province.

We have

amended the act to require errors and omissions insurance for real estate

brokers and salespersons. The regulations will prescribe the amount of insurance

required, but it is understood that $1 million liability coverage is the real

estate industry standard across the country.

Mr.

Speaker, the current legislation contains a public interest test only and does

not clearly reference a code of conduct for real estate brokers and

salespersons. While the Canadian Real Estate Association maintains a realtor

code, it only applies to its members and it is not something that can be

enforced by the superintendent. This has resulted in government being

challenged, at times, to deal effectively with unacceptable conduct. Our

consultations told us that the establishment of a code of conduct is widely

supported by the public and industry, which is also recommending the code of

conduct, plus the implementation of a disciplinary process to handle

infractions. All provinces, except PEI, have adapted a code of conduct in their

act.

With our

amendments we have brought forward today the superintendent of real estate

brokers and salespersons would take on a more active role in establishing and

enforcing a code of conduct. The superintendent would also have the ability to

suspend, revoke or cancel a licence for breach of the code.

Mr.

Speaker, another area which was identified as being significant during our

consultations deals with the restriction of a licensed real estate person to

provide both real estate and mortgage brokerages services. There are potentially

a number of conflicts or perceived conflicts of interest that currently exist,

such as when a real estate broker represents both sides of the real estate

transaction or represents two buyers who are interested in the same property.

Dual

agency occurs throughout the province, but particularly in regions where there

are few real estate professionals available. According to the data provided by

NLAR, sales by their members for 2018-2019 included nearly 30 per cent dual

agency, but this was less frequent in St. John's, at less than 16 per cent.

Nearly 75 per cent of the Burin Peninsula transactions, however, were dual

agency, showing the prevalence is in more rural regions.

personal conflict of interest can also arise when a licensee or a close relative

of the licensee is one of the parties in a real estate transaction. It can also

arise when the licensee provides other related services to a client, such as a

mortgage. The current legislation addresses a licensee trading for themselves,

but does not address other potential conflicts of interest.

During

public consultations, 62 per cent of respondents felt there was potential for

consumers to be harmed where the real estate licensee was in a conflict of

interest. While the response to banning or restricting exclusive listing and

dual agencies was mixed, the response in preventing a real estate licensee from

also providing mortgage brokerage services was strongly supported. The

consultation also cited disclosure and conflict of interest as requiring further

guidelines and rules. While the real estate industry does not recommend a ban on

exclusive listing or dual agency, it recommended stronger disclosure

requirements.

From a

jurisdictional perspective, British Columbia is the only province in Canada to

have banned dual agency, except in limited circumstances. They made this change

in June of 2018. We have amended our legislation to restrict a licensed real

estate person from providing real estate services and mortgage brokerage

services to the same client or related business transaction.

Mr.

Speaker, this government recognizes the important service that licensees provide

in rural areas of the province. A ban on exclusive listing or dual agency would

pose challenges for consumers of real estate transactions in certain rural areas

and would limit consumer choice if their preferred broker or salesperson was

already representing another party in the transaction.

Instead

of a ban on exclusive listings or dual agency, the amendments to establish a

code of conduct will allow the superintendent to address concerns by requiring

disclosure and consent of the individuals involved in the real estate

transaction.

Mr.

Speaker, within the real estate industry, licensees often provide referrals to

their clients for related services such as mortgages or inspection services. In

turn, they receive a referral fee. Licensees may also pay referral fees to an

individual when a client is referred to them by that person. As it currently

stands, the legislation does not address this issue. Other jurisdictions have,

in fact, established disclosure requirements regarding referrals. Therefore, Mr.

Speaker, we have added a

section to the act which allows the superintendent to

establish disclosure requirements for referrals.

The real

estate bond was established to protect consumers from financial loss in a case

where the broker or salesperson is convicted of an offence, a civil judgment

arising out of a trade in real estate made against the broker or salesperson, or

the broker or salesperson declares bankruptcy.

Over the

years, these bonds have been called upon very infrequently and, in a couple of

instances, they were not sufficient to fully cover the financial loss. The

legislation currently requires brokers and salespeople to carry a bond in the

amount of $15,000 and $5,000 respectively. Such bonds cost a minimum of $200.

Public

consultation and industry have mixed views on the current bond requirement,

although 85 per cent of respondents agree that bonds should be replaced with

another mechanism. Industry brought forward a suggestion to establish a recovery

fund, financed by the real estate industry members, as an alternative to the

bond.

Six

jurisdictions – Nova Scotia, Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British

Columbia – in Canada currently operate a recovery fund. In my Department of

Service NL, our Financial Services Regulation Division operates a recovery fund

for prepaid funerals. The act will now allow for the establishment of a recovery

fund similar to the one established for prepaid funerals in the province,

financed by industry participants and managed by Service NL.

Mr.

Speaker, another area that was brought to our attention was that of trust

deposits, specifically the streamlined release of trust deposits, as well as a

mechanism for aged trust deposits. The Financial Services Regulation Division

regularly receives inquiries about releasing trust deposits where conditions in

purchase and sales agreements have not been met. Even when agreements clearly

outline the conditions for the release of deposits, the majority of industry

participants are still reluctant to return deposits because of the risk of civil

action.

The act

currently requires the broker to disburse money from a trust account when

written notice from the vender and purchaser has been received by the broker

authorizing the return of the deposit to the purchaser, or when the court has

given direction as to the disbursement of the deposit.

The

consultations called for greater clarity in the act and an alternate mechanism

to deal with trust account disputes other than the court system. The new

legislation will allow the deposit to be released according to the terms of

contract signed. A new subsection 26(4)(

e) has been added to enable the

superintendent to direct the disbursement of the deposit. This should speed up

disbursement considerably.

Mr.

Speaker, there are a number of aged trust deposits that, for many reasons, have

not been disbursed and remained in trust with brokers in the province.

Currently, if a buyer or seller does not want to go to court, they have no

recourse and the deposit remains in the trust account. The only alternative to

address aged trust deposits is through the court system. Also, brokers are being

named in civil actions when the cause of the dispute and resolution of the

dispute is beyond their control.

We have

amended the act to enable the superintendent to make decisions on disputed trust

deposits as an alternative to the court process. Further requirements for the

superintendent to direct the disbursement of trust deposits will be outlined in

the regulations.

A new

section 27, unclaimed trust money has been added, which states that brokers may

pay money held in trust for more than two years to the Real Estate Recovery

Fund.

Mr.

Speaker, a key component of a strong regulatory system is the ability to enforce

legislation. Under the current act, there is limited ability to discipline a

non-compliant broker or salesperson. The penalties outlined are generally

inadequate, they're outdated and they involve significant resources to move

forward with any type of violation, and this significantly affects the

department's ability to respond in a timely manner.

present, where a broker or salesperson is non-compliant with the act, their

licence can be suspended or, alternatively, a conviction is required prior to

moving forward with appropriate penalties. Formal charges for minor breaches of

the act are not a good use of resources, or the court system and, therefore,

rarely happen. This impedes the ability of the superintendent to act in a timely

and efficient manner to deal with breaches of the act.

Both

public feedback and the real estate industry strongly advocated for enforceable

consequences to breaches of the act, with tighter enforcement and associated

fines or other penalties. A submission from industry recommended the act contain

stronger enforcement mechanisms to handle minor infractions.

Nova

Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and

British Columbia have a range of options in place to handle various types of

offences. Administrative levees can be used for listed minor infractions, such

as late filing of annual reports or non-compliant advertising.

When

dealing with more serious, non-compliance issues, other jurisdictions has the

option to utilize an agreed statement of facts or consent orders and apply

and/or penalties. The decisions are also published, providing additional

incentive to comply with legislation and serve as a learning tool for other

licensees. In Ontario, for example, charges for more serious offences may result

in penalties as high as $50,000 for an individual and $250,000 for a

corporation, and two years less one day imprisonment.

We have

updated the act to allow for the establishment of administrative fines and

conditions for minor infractions up to $10,000, as well as provided authority to

the superintendent to publish administrative decisions. The proposed changes

also increase the maximum amount of the fine to not more than $50,000 and

imprisonment of not more than two years for a person who contravenes the act and

is found guilty of an offence in court. This is an increase in the current fines

which are $1,000 for a first offence and $2,000 for a subsequent offence, and/or

imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months.

Furthermore, there is no longer a distinction between a first and subsequent

offence, and fines apply to both individuals and incorporated bodies. Every

contravention of the act is considered a new and separate offence. While the

maximum fine is higher than in certain other jurisdictions, it is lower than the

maximum penalties in securities and insurance legislation. The intent is not to

drive revenue, but create a stronger, regulatory system with greater compliance.

Mr.

Speaker, as consumer protection is a driving force behind the changes we have

introduced today, we feel the need to address situations which the

superintendent may deem is not in the best interest of the consumer. As an

example, the hold-over clause protects the brokerage and states that if a client

enters into an agreement of purchase and sale within a specified time, the

hold-over period, after the expiration of the contract, the client may still

need to pay commission to the brokerage. In some contracts, this clause provides

an end date where the contract is cancelled but does not provide an end date

where the contract expires. As such, the superintendent will now have the

ability to issue an order to correct that situation.

The act

now allows the superintendent to issue orders to suspend or cancel a licence,

impose conditions on a licence, or pay a fine not exceeding $10,000, or other

orders prescribed in regulations. An appeal mechanism related to a decision or

order under the act would also continue to be available through the Financial

Services Appeal Board.

Mr.

Speaker, the final amendments I will speak to today are mostly of a housekeeping

nature dealing with clarification of language and organization of the act. The

new legislation provides for the appointment of the superintendent and deputy

superintendent of real estate brokers and salespersons by the Minister of

Service NL, rather than the Lieutenant-Governor in Council. These positions are

filled today through a merit-based process under the

Public Service Commission Act , and

that will continue to be the case.

As I

stated earlier, this act was written over 55 years ago. It required a review to

ensure the use of plain language, as well as ensure the language and provisions

are modern and unambiguous.

Mr.

Speaker, I cannot tell you how pleased I am to deliver on the commitment in my

mandate letter to complete a review of the

Real Estate Trading Act . I want to thank everyone who participated and

shared their thoughts, your feedback has helped us modernize a piece of

legislation that goes far in enhancing consumer protection in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

I feel

we have brought forward a progressive piece of legislation to the floor of this

hon. House today, and I look forward to debating these amendments.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

The hon.

the Member for Conception Bay East - Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's

indeed an honour to stand in the House again as we wind down, as we go into a

provincial election and probably our last number of days or weeks into debate

around legislation.

It's

always important when we get to speak about legislation and making changes that

are respective of industries or policies that improve people's lives or offer a

better process to services to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The bill

here, Bill 4,

An Act Respecting the Regulation of Real Estate Trading in the

Province is unique for a number of reasons. The minister has outlined the

logistics around what would be entailed in the bill, but it's unique – first

when I read it yesterday – because it's repealing, which is not the norm in the

House of Assembly.

repeal a full act very seldom happens. It may have happened once in my nine

years here as part of it. Because when you repeal a full act, you're changing

the whole dynamic, the whole structure of it. That doesn't mean that a lot of

the preceding policies or issues that have been covered off in it are not still

included in it, but no doubt it's unique.

Normally, we amend various parts of

an act under subheadings and headings

itself. In this case, we're repealing it and starting off with a fully-fledged

new act. I do realize and appreciate there haven't been major changes since the

'60s and it needs to be upgraded, it needs to be modernized and it needs to

reflect the changing industry that we have here.

As we've

seen in Newfoundland and Labrador, particularly over the last 15 or 20 years

with our economic boom here, with changes in the demographics for houses and

building and manufacturing and all this, the real estate industry, the role it

has, the number of people that it's drawn to that industry and the regulatory

process that needs to be modernized to reflect exactly how it polices itself;

how it shows it as a professional profession itself; how it intends to show that

there's protection for the agents themselves, but, particularly, for the buyer

and seller of a piece of property here.

It's

unique that we're modernizing something after so many years. It's no doubt it's

been kicked down the road. I know there's been a number of consultations a

decade ago, a number of years ago and we're getting to a point to now put

something in play.

I did

serve as minister responsible for a short of period of time, an extremely short

period of time, and one of the seven key heavy pieces of legislation that needed

to be looked at, at the time, sitting and trying to get my head around what

needed to be modernized, what needed to be adjusted and amended, and shaking my

head that this had been a piece of legislation that had gone back to the '60s

and that nobody had gotten an opportunity to really assess what was there. That

doesn't mean that it wasn't a priority. It just means, fortunate enough, the act

itself, the process that was being used, the industry following it and the

policing itself, dictated that things weren't getting out of hand.

Now,

we've had, as you know, in the past, some challenges in the real estate industry

in certain areas, but they've come to light because, obviously, the process, the

policies and the act itself had enough safeguards to ensure that if something

wasn't in line with what was accepted in the industry, that it was identified

and dealt with. Some of it in legal manners, some of it in operational

procedures. So, that's a testament there, but it is due time that we modernize

it. It's a welcomed opportunity to do this.

understanding is this is going to be a very unique set up when we come to

amending, or I should say, repealing and putting in play a new bill that's

reflective of the real estate industry itself and the trades and practices that

they must work under. Because my understanding, and I feel this is where we are

going as we talk about how we make it more efficient and more inclusive and

using the best modes of democracy to ensure the best piece of legislation comes

to this House with the most opportunity for the general public to have input,

but, particularly, those who have a vested interest and a stake in that piece of

legislation, normally, that's either particular interest groups or parts of

industry that would have an interest in ensuring that the legislation meets the

needs of all involved.

We, as

legislators, have an ultimate responsibility to ensure every segment of society

that's touched by this has an opportunity to have input. That's why we're going

to be moving, and this will be a test bill to go to an all-party committee. It

will be the first that we'll do under this jurisdiction where it will be a

discussion. I say all-party, my hope as we have this debate and this structure

is included, that if there are independent Members that they would have an

opportunity to be engaged in this process also, but that'll be something that

will be flushed out in the debate and the discussion over the next couple of

weeks about what the structure would be.

What

will happen in this case, will be, we'll have an opportunity to look at present

legislation, look at what's being proposed by the government and the department,

to then look at the best approach to put forward for the committee to decide and

frame up what would be presented to the House for debate. That could take on a

multitude of approaches, which would include hearings, multitude of meetings

with stakeholders, looking at other jurisdictions, talking to other Legislatures

who have debated this type of legislation, talking to governments that are

enacting it, the industry themselves and talking to the general public about

what impact it may have on them in changing this piece of legislation.

So, we

have an opportunity to do three key things: Look at history and what has worked,

what has been modified and what hasn't. Look at the present, why is there a need

to change this. We know, as I mentioned earlier, the demographics have changed,

the real estate industry itself, the profession itself and how they

self-regulate and how they train, on how to ensure that there are enough

financial supports to protect the industry and particularly protect those

clients that may be part and parcel of the real estate industry itself. So we

have that.

The

third will be an opportunity for us to really look at how we move this House of

Assembly forward in democratic reform on a particular issue around legislation,

on how we debate, design, collaborate on and then debate and accept and pass

legislation in the House of Assembly. So I'm looking forward to that process as

we go through it.

We had a

debate, or a discussion I should say, in the Standing Orders Committee when this

has been talked about the last number of months about what type of legislation –

this is going to be our first process here, our first kick at the cat, for want

of a better phrase, our first review of a piece of legislation, how do we do it

and at what level should it be.

We could

have taken something that was housekeeping, very fluffy, would have been easy to

do. We'd all approve it, we'd pat ourselves and say what a wonderful process the

democratic process is; or we could have took something so controversial or so

substantial that we either would have taken a long process, or we probably

wouldn't have done justice because where we don't have a process in play, we may

have missed things. We may have not had the proper mechanism to ensure that that

piece of legislation was fully thought out, was fully debated and was fully

designed to meet the needs that it was set to do.

So there

was an agreement that we would try to find something in the middle. Something

that was substantial enough that it had an impact on an industry or the people

of our province, but, at the same time, wouldn't be so controversial that, at

the end of the day, there would be protests or there would so much of a

yes-and-no type of a segment here.

What

this is, is modernizing a piece of legislation, understanding and making sure we

reflect the changes in industry over the last number of decades, but,

particularly – and this one of the important things. Sometimes we miss in our

legislation, sometimes we miss it in our debate – I would hope in most cases

that the bureaucrats who are doing this try to adhere to it, but sometimes

they're on time frames and they're logistically dealing with the issue as it

stands today, about looking in the future, trying to anticipate what impacts the

legislation will have now that would reflect industries or services in the

future.

I know

we're not saying you predict the future, but there are indicators and there are

ways of looking at existing protocols, existing processes, existing

jurisdictions that have either ran into issues that we anticipate we may run

into or have already set out a set of policies or procedures or

an act that

would address in an interim basis a very quick mechanism to be able to alter the

legislation to reflect the changes in the immediate need – again, we're talking

decades here, but even instead of years, a couple of years dragging things out

when things can be changed in months if we have a mechanism built into the

system to be able to identify that.

So, I

think we have an opportunity here to do all of that. In this piece of

legislation, we're repealing it. I've looked at it. A lot of it still reflects

what has worked in the industry for the last number of decades. A lot of it

reflects what government has heard and what industry has told them over a period

of time. I do know that industry has done, in a very inclusive, explicit,

detailed consultation with its members about what would need to change. What are

some of the nuances about the real estate industry that need to be addressed?

What are some of the challenges? What are some of the things that would put it

in the same category as a number of other professions when it comes to its

credibility, when it comes to its ability to grow an industry and to be an

economic producer and contributor in this province?

We know

the real estate industry in Newfoundland and Labrador is worth billions of

dollars and that's what we're talking, over the last number of years, billions

of dollars in every house that's sold and built, and every building that's

contracted to be sold and built, the role they have, and the services that they

must provide.

There

even becomes a debate around industry standards and that's what this bill will

also talk about. There are two sides to industry standards. There are those who

work within the industry, want to ensure that they have the top-quality

profession that ensures what they stand for, what they're entitled to, and what

their responsibilities are. But its's also to the consumer and the customer who

want to ensure that everything is done in the best interest of them also as part

of that process, and that they know there are enough safeguards so that across

the board the industry is credible and that there's minimal opportunity for

anybody to work outside the legislative responsibilities and roles to ensure

safety for everybody involved.

That's

what you want done here when we talk about any industry but, particularly, the

real estate industry. In the real estate industry there are two key things here.

One is the biggest purchase you'll probably make in life is your home. From a

business point of view, the biggest purchase you're going to make in your

business is going to be your building. So, you want to ensure that you're

getting an equitable return on that investment. You want to ensure everything

was done, every safeguard, every mechanism to ensure everything is in the best

interest of those involved is covered off.

We have

an ability to do that from home inspections. For example, what does that mean

from a realtor – can realtors use their neighbour and can they use their

brother-in-law for some of these home inspections? What are the protocols there

to ensure there's no conflict of interest? What are the protocols to ensure that

if a client commits to a realtor for what periods of time are there? Because, in

some cases, or a number of cases the relators put their time, energy and money

into it, and in some cases you've got clients who flippantly move around.

Sometimes, on the other side, you've got realtors who don't put the same energy

into a particular home because the return on their commission may be less than

it would be on another client's. So there needs to be protocols and that in play

that would honour that and would show that a profession makes sense.

As a

part of the legislation, the key component here, or a big part of that, is the

department's responsibility to oversee what's being done. We have regulatory

processes here. We have to ensure the licensing process is done. We need an

independent process, and that comes from government. Government are the

independent groups here, because you have the purchaser, you have the seller and

you have the realtor.

between that, you have to have somebody who ensures all of those are protected.

That's where the department comes in, through its process of the licensing

requirements; the process of the errors and omissions; the insurance processes

that must be covered and signed off to ensure everybody's qualified; the

regulatory process internally, when it comes to from home inspections to the

insurance itself to the regulatory process that needs to be done; money that's

put in trust, for example – all these things have to be covered off and have to

be taken by an entity that has the ability to do that and, from a regulatory

point of view, note whether or not somebody is adhering to the regulatory

process that's been put forward. So, the department has that responsibility to

do that.

As I

mentioned earlier, we talk about conflict of interest. Where are the conflicts

if you are real estate agent, but you're also the developer, you're also a

supplier of materials and that, if you also own the land? Are there conflicts

there that can be based on price setting, based on exclusion from certain groups

or individuals from particularly purchasing a home or purchasing a building, for

example? Fines and penalties – there has to be a process, because while we would

hope everybody adheres to and applies the regulatory processes 100 per cent,

unfortunately there's no industry that does that. So we need to have a process

where people are identified for not following the process and the proper fines

and penalties are put in play, and that they then are responsible for ensuring

that those fines and penalties are paid in appropriate times.

We talk

about some of the existing processes that are in play now. Some of the fines and

regulatory stuff are so outdated. But to get to that point, we need to ensure

industry has a stake in what we're doing here. And industry in this case

(inaudible) is not just the actual people who sign off on the dotted line on a

sign as the realtor. It's also the purchaser, it's also the developers, it's

also the stakeholders in Newfoundland and Labrador because we all have a stake

here from a tax point of view, from development of communities, from the

infrastructure. Municipalities have an important role here as they play, so it

can't be just in isolation. We have an opportunity here under this bill here to

bring in the key stakeholders, to have an open dialogue and to ensure we sign

off on everything that needs to be used.

You

know, we're in a modern age. Newfoundland and Labrador is equal to any

jurisdiction in this world right now around how to use technology. Is there

better uses of technology for realtors, for example? Now you do virtual tours of

homes. You can be in BC now and look at a house in Portugal Cove-St. Philip's

and know exactly what's being outlined there, whether or not that is exactly in

the spec of what you're purchasing. So there's an opportunity to do these type

of things.

The

regulatory process here, it's done. Somebody has to be at the helm, for want of

a better phrase, to ensure there are changes in the industry. When you have a

superintendent and a deputy superintendent, the process of appointing those.

What role would industry have in doing that? We've talked about it recently

around the waste management, the roles that government plays versus the role

that people in the industry and municipalities would play on people chairing

committees or people having certain roles and responsibilities.

We're

talking codes of conduct. Every piece of legislation that deals with actions of

individuals or corporations has to have a code of conduct. So we need to know

and modernize what that means in an industry that's flourishing and changing on

a daily basis, as part of those type of things.

Incorporation: Two things you don't want to do in any business; you don't want

to make it so encompassing that people just don't follow the process of being

incorporated. You need that for two purposes. You need that to protect the

individual or the company that's being incorporated as an entity now. My

understanding is, to modernize it with other jurisdictions, we would have to

bring in that the realtors could get incorporated as an entity themselves, as

individuals. So that becomes a protective process for them, but also for the

purchaser because there are other regulatory things there around being bonded

and insurances that would ensure more safety for everybody engaged and more

viability if something goes astray.

So we've

got a number of things here that we would look at here. Even the process about

brokers and salespersons around referrals, how that works. Is there a conflict?

Can an existing company that's a parent company for another part of the industry

refer people, and what does that include? Does that have to be done up-front? Do

you have to tell the purchaser or the seller that here's the conflict or here's

the connection between the company I'm with and the company I do business with,

and what impact that may have?

The

assurance that trust or monies are put there, because we've had a few incidents

in the past where trust money, very substantial amounts of money, didn't go

where it was supposed to be. People were left hanging. Realtors lost their

commissions. Purchasers were following with apprehension. Banks had some very

hyped concerns about what monies were where and who could access it and what was

owed.

There

are a number of things that need to be upgraded to ensure that we get to the

point where this industry is protected, the people involved it in are protected,

the people who avail of it are protected, but, us as a government, the taxpayers

who entrust us to come up with legislation to ensure that they're not at risk

for something somebody may do down the road or something that may change in a

particular industry.

We have

an opportunity to do this. While it's a timely move to upgrade this piece of

legislation that's outdated, but also looking at how we approach the change in

legislation. I'm looking forward to, hopefully very soon, sitting with a

committee and debating the process and defining the process. To have an

all-party committee look at legislation and then what that legislation looks

like as we present it to the House for debate and then, hopefully, for passing,

and the industry realizing, not only does the process work, but it did reflect

exactly the needs of the people here.

Mr.

Speaker, I look forward to further debate on this and look forward as we move

into the next phase of this unique piece of legislation because of the unique

process we're going to use.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER (Warr):

Thank you.

The hon.

the Member for Terra Nova.

MR. HOLLOWAY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

certainly pleased to stand today to add to the debate as we talk about Bill 4,

and for those who are joining us from home, watching us over the Web, this is An

Act Respecting the Regulation of Real Estate Trading in the Province.

I know,

Mr. Speaker, this is extremely important to most people in this province and it

is an honour for me to stand and to, hopefully, add to the discussion that we're

having today. As the department responsible for consumer protection, I'm

certainly pleased that Service NL takes its role very seriously on behalf the

consumers.

When we

think about the monumental events and milestones in our lives, the purchase or

sale of a home certainly comes to mind. Many of us, I'm sure, can all remember

the delight we felt when we purchased our first home and the dreams and the

aspirations that accompanied that purchase.

Now for

many, Mr. Speaker, I'm sure it was a daunting time. It's probably considered to

be one of the major life events that we all go through when we're a young

person, we think about the day that you're going to get married and then, of

course, one of the next things you think about is buying your first home. So,

there's a fair amount of stress that comes with that process and having some

comfort and protection through the legislation is extremely important. I'm glad

it's a role that we take seriously in this House.

Now,

certainly many of us can also call to mind the sale of the home in which we

raised our families and created traditions, and the feeling that transaction

brought about. For me and my wife, in 2009, this was a real experience for us

when we purchased our first home in my home community of Port Blandford. For the

past 10 years now we've lived there, we've created memories, we've raised some

pets and we've had other pets that have joined our family, but all of it's been

centered around having a home in the community.

For us,

and for most people, our home is an important part of our lives. Mr. Speaker,

for most people, these transactions, the transactions of purchasing a home, of

selling a home, they invoke emotional responses making it even more important

for adequate legislation to protect our interests. For first-time homebuyers or

those renewing a mortgage having trust is paramount.

One of

the things my wife and I are going through currently is that we're renewing our

mortgage. So, it's very timely that I stand today to talk about this piece of

legislation.

Over the

last couple of weeks –

AN HON. MEMBER:

Not renewing your vows?

MR. HOLLOWAY:

What's that?

AN HON. MEMBER:

Not renewing your vows?

MR. HOLLOWAY:

Not renewing my vows.

Although, it's our 10th wedding anniversary coming up this year and I think I

said to my wife when we got married in 2009 – and I know she's listening at work

now, so I'm sure she's quite red in the face.

AN HON. MEMBER:

She's blushing.

MR. HOLLOWAY:

She's blushing like I am now

as I talk about it. She's probably texting me as well.

One

thing I said to her on our 10th anniversary, we would renew our vows. We'll see

how that unfolds as we approach September, but thanks so much to my colleagues

for raising that. It was not in my notes, Mr. Speaker, but raising it for

recording in Hansard today.

As I was

saying, we're renewing our mortgage, and one of the things that we're currently

going through is we're back and fourth, both with our current lender and we're

also going to a new lender. So, being assured, because some of these people you

don't know, whether you're a first-time homebuyer or you're selling your home or

you're renewing your mortgage, you don't know necessarily the people you are

dealing with. So there has to be a certain amount of trust and faith in the

process, whether you're using a broker or you're using a lender that they are

acting in your best interest. It's very timely that we're talking about this

piece to legislation to give that sort of guarantee to any of us who would be

going through this process.

Mr.

Speaker, a Maclean's Magazine

article

in February of this year, in 2019: Economic analysts predict upward of 150,000

jobs added over the next year in the country will keep household incomes growing

at a steady pace. Of course, as we know, with more income that really turns into

people's opportunity to purchase homes or to purchase bigger homes. Some people

start out in what we all call a starter home. You think about raising a family

and, over time, you outgrow that home. As your economic means allow you that

affordability, you move into a newer home. So having a piece of legislation that

helps you to do that with ease and comfort of mind is extremely important.

The

articles in Maclean's stated that as more and more millennials begin to start

families, as I've said, they start moving out of the rental market. We know

millennials, by nature, are a little bit longer to – they're focusing on their

education, on their travel, and then as they get a little bit older into the 30s

– and I look at my colleague from Placentia West - Bellevue – then they think

about settling down and purchasing a home. With all these millennials coming

into the marketplace, it certainly would provide a potential boost in home

sales.

Mr.

Speaker, all across the country, including right here in Newfoundland and

Labrador, we see the importance of this industry to our economy. That is why it

is so important that we strive to ensure that our legislation is modern, it's

effective and it serves both the industry and consumers alike. Like so many

other pieces of legislation that fall under Service NL, the best interest of the

residents of our province is forefront and foremost in the changes we bring

forward today.

Mr.

Speaker, it's been said, both by the minister and by my colleague opposite, that

we have consulted with the public, as we have done throughout the last 3½ years.

As a government, we have taken public engagement consultation very serious, as

we have brought forward tremendous positive legislative change in this House.

Our goal

from day one was always about building a sustainable future for the people of

this province. Whether it's been the

Highway Traffic Act , Residential Tenancies Act,

the Vital Statistics Act, the Pension Benefits Act – and I name all these,

Mr. Speaker, because they have been extremely important to the people of this

province – or any number of other pieces of legislation that the Department of

Service NL are always reviewing and they are amending legislation to protect

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

I've

stood in my place in the past, in particular about amendments we've brought in

on the Highway Traffic Act . The

Highway Traffic Act is near and dear

to me. Like many of my colleagues here, I travel the highway on a regular basis.

I have a district that's very large, so I see a lot of things that are happening

on our highways. Any time that we can bring in amendments that strive for

continuous improvement through this House, I think is a great thing and I'm

really pleased the Department of Service NL has that mandate and that it is

allowing us to protect the people in the province.

Mr.

Speaker, when the previous consultations on the

Real Estate Trading Act occurred in 2012 – and I note my colleague

opposite talked about this really dates back to the 1960s. So today this is a

substantial piece of legislation that we bring forward and it's timely. It's

important that we do that.

In 2012,

there was minimal feedback from the industry and I'm pleased to see that the

industry has taken the opportunity this time to provide the minister and the

department with some significant feedback that has helped form the legislative

change that we're bringing forward today.

As the

minister stated earlier, I certainly want to applaud Bill Stirling and the

Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Realtors for their tremendous effort

during this round of consultations. The association, as was mentioned, held

numerous meetings throughout the province with their members and provided a

comprehensive submission, which I know the minister has taken very serious and I

think it has been built into this piece of legislation.

Since

2012, there have been many calls from the industry for regulatory reform. I go

back to my earlier comment that we take that very serious on this side of the

House. We are pleased to deliver on a number of these reforms for the industry

because it is so important to our province.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, to put this into perspective just for a moment, there are approximately

80 real estate brokers and 640 salespersons licensed under the act. As I said,

when my wife and I purchased our first home in 2009, we went to a broker, and I

didn't really know the person. I was looking for the best deal, the best

interest rate. You would think that your broker is someone who is working in the

industry, would be in tune with what all the lenders have to offer, but also

what are all the rules. And the rules, of course, is what we see coming from our

legislation. So for a consumer, it's extremely important to, as I said, have

trust in the broker, but to know that the broker is really in tune with the

industry and can provide that really good advice.

When I

first reviewed the changes that were being proposed under the

Real Estate Trading Act , the

industry's desire to further professionalize their industry was very apparent,

and I think we're seeing that across a lot of sectors today. There's a lot of

professionalism that is happening throughout this entire province.

This

legislation deals with everything from the establishment of a code of conduct

and authority for the superintendent of real estate brokers and salespersons to

continuing education is extremely important, and insurance requirements for

salespersons. Because we want to make sure that everybody involved in the

industry is at the top of their game. All of these changes speak to not only

ensuring consumer protection, but also the industry's desire to strengthen

consumer confidence in real estate transactions throughout the province.

Mr.

Speaker, I will speak about The Way

Forward just for a second. As we know,

The Way Forward is a sustainability plan for this province, but in

The Way Forward we talked about better

services that lead to better outcomes, and I think this legislation certainly

meets that litmus test for us. The bill includes a number of amendments that

help ensure the professionalism of the industry, as I've said, safeguards for

those conducting transactions, and measures to ensure consumers understand all

aspects of the transaction, any interaction with a real estate professional.

The

minister, when she spoke, talked about the use of plain language. I think about

my time prior to coming to the House, I was working with disabilities. The need

for plain language was something that I was hearing every day. So, to make sure

that we bring that into the legislation so that consumers understand what the

legislation is about, I think is extremely important, and I commend the minister

for making sure that plain language is there in this piece of legislation.

So, Mr.

Speaker, I'm very proud of our government's continued commitment to enhancing

consumer protection for the residents of the province. These changes, in my

mind, that we are debating today follow a long list of other improvements we

have made towards increasing consumer protection. This enables people to be

informed and to make good decisions that impact their daily lives.

All of

these changes, Mr. Speaker, were made possible by our ongoing dialogue with the

industry, with stakeholders, certainly, we're listening to our colleagues

opposite today as we debate, and the general public of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

I feel

it's our job, as a government, to do the best that we can do to further the

protection of the people of this province. I want to thank the Minister of

Service NL for bringing forward this important piece of legislation. I know it's

been a lot a work. I know that the minister works very hard to bring forward a

lot of the legislation that has been brought to this House.

I'm

certainly delighted to join my colleagues today for this debate. I look forward

to the debate continuing as we further Bill 4,

An Act Respecting the Regulation

of Real Estate Trading in the Province.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

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

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I'm

happy, too, to have the opportunity to stand and speak to Bill 4, the

Real Estate Trading Act, 2019 . As has

been pointed out by both the minister and the previous speakers, this bill will

create a brand new act. The act that is now in place will be repealed and this

act will be the new act.

It's a

much-needed bill. The act that's in place is what, 50 years old, I think, if not

more, and it's certainly not up-to-date when it comes to the reality of home

buying today and, therefore, of really the needs within the real estate

industry.

The bill

is quite comprehensive because, of course, it's totally replacing the act. While

not every word in the bill will be new, there will be new aspects in there that

are essential. I think my colleague – and I'm sorry that I can't get it

right off the bat – from Terra Nova – I still am getting used to the names three

years after the fact of our new districts, but I think our colleague pointed out

something very personal and something very important, actually, and that is the

stress that is related to buying a home, especially a new home, the first home. In many cases,

that will be a couple, in many cases it will be an individual, but the stress is

still there.

I think

he did refer to research, and I have checked this out as well, that buying a

home and moving is one of the most stressful things that can happen in a

person's life for many reasons. When it comes to stress, and you read the

research on stress, moving and the buying of the home, they're up there with

death, with the death of a loved one. That's how stressful the whole situation

is.

So,

putting in place protections for homebuyers, protections for people who are

launching out for the first time into buying a home, is an essential service of

government to make sure that we have regulations in place, to make sure that we

have protocols in place, to make sure that the industry is professional, to make

sure that those working in the industry are kept up-to-date on what is needed.

All of that is for the good of the homeowner, the homebuyer. There's absolutely

no doubt about that.

Having

said that, there's lots of stress that is there also for the agent or the

broker. I notice that in the new act there will be the use of the word broker

rather than agent, but it's stressful for them too because it's a very special

relationship that one gets into when buying a home. Very often, especially, the

first-time homebuyer is going in without any knowledge, or very little knowledge

of what's involved. They're going in with a high level of trust and personal

dependency on the agent or broker. They're going in hoping that this person is

going to be able to guide them through the process, is going to have their

interest at heart, is going to care about them and is going to make sure they

have correct information.

It is so

important that we have a regulated industry where agents or brokers are trained

to understand how responsible their job is, how much responsibility they have

with regard to – on a personal level – how their clients are feeling and what

their clients are going through. It is an extremely intimate relationship. It's

not so bad maybe in a small place where you know people and you can easily find

out about people and find out about, okay, who do you know that is a good agent

in town, for example.

When I

was involved in buying a home for the first time, I was living in a very large

city and trying to choose a broker was a really, really hard thing to do. As a

matter of fact, the first one got fired and I went into another one. So we've

all had, I think, a personal experience of some kind with regard to that so we

understand how important it is to have a bill that's up-to-date. To have a bill

that ensures that the protection of the homebuyer is number one and that

everything is in place to ensure that the industry itself is professional and

the industry itself is not going to have individuals in it that would bring the

industry into ill repute. This is extremely important.

One of

the things that happens in home buying is very often there are monies in

transaction, monies that are held in transactions before transactions are

completed and that money, some of that money is – you can go into hundreds of

thousands of dollars that is tied up and that money, right now, is not in a

trust fund; does not have to be held in a trust fund. When we're talking about

public money, because the money belongs to the public, then the need for a trust

fund is essential.

The bill

is extremely important and that's why I am glad that the minister has chosen to

put this bill, which he will be making this motion, to the Standing Committee on

Government Services, I think it will be, to the Standing Committee to follow the

process that's in our Standing Orders. Something which hasn't been done here in

the House since, I think, 20 or more years ago, that a bill has gone to the

Standing Committee that's covered in Standing Orders for the Committee outside

of the House to study the bill.

Now, I

know government has talked about, they've done consultation or they've gotten a

report from the industry on consultation that the industry did around concerns

and needs, et cetera. That's fine and dandy, but the issue now is we have a bill

that the government says does reflect what the industry said they wanted, that

does reflect consultations they say they held, and it is quite possible the bill

does; but the thing is, now that we have the bill, the level of consultation

becomes different. When this goes into the Standing Committee for the Committee

to study, it will be, at this point, that the Committee will be able to say to

the industry, you've read the bill now, does this bill reflect what your

industry says are the concerns? Does the bill meet the needs as you see it? The

Committee will be able to go to homeowners associations and say: What do you

think about this bill?

So it's

one thing to do consultation prior to a bill, it's another thing to have a bill

in one's hand and say: Does this bill meet your needs? That's what's going to be

happening, and I'm really delighted because I think this process does need, as

I've been saying for years, to happen here in this House.

When we

have a bill this size, and it is a large bill because it's a comprehensive act

that we're dealing with, then there can be details in here that can get lost. We

received this yesterday, so there's no way that we could, this afternoon, for

example, or tomorrow, be able to say: Oh, yeah, this bill is fine. I have no

idea if it is or not because I have not read every word of this bill yet.

There's no way. This is what needs to happen with something like this.

We have

had examples in the House in my 13 years here, where the bill comes to the House

and we're told there was consultation and this is what people wanted. Then when

you read the bill, you find something in it they omitted, something that was key

in the community.

remember the first bill where I asked for a change; it was a bill in health. It

was about people suffering from mental illness and it became the act that dealt

with people with mental illness. It was talking about people coming out of an

institution. The bill did not, in any way, talk about what needed to be in the

community – if somebody was going to be released from the Waterford Hospital,

for example, and go back to their community, what would need to be in the

community for that person. The bill had nothing in it about that. I knew, from

talking to people in the community who were involved with mental health, I knew

from them that they had said to the minister that needs to be in the bill, yet

it wasn't in the bill.

So, at

that time, I went to the minister, the minister who is the current Minister of

Finance actually was the minister of Health and Community Services, and I went

to the minister and I said we can't pass this bill without something in it about

there being supports in the community. If somebody is going to be released from

the hospital, there have to be supports in the community for the person. We

talked and we discussed and, in actual fact, that amendment got made and got put

into the bill.

I use

that as a clear example of how government can say they're doing consultation,

they can say they've talked to people who are concerned about a particular bill

and that's fine, but they can still ignore maybe a key thing that was said to

them and not included in the bill.

So,

that's what's going to be the point of this comprehensive bill going to the

Standing Committee on Government Services. This will be the bill that will be

looked at and we will use a fine tooth comb, and we will also bring in witnesses

to tell us if they think this really covers their needs, both the needs of

people working in the industry and the needs of the customer, of the client,

people who are dependent on the quality of the people who are the brokers in the

real estate industry. Today, I'm not dealing with any of those details because

they're the details we'll deal with when we work in Committee.

So, it's

a bigger picture that I'm concerned about. The bill is comprehensive, there's no

doubt about that, and there are points in the bill that I know people would be

interested to know about. For example, the bill is going to allow the minister

to appoint a superintendent of real estate brokers and salespersons and the

deputy superintendent of real estate brokers and salespersons. That's going to

be a very important role, Mr. Speaker, because they are going to be the people

who will make sure that the regulations are being followed.

In some

provinces, for example in Nova Scotia, each brokerage has a compliance officer

to review all documentation that goes on in a transaction – a very, very

interesting thing. It might be something that we'll want to look at in

Committee, when we get to Committee and talk about that because while you will

have the superintendent – and that role will be extremely important – having

brokerages with their own compliance officers would really raise the level of

the quality, raise the level of compliance with making sure what's in our act,

when the new act is in place, is being followed.

The bill

will allow the superintendent of real estate brokers and salespersons to issue a

personal real estate corporation licence. That's important. The bill will also

require real estate brokers and salespersons to obtain errors and omissions

liability insurance. That will be important, because the individual broker has

to be protected as well. They have to have protection.

The bill

will also authorize the superintendent of real estate brokers and salespersons

to establish a code of conduct for real estate brokers and salespersons.

Imagine, we don't have that yet. That is so important because, again, of what I

said earlier, of the nature of the relationship between clients and the brokers,

to make sure that there's a code of conduct; and that if somebody runs into a

broker who, for some reason, is not the top of his or her game, is not ethical,

that they will have something to judge by, and they will have a place where they

can go to point out that they're dealing with somebody who has not followed the

code of conduct. The code of conduct now is something that we start taking for

granted, so it's about time that we will now have one in this act which will be

covering the real estate trading.

The bill

also will establish a Real Estate Recovery Fund. It will allow unclaimed money

held in a real estate broker's trust account for more than two years to be paid

to the Real Estate Recovery Fund. So it's dealing with many issues, dealing with

the professionalism of those in the industry, dealing with the issues around how

the money is handled, money which really is money owned by clients, dealing with

the behaviour, the professionalism of people. So it's a broad act because it's

covering every aspect.

So I

look forward – because I am on the Committee that this will be sent to – I look

forward, on that Committee, number one, to testing our process, to testing the

Standing Committee's ability to take a bill and to study it. I look forward to,

because of doing that, getting into the details of this bill in Committee and

finding out whether or not it does, in actual fact, meet everybody's need.

So thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker, for this opportunity.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Indeed

another privilege to get up here today to represent the beautiful District of

Cape St. Francis, and the beautiful people in the District of Cape St. Francis.

Mr.

Speaker, this is an interesting bill that we're discussing here today to respect

regulations with the real estate trading in the province. As the previous

speaker spoke about how this is so different when it comes to we're going to

debate it here today, but we will only do second reading and this is a pilot

that will go out and will be investigated more, and it's the first opportunity

that people will have an opportunity – and I support this 100 per cent – that

the industry will have an idea and look at this bill and be able to have a good

look at it and have some involvement in the regulations and involvement in how

this bill is presented.

It's a

great opportunity for the department too. I know there are all kinds of

consultations that were done. Actually, the minister's consultations were over

2017-2018, and I think there some 90 respondents to that consultation that they

had. Industry themselves, the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Realtors,

they went out and they had their own, and I believe theirs was called

What We Heard . They went out and they

came back to the department with 53 recommendations of what they'd like to see

in this bill and what they'd like to see government do to make changes.

Mr.

Speaker, when I first saw this, actually, and reading it this morning before we

came into the House, and just understanding that, the first act – well, maybe

not the first act, but the last act that was really put in, there were some

changes made over the years, but very minor changes – nothing major at all. If

we look at this, and this went back to 1965, can you imagine?

Here's

the act, and it hasn't been changed in that number of years since 1965. All we

got to do is just look at the changes that've been made in society. For example,

I wrote down a couple of things this morning. I only heard tell of home

inspections in the last probably 10 or 15 years, maybe 20 years, since home

inspections were done. So I don't know in 1965 if there were actual home

inspections done back then. I doubt it very much that they were done.

So the

industry itself and how it was regulated and what we expected from purchasing a

home – the biggest purchase that most people will ever do in their lives is to

purchase a home. You look at mortgages, you'd be lucky if you got a mortgage for

25 years. Maybe most people look at mortgages for 30, 35 years. So this is a

purchase that you're going to, for a very long period of your life – and the

Member across the way just talked about renewing a mortgage. I know a lot of

people do that. Sometimes it's a lot more than 35 years; sometimes it's a whole

lifetime that you're tied into a purchase that you made in your home.

I know

my home means so much to me because I grew up handy to my parents. The piece of

land that my house is on, when I was a young fellow, I used to be playing field

hockey on the same piece of land that was there. My home and a lot of people's

homes, I cut my own sticks. I built my home. I had my home built, I didn't

purchase my home but your home is so important to you. Like you say, you're tied

in for so many years and stuff like this. So if we look at what changes since

this legislation came in, since 1965, like I said property inspections. Can you

imagine now – I'd say back in '65 I'd like to know what the percentage of septic

systems, what they were like back then compared to –

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible.)

MR. K. PARSONS:

Zero, that's right.

Everybody had the wells. Today, people are going with water and sewer and stuff

like that so there are different inspections that need to be done.

I know

in the community I'm from, the last number of years the regulations have changed

on property size. So, one time it was half acre lots and now it's gone to

three-quarter acre lots. That's huge in making sure that you got, especially

when it comes to septic systems, proper seepage in the ground and your wells are

far enough apart.

The

interesting thing is we don't realize I guess – I do, I'm getting older and

stuff like that, but back in 1965 we had very little Internet back then either.

It's amazing anyone purchasing a home today can go into that home and they can

go through every room in the home. They can look in the house, you can get

online and you'll go right through the whole house and see what you want. There

may be something that you want in a baby's room or it might be something that

you want in an open concept. It may be something that you may need in your

basement or something like this.

Back in

1965 when we first brought in this act, I'm sure that the changes back then

compared to now, and even if you look at people purchasing homes today, I would

assume – again, I'm only assuming because I was interested because of the year

back in 1965. I wonder how payments were made. Like today we have mortgage

brokers. Back then, I would imagine it was only the major banks that you could

go get a mortgage off. But, today, if you look there are all kinds of different

lenders, people out there you give a broker to and they purchase mortgages

through different agencies and stuff like that so you can get a lower rate. So

none of that was every available in 1965.

Mr.

Speaker, this bill has a lot in it. There's a lot of information in the bill.

Like I said earlier, the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Realtors, they

don't represent 100 per cent, but they represent 95 per cent of the licensed

realtors and brokers and salespersons throughout the province. Once the

government decided to do their consultations, they went and said we're going to

do our own. That's what they did. They went out and did their own consultations

and it was What We Heard .

They

came back with the recommendations, like I spoke earlier about, some 53 of them.

I'm sure that government looked at these 53 because most times when we in here,

as legislators, we don't know the industry like people who are involved in the

industry, so it's great that they went and did this.

Even

what we're doing with this bill – now, we'll only do second reading, it won't go

to Committee, it won't go to questions, because it's going to go to the Standing

Committee and then they can go through the bill and they can call in witnesses,

they can call in experts and have a look at this bill. So this is going to take

a while. This is not going to be passed today or anything like that; this is

going to take a while but it will have the experts in the industry and people in

the industry. There may be concerns within this bill that need to be looked at

and I'm sure the Committee will have the opportunity to ask questions.

I'm just

going to touch on a couple of little things today. I'm not going to prolong what

the minister went through. She did a good job on going through the whole bill

and my colleagues on both sides of the House have already spoken. To replace the

word agent with broker, my reading is that this is what's done in six provinces

across the country already.

interesting one is that the minister will be the one to appoint the

superintendent and the deputy superintendent for the real estate brokers and

salespersons, rather than Cabinet. I'm sure that once we get into Committee or

whatever then that will be explained a little bit more to us.

Some

other things that I'm sure when they did

What We Heard was, I think, continuing education, to make sure that we have

the proper people in place that are educated and understands everything when it

comes to selling a home or buying a home. I'm sure they have different

requirements that they want put forward to make sure that it's the best.

Like my

colleague just mentioned, when you go to purchase a home, you go to a realtor,

hopefully, that you have a bit of confidence in and will represent you in

purchasing a home, because they know how big that is. That's huge, that we have

the proper people in place.

Also,

this new act – and, again, we'll go through the consultations – is to allow

salespersons to establish and operate a personal real estate corporation,

similar to what independent contractors do in the industry. Interesting thing

here, too, and as part of licensing requirements, there'll be criminal

background checks done. That information will also be required. The minister, at

the time, will be able to set the fees and establish any forms that need to be

done.

The

other thing, too, there are referrals, what we call “by referrals” in this act.

Right now, if I go to a broker, which we'll call a broker right now, and they

want to do a home inspection and they want to do different costs; sometimes they

don't have to disclose that to me as a cost to me. This new act ensures that

these referrals, currently that are not required, will have to be required to

ensure that I know exactly what I'm getting. If a broker comes to me and says,

okay, this is all the stuff you need, then they also got to tell me that,

listen, this is going to cost you X number of dollars down the road. That's

important.

There's

also a conflict of interest

section in this that's interesting, too. I think

more so in rural Newfoundland than anywhere else that maybe in some areas, small

areas, maybe it could be down in any area, really, but sometimes the broker

could be the person selling the house, but it could also be the person that's

representing the person that's buying the house. So, there would be a huge

conflict of interest if you represent both people. In some cases, you can't do

anything about it because, like I said, in rural areas there might be only one

person, might be only one realtor in that place. So, conflict of interest is

talked about in this, but I'm sure when we go through the regulations and stuff

like that …

Another

thing that is interesting is the fines. I read there that the court-imposed

fines were, like, $1,000 to $2,000, and now they're a maximum of $50,000.

Like I

said, I didn't go through them all, there are a lot of changes in this; it's a

huge act. We were only introduced to it yesterday and to look at it and bring it

here to the House today, but it's not something that's going to be passed here

today or anything, but it's going to give us an opportunity to have a look at

it. It's going to give industry a chance to have a look at it and, hopefully,

we'll come out with the best result and the best piece of legislation that the

industry needs and the people in the province who need representation, that they

get the best act so they can be protected also.

Anyway,

Mr. Speaker, that's my bit on this. Again, I applaud the minister for a great

presentation.

Thank

you very much.

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

recognize the hon. the Member for Mount Pearl - Southlands.

MR. LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's

always a pleasure to have the opportunity to speak in this hon. House. Of

course, we are currently debating Bill 4, the

Real Estate Trading Act, 2019 . I'm not

going to get into all the details. I think the minister did a good job in

covering it off, as did a number of my other colleagues who made a number of

relevant points as well, relevant to the bill.

It is a

very significant bill. It's quite lengthy, as has been said, and really it's a

repealing of the old act and the creation of a brand new act.

One of

the things that kind of jumped out at me in the briefing and so on, though, is

the fact that the act that we're replacing was actually created, acclaimed and

so on in 1965. Since 1965, despite the fact that times have certainly changed in

the real estate industry, as it has in general, I guess, society evolves, things

change, the way we operate changes, but despite that, there's been no change

since 1965.

Apparently, there was a review undertaken in 2012. So, in 2012 we did a review.

I guess we did consultations and so on and, at the end of that, despite the fact

that the act was – well, would have been 47 years old at that point in time,

after going through this review process, we decided to do nothing with it.

I'm not

quite sure why that happened, although I did ask staff at the briefing. I guess

their explanation was that when they did the review and the consultations back

in 2012, there didn't seem to be too much uptake from the real estate industry.

That's what they told me. There didn't seem to be any great appetite to move

forward with this.

Now,

that was their take on it. I think they were saying at the time we were in a bit

of a boom period, if you will, and houses were selling like gangbusters and the

prices were through the roof and so on. Everyone was busy and I guess everyone

was making lots of money and so on. I guess at that time, to take the time for

the industry to have to engage in this process and so on, I guess, if the system

was working, albeit perhaps somewhat antiquated, if the system was working and

the legislation was working and times are good, it was felt at that time that

there wasn't a whole lot of interest on behalf of the industry to tackle the

issue.

I guess,

since that time, housing starts and so on have certainly slowed down and sales

of houses, certainly the larger homes. We're not seeing as many sales of those

anymore. I think most of the sales we're seeing now are duplexes and smaller

homes in the $200,000 to $250,000 range as opposed to back a number of years ago

there was a lot of these houses $400,000 and $500,000 that were being sold and

so on.

Nonetheless, there has been a move by the industry. This is very much industry

driven, I believe, to look at the act and to recognize the fact that it is

antiquated and things have changed significantly, and the need to make change. I

guess, the reality of it is that there are so many changes required from that

act of 1965, that it was felt you were better off just to repeal the existing

act and start fresh with a clean slate.

A lot of

times you have

an act and if it was reviewed on a regular basis, like some acts

actually have clauses in them that things have to be reviewed every five years

or whatever, but if that was the case and there were a few changes, I'll say, or

some minor changes, a lot of times what you'll normally see are amendments to

the act, but because this act was so old and nothing done with it for so long, I

guess government felt, and in consultation with industry, they felt that it was

better to repeal the existing act and create a brand new act instead, and that's

fine. That's fine. That's what they decided to do.

Obviously, in terms of the creation of this act, there were a number of

consultations that were conducted and, again, this was industry driven, it was

done by the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Realtors. They actually

went throughout the province doing public consultations. In those public

consultations, it was open to realtors and people in the real estate industry,

but it was also open to the general public as well.

actually attended one of those consultations, I think it was last year, if I'm

not mistaken, and it was at one of the hotels here in town. I think it might've

been the Holiday Inn. It could've been the Capital, but I think it was the

Holiday Inn – not that it really matters. But they did have a consultation, I

did attend, and they made a presentation and there was lots of opportunity for

feedback.

provided some feedback myself, actually, from a consumer point of view, because

it was open to public. You have to realize that a lot of these changes, while

the day to day, in and out around this is governing the real estate industry and

talking about real estate brokers and salespeople and so on, the reality of it

is that the general public is very much impacted by this legislation. Because it

offers protection not just for the industry and the industry players, but it

also offers protection for people who are selling their home, and people who are

buying homes.

That's

an important part we have to remember as well. It's not just about the real

estate industry; it's about the general public. As the Member for Cape St.

Francis mentioned, I do believe, the most significant purchase, generally, that

99 per cent, or 95 per cent of the people – there are always exceptions, but 95

per cent of the people, the most significant investment you'll make in your life

is your home. That's the biggest investment.

So it's

very important to ensure that when that's happening, as a consumer, as a

homebuyer, or as someone selling a home, that all of the protections are

afforded to you also, in addition to providing guidance and rules and protection

for people who are actually involved in selling those houses for you.

So, they

did their consultations and, as a result, there were a number of changes. Some

of them are somewhat, I'll say, housekeeping in nature. One that comes to mind

here is to change the term agent to broker. Basically, it means the same thing.

Certainly from a laypersons point of view it does, I guess, but it's just

recognizing the terminology that's now used in the industry compared to the way

it used to be and it's just a minor change.

They're

going to put in licensing requirements here. They're going to enhance licensing

requirements. One of the things it is going to ensure that anybody working in

the real estate industry would have to have a criminal background check as part

of their licensing. Also, a requirement to report any changes in that status as

time goes by.

That's

obviously important for the industry and important for consumers, people buying

and selling their homes. Obviously, you would be very concerned if there was

somebody, as an example, that is engaging in the handling of money, your money,

who has a criminal record for fraud or theft or something like that. That's not

something we would want. It's just tightening up things and making sure that the

people who are involved, that no bad eggs get in.

Generally speaking, we know that's the case, but I think we also know, we've

seen over the past year or so, where there have been challenges in the real

estate industry and some fairly significant allegations and so on before the

courts involved that industry, and perhaps that was part of the impetus to some

of these changes. I suspect it was – one particular public case in particular.

There's

also a provision here for education requirements for real estate brokers and

salespersons. The real estate association already, I think, have certain

training requirements and training that they encourage through the association,

but it's not something that's necessarily mandatory. What is being looked here

is giving the superintendent – I forget the title now. I'm going to call it

superintendent of insurance. I'm sure that's not exactly the name, but anyway,

for my purposes now, which is basically a director in the provincial government

that looks after the insurance industry, I know the title is superintendent, I'm

not sure the full title, but anyway, that person would have the ability, the

authority, to prescribe continuing education.

It's

giving that individual – again, this is something that the industry wants

– the ability to create mandatory training. That's what it comes down to. The

ability to create mandatory training so that if you want to be a real estate

broker or salesperson and there's certain training and ongoing training and

education that, I guess, they're envisioning that you would have to do, through

the superintendent they could prescribe regulations saying exactly what that

training is going to be and what you have to do and how often you have to do it,

and refreshers and all this kind of stuff. Again, it's to ensure that the people

operating in the industry are competent, qualified and that they're up on all

the latest technology, trends and whatever else is required to do that job. It's

trying to make things more professional.

The real

estate industry itself, through its association, already promotes a lot of that

stuff, and they expect a lot of that stuff from their members, but there are

actually people who sell real estate that are not members of the real estate

association, because they're not required to be a member. This is going to give

the ability, at some point in time, as this progresses, give the ability for the

government to be able to, in working with the industry, prescribe certain

training requirements that would be mandatory if you want to have a licence and

if you want to keep your licence.

There's

a

section here on allowing salespersons to incorporate. Right now, they can't do

that, but this will allow them to create a corporation. That's really for tax

purposes. That's not something I'm told that every salesperson is going to do.

For a lot of salespeople it wouldn't make sense to incorporate, but there are

some salespersons, perhaps, depending on the volume of houses or commercial

entities and so on that you're selling, the amount of money involved, the

profits that you're earning and so on, it may make sense for that person to be

able to incorporate for taxation purposes. So, it's providing that opportunity.

That was something that was asked for.

There's

a

section here on errors and omissions insurance. This is to protect

professionals whose clients could claim damage as a result. Errors and omissions

insurance, basically, is if the real estate agent – I'm going to say in layman's

terms – make a mistake, they screw something up, and as a result of that the

client feels that they are out money in some way, then they could sue that real

estate agent. This is requiring that agent to have insurance for that purpose,

and that the regulations would be set to $1 million, which is the industry

standard. Again, that's protecting consumers.

If a

consumer, if a client, due to some form of negligence or so on by the real

estate agent, if that occurred and that individual, that consumer, is somehow

out money, then it's a mechanism to ensure that when they take that real estate

agent to court then there's money – through that insurance program – for the

person to recoup their losses.

There's

a code of conduct here; a code of conduct for people in the industry. This bill

will allow the superintendent to establish that code of conduct. Code of conduct

is not necessarily around criminal matters, for example, but code of conduct is

more about ethical practices. Basically, it's to establish this code of conduct

under the act, these standards, ethical standards and so on, and practices, that

the expectation that all people who hold a licence would be required to follow

that.

Again,

the industry itself, the association has a code of conduct, but, again, not

everyone is in that association, they're not required to and they can't really

enforce it. I suppose they could throw them out of the association but that

person could still continue to do it on their own anyway.

Whereas, in this case,

if it's under the legislation, then, in theory, their licence could be revoked

if they weren't following the proper code of conduct.

Now, I'm

told they wouldn't just go out and start revoking licences. They would work with

the person to try to correct whatever the issues are and so on. It would be

pretty extreme to do it, but the ability would be there to do that if they

wished.

section here on conflict of interest, and this is basically where you could have

a person who is a salesperson and also a mortgage broker, and basically saying

that while you can be a salesperson and a mortgage broker, you can't be the

salesperson and mortgage broker for the same client. In some areas,

particularly, maybe, in rural areas, that might be the situation, where there's

not many salespeople or mortgage brokers in the community. So there could be

practices in the past where the person was one in the same. That would obviously

be considered a conflict of interest and that will no longer be permitted. You

can be both, but you can't act as both for the same client.

Same

thing, there's an issue on referrals. There has to be disclosure where a

referral is made for a fee. That would be like somebody, basically, making a

deal with a home inspector or whatever, and if an agent is going to be referring

clients to other professionals, then there has to be full disclosure on that.

You wouldn't want a situation where somebody is referring people, even though

they might know that person is not doing what they should be doing, but they're

referring them because they're going to get a little kickback of cash or

whatever for making the referral. It's to deal with those type of unethical

issues if they were to arise. It's basically putting legislation in place to

prevent that.

There's

going to be a recover fund here. This is, again, to cover financial loss. This

is not like the other fund I spoke to, but, basically, if you made a deposit or

something and they went bankrupt, you'd be recovered.

Mr.

Speaker, I see I'm out of time. I will just say good bill, I support it, good

job, Minister. I'll support the bill.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER (Trimper):

Thank you.

If the

hon. the Minister of Service NL speaks now she will close debate.

The hon.

the Minister of Service NL.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would

like to thank my colleagues from Conception Bay East - Bell Island, Terra Nova,

St. John's East - Quidi Vidi, Cape St. Francis and Mount Pearl - Southlands for

contributing to the conversation here this morning on Bill 4, the

Real Estate Trading Act, 2019.

Mr.

Speaker, we're very pleased that the industry reached out to us and expressed

the need for significant changes to the current legislation. As you can tell by

my opening remarks this morning and my colleagues' remarks, this is, in fact, a

very substantive piece of legislation.

Mr.

Speaker, I would just like to, again, thank Mr. Bill Stirling from the

Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Relators, but I would also like to

thank some other individuals who have been engaged with us as we move forward

with this piece of legislation and the changes, that is Mr. Ed Hollett, Tim

Crosbie, Ms. Kimberly French and Mr. Neil Norcott.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, I may have missed a couple of people, but I have to be truly honest,

this has been a very collaborative process. The association has been very

engaged in the changes and we've stayed with them right throughout the whole

changes, they've stayed with us. We've had great conversations. There's been

consultations completed by the industry and also consultations done by us.

Mr.

Speaker, Bill 4 is our government's response to industry, to stakeholders and to

regulatory needs. As I was saying in my opening remarks, we made consumer

protection a high priority in our Way Forward, Mr. Speaker, and it was our

vision. One of our main objectives has been better services for the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador and consumer protection plays a major role in

realizing this objective.

When you

consider that the act has only had minor amendments since it was introduced in

1965, the need to modernize this goes without saying. The real estate landscape

has changed significantly throughout Newfoundland and Labrador over the last 50

years and new real estate legislation is absolutely necessary, Mr. Speaker.

The new

legislation will come into effect on January 1, 2020, with the exceptions are

the pieces dealing with the recovery fund and the personal real estate

corporation, which will be proclaimed once administrative measures are in place.

Mr.

Speaker, just for my colleague from Mount Pearl - Southlands, I'd just like to

say that the superintendent of real estate agents and salespersons will, in

fact, change to the real estate brokers and salespersons. This position is the

director of Financial Services Regulation Division.

Also,

the appointment of the superintendent and the deputy superintendent, Mr.

Speaker, given the director and the manager are hired through the merit-based

process under the Public Service

Commission Act , it is proposed

that these will become ministerial appointments rather than Lieutenant-Governor

in Council appointments. Mr. Speaker, these individuals are best suited for this

position. They're the most qualified for the position.

Again,

Mr. Speaker, I want to say how proud I am to be part of a government that has

listened to the people it serves and today is bringing forward a very important

progressive piece of legislation. I also want to thank my hon. colleagues for

their support for these amendments.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

Is the

House ready for the question?

The

motion is that Bill 4, entitled,

An Act Respecting The Regulation Of Real Estate

Trading In The Province, now be read a second time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, ‘nay.'

The

motion is carried.

CLERK:

A bill,

An Act Respecting The Regulation Of Real Estate Trading In The Province.

(Bill 4)

MR. SPEAKER:

This bill has now been read a

second time.

When

shall the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole?

MS. COADY:

Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER:

Tomorrow.

motion, a bill, “An Act Respecting The Regulation Of Real Estate Trading In The

Province,” read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole

House tomorrow. (Bill 4)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Deputy

Government House Leader.

MS. COADY:

Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding

Standing Order 80, I move, seconded by the Minister of Service NL, that the bill

entitled,

An Act Respecting The Regulation Of Real Estate Trading In The

Province, Bill 4, be referred to the Government Services Committee for

examination and the Committee report its findings to the House of Assembly

within 10 sitting days.

MR. SPEAKER:

The motion is that

notwithstanding Standing Order 80 that the bill entitled,

An Act Respecting The

Regulation Of Real Estate Trading In The Province, Bill 4, be referred to the

Government Services Committee for examination and that the Committee report its

findings to the House of Assembly within 10 sitting days.

All

those in favour, ‘aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those in favour, ‘aye.'

The

motion is carried.

The hon.

the Deputy Government House Leader.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Considering the hour, I move that we adjourn – no?

MR. SPEAKER:

Recess.

MS. COADY:

That we recess, sorry, Mr.

Speaker, we recess until 2 p.m. today.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

This House does stand in

recess until 2 o'clock this afternoon, consistent with Standing Order 9(1)(b).

Thank

you.

Recess

The

House resumed at 2 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Trimper):

Admit strangers, please.

Order,

please!

I'd like

to welcome the Members back for the afternoon.

We do

have a special guest in the Speaker's gallery, someone I actually happen to know

as well, Mr. Christopher Sheppard, former Executive Director of First Light, who

will be recognized in a Member's statement this afternoon.

Welcome

to you, Sir.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

MR. SPEAKER:

For Members' statement this

afternoon we will hear from the hon. Members for the Districts of Topsail -

Paradise, Conception Bay South, St. George's - Humber, Bonavista and St. John's

Centre.

The hon.

the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

MR. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

today to acknowledge April 7 to 13 as Volunteer Week, a time to recognize and

celebrate the incredible contributions of our volunteers, especially those in

the District of Topsail - Paradise.

This

year's theme is the Volunteer Factor – Lifting Communities. It celebrates and

recognizes the exponential impact that volunteers have on our communities and

how they lift them up. Volunteering is often seen as a selfless act; a person

gives of their time, their skills, their experience and a passion to help

others, without expecting anything in return. While volunteering is a form of

service, many volunteers will tell you that you get more than you give. From

opportunities to develop new skills, to finding deep and meaningful personal

connections, the magic of volunteering is that it creates social and economic

value for all.

Volunteers are crucial to the many great causes and also the non-profit sector

of Newfoundland and Labrador. It is estimated that there are approximately 3,600

volunteers and non-profit organizations in Newfoundland and Labrador and over

200,000 active volunteers.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all Members to join me in thanking all the volunteers of

Newfoundland and Labrador for what they do.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

The hon.

the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

today to inform my hon. colleagues about an exceptional year the CBR Junior

Renegades had. This has led to what has been proclaimed as one remarkable shot,

10 years in the making.

Friday

night, Drew Stonehouse scored at 9:03 in double overtime to lift the Assante

Wealth Management CBR Junior Renegades to an exciting 3-2 win in game seven over

the Mount Pearl Junior Blades. For the first time ever, our Renegades are now

league champs. Congratulations to this talented group of players, coaches,

volunteers and sponsors.

The road

to the championship started 10 years ago. Special thanks for all the loyal fans

of junior hockey for helping the Renegades accomplish this championship. Four of

the last five games in the final were decided by a single goal. The Renegades

had taken a 2-0 lead in the series before the defending champion Blades stormed

back with three straight victories. Stonehouse was the player of the game

Friday, while CBR net minder, Jordan Blackwood, was named MVP of the playoffs.

Once

again, congratulations to the CBR Junior Renegades and I ask all hon. Members to

join with me and wish them good luck in representing Newfoundland and Labrador

at the Don Johnson Memorial Cup Atlantic Junior B Tournament in PEI.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

The hon.

the Member for St. George's - Humber.

MR. REID:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

recently had an opportunity to attend the annual general meeting of the Leading

Edge Credit Union, which has a number of branches in the district I represent.

The Leading Edge Credit Union was founded on the philosophy of co-operation and

its central values of equity, equality and mutual self-help. Basically, it is

the principles of human development through people working together to better

their lives and their community.

Based on

these values, the Leading Edge Credit Union has made many contributions to the

communities they serve. They sponsor countless events and make donations to a

number of worthy causes throughout the year. They also offer free financial

literacy workshops to seniors, high school students and everyone in between.

These workshops and courses cover a number of topics from budgeting basics to

home ownership. Their commitment to education is also evident in the number of

scholarships they offer to students each year.

I ask

all Members of this House to join me in congratulating the Leading Edge Credit

Unions on the work that they do and also in the way they do it.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Bonavista.

MR. KING:

Mr. Speaker, it's truly an

honour to stand in this House to recognize great people, organizations and

events from my district. That is certainly the case with the Bonavista - Trinity

Regional Chamber of Commerce.

Thursday, March 28, 2019, the Chamber held its annual general meeting and

dinner. In just a few short years, this organization has grown from 80 members

to currently 170. Colleen Kennedy and Ian Stone of Gros Morne Co-operating

Association gave a presentation on: Growing jobs and the visitor economy through

innovative community partnerships.

The

spectacular meal was prepared by chefs: Katie Hayes, Peter Burt, Roger Dewling

and Duane Chatman, with guest chefs: Roary MacPherson and Todd Perrin, and cook

program alumni from CNA Bonavista. It should be recognized that Duane Chatman

was the gold medal winner in culinary at the recent Skills Canada - NL

competition. He will now go on to compete with Team NL in Halifax at Nationals.

The

election of executive positions was also held with the following positions being

filled: President and Chair John Norman; 1st Vice-President Johanna Ryan-Guy;

2nd Vice-President Colleen Tinkham; Secretary Corina Ryder and Treasurer David

Hiscock.

Please

join me in congratulating the Bonavista - Trinity Regional Chamber of Commerce

on another successful year.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

The hon.

the Member for St. John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

How

fitting to honour Christopher Sheppard as he prepares to leave our province with

his husband, Jacob Buote, and their three dogs to take his incredible skills and

expertise to Saskatchewan friendship centres.

An Inuk,

born and raised in the Inuit community of Postville, Nunatsiavut, Chris came to

St. John's in 2004 getting involved in the urban Indigenous community. An

outstanding leader and advocate, he represented urban Indigenous young people in

the Atlantic region, then nationally and internationally. Elected youth

representative on the National Association of Friendship Centers, he quickly

became vice-president and now president.

As ED of

the St. John's Native Friendship Centre, now rebranded First Light, he built an

amazing team, expanding the centre's services, including a child care centre,

supportive housing, catering and exciting outreach and programming for the

community. More is coming: increased support for Aboriginal patient navigators,

funding the first urban Indigenous coalition here, an infant space expansion to

the child care centre and more.

At 33,

Christopher has accomplished much. How lucky have we been to have him and his

passion for change.

Nakkumek, Chris, we will miss you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BYRNE:

What a day, Mr. Speaker, we

had announced community gardens, we're going to announce even more here today.

Mr.

Speaker, there is a true renaissance occurring in both our farming and our food

awareness in this province. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are hearing the

message of the government and embracing the fact that our farmers and our local

foods are important to each and every one of us. We have committed to doubling

our food production, increasing our food security and raising our farms and our

farmers as part of the very core of our province's economic and social

well-being.

Since

taking on this ambitious challenge, Mr. Speaker, I'm happy to report that we

have supported 46 new farmers through our industry development programming,

which includes awarding two large scale land development pilots for agricultural

production in the towns of Reidville and in Cormack. We have created the

province's first post-secondary training program in agriculture, and expanded

the role of the former Wooddale Tree Nursey and re-profiled it as the Centre for

Agriculture and Forestry Development.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, in 2018, we launched a pilot project at the Centre for Agriculture and

Forestry Development at Wooddale to produce vegetable transplants for commercial

farmers to give them a head start on the growing season and an opportunity to

try out some different vegetable products.

In 2018,

the first year of the transplant program, 25 farmers requested 250,000

transplants. Due to the overwhelming success and popularity of this program, in

2019 we will disperse seven times more vegetable transplants, over 1.5 million,

including turnip, onion, kohlrabi, Brussels sprouts, kale, leek, broccoli and

cabbage to commercial farmers to help them jump start the 2019 season. So

successful, Mr. Speaker, one of those farmers requested 278,000 transplants for

his farm to grow more vegetables for our tables. Requesting that many

transplants, Mr. Speaker, speaks to how that farmer supports this initiative.

Since

that launch of our Agriculture Sector Work Plan, more than 278.5 acres of land,

the equivalent of 211 football fields, have been prepared for fruit and

vegetable production. This much agricultural land has the potential to produce 5

million pounds of food for our tables.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, this is major progress towards our goal to double food

self-sufficiency, create new business opportunities and support entrepreneurs in

the agriculture sector. Working with our province's dedicated and hardworking

farmers, including the farmer who requested 278,000 seedlings for transplants,

we are looking forward to building on this success.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

Mr. Speaker, once again I

would like to thank the minister for a partial copy of his statement.

I share

with the minister in his enthusiasm as it pertains to activity within the

agricultural industry. I can attest, as the minister refers to, that the

renaissance had started long before this current administration took office.

Almost two decades ago the government of the day commissioned Bud Hulan to

produce the Task Force on Agrifoods. To each successive government's credit, the

department of agrifoods and industry has been continually supported through

dedicated and knowledgeable staff.

Mr.

Speaker, while the industry appreciates this administration's continued support

of policies and programs laid out by previous governments, the politicization of

farmers success is not.

Both new

and existing farmers are rising to the challenge of doubling production, but the

question remains: Why has government oversight and not considered doubling the

amount of funding for these farmers? We consistently hear of both existing and

new farmers' frustration with access to Crown land. I know of applications for

land which have been in the department's hands for 18 months or more.

Mr.

Speaker, in closing, I would like to remind the minister that both

The Way Forward and the –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. LESTER:

– Agriculture Sector Work

Plan were developed in consultation with industry for virtuous intent of

improving the industry, and not for political posturing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East - Quidi Vidi.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Order,

please!

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think

you recognized me.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon.

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

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I thank

the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I'm glad to hear this news

on agricultural initiatives, and I wish the 46 new farmers every success in

their work. There's absolutely no doubt, I know how hard-working they are.

The

vegetable transplants program is an excellent initiative – not new – but an

excellent initiative. Anyone familiar with growing vegetables in our

unpredictable spring weather knows the advantages of these transplants, or

starts, as they are known.

I hope

also that the minister is working on initiatives at the other end of vegetable

farming, developing marketing plans, cold storage options and other ways of

ensuring fresh local vegetables get to market. This is also what the farming

industry needs.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

Further

statements by ministers?

The hon.

the Minister of Transportation and Works.

MR. CROCKER:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this

hon. House today to highlight our government's actions to make highways safer

for all motorists and Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who make their living on

our highways.

March, the department announced the results of a highway construction camera

pilot project that examined the effectiveness of camera technologies that

monitor vehicle speeds in highway construction zones.

The

Department of Transportation and Works will now work with Service NL and the

Department of Justice and Public Safety to determine how these technologies can

be used for enforcement.

This

construction season, our government will add centre-line rumble strips to

Veterans Memorial Highway. This will mark the first time in the province's

history that rumble strips were added to the centre line of a highway to alert

motorists who inadvertently veer from their lane.

Mr.

Speaker, this summer we will also be introducing a 511 quick-dial telephone,

smartphone and website app that will provide easy access to our highway

conditions and construction reports, highway cameras, our Provincial Plow

Tracker along with our ferry schedules. The website and app will provide new

interactive maps that show where highway construction is located that will also

make it easier for travellers to plan for safer trips.

Mr.

Speaker, we will never be finished looking at ways to improve safety on our

highways. As we take these steps, we also look for more ways to use modern

technologies and meeting with our road builders throughout our province to make

sure we maintain highway safety for everybody.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for the advance copy of his statement. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to

commend the department on some of the safety initiatives outlined here today.

Passenger, pedestrian and worker safety on our roads and highways is something

we should always work to improve.

I look

forward to seeing what can be accomplished using modern technology and help

protect the people of our province. As the construction season ramps upon us

soon, we would like to recommend to the people of our province to practice safe

driving habits and please slow down in construction areas because there are a

lot of hard working Newfoundlanders and Labradorians out repairing our roads,

Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you very much.

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East - Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I thank

the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I'm glad to see government

putting all these traffic measures in place. Whatever can be done to make

highway travel a safer experience for all must be done.

On that

note, I have to say that while these new actions are good, no measure is more

effective than adequate policing. What we also need to ensure better highway

safety is an increased police presence on our highways. I urge the minister and

the government to ensure that this happens.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

The hon.

the Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Labour.

MR. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my

pleasure to rise today in this hon. House to invite nominations to the Council

of the Federation Literacy Award. Created by the Canada's Premiers, this award

recognizes outstanding achievement, innovation, practice and excellence in

literacy by individuals and organizations.

Last

year, the Premier presented the Council of the Federation Literacy Award to Suna

Dau Yath. Born in Sudan, she started her education learning in Arabic by an oil

volunteers at her local community centres and children's schools and plans to

pursue post-secondary education.

For

2019, nominations for the Council of Federation Literacy Award are being

accepted in the category of Adult Literacy Learner, recognizing individuals who

have faced difficulties in life because they could not read or write well and

have taken steps to improve their reading and writing skills.

Any

individual or organization can submit a nomination. Nomination forms are

available on our website. Nominees must be residents of Newfoundland and

Labrador, 18 years of age or older and have participated in an adult literacy,

workplace literacy or Adult Basic Education program for at least six months. The

deadline for nominations for these individuals is May 31.

Mr.

Speaker, I encourage everyone who has an outstanding recipient in mind, please

nominate them for this prestigious award.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

The hon.

the Member for Topsail - Paradise.

MR. DINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the Member opposite for an advance copy of his statement. Mr. Speaker, as the

minister noted the Council of the Federation Literacy Award was established by

the nation's Premiers to recognize outstanding achievement, innovative practice

and excellence in literacy.

Mr.

Speaker, the ability to read and write is perhaps one of the most fundamental

skills that touches almost every aspect of an individual's life. The ability to

finish school, find a job and even fill out a basic application for volunteering

are all intrinsically linked to the ability to read and