Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 22 November 2006 (45th General Assembly, 3rd Session, Vol. XLV No. 28)
2006-11-22
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
November 22, 2006 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 28
The House met at 2:00 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!
Admit strangers.
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon we have members' statements as follows: The
hon. the Member for the District of Grand Bank; the hon. the Member for the
District of Bonavista North; the hon. the Member for the District of Grand
Falls-Buchans; the hon. the Member for the District of Humber Valley; the hon.
the Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, and the hon. the
Member for the District of Trinity North.
The Chair recognizes the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to extend my congratulations to Qualified Petty Officer 1 st
Class Jonathan Dunphy of 237 Truxtun Sea Cadet Corps of Lawn on receiving the
Army, Navy and Air Force Veterans in Canada Medal for top engineer on course
this summer.
Qualified Petty Officer 1 st Class Dunphy spent the summer at the
cadet summer training center Quadra in Comox, British Columbia. The medal
reflects the Army, Navy and Air Veterans of Canada desire to promote excellence
and awareness of the Canadian Cadet Organization.
Qualified Petty Officer 1 st Class Dunphy also received the
Lieutenant Commander Klingle Award for Top Cadet and the Commodore Award for top
engineer after the eight-week program and hopes to obtain a staff cadet position
next year as an engineer instructor at HMSC Quadra.
Jonathan is the son of Craig and Cathy Dunphy of Lawn.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating
Qualified Petty Officer Dunphy.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista North.
MR. HARDING: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the achievements of
Myles Burry. Myles is an eleven-year-old, Grade 7 student at Lester Pearson
Memorial High School in Wesleyville. Over the past two years this young boy has
shown ingenuity, creativity and caring that belies his age.
In 2003, Myles and his family were touched by tragedy when his uncle, George
Tuff, lost his battle with a disease called Pulmonary Fibrosis. In the wake of
this sad and unfortunate event, Myles decided he wanted to do something to
honour his uncle and help others suffering from the disease. Being a creative
person, Myles decided to put his talents to work and he sketched a number of
drawings featuring Christmas scenes which he then had converted to Christmas
cards. Myles then donated the proceeds generated from the sale of these cards to
Pulmonary Fibrosis research. He is continuing his efforts this year and has
already sold 1,600 cards.
Myles' family is part of the research project being conducted at the Health
Sciences Centre under the direction of Dr. Bridget Fernandez. A large portion of
the funding for this research has, to date, come from the late Mr. Craig Dobbin,
whose wife's family has also been touched by the disease. The level of
maturity, entrepreneurial spirit and most importantly, heart, shown by Myles
Burry, teaches us all that we can do our part to make our world a better place.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating Myles Burry
on his efforts and offer encouragement as he continues this noble endeavour.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Fall-Buchans.
MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, during the past summer the Town of Grand Falls-Windsor held
their 2005 Citizen of the Year Awards, and today I rise to congratulate Paul
Hennessey and Albert Evans who were awarded the 2005 Grand Falls-Windsor
Citizens of the Year.
For the first time, two people shared the honour to become Grand
Falls-Windsor's Citizens of the Year for 2005.
Mr. Speaker, Paul Hennessey, Chairman of the Centennial Committee and Albert
Evans, co-chair were jointly nominated for the award by a number of their fellow
citizens and committee members. The duo were honoured for leading the
organization through a full year of events and festivities. It was indeed a
pleasure for me to attend this function at the Mount Peyton Hotel where I
expressed to the nominees their valuable contribution to the town.
Mr. Speaker, the nominees for the Citizen of the Year were: Barbara Smith,
Louis Alteen, Paul Hennessey and Albert Evans. All of these nominees have helped
to build and strengthen our town and enhance the lifestyle of our citizens.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join with me in
congratulating Paul Hennessey and Albert Evans, the 2005 Grand Falls-Windsor
Citizens of the Year.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.
MS GOUDIE: Mr. Speaker, as the Member for Humber Valley, it is with
pleasure that I rise in this hon. House today with great pride to congratulate
and acknowledge the career of Darren Langdon. On November 5, a retirement
reception was held at Deer Lake in his honour.
Mr. Speaker, Darren not only made it to the NHL, but he spent twelve seasons
there, and with 521 NHL games played, Langdon leads all Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians in this category, and less surprising, might be his penalty minutes
for a total of 1,251.
Darren has proven to the young boys and girls of this great Province that if
you work hard enough and follow your dreams, they will come true.
Darren now resides in his hometown of Deer Lake, where he is enjoying his
family, operating his own business and currently playing hockey with the Deer
Lake Red Wings, a passion he will always have in his heart.
I would ask that all hon. members join with me today to congratulate Darren
on the wonderful career he had in the NHL and to wish him all the best in the
years to come.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse
au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is with great pleasure that I rise in the House today to congratulate Ms
Joyce Hancock, the 2006 recipient of the Governor General's Award in
Commemoration of the Persons Case.
Mr. Speaker, the Persons award annually honours five Canadian women for their
outstanding contribution to the promotion of women's equality in Canada and
who have demonstrated leadership and excellence in carrying out that work. Only
those recipients whose effectiveness and courage have advanced the cause of a
quality for women in significant and substantial ways and who have enriched
communities through their efforts are chosen for this honour.
Mr. Speaker, Joyce Hancock has spent nearly three decades as an advocate and
activist for women's equality, equity and inclusion. She has led the way for
women's equality in community development and social justice in Newfoundland
and Labrador for more than twenty-five years.
An inspired feminist leader, Ms Hancock was president and chief executive
officer of the Newfoundland and Labrador Advisory Council on the Status of Women
from 1996 to 2006. During that time, she also co-chaired the Coalition of
Provincial/Territorial Advisory Councils on the Status of Women, helped guide
the Minister's Committee on Violence Against Women, worked tirelessly with the
Premier's Council on social development to develop a social audit and advise
government on social and economic policy and regional decision making led a
grassroots lobby effort, Mr. Speaker, which resulted in provincial funding to
local women's centers throughout the Province.
She helped fund both the Newfoundland and Labrador Elizabeth Fry Society and
the Women in Resource Development Committee, which works to increase women's
participation in resource-based training and employment.
In 2000, under Ms Hancock's leadership, the Advisory Council brought
together hundreds of women from all parts of the Province.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The member's allotted time has expired.
Does the member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, thank you in appreciating that this is a woman of
substantial accomplishment in our Province. I certainly appreciate the time to
conclude my statement.
The Advisory Council brought together hundreds of women from all parts of the
Province in a conference entitled: Exploring Common Ground. That same year, she
also organized and coordinated participation by Newfoundland and Labrador women
and women's groups in the World March of Women.
She was a founding member of the Bay St. George Status of Women Council and
served as the council's executive director and as coordinator of the Bay St.
George Women's Center in Stephenville from 1985 to 1996. In 1994, Ms Hancock
was chosen by OXFAM Canada to serve as a peace-monitor and election observer in
South Africa's first post-apartheid election.
She is a mother of two adult children and now resides in St. John's.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my hon. colleagues in the House to join with me today in
congratulating Ms Joyce Hancock, who is a recipient of the Governor General's
Award in Commemoration of the Persons Case and for her accomplishments in the
Women's Movement in Newfoundland and Labrador.
She is joined with us today in the gallery by her daughter Robyn, her sister
Bernice and her nephew, Marcus. So, I ask you to extend your congratulations.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring a special birthday greeting to one of the
oldest residents in my district. Today, November 22, Mrs. Fanny Short is
celebrating her 102 nd birthday.
Mrs. Short was born in British Harbour, Trinity Bay and later moved to
Catalina and then on to Old Bonaventure. Currently, she is residing at Blundon's
Personal Care Home on Random Island.
Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Short remains active and enjoys the company of her family
and friends who are joining her today in a very special celebration.
Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Short has witnessed many changes in her lifetime, including
the resettlement of her home community of British Harbour. She dealt with the
death of her husband in 1953, leaving her to raise her family on $25 every three
months. I am certain there were many challenges in her lifetime; however, she
still cherishes the life she has had and she is proud to share the memories of
her many life experiences.
I ask the members in this hon. House today, together with all residents of
Newfoundland and Labrador, to join me in celebrating the 102 nd
birthday of Mrs. Short. We celebrate a great life of a great women who had made
a great contribution to her family and to her community.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statement by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform the House of another
new initiative to diversify the economy and create meaningful employment in our
agriculture industry.
I am announcing today that government has agreed to assist Brookfield Dairy
Group to expand its premium ice-cream production operation. The expansion will
see Brookfield using industrial milk from our Province's dairy farmers to
produce high-quality specialty ice creams.
We are investing $1 million under our Agriculture and Agrifoods Development
Fund in the initiative, with Brookfield contributing the remaining $4 million.
In other words, Mr. Speaker, the Province is providing 20 per cent to assist in
this industry expansion and our private sector partner is investing the
remaining 80 per cent.
Mr. Speaker, government supporting this type of investment is important, as
it works on so many levels.
Under this plan, Brookfield has committed to expand its processing operation
in St. John's and to create forty-four new full-time, permanent jobs over the
next five years.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: The Province is confident in Brookfield's plan, as the
company has a proven trace record in the ice cream business, with eighty-seven
full-time and twenty-three part-time employees.
Mr. Speaker, these are secondary processing jobs that add significant value
to our milk production. Supporting the development of higher-level processing in
this Province is a key element of our plan to diversify our economy and keep
these jobs in Newfoundland and Labrador.
As part of this initiative, Brookfield has committed to buying 1 million
litres of industrial milk from our dairy farmers each year.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Our dairy farmers joined the National Milk Marketing Plan
in 2001 and were allocated an annual share of the national Market Sharing Quota.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS DUNDERDALE: The goal was to produce 31 million litres of industrial
milk annually by the year 2016. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to say that we are on
track to reach that goal. This year, the Dairy Farmers of Newfoundland and
Labrador will produce 17.5 million litres of industrial milk.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: While our farmers have been exporting the vast majority of
that milk up to this point, this announcement and other initiatives currently
being worked on are helping to ensure more industrial milk will be processed
right here in Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, this government is committed to our farmers
and to giving them the tools they need to continue the work right here in this
Province, especially in rural Newfoundland and Labrador where innovative farmers
are building a future for themselves and for their communities.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement.
Certainly, it must be a polling period again. Here comes the paper.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. PARSONS: It is very nice to see that we are finally having some
public pronouncements from the Minister of Natural Resources when it comes to
agriculture, because it has been very confusing to the public. We have the
Minister of Aquaculture attending an agriculture convention in Belgium. We do
not hear anything from the Minister of Natural Resources -
MR. REID: In Russia.
MR. PARSONS: In Russia, excuse me.
The Minister of Natural Resources finally comes out with an announcement
today; yet, all we hear in the public is a certain individual involved with the
Federation of Agriculture saying we cannot get a meeting with the minister. It
is obvious that this is just a paper exercise given for a polling period again.
The other piece is, it is quite obvious that this money is a drop in the
bucket to what is needed in the agriculture industry in this Province, and it is
shameful what little attention this Administration is paying to the agriculture
industry in this Province, and we have many, many more serious issues that are
not being dealt with. For example, we have the Sprung property in Mount Pearl
now.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. PARSONS: Will it continue to be used as agricultural land, or will it
be put up for real estate? We have all of those serious questions out there.
Where is our mink farming going, given the Minister of Environment's
announcements about certain proposals that were put forward for here on the
Northeast Avalon?
Let's not see this fluff stuff. Let's see some substantive initiatives
from this government.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. R. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement.
Mr. Speaker, the agriculture and dairy industries are very important to our
Province, and any type of support they can get, I am sure they warrant it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. R. COLLINS: Also, Mr. Speaker, the Brookfield Dairy Group has been a
long-term employer in this Province, providing many good jobs over the years,
and it is good to see them expanding rather than to see shipments coming into
the Province from other provinces where things are produced.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. R. COLLINS: That is not to say, Mr. Speaker, that there is not more
that needs to be done - I am sure there is - but any start, any initiative, is
certainly welcomed by our Party while we acknowledge and tell government that
there are many other areas that need to be worked on, but we welcome any
initiative that may be put forward.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and
Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to advise my hon. colleagues that today, November 22, is
National Housing and Homelessness Day. It is a day to raise awareness and draw
attention to the goal of eliminating homelessness in Canada.
As well, 2006 marks the tenth anniversary of the national Raising the Roof
Toque Campaign. Proceeds from this year's campaign will go to local shelters
and supportive housing providers, including: the Tommy Sexton Centre, the AIDS
Committee of Newfoundland and Labrador, Salvation Army, St. John's Native
Friendship Centre, Choices for Youth, and the Stella Burry Community Services
Centre. These are associations that we at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing
Corporation have also supported, and I was pleased to join with them today as
they launched their campaign.
Mr. Speaker, in 2005-2006, the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation,
in partnership with the federal government, invested approximately $77 million
in support of social housing programs throughout our Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. SHELLEY: The corporation also provides approximately $8 million in
home repair grants and/or loans to more than 1,900 households annually which
help keep low-income families in their own homes for as long as they can and
prevent homelessness.
In addition, Mr. Speaker, through the 2006 Affordable Housing Program Request
for Proposals we will also successfully increase the number of seniors and other
supportive housing units in our Province by 125-150. Approximately $9 million
was made available under this program to private and non-profit sector
developers across the Province, who submitted fifty-eight proposals in total.
As a government, Mr. Speaker, we have demonstrated leadership and a
commitment to strong and meaningful social programs and services. We have
implemented a Poverty Reduction Strategy with a commitment of over $60 million
annually to improve the lives of low-income Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. As
well, our government has contributed to a home heating rebate to allow citizens
more affordable and comfortable winters.
Further, Mr. Speaker, to improve the living conditions of those who need our
help the most, we have increased Income Support rates by 5 per cent and expanded
the Provincial Prescription Drug Program to include some 37,000 individuals and
gradually increasing to 60,000 individuals. These are just some of the
initiatives undertaken by our government to assist those who need help the most.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, we are committed and willing to listen, learn and
work with all community groups and levels of government to find the best
possible solutions that will help us to alleviate homelessness and improve the
lives of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Our most sincere congratulations and
appreciation are extended especially to the St. John's Community Advisory
Committee on Homelessness, and to all those involved in today's campaign.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.
MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to thank the minister, first of all, for the advance copy of the
statement.
I want to congratulate the St. John's Community Advisory Committee on
Homelessness. I want to say to the minister, and to the people in the House, I
was there at the initial anniversary of that particular Raising the Roof Toque,
and people like Jocelyn Greene from the Stella Burry organization have done
tremendous work, and others who have supported it there.
Also, I want to say that this particular committee, when I had the
opportunity to be Minister of Housing, were really supportive, and I am sure
they will continue to support whoever is in office to improve the life of people
who are homeless.
As the minister said, there is a lot that has been done, there is no doubt
about that, over the years, but there is still a tremendous amount of work
needed to help the homelessness in the Province and in the St. John's area. It
is good to see additional supporting units made available through the
Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, and that is their mandate: to
help those who are in need. There are still -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time has expired.
MR. LANGDON: By leave?
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been requested.
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave is granted.
MR. LANGDON: There is still an urgent need for those who are at the lower
rung of the social economic ladder to receive programs to improve the quality of
but there is still an urgent need for expanding provincial drug programs for
those who cannot help themselves.
When we think about it, when we live in a society like ours and there are
times that we can help those who are unable to help themselves and are more
vulnerable than us, we should do everything that we can, as a government and as
a people, to improve the quality of lives of the people involved.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thanks to the minister for the
advance copy of his speech today.
A couple of things: I am very pleased with what the government is doing
around housing, and there is doubt that we have had a lot of improvements here
in St. John's over the past ten years when it comes to shelters.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS MICHAEL: However, I have one concern that I would like to raise.
Social housing, as we know, is extremely important, but NLHC, Newfoundland and
Labrador Housing Corporation, over the past few years, has sold off too many
social units. This is an issue all over the Province, particularly here in St.
John's, but in Labrador West as well. We still have too many people on waiting
lists for social housing, so I guess what I want -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time has expired.
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: By leave.
Leave is granted.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
A final statement: I look forward to the government improving on what it is
doing so that we have nobody left on waiting lists.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
Oral Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the Premier; I hope he is not in the suing mood today.
On a serious note, Mr. Speaker, on Monday in the House of Assembly, the
Premier rose and said that he was surprised at the number of people who showed
up on Kenmount Road a couple of weeks ago to look for employment outside of our
Province. He said, as well, in the comments in the House on Monday, that he wasn't
that surprised that they leaving because they were looking for higher wages.
Mr. Speaker, earlier this year when FPI was involved with negotiations with
the plant workers on the Burin Peninsula, John Risley asked them to take a cut
in pay. The Premier stood with John Risley at that time and said that the plant
workers there should actually consider that, that they should take a cut in pay.
How can the Premier say that when his colleagues - and himself, on occasion -
are out saying that the reason people are leaving the Province is to seek higher
wages, when he stands with Mr. Risley and tells plant workers on the Burin
Peninsula to take lower wages?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This government has done more in the last three years to create and increase
the number of jobs in this Province than they did in almost fifteen years.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: They don't want to hear the answer.
MR. SULLIVAN: They don't want to hear an answer, Mr. Speaker.
We have 214,900 people working in our Province, the most in our Province's
history, and in the two previous years we had the second and third most working
in our Province's history, I might add. In fact, during each of the years from
1971-1972 up to 2004-2005 there was an out-migration number, net out-migration,
that exceeds what it was almost three times during our three-year term. In fact,
from 1971 to 1993, there was an out-migration of 3,800. From 1993 to 2005 it
averaged 5,000 a year. For the last three years, even counting an increased
amount this year, it has averaged one-third of that.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I say to the minister, you should tell that to the people in the Stephenville
area and on the Connaigre Peninsula and on the Burin Peninsula, and maybe you
can go and tell it to the Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who are now in Fort
McMurray who want to come home.
Mr. Speaker, it was recently reported in the media that Persona and Rogers
have contributed significant amounts of money to the PC Party over the past few
years.
Mr. Speaker, in 2002, the current Premier, the individual who sits across the
floor from me, asked the then Premier Roger Grimes, and I quote: Do you think it's
appropriate that you should solicit and accept donations from someone with whom
you are entering into negotiations? Is that a conflict of interest? Do you see
anything wrong with that, because the people of Newfoundland and Labrador do?
I ask the Premier: Do you still stand by these comments and do you see
anything wrong with accepting donations from Rogers and Persona, two companies
with whom you are currently negotiating?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, fundraising is part of the political
process. The hon. member opposite knows. They had Mr. Graham in town last week,
and he was there for a fundraiser last night. We had a fundraiser.
The way the system is set up is that we have to solicit corporate funds in
order to keep our parties going. That is the way the system works in
Newfoundland and Labrador. If at some point in time it has to be changed and the
government and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are going to fund
political parties, well then so be it, but right now there has to be a
solicitation process. When I was in the private sector I donated to the
Conservative Party, I donated to the Liberal Party, and I donated to the New
Democratic Party because I believed in that process.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: It was not okay in 2002 when you were in Opposition, but it is
okay today when you are in a government and you are negotiating with these
people. That is what you are saying, that's fine.
Mr. Speaker, the federal government recently invested significant amounts of
money in an underwater fibre optic project to the Magdalen Islands.
I ask the Premier: If there was a need for this fibre optic cable in our
Province and everything was so squeaky clean, as you say it is, why didn't the
federal government invest money in this project?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I do not know the answer to that because,
you know, I do not speak for the federal government. All I know is that Persona
and Rogers actually asked us to approach the federal government to see if they
would actually fund it, which we did, and they would not. They said: No. We have
no control over what the federal government does in that particular situation.
As a result, we stepped up to fill the void because this was a good rural
Newfoundland and Labrador project that is going create1,650 person-years of
employment, and $120 million in wages and it is going to save the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador $400 million. That is why we did it, and it made good
sense to me at the time, I can tell you right now.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: So what you are saying, Premier, is you have no idea why the
federal government said no.
Mr. Speaker, this morning in a technical briefing, officials from the
Department of Innovation, Trade -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. TAYLOR: (Inaudible).
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, can I get protection from the minister?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair has recognized the hon. the Leader of the Opposition posing a
question. I ask all members for their co-operation.
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This morning, in a technical briefing by officials from the Department of
Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, it was confirmed that Memorial
University pays little or nothing for broadband services. Meanwhile, the Premier
and the minister have been out stating publicly that the university pays between
ten and a hundred times more than other universities in the country.
I ask the minister: Will you explain why you have been saying that the
university will save money when in actuality a federal government agency, called
Canarie, provides broadband to the university free of cost?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural
Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that the Leader of the Opposition not only does
not read but he also does not hear. The fact of the matter, Mr. Speaker, is the
Canarie network is funded through federal and provincial funds. One-third of the
cost of the connection from St. John's, Newfoundland, Memorial University, to
Halifax; one-third of the national network is to cover the cost from St. John's
to Halifax.
The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, if the funding that is available to
Memorial University to connect to Halifax was able to be funded, able to be
spent in a competitive nature, consistent with what it is in the rest of Canada,
we would have greater access to broadband. We would enable our researchers at
Memorial University to have, as Chris Loomis said, connectivity comparable to
that already in place in other parts of Canada. Newfoundland and Labrador should
not expect or settle for anything less. This connectivity is absolutely critical
for building and maintaining a competitive research environment on which
innovation, the development of value-added products and services, and the
creation of highly skilled jobs depend, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: A final question, Mr. Speaker.
You wonder why we are asking for an inquiry into this project, when we just
came out of a briefing less than half-an-hour ago with my colleague, the Leader
of the NDP, where the question was asked: How much does Memorial University pay
for that service today? We were told by your own officials that they do not pay
anything because it is paid by a federal government agency. Now you are standing
in the House and talking like they are paying something.
Why is your story different from the story that was given to us half-an-hour
ago by one of your own officials?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural
Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My story is not different from the rest of my officials, Mr. Speaker. The
fact of the matter is it costs ten times the amount to reach from Memorial
University to Halifax, Nova Scotia, as it does for Dalhousie University to
connect over a comparable amount of distance in the rest of Canada.
The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, it will save money because if we want
to have Memorial University on the same level playing field as the rest of the
educational institutions in Canada then we have to find the rest of the money.
Quite frankly, in Memorial's budget, which comes from the provincial
government - and part of it comes from the federal government - they cannot
afford that additional connectivity. As a result, Mr. Speaker, they will save
money because they will have greater access to the research network. They will
have increased bandwidth. They will be able to attract more than the $80 million
in research funding that they have right now, Mr. Speaker. Those are the facts.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The reality is that you are not paying anything now, so I do not know how you
are going to realize any savings.
The Minister of Business has stated publicly that with this $15 million
investment government is never going to have to pay for the use of fibre
services again. The report prepared by Electronic Warfare Associates quotes
Persona as suggesting that with this increased competition government will see a
possible savings of 50 per cent.
I ask the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development: What is it,
will there be no cost or half the cost?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural
Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: If they were light bulbs, Mr. Speaker, they would be about
five watt, that is how bright they are.
Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is, the media had a technical briefing
this morning for forty-five minutes to an hour and they got it. They understood
the concept. They understood the facts. They understood the merits. They saw
what was being presented. They understood the background to it, Mr. Speaker.
The Opposition had a briefing for about the same period of time and they did
not get it, Mr. Speaker. It is obvious that they have not got it or they
disregard it. I can only conclude, Mr. Speaker, that they have not got it
because at the end of the briefing today they asked for a further briefing
tomorrow so that they could maybe get it through their heads, what is going on
here.
The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, we did not say there would be no
cost. We said that we would not have to depend on somebody else's carrier
service for our Internet access.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, at least he gives me credit for being bright,
instead of being a burnt-out light bulb going through three departments.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Colleagues, time is going by very quickly.
The Chair recognizes the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: By the way, Mr. Speaker, we had to ask for the briefing; it
wasn't offered to us.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier, in announcing the establishment of a Business
Advisory Board when he took office, said, and I quote: The newly established
Business Advisory Board will report to the Department of Business and provide
advice and recommendations to the government.
The Premier appointed Dean MacDonald to this board. I ask the Minister of
Business: Was the Business Advisory Board asked for input on this unsolicited
proposal?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural
Development.
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I will just say this to the Member for Grand Bank: It is a lot
better to be going through three departments than to be a burned-out government
and end up in Opposition like happened to them three years ago. With their
performance on this file, and their leader sitting at 7.2 per cent, they will be
there for a while yet.
The fact of the matter is, the people who are involved in the technology
industry in Newfoundland and Labrador have been consulted on this. The people
who are involved in advising governments, agencies, departments, and what have
you, worldwide on this type of initiative have been consulted on it, and that is
EWA and PriMetrica. All people who have been involved in a technology industry
who know anything, unlike the Opposition who know nothing about
telecommunications, have agreed that this is a good deal and should be supported
by government.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, it is easy to get elected as a government; but,
the thing is, you have to keep your promises, like to the people of
Stephenville.
Mr. Speaker, the government's own promotional material, which is available
on the Web site, lists several activities as ineligible services for funding by
the government. One activity considered as ineligible for government funding is,
and I quote: To assist a business to gain market share from other local
companies.
I ask the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development: How do you
explain giving $15 million to this consortium?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural
Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, will they ever, ever, ever get it through their heads that we
are not giving $15 million to anybody? We are taking $15 million and we are
buying an asset in the form of a number of fibre optic strands that are wrapped
in tape, and duct tape, and whatever in the world it is wrapped in, whatever
they wrap that stuff in, rubber, casings and whatever, Mr. Speaker -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development.
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
You need a lot of duct tape to hold that place together over there; that is
all I will say, Mr. Speaker. I think you will need more than Red Green to put
that one back together, and all the king's men won't put Humpty Dumpty back
together either.
The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, we are spending $15 million to buy an
asset that will enable government to meet its data transmission and Internet
connectivity needs for the foreseeable future, Mr. Speaker. That is what we are
buying. We are not giving money to anybody, unlike the crowd opposite when they
were in government.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I can understand why the pharmacists are leaving the Province and the
government is buying $15 million of duct tape, by the sounds of it.
My questions today are for the Minister for the Status of Women. Taking Our
Places has been an initiative of the Bay St. George Status of Women Council for
the past seven years. They are now closing their doors and laying off employees.
Their proposal for phase five of funding was rejected by the federal government
based on a recommendation from the Minister for the Status of Women in our
Province and the member for that district, who sent the message to Ottawa, Mr.
Speaker, that they could not support this proposal.
I ask the minister today: Why did you not support the proposal, and why did
you shut down the important work of this group in the Stephenville area after
seven years of programming?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education, and Minister Responsible
for the Status of Women.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to clarify that the Bay St.
George Women's Council has received funding from this government, and actually
has received increases every year since we took government, and we continue to
maintain that money to the Bay St. George Women's Centre.
Mr. Speaker, there was a proposal put in to the Status of Women Canada for a
project from the Bay St. George Women's Council. That proposal, certainly, was
in conjunction with doing some work that is being done on the Poverty Reduction
Strategy by this particular government.
Mr. Speaker, the proposal was put in; however, a copy was not given to the
Women's Policy Office to review. I was asked for a letter of support and, Mr.
Speaker, when I approached the Women's Policy Office in an attempt to support
that project, we realized that we did not have a copy of the proposal.
When we dealt with the Women's Council, they felt that, as part of that
proposal, they did not have to necessarily come and review it with us, and the
Status of Women Canada and their local office here certainly submitted it on to
Ottawa without consulting us; but, Mr. Speaker, what is important here is, when
the federal government provides funding to the women's centres to do work,
that is going to look at the work of this government -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe what I just heard: the Women's
Policy Office didn't have the proposal. The minister met with the group in
August. She sat in their office for several hours. She was thoroughly briefed.
She was given a copy of the proposal, and she made a commitment to write a
letter of support. Instead, her office went to Ottawa, stopped the grant of
$180,000 from going to this women's group. Minister: Why the about-face on
this issue?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education, and Minister Responsible
for the Status of Women.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I want to be perfectly clear that I did not
receive a written copy of that proposal until after it was submitted to Ottawa
and the Women's Policy Office had to track it down from the Status of Women
Canada in Ottawa.
Mr. Speaker, what is important here is, when the federal government is going
to provide money to assess and look at ways to improve provincial policies, and
we have a Women's Policy Officer, I think it is incumbent on the federal
government to recognize us as a partner and consult with us and look for our
opinion. We do this work day in and day out in this Province and we deserve more
respect from the federal government.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the response from the minister is: I was sooky and
I didn't like it. They were bypassing my office, so I intervened and I stopped
it.
Minister, let me say this; let me ask the minister this question: First of
all, the Status of Women group in Bay St. George briefed myself and the hon. the
Leader of the NDP - and she can speak for herself - that you were given a
proposal, you were well-informed, you committed to a letter of support, and you
did not deliver. Now, they have written you, they have written the Premier, they
have asked for an apology, and they have asked for your department to ante up
the $180,000 in funding that they have lost. Are you prepared to do that?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education, and Minister Responsible
for the Status of Women.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, as I said, we did not have a copy of that
proposal. We asked from Ottawa to get a copy of that proposal.
When I was asked for a letter of support, I asked for a copy. I asked the
Women's Policy Office to review the proposal. We were not given a proposal at
that time and, Mr. Speaker, I will say that any time I am asked for a letter of
support on any proposal, I don't know what the previous Minister Responsible
for the Status of Women would do, but I will want to see that written proposal
before I will write a letter of support.
Mr. Speaker, I also want to add that we will continue to work with the Bay
St. George Women's Council. We are actually going to be meeting with them this
weekend. We certainly want to support a proposal from them. We want to make sure
that we clarify the process between the three levels, between the council,
between us and the federal government. We have a commitment with them. We have
been talking to them and we will continue to work with them.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, the minister would know that any proposal that
goes through the federal Status of Women office does not have to be approved by
her office, does not have to be sanctioned or anything of that sort, Mr.
Speaker. They only asked her for a letter of support as a courtesy.
Mr. Speaker, let me ask this question. On October 17, I listened to the
minister on the radio denouncing the federal government's cuts to women's
groups. Mr. Speaker, all the while she was interfering in Ottawa with a proposal
by the Bay St. George Women's Center trying to get money.
I have to ask: Why is it that the Women's Policy Office, Minister, under
your direction is now interfering with equality seeking groups in this Province
that go outside of your government looking for money?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education, and the Minister
Responsible for the Status of Women.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I want to make two points. One, anytime we are
identified as a partner in a proposal we are asked for a letter of support. The
Women's Policy Office will review the written proposals before we write any
letters of support.
In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, I also want to make the point, as the hon.
member made, we have no veto power over the decision making of the Status of
Women Canada. Despite the fact that we wanted to see that report and we had not
put in a letter of support, they still had the jurisdiction to fund that if they
wished to do so.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair wishes to recognize the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair,
and I ask members for their co-operation.
The hon. the member.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable that any government or any
minister would stop a non-profit group doing work around women, poverty and
equality in this Province from accessing government funding which has nothing to
do with them.
Let me ask the minister this question. I just learned this morning that the
federal government is going to close the Status of Women Canada office right
here in St. John's. They are going to, in fact, have three across Canada, one
in Quebec to service Eastern Canada, including Newfoundland and Labrador. Maybe
the minister would like to intervene there and save that office.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education, and Minister Responsible
for the Status of Women.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, there have been a number of issues recently that,
as Minister Responsible for the Status of Women or the Minister of Education, we
have addressed in Ottawa. One was certainly the funding for the Community Access
Programming, or CAP. Another was the literacy cuts and the other was when we
heard that they may be taking the capacity to do employment equity out of this
Province.
Mr. Speaker, we went to Ottawa, we spoke with our elected officials from
Newfoundland and Labrador and we represented what we thought was right for this
Province. If they are going to make a decision to remove that office, we have no
problem, once again, making our views known to our elected federal officials.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
My question today is for the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and
Employment.
Homelessness is growing in our Province. Agencies are seeing more people have
nowhere to live and whose lives are in crisis. The federal government has not
yet decided whether to renew the National Homelessness Initiative, which has
provided shelter space in this Province, and good shelter space. If it keeps
delaying, then some shelters will not get built here next summer as planned.
What are the minister's plans for continuing to pressure the federal
government to renew the National Homelessness Initiative?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and
Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would say to the member, I appreciate the question. She was at the event
that I was at today on homelessness. As I said at the event, and I say it here
in the House again, it is incumbent on this government - which I have written
the federal minister. I have met with the federal minister. Senior officials
from housing have met with deputy ministers in Ottawa. I ask the members
opposite, including the member herself, Mr. Speaker, to talk to all their
colleagues in Ottawa, because the fact of the matter is, we support it. I asked
in my last letter that this be urgent for this Province. It is a no-brainer, in
my mind, Mr. Speaker, that it has to continue and that we certainly support it.
I ask support for all of our colleagues in Ottawa.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, my question was asking what the minister would
do further. I would like to say that the National Homelessness Initiative was
designed for larger cities but homelessness is growing in rural locations,
particularly in Labrador City, Gander and Happy Valley-Goose Bay.
Would the minister continue in his discussions with the federal government
and ask them to expand the National Housing Initiative to include smaller and
rural communities?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and
Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I appreciate the question, because it the same thing I have said to officials
in my own department, that we just cannot look inside the urban centres of St.
John's and Corner Brook and so on, because we do have problems in Labrador
West that I am quite aware of, and within our departments of government here we
recognize how serious that is. We have to move outside the overpass, as we say,
because the problem is throughout rural Newfoundland and Labrador. I will be
urging the federal government to look at the rural centres as well as the urban
centres, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for his reply.
In the last six months, over 150 adolescents had to be turned away from the
youth shelter in St. John's because it does not have the capacity to do intake
of youth after hours.
Will the minister commit to providing this and other shelters with the
resources they need to adequately meet the needs of young people, no matter when
they arrive at their doors?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources, Labour and
Employment.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SHELLEY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely right and it is a
very serious concern that we all have in this department.
I can tell the member that just today, as a matter of fact, before we went to
the event today, I told the three social work students, who took it upon
themselves just a few weeks ago - and I think most members know - to go out on
the streets themselves for twenty-four hours and see exactly how it affects
them. They reported back. I am meeting with those three students next week and
we are going to work to continue to support these youth groups because we know
that is a cycle that has to be broken with the youth in this Province. We are
certainly committed to making that an urgent response to the federal government.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It became known to the media last week that the companies involved in the
fibre optic consortium deal were not registered pursuant to the requirements of
the Lobbyist Act. The Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, of
course, being the lead minister on this file, I ask the minister if he can tell
us: Have you followed up on this issue with the Commissioner of Lobbyists? If
so, can we have a copy of whatever you corresponded to the Commissioner, and, if
you haven't, do you intend to do so?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural
Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as the Opposition House Leader would know, the legislation
stipulates that it is up to the private enterprise, the lobbyists group or the
company that may or may not have people engaged in lobbying, to determine
whether or not they meet the requirement for registering with the lobbyists'
registry and they must take the initiative to deal with that. I can only say
that we contacted the lobbyists' registry to determine who was or was not
registered as it related to this deal and telecommunications generally, and as
far as we are concerned, Mr. Speaker, that is as much as we are required to do.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Quite frankly, that does not tell us very much. When did you consult with the
Registrar of Lobbyists to find this information out, and what was the form of
communication? Was it in writing? When is very, very important. We are talking
about companies here who have solicited the Province for $15 million, and it is
your department, Minister, that is carrying the ball on this and has recommended
the payment of this money. I would think it is an essential part of any due
diligence check that this government would do as part of spending $15 million,
that you would check to see if these companies are in compliance with our laws.
Now, what did you or did you not do?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural
Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, as I said, and as the Opposition House Leader
knows, as a former Minister of Justice and a lawyer, he knows that legislation
requires the companies to determine whether or not they have to register as
lobbyists. There is no requirement of the minister, the department, the
government or otherwise, to contact the lobbyist registry to find out who may or
may not be registered.
I, Mr. Speaker, have not contacted the lobbyist registry to see if anybody
from the Penny Group, for example, is registered in our deliberations on
continental stone. I have not contacted the lobbyist registry to find out if
anybody from Cooke Aquaculture is registered with the lobbyist registry; nor
have I consulted on any other deal that comes in front of us. That is not the
requirement of government. That is the requirement of the company. If they are
found not to be in compliance, then it is a legal issue that must be taken up by
the Department of Justice and the police.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The time allocated for Question Period has expired.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Tabling of Documents.
Notices of Motions.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I give notice that I will move that the House resolve itself into a Committee
of the Whole To Consider Certain Resolutions Relating To The Advancing Or
Guaranteeing Of Certain Loans Made Under The Loan And Guarantee Act, 1957. (Bill
48)
Further, I give notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, An
Act To Amend The Teachers' Pensions Act. (Bill 47)
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motions?
Answers to Questions for Which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile.
MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It looks like I might just get in under the wire. I would like to present a
petition again on behalf of the residents of Ramea. Again, I explained yesterday
the circumstances pertaining to why the people of Ramea are putting a petition
through the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile as opposed to the Member for Fortune
Bay-Cape la Hune. It is a joint effort by both of us, but the physical
facilities they are looking for would be situated within the District of Burgeo
& LaPoile.
The issue is that people who use the ferry service on the South Coast from
Burgeo to Ramea - they do not have any washroom facilities in Burgeo. So, if you
come across from Ramea and you go and do your shopping or your business in
Burgeo, or up to Stephenville or Corner Brook or anywhere else - or your medical
needs - when you come back and you wait for the ferry, you wait, and you had
better hope you do not need to use the washroom while you are waiting because
your nearest washroom that you have access to is either home, across the stretch
to Ramea, on the ferry when and if she gets in, or you have to go to some public
place in Burgeo; and, by the way, there is no public place near the wharf
facilities in Burgeo. It is not like in Port aux Basques or somewhere, where
there might be a public washroom you can run into, someone else's place. If
you want to use the washroom while you are waiting for the Burgeo to Ramea
ferry, you physically either have to go and knock on someone's door and ask
them to let you use their washroom, go to a hotel which is about two or three
kilometres up the street, or, as often happens, of course, you have to do it
right where you are.
That is what is the inhumane part of this, the health piece of this. The
people are simply saying: Give us a porta-potty or put some kind of facility
there so that we can, in some kind of human dignity and decency, have a washroom
facility while we are there. They have expanded it and said, why not even have a
little whatever, twelve by fifteen waiting room area, that we can put it there,
tie in a washroom facility.
Look, just remember, these are not healthy persons all the time. These are
sometimes handicapped persons. There could be people with small children. There
could be senior citizens who cannot easily get about, and you cannot be
expecting these people in this day and age to be running off up the road to the
Burgeo Motel because they need to use the washroom.
So, I put it to the Minister of Transportation and Works, who is responsible
for that service: Please, this is not a frivolous type of request. This is a
very reasonable, humane request, and we would certainly like to see something
done. I am sure the people of Burgeo will be very co-operative, as will the
people of Ramea, to do something jointly, if we could, to get this matter dealt
with.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
With leave of the House, if we could just do first reading on Bill 47. We
give notice today so it can be printed and circulated, if that would be okay.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
We are attempting to have a discussion between the two House Leaders. The
Government House Leader has asked for leave to do first reading on a bill. It is
2:59 p.m. He would need some agreement to make that happen. I am wondering if he
has leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: We have leave to do that.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Finance shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled, the Loan and Guarantee
Act, Bill 48.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. minister shall have leave to
introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance to introduce a bill, The Loan And
Guarantee Act, carried. (Bill 48)
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I move first reading of Bill 47,
An Act To Amend The Teachers' Pension Act.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Minister of
Finance shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The
Teachers' Pension Act. (Bill 47)
Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. the Minister of Finance shall
have leave to introduce said bill?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Motion carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance to introduce a bill, "An Act To
Amend The Teachers' Pension Act," carried. (Bill 47)
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the said bill be now read a
first time. Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now a read
first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Motion is carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Teachers' Pension Act. (Bill 47)
MR. SPEAKER: Bill 47,
An Act To Amend The Teachers' Pension Act, has
now been read a first time. When shall the said bill be read a second time?
MR. SULLIVAN: On tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 47 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I guess it being three o'clock or twenty past, we will call the Private
Member's motion that was, I think, introduced by the Opposition House Leader
under the name of the Opposition Leader.
Private Members' Day
MR. SPEAKER: Today being Wednesday, we now proceed to the resolution put
forward by the Leader of the Opposition.
I recognize him to begin his address.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is my understanding as well, that I have fifteen minutes to introduce the
bill and fifteen to conclude it later on this afternoon. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I am about to present a Private Member's motion calling on the
government to
initiate an independent inquiry into this broadband initiative to which the
Government of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador will be contributing $15
million.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to read the motion into the record. It says:
WHEREAS $15 million in taxpayers money has been allocated for a project to
bring two additional fibre optic cables to the Province in a deal which involves
close personal friends and business associates of the Premier without a call for
public tenders or a request for proposals: and
WHEREAS many significant concerns have been raised about the lack of
analysis, the role of lobbyists, the disclosure of a benefits analysis, the
exploration of other options and the procedures followed in allocating this
money; and
WHEREAS the government majority on the Public Accounts Committee did not
support the Auditor General and the Public Accounts Committee carrying out an
investigation into this matter;
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly now calls on the
government to appoint an independent inquiry with broad and expansive terms of
reference to immediately investigate all the details and circumstances of the
fibre optic deal.
Mr. Speaker, I have to give a little history of this so that people in the
Province will understand why we are calling for this inquiry and why we are
doing it, because we have not received the answers to which we have questioned
the government over the past three weeks.
Roughly, about three weeks ago, I think it was on a Friday night at around
9:00 p.m., we witnessed, I guess, what we refer to as a blackout of
communications. For example, telephone, Internet service, cellphone services to
a large part of our Province, especially on the Northeast Avalon and the greater
St. John's area.
Many people said that the reason for this was the fire at Aliant, but the
reason they said there was such a blackout was that there was only one fibre
optic cable coming into this Province and that cable was supplied by Aliant. As
a result, following the Friday night, there was an outcry on behalf of the
people. They said what was needed was another company, other than Aliant, to
have another fibre optic cable placed across the Province so that we would not
experience this blackout in our communication services ever again. That fibre
optic link, they were saying, should go from St. John's across the Province
and hook into the mainland, across the Gulf of St. Lawrence. This other line
would also provide competition and, as a result, would result in cheaper costs
to consumers of Internet, to government and institutions and the local
population.
Shortly after the blackout, the government came out with an announcement - I
think it was roughly eight or nine days after the blackout, the government came
out without any public fanfare. I think the Premier was out of the Province at
the time and the proponents, I think, from Persona and Rogers were probably out
of the Province as well. Without any fanfare, it was announced by the Minister
of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development that the government would be putting
$15 million of taxpayers' money into a consortium of companies made up of
Persona, Rogers Communications and MTS Allstream, three companies that made up a
consortium. We were going to put $15 million towards a $52 million project to a
fibre optic cable from St. John's to Halifax. Actually, it was only in the
last day or so that we realized it was going all the way to Halifax, because it
was our understanding, first of all, that it was only going to go as far as Cape
Breton Island.
Mr. Speaker, as a result of the fact that the government never put out a Call
for Tender for this project - they did not ask for proposals and nobody knew,
actually, that Persona and Rogers and the like were companies who employ close
personal friends of the Premier and previous business partners and associates -
we started to raise questions. Why is the government investing $15 million of
our money, the taxpayers, people out there who are watching us today, why the
government is spending $15 million of your money to help a consortium run a
fibre optic cable off to Halifax? If you had listened to the people who came out
and spoke, like the Mayor of St. John's and the president of the Board of
Trade, they said that this was required because we only had one fibre optic link
to the mainland. So we started asking questions and we have been asking
questions now for -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. REID: Yes, Mr. Dillon from the Board of Trade, who happens to be an
employee of Rogers Communication.
Anyway, Mr. Speaker, we started asking questions some three weeks ago and the
more questions we ask, the more questions we find we need to ask. The more often
we hear the minister in the House of Assembly and in the media, the more
questions we feel that we should ask. When the Premier gets involved, we have to
ask more questions.
Then, as late as 11:30 this morning, our caucus, the Liberal caucus, along
with the NDP, met with a group of officials from the Department of Innovation,
Trade and Rural Development, the officials who are taking the lead on this
project. We met with them and, as a result of that, we even have more questions
that we should ask and have to ask. Because a lot of the questions that we asked
and we got the answers to were not sufficient in our minds to justify the
spending of the $15 million, last week, or the week before, we asked that the
Auditor General and the Public Accounts Committee hold public hearings. We asked
the Auditor General to go off and investigate; but, in addition, we asked that
the Public Accounts Committee hold hearings so that we could bring - because the
Public Accounts Committee of government is somewhat independent and it has the
authority to subpoena witnesses to come before it, so the Public Accounts
Committee could have called anyone. It is almost like having to appear in front
of a court. Even if you do not want to come, if the Public Accounts Committee
subpoena somebody to come and stand before them or sit before them, that
individual or group of individuals are obligated under the law to do so. So,
what we wanted to do was for the Public Accounts Committee, independent of
government, to establish a review of this and have the power to call people in
to get to the bottom of exactly what was going on about this deal, because that
is all we have been asking for, Mr. Speaker. We have been asking for the
details, and those details have not been forthcoming.
As you all know, we have asked - I asked, I think, fourteen questions myself
yesterday in the House of Assembly. My colleague from Grand Bank asked five or
six questions. We have been doing this both in the Legislature and in the media
now for three weeks and we have not been getting the answers that would satisfy
in our minds why the taxpayers of this Province are subsiding three companies to
the tune of $15 million to put an additional fibre optic line across the
Province when we found out, since all of this started, that Aliant currently
have two fibre optic cables across the Province, and if we put two more there it
is highly unlikely that the blackout that we experienced some three weeks ago
will be prevented in the future. There is no guarantee that, even if we put two
additional lines at a cost of $15 million to the taxpayers, that is going to
prevent that from happening again. We have asked a lot of questions and we have
not gotten a lot of answers, which leads....
I don't think it is just politicians who have suspicious or inquisitive
minds, but when you start asking questions and you don't get the right
answers, or you get answers that you know there is something wrong with, and
then you tie that to a group of individuals who have close personal and business
ties to the Premier - of course, you get suspicious. What is going on here? Why
are we subsidizing a couple of multinational companies to run this cable across
the Province to compete with Aliant? Why don't they do it themselves? Why
doesn't this group of companies do it themselves? Because, if they were to do
it themselves we would not be debating this in the House of Assembly today. We
would not be talking about it.
If a company or a group of companies want to come into this Province and
invest their own money, do their own thing and compete against another company
then we have no problem with it; but, when we are asked to subsidize companies
like Rogers Communications, Persona and MTS Allstream, then we have a right to
ask questions. We have a right to know if that is a wise investment that the
people of this Province are making.
You have to ask yourself: Who are these group of companies? Rogers
Communications, for any of you who do not know, is not a poor company. I do not
think they need the poor taxpayers of this Province to subsidize their venture
in the Province, because Rogers Communications is one of the largest cable
providers in North America. Anyone who turns on a television, it is almost
impossible to miss the number of stations that Rogers provides, not only in this
Province but around North America.
They are not a poor company. They are an international, rich company. In
fact, they are paying larger dividends to their shareholders than most companies
that trade on the stock market. Rogers Communications also, Mr. Speaker, owns
the Toronto Blue Jays. That is not a company that is short on cash; they own the
Toronto Blue Jays. The Toronto Blue Jays' payroll last year for their ball
players was $200 million, Mr. Speaker. They are paying their ball players $200
million. In fact, just recently, in the last few weeks, they went out and they
wanted to pick up a new designated hitter for next fall, or next season's ball
team. They just offered one individual, I think, $16 million to be the
designated hitter on the Toronto Blue Jays. Yet, a company with such wealth is
asking the taxpayers of this Province for $15 million to help subsidize an
initiative that they are going to carry out in this Province that will compete
with a company that already exists in this Province, that already employs
hundreds of individuals in this Province, that being Aliant. That was one of the
problems we had with it. That was one of the problems we had with it.
We had lots of questions and, because we raised all of these questions, the
minister of industry thought that he was going to put a squash to all of this
the other day when he said: Here, the reason we are doing it is because we had
an independent company out there analyze this project to see if this was a good
value for the taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador. Here, he said, here is the
analysis that was put forward by a company called Electronic Warfare Associates.
The minister went out and paid them to come in and have a look at this proposal
that was put forward by Persona and Rogers, two multinational companies, and
say: Does the Province really need to put $15 million in that? So, the minister
contracted that company to do it, Electronic Warfare Associates, and he
presented their findings in the House of Assembly the other day.
Now, I thought that might be the end of it, after I read this report from
Electronic Warfare Associates, that would be it, that would satisfy our quench
for more knowledge about this initiative, that it would satisfy the people of
the Province, that because this company, an independent company, the minister
said, went out and analyzed it, that we would be satisfied, we would not have to
ask any more questions.
Well, Mr. Speaker, I do not know if you have read it. The minister accused me
of not reading it, because I asked him fourteen questions about it yesterday. I
would suggest that he did not read it himself; because, once you start to read
the report, it raised more questions than it gave us answers. It raised more
questions than it gave us answers, because the minister has been out there
talking about: We are going to be buying fibre on the line. When you are talking
about fibre optics, it is cable. I think it is about one-and-a-half inches in
diameter, and in that you have all of these little, tiny fibre optics. He is
saying that we are going to be buying a couple of them. Even though there might
be hundreds or thousands in that cable, we are going to buy a couple of these
and, as a result of buying these couple of fibres -
MS FOOTE: (Inaudible) duct tape.
MR. REID: The one that he said today was wrapped up in duct tape, I might
add.
He said: As a result of buying these fibers, we are going to be able to save
a lot of money on what the university and the hospitals and the government pay
for long-distance telephone charges, local telephone charges, and Internet
access.
Then I read the report from the group that the minister commissioned to see
if this was a good deal and right there in it, it says: At present, the
government has no use for these fibres.
We are going out and spending $15 million to buy a few fibres when the
government, according to this report, Electronic Warfare Associates, says we don't
have any need for this at this particular time.
The minister and the Premier have been out there in a tirade in the last few
days talking about all of the benefits that this project is going to have for
the Province, when right in the report it states that - the people he has asked
to do this report, EWA, Electronic Warfare Associates - they cannot quantify the
benefits to the Province. They cannot quantify the benefits to the Province!
Another question that this group was asked is: Do Persona and Rogers need $15
million worth of taxpayers' money to do this project? Their answer was yes,
but then they go on to say: However, we have not been given any financial
statements by any of these companies. We do not know how much money Persona and
Rogers are going to make from this project once it is installed. We do not know
how much money they are going to make from it. In fact, at one point in this
study, EWA, Electronic Warfare Associates, even suggested they could not even
tell, with the information that they were given from Persona, if Persona was
solvent.
Mr. Speaker, just imagine! This report says that we should give them the $15
million based on the information, but they did not even have enough information
to know if Persona was solvent. In other words, Persona could be bankrupt, yet
we are going to give them $15 million. It also says here, if there are any cost
overruns on this project, they do not know if Persona can cover the cost of the
overruns, yet we are going to give them $15 million. We do not know, for
example, if -
MR. TAYLOR: (Inaudible).
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, can I have some protection from the minister?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. REID: He is going to have ample opportunity to stand this afternoon.
I would suggest he read the report before he makes statements (inaudible).
Now, Mr. Speaker, there are at least eight-nine questions that I have -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is expired.
MR. REID: Can I have a minute to clue up?
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted to make some concluding comments.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
All I am saying is I have at least eighty-nine questions that I would like to
ask about this project. We cannot get the Premier and his government to agree to
the Auditor General and the Public Accounts Committee looking at it, so that is
the reason we are asking for an independent review of this, so that the people
of this Province will have an opportunity once someone who is independent of
government, someone like Justice Greene who is investigating us or our
constituency allowance, comes in and look at this. If that individual or group
of individuals says, listen, this is all above board and this is a great deal
for the Province, I will certainly get up and say: Great! Go ahead and give them
the $15 million. I hope they do not expect me to just say: Yes, this is all fine
and this is all rosy. We are not giving you the information, we are not going to
answer your questions, but trust me this is worth $15 million; trust me.
The minister is going to stand now in a minute. He has been telling us for
two weeks that the University pays ten to a hundred times more than any other
university for its internet access and we find out from his own officials today
that the University, Memorial University of Newfoundland and Labrador, actually
pays nothing - nothing! - for their internet access.
Mr. Speaker, I will continue at the end of the afternoon when I get an
opportunity to speak for fifteen more minutes.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, before I get into the merits of the proposal I just have to go
back at the Leader of the Opposition on some of his assertions here today,
because he comes into this House and he goes outside of this House and he gets
on the radio and he gets in front of a TV camera and he continuously makes
misleading statements; continuously, continuously, Mr. Speaker. Now, I am not
suggesting that he does it purposely, Mr. Speaker, but certainly the statements
that he makes are inaccurate and he does it consistently.
I will just point out one. He is talking about the EWA report not having
access to Persona's financials, Persona's complete balance sheet, solvency
position, stuff like that.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. TAYLOR: Yes they did say that, Mr. Speaker.
He neglected to say that they identified in this - and he talks about
potential cost overruns and how that should be dealt with. What he neglected to
say, Mr. Speaker, is that EWA said: As a result we are unable to comment on
Persona's solvency nor its ability to fulfill its comments to cover the cost
overruns. It goes on to say - a very, very critical piece, Mr. Speaker: Our
suggestion to solve this would be to require Persona to post a bond to cover
both the completion of the project and any cost overruns that may occur which
Persona has indicated a willingness to do. A very important piece, Mr. Speaker,
but, of course, the Leader of the Opposition, that is not politically expedient
to point that out.
He also neglects to say, which I have said also previously to today, Mr.
Speaker, Persona has indicated their willingness to us to provide their complete
financials on a confidential basis so that we can determine their solvency, Mr.
Speaker. They will provide it to EWA but they will not provide it, Mr. Speaker,
to the general public because they are a private company and that is the norm in
any business, Mr. Speaker. That is the norm. It was the norm when they were in
government, it is the norm while we are in government, and it will be the norm
if the NDP get in government. It is the norm everywhere in this country and
everywhere in the western world, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition needs to stick to the facts, and if
he wants to debate this deal on the facts, fine, but at least stick to the facts
and stop with the misrepresentation.
Mr. Speaker, furthermore, he states there is no need for the fibre. What
bunk! What bunk, I say, Mr. Speaker. The fact of the matter is the report does
not say there is no need for the fibre. The report that was completed on June 21
said that government had no intention to use the fibre, what we had articulated
on the day that we made this announcement. Mr. Reid, of course - I am sorry, Mr.
Speaker, I apologize, the Leader of the Opposition. I know I am not supposed to
mention people's names in here. The Leader of the Opposition chooses again not
to hear that. I guess that is what it is, he chooses not to hear it and he
chooses not to read it.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) do not want to hear it.
MR. TAYLOR: That is right. They say there is no one so blind as he who
would not see and no one so deaf as he who would not hear, Mr. Speaker. That
certainly sums up the Leader of the Opposition.
The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, as we said right from the beginning,
our intent and our absolute commitment is we are going to use this fibre. We are
going to light this fibre, we are going to use it for government's network,
and we are going to use it for our data transmission requirements, Mr. Speaker.
There is no need for it. Forget what the government is saying. Forget what EWA
is saying, Mr. Speaker.
As for this issue of Memorial University, well, Mr. Speaker, I do not speak
for Memorial University but I know a couple of people who do and they put out a
press release on this. The President of the University and the Vice-President of
the University, what did they say? What did Memorial University say? "... a
second fibre optic link would ensure Memorial's educators, researchers and
students would have continued access to transmit and receive data. As well, the
fibre optic link will have implications both for rural connectivity and distance
education, both of which have great significance to this institution."
They go on to say, "For example, last year, researchers at Memorial
brought in more than $80 million in external funding for their research efforts.
These researchers depend on a stable fibre optic link on a daily basis."
"An additional fibre link has the potential for achieving this
objective. The university's requirements for transmitting very large and
complex data are related to research and state-of-the-art education."
I thought that is what we wanted in this Province, Mr. Speaker. That is
apparently what Memorial University wants. That is what this government wants.
That is what the Minister of Education wants. That is what the people in the
technology industries want. That is what the people who are engaged in research
initiatives in the private sector, people like Dr. Wayne Gulliver, people like
Siobhan Coady, people who are involved in transmission of comprehensive and
large data files, Mr. Speaker, that is what they want. The people at Nati,
Newfoundland Association of Technology Industries, that is what they want.
Apparently, Mr. Speaker, that is not what the Opposition wants.
If you listen to the Opposition, Mr. Speaker, the Outer Ring Road would have
never been built. Although, they built it. If you listen to the Opposition -
because there was a way of moving from the East End of St. John's to the West
End of St. John's, but you build the Outer Ring Road and you opened up more
area for development. Mr. Speaker, if you listen to them, the road up the
Northern Peninsula would never have been built because you could get up the
Northern Peninsula on a dog team, or you could get up the Northern Peninsula on
a coastal boat, or I suppose, like Matty Mitchell did a hundred year ago with
caribou for Dr. Grenfell, you could walk and you could take three months to do
it. But no, we have advanced, Mr. Speaker, we are not going back there.
Modern societies and modern civilizations - communities that are engaged in
research and development require this type of infrastructure and everybody who
is involved and everybody who is on the leading edge of technology development
and research in Newfoundland and Labrador have told us that we need it. Are they
all wrong, Mr. Speaker? Is Memorial University wrong? Is Dr. Chris Loomis, the
Vice-President of Research at MUN and Chair of the Canarie board, is he wrong?
Is he wrong when he says we will have connectivity comparable to that already in
place in other parts of Canada? Listen to this; quite the opposite of what the
Opposition and the Leader of the Opposition says. Dr. Chris Loomis says this:
This connectivity is absolutely critical for building and maintaining a
competitive research environment on which innovation, the development of
value-added products and services, and the creation of highly skilled jobs
depend.
Again, Mr. Speaker, if you listen to the hon. crowd opposite every day
talking about out-migration and we are losing our skilled workers and what have
you - and what do you do, only talk to the Minister of Business about: What are
you doing to attract business in Newfoundland and Labrador? Well, ask him. Ask
him if the people from BlackBerry, Research in Motion - but I mean, they wouldn't
know who that is. If I said RIM, they would not know what it is because they
probably have not turned over their BlackBerry to look at the back of it and see
RIM written on it. If they did, they probably would not know what RIM was
anyway, Mr. Speaker.
MR. PARSONS: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. TAYLOR: Oh, yes. You will have your turn, Kelvin.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
A point of order has been called by the Opposition House Leader.
MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I will just raise a point here. We get carried away sometimes emotionally,
and that is understandable, especially when we talk about things in the heat of
the moment.
MR. TAYLOR: (Inaudible).
MR. PARSONS: You can have whatever time I take in the course of making
this. I have no problem with that.
It is very disconcerting here in the last few days from this particular
minister - and I refer you to Hansard of yesterday, when we heard about the
stunned people, the nobodys across the way. Now today words like bunk. I mean,
as much as he might think we are in some club or bar somewhere, I would think
his language has been, on many, many occasions in the last couple of days,
inappropriate. I would suggest that the Chair ought to bring him to his
attention. Standing up and saying people do not know what RIM stands for. You
can make your points, I would suggest, Minister, without having to be
unparliamentary and without having to be totally, personally condescending
towards anybody else in this House.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair has noticed that the intensity of language sometimes is common on
both sides of the House at various times, especially in Question Period. I would
ask of all members, to be respectful of each other, to be respectful of the
House and to refrain from using language which members might find offensive or
insulting.
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural
Development.
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have to say that the Opposition House Leader is much more sensitive when
the slurs are going that way than he is when the slurs are coming this way.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. TAYLOR: He is much more concerned, and as usual - I will say this,
Mr. Speaker, and I do not think it is unparliamentary, but his self-righteous
indignation is a little much to take, to be quite frank about it.
Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I will just continue on as I was saying. RIM, Research
In Motion, who developed BlackBerry - Mr. Speaker, they just got up on a point
of order, now I will just ask if they are going to get up and ask me to behave
myself than just give me the time of day to say my piece without interruption.
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, Research In Motion is in the process right now
of establishing a 1,200-person operation in Halifax, Nova Scotia as their
technical service and support centre for BlackBerry worldwide.
If you want to ask a question, I say to the Member for Grand Bank, to the
Minister of Business, ask him if RIM approached Newfoundland and Labrador. Ask
him if, from a business attraction perspective, they were approached to see if
they would set up that 1,200-person facility here. No, Mr. Speaker. The answer
is no, they were not. No, they did not come here. Why didn't they come here?
Because they would not depend on a single carrier environment and it was cost
prohibitive for them to put their facility here because of the rates that are
being charged for off island connectivity from here to Halifax. The fact of the
matter is, if you want to do business on a scale that BlackBerry is doing it in
the world and you want to do it in Eastern Canada, you cannot come east of
Halifax, as we currently stand.
I will go on, Mr. Speaker. What did Todd Hiscock, Chair of Nati, say? This
will better position our Province as a place to invest in research and
development, deliver new and exciting services to business and consumers alike
and further our ability to compete globally in this knowledge-based economy.
What did Sydney Ryan from Telelink say? I strongly urge the government to
support this initiative. Phonemed: We ask you to strongly consider a dual system
for both voice and data.
Mr. Speaker, the merits of this proposal, the evaluation that has been done,
speaks for itself. I cannot help it that the Leader of the Opposition, the
Opposition House Leader and the rest of the people who sit in the Opposition, or
at least in that end of the House, Mr. Speaker, do not understand or choose to
ignore the facts that are put in front of them. The fact of the matter is, in
Newfoundland and Labrador, the people who are engaged in the technology industry
believe that this connectivity is required.
As for the Leader of the Opposition suggesting, well, there are already two
lines, he did not know that there were two lines. You know, that boggles my
mind. Anyway, he did not know that there were two lines. What we have always
said, Mr. Speaker, is that there was one carrier. There was no carrier
redundancy. We did not say that there was no cable redundancy. There is cable
redundancy, but even if we did say that, which is beside the point - which we
did not - but the fact of the matter is, that system has failed twice in the
past couple of years. That system has failed twice. We need carrier diversity.
Another fact that needs to be put out there: It has been estimated that if we
lose our connectivity to the outside world for one day, the disruption to
government, the economy and everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador would cost
approximately $15 million per day; $15 million per day in direct costs to the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador. What will we do? What are we going to do,
Mr. Speaker? Are we going to continue on the way that we have been going? How
are the people at Telelink, how are the people at Converges, how are the people
in Memorial University, who are trying to attract $80 million and trying to
build on the $80 million that they have attracted in research dollars over the
past number of year, how are they going to explain to the people outside of
Newfoundland and Labrador, who they are working with, how are they going to
explain another breakdown in this system? Mr. Speaker, the integrity of the
communication system in Newfoundland and Labrador has to be restored. We are
willing to work with Aliant. We are willing to work with Aliant as we have in
the past. Aliant has had -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I understand I have a couple of minutes left.
I would say this, Mr. Speaker, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador,
of all political stripes, has worked with Aliant in the past to build the
infrastructure that they have in Newfoundland and Labrador and we see no reason
why we cannot work with them in the future. The fact of the matter is, Mr.
Speaker, the world - while the Leader of the Opposition and others in the
Opposition suggest that Rogers is not a small company; Persona is not a small
company; MTS Allstream is not a small company, well, Mr. Speaker, Aliant is not
Newtel. Aliant is not that little old Newfoundland and Labrador company that was
kicking around here in the 1960s, 1970 and 1980s. Bell owns Aliant and, Mr.
Speaker, Bell is one of the biggest companies in the world, too.
Mr. Speaker, what are we to do? If anybody owns an yacht, or if anybody is
involved in something extracurricular outside of their business activities, we
are not allowed to engage in discussions with them on fostering economic
development in Newfoundland and Labrador? I guess, Mr. Speaker, we must pick up
the phone, call Cooke Aquaculture and ask them to return our $10 million,
because Glenn Cooke is not a small guy either. Glenn Cooke is the biggest
aquaculture operation in North America. Maybe we should call Continental Stone,
Mr. Penny and Mr. Williams, who are not small boys in the Newfoundland and
Labrador context, nor in the North American context, Mr. Speaker, and tell them:
No, boys, we are not even going to consider what you are proposing to us on an
aggregate quarry development in Belleoram. Forget it. You are big and ugly
enough to look after yourself.
No, Mr. Speaker, we are not going to do that. We are not going to say no to
Brookfield. We are not going to say no to Continental Stone. We are not going to
say no to them just because of who they are, how big they are or whatever. We
are going to look at what they propose, we are going to judge it on the merits
of the proposal and, Mr. Speaker, if it makes sense, we will work with them
every day that we get the opportunity.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Whenever the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development stands up,
you never know what is going to come out of his mouth. I have to say, he says it
boggles his mind that the Leader of the Opposition actually thought there was
only one cable link across this Province. Well, he should also be boggled by the
fact that his own leader, according to a story in The Telegram , thought
there was only one line across this Province, and this is a man who apprized
himself on having twenty-five years of experience in the communications
business. Here, in a story, the October 27 edition of The Telegram ,
headlined, "Province ponders second line in wake of phone outage," -
and, it says: Williams said Newfoundland is considering construction of a second
fibre optic link to Nova Scotia.
It doesn't make sense that you would have the Minister of Innovation, Trade
and Rural Development stand up and say he is puzzled that the Leader of the
Opposition didn't know there was a second line when his own leader obviously
either didn't know or had a lapse of memory when he did the story that there
was a second line. It doesn't take a lot to boggle the mind of the minister of
industry.
The issue here, Mr. Speaker, is - there are two points here. One is -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair has recognized the hon. the Member for Grand Bank and I would ask
the co-operation of all members so that we can hear what the member is saying.
The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank you for the protection from the members opposite, who do not want to
hear what someone else has to say because they think they have all the answers.
Let's talk about priorities here, and that is what this comes down to,
priorities of a government who does not know but that rural Newfoundland and
Labrador is good to eat. They certainly do not know what is going on in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador, when the Premier stands in his place in the last
couple of days and says how surprised he was that 9,000 people turned out for a
job fair, when people were recruiting people from this Province to go to
Alberta. So, talk about priorities and talk about an understanding of what is
happening today in Newfoundland and Labrador.
The other issue here with this whole project is how the process was handled,
and the perception out there that all is not above board; and, of course, it has
to do with the players involved who are personal friends of the Premier. So,
this is perception and these are issues that need to be dealt with, and what we
are doing here in saying: Let's hold the agreement up to scrutiny.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, would you please offer some protection from these
members?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the Member for Grand Bank, and I ask members for their
co-operation.
The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Again, it goes back to the point that they do not want to hear the truth.
They do not think anyone else has anything to offer to this debate because they
have been told, obviously, that there is only one line to toe here, and that is
that this is okay. Don't give it any scrutiny, don't debate the issue, just
try and somehow attack the individual who is trying to put across other points
of view.
Let's get back to priorities, Mr. Speaker, $15 million. Now, what could
this Province spend $15 million on - taxpayers' money - other than making a
contribution to a consortium who can well afford to do this project on their
own? We are talking Rogers, we are talking Persona, and we are talking MTS
Allstream, three companies who can well afford, if they want to come into this
Province and compete with Aliant, they can well afford to do it, just as Aliant
can afford to compete with them.
How else can we see $15 million being spent, other than making it possible -
because, even though the minister said today, let's get it right, we are
buying cable here - albeit, he said, this thing being connected with duct tape,
I can tell him he can get a lot more duct tape at the dollar store for $15
million than he is going to get from this particular agreement.
Let's get it straight here. Even though he says we are buying fibre, by
buying that fibre we are making it possible for this consortium to come into
this Province and compete against a local company. When I say a local company,
you can argue that, well, you are talking Bell Canada here, but you know there
are hundreds and hundreds of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians working for this
company. There are hundreds and hundreds of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who
are retired and living in this Province. So, when the Premier talks about, you
know, how can you pick on a local company like Persona? Well, Aliant is a local
company. Let's have a level playing field here. Why would we turn around and
give $15 million to a consortium to come in and possibly - possibly - end up
taking away the jobs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who are presently
working in our Province and making a contribution to our Province?
So let's talk about priorities. We have pharmacists who are leaving our
Province. They met with the Minister of Health and they felt comfortable about
that meeting. They thought he was listening to their concerns, and I don't
doubt that he was, but when he took their issue to the Minister of Finance, I am
told, whoa! Hold on a second now, we can't do one-offs. It doesn't matter
how many pharmacists leave this Province, how many people in Newfoundland and
Labrador are left without their services, we cannot do one-offs.
Paramedics: I have met with the paramedics in my district and I can tell you
they are hard done by. These are individuals who work around the clock, who are
expected to provide the kind of service that can be a life-saving service, in
fact, but there is no continuity, there is no consistency throughout this
Province in how these paramedics are treated.
I don't know how many of you heard the lady from Garnish on the Open Line
show the other day, Mrs. Rideout. Mr. and Mrs. Rideout find themselves in a
situation that is deplorable. It is humiliating, in fact. They work in the
fishery, and Mrs. Rideout has MS and cannot afford to purchase the drugs. So,
what are they being told? They are being told by government: If you want to give
up work, sell your boat, anything that you have, if you want to sell it and go
on social services, then we might be able to help you.
Can you imagine how humiliating that is to people who have worked all their
lives to provide for their families and survive and make a contribution in a
community like Garnish which is in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. It is a sad
set of circumstances when this government does not see fit to provide the
funding to ensure that people who require this particular drug can avail of it.
What about nurses? I am told they are not happy with their lot. Why wouldn't
we be looking at that $15 million and seeing how we can do something in the
health care sector? Because there are so many issues: pharmacists; paramedics;
nurses; doctors; and the recruitment of specialists. I am told that in one part
of our Province we have a board that, in fact, put up $20,000. I am told that
they are not allowed to do that, but what else were they to do in terms of
recruiting a specialist? People are being forced to do things because this
government is not paying attention to what is happening throughout Newfoundland
and Labrador and the circumstances that people in rural Newfoundland and
Labrador are finding themselves in.
We have hundreds of boil water orders throughout this Province; hundreds.
People are living in communities who cannot drink the water. They have to boil
the water. Heaven only knows -how do you teach a child not to drink the water?
You know, how in a school when a child goes to drink out of the water fountain -
how do you convince a little five year old not to drink it? These are issues
that need to be dealt with in Newfoundland and Labrador, particularly in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador.
When I look at $15 million going into a consortium to make it possible for
them to compete in this Province when the government's own guidelines with
respect to financial help, there own guidelines which are on the website for
anyone to see, say: Government will not assist companies to compete with a local
company in the market. It is up, it is up on the website. That is exactly what
is happening here with what this government is doing by handing over $15 million
to the consortium. That is the problem we have here today. Priorities:
government has them all wrong. Obviously the government has them all wrong and I
think the majority of people, particularly in Newfoundland and Labrador, will
send that message loud and clear.
Whether or not the Premier wants to admit it, the perception is out there
that this deal smells. Even though he has said that personally he took this
initiative off the table because he thought it could not stand the political
test, I wonder what he did to sweeten it up to take off some of the odour so
that it could go forward? I am assuming it went forward to Cabinet and it was
approved by Cabinet. I do not know, I am assuming that is what happened here.
The reality is that we are looking at a deal here where we have to question
the process, we have to question who is involved here and we have to question
government's priorities. It may be a good deal. I do not know. We are not
given enough of the detail to determine whether or not it is a good deal. We
know we have this report from Electronic Warfare Associates, who I understand
really looks at security issues and engineering issues. I am not sure why they
were asked to comment on economic issues and whether or not it was a good deal
economically, because that, from my understanding, is not what they do. That is
exactly what they did, and anyone who takes a close look at that Electronic
Warfare Associates report would have to have as many questions as we do about
what has transpired here with respect to this consortium and government's
involvement in it. I say involvement, because if you are going to take $15
million of taxpayers' dollars and make it possible for this consortium to
compete with a local company, then you are in fact investing in this company.
Sure, you can say you are buying cable. Alright. But, you know, you must have
thought or I think you would have thought to speak to Aliant and say to them,
you know, do you realize that if we go down this path this is going to cost you
money, Aliant. Because if what they say is true, my fear is that government is
going to automatically just switch all of its business over to Persona. If that
happens, what happens to the employees at Aliant? Are they not setting up a
situation where all of government's work will be done by Persona, subsidized
by the taxpayers of this Province?
Persona is on record as saying: With this deal, we can offer service to
government for 50 per cent of the cost. But wait now, we are paying $15 million,
so you should be able to offer services to government for 50 per cent of the
cost. My heavens, upfront $15 million! Factor that into your bottom line, you
should be okay.
There are so many questions being raised about this deal. Is it any wonder we
would be standing here today calling for an inquiry. Why would government object
to an inquiry? If it is so squeaky clean that the Premier can stand there and
say there is absolutely nothing wrong with this deal, why would government
object to an inquiry? I would think they would welcome an inquiry. I would think
it would be a golden opportunity for the Premier, whose relationship with the
business partners involved in this is brought into question. I would think that
the government would welcome this inquiry.
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!
I remind the hon. member that her speaking time has expired.
MS FOOTE: Thank you.
MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Madam Speaker, thank you.
I want to speak to this Private Member's Resolution today. We have heard a
lot about the merits of the business case to be made for investing the $15
million, and I want to leave that alone. My colleague, the Minister of
Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, did a tremendous job of that earlier as
he mapped out the benefits. I want to stick to the resolution itself because I
think there is some merit, probably, in the resolution, particularly where it
says: THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly now calls on the
Government to appoint an independent inquiry with broad and expansive terms of
reference to immediately investigate all the details and circumstances of the
fibre optic deal.
We heard the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile yesterday talk quite eloquently
about the importance and significance of public inquiries and why that
legislation should, in fact, be passed.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. WISEMAN: As I listened to the members talk about this particular
deal, I think, Madam Speaker, it is important for this House to reflect on some
past experiences. If we are going to look at the fibre optic deal itself - and
the members opposite think this particular investment, the purchase of an asset,
warrants a public inquiry. I wonder how the people of Newfoundland and Labrador
and the members of this House would want to look at some other things that have
happened within this Province and whether or not we should lump them all
together. I think, if we are going to look at this fibre optic deal, maybe we
should look at the Apollo contract; maybe we should look at that one.
Back in 2000, when the members opposite sat on this side of the House in
government, about ten days before the close of a tender that had gone out
through the Public Tender Act, a public document, they went out ten days before
it closed and changed the criteria so that the existing boat that is owned by a
company that was founded by a member of this Legislature, a Liberal sitting
member of this Legislature at one time, a founding member of that company was
able to be successfully awarded a contract with a boat that was deemed by the
federal department of transit as being too large for the docking facilities.
Maybe we should look at that.
Maybe we should also look at the fact that just prior to the last provincial
election that same crowd opposite, while they were over here in government, took
that same contract, a year in advance of its expiry, and automatically extended
it untendered. What was so miraculous after that - this happened just several
months before the election call, which the Premier had full knowledge of - the
owners of that now company made a $5,000 donation to the provincial campaign of
the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair; $5,000 just several months after
their company was awarded a contract - not awarded, but had a contract extended.
Maybe we should lump that Apollo deal into this inquiry as well. We could
have an inquiry going on for years.
If we are going to add the Apollo one in there, what if we also look
at CHC Composites? Why don't we look at that? My colleague for the District of
Gander - obviously, a great company in his particular community and constituents
of his are working there, but at the same time, I have to say, Madam Speaker,
the members opposite, when they were in government, did not buy anything. They
did not invest anything. They gave CHC Composites about 50 per cent of the total
investment. Of a $20 million investment, that government gave them $9 million
and did not own a thing, did not buy anything, not a thing. Then, just before -
these people opposite had a busy June month in 2003, knowing that they were
coming up for election. They extended the Apollo contract but they then
gave CHC Composites another million in June of 2003. And, what was that? Just on
the eve of an election, I say, Madam Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the Member for Trinity North.
MR. WISEMAN: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
So, if we are going to talk about inquires, Madam Speaker, why don't we be
all encompassing? I mean, I might even support this resolution if we are going
to be all encompassing, if we are going to throw all these sorts of things on
the table for an inquiry as well. Maybe we will add Apollo Contract, we
will add CHC Composites.
What about Bristol Communications? From the year 1999 to 2004 they had over
$20 million of benefit from this government untendered; $20 million. It is
ironic that Bristol Communications was the same company doing public relations
for the Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador. What a coincidence. Now,
would you believe that? If we are going to be looking at investigations, I just
wonder how come in 2004 Bristol Communications gave the Liberal Party of
Newfoundland and Labrador $186,597? If we are going to be adding things to a
list, why don't we add Bristol Communications?
Now we have Apollo , we have CHC Composites, we have Bristol
Communications. Now we are starting to shape up. We should have a pretty good
inquiry. Now we are going to have - as I listened yesterday, with a great deal
of interest, the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile really stretched the limits -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. WISEMAN: - of relevancy when he got up to talk. In fact, he spoke for
an hour and he said he now has two minutes left. He talked about a piece of
legislation,
an act dealing with public inquires and he spent his entire hour
talking about the fibre optic deal. I just happen to wonder - I mean, I pose a
question. It is ironic that this fibre optic cable is going to run through the
south coast, in his district, out into Port aux Basques, all along the south
coast, including the communities of Burgeo, in his district? It is going to be a
major benefit to his particular district but he actually spent an hour yesterday
condemning the deal because it was not beneficial. I pose a question. I do not
know, but I wonder: Does it have anything to do with the fact that Sunset
Solutions, a company in his district owned by his family, have a relationship or
are into this business? The question is: Does it impact that business? Maybe we
should ask that question. Maybe it is something we should ask an inquiry to look
into. Would it have an impact? Would the protest be as strong if it wasn't? I
mean these are all questions.
Just like the Opposition said yesterday, there are many unanswered questions.
I am not suggesting for a moment there was anything untoward here, but as the
Member for Grand Bank - and I think her words were perception. Maybe there is
absolutely nothing wrong with Liberal Party supporters getting contracts for
boats, nothing wrong with Liberal Party supporters getting 50 per cent
investment in their company, nothing wrong with posing the questions. It is a
perception, but inquiries, as the members opposite said - members opposite said
inquiries get to the bottom of all that. If we are going to ask for an inquiry
into a solid investment decision, if we are going to be inquiring about
situations or instances where government is buying an asset, if we are going to
be doing an inquiry on superficial things like that, then we definitely should
be looking at things where there is a real perception of wrongdoing, where
public funds are, in fact, getting money -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the Member for Trinity North, and I am having trouble
hearing him.
MR. WISEMAN: Madam Speaker, the list goes on.
As I listen to the members opposite rattle over there now, and particularly
the Member for Bay of Islands who is the Chair of Public Accounts - I mean, why
would we want to allow Public Accounts under his chairmanship to have people
from the business community of this Province come in and subject themselves to
that kind of harassment by the Chair of Public Accounts? I mean, it would be
like a kangaroo court. What we are seeing exhibited here today in the House, I
say, Madam Speaker, is a classic example of the behaviour by members of the
Opposition when they have nothing substantive to talk about, but really, really
want to create an illusion that there is something actually wrong taking place
here. They just cannot acknowledge that there is something going right here.
The list goes on, Madam Speaker. Like I said a moment ago, we can have an
inquiry established here that could get a pension out of it, it could be so
long.
Madam Speaker, let's look at the Lower Churchill deal; the deal that wasn't.
All the promotion was done, pictures taken, ads developed, videotapes done. The
whole thing was done. Consultation -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. WISEMAN: Now, we have Reid and Associates, the brother of the current
Leader of the Opposition, former minister of a former government, doing
consulting business. A question was: How much money was involved? The question
is: Was he involved with, as a resource consultant, the Lower Churchill project?
Did he receive any money for that? Was it tied to, in some fashion, the $14,000
donation made to the Liberal Party in 2003? Was there any connection?
Just a perception. Just a question. Members opposite can float the words out,
their questions, their perceptions; I am posing the same thing. These are
questions that are legitimate questions. Maybe if we are going to have an
inquiry, maybe we can throw them all in there. We should create a list of all
the things that have happened in the last five or six years in this Province
that fall into the same category, the exact same category; in fact, many
circumstances much worse than the situation and circumstance being described
here. If we are going to be having an inquiry, why don't we create a list? Why
don't we establish a permanent inquiry? These things are substantive pieces of
work, I say, Madam Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. WISEMAN: When we start looking at the Apollo contract, that,
in itself, the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair sits in this House
session after session after session and complains about ferry service in
Labrador, complains about it. It begs the question: Where that particular ferry
lands in Labrador, does it have any relevance or have any impact on the member's
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!
Once ag