PDF Version

March 26, 2018

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVIII No. 4

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Trimper):

Order, please!

Admit

strangers.

I would

like to welcome to the public gallery today several guests that I'd like to

identify. First of all, I have Kim Paddon, Dave Paddon and Deborah Collingwood.

and they will be mentioned in a Member's statement this afternoon.

A big

welcome to you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

I would also like to welcome

Ms. Sarah Murphy, Community Information Officer, and Gail Dempsey, Executive

Director of Epilepsy Newfoundland and Labrador, visiting today for a Ministerial

Statement. And I would like to thank the Members for a lot of purple that I see

here today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

And finally, to our municipal

colleagues, I would like to welcome Mr. Leo Gaulton, former Mayor of Baine

Harbour, his daughter Janice and granddaughter Nadine.

Welcome

to all of you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

MR. SPEAKER:

For Members' statements today

we will hear from the hon. Members for the Districts of Placentia West -

Bellevue – surprise, surprise – Terra Nova, Ferryland, Bonavista and Mount Pearl

- Southlands.

The hon.

the Member for Placentia West - Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BROWNE:

Mr. Speaker, at the risk of sounding repetitive: She's done it again!

From

silver in Sochi, to gold and bronze in Pyeongchang, determined to outdo herself

once again, leaving it all on the ice, Marystown's own Kaetlyn Osmond walked

away – or shall I say, skated away – from the World Figure Skating Championships

in Italy as the first Canadian woman in 45 years to become the reigning World

Champion.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BROWNE:

Mr. Speaker, we are proud of her, of her medals, of her tenacious perseverance,

of her family's deep abiding support, of her rise as a young girl in Marystown

to now a World Champion. But we are also deeply proud of the joie de vivre that

is evident in her every performance – her smile and grace is just as widely

known as her accomplishments. We anxiously await her April homecoming.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all hon. Members to join me in celebrating Marystown's greatest

pride, Newfoundland and Labrador's most decorated and accomplished athlete,

Canada's most iconic Figure Skating Olympic Gold Medallist, and now the World

Figure Skating Champion, Kaetlyn Osmond.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BROWNE:

Mr. Speaker, I am convinced to say: The best is yet to come!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Terra

Nova has to top that.

MR. HOLLOWAY:

Hard to follow that act, Mr.

Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, the Terra Nova District is filled with enthusiastic leaders,

entrepreneurs and long-standing community-based organizations. Today, I rise in

this hon. House to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Clarenville Area

Consumers Co-operative Society Limited.

The

history of the co-op dates back to 1967 when local area resident, Frank Collins,

returned from an inspirational 4-H camp in Pasadena. A year later, Frank's

vision led to the establishment of the co-op's first provisional board.

Today,

the co-op, its board and staff, are known as leaders in the community, giving

generously to support community infrastructure, projects and programs; thus,

adding to the abundance of socially responsible businesses and organizations in

the area.

partnership with the Lion's Club, the co-op provides financial support to

schools, playgrounds, hospitals, sporting groups and other important initiatives

within Clarenville, and throughout the Bonavista and Southwest Arm region.

Mr.

Speaker, Mr. Collin's foresight was spot-on. Frank saw the possibilities that a

co-operative business venture could have on the people of this district.

I ask

all Members to join me in congratulating the Clarenville Area Consumers

Co-operative Society Limited for 50 years of dedication to the people and places

in the Terra Nova District.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I stand in this hon. House today to recognize John and Carol Ann

Devereaux, owners and operators of Edge of the Avalon Inn, on their CBDC Tourism

Business Award of Excellence, presented at the annual Tourism Excellence Awards

Gala held on February 22, 2018.

John and

Carol Ann operate Edge of Avalon in Trepassey, which was previously operated as

Trepassey Motel. The CBDC Tourism Business Award of Excellence recognizes

businesses that have built a reputation in excelling and continuously improving

upon all areas of operation – customer services, human resources and business

results.

Not only

does the business excel in its operations, but they are committed to and playing

an important role in improving the tourism of the Southern Shore in Newfoundland

and Labrador. The Devereauxs, as entrepreneurs, have done incredible work in

building their business by incorporating new rooms to their facility,

introducing a new chef, arranging tours to notable attractions around town and

providing tours at the UNESCO site in Portugal Cove South.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all Members in this House to join me in congratulating the Edge

of the Avalon Inn on CBDC Tourism Business Award of Excellence and making a

significant contribution to the tourism and business industry on the Southern

Avalon.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Bonavista.

MR. KING:

Mr. Speaker, preserving

history, culture and heritage is nothing new on the Bonavista Peninsula. Our

region is the place to be with visitors flocking here to experience what we have

to offer.

That is

Anglican Church was deconsecrated and almost demolished. Being the last

group of like-minded individuals, decided they were going to save the structure.

The association's hard work saw the building refurbished and designated as a

heritage site, reopening in 2007.

The

mandate of the centre is the promotion of artistic and cultural education and

the preservation of historic and cultural spaces. It hosts artist residencies,

craft workshops, gallery exhibitions, musical performances, film screenings,

poetry readings and other events.

The

impact that the Arts Centre has on our region hasn't gone unnoticed. Recently,

community category, for their work in preserving the church and using it as a

venue to foster arts and culture in the Trinity Bight.

Please

join me in congratulating the association's board, their volunteers and the

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl - Southlands.

MR. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, it is my

privilege to rise in this hon. House to offer congratulations to a group of

individuals who have made a significant contribution to sport in my community.

Once

again, this year's Mount Pearl Athletic Awards was a tremendous success which

highlighted the achievements and emphasized the important role that sport has

played and continues to play in the development of youth and adults alike within

our great city.

There

were a number of very worthy nominees again this year nominated in five

categories. Congratulations to this year's winners: Coach of the Year, Gerard

Power of Pearlgate Track and Field; Peter Halliday Executive of the Year award

winner, Shane Chafe of the Mount Pearl-Paradise Youth Bowling and the 5-Pin

Bowlers' Association of Newfoundland and Labrador; Female Athlete of the Year,

Erica Hayward and Male Athlete of the Year, Daniel Kelloway, both representing

Pearlgate Track and Field; and Team of the Year, the Dogs Rugby club Senior 'A'

Men's team Goodyear Cup winners.

Mr.

Speaker, I would ask all Members of this hon. House to join me in congratulating

these individuals on this significant accomplishment and wish them all the very

best in their future sporting endeavours.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

After a

week of exciting competition, the 2018 Newfoundland and Labrador Winter Games

concluded on March 18 in Deer Lake. I was fortunate to have an opportunity to

attend some of the events, and it was such a pleasure to watch our province's

young athletes as they strived for the podium.

By all

accounts, this year's Winter Games was a resounding success for the 1,300

athletes, coaches and managers who participated. Their dedication, enthusiasm

and sportsmanship were on full display throughout.

While it

would be impossible to mention all the medal winners here today, I would like to

acknowledge a few special team awards that were presented.

Central

region won the Premier's Cup, which recognizes the region accumulating the

highest number of points, followed with the St. John's North region who won the

highest number of medals. Athletes from the Labrador region received the Sport

Newfoundland and Labrador trophy, for the team showing the most improvement from

one Games to the next. Finally the Lieutenant-Governor's Award, which celebrates

the overall spirit of friendly competition and fair play, went to Team

Indigenous – a great achievement considering this was the first time that

indigenous athletes have competed as a single team at the Newfoundland and

Labrador Games.

Mr.

Speaker, the Newfoundland and Labrador Games is the highest and the largest

multi-sport event for youth in the province, and it has been encouraging

participation in sport and the pursuit of athletic excellence for more than 40

years. Events like these that promote sport, recreation and healthy living are

critical as we work to increase the activity levels of residents of all ages.

At this

time, I would also like to congratulate the Town of Bay Roberts as the host

community for the 2020 Newfoundland and Labrador Summer Games. I know the area

is up to the task.

Mr.

Speaker, I encourage all of our young athletes to set a goal of participating in

the upcoming Newfoundland and Labrador Games. The memories gained and the

friendships made could last a lifetime.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I thank

the Premier for the advance copy of his statement today. We join with government

in congratulating all 1,300 athletes, coaches and managers who participated in

these most recent Games.

I'd also

like to take a moment to express our sincere thanks and appreciation to the

event organizers in Deer Lake. I know from my own experience in 2016 when the

Summer Games were held in Conception Bay South and I volunteered there and had

first-hand – we were able to see how much work has to go into coordinating and

planning and delivering on successful Games, and by all accounts these Games

were successful.

Mr.

Speaker, for some of these athletes, this is the top level they'll compete in.

Just this weekend, I spent some time with Liam Hickey when he had a homecoming

at his home rink in my district, in Paradise, and I could see first-hand how

these athletes are an inspiration to so many other athletes and young people in

our province.

For all

of those who participated in Deer Lake, we wish them congratulations and hope

that the memories will last a lifetime.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the Premier. Congratulations to all athletes and organizers who came together

for the 2018 Winter Games in Deer Lake. As a hockey player myself, I appreciate

the benefits of this event and other initiatives in promoting sport, recreation

and healthy living.

How

exciting to see the creation and success of Team Indigenous, especially given

that supporting indigenous athletes is among the calls to action of the Truth

and Reconciliation Commission. Congratulations to them on winning the

Lieutenant-Governor's award.

I look

forward to the Town of Bay Roberts hosting the 2020 Summer Games and thank all

organizers in advance for all their hard work in making this possible.

Bravo!

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

The hon.

the Minister Responsible for the Public Procurement Agency.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, recognizing the

important role that business and industry play in driving our province's

economy, our government introduced a new

Public Procurement Act in November 2016. As of March 24, most of the act is

now in effect, while provisions on supplier debriefs, complaints and supplier

performance come into effect on September 24.

The

Procurement Act modernizes the purchasing process, and gives public bodies more

flexibility in choosing the procurement method that will achieve the greatest

value by removing barriers to requests for proposals and other alternatives to

public tenders. It includes measures that will help local companies play a

larger role in the growth and development of all regions of the province.

Local

suppliers will also realize benefits through increased opportunities to bid on

government services that were once excluded from procurement legislation. The

new framework increases transparency and allows public bodies more opportunity

to hold suppliers accountable for their performance. An increase in thresholds

provides greater opportunity for acquisitions to be sourced locally within

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr.

Speaker, some key elements of the former

Public Tender Act have been moved to the new regulations, which are online,

so government can be creative and flexible in its procurement approach. The new

act and regulations promote consistency and coordination across the public

sector and will help reduce regulatory burden.

The

Procurement Act is an example of how our government is listening and responding

to the needs of business, industry and social enterprise in our province. We

will continue to work with stakeholders to develop policy within the current

framework.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I want

to thank the minister for an advance copy of her statement. Mr. Speaker, we are

also pleased to see the Procurement Act and most of it has finally come into

effect. As those in this House know, this legislation was actually passed in

December 2016.

Public

tendering and the procurement process is an important one. It's important to

government by means of achieving best values. It's also very important to many

local businesses across the province who participate in the process.

I know

many of these people in particular have been waiting anxiously for this act to

finally take effect. I understand the regulations are now finally online, but it

will be interesting to see exactly what government means when it says they'll be

creative and flexible.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I, too,

thank the minister for the advance copy of her statement. I am pleased, of

course, that the new Public Procurement

Act will give more opportunities to local businesses, but I am disappointed

that the new act doesn't have provisions for crediting gender equity, diversity

and social impact, which other jurisdictions are incorporating into their acts

and which have become best practices. We have a missed opportunity.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

The hon.

the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Epilepsy

affects over 10,000 people in this province, more than 300,000 Canadians, and

approximately 50 million people around the world.

The

provincial government gladly joins with schools, businesses and individuals in

communities throughout the province today, as well as across Canada and in other

countries, to recognize Purple Day in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Cassidy

Megan was the driving force behind this event. She organized the first Purple

Day at her elementary school in Nova Scotia in 2008.

Since

then, it has grown into an international initiative dedicated to increasing

awareness and understanding about epilepsy worldwide. Last year, people from

dozens of countries on all continents participated, even folk in Antarctica.

Mr.

Speaker, I encourage all Members of the House of Assembly to check out

activities happening in your communities and to support those living with

epilepsy today and every day.

Thank

you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Conception Bay East - Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for an advance copy of his statement. The Official Opposition joins

with government, schools and communities across the province and the country to

recognize Purple Day. As the minister outlined, epilepsy affects over 10,000

people in our province alone. It's very likely we all know a family member or

friend who copes with epilepsy, so it's important that we use every opportunity,

like today, to recognize its impact.

Purple

Day wouldn't exist if it were not for the actions of a young lady from Nova

Scotia. That really shows all of us how one single person, young or old, can

make an impact. Let this be a lesson to us all.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I too

thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I'm delighted to stand

with my colleagues today and offer congratulations to all those organizing

Purple Day events, and I too encourage everyone to attend activities in their

communities.

We must

stand in support and act in support with those who live with this disease.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Well,

Mr. Speaker, it's been almost two weeks since we learned the devastating tariffs

were hitting Corner Brook mill and also the forest industry in our province.

So I ask

the Premier for an update: Can you tell us what's transpired over the last 10

days?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

doubt, as the Leader of the Opposition mentioned, they were devastating tariffs.

The highest imposed on any newsprint company in Canada.

Mr.

Speaker, there's been a considerable amount of work that's been done in the last

two weeks. As a matter of fact, just a few days ago we had a meeting with

Minister Carr, the federal minister, who's made a commitment to stand by

Newfoundland and Labrador and to fight with us every step along the way. We've

had many meetings with Kruger, almost on a daily basis right now. And at 3:30

this afternoon again we'll be speaking with the ambassador in looking at

exploring what options we have as a province as we continue to push back on

these unwarranted tariffs.

Mr.

Speaker, there's a lot of work to be done. We have our own staff, Kruger, the

federal government. All hands are on deck on this particular file.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, 500 jobs directly at the mill; 5,000 jobs, direct and indirect jobs, in

our forestry in our province.

I ask

the Premier: Premier, have you spoken directly yet with the prime minister about

what actions the federal government will take? This is a very serious matter.

Have you had a direct conversation with the prime minister?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just

remind the Member opposite again, it seems to me that he's either deliberately

ignoring or forgetting the conversation the times I've stood in this House. As a

matter of fact, it was just a few Fridays ago I was on a conference call with

the prime minister when this issue was raised.

I just

remind the Leader of the Opposition, that conversation has been had. Since that,

we spoke to the federal Minister of Natural Resources, Minister Carr, the

ambassador is now involved, Kruger is involved. Mr. Speaker, I will tell you

that this group today have asked more questions about Kruger, as Kruger as an

entity in this province, than they have in the last two years.

Mr.

Speaker, let's remind the people in this province, this is the same group that

watched closures of the mill in Stephenville, closures of the mill in Grand

Falls-Windsor.

Mr.

Speaker, I will guarantee you that this government is doing everything it can to

protect the forestry industry in this province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Leader of the Official

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So the

answer to that is the Premier has not spoken to the prime minister since these

tariffs were (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

That's the bottom line there,

Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask the Premier, last time he talked about having discussions – he

talked about it today, having discussions with the Canadian ambassador. What

about the United States ambassador to Canada or about officials with the United

States Department of Commerce?

Having

discussions with Kruger is a good thing to do and local people, I get all that,

but they're not the ones who made the decision. It's the US government who's

done that. Have you spoken to people in the US government representing

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Mr. Speaker, like a lot of

people in our province, sometimes we get a tendency to talk a bit fast but, then

again, some people are a little slow in listening. I'm not saying who is

responsible for what.

I will

repeat this again, Mr. Speaker – repeat this once again.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER BALL:

I've said it many, many

times: Yes, I have spoken to the prime minister of Canada who happens to be

Justin Trudeau.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER BALL:

Just as a reminder, yes, I

have spoken to the prime minister on this issue. I've also spoken to the federal

Minister Jim Carr. I'm also speaking with the ambassador to see what options we

would have south of the border on a decision that was made by the Department of

Commerce, Mr. Speaker, unwarranted.

Let's

keep in mind that Kruger themselves were never part of this review. It was

imposed on them by an administration south of the border.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Leader of the Official

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is

a pretty serious issue and the Premier sometimes likes to make some personal

comments. Premier, this is a very important issue. It's a very important issue

for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. You're right. You just reinforced my very

comment that it's the government south of the border that's made the decision.

I'll ask

the Premier again, he hasn't spoken to the prime minister since the

announcement; he's already made that clear. Has he been talking to anyone from

the United States government? Has he talked to the United States ambassador to

Canada? Has he talked to the Department of Commerce? Is there anyone in the

United States representing the United States government that he's spoken to on

behalf of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Keep in

mind that this is the individual, the Leader of the Opposition that refused to

actually come and meet. I have to give the Leader of the Third Party – at least

when we talked about bringing each other up to speed, it was the Leader of the

Third Party that agreed to do this. The Leader of the Opposition didn't really

feel like that would be meaningful. I will continue, Mr. Speaker, the work for

the forestry industry and do everything we can.

As we

reach out into the US to see what options we have available to us, even with

other provinces, I would say, Mr. Speaker, with our federal government, it's

important that we have the discussion with the ambassador. That discussion will

begin today at 3:30.

Kruger

and the officials are very much engaged. And I will say this, Mr. Speaker, the

information that's coming from me is that Kruger says they are seeing

unprecedented engagement from a provincial government than they've seen with the

past administration.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Official Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Having

this important action by the US government deserves a lot of face time with

Kruger and the government – it absolutely does. Mr. Speaker, it deserves it

because it's such an important issue, not only to Kruger itself but to thousands

of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

Mr.

Speaker, we have seven MPs in our province representing Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians. I know last week when it was raised in the House of Commons and

the question was asked about Corner Brook, the federal minister in her answer

never even mentioned Corner Brook or Newfoundland and Labrador. She never even

mentioned them, but we do have seven MPs. I know that the Premier spent some

time with MP Hutchings last week.

Have you

had discussions or created a plan with the MPs on how we're going to do this, or

what they're going to do, moving forward, to fight for Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well,

for the first time in a long time it's really nice to have MPs in Ottawa that

are taking our calls. We are engaged with those MPs constantly. They are very

much in tune with the situation related to the tariffs at Kruger, as they are on

all issues impacting Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

This

particular issue, it is an important issue for us. It is the basis of the

forestry industry in our province. I will say to the Leader of the Opposition,

this is a government that is directly involved in these discussions. I will tell

you that I have heard from Joe Kruger himself who says he will be fighting. As a

premier, he said, I like the way you're fighting on our behalf.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER BALL:

Mr. Speaker, there's full

engagement here. I can assure the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and those

connected to the forestry industry, they have our commitment to put our best

efforts on this.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, the Electrical Power Control Act ,

Bill 14, we'll be debating today, does not specify if tariffs charged as noted

in the Electrical Power Control Act

will be used to reduce future power rates.

Could

the Minister of Natural Resources please update us on that?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today,

this afternoon, we will be debating this important act that gives open access,

Mr. Speaker, to Newfoundland and Labrador and interconnects with the North

American grid. It's the first time that we'll be able to do that.

With

regard to the tariffs, of course they are administered and under the review of

the Public Utilities Board. These tariffs will be applied when and if anyone

would like to use the transmission system in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador, and the Public Utilities Board will utilize those tariffs, as they

would require any use of any tariffs that are paid to the province.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Under

the new entity that would be set up, it would be administered – and the tariffs,

for those who want to flow electricity through the transmission, as I said, will

be charged a tariff. But I'm just asking the minister: Because the transmission

would already be paid for by ratepayers, is it her intent to have, or her desire

to have those tariffs be directed to reduce or mitigate rates in Newfoundland

and Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

Member opposite is raising an incredibility important question to the people of

this province. As the people of this province know, Mr. Speaker, because of the

project that we inherited, Muskrat Falls will soon be coming on stream and we

are very concerned about rates. That's why this government has worked very

diligently to manage rates, and will continue to do so, and to mitigate the

costs associated with Muskrat Falls.

The

Public Utilities Board, obviously, has a role to play in the tariffs that are

applied to the transmission lines, Mr. Speaker. I'm sure that as the Public

Utilities Board takes into account the monies that are paid into the system,

they will look at what we can do to help offset those horrendous costs of

Muskrat Falls.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, the media has reported that tomorrow's budget will include an

announcement on the splitting of Nalcor assets.

I ask

the Minister of Natural Resources: Are the board of directors being engaged in

the decision to break apart the Nalcor corporation?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the

Member opposite knows, and indeed the people of the province know, the

Department of Natural Resources, along with the industry council, has worked

very diligently over the last year to develop a plan to really promote

responsible development in our offshore oil and gas industry, Mr. Speaker.

We have

laid out a very, very good plan that over 150 people have been involved with,

including Nalcor has been involved. Nalcor Oil and Gas has been involved in the

development of the plan.

Mr.

Speaker, Advance 2030 really sets out good targets. We want to have 100

different exploration wells over the next dozen years. We want to double

production. We're looking to have 7,500 people involved directly with the

industry. It's a very aggressive plan, and we're looking forward to making sure

the implementation bears those results.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, the minister mentioned the industry advisory council. So I ask the

minister: Has that council recommended the breaking up of assets of Nalcor?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Mr. Speaker, the industry

advisory council has provided incredible advice to me as minister and to

government, and, indeed, to the entire industry. They've worked very diligently

over the last year to develop what I consider an incredible plan for growth.

Indeed, the industry, all the different stakeholders, labour, education, supply

and services, the operators themselves have all embraced the plan for growth in

our offshore oil and gas industry. And if the Member opposite has not had a

chance to review the ambitious goals that we have and the way we're going to

make this happen, I'll be happy to table a copy of that incredibly important

plan.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, a very straightforward question was whether the industrial advisory

council had recommended the breakup of assets at Nalcor.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask the Minister of Natural Resources: The Muskrat Falls generation

and transmissions assets are they being split for a quick sale? As we've talking

now for the past two years with very little details here in the House of

Assembly?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Mr. Speaker, there have been,

I don't know, somewhere in the vicinity of 70 questions by the Member opposite

about what role Quebec has, what secret meetings we may have.

Let me

tell the House again. We have been very upfront in our discussions with Quebec.

We've had great discussions with them about mining. We have had national

discussions about the Canadian Free Trade Agreement, Mr. Speaker. Those are the

things that we have been speaking to Quebec about.

With

regard to Muskrat Falls, as the Premier has said, I don't know of anyone who

would want to buy it at the exorbitant cost it's taken us because of the

mismanagement by the Members opposite.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

answers again.

Mr.

Speaker, I'll ask the minister this: Are there any plans to sell equity stakes

of White Rose, Hebron or Hibernia's Southern Extension as part of this report

today to break up for the assets of Nalcor?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Mr. Speaker, I'm a pretty

forthright person. I lay out good answers to my questions. Because they don't

fit the narrative that the Member opposite wants to hear, doesn't mean I'm not

giving good responses to his questions.

Mr.

Speaker, I am going to table this document, it's Advance 2030. It clearly lays

out the direction that we're taking oil and gas into the future. We want to

drive exploration; we want to expand the opportunity that we have in our

offshore very responsibly. It has the endorsement of operators, offshore supply

and service industry, labour, education. Everyone has come together to build on

the opportunity that we have in offshore Newfoundland and Labrador. I invite the

Member opposite to join us in this.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, we're on the cusp of owning a piece of Upper Churchill and whether 50

years of a terrible Liberal Upper Churchill deal that Quebec has gotten –

AN HON. MEMBER:

It's better than Muskrat

Falls.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

No, actually, it's not.

Quebec has gotten –

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Quebec has gotten $25 billion

since it was signed.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. HUTCHINGS:

In addition, $92 billion has

been paid to Quebec in equalization over and above that.

I ask

the minister: Do you really think this is the time to sell public assets to

Quebec?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I love

the comparison between Muskrat Falls and the Upper Churchill deal.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask the Members, I ask all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians: How

often have they had to dip into their own pockets to pay for the Upper Churchill

deal? How often have they had to?

Yes,

there were missed opportunities, Mr. Speaker, but I will guarantee you this, it

hasn't cost Newfoundlanders and Labradorians nearly $5 billion.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for the

District of Mount Pearl North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. LESTER:

Mr. Speaker, just a few

months ago news broke that the planned $185 million biofuel facility in Botwood,

with the promise of hundreds of jobs, was dead after the company complained of

this government's unorganized, chaotic processes. Now, just days ago, we learned

that the most recent proposal has met a similar failed fate.

I ask

the minister: Why can't you close a deal?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. BYRNE:

Well, Mr. Speaker, I think

the phantom ghost – the ghost opportunity of the Fisheries Fund that this

Opposition here keep on wanting to talk about, we can close a deal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BYRNE:

We can close a $100 million

deal.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, what I would like to ask the hon. Member, since he is very much aware

and he's so passionate about this – I'd like to know why we want to close a deal

when Newgreen voluntarily removed their request for fibre from Central

Newfoundland. What I'd also like to know is why would we close a deal when Bulk

Logistics did not accept, themselves, an offer to generate a memorandum of

understanding for 60,000 cubic metres of fibre.

Yes, we

can close a deal; we just need a willing participant to be able to do so, Mr.

Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

So deal number one, gone;

deal number two, gone. Why was the government only willing to offer the 60,000

cubic metres of timber rights, about 20 per cent of the total resource to this

company, when they claimed they needed much more to be viable?

What is

the government's plan with the remaining 80 per cent of the timber stand?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. BYRNE:

Fisheries fund: gone;

Roddickton pellet plant: gone. Where did that go, Mr. Speaker? I'd like to know.

Eleven million dollars: gone.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, what we did – I'm delighted the hon. Member stood on his feet and asked

this question because what it does is it provides me a wonderful opportunity to

highlight something our forest industry is so, so pleased about. On Friday, the

Premier and I were able to announce that we are unlocking opportunities by

unlocking fibre.

Newfoundland and Labrador, we have tremendous fibre resources which have been

locked up, which have not been able to be utilized because they have been under

the control of permit holders who have not been using them. We unlocked those

opportunities, Mr. Speaker, and what a great day it was for the forest industry

of Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

Mr. Speaker, a forest is a

maturing resource that will diminish if it is not harvested. It's not like oil

beneath our ocean; we need to make use of this resource now for jobs and the

economy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. LESTER:

Mr. Speaker, the current

government promised to increase forestry production by 20 per cent from 2015 to

2020. We're into year three of their process.

To date,

how much of that production has been achieved? Can the minister give a number?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. BYRNE:

Mr. Speaker, I can give a number of 244 commercial permit holders in

Newfoundland and Labrador that were extremely excited, that were very, very

pleased to hear that we are unlocking opportunities by unlocking fibre.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, what I'm also very, very pleased to note – the hon. Member has stood on

his feet and said we need to do more. We need to ensure that fibre gets

utilized. I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the hon. Member's endorsement for

forestry activities, not only in area 11 and 12 but in area 6 as well, and in

all the areas.

I heard

responses and voices this morning – there was a Member who is very close to the

Opposition by the name of Sandy Collins who questioned the practices of 244

commercial permit holders in Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. LESTER:

Mr. Speaker, I ask the

minister: Does the current government's plan to increase forestry production

include opening up the Abitibi timber stand to local harvesters, or will it be

reserved to attract new business to the area?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Fisheries and Land Resources.

MR. BYRNE:

Mr. Speaker, the Abitibi reserves are definitely open for business. In fact, the

Premier and I took Friday and we announced a new allocation policy. Not only

will we be reviewing commercial cutting permits that were issued on an annual

basis, but we'd have timber sale agreements. And, to provide increased security,

we'd offer five-year commercial forestry permits.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, this was very, very well received by our forest industry, but one thing

I will say to you, we are open for business, we encourage new participants, new

entrants, but we also respect incumbent participants, incumbent commercial

permit holders.

Now, Mr.

Speaker, what I'd like to say is that we offered 60,000 cubic metres to Bulk

Logistics. They said it wasn't enough. Does he agree?

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East - Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

recently learned the only cardiologist in Western Newfoundland had quit. While

the department will say another resignation is completely coincidentally, most

believe something else.

Can the

minister tell us why this doctor chose to quit all of a sudden? Was it simply a

case of the doctor being overworked and under resourced?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much for the

question, Mr. Speaker.

This

gentleman was on a planned vacation and locum coverage had been arranged for the

early part of the summer while he was still away. He simply wrote in and said he

would not be returning, except to close his practice, because of family reasons.

That's the only comment I can make about that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East - Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Considering this doctor was the only cardiologist in Western Newfoundland, how

can the minister suggest there will be no or limited impact on patients on the

West Coast?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I would

take issue with some of the

preamble to the Member's question opposite. There

are other resources, clinical and non-clinical, that are willing and able to

fill the gap until a newly recruited physician will take up post later on in the

year, Mr. Speaker. So there will be no impact to clinical services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East - Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you. Mr. Speaker.

We're

hearing a whole different story from people who have to avail of the cardiology

services on the West Coast and we'll see how that, unfortunately, unwinds over

the next number of weeks.

Thursday morning, a picture of an unidentified, elderly woman stretched across

three chairs in the waiting room of the Health Sciences Complex surfaced on

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

Indeed,

that was a rather distressing picture. Eastern Health management have reached

out to the family of that individual and also to others who were in the waiting

room at the time to explain the situation and to apologize, and they will manage

that on a go-forward basis.

As a

background to that, Mr. Speaker, I have to point out that over the last two

weeks the emergency rooms across this province have been swamped with an issue

around the flu season, essentially. It is simply the worst peak of flu cases.

Despite our best vaccination year, it is the worst year for five years. This is

due to a problem with one of the elements in the vaccine as much as anything

else. We're working to do what we can to resource them better.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Member for Conception Bay

East - Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask

the minister: Can he reassure us that there will be mechanisms put in play to

ensure that situations like this do not occur again and that elderly people are

not left for hours lying on chairs when they need critical health care?

MR. SPEAKER:

The Minister of Health and

Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I've

spoken with both staff in the department and the CEO of Eastern Health quite

recently. Measures have been taken to look at what resources are necessary for

emergency departments. We have been at overcapacity as high as 25 per cent in

some areas of the province. We're working to put in place further measures above

our existing overcapacity measures.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Member for Conception Bay

East - Bell Island for a very quick question, please.

MR. BRAZIL:

I ask the minister

responsible for seniors: Has the Seniors' Advocate reached out to the family in

this situation?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. DEMPSTER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the Member for the question. The Member knows, before he asked, that I can't get

into specific situations.

The

Seniors' Advocate, first of all, Mr. Speaker, the first one in our province –

I'm happy to say we followed through on our platform there – is independent of

this government and is a Statutory Office of the House. She doesn't report to us

on her day-to-day operations, but I have no doubt that my colleague is dealing

with this and making improvements where we can.

It's

unfortunate what happened, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

pre-budget leak says government plans to break up Nalcor Energy in order to

separate the Muskrat Falls Project from the oil and gas line of business.

I ask

the Premier: Does he plan to make Muskrat Falls Project a stand-alone Crown

corporation as well?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Mr. Speaker, where this all

began is really around the budget, which we announced a few weeks ago would be

on March 27, which is tomorrow. It goes back much further than that.

When you

look at the work that's been done with the mandate letter, the minister setting

up an oil and gas council, Advance 2030, public consultations – Mr. Speaker, we

even gave for the first time, I believe, an opportunity for both official

parties to actually participate in budget consultations in this House right here

and no one showed up I would say. Consultations continued after that with a lot

of work that's been done with staff.

Tomorrow

morning at 10 a.m., both Opposition Parties will be given copies of our budget

and the Budget Speech, and at 2 p.m. tomorrow, the Minister of Finance will rise

and deliver the budget, Mr. Speaker. So we'll be speaking more on this tomorrow.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Third Party.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I remind

the Premier, that every time we stand here in this House we are showing our

concern for the budget and everything else this government does.

Mr.

Speaker, the separating of the financially disastrous Muskrat Falls Project from

the lucrative oil and gas line of business is probably not just for optics.

I ask

the Premier: Is this the first step in preparing to sell and privatize the

Muskrat Falls Project?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER BALL:

Mr. Speaker, whatever

decisions we make tomorrow will be about – and which will be released tomorrow –

building for the future of our province, investing in Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians and taking on, which we did back in 2015, I would say that as you

would say, as many others, it was a ship that was sinking, and we have put this

province on a stable course. We have made a significant amount of decisions

based on the advice that we've been given.

Mr.

Speaker, tomorrow is budget day at 2 p.m. The Members opposite will have a copy

of the budget at 10 a.m. tomorrow. They will then be prepared to answer as many

questions as they want once that opportunity comes within Question Period and

through all the other avenues that they would have coming after tomorrow.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, the Labour

Relations Board twice found DJ Composites in Gander guilty of violating our

province's Labour Relations Act and

bargaining in bad faith. This American union-busting aerospace company has

locked out local workers for 15 months. They are trying to break the back of our

workers and bust their union. Our labour laws are not protecting our workers

from multinational companies who violate their rights. The workers and their

families are suffering.

I ask

the minister: Will he bring the Labour

Relations Act before this House to implement recommendation 5 of the 2010

Industrial Inquiry Commission that calls for imposing a binding arbitration

process when a prolonged strike or lockout has been ineffective in bringing

about a resolution?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Advanced Education, Skills and Labour.

MR. HAWKINS:

I hope I have an opportunity

to use as much time in the

preamble for the answer.

Mr.

Speaker, we are very, very concerned about any dispute. As you know, Mr.

Speaker, from government's perspective, we do have a Labour Relations Board in

place to handle. We provided conciliation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. HAWKINS:

As a matter of fact, Mr.

Speaker, in addition to the conciliation that we used, we also put in place an

independent mediator to try and solve the situation.

Mr.

Speaker, as I've said many times before, a negotiated settlement is the best

settlement, and we will certainly make our services available and will continue

to provide services until a settlement is reached.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The Member for St. John's

Centre for a very quick question, please.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We know

that the Commission has recommended number 5.

Mr.

Speaker, February 9, regional director for Unifor wrote the Premier asking him

to stand up for the rights of these locked out workers who are currently in the

middle of a second winter on the picket line.

I ask

the Premier: Will he intervene and stand up to this company who is violating our

workers' rights and will he meet with their union as they requested in their

letter?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Advanced Education, Skills and Labour for a quick response, please.

MR. HAWKINS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Certainly, we, as a government, have met with both the union and the employer on

an occasion back last year to try and come to some settlement.

Mr.

Speaker, it's easy for the Members opposite to get up and make comments like

that, realizing, as a government, the Labour Relation Board is a quasi-judicial

board. They make the decisions. Government is there to represent a balance

between employers and employees, and that's what we continue to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The time for Oral Questions

has ended.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling

of Documents.

Tabling of

Documents

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Mr. Speaker, clearly we had a

lot of questions today about Advance 2030 .

I would like to table the report so the Opposition could review it and

understand how we're going to drive exploration and development of our offshore

oil and gas industry.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further tabling of documents?

The hon.

the Minister of Service NL.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, in accordance

with the requirements of

section 10 of the

Architects Act , I am pleased to table the eighth annual report of the

Architects Licensing Board of Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further tabling of documents?

accordance with

section 19(5)(

a) of the

House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act , I hereby

table the minutes of the House of Assembly Management Commission that was held

on February 1, 2018.

Notices

of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

appreciate the opportunity to rise today.

I give

notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The

Status Of Women Advisory Council Act, Bill 4.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

The hon.

the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MR. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give

notice that I will move the following motion, that this House approve in general

the budgetary policy of government, or the Budget Speech.

Further,

I give notice that I will move that this House resolve itself into a Committee

of the Whole on Supply to consider a resolution for the granting of Supply to

Her Majesty, Bill 3.

Further,

I give notice that I will move that this House resolve itself into a Committee

of the Whole to consider a resolution relating to the advancing or guaranteeing

of certain loans made under the Loan and

Guarantee Act, 1957 , Bill 6.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

The hon.

the Minister of Service NL.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, I give notice

that I will ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Pension

Benefits Act, 1997. (Bill 5)

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

The hon.

the Member for Windsor Lake.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Harbour Grace - Port de Grave,

that:

WHEREAS

sexual harassment is a common occurrence in the workplace throughout

Newfoundland and Labrador; and

WHEREAS

women of the province and all people deserve to work in a safe environment free

of harassment and sexual harassment; and

WHEREAS

three pieces of legislation governing safety in the workplace in Newfoundland

and Labrador, the Labour Relations Act ,

the Labour Standards Act , and

the Occupational Health and Safety Act

govern safety in the workplace; and

WHEREAS

Newfoundland and Labrador legislation currently does not reflect societal

expectations of harassment free workplaces.

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House supports the newly strengthened

and modernized workplace harassment policy introduced by the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador and urges the government to show continued leadership

by making legislative changes to these or other pieces of legislation to ensure

women and others are protected in all workplaces in Newfoundland and Labrador

from harassment and sexual harassment.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant

to Standing Order 63(3), the private Member's resolution entered by the Member

is the one that shall be debated on Wednesday.

Further,

I give notice pursuant to Standing Order 8(8) that this House adjourn at 5 p.m.

Wednesday, March 28, 2018, until Monday, April 16, 2018.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

Answers

to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

Indian Meal Line and the Bauline Line are maintained by the Department of

Transportation and Works. These roads are very narrow shouldered, particularly

for pedestrian traffic. Excessive speed is an issue on these roads.

We, the

undersigned, call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to implement traffic-calming measures, such as speed

bumps and electronic signage to reduce speeds and ensure the safety of the

residents.

Mr.

Speaker, I had over 300 names on petitions that were presented to me about these

two roads in my district. I do have to thank the Minister of Transportation; we

did have a meeting with him, with the mayor of Torbay and a couple of residents

that were on that petition.

This

happens on a lot of roads in the province, especially on the Northeast Avalon,

it seems like, with most of the development. One time the Indian Meal Line was

fairly a road that went between Torbay and Portugal Cove Road. Right now, there

are probably about 1,000 to 1,500 people living on that particular road.

It's a

very serious thing when you look at the traffic that's on that road. There are

dump trucks; there are all kinds of different equipment. I'd say in the last 10,

15 years there is probably an increase of 300 or 400 per cent in the traffic

volume on that road.

It is a

provincial road. I call on government to give the town permission, which we have

discussed already, to be able to put these calming – if they're not going to do

it, let the Town of Torbay or towns in this province to be able to go and be

able to put the things in.

I notice

myself sometimes when you see these new signs that you'll see along the shoulder

of the roads where it actually lights up and tells your speed. I know myself and

I'll always look down to see how fast I'm going to make sure that, okay, that

sign is right, or to slow down or whatever. They're used now in school zones, I

know in my district.

I really

thank the minister for meeting with the group, but now we need a little bit of

action to make sure that provincial roads, no matter where there are, if there

are narrow shoulders and it's very dangerous for pedestrians that we put some

things in effect so the calming can slow down speeds so nobody gets hurt or

killed.

Thank

you very much.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Transportation and Works for a response, please.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I thank

the hon. Member for the petition. Like the hon. Member did allude to, we did

meet with the town back some time ago and had a very constructive conversation

about options that may be available.

I can

assure the Member opposite, we're more than willing to sit down and talk to

municipalities throughout the province. If there's a way that we can work

together with municipalities to implement things – it has to be within the

Transportation Association of Canada guidelines but if there's something that

the town is interested in doing that we can work with them on, that's something

that we're more than willing to do, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I

thank the hon. Member for the petition.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further petitions?

The hon.

the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the

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

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

policing is vital to the protection of services of our province's communities;

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

of Assembly to urge government to increase the presence of law enforcement in

Conception Bay South area.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, this is a continuation of many petitions I presented. I present them on

occasion; I'm trying to get them all on the record because they deserve to be

put in there. It's a very important issue to the residents of my district that I

represent, policing in general.

fairness, I've spoken to the minister on this, I've spoken to the RNC police

chief and the town has been involved. It's been great conversations but I still

feel until something actually happens, it's important for me to keep this on the

radar. It is of importance but in fairness it's not a matter of – it's more

about presenting and keeping people's concerns alive because it is a big issue

in the second largest municipality in the province where people don't feel safe.

I've

spoken about this many times publicly and in here. Residents of CBS do have

concerns about their safety. Like I said, I've written the minister and the

police chief. We have had great discussions but I feel it's important for me, as

Member representing that area, to keep this alive and well, present people's

concerns as I have this petition here and I presented others.

I want

to ask government and the minister to keep it on the radar. It's very important

to the residents of Conception Bay South to have a police presence, both office

and officers on the ground, because people don't feel safe. I think it's

incumbent upon government and us as a House to urge that people's safety be

first and foremost.

Thank

you very much.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Justice and Public Safety for a response.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just

want to sort of stand here today to respond to the Member's petition and to

reiterate much of what he said, that I agree with what the Member is saying, he

has a duty to his community to put their concerns forward and to acknowledge the

fact that we have had several discussions on this. The Member opposite has met

with the RNC; I believe, in fact, been speaking to the chief who has been doing

a fantastic job.

There's

not a Member in this House that doesn't or hasn't had conversations with their

community on policing presence. It's something that we all desire. I've always

said that I haven't had a conversation with a community yet where they've said

we have enough police; we have too many police. In fact, we would love to have

an increased police presence everywhere.

The

Member opposite represents a growing community, so at this point I would just

state that again I welcome his petition. In fact, we need to continue these

conversations. That's the main point. If there was no conversation going on, we

may have an issue.

encourage the Member to keep in contact with the RNC who are the best people to

discuss this with. I'll certainly do everything I can to encourage that

communication to make sure that we have meetings so that all citizens of this

province and Conception Bay South feel safe in their homes.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further petitions?

The hon.

the Member for Conception Bay East - Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the

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

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

opioid addiction is a very serious problem affecting many individuals and

families in our province, and the Bell Island area is no exception; and

WHEREAS

the effects of these problems have implications that negatively impact many

people, old and young; and

WHEREAS

support and treatment programs have been proven to break the cycle of addiction

and have helped many into recovery;

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

government and the House of Assembly to urge government to establish a

Suboxone-methadone treatment plan for Bell Island, which would include a drug

addictions counsellor at the hospital and a drug awareness program in the local

schools.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Well,

Mr. Speaker, we know and we've debated and discussed it and we've supported from

all sides around addressing the issues of opioids in this province. It's

unfortunate that in a small community like Bell Island – and maybe it's its

isolation, maybe it's going from a larger community to a smaller, maybe it's its

geographic location to a bigger urban area, but for whatever reason the opioids

addictions and the opioids crisis has exploded in that community.

But more

importantly, and the positive part here, is that the community has come together

to try to address this. The community has established organizations. We have one

great organization called Unity in Our Community, which brings together all the

professionals, the parents, concerned citizens, those who themselves are dealing

with opioid addictions, those who've gone through it and can serve as the role

models and support mechanism, have all come together to try to address how we

deal with this, how do we give people an opportunity to heal again and to get

control of their lives, and obviously get control of their family's lives and

their community's live. But to do that we need supports. While you might say

we're close to St. John's and we all know issues around ferry services and we

all know around Mother Nature and the seas itself, the issue is we need

home-grown supports. And we have a process here in government and in Opposition

that we all agreed we need to tackle this.

In a

community such as Bell Island we have a mechanism in place, we have the law

enforcement people who want to support it, we have the professionals who want to

support it, but we need some additional supports. What's being asked here now is

to come up with a plan that deals with how we would provide Suboxone and

methadone treatment on Bell Island, have counsellors in play so that the

supports are there for the families, they're there for those who have opioid

dependencies, they're there for the community as a whole, but they're also there

for preventative measures.

So, Mr.

Speaker, I'll get to present this again, and I look forward to discussing this

with the Minister of Health.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further petitions?

The hon.

the Government House Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I call

Orders of the Day.

MR. SPEAKER:

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I call from the

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

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I moved,

seconded by the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women, that Bill 1, An

Act To Amend The Family Violence Protection Act, be now read a third time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

the said bill be now read a third time.

Is it

the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

All

those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

This

motion is carried.

CLERK (Barnes):

A bill,

An Act To Amend The

Family Violence Protection Act. (Bill 1)

MR.

SPEAKER: This bill

has now been read a third time and it is ordered that the bill do pass and its

title be as on the Order Paper.

motion, a bill, “An Act To Amend The Family Violence Protection Act,” read a

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

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I call Order 3,

second reading of Bill 2.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded

by the Member for Labrador West, that Bill 2,

An Act To Amend The Electrical

Power Control Act, 1994 And The Public Utilities Act, be now a second time.

MR. SPEAKER:

It is moved and seconded that

Bill 2,

An Act To Amend The Electrical Power Control Act, 1994 And The Public

Utilities Act, be now read a second time.

Motion,

second reading of a bill, “An Act To Amend The Electrical Power Control Act,

1994 And The Public Utilities Act.” (Bill 2)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Natural Resources.

MS. COADY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a

bit of a back issue today, so I'm going to be like Winston Churchill and lean

forward on the desk. So forgive my posture. My mother would not be pleased, not

to see me standing very tall today but my back, unfortunately, is causing some

issues, but I will endeavour to get through the introduction of this bill and

advise people in this House and in the province what this whole bill is

concerning.

Mr.

Speaker, today, we are giving second reading in the House of Assembly regarding

a bill to amend the Electrical Power

Control Act, 1994 and the Public

Utilities Act . These amendments are to adopt an open access transmission

framework for the province's high-voltage electricity transmission system.

Basically, it's to ensure that we have open access across our borders; across

our border into Nova Scotia, across our border into Quebec, across our border

into the United States to have open access for our transmission system.

Over the

next several minutes I will explain why this legislation is required. In

essence, it is to allow for interconnection with the North American grid. For

the first time ever, Newfoundland and Labrador will have interconnection with

the North American grid. It's to establish an independent system operator and

Open Access Same-Time Information System, or OASIS, and establish PUB oversight

process.

An open

access transmission framework is necessary as the province becomes fully

connected, fully interconnected with the North American grid. The Island portion

of the province will be connected to Labrador via the Labrador-Island Link and

in Nova Scotia via the Maritime Link. An open access transmission regime is an

important component of broadening participation in both import and export

electricity markets.

With

these new transmission connections, Newfoundland and Labrador will have the

ability to transmit power directly to the Maritimes and beyond, including

northeast United States. Access to these markets can provide additional options

for rate management through export sales and off-Island purchases.

The

Newfoundland and Labrador system operator division of Newfoundland and Labrador

Hydro will be designated as a system operator and will be responsible for

providing reliable operation of the province's high-voltage transmission system;

an open, non-discriminatory and non-preferential access to service on the

system. It will also be responsible for providing same-time information in

respect to the system. Mr. Speaker, that really does speak to the principles of

open access; non-discriminatory, non-preferential, open access and same time

information.

There

are also requirements to provide timely and open access to transmission

information on the Open Access Same-Time Information System, or OASIS. The

Public Utilities Board will have independent regulatory oversite. I will repeat

that again for those listening. The Public Utilities Board will have independent

regulatory oversite of the open access transmission regime and will have a

process for resolving transmission system participant concerns.

The

province's open access transmission framework is consistent with the principles

of open transmission access adopted by the US Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, most often referred to as FERC, and enables Newfoundland and

Labrador to satisfy requirements regarding transmission access and electricity

market participation, including provisions of the Canadian Free Trade Agreement.

To date,

Newfoundland and Labrador's electricity system has been largely isolated from

the North American grid which has limited our participation in North American

electricity markets. Completion of the Labrador Transmission Assets and the

Labrador-Island Link will connect the Island to the Labrador electric system and

the Maritime Link connects the Island to Nova Scotia. Collectively, this will

create an electricity loop or circuit enabling the transfer of electricity from

Nova Scotia to Quebec via Newfoundland and Labrador.

This

interconnection is something we must capitalize on as another tool to help

manage the effects of the Muskrat Falls Project on the ratepayers and taxpayers

of Newfoundland and Labrador. This interconnection will present us with new

opportunities as well as responsibilities for trading electricity.

Fundamentally, we must be fully prepared to offer neighbouring jurisdictions

access to our transmission system that reciprocates the access they provide to

us.

Since

Nalcor has negotiated transmission rights through Quebec and the Maritimes, we

must ensure we can offer the reciprocal rights in this province. Without

providing this sort of open access to our transmission system, we would risk our

ability to trade electricity in the manner that gives us access to as many

customers as possible. More customers mean a stronger negotiating position to

maximize export revenue to the benefit of the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

When our

government inherited the Muskrat Falls Project, we understood that managing rate

impacts on the people of the province would require, in addition to effective

cost control, a diligent focus on creating new opportunities to trade

electricity. Early in our mandate, we recognized that doing as much as possible

to gain access to electricity markets would be vital.

This is

why we leveraged the negotiations for the Canadian Free Trade Agreement

to create, for the first time in the history of Canada, an intergovernmental

mechanism to enable enhanced interprovincial electricity trade through creating

rules on open access transmission. During that process, we also recognized that

we do not only want to trade electricity with other Canadian jurisdictions, we

want to ensure that when the time came we were positioned to undertake enhanced

electricity trade with the United States jurisdictions as well.

This is

why we proposed a model for the Canadian Free Trade Agreement that draws substantially from the model used in the United States

where its Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is often referred to – and

I said this before – FERC, imposes mandatory open access requirements on all US

transmission owners. The legislation before the House offers an open access

regime that is CFTA and FERC compliant, and creates a regime that allows

Newfoundland and Labrador to trade electricity with any jurisdiction on the

North American grid.

Upon

connecting to the North American grid, Newfoundland and Labrador will be

expected to have in place an open access transition regime that provides for

open, non-discriminatory and non-preferential access to service on the

high-voltage transmission system in Newfoundland and Labrador. That is what this

bill and these changes will accomplish.

Specifically, it will include provisions for establishing a Newfoundland and

Labrador system operator and requirements to provide timely and open access to

transmission information on the Open Access Same-Time Information System, or

OASIS. This bill ensures that these elements will be regulated by the Board of

Commissioners of Public Utilities which will also serve as the adjudicator for

open access transmission-related complaints in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Capturing open access principles and requirements in legislations required a

number of amendments to the Electrical

Power Control Act and the Public

Utilities Act , and new regulations under both acts. These amendments and

regulations will ensure that transmission customers, transmission owners and the

system operator are bound by these principles and requirements and provides the

Public Utilities Board with regulatory oversight, as I've mentioned, of the open

access transmission regime.

These

two acts together, with the Electrical

Power Control Act providing overarching, high-level rules and principles

around the operation of the Newfoundland and Labrador electricity sector, and

the Public Utilities Act prescribing

an oversight mechanism for the operation and regulation of the utility sector

generally and, in particular, the electricity sector.

addition to those amendments strictly related to open access, this bill contains

a number of amendments that will enhance the overall readability and clarity of

both the Electrical Power Control Act

and the Public Utilities Act .

I will

now present the specifics of the bill, outlining how the proposed amendments

relate to the requirement to establish an open access transmission regime in

Newfoundland and Labrador. Sections 1 through 6 of the bill capture proposed

amendments to the Electrical Power Control

Act and

section 7 through 27 of the bill capture proposed amendments to the

Public Utilities Act .

Section 1 presents amendments to the definition

section of

the Electrical Power Control Act ,

adding key terms related to open access transmission, required for clear

interpretation of the legislation. Accordingly, it is necessary to define these

terms, as they are used throughout the act. Notably, this

section of the

Electrical Power Control Act defines

the transmission tariff, which is the compilation of documents that outlines

transmission rates and the methodology for developing those rates and the

conditions of service, and the policies and rules related to high voltage

transmission system services. It also provides

definitions for transmission

service, transmission customer, transmission owner, system operator and

ancillary service.

I should point out that what is generally referred to as

the high voltage transmission system is termed the integrated electric system

for the purposes of these acts, and generally refers to the system providing

transmission service at 230 kilovolts or above – really, the bulk transmission

lines.

This term is also defined in the

Public Utilities Act and the reference to integrated electric system

in the Electrical Power Control Act

refers the reader to the Public Utilities

Act . This makes the process for any further amendments or future amendments

to this definition simpler and more streamlined.

The acts further outline that transmission service refers

to a service for the reservation

and transmission of capacity

and energy from one or more points of receipt to one or more points of delivery.

An ancillary service refers to a service that is necessary to support

transmission service on the high voltage transmission system while maintaining

reliable operations of the system.

Section

2 expands upon the power policy of the province, as currently outlined in the

Electrical Power Control Act , to

include open access transmission as a fundamental principle of that policy.

Section

3 of the Electrical Power Control Act

sets out the principles upon which the Newfoundland and Labrador electricity

system should operate referred to as the power policy of the province. When this

section was drafted or last amended, there was no need for an open access

transmission regime because the Island was not connected to the North American

grid.

Now that

both Newfoundland and Labrador will be connected to the North American grid,

open access will be an important principle for the operation of the province's

electricity system. This

section of the

Electrical Power Control Act was amended to capture open, non-discriminatory

and non-preferential access to interconnection with and service on the

integrated electric system as a principle of the power policy of the province.

Section

4 pertains to

section 5.8 of the

Electrical Power Control Act which excludes certain transmission

assets in Labrador, including those covered by the

Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corporation

Limited (Lease) Act, 1961 , and those which comprise part of the Muskrat

Falls Project for the purposes of setting rates for electricity customers. This

amendment maintains this exclusion but ensures – and that's critical, Mr.

Speaker – that the open access requirements apply to these assets. If these

assets were not brought into the new open access regime, there would be no open

access path for transmission service through Labrador.

Section 5 captures key requirements for open access,

including establishing the system operator to administer an open access

transmission regime and requiring that the system operator provide transmission

customers with open, non-discriminatory and non-preferential access to

transmission information. None of these provisions were captured in the existing

Electrical Power Control Act and

needed to be added to establish an open access transmission regime in

Newfoundland and Labrador – oh, they're coming with help.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MS. COADY: Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much. Everyone is trying to help me out with

my poor back. I really appreciate it. Thank you.

This

section creates the requirement for transmission

owners to provide the system operator with the authority to direct the

operations of the high voltage transmission system for the purpose of

establishing and operating the open access transmission regime.

Section 6 establishes the necessary regulation-making power

under the Electrical Power Control Act

related to open access. With the establishment of the system operator and the

provision of roles, responsibilities and authorities pertinent to open access,

there is a need to ensure that necessary regulation-making authority exists with

respect to the system operator and delineation of roles, responsibilities and

authorities of the various participants. Specifically, the regulation-making

power added to the Electrical Power

Control Act provide for designating a system operator and prescribing the

duties and functions of the system operator in greater detail than is

appropriate or useful to outline in legislation.

This will provide the ability, if necessary, to add or

remove system operator duties and functions. Overall regulation made with regard

to the system operator will provide certainty around requirements for open

access.

The regulations will also provide for the ability to

prescribe the duties and functions of the transmission owners, the transmission

customers and will allow those duties and functions to evolve, as they will if

ever necessary through amendments to regulations.

In addition, the regulations will provide the ability to

prescribe the type and timing of transmission information to be publicly

available in order to ensure compliance with open access transmission regime.

Section 7 is where amendments to the

Public Utilities Act begin. It adds key terms related to open access

transmission required for clear

interpretation of the legislation and clarifies

some existing terms that already exist in the

Public Utilities Act . The

section also adds new, non-open access

related terms such as person; deletes obsolete or unnecessary terms such as

telecommunications, shareholder and extension.

Section 8 contains an amendment to ensure that transmission

owners are subject to the Public Utilities

Act . The existing section, 3.1 of the act, was drafted at a time when open

access was not contemplated, Mr. Speaker. This amendment will provide all

transmission owners who own or manage part of the high voltage integrated

electricity system are not exempted by this

section of the act.

Section 9 ensures that entities excluded from all or a

portion of the Public Utilities Act by

prior exemption orders are covered by the act for the purposes of the open

access transmission regime. Exemptions granted prior to the advent of open

access were not undertaken with the intention to exempt the

subjects of those exemptions

from open access requirements. Accordingly, this

section will clarify that those

exemptions under

section 4.1 of the existing

Public Utilities Act will remain in

place for the purpose for which they were granted, but that open access

provisions will apply.

If this

amendment were not undertaken, any entities which are subject to the exemption

order would not be subject to open access, and like those exemptions under the

Electrical Power Control Act , could

threaten Newfoundland and Labrador's ability to prove it has an open access

transmission regime in place.

Section

10 is a very minor amendment, simply revising the existing

section of the act to

ensure that the use of the term person is consistent with the added definition

of person in the act. This reflects that fact that the definition of person

includes corporation.

Section

11 relates to a fundament requirement of open access, ensuring the transmission

owners are obligated to provide transmission customers with open,

non-discriminatory and non-preferential access to interconnection with and use

of the part of the high-voltage transmission system. The

section also obligates

the system operator to provide transmission customers with open,

non-discriminatory and non-preferential access to high-voltage transmission

system services.

Sections

12 and 13 are similar to

section 10, as these are also amendments revising the

existing

section of the act to ensure the use of the term person is consistent

with the added definition of person in the act.

Section 13 contains further

revisions for clarity only and does not pertain specifically to open access.

Section

14 is also similar to sections 12 and 13, as it only removes a single word:

lawful, to ensure clarity of

interpretation. This removes an unnecessary

adjective for rules and regulations. The header of the

section was also updated

to reflect the substance of the provision.

Section

15 returns to key amendments related to open access establishing the Public

Utilities Board's authority to approve the transmission tariff for open access,

the PUB's ability to enable the system operator to take certain measures to

optimize transmission system usage. A key requirement for open access is

independent, regulatory oversight. The PUB is the existing regulator in the

Newfoundland and Labrador electricity system and it is the appropriate body to

oversee compliance with the open access transmission regime.

With

regard to the optimization rate, it is appropriate and very useful to make a

provision which is subject to regulatory approval and oversight. For the system

operator to grant discounts from the approved transmission rates to enable

increased usage of the transmission rates and system when there is unscheduled

capacity for a certain time period, this can increase revenue to ultimately

benefit taxpayers – sorry, to benefit ratepayers, a critical difference. This

can increase revenue to ultimately benefit ratepayers. Failure to provide for

such a scenario could lead to a suboptimal usage of transmission assets and

reduce revenue.

For

example, Newfoundland Hydro is obligated to pay the full cost of the Labrador

transmission assets and the Labrador-Island Link which are key inputs into the

transmission tariff rate. So if it is forecast that tomorrow Newfoundland Hydro

does not require the full capacity on the transmission system, it would benefit

ratepayers to sell some of the unused capacity at a lower price to encourage

higher usage of the high-voltage transmission system and thus reduce

Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro's revenue requirements from its ratepayers.

Section

16 is an amendment that simply allows the legislation to catch up with the

current information disclosure practices requiring information related to

electricity rates to be posted online as well as in other places. This amendment

is not strictly related to posting information related to open access.

The

changes to posting information regarding electricity rates were undertaken to

update the provision to reflect the way the public generally seeks this sort of

information. This was achieved by adding a requirement to post this information

on the utilities website. The requirement to post the information in plain type

where payments are made by consumers or users was maintained.

Section

17 extends an existing power of the Public Utilities Board to open access

requirements specifically the PUB's ability to issue interim orders to make

changes to the transmission tariff where the Public Utility Board deems it

necessary. Interim orders enable PUB to order immediate adjustments that the PUB

can subsequently review or alter. The PUB already has authority to unilaterally

issue interim orders with regard to utilities issues that are already covered by

the Public Utilities Act . As this act

is being amended to include open access provisions, it is necessary to clarify

the PUB's interim order authority on those provisions as well.

Section

18 repeals the

section of the act related to unilateral PUB investigation of

electricity rates and moves that authority to a new section, 86.2 of the act,

for increased readability and better organization of the act. It maintains that

issue, though.

Section

19 revises an existing provision of the

Public Utilities Act related to complaints from municipalities or a

group of persons for clarity and readability. This is purely a drafting

improvement.

Section 20 adds a

section to the

Public Utilities Act related to the Public Utilities Board procedure

when it receives a complaint related to open access. This

section relates to the

establishment of the Public Utilities Board as the adjudicator of complaints

related to open access which is a key requirement of open access.

A key component of an open access transmission regime is a

complaints process to provide relevant recourse to all open access transmission

regime participants, transmission customers, transmission owners or the system

operator. As the Public Utilities Board will be given authority to approve the

transmission tariff and ensure that open access participants are meeting their

respective duties and functions under the legislation, and given that the Public

Utilities Board is already the complaint adjudicator for issues contemplated in

the existing legislation, it is appropriate for the PUB to assume the role of

complaints adjudicator for matters related to the open access regime.

Section 21 is a minor amendment that ensures the procedure

for providing notice, in the event of a complaint, also pertains to the

complaints and hearings related to open access. It is necessary to ensure that

complaints related to open access are subject to the same notification processes

as other utility-related complaints.

Section 22 establishes the Public Utilities Board authority

to investigate matters related to the tariff for open access and any other

matter, and recaptures the provision of the act that was repealed in

section 18

of the bill. Specifically,

section 86.1 of the act ensures comprehensive access

to the Public Utilities Board as the complaint adjudicator for any person for

any issue related to the conduct of the system operator.

Section 86.2 of the act replaces the repealed

section 82 of

the existing Public Utilities Act

providing the authority for the Public Utilities Board to unilaterally

investigate matters relating to rates, charges, services or other matters.

Section 86.3 of the act adds language providing the Public

Utilities Board with the ability to unilaterally investigate matters related to

open access, as it is appropriate for the Public Utilities Board to be able to

investigate matters related to the transmission tariff and other open access

matters as it deems necessary.

Section 23 establishes the Public Utilities Board's

authority to remedy any issue it identifies through the investigation into a

matter related to open access. In order to regulate open access transmission

effectively, the Public Utilities Board must be fully empowered to correct any

issues it identifies with regard

to this service. This mirrors the Public Utilities Board's authority with regard

to electricity rates that already exist in the

Public Utilities Act .

Section

24 simply ensures that transmission customers are included in the provisions of

the act related to the providing notice for PUB hearings, and includes

additional changes made for better readability.

Section

25 is a minor amendment, undertaken to improve clarity. Specifically, references

to disobedience in this

section have been amended to read contravention. This is

purely a legal drafting improvement. A reference to transmission customer was

also added where necessary and appropriate to reflect the fact that the

Public Utilities Act is now intended

to apply to open access.

Section

26 adds a penalty for failure to provide open access and ensures that all uses

of the term person are consistent with added definition of person in the act.

This

section of the Public Utilities Act

already outlines penalties for utilities where they violate the act. Given that

the act will now apply to open access, it is necessary to ensure that there is

also a penalty for failure to provide open access.

Finally,

Mr. Speaker,

section 27 establishes the necessary regulation-making power under

the Public Utilities Act related to

open access. The regulation

section of the

Public Utilities Act provides for exemptions and inclusions for certain

types of electricity infrastructure. This regulation-making power also ensures

that assets that relate only to electricity distribution to industrial and

domestic customers are not included in open access.

addition, this regulation-making power includes the ability to prescribe the

information that is required to be submitted to the Public Utilities Board for

the approval of the transmission tariff. This regulation-making power further

clarifies the requirement already captured in this legislation and enhances the

government's ability to ensure compliance with open access provisions.

Collectively, these regulation-making powers are about ensuring thorough,

appropriate and timely regulatory oversight of open access. Together, these

amendments to the Electrical Power Control

Act and the Public Utilities Act

will achieve two fundamental outcomes. They establish the open access

requirements relevant to all open access participants, and they establish the

Public Utilities Board's regulatory authority over all of those open access

requirements and participants.

Ultimately, these amendments will enable an open access transmission regime in

Newfoundland and Labrador that will help us to maximize export revenue

opportunities to ensure our citizens receive the maximum benefit possible from

the province's ability to trade electricity.

Mr.

Speaker, I think I've been very thorough in reviewing the act in detail, given

every

section of the bill. I thank you for your indulgence of allowing me to

lean forward, and I thank the House for consideration of these amendments to

allow for open access transmission.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Reid):

The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

pleased to rise today to speak to Bill 2,

Electrical Power Control Act and the

Public Utilities Act . I want to recognize the minister for going through a

detailed process in regard to the bill and the particular applications, and some

of the detail in regard to the intent and specific changes related to the

various sections of the bill.

I do

want to acknowledge the staff of Natural Resources. We had a briefing. We had a

large contingent from our caucus and from our staff that had a very good

discussion in detail in regard to this particular bill, and had some very good

discussion and great feedback. So I just want to recognize the staff and the

work they did in the briefing that we went to.

As the

minister has mentioned, this bill is about amendments to the

Electrical Power Control Act and the

Public Utilities Act and looks to the

province's overall electrical system. It's about access to electricity and the

transmission system in general, and how now it's integrated as opposed to, in

prior years, before the current construction of Muskrat and the inter-Island

link to Nova Scotia, it was basically the Upper Churchill and the transmission

of power west into Quebec. I think the minister alluded to it as well. This

provides this loop or this interconnected system now from Labrador to the Island

and then on to Atlantic Canada and access to the Eastern Seaboard, which

provides options now for the sale of that electricity, no matter how it's

generated, whether it's through our current hydro-electric development, whether

it's through future wind, whatever that may be.

It's a

necessity of the capital infrastructure and what's gone on over the past number

of years. It now creates that link and the regulatory framework. This act would

provide the basis for that regulatory framework for the oversite of it and how

it would operate.

More

importantly, it brings our system in line with what is called the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission in the US for the transfer of power through a transmission

grid, and as well through the Canada Free Trade Agreement regulations that were

brought up and discussed some time ago in regard to the provinces of Canada and

how the free flow of electricity trade and services would be part of that and

how it evolved into that and a need to take down those barriers and to make sure

there is a free flow for economic benefits for all concerned in our country.

That was

something, I know in my time in government and dealing with trade, it was always

the challenge in regard to getting a consensus and getting that to come about

and we did some work. The current administration did sign off on the Canada Free

Trade Agreement regulations in regard to the flow of goods and services and

breaking down those barriers, which would include transmission and electricity.

So the

open access electricity transmission system is all about transmission lines are

able to be used by any power customer who wishes to do so. So the infrastructure

is built. What's currently built today is completed in Labrador, the Island and

on to the Eastern Seaboard, eastern Canada. That would be used by Hydro-Québec,

could be Emera, could be another entity that wanted to use that transmission

power and capacity to move electricity.

This is

about providing that statutory and regulatory framework of how to support that.

The principles of that are it needs to be non-discriminatory and

non-preferential access to transmission for electrical trade between – well, for

us it would be notably eastern Canada, the Eastern Seaboard.

really have to do this if we want to look at exporting of power and being a part

of that loop, as I said. That was part of when the decision was made to sanction

Muskrat Falls that with the transmission that would be built, this would need to

be done at a point in time when we got to the point that we were connected and

would use this to create that loop and to be part of the regulatory framework

similar to FERC and the regulatory framework that is used in Quebec now through

Hydro-Québec.

understanding is that applied to our province high voltage transmission assets

that are 230 kilovolt or above, the extra capacity which is available on

transmission lines is what will be made available to various customers. So any

transmission capacity would have a certain, I guess, level in regard to what

that capacity would be and how much electricity could be moved on that

transmission facility.

What

this is looking at is, obviously, we would suffice our own needs. Nalcor,

through Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro – we would use what's needed for our own

use or for the export of our own power. My understanding is that would be the

priority in terms of the use of that transmission.

First

and foremost, we'd look after Newfoundland and Labrador's interests first. Then

when you look at that transmission capacity, what's left over in particular

lines, that's what's been talked about here in regard to using that excess

capacity for others that want to transmit electricity through that

infrastructure.

The

legislation, as we look at it now, with the completion of Muskrat Falls related

to transmission assets of our province is now connected to the North American

electricity grid, Quebec and the Maritime Link so energy can move through these

various locations.

When you

look at where we are geographically and how we're situated, we're certainly in

the corner of the North American energy grid. So likely customers, as I said

before, probably would be Emera, Hydro-Québec and, hopefully, maybe the New

England area, New England States.

We've

seen in the past number of months and couple of years in regard to them moving

towards more use of hydroelectricity development. I know a number of years ago

they would look at small hydro development. They've sort of moved away from

that, the New England States, and now are looking at larger hydro development.

Some

time ago I know Quebec Hydro and a consortium looked to provide significant

electricity to – I think it was Massachusetts, maybe the New Hampshire area,

somewhere in the range of eight or nine terawatts, I think, in terms of

supplying that electricity. So there is a need for it.

remember reading about the Eastern Seaboard in regard to electricity capacity

and the infrastructure. They don't have a lot of the infrastructure for natural

gas. So if we can be competitive on hydro and electricity of that form and wheel

it in there, there are certainly opportunities as we look to the future. Other

jurisdictions too, when you look at places like Ontario and the investments they

made in nuclear energy, and whether they'll continue that investment or whether

they'll look at other ways to provide that electricity.

Atlantic Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, we know they have issues in

regard to coal production and requirements by the federal government for them to

come off coal and to find an alternative to that. My understanding is now that's

been pushed out to 2025 or 2030, but still the issue is they need to find an

alternate source of clear energy to offset coal. So that's another opportunity

for us.

This

allows us, in terms of the regulatory changes and framework, for open and free

that and helps with the excess energy that we have and we will develop. That

takes into account, too, obviously over the past number of years and decades,

that hydro capacity that we built on the Island are well in what we've done. All

of that allows open access and transmission systems which this bill we're

talking about today allows to move forward.

province or state in the middle of the grid would have many more customers than

we would because, as I said, we're sort of in the North American energy gird,

but sort of off to the northeast, if you would. We need to look at and be ready

to access what we can. Those other jurisdictions that are closer probably would

have more opportunity when you look at where they border and what the

opportunities would be. Nevertheless, we do have a capacity to wheel excess

power and additional tariffs, as well, through other jurisdictions.

Coming

for Newfoundland and Labrador will mean the power would also possibly go to

Quebec, Nova Scotia and likely other jurisdictions in that vicinity and area. We

look forward to that. This allows the opportunity to do that.

I know

in the briefing we talked about Fortis, which noticed that there are potential

customers of the open system in this province as well. And talked about there

are transmission lines greater than 230 which could be included, as well, in the

overall process as we move forward. The minister touched on, as well, some of

the new requirements and entities that need to be struck, I guess, or created in

regard to the legislation. The legislation allows that to occur.

talked about establishing a Newfoundland and Labrador system operator. That's

the entity that's going to be created, through this bill, to oversee the

operation of the transmission system in the province. That's the full

transmission system that we spoke of and return in regard to the transport of

electricity for those other providers or those that want to move power, and some

of the ones I mentioned earlier. The system operator would oversee that.

understanding, and what we were told, it would be a division of Newfoundland

Hydro. To ensure, obviously, that Newfoundland Hydro would be part of the

activity or the industry and not give an unfair advantage and preferential

treatment, it would be a division which follows a strict code of conduct. This

structure – I know we had some discussion in regard to, jurisdictionally, what

other entities in the country do in regard to publicly held hydroelectricity

entities.

This is

somewhat comparable to other provinces, I think except Ontario and Alberta.

These two have independent electrical systems. My understanding is they're not

exactly Crown corporations, as we see here and would see with Quebec as well.

A tariff

would be charged to transmission customers, those that flow electricity through

the transmission lines held by us through the corporate entity. The tariff will

be collected, whatever that would be, through the Newfoundland and Labrador

system operator. The Newfoundland and Labrador system operator will then

distribute the tariff to the transmission owners, being those that own the asset

which would be, ultimately at the end of the day, the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador who Newfoundland Hydro held through Nalcor is a Crown corporation

ultimately owned by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

One of

the issues that was brought up, and I'll speak to it a little later I guess. I

brought it up today in Question Period with regard to that tariff. I think the

act was silent too in regard to the amendment of what happens to those tariffs

and if they would revert – well, they would revert once set by the PUB, revert

to the entity of Hydro and Nalcor, and then what that revenue would be used to

do.

I had

asked today in Question Period about that being part of a mechanism to make sure

rates are competitive and to reduce rates if necessary, and that would go

through that rate mitigation process. Because when you think about it, those

transmission facilities that were built have already been factored into rates,

or would be factored into rates in the near future. So they would already be

part of that. That would be a return back to and an insulator and a help to the

people of the province in regard to those tariffs when they flow back to the

system operator and then, subsequently, to the owners of the transmission

facilities.

The

tariff itself will be set by the Newfoundland and Labrador system operator.

Various costs would be looked at in terms of transmission to establish what the

tariff would be. My understanding is the tariff would have to be submitted to

the PUB for approval. The process is the same process used for general rate

applications today that you may see. As well, I understand there would be

opportunity to have intervener status and hearings held as well, very similar to

what would happen today.

The PUB,

through the legislation we're debating here today, is given the ability to

receive complaints, undertake investigations and hearings; this mechanism to

enforce the open system and what's been set up here as a regulatory framework in

the bill today.

mentioned earlier about FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, in the

US. That regulates the interstate transmission of electricity and includes not

only oil but, as well, natural gas.

On the

website dealing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, it talks about:

“On April 24, 1996 the Commission issued Order No. 888 which required public

utilities to provide open access transmission service on a comparable basis to

the transmission service they provide themselves. Specifically” – that order

–“Required all public utilities that own, control or operate facilities for

transmitting electric energy in interstate commerce to file open access

non-discriminatory transmission tariffs that contain minimum terms and

conditions of non-discriminatory service.” In addition, it directed “public

utilities and transmitting utilities to seek recovery of legitimate, prudent and

verifiable stranded costs associated with providing open access and the Federal

Power Act,

section 211 transmission services.”

So that

would be tied to and mirroring what we're doing today here with this bill from a

Newfoundland and Labrador perspective from Nalcor and for Newfoundland and

Labrador Hydro.

The

commission, at the time for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, “was to

remove impediments to competition in the wholesale bulk power marketplace and to

bring obviously more efficient, lower cost power to the Nation's electricity”

customers through FERC. “In a companion order the Commission issued Order No.

889 at the same time which established rules governing Open Access Same-time

Information System … and prescribing standards of conduct.”

So that

was sort of the evolution and certainly what we're looking to mirror today in

regard to Newfoundland and Labrador. The other reference was made to compliance

and a necessity for this bill was related to the Canadian Free Trade Agreement,

which came into effect, I mentioned earlier, July 1, 2017. That, in and of

itself, includes a regulatory framework governing electricity transmission and

it provides specific rules and builds on the principles of open access and

non-discrimination that were outlined in the Canadian Energy Strategy.

addition to development of these rules, the Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador, the present government, at the request of other provinces, territories

and the federal government, engaged with the Government of Quebec to discuss

electricity transmission.

Now, at

the time there was some reference in regard to this had meant or it was a jump

to Newfoundland having the ability to wheel power west out of Quebec into Quebec

unencumbered. That provision is in the Constitution of Canada – I'm not sure, I

think

section 91, which deals with apparent unencumbered, non-discriminatory

transfer of electricity.

Eger

since Upper Churchill, and probably before that and when it's been talked about

and that ability, whether it's a Liberal government, a Progressive Conservative

government, or a Conservative government in Ottawa, we've never had the

opportunity where no one held the Province of Quebec to task for not allowing

that to occur. Because I've known over the past number of years of being in

government there was always an issue of wanting to flow power from Labrador at a

greater extent, with building capacity, and allowing the development of hydro

activity in Labrador. It was always (inaudible) at that level.

So the

Canadian Free Trade Agreement did recognize, or direct a discussion – I think

there's a timeline; we talked about that in the discussion we had on the bill.

There's a two-year timeline and the clock is ticking on that. There would be

consensus reached with Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador to allow that

freewheeling of power west into Labrador, and unrestricted, which we haven't had

to date in our history of joining Canada since 1949.

That's

the huge issue and we'll have to see where that goes, but it doesn't mean it's

automatic. It's something that we hope will be achieved and should be achieved.

As a member of the great country of Canada, we should have that ability.

We hear

now about consensus about building pipelines across the country and being able

to flow natural gas or oil inter-provincially across boundaries. Well, this was

no different. This is just a different commodity, a different way through

transmission infrastructure, so there should be no restriction and Newfoundland

and Labrador should have the same right as anybody else, any other province or

territory as a member of Canada.

The

Canadian Free Trade Agreement creates an environment for Newfoundland and

Labrador business to grow and diversify, as I talked about before, and

ultimately creates more jobs, because that's what it's all about, to break down

those barriers and allow the free flow. It also creates rules for electricity

transmission. It certainly opens the door for maximizing different activities

that we can be a part of as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

The

technical briefing we had, we got much of a larger overview. We did not get into

it specifically – there was a couple, as I mentioned before, the

section I

talked about, specific sections and some details in regard to some questions we

had, but I'll probably leave those as we go through Committee and we'll have

some discussion with the minister in regard to some of the particular sections.

In some cases, I'm sure it's just clarity in regard to what we might ask.

But as I

mentioned before, these amendments deal with providing open access on the

Newfoundland transmission system, including Labrador and Churchill Falls, which

certainly was planned from the outset. It's important that we ensure the

implementation is handled properly and through that there are a couple of key

points. I just want to make sure I make these before I conclude, if I haven't

mentioned them along the way.

Regarding

section 14.4 of Bill 2, I think we agree with the discussion we had,

there needs to be an arm's-length relationship between the system operator and

Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. I think we had a good discussion with the

officials on why that is and how it should be structured and those types of

things.

Setting

up a separate system operator entity outside Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro or

Nalcor, possibly would be an inefficient, very expensive and totally not where

we need to be, really unnecessary. As long as there's a code of conduct that's

implemented, there's oversight and that's independent, for this side, I think

we're happy to move forward with that component of the bill.

Quebec,

Nova Scotia and New Brunswick have the system operator as well, is my

understanding, within the company. New Brunswick had it out then moved it back.

When you look at our transmission system to date, it's not extensive to manage

at this stage. Request for service could possibly be low, initially, when you

look at the fact of where we're situated, geographically, and that loop we have.

To build a new entity would certainly be – what we have, it would probably be a

low-staffing entity and staffed by people who are familiar with the system at

Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and have grown with it and have that experience

and background to fill the role that's identified.

certainly think creating the arm's-length entity within Nalcor is sensible.

Creating a larger outside organization, I'm not so sure this idea is a good

idea. You look at high costs, less efficiency and knowledge factors to try and

begin that from scratch now.

So as a

general principle, the overhead associated with open access should be sufficient

to meet the requirements; requirements which may be less than Quebec has to meet

because we're not directly an adjacent jurisdiction to the US in terms of what

they have. At the same time, we want to ensure we're not creating a huge entity

to do a relatively, maybe simple job at this stage.

Nalcor

and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, we believe, should continue to have the

necessary transmission rights, booked properly to handle the excess power of

Muskrat Falls and Churchill Falls. As we go forward, obviously, that becomes

more of an issue. As well as develop new possible hydro-wind combinations as we

move forward. Newfoundland has invested in these transmission rights.

Any

transmission tariffs paid on the Labrador-Island Link and the Newfoundland and

Labrador Hydro transmission lines, as I mentioned before, we believe should go

back to the ratepayer, as they have paid for the transmission already.

Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, the first step in a complaint process –

and that's one of the issues that's identified as well – goes to the

transmission operator. In Quebec it would be Hydro-Québec, then the system

operator, an entity within Quebec Hydro, then the Public Utilities Board, the

Régie in Quebec, which is the regulatory framework which we would be similar to

or parallel to here in the province with this new system we're setting up.

Section

19 of Bill 2 amends

section 84.1 of the

Public Utilities A ct, but it's not clear if a complaint goes directly to the

PUB as a first step. So maybe that could be clarified when we get to Committee

as well.

We would

think the steps should be similar to other jurisdictions and maybe they are, or

maybe that's something to be clarified when we go through Committee, as that, we

think, would be the most efficient and cost-effective method of resolution as we

go through. There may be a process before complaints – there may be a process

before the complaint lands at the PUB, but that's not clear in the particular

bill or legislation. That's something we'll look for clarity as we go through.

So, Mr.

Speaker, that's my commentary on the particular bill. We certainly look forward

to having further discussion when we get in Committee on some issues we have in

regard to particular sections that we can have further discussions on, but this

is all part of the original – I know we had started an energy plan in regard to

build hydro or build energy assets. This, for the first time in our history,

links us to Atlantic Canada, access to the Eastern Seaboard, and for the first

time ever it gives us – we're in the game and in the market. We need to do this

to be non-discriminatory in our actions of what we're doing.

I look

forward to further discussion on the bill as we move forward.

Thank

you very much.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Labrador West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. LETTO:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today,

it's a pleasure for me to rise and to discuss a bill to amend the

Electrical Power Control Act, 1994 and

the Public Utilities Act .

As the

minister stated, this bill is about adopting an open access framework for

transmitting electricity which is necessary as the province becomes fully

interconnected with the North American grid. This is just yet another step this

government has taken to ensure that this province is an attractive destination

for investment. That's what this is all about, Mr. Speaker, is making ourselves

accessible to the world, to North America, so that we can do business with

whomever.

Beyond

the benefits to the electricity sector, adopting an open ac