PDF Version

November 5, 2013 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVII No. 24

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Before we start today's proceedings, I want to acknowledge some special

guests in our gallery. Today we are joined by twelve business and human resource

management students from Keyin College, St. John's campus. They are accompanied

by their teacher, Paulette Sampson.

We are also welcoming today

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I want to acknowledge Ms Jessie Noseworthy, who will be

mentioned now in a moment in a member's statement. She is joined by her family.

Also today, also going to be mentioned in a member's statement, Ms Jillian

Joy, joined by her mother, Tanya Morrissey, her father, Paul Joy, and together

with two members of the staff of the Buckmaster Community Centre, Kim Mallard

and Lindsay Hynes.

Welcome, all of you, to our gallery.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today, we will have members' statements from the District of

Bellevue; the Member for the District of Burin Placentia West with leave; the

Member for the District of Baie Verte Springdale; the Member for the District

of St. John's Centre; the Member for the District of Lake Melville; and the

Member for the District of Bonavista North.

The hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PEACH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this hon. House today to recognize the Royal Canadian Legion,

Branch 39, of Dildo. On Saturday, November 2, 2013, I had the great privilege of

attending the Legion's annual Remembrance Day dinner and dance.

The Legion has been very active in the schools at fundraising, attending

events, and especially with the poppy campaign of 2013. This year of events for

2013, like others, has been a very successful year.

Branch 39, this year held a very special night in recognizing the sixtieth

anniversary of the Korean War, and at the event there were three Korean War

veterans in attendance: Thomas Lahey of Chapel Arm, Peter Petipas of Whitbourne,

and Alfred Pretty of Dildo. All three are in good health and the memories that

they shared and the stories they told while reminiscing with others made for an

interesting night.

Major Michael Bennett was the guest speaker and his speech "Korean War, not

Forgotten" was very informative and educational.

I ask all the members of this House to join me in congratulating the Royal

Canadian Legion, Branch 39, on the outstanding work they do throughout the

Trinity Bay area.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin Placentia West with leave.

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to pay tribute to a remarkable lady, Mrs. Margaret Moores of

Rushoon, who is today celebrating her 108 th birthday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: This makes her, Mr. Speaker, the oldest resident in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the members opposite for granting me leave to personally

acknowledge this milestone in the life of Aunt Maggie Moores.

As her daughter Marie will tell you, her mother, like all of us, has her good

days and bad days. Mr. Speaker, I am willing to say that at the age of 108, Aunt

Maggie has seen more good days than bad.

Her hearing is a little impaired, Mr. Speaker, but her mind is still sharp

and alert, and she is keenly aware of what is happening around her and that

extends to the political scene as well.

Mr. Speaker, on a recent visit with Mrs. Moores, I could see the pride she

felt in her daughter, Marie, with whom she resides. I could also see the pride

Marie has in her mother. I could see a woman who has given much to her family,

and a family who has given much to her in return.

I tip my hat to Marie and Patrick, and to all her extended family, and ask my

colleagues in the House to join me in wishing Aunt Maggie Moores of Rushoon a

happy 108 birthday.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte Springdale.

MR. POLLARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is with great pleasure that I rise in this hon. House today to recognize

the special achievements of five graduating students in the District of Baie

Verte Springdale: Danika Bath, of Cape John Collegiate, La Scie; Andrew

Burton, of Copper Ridge Academy, Baie Verte; and Andrew Hillier of Indian River

High, Springdale captured the Electoral District Scholarships, valued at $1,000

each.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, proud recipients of the Centenary of Responsible

Government Scholarships were Zachary Roberts of Cape John Collegiate, and Faith

McCarthy of Indian River High, also valued at $1,000 each.

The criteria to receive such prestigious awards are based solely upon their

performance on the Department of Education public examinations. This is a

testament to the entire school community's caring, supportive attitude towards

educating our youth so that they are able to become productive members of

society.

Honourable colleagues, please join me in applauding Danika's, Andrew

Burton's, Andrew Hillier's, Zachary's, and Faith's accomplishments. They sure

have made their parents, their school, and their communities proud.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS ROGERS: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to congratulate several students from

my District of St. John's Centre who were awarded scholarships this fall and

some of them have actually joined us here in the gallery today. Scholarships are

recognition of their hard work.

The Department of Education awards Electoral District Scholarships to three

graduates in each district with the highest marks. This year our students were

Xiongyi Cui, Danielle McDonald, and Lauren Hayes. Jessie Noseworthy also won the

Centenary of Responsible Government scholarship for her high marks.

Two students from Buckmaster's Circle Community Centre were also awarded the

generous Fry Family Foundation awards. Jillian Joy won the Fry Family Foundation

St. John's Community Centre's $2,500 Post-Secondary Entrance award, and is now a

successful Memorial student. Amy Haynes, a Grade 12 student, was recognized for

winning the Fry Family's junior scholarship.

We are all proud of these students and look forward to their brilliant

futures.

I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating these students and

thanking the donors as well as the community centres who helped turn these

students' dreams into a reality. Bravo!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Lake Melville.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RUSSELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand in this hon. House to congratulate the Mealy Mountain Collegiate

Female Soccer Team on their success in capturing their second straight AAA

provincial banner at the School Sports Newfoundland and Labrador provincial

championship held in Happy Valley-Goose Bay from October 18-19.

The Mealy Mountain Collegiate girls did not disappoint their fans in Lake

Melville, Mr. Speaker. They won their first game against and tied the second in

order to secure a bye to the final round.

I watched the finals where the MMC girls played the Menihek Magic in the

rain, Mr. Speaker, with over 150 fans, family and friends of the team cheering

them on. Down 2-1 in the final minutes of the second half, the team rallied with

two straight goals and won the championship.

Coaches Mr. Ed Turpin and Mr. Andrew Rowsell are to be commended for the

coaching of these girls who represented their school and community with class

and sportsmanship.

The team members were: Julia Kelland, Billie Dawn Sampson, Tana Pittman, Amy

Rowsell, Megan Manners, Danielle Spearing, Andrea White, Brittany Patey, Caleigh

Ivany, Kaely Marques, Laura Baikie, Ally Acreman, Hannah Kennedy, Tiffany

Parsons, Sidney Goudie, Brittany Baldwin, and Breanna Wall.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members of this House to join with me in

extending congratulations to the Mealy Mountain Collegiate Female Soccer Team on

capturing the School Sports Newfoundland and Labrador provincial championship.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista North.

MR. CROSS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, I stand to pay tribute to a resident of Wesleyville. He may have been

a man small in stature, but he sang with a big voice.

Gordon Sturge displayed a musical talent for many years. He shared his voice

with many, most especially if they were ill or for families suffering the loss

of a beloved member. He performed at hundreds of family services in our local

funeral homes.

Gordon's performances of The God of the Mountain , What a Friend We

Have in Jesus , or any of his repertoires could rival that of any great

vocalist of this or any era. His voice and his piano accordion brought comfort

to those who were mourning and were suffering.

About eighteen months ago, at age sixty-nine, Gordon experienced several

strokes that have left him without his voice. Today, he receives and enjoys

friends as they visit to repay his kindnesses.

I ask all humble members to salute Gordon Sturge, who is indeed a symbol of

many others around our Province who give so freely of their talents to comfort

others.

Best wishes, my friend. Have a happy day, Gordon Sturge.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight a significant

milestone in the history of education in Newfoundland and Labrador.

In the 2012-2013 school year, this Province recorded the best ever high

school graduation rate with 94.2 per cent of eligible graduates earning a

diploma.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: As I noted publicly a week ago, this is a tremendous

achievement, and speaks to the commitment of our students, teachers, parents, as

well as school board and department personnel. While we have consistently shown

a graduation rate of over 90 per cent since 2008, this is the best result we

have ever recorded, Mr. Speaker. I believe it shows that today's students

understand that education is the key to a successful future, and that it all

starts with a high school diploma.

It is also worth noting, Mr. Speaker, that over the past several years, more

students are graduating with an honours or academic diploma as opposed to a

general diploma. This is an important development, Mr. Speaker, as it means more

of our students are graduating with diplomas that allow them to pursue a wide

range of post-secondary opportunities. It is all about having choices, keeping

all the options open, and having the best possible head start in the realization

of lifelong goals.

This milestone has not been achieved without great effort, Mr. Speaker. For

example, this is the third consecutive year that the department has offered two

opportunities for students to write supplementary public exams in August and

November in order to allow students the chance to achieve graduation status or

improve their standing. So, following the results of this month's supplementary

exams, the graduation rate could improve even more.

I invite my colleagues to join me in congratulating the graduating class of

2012-2013, and to wish them every success in their future endeavours.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for his advance copy and I

thank him for his notice yesterday it is foreshadowing, we used to say, when

per cent passed and in the public exams 75 per cent passed, but the Department

of Education went with the school submitted mark of 90 per cent passes. Math

3204, 81 per cent of the boys passed at school, only 66 per cent passed public

exams, and the department went with 77 per cent. In science, 87 per cent passed

the school exams, only 74 per cent passed the departmental exams, and the

department went with 88 per cent pass rate.

If you look deeper into the numbers you will see that in 2007-2008, which is

the five-year period he is talking about, only six students passed who were age

twenty years of age and older,

whereas last year 115 of the graduates were

twenty years of age and older. Mr. Speaker, I guess it goes to show that if you

lower the passing requirements enough and if you keep them in school long

enough, you get a higher passing rate.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

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

percentage of eligible graduates earning a diploma is certainly good news. It

speaks well for our future generation being well educated and able to contribute

to the workforce and their communities.

Mr. Speaker, we still have students falling through the cracks. They have low

achievement, problems with attendance, and other issues. The past program was

piloted in eight schools to identify and assist these students at risk, but now

that pilot is over, Mr. Speaker. I am encouraging the minister to work with the

new school board to ensure that the past program is established as a permanent

program in schools across the Province, to reach all students who need it.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the Member for St. John's North have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Does the Member for St. John's North have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

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

MR. KIRBY: Thanks to the minister for an advance copy of your statement.

By the way you were talking yesterday, I thought you were going to be announcing

all-day kindergarten today, but it is good to see increased numbers of high

school graduates and it is certainly a reflection of all of the hard work of our

teachers, school staff, students and, of course, moms and dads.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KIRBY: It is important that we also make sure that there are spaces

for these young people in our post-secondary institutions because there will be

more of them coming out, and make sure there is more guidance for them in

schools as well so they make the right choices right from the beginning.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to provide an

update on the Population Growth Strategy.

Mr. Speaker, in keeping with the provincial government's commitment to

building a vibrant economy and sustaining Newfoundland and Labrador's

communities for the long term, a set of community workshop consultations was

conducted this past month to help inform the development of the Population

Growth Strategy.

More than 170 people attended the public workshop consultation sessions

throughout the Province, which was carried out by our Office of Public

Engagement. We also held direct stakeholder meetings and we received private

e-mail and mail submissions. In total, over 300 people have provided input so

far. Subjects raised included the impacts of a transient workforce, improving

supports for parents and families, and the need to continue building welcoming

communities for newcomers.

Feedback from participants has been positive and supportive. For example,

following the workshop in Corner Brook, a student at Grenfell Campus mentioned

in a tweet that the discussion was very interesting and highly democratic. I

cannot say I witnessed that myself, Mr. Speaker, not being a tweeter.

Mr. Speaker, though the scheduled workshop consultations have concluded, we

are still encouraging online and mail submissions and taking requests for

meetings as we prepare a What We Heard document before the strategy is released

next year. Individuals can e-mail populationgrowth@gov.nl.ca.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, this is an unprecedented time for our Province.

More people are working than ever before, we have a growing demand for skilled

labour, and our approach to delivering affordable, accessible, quality

post-secondary education is being recognized across Canada and beyond.

Mr. Speaker, the Population Growth Strategy will provide a plan to build on

the economic and social foundations created by this government's first ten years

of work, and it will help make this Province the home of choice for women and

men around the world.

In the coming weeks and months, I look forward to providing regular updates

on its development.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

MS DEMPSTER: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for an advance copy of his

statement.

We became aware of the Population Growth Strategy earlier this year when it

legitimized, by rewarding a key player in the PC Election Campaign with a

six-figure salary. The importance of the strategy in our Province's future was

touted as the justification for the $150,000-plus political appointment.

Once Mr. Reid was appointed as the Chief of Staff in August, however, Mr.

Speaker, we have since seen responsibility for the strategy downloaded to the

Parliamentary Secretary level. This raised flags to us whether the strategy or

its leader was the priority.

The Population Growth Strategy is meant to address, in part, the growing

demand for skilled labour, which is what this government's skilled task force

was meant to do. With the log-jam of apprentices unable to complete their plans

of training, scores of skilled workers are leaving the Province with

multinationals like Vale looking outside the Province for workers.

It is fairly safe to say that this government strategy to meet this skilled

labour demand has failed miserably. Wrapping this challenge into yet another

strategy is a convoluted stall tactic. The programs and services that would keep

residents here are the same programs and services that would attract more

residents.

My time is up?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

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

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

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: I look forward to the continuing work that is going to be

done on the population growth. I point out to the minister, Mr. Speaker, that we

will need both, more babies along with more working adults in the future.

Quebec's affordable daycare at $7 a day has generated

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS MICHAEL: a baby boom across all income brackets in Quebec,

increasing the population significantly, and has also added a lot of working

women to the system. I say to the minister, a one-fee universal daycare program

can be the big economic and social payoff for us here that it has been in

Quebec.

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

have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Leave.

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

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

are probably one of the key issues going forward for the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, especially our rural communities. So I am very

encouraged to see the minister out there engaged throughout the Province.

I had the opportunity in St. Anthony to participate in the discussion and

dialogue. I look forward to the updates moving forward, and see what comes out

of the strategy.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, on the same day Nova Scotia demanded more Muskrat

Falls power with a ruling by the UARB, Hydro-Quebec launched a court challenge

water rights and water management on the Churchill River. If Quebec is

successful, Muskrat Falls would only be able to deliver a fraction of the power

this government has promised.

I ask the Premier: What is the status of the Hydro-Quebec court challenge and

what liabilities are there for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when we came to government in 2003, one of our stated intentions

was to develop the Lower Churchill. Mr. Speaker, we were determined in doing

that, we would not make the mistakes that had been made in the past. We began to

study the river, the obligations on the river, the regulation on the river, Mr.

Speaker, so that we understood right from the very beginning what needed to

happen in order to have a successful development on that river.

One of the things, Mr. Speaker, we had to look at was water management,

because under the Tobin government there was an effort to develop the Lower

Churchill. As part of the regulations and preparation for that document, they

gave CF(L)Co a veto on development on the Churchill River; in fact, gave the

river to Hydro-Quebec.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Once again, the Premier refuses to answer the question. What

liabilities are there for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians?

The Hydro-Quebec case is serious enough that Emera of Nova Scotia has sought

assurances that their investment in the Muskrat Falls link is protected. To

satisfy these concerns, government has agreed to pay Emera compensation if the

delivery of power is interrupted.

I ask the Premier: With such serious questions on water management to be

decided in a Quebec court, what is the total liability to our Province because

this issue was not settled?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, following on my last answer; one of the things that we realized

right from the very start was that we had to have control of water management of

not just the Churchill River, Mr. Speaker, but of all rivers in our Province. A

valuable resource that belongs to the people of the Province, and government

should be the stewards of that resource.

As a result, we brought in a bill on water management in this House of

Assembly in 2007, in which Newfoundland and Labrador took control of the

Churchill River, and every other river in the Province. In order to do that, we

understood water management from start to finish, especially how it related to

the Upper Churchill, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we are not concerned about the court case. It is following due

process. We understand what our rights and obligations are under water

management in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Once again, Mr. Speaker, we see the Premier hiding the

liabilities from the people of Newfoundland and Labrador who are going to pay

for it down the road. Shameful, Premier! Shameful that you will not let the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador know the liabilities that they are facing.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the member to direct all of his comments to the Chair, please.

MR. JOYCE: I am sorry, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier and the minister have talked about more rain and snow adding more

capacity to Muskrat Falls, but the VP of Nalcor has said that the average

production of Muskrat Falls will only be 510 megawatts, not the 824 that has

been promised by the Premier.

I ask the Premier: Which one of you is correct, you or Nalcor?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I wish there were time in Question Period that I could educate

the Acting Leader of the Opposition on running a utility and how that works, and

the amount of electricity that is generated and the amount of loss on lines and

so on.

Mr. Speaker, the Muskrat Falls Project is a great project for Newfoundland

and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: There is a $2 billion difference between Muskrat

Falls and the next least-cost alternative, Mr. Speaker. It is providing

opportunity, jobs, and benefits to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. It

will continue to do that, particularly in Labrador, Mr. Speaker. It is a project

that we are all very proud of on this side of the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Once again, the Premier refuses to answer the question because

she does not want to say that Nalcor officials are wrong. One of you has to be

wrong, Madam Premier.

Mr. Speaker, the Workers' Compensation Review Division is supposed to be an

independent body that undergoes a fair review process. I recently represented

different injured workers, heard by Mr. Lloyd Piercey. Everyone was denied.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. JOYCE: At the time, Mr. Piercey was on the executive of the Burin

Peninsula PC Association and a member of the PC Party of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

I ask the Premier: Was a political appointee permitted on the board to make

decisions that are supposed to be independent?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Service NL.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In a system where rights of injured workers are at stake, it is very

important that we have the right people doing the jobs as commissioners, Mr.

Speaker. These commissioners are highly qualified. They go through a very

rigorous training process. Every one of our commissioners are qualified to do

that work that is being done on behalf of the people in the Province, and on

behalf of the injured workers of the Province as well, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, the only qualification he had was to be President

of the PC Burin Association.

Mr. Speaker, I expressed my concern to the former minister, in writing, and

was told this past June Mr. Piercey was no longer a member of the Burin PC

Association; however, government records show that Mr. Piercey was appointed as

commissioner on June 6, 2011, a full two years of hearings.

I ask the minister: Do you feel that it is appropriate for injured workers to

have appeals heard by political appointees, who are still on political

associations, with Liberal MHAs representing them?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Service NL.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Speaker, thank you very much.

It is my understanding he is certainly not a political appointee. He is a

qualified Newfoundlander and Labradorian who has been trained extensively to do

this job and I understand he is doing a very good job. I am proud of the work

that he is doing.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, if he does not think it is a political appointee,

let me show you on the Web site where he was the president of the association

when he was appointed. Go read the facts, boy.

Mr. Speaker, I have the letter here from the minister, as well as the

government's own list of political appointees, that shows a Mr. Lloyd Piercey

was clearly in a conflict of interest.

I ask the minister: For the injured workers who feel they were not given a

proper hearing because of this blatant conflict and to ensure transparency, will

the minister immediately remove Mr. Piercey from the review division and order

new hearings on all of these cases?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Service NL.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Speaker, I can only say that these reviews are very

complex; there are a lot of facts on the table. The people who are adjudicating

these reviews are very highly qualified. I am proud of the work that is being

done, Mr. Speaker. Every one of our commissioners is there for the right

reasons.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Eight months ago the government voted down a Liberal motion to introduce

fracking regulations in our Province. Yesterday's announcement on fracking comes

without detail, without timeline, and without deliverable.

I ask the minister: People want to see details, how can you make such a

significant announcement without details attached?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, I do not have a problem making announcements

when it is in the best interest of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, I have no problem making announcements when it

is in the best interest of the health of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and I

do not have a problem making announcements when it is in the best interest of

the environment of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: That is exactly what I did yesterday, Mr. Speaker.

As I indicated, it is a very emotional issue. It is a very important issue

for the Province. There is an amount of work that needs to be done in a

jurisdictional review. We need to look at how hydraulic fracturing will impact

the West Coast, particularly in the geology and the rock formations of the West

Coast, Mr. Speaker. When we have had an opportunity to take a look at all of

that work, we will make it public so that we can inform a good debate and

discussion in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Huber Valley.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, the best interest was not that way just a few short months ago when the

minister and all of the members opposite voted against the regulations that we

were proposing. With over 20 million barrels of oil in play, announcing a

moratorium on fracking is a significant move and a marked departure from

government's previous policy.

So I ask the minister: While the moratorium is in place, will you appoint an

independent committee of experts to hold public consultations, sessions, and

make recommendations to this government?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, references months ago about hydraulic fracturing

were around regulation and stiffening up regulations, of which we committed to

do a piece of work with.

Mr. Speaker, my announcement yesterday was a responsible act by this

government to undertake a full review of hydraulic fracturing, whether it is the

health of the people, whether it is the environment, and, Mr. Speaker, as well

the economic impact and the importance of hydraulic fracturing to the industry

so that we present a balanced view.

By the line of questioning today, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the member

opposite would clearly say do you agree with this initiative or don't you?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. BALL: I have no problem responding to that. That is the reason why we

put the PMR in place that you voted against, I say to the minister. So, we were

in favour of that; you are a little bit late on that one.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, a fishing boat out of Shoe Cove caught fire, forcing

three fishermen on board to climb into a life raft and wait for rescue. Today we

learned that the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre in Halifax dispatched the Fogo

ferry to respond to Green Bay seven hours away.

So I ask the minister: In light of yesterday's near tragedy, are you still

satisfied with the dismal state of search and rescue in our Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as we have stated many, many times in this House, there is

nothing more important to us than the health and safety of our people,

particularly the people who earn their living on the water. It is so fundamental

to who we are as a people. The people who earn their living need the reassurance

that their safety is extremely important and appropriate response is there for

them by their governments and others, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we have reiterated our view many times to the federal

government, we even made it a part of the CETA negotiations, even though it was

not in the framework, and we have presented our view to the Quadrennial Review

stating clearly what our expectation is as a Province. People can go to that

submission and read it on our Web site.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, I do not think in the opinion of people in this Province that the

appropriate response would be the Fogo Island ferry.

Mr. Speaker, this past spring our caucus called for an inquiry into search

and rescue services in our Province. Yesterday's fishing boat fire off Green Bay

would have been tragic if not for Terry Ryan, a local fisherman, who intercepted

the call. Had the three men aboard the fishing boat waited seven hours for the

rescue from Fogo, they may not have made it.

I ask the minister: Will you now agree, one more time, for a full provincial

inquiry into search and rescue?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Intergovernmental

Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENT: Mr. Speaker, this issue clearly falls within federal

jurisdiction. That said, it is obviously important to Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians.

My officials reached out this morning to the Joint Rescue Co-Ordination

Centre in Halifax to get a full report on what indeed had happened. In this

particular case, procedures were in fact followed. It is not uncommon, Mr.

Speaker, for a private vessel to perform a rescue before federal resources or

provincial resources arrive on the scene. That said, this does raise the issue

of search and rescue. It is an important one for this Province, and we are going

to raise that issue with the federal government at every opportunity.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, the Minister Responsible for Violence

Prevention is taking her cue from the RNC in her refusal to release a report on

sexual exploitation. When government distributed an excerpt of this very report

to 180 schools in this Province, the very same RNC spokesperson called it

educational.

I ask the minister: Which is it? Is it educational or irresponsible to make

the public aware of the dangers of sexual exploitation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the research that has been done in this field is very valuable.

Because we did the report, it does not mean that we did not act on the

recommendations. We have acted on many of the recommendations; we continue to

act on the recommendations. Since the report, we see the joint task force on

organized crime, we see the task force for child exploitation, we see a new

manager of special victims' initiatives in the Department of Justice, and we see

the two treatment centres for youth.

I ask the member opposite, if I do not take the advice of the RNC, who is the

public body responsible for public safety in this Province, who do I take it

from? What is your position on that?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I would ask the minister again: Is it educational or irresponsible? We are

getting conflicting messages from this government and the RNC. The people

involved in this report, who went out on the line and made their positions known

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. PARSONS: people who were involved said they wanted their voices

heard. As the minister, you should know the role that silence plays in sexual

violence.

I ask the minister: Will you honour the voices of the people who were brave

enough to speak out, and release the report and the recommendations?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, what the member is forgetting is the voices of the women who do

not want to speak out.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, it has been clearly articulated to me that these

people are in a very vulnerable situation, and by releasing this report it would

put them in further harm's way. That is something this government is not going

to allow to happen, and I cannot believe you are on the floor of the House

asking for this to be done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, one of the sex workers who contributed to

this report actually read the report and said they could not even see where they

were in it. They called it, and I quote, "ridiculous" that this report is not

released to the public. That is just one who was brave enough to come out.

I ask the minister: Isn't it shameful that you are not releasing a report

that people were brave enough to contribute to?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to offer a briefing to the member and any

members of the Opposition on the realities that are involved, and how women,

predominantly women are involved in the sex trade and sexual exploitation, can

be severely harmed. Not only the women, Mr. Speaker, but the children and their

families have been threatened.

Mr. Speaker, for the member to say one person, there were numerous people,

hundreds of people, involved in this report. The easiest thing for us to do

would have been to speak to the recommendations because we have acted on many

and we will be acting on more of them, and VPI Phase 2. We take it very

seriously to ensure that vulnerable people are protected, and not to put them in

further harm's way. I cannot believe what I am hearing from the member opposite.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Premier told this House there

would be no job losses from CETA doing away with our MPRs, but the federal

minister, Stephen Harper's minister, says part of the payoff she wants to take

is for job losses.

I ask the Premier: Who is right? Would she like to correct the record, or

correct Stephen Harper? Because he is telling Canadians something different than

she is telling us.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I was absolutely delighted when I saw the member opposite at our

news conference, announcing the $400 million. Had he been paying attention to

what was going on he need not have referenced the federal government. If he had

just listened to the questions and answers coming out of the scrum, he would

have heard me acknowledge that on the outside, the absolutely outside chance

there might be a repercussion from the loss of minimum processing regulations,

that there was an ability within the fund to deal with that.

He could have saved himself a phone call to Ottawa. I gladly shared that

information publicly on the day of the announcement, and I am happy to share it

again here in the House today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, does that mean when the Premier said yesterday,

how many people will lose their jobs? She said: I say, Mr. Speaker, none, none.

Is she backtracking on yesterday's answer?

When I went to the announcement last week, if I had gone earlier like the

invited guests in the cheering section, I would have had probably a half hour

private briefing that they had before they threw the party. A private briefing

the media did not even get to.

Does the Premier agree that for every processing job there are 2.2 jobs

created in the economy, and how many more of those jobs will be gone?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, Nova Scotia does not have minimum processing regulations. New

Brunswick has no minimum processing regulations. PEI does not have any minimum

processing regulations. Quebec has a number of minimum processing regulations on

a wide variety of different species of fish, Mr. Speaker. They have let their

minimum processing regulations go in this CETA process in order to have access

to the European market.

While we were all able to do that, Mr. Speaker, we know that there is no

threat to our fishery here from the European processors. It is not economical to

come here, get fish, bring it back to Europe and process it and sell it at a

competitive price, Mr. Speaker. We consulted widely within the industry. The

consensus is they are on that point, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

MS DEMPSTER: Mr. Speaker, we have perishable freight destined for Black

Tickle that has been sitting in an unheated freight shed in Cartwright for days.

By the time this freight reaches Black Tickle much of it will be unfit for human

consumption.

I ask the Minister of Transportation and Works: Why are you allowing this

freight to sit in Cartwright while residents of Black Tickle are being denied

access to fresh fruits and supplies?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have been in constant contact with the community officials in

Black Tickle, as well as the contractor that supplies the vessel to go to Black

Tickle. The Astron is now commissioned to bring the freight in. When it

comes to freight going into Black Tickle, if it comes down to bad weather, we do

not take a chance on the safety of the crew. When the captain decides the ship

cannot go into Black Tickle because of bad weather, well then I do not argue

with the captain. I am, as I said, keeping close contact with the officials in

Black Tickle. I got off the phone with them just this afternoon, and we have

another ship commissioned now to bring that in there.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright L'Anse au Clair.

MS DEMPSTER: Mr. Speaker, the people cannot wait for days while things

get sorted out in the interim. Mr. Speaker, Food Banks Canada just released its

HungerCount report for 2013. Yet again, Newfoundland and Labrador has the

highest percentage of its population relying on food banks to survive. We have

twice the national average of food bank usage.

I ask the minister: With the highest rate of food bank usage in Canada, how

is your government going to reach your commitment of having the lowest rate of

poverty in Canada by 2014? Which is only two months away, I might add.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I want to reference that right now in the

history of Newfoundland and Labrador we have the lowest amount of people on

Income Support ever in the history of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. O'BRIEN: Do I recognize the issue that the hon. member referenced? I

absolutely do. That is the reason why we have such diverse programs within

Advanced Education and Skills to encourage people to go into the skilled labour

force, to access the jobs that we are creating all across this Province in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

We have big things that are happening here; we have big opportunities. I

encourage people to take advantage of all the array of programs within Advanced

Education and Skills, to access the programs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Expert testimony at the 2010 Offshore Helicopter Safety Inquiry stated that

the survival rate for a nighttime helicopter crash offshore is 30 per cent as

opposed to 70 per cent in daylight. Commissioner Wells noted that asking workers

to fly at night is asking them to take on more risk.

I ask the Premier, Mr. Speaker: Will she stand with us in opposing any return

to regularly scheduled night flying in the offshore?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, time and time again in this House the Premier

and our government has had an opportunity to express the concern about offshore

safety. We have been very clear.

Mr. Speaker, an unfortunate incident, a tragedy, has brought to light some

issues. During that period of time Commissioner Wells has recommended to the

C-NLOPB to suspend night flights, of which the C-NLOPB complied.

At this time, Mr. Speaker, I understand that there may be a recommendation

coming from industry to the C-NLOPB to review the issue of their flying

schedules. Mr. Speaker, the C-NLOPB is the regulator at this time, and we will

certainly await that decision. Mr. Speaker, be sure, we do continue to press the

federal government for an offshore independent safety regulator.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Commissioner Wells also suggested that adding a helicopter during the four

winter months when the pressure to fly at night is more acute would be a good

idea.

I ask the Premier: Will she join with us in demanding that offshore oil

companies provide the extra helicopter for the winter months instead of trying

to fly at night?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Mr. Speaker, just to reiterate our position, offshore safety

is of utmost concern to the people on this side of the House, and I am sure to

the opposite side, as well as all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

When it comes to the operations of the offshore and the regulator, Mr.

Speaker, the C-NLOPB are charged with that task and they do a good job. In the

meantime, Mr. Speaker, we will be very vigilant and we will continue to ensure

to protect the workers offshore and continue to pressure the federal government

to consider and to implement an independent offshore regulator.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Third Party.

MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Nova Scotia's Energy Minister says there is no rush for a utility board

decision on Nalcor and Emera's latest deal on the Maritime Link, though

section

17 of that deal states time shall be of the essence.

So, Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier: What are the implications to the federal

loan guarantee of a prolonged Nova Scotia utility board review?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we have had parties opposite raising the alarm about one thing

after the other with regard to Muskrat Falls since we introduced the subject

with the signing of the MOU between Nalcor and Emera. The accusations that they

have hurled from the other side with regard to deficiencies in the planning of

this project, many of them have to come to show exactly what they were: fear

mongering.

We have done our due diligence. We have imagined every case scenario that can

occur, and we have proposed a remedy. This project is progressing as it should,

Mr. Speaker. The interests of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are

protected in that process.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, restaurant maintenance and inspection reports are posted online

for public scrutiny.

I ask the Minister of Transportation: Can the minister please tell this House

why he would refuse to post ferry maintenance and inspection reports online as

well?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as this government has proven over and over again, we want to be

a transparent government, but there are certain things that are just too

technical. When you look at a scheduled maintenance report for ferries and

inspection reports, they are probably 300-400 pages long, and it is something

that just would not be posted for online viewing. It is too technical 90 per

cent of people would not understand it because we are not trained for it. They

are very technical inspection reports, and very lengthy, about 400 pages long.

You just would not be able to put it on to the Web site.

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

MR. MURPHY: So, Mr. Speaker, I take it if it is a 300- or 400-page

document and he is not willing to put it online, it sounds like he is more than

willing to let everybody in the public out there see them if he wants to make

them readily available.

Is there something in these reports that he would rather not expose to public

scrutiny?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, these reports are very technical. It is not something

that would normally be released to the general public, but if the general public

are interested in seeing, they can get in touch with my officials and we will do

our best to make them public for them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MURPHY: A hopeful sign, Mr. Speaker.

In the meantime, government is having problems, of course, with ferries and

the lack of a swing vessel obviously is evident. The lack of a swing vessel in

the Newfoundland and Labrador ferry fleet has made us susceptible to a lot more

risk out there. It is so bad now that there are rumours that the old Hamilton

Sound is being enlisted to be put back to work after being sold for scrap a

few years back.

Will the minister tell this House if indeed the now-named Norcon Galatea

is being considered to be pressed into service?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MCGRATH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, since I have gone into the department, one of the things I have

diligently been working on is getting out a contract for a new ferry, for an

eighty-metre ferry. We are working on it and very close to it, so stay tuned on

that one.

When it comes to the old Hamilton Sound , the Hamilton Sound was

sold. It has been refurbished with over $1 million worth of refurbishment done

to that. We are talking to the company that owns that now, to the contractor. We

are in the process of doing a negotiation and we will see what comes out of

that.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Under

section 37 of the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and

Administration Act, the Commissioner for Legislative Standards conducted an

inquiry into the conduct of the Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island for

the alleged contraventions of the House of Assembly Act, the House of Assembly

Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act, and the Members of the House

of Assembly Code of Conduct.

Under

section 38 of the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and

Administration Act, the Commissioner for Legislative Standards delivered his

report resulting from the inquiry to me, in my capacity as Chairperson of the

Management Commission of the House of Assembly. This report was distributed by

me, as Chairperson of the Management Commission of the House of Assembly, to

members of the Management Commission on August 15, 2013.

In accordance with

section 38.(1) of the House of Assembly Accountability,

Integrity and Administration Act, I am hereby tabling the report of the

Commissioner for Legislative Standards into the conduct of the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

Further reports?

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

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

Board.

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pursuant to subsection (5)(

a) of

section 26 of the Financial Administration

Act, I am tabling nine Orders in Council relating to funding of pre-commitments

for the 2014-2015 to 2016-2017 fiscal years.

Mr. Speaker, these relate to pre-commitments. One is to facilitate the award

of a contract to Pennecon Heavy Civil Limited for the construction of

underpasses at two sites on the Team Gushue Highway, $1.784 million.

The second is to facilitate the award of a contract to LSG Construction for

the Exploits Valley High School redevelopment project, $2.646 million; to

facilitate the award of a contract to Mike Kelly and Sons for the widening and

hard surfacing of the Trans-Labrador Highway, $7,778,145; to facilitate the

award of a contract to Mike Kelly and Sons Limited for the widening of the first

eighty kilometres of Phase II of the Trans-Labrador Highway, $5 million; to

facilitate the award of a contract to Marco Services Limited for the

construction of the new west end high school in St. John's, $15,700,000.

Also, to facilitate the award of a contract to Anchorage Contracting Limited

for mechanical and electrical upgrades to the Confederation Building East Block

tower, $1,888,699; to facilitate the award of a contract to Redwood Construction

Limited for the renovation and redevelopment of the RNC Annex Building,

$6,132,117; to facilitate the award of a contract to Brook Construction

(2007) Inc. for the William Gillett Academy rebuild, $4,206,800; and finally, to

facilitate the awarding of a contract for mental health and addiction

initiatives to m5 Marketing Communications for $300,000, for a total over the

years 2014-2015 to 2018-2019 of $46,035,845.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice, seconded by the Member for Gander, of the

following resolution:

WHEREAS in accordance with

section 45 of the House of Assembly Act and

section 39 of the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration

Act, the Commissioner for Legislative Standards has recommended to this hon.

House two following recommendations: first that MHA Brazil be reprimanded by the

House of Assembly for failing to file an accurate disclosure statement; and

second, that MHA Brazil be reprimanded by the House of Assembly for violating

the Members' Code of Conduct.

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly concurs with the

findings and recommendations of the Commissioner for Legislative Standards and

ask that the Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island stand in his place in

this House and apologize to this Assembly for his failure and violation as cited

by the report of the Commissioner for Legislative Standards.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?

The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

An Act to

Amend the City of Corner Brook Act, the City of Mount Pearl Act, the City of St.

John's Act, and the Municipalities Act, 1999. (Bill 20)

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

MS SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

An Act

Respecting Food Safety in Food Premises. (Bill 22)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will ask leave to

introduce a bill entitled,

An Act to Amend the Insurance Adjustors, Agents, and

Brokers Act. (Bill 21)

MR. SPEAKER: Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, a petition to the hon. House of Assembly of the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of

the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

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

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

to be discharged from hospital earlier; and

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

workers for their loved ones; and

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

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

people the option of receiving that care from family members; and

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

implement paying family caregivers;

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

House of Assembly to implement a new home care model to cover family caregivers.

And in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, this is an issue which remains current because government is not

making good on its promise that it made to get re-elected in 2011. It is not

making good on its promise in the 2012-2013 Budget that the House just passed.

Funds were set aside. People are calling on a regular basis.

Today, I had a telephone discussion early this morning with a resident from

the District of Carbonear Harbour Grace. This is a province-wide issue, Mr.

Speaker. It is a province-wide issue. The resident from Carbonear Harbour

Grace said we are finally getting some pavement. I guess it is by-election

pavement, but I want you to ask about home care. Are you asking about home care?

I said absolutely, I am asking about home care.

People are sending in petitions day after day after day. It is a simple

matter. Government has already allocated the fund. The funds are readily

available. This person is an older person. He had the situation of having to

care for a loved one. He had to give up work, give up employment to care for a

loved one. This is really unfair. Most people can agree that it is unfair. I

believe even this government agrees that it is unfair because they made a

promise and allocated the funds.

The belief among many people in the Province is that Muskrat Falls is running

such a massive deficit that government is taking every single dollar they can

find, that should go for the benefit of people, and just throwing it into the

hole. Just throwing it into the hole, $6 million here, $8 million there, $10

million some place else to make up the shortfall. Mr. Speaker, this petition

calls on government to make good on its promise.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. KIRBY: 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 current government regulations deny busing services to students who

live closer than 1.6 kilometres to school; and

WHEREAS parents have expressed concern that children living within 1.6

kilometres of school face dangers in walking to school, such as congested

streets and busy intersections, especially during the winter; and

WHEREAS the $75,000 review of the school transportation system completed by

Deloitte recommended that the Department of Education consider reducing the 1.6

kilometre eligibility zone for kindergarten and elementary students; and

WHEREAS the $75,000 Deloitte report also noted that only 10 per cent of those

surveyed for the school transportation review agree that the current 1.6

kilometre policy is reasonable for students and families; and

WHEREAS parents are continuing to demand more flexible policies to meet the

current needs of school children;

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

House of Assembly to urge government to change the outdated 1.6 kilometre school

busing eligibility policy in order to ensure safe transportation to school for

primary and elementary school children in the Province.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to mention that one time during September, I

believe it was, I was listening to the radio and the Minister of Education was

on there singing to high school students over the Internet distance education

students. Now, I do not know what the song was, Mr. Speaker. I think it was that

song by Bill Luffman, Light and Power Boys . I think that was the one he

was singing, but I am not for certain about that. He can certainly carry a song.

The minister can certainly sing; there is no question. He is no Gene Autry, but

he might get there with trying.

In seriousness, the minister did get the report, the Deloitte report for a

song. It was $75,000 of taxpayers' hard-earned money that went into that report,

and it was a good idea to do it. We petitioned the government to do that review,

the minister listened, which is always good when ministers do that. Now I urge

members to think about the implications of that report and to implement some of

those recommendations so that our kids can have safer school busing across the

Province.

Thank you.

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS the residents of the isolated communities in Northern Labrador have

major issues with regard to the passenger ferry and freight service that is

offered by the provincial government; and

WHEREAS for six months of the year ice prohibits any marine transportation,

and the residents rely on the ferry service for supplies of food, other

necessities and goods, as well as for travel in the ice-free months; and

WHEREAS the current ferry service has had ongoing mechanical and electrical

problems resulting in stranded passengers, delayed freight and vacations, which

affect the availability of food, travel plans, and supplies for business and

tourism;

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

House of Assembly to urge government to replace the MV Northern Ranger .

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I know that this Province is dealing with very heavy issues when

it comes to the ferry replacement strategy, and I know that they are dealing

with heavy issues now as regards to finding suitable boats that are out there

that are going to be under the government preview in the next few years. Since

2003 and, indeed, I think even before that, we have had problems with our boats.

Ever since the provincial government took them back from CN Marine and took over

jurisdiction.

Before that, it did not seem like there was any kind of a problem with the

old CN Marine boats that were out there. Sure, they would update them and we

would have new boats out there, particularly along the Coast of Labrador; but

for some reason, since the Newfoundland and Labrador government took over the

service it seems like, particularly on the Coast where it is pretty important

for the people of the Coast and I have signatures here from the people of

Postville, Cartwright, Nain, Hopedale, and all along the Coast, Mr. Speaker,

that are very heavily dependent upon these boats.

The petition in essence is asking government for assistance here, to get this

problem addressed sooner rather than later. I think it is pretty safe to say,

Mr. Speaker, that as the years go by, government has failed in its strategy to

replace these boats and at the same time are still not giving answers to the

consumers who are out there and the people who are living on the Coast of

Labrador who are so heavily dependent on these boats.

Mr. Speaker, I will leave this petition with you. Hopefully government will

listen to this and address these problems on the part of the people of Labrador,

particularly when they are asking in this petition. We hope to hear from the

Minister of Transportation when he is talking about this new eighty-meter vessel

and hopefully it is going to address some of the problems with the fleet.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Burgeo La Poile.

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

I have a petition. To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the

undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS hundreds of residents of the South Coast of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, including residents of the communities of Burgeo,

Ramea, Grey River, and Franois use Route 480 on a regular basis for work,

medical, educational, and social reasons; and

WHEREAS there is no cellphone coverage on Route 480; and

WHEREAS residents and users of Route 480 require cellphone coverage to ensure

their safety and communication abilities; and

WHEREAS the Department of Innovation, Business and Rural Development recently

announced significant funding to improve broadband services in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador; and

WHEREAS the residents and users of Route 480 feel that the Department of

Innovation, Business and Rural Development should also invest in cellphone

coverage for rural Newfoundland and Labrador;

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

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

the users of Route 480 in their request to obtain cellphone coverage along Route

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Now, Mr. Speaker, this is an issue I have obviously raised on numerous

occasions and I thought it was timely that I do so again, given that we have a

new minister in the Department of Innovation, Business and Rural Development.

Again, this is something I have done on numerous occasions. I have written to

the previous minister and I get the same unsatisfactory answer back to my

questions, which basically is not even an answer.

I am just asking at this point if government has a strategy for what they

would like to implement in the future. I understand the fiscal situation this

government has placed themselves in not found themselves in, but placed

themselves in; again, it is a monster of their own creation but I would at

least like to know that we have a plan for down the road so that we can expand

this coverage to all areas of this Province.

We have a

section here, Route 480, which is not the only place in my district

that does not have cellphone coverage. There are lots of areas across this

Province that do not have it. I would like to know if the government has an

inventory on where they do not have it. Is this an issue? Is this a priority for

this government, to make sure we have this coverage somewhere down the road?

The coverage will mean wonders when we talk about safety, people in these

desolate areas being able to have contact if something goes wrong, which we saw

just last winter on the Burgeo road. When it comes to economic reasons, people

being able to connect back and forth, when we talk about tourism, tourists like

to know that they have connections. Again, we have a lot of great apps when it

places you cannot actually use them.

I hope this is a priority. I am hoping that the new minister will have a

serious look at this, and I will continue to present these petitions until such

time.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Parliament Assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS Route 432, Grenfell Drive, is the primary highway for the residents

of the Great Northern Peninsula East; and

WHEREAS prior to 2012's repaving in patches, Route 432 had a twenty kilometre

rough road sign; and

WHEREAS without repaving on the remaining

section of Route 432, this past

investment will rapidly erode; and

WHEREAS Route 433 connects Roddickton-Bide Arm, Englee and Conche and it too

is in deplorable condition; and

WHEREAS it is government's obligation to provide basic infrastructure to all

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians; and

WHEREAS an improved road network is needed to enhance road safety, and help

with local commerce, enhance tourism and create new business opportunities

surrounding this

section of highway;

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

allocate funds under the provincial roads program to pave this

section of Route

432-433

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I am well aware that there are many sections of the highway in

Newfoundland and Labrador that are in very poor condition. A number of members

opposite had the opportunity to visit my district this summer and drove that

section of highway and would know the condition of it.

I commend the Member for Harbour Main, the past Minister of Transportation

and Works, because there was an allocation for tender and that was stretched out

to pave sections of the highway, and it covered most of the potholes; but,

without further investment, that investment of doing it in sections is going to

rapidly erode and we are not going to get best value for our tax dollars.

Right now, there are a number of tenders for municipal works that have been

carried forward for Conche, for the Town of Roddickton-Bide Arm, and in the area

so there will be roadwork done in the spring of the year. What an opportunity it

would be to look at making an investment in Route 432-433 to make that road

network stronger; because if our rural communities are going to be stronger, we

need to have advance transportation networks. That is certainly key, Mr.

Speaker. That is what my constituents are petitioning for.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. BENNETT: Mr. Speaker, a petition to the hon. House of Assembly of the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of

the undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS mental health is important to overall health and vital to health

education, which is a responsibility of the provincial government; and

WHEREAS one in five Canadians suffers from mental illness, crimes and tragic

stories pertaining to mental health disorders and illnesses are becoming more

prevalent in Canada today; and

WHEREAS the first signs of genetically inherited and developing mental health

issues are often shown right after puberty and during teenage years; and

WHEREAS mental illness has a significant impact on productivity in school,

work and overall happiness, major depression is the leading cause of physical

disability; and

WHEREAS mental health issues are followed by a stigma which prevents

diagnosis, though 80 per cent of symptoms pertaining to mental health disorders

and illnesses are resolved through treatment;

WHEREUPON your petitioners call upon all Members of the House of Assembly to

urge government to implement mental health education into the school board

curriculum;

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, in November every year there is a group of young people and they

have an Unconference at Memorial University. A number of the students at

Memorial and some of their mentors invite young people from various high schools

in the Province.

The young people in a high school prepared this petition. As part of their

learning about democracy, they learned how petitions work, how to draft

petitions. At the closing ceremonies on Sunday evening they presented federal

petitions and provincial petitions.

They provided this one to the Member for Mount Pearl South and asked him to

present it in the House of Assembly. He was not very comfortable presenting the

petition in the House of Assembly. He thought that I ought to do so.

Mr. Speaker, this is a well written, well thought out and purposeful

petition. The request is simple, to ask the members of the House to urge

government to implement mental health education in the school board curriculum,

a better cause I cannot imagine.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Hopefully, the Minister of Education will also take

this under advisement.

Thank you, Sir.

MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance and President of

Treasury Board, to ask leave

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will start over; I am not sure how far I got.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board,

to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act to Amend the Revenue

Administration Act No. 4, Bill 12, and that the said bill be now read a first

time.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. Minister of Finance

shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act to Amend the Revenue Administration

Act No. 4, Bill 12, and that the said bill be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the minister shall have leave to

introduce Bill 12, and that the said bill be now read a first time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

Motion, the hon. Minister of Finance to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend

The Revenue Administration Act, No. 4", carried. (Bill 12)

CLERK: A bill,

An Act to Amend the Revenue Administration Act, No. 4.

(Bill 12)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill is now read a first time.

When shall the bill be read a second time?

MR. KING: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 12 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment and Conservation, for leave

to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act to Amend the Proceedings Against the Crown

Act, Bill 19, and that the said bill be now read a first time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it moved and seconded that the hon. Minister of Justice

shall have leave to introduce a bill,

An Act to Amend the Proceedings Against

the Crown Act, Bill 19, and that the said bill be now read a first time.

Is it the pleasure of the House that the minister shall have leave to

introduce Bill 19, and that the said bill be now read a first time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

Motion, the hon. Minister of Justice to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend

The Proceedings Against The Crown Act", carried. (Bill 19)

CLERK: A bill,

An Act to Amend the Proceedings Against the Crown Act.

(Bill 19)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a first time.

When shall the bill be read a second time?

MR. KING: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, Bill 19 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Order 2, second reading of a bill,

An Act to

Amend the Services Charges Act. (Bill 5)

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

Board.

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am sorry that I was not alert at the time, but the Member for Bay of

Islands was telling me about the good work that is happening in the Forestry and

Agrifoods Agency out in Corner Brook. I was delighted to hear commendation.

MR. JOYCE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, on a point of order.

MR. JOYCE: Actually, I was telling him about the lack of construction for

the hospital in Corner Brook and how much he should be ashamed of it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to get up today to speak to

and to recommend a motion, seconded by the Minister of Education, the passage of

Bill 5, which is merely

An Act to Amend

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It is moved and seconded that Bill 5, entitled

An Act to Amend the Services

Charges Act, be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act".

(Bill 5)

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is what you would call just some basic housekeeping legislation. For the

benefit of new members to the House, I would like to say there are times in this

House of Assembly when momentous things happen. Tremendous things that affect

the history of the Province happen in this House, but unfortunately this bill is

not necessarily one of them.

Mr. Speaker, this bill is, as I said, housekeeping amendments to the Services

Charges Act. This proposal is being brought forward by myself, as Minister of

Finance, and by my colleague, the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador,

who is responsible for the Registration of Deeds Act. This act is the result of

a review that took place back in 1998. It was reviewed to ensure the validity of

some of the fees that the Province was charging. This was in response to a

decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. It was called Euriv versus Ontario, was

the name of the case.

Basically, that case essentially held that probate fees that were charged in

that province, the Province of Ontario, were in reality or in substance taxes.

Thus, if it was a tax as opposed to a fee, then it had to be imposed by

legislation. It had to be imposed by the act of the elected representatives of

the people gathered in the Legislature.

Mr. Speaker, in response to that court decision the Department of Finance

here, in conjunction with the Office of Legislative Counsel in the Department of

Justice, initiated a survey. They took a look at all provincial fees that

government was levying here and fees charged by agencies to determine whether

they were really taxes as opposed to fees, and if they were taxes to bring

forward legislation to give authority to those taxes.

As a result of the review, four varieties of fees were identified. Amongst

the classification of fees, were those that were similar to the fees that had

been challenged in the Euriv case that were clearly not a fee but a form of

taxation, since there was no reasonable linkage between the amount of the fees

and the cost of providing the service or the benefit.

These fees would include probate fees in this Province levied by the

Department of Justice, and property registration fees levied by Service

Newfoundland and Labrador under the Registration of Deeds Act, which is a piece

of legislation or law in this Province where all documents relating to land, to

protect the person named in the documents, are registered in a public Registry

of Deeds where members of the general public can come in and search title to

their documents and to their land. Mortgages, deeds of conveyance, releases of

mortgages, all documentation affecting title to land, it is important that they

be registered so that the public, the people who are taking an interest in the

land, people who are buying the land, can ensure that they are going to get

ownership of land free and clear of all other registrations or claims.

There is a fee paid in the Department of Service Newfoundland and Labrador

under the Registration of Deeds Act, and these fees amount to quite a lot of

money taken in by the Province. I know in places like Ontario they have a land

transfer tax, which we do not have in this Province, and they also have

registration fees. I think here in this Province it was always the intention to

go with the one charge, which would be the registration charge, instead of

having a separate land transfer tax.

The Services Charges Act received Royal Assent and was proclaimed into force

on December 15, 1998 and it effectively established the fees covered by the act

to make sure that there were valid taxes imposed by the statute; however, the

act has had an unintended inconsistency with the

schedule of fees that are

prescribed by the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador under the

authority of

section 39.(1) of the Registration of Deeds Act, 2009, as well as

the former Registration of Deeds Act.

Recommended amendments to the Services Charges Act will have no net impact on

registration fees that are currently being charged so, as such, the total amount

of revenue coming in to the coffers of the Province will not be affected.

Mr. Speaker, the amendments are quite straight forward. The first one is

subsection (3)(

a) of

section 5 and

section 5.(3)(

b) of the act, the Services

Charges Act. The act presently makes an incorrect reference to the fee payable

for the registration of mortgage of land based on the value of the land. Of

course, the registration fees for a mortgage of land are not based on the value

of land, so the reference is incorrect. The registration fees are based on the

indebtedness that is secured by the particular mortgage.

In fact, the registration fee of a mortgage, as I said, is not based on the

value of the land it is based on the amount of indebtedness secured by the

mortgage, so it is proposed in this legislation to replace the words "the value

of land" with the words "the amount of indebtedness".

The second amendment has to do with

section 5.(2) and 5.(3) of the Services

Charges Act because they do not fully address the manner in which the

registration fee is calculated. Where the value of land exceeds $500 the

registration fees provided in subsections (2) and (3) of

section 5 are $100 for

the first $500 of value, plus forty cents for each additional $100 of value. So

to be clear, the language for these formulas should indicate that the

registration fee is $100 plus forty cents for each $100 or part of each $100. So

this will address the scenario where the value of the land is not in $100

increments.

The third amendment, Mr. Speaker, is subsection (1) of

section 5 of the

Services Charges Act. It makes a reference to an obsolete part of the previous

Registration of Deeds Act. The new Registration of Deeds Act, 2009 received

Royal Assent on May 28, 2009, and that was proclaimed in force on December 13,

2010. So the act needs to be amended to make reference to the new act, not the

former act.

The next amendment, Mr. Speaker, has to do with subsections (1) and (3) of

section 5 of the Services Charges Act, which makes an outdated reference to the

term: the registration of mortgage of land. Well, for some time now, the

mortgage of land itself, the mortgage is not registered, because under

subsection 7.(1)(

e) of the Registration of Deeds Act, 2009, the full mortgage

document is no longer registered, rather registration of the existence of a

mortgage is done by filing in the registry what is called a notice of mortgage.

The last amendment, Mr. Speaker, is to

section 5.(3), will render

section

5.(4), so it is proposed that

section 5.(4) be repealed.

As I said, these charges will not have any impact on the total amount of

revenue that comes into the Province by the fees charged, and my colleague, the

Minister of Service NL, will have more to say about that.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for District of Humber Valley.

MR. BALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I concur with the minister when he mentioned the House of Assembly and when

you look at all the pieces of legislation that we actually discuss and debate in

this House and the significant changes that it can have on people within the

Province, Bill 5 is certainly not one of those. It is indeed something we would

consider to be very technical, and indeed the word that we often to use to refer

to something like this is housekeeping.

We did have a little briefing session just to make sure a little bit about

the history on all of this. Really what it goes back to is that the Services

Charges Act was put in place originally to ensure that fees being charged were

constitutional as a result, as the minister said, of the Supreme Court of Canada

decision, which goes back 1998 and the impact that it had regarding those fees.

Essentially the original purpose of the legislation sets fees as a legislated

tax. That was not the purpose here because the current amendments being made in

Bill 5 bring the legislation in line with how fees are actually being levied by

Service NL.

As the minister said, there is no change in these fees. As a matter of fact I

looked at the history to see when the last changes were made. Over the last ten

years this fee has jumped from $50 to $75, and now as the baseline the floor of

this fee is at $100. As you go over that up to $500 there is a surcharge then or

an addition to that fee of some forty cents.

Then it becomes to the value of the mortgage versus the value of the land or

the amount of indebtedness I would say, Mr. Speaker. Not only just the land here

because the legislation makes reference to land, but it also deals with the

structure that could be put on that land. It is kind of the value of the whole

mortgage indeed. It is a floor of $100. As we get over $500, there is forty

cents that gets added to that for every $100.

Mr. Speaker, as an Opposition and as the critic for Finance, there is really

not a whole lot to say about this. Some people might look at this and get a

little confused about how Crown land fits into this discussion. This is not

about Crown land; this is about setting fees against the value of a mortgage or

the amount of the mortgage that would be set and that would be paid to the

general account through Service NL.

Mr. Speaker, there is not a lot to say about it. This is a piece of

legislation that we will be supporting because we do believe it tidies up the

legislation and gets it in line with its intended purpose.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Service of NL.

MR. CRUMMELL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I believe the Minister of Finance, as the Member for Humber Valley did

eloquently say, did a great job of capturing the essence of this amendment. The

Services Charges Act governs specific fees and charges levied by a number of

departments and agencies. The Commercial Registration Division of Service NL is

responsible for one of the legislative initiatives under the Services Charges

Act. That is the reason I am on my feet speaking to this here now, Mr. Speaker.

We are proposing four amendments to be made to the act. These changes relate

to mortgage registration fees, registration fees for conveyance of assignment of

land leases and incorrect reference to the previous Registration of Deeds Act,

and an outdated reference which mentions registering a mortgage of land at the

Registry of Deeds rather than the current requirement of registering a notice of

the mortgage of land.

The difference there, Mr. Speaker, is one time when an individual registered

a mortgage of land, you had to register the full mortgage document but now you

do not have to do that. You do not have to register the document itself, you

just have to register the notice. So it takes a bit of paperwork out of the

equation. It simplifies the process, and we are all about reducing red tape, Mr.

Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, these amendments are necessary to ensure fees outlined in the

Services Charges Act reflect the fees charged by the Commercial Registration

Division. This will in no way impact fees currently charged by the division.

This amendment, while likely housekeeping in nature, will update the act and

ensure consistency between the legislation and the actual fees charged.

Just to comment a little bit about what the actual fees are. It is indeed

forty cents per $100 to register a mortgage. Mr. Speaker, that rate has not

changed since 2005. At this point in time we have no plans to change that rate,

but we will see in the upcoming Budget. There are no increases in rates with

this legislation. There is no extra cost to the public, and no increase in

revenues for the government.

Mr. Speaker, it really is a little piece of housekeeping that we need to get

through, and I rest my case here.

Thank you very much.

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure to get up for a few minutes and talk about

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: Yes, I guess this is a momentous occasion. The hon. Member

for St. John's East is getting up and talking about small print.

I had a couple of observances when I was

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MURPHY: When I was going through the legislation, Mr. Speaker, last

spring with one of my researchers, of course we had a couple of questions that

were pretty prevalent in the legislation that I felt had to be addressed

because, again, for anybody who has bought a home and knowing there is a fee

that has to be levied for the registry of a mortgage, it would be readily

apparent to them.

One of the things that immediately jumped out at me was the simple fact that

the first issue we had with it, the proposed amendment to

section 5.(3)(

b) of

the Services Charges Act places a cap on the service charge at $5,000, which is

in fact a break for rich people who buy expensive homes; homes that are valued

at more than $1.25 million.

My first question to the government here as regards to looking at this piece

of legislation, it is pretty evident here, I think: Why do we have a cap here?

Why the cap? That is one question I think we will ask when it comes towards

committee. I can appreciate that it is a piece of government housekeeping here.

The second issue that was pretty prevalent amongst the people we consulted

with, lawyers included; lawyers have concerns regarding the notice of mortgage

reference leading to big legal problems in the future and a problem that must be

addressed. What they were telling us is fraud is possibly going to be a concern

here in the future.

One thing that was really evident as regards to the first issue again, not

probably to a lot of people but I will repeat it, the $5,000 cap on that

particular item. We know there are not too many of these homes that are for sale

are worth more than $1.25 million. I think in the last year there were probably

twenty-five or thirty homes that were valued over that amount where government

has lost revenue. We can appreciate there is a limit there, but at the same time

when you are talking about a very expensive piece of property, it in essence

sounds like a tax break for anybody who can afford it.

The other thing that concerns me as regards to this, just looking down

through the notes here, talking about the whole aspect of home ownership, and it

sort of rang with me, is government really needs to get back here and address

the whole fact of home ownership, too. I say to the ministers involved here in

this piece of legislation, that while we are talking about a tax here, some form

of tax on a mortgage, the simple fact is some people cannot afford a mortgage

right now based on the whole text when you are talking about the price of home

ownership.

I would like to bring that particular point to the attention of the

government as well, that some people cannot even afford to have a mortgage

because homes are so expensive. Hopefully, at the same time, Mr. Speaker, in

addressing this piece of legislation they will keep it in mind too for those

people who cannot afford a mortgage.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will just have a few brief words to say about Bill 5,

An Act to Amend the

Services Charges Act. Of course, we are all aware, and people who pay fees are

all aware, that fees are one of the limited numbers of ways that government

collects funds, raises funds from the public. Oftentimes that is just really to

cover the cost of doing business, of providing services.

We pay a variety of different fees from drivers' licensing, to birth

certificates and other services that government provides. By and large, in many

cases, these fees are collected in order to cover the cost of service provision,

whatever the service may happen to be. Regardless of income, in a lot of

instances people pay the same fee or similar fees for whatever service it is

they are procuring from government.

This fee is for the registration of a mortgage of land. Now it will be based

on the value or the amount of indebtedness with this legislation rather than the

value of the land. I was very pleased to hear the minister say that this is

going to reduce the amount of paperwork. I think we are all for reducing red

tape and ensuring that we have an economic environment that invites growth,

incents growth, and helps to create additional growth. Paperwork and red tape

certainly impedes that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. KIRBY: Also, Mr. Speaker, it is great to see that the rate is

basically staying the same, especially in light of the current housing cost,

especially here in the Northeast Avalon and my District of St. John's North.

People in Kenmount Terrace will certainly tell you that the cost of housing is

pretty dear, to use local terminology.

So I am certainly happy to see that, and for those reasons, Mr. Speaker, I am

happy to vote for this legislation.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

It is a privilege to get up here today and speak on this bill. I would like

to thank the people in the Department of Finance this morning for the

informative briefing they gave us. Like the minister said, this is a

housekeeping bill. The biggest thing when you look at any of these bills and

people look at when you talk of fees, taxes, and everything else, the first

thing anybody thinks of is, oh, gee, they are changing something and the taxes

are going to go up. This is just, like I said, housekeeping.

The main thing to assure the people of Newfoundland and Labrador is that

there is no increase in fees whatsoever. It is just mainly an increase in most

of the terminology that is in the bill to be consistent with other pieces of

legislation, and it brings two departments in line with the proper terminology

that is here. The Services Charges Act is something that governs fees and

charges that are levied by different departments and agencies within government.

If you look at some of the parts of this legislation that we are changing

here today, it is pretty simple. One part there is just a change of whether you

register a mortgage or you register a notice of a mortgage. That is all they are

doing, basically, is changing the part of the act that says that you have to

register mortgage of land to the register of a notice of motion for a mortgage.

The other part that is getting changed is really the title of the act. It is

Registration of Deeds Act; we are changing it to the Registration of Deeds Act,

2009. Other than that, Mr. Speaker, there is not much to this. It is like it is.

It is a lot of housekeeping and stuff like this.

Another part that is being changed is just basically to make sure that the

fees are getting charged properly. Forty cents goes on to each $100 after $500

and it is done in $100 increments. What this will do is if it goes into

something that is $1,050, the $50 is recognized that they have to pay the forty

cents on that $50 rather than everything at $1,100, $1,200, and $1,300.

That is basically most of the changes, but the biggest thing that I want to

emphasize to the people is that these changes are made just for housekeeping and

they are basically made to make sure that two departments are in-line with each

other; and also to ensure the people that there is absolutely no increases in

any fees or levies that will be charged for when you do register a mortgage. It

is just changes to the terminology.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. MITCHELMORE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to speak to

the bill,

An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act. It is very positive to see

that errors are being amended with this legislation to make sure that everything

is accurate.

One of the things that is very important that I heard the Minister of Service

Newfoundland and Labrador state was that no longer are the full mortgage

documents to be required and that a notice is acceptable. The notice itself sets

out all the terms of a mortgage document, of the transaction, the amount of

debt, the debt due, the interest rate, and all of these types of things. It is

built in to the insurance. That simple document will certainly streamline the

process. There will be less information that government needs to hold when it

comes to a full piece of a mortgage document.

So it is a means to help us in our database management when we are looking at

how we handle resources, and today we are looking at more information than ever

before. So it is great to see. I just hope the information is there, the

database management to basically upload that document and make sure that it is

in electronic form, and then we can go from there.

What I am seeing is where the fees are the same, which is great, but land

values certainly in many of our areas are going up. So we are probably seeing

more of these transactions hit closer to the $500 mark, which is bringing in

more revenue for the provincial economy. I am wondering, and maybe I will ask

the question in Committee, if you know the resources are being provided back for

staffing to ensure that applications are being processed in a timely and

efficient manner, especially in rural regions, because that is always a concern

of mine when we look at this.

What I see in the act and the bill itself is positive. It is housekeeping in

nature, and it is certainly something that I can support, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: If the Minister of Finance speaks now he will adjourn debate

at second reading.

The hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the hon. members opposite who have taken

part in this

debate on what is basically a pretty routine piece of legislation, housekeeping

legislation.

One of the things that did come up, and it is always interesting to hear

other points of view, because they will bring up things that sometimes you have

not even considered. The point I want to emphasize is the fact that this is not

a fee increase. This is merely correcting some anomalies and some redundancies

in the legislation. This is not an increase.

The hon. Member for St. John's East mentioned a cap, and my understanding -

it has been ten years since I practiced, but the Minister of Service NL reminded

me that there is no cap to Registry of Deeds. Regardless of the consideration in

the deed there is no cap, but there is a cap when you register a mortgage. It is

a cap of $5,000. Given the increase in real estate, the increase in prices, and

the prosperity we are seeing here, it could be a time to maybe review that

number.

So, with that we look forward to Committee, and if there are any further

questions we can answer them at that time.

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that the said bill be now

read a second time?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act. (Bill 5)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill is now read a second time.

When shall the bill be referred to the Committee of the Whole House?

MR. KING: Now.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act", read a second

time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, by leave.

(Bill 5)

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

MR. KING: Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance and President of

Treasury Board, that Bill 5,

An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act, be now

referred to the Committee of the Whole.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that I do now leave the Chair, and

that the said bill be referred to the Committee of the Whole.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

Motion carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr.

Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Littlejohn): Order, please!

We are now considering Bill 5,

An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act.

A bill, "An Act To Amend The Services Charges Act." (Bill 5)

CLERK: Clause 1.

CHAIR: Shall clause 1 carry?

The hon. the Member for The Straits White Bay North.

MR. MITCHELMORE: I just have a question relating to clause 1, 5(2)(

b) into the value of land and how it does not exceed $500, $100.

Just for the Minister of Finance, if we could have some clarification as to

how the forty cents was calculated, is there some sort of formula or reasoning

behind these actual figures and numbers for the determination? I would like to

know why these figures were chosen.

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Chair, I registered documents in the Registry of Deeds

for over thirty-two years. Based on my memory it was always forty cents. What

did change was the charge, and again, I am going on memory. I have been in this

House for ten years now, so it has been a while since I practiced. What did

change was the first $500. I think the fee charged for the first $500 way back

was $50. I know in 1998 it was $50 and it was forty cents for each $100 after

that, or each part of $100.

Then in 2004 it went up to $75 on the first $500. You paid $75 for the first

$500 of value, and then it was forty cents for every $100 or part $100

afterwards. Then it went to $100. I cannot remember when it was not forty cents,

but I do know the charge on the first $500 did change.

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Just a question for the Minister of Finance on this issue when it comes to

the particular question around the whole fact of the allowance of other staff,

for example, to be handling the paperwork now, where it seems like the paperwork

has lightened off. It does not necessarily involve lawyers anymore.

When we went to consult with some lawyers on the issue they are saying that

it really downloaded the administrative duties previously done by registry

staff. I have a little bit of a concern about that. When it comes to the whole

issue and I guess, Mr. Minister, you might be able to answer the question

about the whole issue of the preservation of legalities and the more mistakes I

think that are probably going to happen within the system.

Are you aware of any mistakes that have become evident as regards to this

that would have necessitated the change in this legislation?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. CRUMMELL: Yes, Mr. Chair, not to our knowledge. We do not have any

information around that.

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

MR. MURPHY: Okay. I guess, Mr. Chair, that might do it.

I just want to get a little bit more clarification though around the $5,000

limit, because that was my point about the growing wealth within the Province. I

know real estate values and everything are exceeding faster than, I guess beyond

everybody's dreams in some cases if you are a property owner.

In some cases, like I say when you are not a mortgage owner but you are

pursuing the value of a home then it becomes quite evident, of course, when the

whole question is about affordability. That is another issue, but I just wanted

to get some clarification, and possibly government might be able to address it

again as regards to the whole issue of why that cap was put there in the first

place, this $5,000 cap.

Are we going to end up seeing another piece of legislation, or a revision to

the legislation to get that cap lifted?

CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Service Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. CRUMMELL: Mr. Chair, we certainly will take that under advisement and

talk to our officials about the history of that cap. We will look into that for

you and get back to you at the appropriate time.

CHAIR: All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

CLERK:

Be it enacted by the Lieutenant Governor and House of Assembly in

Legislative Session convened, as follows.

CHAIR: Shall the enacting clause carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, enacting clause carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act to Amend the Services Charges Act.

CHAIR: Shall the

preamble carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion,

preamble carried.

CHAIR: Shall the title carry?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

On motion, title carried.

CHAIR: Shall I report the bill without amendment?

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: All those against, nay'.

Carried.

Motion, that the Committee report having passed the bill without amendment,

carried.

On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit

again, Mr. Speaker returned to the Chair.

MR. SPEAKER (Wiseman): The hon. the Member for the District of Port de

Grave.

MR. LITTLEJOHN: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have considered

the matters to them referred and have directed me to report Bill 5,

An Act to

Amend the Services Charges Act, carried without amendment.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair of the Committee of the Whole reports that the

Committee have considered the matters to them referred and have directed him to

report Bill 5 without amendment.

When shall the report be received?

MR. KING: Now.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

When shall the bill be read a third time?

MR. KING: Tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: On tomorrow.

On motion, report received and adopted. Bill ordered read a third time on

tomorrow.

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I call from the Order Paper, Order 4: a motion to move that the House resolve

itself into a Committee of the Whole on Supply to Consider a Resolution Relating

to the Granting of Supplementary Supply to Her Majesty. (Bill 8)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to inform the House, and through the House the people of Newfoundland

and Labrador, that in accordance with the Constitution of this country, I have

received a message from His Honour the Lieutenant Governor.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

As the Lieutenant Governor of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, I

transmit Estimates of sums required for the public service of the Province for

the year ending March 31, 2014 by way of Supplementary Supply and in accordance

with the provisions of

section 54 and 90 of the Constitution Act, 1867, I

recommend these Estimates to the House of Assembly.

Sgd.: ____________________________

Frank F. Fagan, CM, ONL, MBA

Lieutenant Governor

The hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Government House

Leader and Minister of Justice, that the message together with the bill be

referred to the Committee of Supply.

MR. SPEAKER: It has been moved and seconded that I do now leave the

Chair.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion carried.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on

Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole on Supply

CHAIR (Littlejohn): Order, please!

We are now reviewing Bill 8,

An Act For Granting To Her Majesty Certain Sums

Of Money For Defraying Certain Additional Expenses Of The Public Service For The

Financial Year Ending March 31, 2014 And For Other Purposes Relating To The

Public Service.

CLERK: That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide for the

granting to Her Majesty for defraying certain additional expenses of the public

service for the financial year ending March 31, 2014, the sum of $62,517,800.

CHAIR: Considering a Resolution Relating to the Granting of Supplementary

Supply to Her Majesty, Bill 9.

The hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Supplementary Supply.

Supply bills are obviously very important to this House, to the members of this

House, and to the people of the Province. We do three types of Supply bills. The

big one, of course, is the Supply bill that comes with the Budget that we do

during the Budget session of the House in the spring, and that is when we debate

the main Supply and we have a debate over the Estimates, the money that is going

to be spent by the government over the year.

Prior to doing the main Supply bill, when we first come into the House for

the Budget session, we do something called Interim Supply. While we are debating

the main bill and while we are debating the Budget, government needs some money

to pay its employees and conduct its day-to-day operations, so we go through

something called Interim Supply which provides the government money for three

months.

When the amount in the Estimates is spent and more money is needed, it is

necessary for government to come back into the House and seek additional monies,

and they do this by a process that we are going to do today called Supplementary

Supply. It happens in two different situations.

One is like today when the government has a need for some new funds and the

House is sitting, we come in looking for Supplementary Supply. The other one,

which we will do on another day, is where government needs monies, there is no

money in the particular appropriation, and the House is not sitting. The example

is when the House was not sitting and there was a by-election called in

Cartwright L'Anse au Clair and more money was needed for the conduct of that

by-election, government sought what is called a special warrant; the Lieutenant

Governor issued the special warrant which provided the funds.

Good practice is that in such a situation, when the House reconvenes, that we

come together and the government comes in and says: Look, this special warrant

was issued and now we want the House, the representatives of the people, to

ratify what the government has done. This is based on a principle that has been

around for a long time, and it is the principle that the government, the Crown,

cannot spend money that is not approved by the representatives of the people

gathered in this House of Assembly.

Now, Mr. Chair, with respect to this bill, hon. members will recall that in

September the government reached a tentative agreement with the Newfoundland

Association of Public and Private Employees, known as NAPE. I am pleased to say

that agreement was ratified by eleven of the twelve bargaining units of NAPE

last month. Discussions continue with Marine Services.

Shortly thereafter, hon. members are aware that the Canadian Union of Public

Employees, CUPE, and the Association of Allied Health Professionals, AAHP, they

also reached tentative reached agreements with the government, and the

ratification votes are now taking place with those two unions.

I am pleased with the hard work and dedication of all those involved on both

sides of the negotiation process. These agreements are good deals for the public

employees of our Province. Through the negotiation process all parties were

focused on reaching a fiscally responsible deal, one that recognizes the fiscal

situation of the government, but that is also fair and reasonable to our

employees and recognizes their hard work and dedication. This was most certainly

achieved.

The framework of the agreement includes a general economic increase of 5 per

cent over four years. Zero per cent in the first two years, then 2 per cent in

the third year, and 3 per cent in the final year. In addition, the employees

will receive a one-time signing bonus payment of $1,400 on a pro-rated basis in

year two of the agreement, which is this year, fiscal year 2013-2014. This year,

of course, will end on March 31, 2014.

Mr. Chair, this payment is a fiscally responsible way to provide appropriate

compensation for public employees in this year of the agreement. The bonus will

reflect a one-time expenditure for government in 2013-2014. It will not become

part of the salary base; therefore, it will not impact the fiscal forecast for

the following year, 2014-2015, and beyond.

Our government has committed to employees that they will indeed receive the

$1,400 payment in year two of the agreement that is this year as negotiated.

We want to ensure that the employees receive the payment by Christmas. In order

to ensure that cheques can be sent out in time and can reach our employees by

then, I am advised that between November 15-18 is as late as we have to pass

this Supplementary Supply so that the cheques can go out in time for the

Christmas period.

The cost to the taxpayer for the bonus

part if you look at the

Schedule in

the bill, you will see under Supplementary Supply $59,566,400 and $53,633,977 of

that is the bonus; that is the amount of the bonus. Also included in the

agreement were other benefits to employees, increased benefits, such as

increases in the shift differential, increases in the weekend differential,

there were substantial increases, and there were substantial increases in the

standby. Those items, the shift differentials, the weekend differentials, and

the standby will amount to another $5.9 million. Those two, the amount for the

bonus, the $53,600,000 and the $5.9 million will give you the $59,566,400 set

out in the

Schedule under Salaries.

The next thing, Mr. Chair, is the Employee Benefits and you will see that in

the

Schedule there are Employee Benefits of $2,248,000 and that is Employment

Insurance, Canada Pension Plan and payroll tax on the $59,500,000 figure.

The last item, Mr. Chair, in Transportation and Communications at $703,400

that is an increase in meal allowance that showed up under Transportation and

Communications; I think it is the ferry services. I think that has covered it

all, the bonus, the shift differential, the weekend differential, the standby,

the payroll taxes on those, EI and CPP, and the meal allowance.

Mr. Chair, these are good benefits for our public service employees. We must

now take steps to ensure that they receive the benefits in a timely matter upon

ratification. As such, it was recommended the Lieutenant Governor direct the

Office of the Legislative Counsel to prepare this bill, this Supplementary

Supply bill, for 2013-2014 not to exceed in total, of all those numbers that I

previously mentioned, $62,517,800. That is the total of the numbers that I

previously mentioned.

This is required in order to enable the funding of the costs associated with

the signing bonus and the other costs as I discussed as part of the new

collective agreements with costs calculated to apply to all public employees.

The number of $62.5 million is based on the cost if everybody ratifies the

agreement.

Mr. Chair, it is precedent that negotiated benefits in the collective

agreements of the public service be applied to non-bargaining units, employees,

and management as well. Therefore, the same general economic increases and the

one-time payment in year two, the $1,400 bonus, will be applied to these groups.

It is in the spirit of equality that this precedent has been set and I think all

members of the House will be pleased to continue to honour all public employees

with these fair and fiscally responsible payments.

These payments were welcomed by employees as illustrated by the ratification

by eleven of twelve NAPE groups and the tentative agreements in place with CUPE

and AAHP. As an employer, government is certainly pleased to recognize their

employees in this way and to be able to proceed in a fiscally prudent manner for

the term of the agreement.

Mr. Chair, before I conclude I see I have about five minutes left there

may be some questions on who will get the bonus and who does not. I can tell you

that MHAs are not going to get the bonus. I can tell you that doctors and

provincial court judges are not going to get the bonus. Resigned employees who

have voluntarily ended the employment relationship with the employer will also

not get it. Employees who were dismissed with cause because the employment

relationship ended for cause will also not receive it.

It is important to remember that Supplementary Supply is being secured to

ensure there is funding to allow the payment to be made to those who have

negotiated a contract, those currently in negotiations, and management and

non-bargaining management groups. If individuals have any questions, they can

certainly contact their managers, their executive, or their union

representative.

Now, Mr. Chair, as I said earlier, every effort will be made to get the

payment to bargaining unit employees who have ratified the agreement before

Christmas. Every effort will also be made to apply this benefit to those groups

of management and non-union employees before the end of the fiscal year. We must

first focus our resources on those groups who have ratified collective

agreemen