December

10, 2009

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. X L VI

No. 38

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order please!

Admit strangers.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Today the House welcomes the following members'

statements: the hon. the Member for the District of Port au Port; the hon. the

Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi; the hon. the Member for the

District of Cape St. Francis; the hon. the Member for the District of Humber

Valley; and the hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay

North.

The hon. the Member for the District of Port au Port.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CORNECT: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this hon. House to congratulate

Gerald Morgan, Principal of Stephenville Primary School for being recognized

with the Victor May Distinguished Administrator Award for his outstanding work

in the school, school district and Province this past October.

Mr. Speaker, Gerald has been principal at Stephenville Primary School for the

past five years and is well known for his commitment and dedication to the

students. Mr. Morgan has been involved in many initiatives that enhance the

learning experience of all students. Under his leadership the school received

environmental awards, strengthened its commitment to literacy and implemented

the Families and Schools Together program, and, Mr. Speaker, the list could go

on. Our community and, indeed, our children are very fortunate to have an

educator of Mr. Morgan's calibre.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members of this hon. House of Assembly to join

with me in congratulating Gerald Morgan for receiving the Victor May

Distinguished Administrator Award.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

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

It gives me great pleasure today to stand in the House and recognize a

constituent, Chris Brookes. Chris is an author, storyteller and independent

radio producer whose documentary features have won over forty international

awards, including the Peabody Award and the Prix Italia, and have been broadcast

around the world.

I want to congratulate him particularly Hark! a documentary on the

acoustic world of Elizabethan England. It was winner of the 2009 Prix Marulic,

the "best of festival" Grand Award at the 2009 International Radio

Festival of New York, and the Gold World Medal for Best Sound. In October, Hark!

opened the 2009 Prix Europa radio screenings.

Chris has taught documentary storytelling at festivals and workshops across

North America and Europe. As a sound artist, his audio art has been exhibited at

international festivals and released on CD. He was formerly artistic director of

the Mummers Troupe Theatre of Newfoundland and pioneered the use of theatre as a

vehicle for community development. He has also produced radio drama for CBC.

He has been inducted to the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Hall of Fame,

holds an honorary doctorate from Memorial University of Newfoundland, and is a

recipient of the Order of Canada. Brookes currently directs his production

company Battery Radio, fittingly, at the bottom of the cliff where Marconi

received the first trans-Atlantic wireless message.

I ask the members of the House to join me today in congratulating Chris

Brookes.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate the Pouch Cove

Lions Club and all its members on their efforts during the past year.

At a convention in October, they were honoured by receiving the award as the

Best Club for 2008-2009 under the leadership of Lion Kevin Connors, who also

received the President Excellence Award and the President Excellence Award from

Lions International.

Lion Tracey Granter received the Secretary award from Lions International.

One of their newest members, Stephen Hewlin, received the Rookie of the Year

Award. All these awards are due to the joint effort of all members of the Pouch

Cove Lions Club.

Mr. Speaker, the Pouch Cove Lions Club is an excellent organization in the

District of Cape St. Francis. Last year, there were thirty-five individuals and

groups that benefited from their excellent work and determination. The Pouch

Cove Lions Club raised in excess of $32,000. They raised this funding by having

everything from a booth at the Regatta, bingos, card games, sock hops, selling

cold plates and so on. It is easy to see why they were selected the Best Lions

Club.

I ask all hon. members in this House to join with me in congratulating the

Pouch Cove Lions Club and wishing them all the best in their future endeavours.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KELLY: Mr. Speaker, it is my esteemed pleasure to rise in this hon.

House today and pay tribute to the organizers of two special events in my

district this past summer. Both the towns of Hampden and Reidville have

significant milestones in the history of their respective communities. The Town

of Reidville celebrated its fortieth anniversary and the Town of Hampton

celebrated its fiftieth. Both had Come Home Year celebrations to celebrate the

event.

The immense success of both these events can be attributable to the

persistent and dedicated efforts of the committees charged with the task of

organizing the events. Hats off to Joan Parsons, Chair of the Hampton Come Home

Year celebrations and Cliff Reid, Chair of the Reidville Come Home Year

committee. Both committees were staffed with strong members and a community

network of volunteers.

Mr. Speaker, Reidville's event ran from July 10 to July 15 and Hampton's

celebration took place from July 16 to July 19. The strong sense of community

pride was quite apparent in both communities. Both had special projects that

included an outstanding video production on the heritage of their respective

communities.

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

congratulating both the communities of Hampton and Reidville on the outstanding

success of their Come Home Year celebrations.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits &

White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to stand in the House of

Assembly today to recognize the efforts of students and staff at James Cooke

Memorial School in Cooke's Harbour for standing up to bullying.

The international Stand Up Against Bullying Day was started after two senior

students in Nova Scotia stood up for a freshman student who was being bullied

for wearing a pink shirt. The thirty-four students and four teachers of James

Cooke Memorial are one of 1,000 schools, workplaces and organizations

participating and represent more than 500,000 people who have taken the pledge.

The students and staff participated in a number of events to bring awareness

to this growing problem. The primary class acted out scenes to identify bullying

and drew posters. The intermediate students held discussions and the senior

students watched videos and participated in a question and answer session. The

student council also designed a bullying box in which incidents of bullying were

submitted anonymously.

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

the students and staff of James Cooke Memorial School for taking a stand against

bullying and extend to them the very best wishes for continued success in any

future projects they may take on.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge December 10 as International Human

Rights Day. Each year this day is set aside in recognition of the adoption of

the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations General Assembly

in 1948. The focus of this year's Human Rights is non-discrimination and we

are all encouraged to "Embrace Diversity, End Discrimination".

Mr. Speaker, prosperous, peaceful and open societies embrace diversity and

aim to end discrimination. As we continue to open our arms to people from around

the world and share our prosperity and peace, we must continue to embrace the

principle of non-discrimination. Nobody, regardless of their age, race,

religion, political opinion, marital or family status, sex, sexual orientation,

disability or background should face discrimination. Indeed, embracing

non-discrimination is fundamental to our success as a people.

Mr. Speaker, last year on this date, the provincial government announced that

consultations would take place as part of a government's goal to revise the

Human Rights Code of Newfoundland and Labrador, a fundamental document for our

Province. To encourage and stimulate debate on this topic the Department of

Justice prepared a consultation document which was available to each resident of

the Province. This consultation process included consultation sessions

throughout the Province, and also encouraged individuals and groups to prepare

and make submissions via mail and the Internet.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the many organizations that made

representation during the consultation process, along with the general public,

and indeed the Members of the House of Assembly. The Department of Justice is

still in the process of reviewing the submissions received; however, I am

confident that suggestions from the people of the Province will no doubt have a

great influence on this new code. I look forward to presenting a revised Human

Rights Code to the people of the Province in this Legislature during the next

session.

Today, as we mark International Human Rights Day, it is important to keep in

mind the words of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, "All humans

are born free and equal in dignity and rights." This is a truly powerful

statement, one which should be echoed throughout our world, and indeed one that

we should embrace and live by each and every day.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

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

pay tribute and recognition to the International Human Rights Day, and we also

embrace diversity and wish to end discrimination, as the theme is for this year.

The minister alluded at length in his statement to the Human Rights

Commission and the Human Rights Code here in the Province, and we also look

forward to seeing a revised Human Rights Code. We are all aware, of course, and

I am sure the minister is, of the Auditor General's report of 2008 where he

pointed out some very serious deficiencies in the Human Rights Commission that

we currently have. There were backlogs; there were high staff turnovers and so

on due to resource shortages.

We, the Opposition, in fact, made it an official presentation during the

consultation process, as recommended. As recommended by the Auditor General, we

also recommended that the Human Rights Commission should be made an independent

office of the House of Assembly as opposed to, which it currently is, an arm of

Department of Justice. We feel there is certainly a conflict of interest there

in having the Department of Justice not being at arm's-length because the

government is indeed involved in 50 per cent of the human rights cases in this

Province. We feel it is more appropriate that they be at arm's-length and not

as they are currently structured.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

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

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

applaud him for the declaration that he has made today.

Human rights are very important to all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, not

just for ourselves but on an international level as well. We have had an ongoing

evolution of recognition of human rights in our Province. It has been an

interesting one - everything from the issues that happened around denominational

education to the inclusion of gays and lesbians in the code. There have been

many things that have happened in our Province that have been motivated by human

rights.

The story though, as the minister noted, is not over. We are continually

growing in our understanding of human rights. I, too, am interested in seeing

the legislation that will come forth with regard to the revision of the Human

Rights Code that is ongoing at the moment. The consultations took place last

year, and I was hoping that we might see the new legislation at this time, so

now I guess we look forward to the spring sitting.

I do hope that the minister will ensure that the revised code includes all

the improvements brought forward by participants in the consultations. I know

that I took

part in the consultation here in St. John's, and I did not hear

anything at that consultation that I would not think should be in or covered by

our legislation.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to ask all

members, their families and the general public to come and celebrate this year's

Christmas Lights Across Canada Ceremony. The event takes place this evening,

beginning at 6:15 p.m. in the main lobby of the East Block of Confederation

Building.

This ceremony, Mr. Speaker, has without doubt become an annual family

tradition that will see some 60,000 lights illuminate Confederation Hill. This

year our display will once again include six cut outs depicting Christmas

scenes, and thirteen trees decorated with white lights, symbolizing our thirteen

provinces and territories. The main tree on the steps of Confederation Building

is approximately twenty-five feet tall, and was cut from the Ocean Pond area.

Once again this year, our tree contains all LED energy saving Christmas

lights, and in fact, all our lights in this year's display are energy

efficient bulbs. This is the twenty-third year Newfoundland and Labrador has

participated in this national event.

Mr. Speaker, we are ahead of the game this year, holding our ceremony a

couple of days before the national ceremony in Ottawa, which this year is

Saturday, December 12, but that certainly does not dim the sense of pride we

feel as we join with other provinces and territories across this beautiful

country in officially marking the start of the holiday season.

This year it is my pleasure to be joined by the hon. Deputy Premier and

Minister of Natural Resources and her grandchildren, who will turn on the switch

that will illuminate thousands of lights up and down the Parkway here in St.

John's. We will also hear from the Zara Vocal Group and the Royal Newfoundland

Regiment Band.

Each year Christmas Lights Across Canada brings a smile to the faces of young

and old alike, and I invite everyone to join us in this annual holiday event.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. It is good

to see that a twenty-three-year-old tradition is continuing this evening here on

the steps of the Confederation Building.

It is also worth noting, like the minister said, that all the lights that we

see that are going to be lit up this evening are energy saving, so it shows that

we are headed the right way, economically-friendly and what have you.

I know the weather is not very good out here today. I know the weather is not

the best, but in case the minister does get in trouble I know he is in very

capable hands, the Deputy Minister and her grandchildren are going to be there

to help to flick that switch.

I want to congratulate everybody involved with this wonderful project. I hope

that it is a good evening, everybody gets out to enjoy it, and as we do let's

not forget those who are less fortunate and give thanks for all the good

blessings that we do have.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

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

I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy, or thank Santa Claus,

whichever. This is such a feel-good thing, what can one say? We all enjoy the

Christmas season and all the holidays that happen during this season as well.

Hanukah will be coming up tomorrow - I think the eleventh, this year, is Hanukah

- and we have other celebrations that go on. I think everybody do join together

in celebrating everybody's celebrations at this time. I know some people do

not like calling it the holiday season, but it really is. It is a major holiday

season. For those of us who celebrate Christmas, it certainly is a major one.

I, too, was delighted to see, as the years have done over, the last three or

four years, the increased use of the LED lights. I think it is just right that

people see the government buildings using the LED because, I think, it puts it

in their mind to realize they are beautiful and they will make the change over

as well.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, a house fire in Labrador claimed the lives of five people, two

of whom were children and one of whom was under the care of Child Welfare. After

this incident, government did complete an internal investigation. We requested a

copy of this report through the Access To Information and we did receive it, but

for the most part a lot of the document was blacked out. In fact, Mr. Speaker,

even a number of the recommendations in the document were blacked out. There

were eight recommendations that we were aware of that involved improving

training, clinical supervision and risk management. Some of the other

recommendations, we do not know what they are.

I ask the minister: Has there been any action to implement the

recommendations that were contained in that report, and are you prepared to

share with us those recommendations that were blacked out?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I can say that the report that was received based

on the fire in Labrador was taken very seriously by Health and Community

Services and now by the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services. I can

also say that any information that was blacked out was according to the

guidelines of the legislation that guides how we black out information or what

we black out, and a lot of it may have been about personal information of the

people who are involved in this particular review.

Mr. Speaker, what I can say is that based on those eight recommendations, we

are moving forward with every area of those recommendations to make sure that we

set up a system that protects the children of Newfoundland and Labrador and no

recommendations will be ignored or not followed upon.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I should let the minister know that we have appealed to the Information and

Privacy Commissioner, simply because oftentimes we know that there are private

and personal information that are blacked out but recommendations in a document

are there to improve the system itself and to make it work better for the people

who use it.

So I ask the minister, if she is prepared to provide to us a full copy of the

recommendations that was in that report?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, based on the legislation, but more importantly in

this particular case, based on the fact that some of the recommendations may

contain personal information or names of private individuals who may not wish to

have that made public, that I have to respect the law and I would not want to do

anything to embarrass the families any further or to release information right

now that under the law is protected. If there are any appeals made, and the

Privacy Commissioner determines that that information should be released, we

will do it, but I will not take it upon myself right now to violate the privacy

of any individual. Especially, Mr. Speaker, when we are talking about people

right now who have been severely and seriously affected by a very tragic event

in Labrador, and there are still people grieving, Mr. Speaker. I hope they have

been notified by the Official Opposition today that questions were coming. I

hope they knew that it was being in the media last night, because earlier this

summer when they made issues public, I know that that family had not been

notified.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If the minister is all that concerned, I can certainly inform her that I have

had many discussions with the family.

Mr. Speaker, we know that Labrador has unique challenges involving geography,

culture, workload and staffing that often requires different approaches in

dealing with issues. In this case in Labrador, it was alleged that reports were

made but not followed up on within the Department of Child, Youth and Family

Services.

I ask the minister today: Has there been any improvements made in the system,

especially in Labrador, to ensure that there is follow-up on all of these child

welfare issues?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, there is so much I can say about this particular

topic right now that to have a few seconds to address it just does not give it

justice.

Mr. Speaker, this government, over the last couple of years, invested $25

million in Child, Youth and Family Services and with that there were 200 new

positions, but, Mr. Speaker, despite that investment, we did not feel that that

service was moving ahead in the way that we felt was most effective. As a result

of that, Mr. Speaker, we have created the new Department of Child, Youth and

Family Services. That certainly shows that this government takes this area of

our work very seriously and we are preparing to move forward to make the

improvements that are necessary.

Mr. Speaker, just last week I had the opportunity to meet with the Deputy

Minister of Health and Social Development for the Nunatsiavut government. I was

accompanied by the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs. We talked about the unique

issues in Coastal Labrador regarding child protection issues. I also had the

opportunity this summer, Mr. Speaker, to meet with the staff in the Nain office,

in the Hopedale office, and in the Makkovik office as well. I also met with the

staff in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Cartwright and Forteau.

Mr. Speaker

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer.

MS BURKE: Well, in conclusion, Mr. Speaker, what I would like to say is

that this government is keenly interested in the areas, particularly in

Labrador, and we plan to continue to address these areas until we get the

progress that is absolutely (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Kathleen Kufeldt, the former Chair of Child Protection at Memorial University

and a child welfare expert, has stated that when these types of incidents occur

within the system an independent investigation is warranted and should be

initiated by government. However, Mr. Speaker, in this case until we took the

issue ourselves as an Opposition to the Child and Youth Advocate Office there

was no such investigation planned by government.

I ask the minister: Why was there not an independent investigation into this

case launched by your department and your government?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, there was an internal review, as the member had

indicated, that was done by Child, Youth and Family Services. It is also my

understanding that this had been referred to the Child and Youth Advocate at one

point in time and was deemed that it would not be investigated by the Child and

Youth Advocate. Now, Mr. Speaker, that referral and that decision was made

outside of government. Then I understand that the hon. member made

representation to the Child and Youth Advocate that this case be opened and

there was a statement made that the advocate's office would review this.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the advocate's office is arm's-length from the MHAs and

from the House of Assembly. They report to us but we do not go down or we should

not be down telling them what to do or what to investigate, but, in saying that,

I also received correspondence from the present advocate who indicated that he

felt that the appropriate decision was made initially not to review this case

but because the advocate who is now no longer in that position made that

decision, that he would honour that decision. So, Mr. Speaker, the decision of

the advocate's office should be independent of us. If we are not making that

referral, which we did not in this case but it was indicated that it had been

referred, they looked at their files and they felt they did not need

(inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Is the minister telling me today that the Child Advocate is investigating a

case of a death of a child who was a ward of the state in this Province only

because he feels an obligation to do it, not because he thinks it is necessary,

should be done and should be a practice that happens within government and

within this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, the answer is - I guess the question is not

correct because the case we are talking about is not a child who was a ward of

the director of Child Protection. This was a child who was with their birth

parent. The child died in a fire. The fire was investigated and the fire in that

house was accidental. The Child and Youth Advocate's Office at one point took

the referral and decided that they did not have a role. They do that

independent. They do not report back to me. The present advocate reviewed the

case again - and I cannot speak for the advocate, only what was given to me - he

felt that the review was unnecessary but would continue based on the actions of

the previous advocate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is unfortunate that you have to drag an investigation out of the Child and

Youth Advocate in this Province when a child dies. I just cannot believe what I

am hearing here today.

Mr. Speaker, the Turner report was supposed to overhaul the way in which

child welfare and support services functioned in this Province and address some

of the systemic problems that exist. The Department of Child, Youth and Family

Services was set up to put more focus on the welfare of children in the

Province, and unfortunately there are still some very serious problems that

still exist.

I ask the minister today: What are we learning? Are we learning any lessons

from all of these incidents and the impact that this has had on people's lives

in our Province? If we are, why is there still recurring incidents?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, we are in the process of change in this particular

field in Newfoundland and Labrador. I will refer back to the clinical service

report done by Susan Abell. She indicated in that report and I have great

respect for her as an expert. She said that a series of quick fixes will not

work; it will take three to five years. She is right, to do a systems change

takes a long time.

One of the fundamental changes we have to make, Mr. Speaker, is our

legislation. We have to review the legislation; we have to amend it. One thing

that is fundamentally flawed with the legislation, Mr. Speaker, is the fact that

it does not focus on the best interests of the child.

Mr. Speaker, the previous government received a report in 1997, and on page

59 of that report it outlined what the focus should be in the legislation. In

not one place did it say it should be in the best interests of the child. Do you

know what? You took it, you brought it in and now we are left with the problems.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in July, government issued a tender for the provision of ferry

services on six coastal service routes in the Province. With the outline specs

of the tender that was issued by government, it would require that the vessels

be fifteen years of age or younger. It was impossible to supply this contract

unless new vessels were being built. However, Mr. Speaker, there was no

stipulation in the contract to say if new vessels were to be built, they would

be built at shipyards in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I ask the Premier today: Why was this clause excluded from the tender

documents when your government had made a commitment that ferries would be built

in Newfoundland and Labrador?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In response to the question from the member opposite, these were six

contracted ferry services which we put out a tender for, and in the response to

that tender that came back, that it did call for we were hoping that there

would be some boats around that would fit the specs of those tenders, that they

could be used. It came back that these would have to be newly constructed

ferries, and of course, that put another wrinkle into the mix. So looking at the

tenders, looking at the money that came in, we decided to let those tenders

elapse and to go back to the drawing board.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Will the minister confirm that new tenders for these six vessels in the

Province will stipulate a requirement that if new vessels are to be built, that

they would be built in shipyards in this Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in my previous answer, these

were contracted ferry services put out in a tender, these were services, not

construction. These were put out; I believe a number of companies tendered for

them. Again, looking at what came back nowhere in those contracts was anything

with regard to construction of ferries in Newfoundland and Labrador.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do not see the point in asking the question again, obviously there is not

going to be a requirement to have those ferries built in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, this government also closed down thirteen highway depots in the

Province in 2005. It was done as a cost-saving measure to government. NAPE, the

union representing these affected workers has grieved the decision, took the

government to court and they won their case. In fact, Mr. Speaker, they won

their case twice. Now government is appealing it for the third time.

I ask the minister today: As opposed to continuing appealing these decisions

in the courts, wasting taxpayers' money and time, why is government not

prepared to reopen those depots and put these workers back to work?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Decisions are made, and I guess any policy, and when those

decisions are made, it is based on what we believe as a government is the best

course of action. Of course, when those decisions are made, they are not always

agreed upon. In the interim, I suppose, parties can come back and ask that they

reviewed, whether it is through the courts or through grievances or whatever.

That is where that process is now, Mr. Speaker. It is in the appropriate

place. We, as a government, are representing the interests of the Province, and

we will await the outcome of that particular appeal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is quite obvious that government's decision in the Province and to lay

these workers off was the wrong decision. The courts have ruled twice in favour

of the workers. Why the government continues to appeal it, we have no

understanding of that.

I ask the minister today: How much has your government spent so far in court

and legal action on this particular file, and how much has the savings been

since 2005 when you made the decision to close those depots?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Again, Mr. Speaker, I say to the hon. member opposite, as

I have said before, we work in the best interest of the people of Newfoundland

and Labrador. During the course of operating in that manner, there are expenses

that we incur, but again, we feel that we have to go down this path in order to

clarify this situation and the decision; that is where we stand right now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, the tourism industry has been rationalized into

four destination marketing organizations down from twenty-seven regional tourism

associations. In their inceptions, these DMOs have a mandate to increase

economic development in the four regions through tourism. Yet, Mr. Speaker,

there is a concern that some of them are immensely large in size and also

concerned that the goals of the regional tourism growth market and product

development are being compromised.

I would ask the minister: Since her department recently changed the mandate

of DMOs towards exclusive marketing of tourism, the position of marketing co-ordinator

for the Northern Peninsula and Southern Labrador was eliminated, and today I

wonder how this contributes to the goal of economic development?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: I would like to thank the hon. member for my first question

in the House of Assembly. Thank you very much; I appreciate it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, we have four DMOs set up in the Province now; we

are about to set up a fifth one. Last year, we set one up in Central

Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker, when we talk about marketing in this Province, just a

point for the House of Assembly: Do you know how many awards we have won in

marketing in this Province? We have not won one, we have not won ten, and we

have not won twenty - fifty-one awards.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits &

White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It seems like the hon. minister is off to a good start; he did not answer my

question.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. DEAN: Probably it is possible to go from fifty-one awards to 101 if

we put the proper staffing out there. It was very disturbing, Mr. Speaker, to

discover that the Western DMO will no longer be employing regional staff people

in these rural areas to work with the businesses in our region -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. DEAN: The individual who held this was previously employed with the

Viking Trail Association, an organization that previously received its core

funding to attract tourists to L'Anse aux Meadows and we look at the numbers

that visit Gros Morne and we look at the difference between what visits L'Anse

aux Meadows.

I ask the minister: Without local liaisons working with the in excess of 600

businesses, communities and organizations that depend on the tourism for

revenue, how will the DMOs adequately market their products?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, it is very important in the tourism industry

that we be consistent. We have taken this Province a long, long way. Actually,

the DMOs came about because of a 2004 report that we went out, consulted with

the industry, Mr. Speaker, and at the time there was twenty-eight different

organizations out there promoting this Province. Many of them still exist by the

way. This is a way to put a professional team in place so that they can assist

all areas of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman opposite just mentioned L'Anse aux Meadows, and

I happened to be down there recently as the hon. member probably knows. I can

assure you, Mr. Speaker, I can assure you as I was driving over the $4 million

worth of new pavement to go to L'Anse aux Meadows; this government does an

awful lot for tourism in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits &

White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Yeah, Mr. Minister, you never got an award for that visit, but

anyway.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, I would suggest again that it is not reasonable to

decrease the representation of our regions. You know, quite frankly, when I look

in my districts, as many districts throughout the Province possibly in rural

Newfoundland, the numbers continue to go and the liaisons and support staff

continue to decrease.

I would ask the minister, again: Would he consider to increasing the numbers

in tourism and in support staff and so on rather than decreasing the numbers?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, we have taken a marketing budget in this

Province that now peaks at $13 million in this Province. We are constantly

concerned. Last year we had a recession; a world recession and our numbers in

this Province went up, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: So, I would certainly take any advice the hon. member would

like to pass along but we are all about moving this Province forward when it

comes to tourism. We have the record to show for it. We have increased numbers.

This industry now in this Province, Mr. Speaker, is an $850 million industry.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, not only is it an $850 million industry, it

employs 13,000 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, that is not in places like St. John's. That is

in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, last year government announced a pilot project

for twenty-four hour snow clearing in the Province and would evaluate the effect

of such a program.

I ask the minister: What were the outcomes of the pilot project, and will the

program happen again this year?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last year, indeed, we did put into place a pilot project with regard to

twenty-four hour snow clearing in specific spots throughout the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador. In doing so, Mr. Speaker, we had some preliminary

analysis but looked to extend it for another year to make sure that we have the

information that we need in order to make the informed decisions that have to

be, to see what we can do with twenty-four hour service in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, last year many community leaders voiced their

concern that their areas were not included in the twenty-four hour program.

I ask the minister: Will the twenty-four hour snow clearing program be

expanded this year to include other areas of the Province, and if so, what areas

will be included?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In response to the question from the member opposite, it is a pilot project.

It is not a program, and it is a pilot because obviously we are looking to what

direction we can go in. In order to do that, as I pointed out in my previous

response, we need to have the specific information to make the informed decision

so that we can move forward with perhaps the extension on that pilot.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, the pilot project was only in effect from Monday

to Friday. Many felt that this was inadequate because we all know there is a lot

of traffic on our highways on the weekends.

I ask the minister: Will the pilot project this year include weekends?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: In actual fact, it was, I believe, five nights per week,

Sunday through Thursday. Again, we are looking at it as a pilot. We are looking

at the time that we are doing it, we are looking at the traffic flows, and we

are looking at the storm conditions, and so on and so forth. We are putting all

that information together. Again, we need a second year to ensure that the

decisions that we make are the right decisions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General noted, as of March 2008

there were 1.3 million tires in stockpile in Placentia and Bull Arm. He also

noted that there were safety concerns around the 110,000 tires that were at Bull

Arm. The tires were not being stored in accordance with the Office of the Fire

Commissioner.

I ask the minister: What is the update on the Bull Arm site? What actions

have been taken, and are there any tires remaining at this site as we speak?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we take the Auditor General's report very seriously, and as a

result, we have had all of the tires removed at the Bull Arm site. They are all

gone, and all the tires that are currently at the Placentia site are being

stored in order with all the fire codes that are necessary. So they are all

gone, we are happy to report.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

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

Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Health and Community

Services. There is a serious shortage in the Province, as we know, of home

support workers who provide personal care in people's homes. Recently, at the

town hall meeting that I held in my district, where people expressed their

concerns about home care, many issues were raised. Mr. Speaker, home care

recipients and workers both said that a major reason why there is a shortage of

home support workers is the low wages and lack of benefits in this very

demanding field of work.

So I ask the Minister of Health and Community Services: Will the spring

budget address this injustice by raising the wages and benefits of home support

workers to the same level of personal care attendants in long-term care

facilities?

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

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in Budget 2009 the provincial government earmarked $35 million

to improve services and enhance supports across the Province to strengthen

long-term care and community support services. Of that, Mr. Speaker, $16.5

million was to increase home support hourly subsidy rates; $8 million, Mr.

Speaker, was utilized to address home support program growth; $1.5 million to

increase the personal care home subsidy; and $1.1 million to begin

implementation of the new assessment tool, Mr. Speaker. We have seen the

benefits of that assessment tool, and we have seen the savings that have come

about.

The member opposite implies that we are not doing anything about home care.

Home care, Mr. Speaker, has been a concern for this government and last year's

budget indicates, with a $35 million investment, how much we are contributing to

the same.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

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

I will point out that I did not imply what the minister just said. I asked a

very specific question: Will the wages and benefits of those doing the personal

care in homes be brought up to the same level of the personal care attendants in

long-term care facilities? He did answer that question. I made no implication

that the government was doing nothing about home care.

Mr. Speaker, at the town hall home support workers said they need more formal

training to acquire the skills to do their jobs safely, and especially to serve

clients with complex needs. The minister said last week he saw the video, and he

heard that if he watched it.

Mr. Speaker, the training programs cost several thousand dollars and only a

few workers have been able to access funding to help with this cost.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Now that the Province has taken over federal

job training programs, will the Minister of Health work with the Department of

Human Resources, Labour and Employment to ensure that all home support workers

have access to high-quality, affordable training programs?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, last year's budget, the $16.5 million which was annualized to

$24.6 million increased the home support hourly subsidy rates as follows: $7

million, Mr. Speaker, for a 50-cent increase on March 1, 2009; $7.6 million for

a 71-cent increase on July 1, 2009; and another 50-cent increase on January 1,

In relation to the training, Mr. Speaker, of the home support workers I am

certainly willing to discuss the same with my colleague in Human Resources,

Labour and Employment, and anything we can do, Mr. Speaker, to improve the

services offered to the seniors in our Province, the persons with disabilities,

we are certainly willing to consider and we will continue to address these

needs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I thank the minister for the last part of his answer because if having the

control over - now the training dollars are here in the Province and we need to

match training with our labour market. If we ever had a labour market need, it

is the training of the home support workers.

Mr. Speaker, workers and people needing home support also express frustration

that there are no legislated standards for home care, which leaves government

off the hook for adequately monitoring home care provided through the private

agencies.

I ask the minister again, Mr. Speaker: Would he put in place regulations for

home care including standards of care in education, and provide the resources

for monitoring and enforcement so that these standards take care of the health

and safety of both the workers and recipients of home care?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the NDP raised the issue - last week I think it

was - about the long-term care strategy. A long-term care strategy, Mr. Speaker,

is something that will address all of the issues involving support services in

the community in terms of long-term care, community care and home care workers.

What we have to do, Mr. Speaker, as a government is look to our aging

demographic and how we can best deal with people like our seniors and treat them

with the respect they deserve in their elder years.

Also, Mr. Speaker, we have to look at our home care workers, and part of the

long-term care strategy, we will look at all aspects of it. We will look at

independent living, Mr. Speaker. We will look at community programming. We will

look at home care.

One of the issues I expect that will arise in this strategy will be the need

for standards to govern how care is provided to seniors, persons with

disabilities and, Mr. Speaker, all those who can benefit from the kinds of

monies that this government is putting into these programs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The time allotted for questions and answers has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

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

Board.

MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my pleasure today to table in this House the Public Accounts for the

Province for the year ended March 31, 2009.

Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of members of the House and for the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador who are watching, the Public Accounts are prepared by

the Comptroller General of Finance pursuant to

section 59 of the Financial

Administration Act. Volumes 1 and 2 of the Public Accounts are audited by the

Auditor General.

These are the actual accounts prepared by the government's accountant; they

differ from the budget which the Minister of Finance gives every year. These are

the actual financial statements prepared at the end of the year and audited by

the Auditor General.

The Public Accounts are required to be tabled in the House of Assembly by the

Minister of Finance before February 1 of the following year. The Public Accounts

comprise of two volumes. They are in three books, but there are basically two

volumes. The most important one, Mr. Speaker, is the consolidated

summary

financial statements. These are the audited financial statements of the

Consolidated Revenue Fund and public sector entities combined, so that is the

departments of government, but also all public sector entities that are out

there.

I always remember my former critic, the previous Member for Grand

Falls-Windsor, Anna Thistle, who used to say these statements meant everything

was in, and she was right. They present the consolidated assets and liabilities,

the revenues and expenses, the annual surplus or deficit prepared on what is

called an accrual basis in accordance with the accounting standards that are

established for governments by the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants.

A comparison to actual or accrual budget figures made are available.

Mr. Speaker, I think it is interesting to note that the surplus for that

year, at the end of March 31, 2009, that fiscal year, the surplus was $2.4

billion, which I believe is the highest ever in the history of Newfoundland and

Labrador. The net debt at that date was actually down to around $8 billion from

the just under $12 billion net debt when this government came into office.

Mr. Speaker, I would point out to hon. members and also to the population

that there is a financial statement, discussion and analysis

section which

precedes the consolidated

summary financial statements in Volume I, and this

section assists the reader by providing more meaningful information about the

Province's financial position and the financial results through narrative and

through trends and ratio analysis. I think that all members of the House and all

our residents of the Province would be well served by taking a look at this

analysis.

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General has audited the financial statements

presented in Volumes 1 and 2 of the Public Accounts and his short form report

provides an unqualified, or what is called a clean opinion on the Public

Accounts. The Auditor General, of course, will issue a separate report, a

separate narrative report on the financial statements in due course. The

Comptroller General of Finance is provided an opportunity to read the Auditor

General's report in draft form and to comment at that time.

I am very pleased, Mr. Speaker, to present for all members of the House the

Public Accounts for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and the financial

statements of Crown corporations, boards and authorities for the fiscal year

ended March 31, 2009.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Further tabling of documents?

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Deputy Premier.

MS DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will ask leave to

introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Order Of Newfoundland And

Labrador Act. (Bill 58)

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motions?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

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

I stand today with another petition on behalf of some 2,000 people throughout

this Province with regard to what we know as gravel pit camping.

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to read into the record again the full prayer of

the petition, but what those people are asking for is that government consult

with them to work out a long-term solution to problems with the practices that

government finds acceptable.

Mr. Speaker, I referenced a case in time yesterday with regard to Wolf Pond

in the Fox Marsh area. That is a prime example of what all those people are

asking for. I did not realize it, but I called the lady whom I attended many

meetings with over a period of two-and-a-half to three years. From the time they

were notified that they had to move from that site - there were people who were

raised there with their own parents, and now their children grew up there and

grandchildren. They were there for some forty-five to fifty years. All around a

lovely little pond, and they were told that they were in a forest management

area. There was nobody in the forest. There was nobody even in a brush on the

side of the pond. Anyway, they had to move. They wanted some action taken to

come to a successful conclusion so that they could still camp the way they did

for most of their lives.

What happened, Mr. Speaker, for some two-and-a-half to three years? We met

with officials within the department, and there were some very rough meetings,

let me assure you. At the end of the day, and I think, to be honest with you, I

think we went through two ministers while we were bringing forth their case.

Today I spoke with the lady who is in charge, just before lunch, and she tells

me that the site that was put there, with the approval of government now do

not get me wrong, government just did not do it out of the goodness of their

heart. They have to pay a certain amount of money each year for five years for

the little road that they put in, and they have to pay a fee of $185 a year.

There are some sixty people there. They have three little subdivisions in this

site that was created for them. They are on the same pond they were asked to get

away from, but just a little distance away from it. Those people are very

pleased that they are there.

All we are asking for in those petitions - the petition that I present today

is from people from St. John's, CBS, Foxtrap, Plum Point, all over this Island

who are asking for the same thing, that officials sit down with them and talk

this through, and hopefully they can come to a conclusion where those people

will be able to continue on with a tradition that they have had for many years,

a standard of recreation. Many of them do complain about maybe the odd person

who will come into a site where they are, who is not keeping that site

environmentally friendly. They do not want that either, Mr. Speaker, but I do

not think you should throw everybody out for the sake of one or two. Clean up

the mess that is there, sit down with those people and consult with them so that

a solution can be found, similar to what was found in Wolf Pond in the Fox Marsh

area.

Anyone can go there, the media can go there and see this wonderful site. The

government even went in and put a few outdoor toilets in there for them. They

are putting more in because they raised their money. They are looking after that

site. All we are asking, Mr. Speaker, through those petitions, is that

government will do the same for those throughout the Province.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to call from the Order Paper, Order

11, second reading of a bill,

An Act To Implement Labour Mobility. (Bill 55)

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 55,

An Act To Implement

Labour Mobility be now read a second time.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Implement Labour

Mobility". (Bill 55)

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

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, that Bill 55,

An Act To Implement Labour Mobility be now read a second time.

Mr. Speaker, I am certainly very pleased to stand here today and have a few

moments to talk about the Labour Mobility Bill that is before us. I had the

pleasure this morning of meeting with members of the media, and my staff took an

opportunity to brief the media as well as hon. members opposite on the specifics

of this bill. So I am certainly pleased to take a few moments today to have a

few words about this.

For the information of the House, Mr. Speaker, negotiations and discussions

have been ongoing for the past two years with respect to labour mobility and, in

particular, to the amendments to the federal-provincial-territorial agreement on

international trade. My department, today, is bringing forth the amendments for

Chapter Seven, which is the

chapter that deals with the labour mobility. The

intent is to ensure that a worker, who is granted certification in a regulated

occupation in one jurisdiction throughout the country, would be granted

certification to practice their occupation in any other jurisdiction in Canada.

In other words, if you are certified to practice in a particular occupation

in Alberta or British Columbia or Saskatchewan, then you would be able to

practice the same occupation right here in our own Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador. The expectation with this bill, Mr. Speaker, is that you will be able

to do that without being required to have to undergo any further training or

experience, or any particular examination or assessment unless an exemption is

granted for a particular occupation.

This move, Mr. Speaker, and the introduction of this bill today is certainly

consistent with what has taken place across other jurisdictions in Canada.

Labour mobility is a key element for us, Mr. Speaker, of labour market

efficiency. We recognize that the labour mobility contributes to sustaining

economic growth, to fostering innovation, and increasing productivity, as well

as enhancing our Province's competitiveness in what is increasingly becoming a

knowledge-based global economy. As well, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the

changes we are talking about in this bill today will be a benefit to workers who

will see a more consistent approach to assessment and to certification.

Through ongoing dialogue, Mr. Speaker, as well as the sharing of best

practices, workers in regulated occupations will encounter fewer obstacles with

the passing of this legislation. They will encounter fewer obstacles to full

labour mobility and they will have access to tools and to information that will

facilitate a co-ordination and consistency across jurisdictions across Canada.

To ensure regulatory bodies in Newfoundland and Labrador meet the obligations

under this

chapter we are moving forward today with this particular bill,

An Act

To Implement Labour Mobility to be introduced and passed here in the House of

Assembly in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I would like, Mr. Speaker, to take a couple of moments just to touch on a few

of the elements of the bill that we are debating here today, to make sure, as

best we can, in a general sense at least, that members of the House and those

who may be watching through the broadcast have a decent idea at least, of what

we are talking about here.

The Act To Implement Labour Mobility, Mr. Speaker, requires all regulatory

bodies to comply with "Chapter Seven of the Agreement on Internal

Trade." Some of the key elements, I will just touch on. First of all, it

requires regulatory bodies to seek government approval for workers from other

jurisdictions that they want exempted from this particular chapter, this

particular bill. It also requires that regulatory bodies to apply

Chapter Seven

when certifying workers from another province. It also ensures that the elements

of this bill will apply to existing and future legislation. It will ensure that

a legal proceeding cannot be brought against the Province as a result of a

disagreement from

Chapter Seven, but rather it provides for a dispute resolution

mechanism under

Chapter Seventeen.

Also, Mr. Speaker, it provides authority to make regulations should this be

necessary in the future, regulations governing the actual implementation of this

bill. Clearly outlined as well is the implementation date and it will commence

on June 30, 2010 to allow for changes to legislation, changes to policies,

changes to by-laws and to coincide with the date that has been agreed upon by

ministers from across the country. It was felt, Mr. Speaker, as that date was

agreed upon, that certainly that date would be the earliest date by which we

could actually move to full implementation and allow for any particular disputes

to be brought forward and assessed and considered.

Mr. Speaker, there are number of points that I would like brought forward

here today with respect to the process and timelines respecting this particular

bill coming out of the agreement on internal trade but I am going to leave some

of those comments to my colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary for Education, to

bring forward when he has a few moments shortly to speak.

Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to highlight for the House that this

bill represents a very positive step for us, positive step for government and a

positive step for the Province. Certainly, in trying to move forward and ensure

we have a qualified workforce available to us here as the demand for skilled

trade workers and the demand for health care professionals, in particular,

continues to grow, Mr. Speaker, it is very important that we have access to a

qualified workforce and many of the professionals, as I have said already, Mr.

Speaker, would come from areas like the heath care sector.

As well, Mr. Speaker, I certainly want to make mention that one of the things

this does is it makes easier for many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who may

be working in particular occupations today, who are working away in other parts

of the country, it makes it easier for them to find a way now to come back home

with full labour mobility.

I have had discussions, Mr. Speaker, with any number of individuals with whom

this particular bill would be of benefit. I think of one good friend of mine,

Mr. Speaker, from my district in the Community of St. Lawrence who has a

daughter working as a massage therapist on the West Coast of the country.

Massage therapy, Mr. Speaker, is one of the occupations included in this

particular bill. When this bill is passed, Mr. Speaker, it will provide full

mobility so someone practising as a massage therapist in British Columbia or

Alberta will now be able to move to another province without having to go

through some of the bureaucracy and the red tape that may have existed

previously prior to the suggestion of this bill, Mr. Speaker.

So, I am certainly very pleased to highlight that for people. This is indeed

a very, very positive step for our Province. It is one, Mr. Speaker, that

certainly falls in line with many of the other supports that we have been

bringing forward and been introducing to try and help grow our workforce and to

help make sure that the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador is prepared and

ready for the challenges that we face and for the growing economy and the many

projects on the horizon and the many needs that we are going to face here on

education and training, Mr. Speaker. We see great opportunities here for this

bill to certainly provide further support to us in that particular area.

I might add, Mr. Speaker, a couple of points that were raised this morning by

the media when I had a chance to chat with them. One question raised was whether

or not this opened the door for foreign workers to gain easier access to jobs in

the Province, Mr. Speaker. For clarification, I want to say that the bill does

not open up access for foreign workers other than if a foreign worker becomes

certified in one of the occupations covered under this chapter, if a worker

becomes certified in another province, Mr. Speaker, in one of the occupations in

this bill then that worker will have full access and full labour mobility, the

same as any other resident of Canada would have, but it is only if they become

certified in an occupation in another province or I should say, Mr. Speaker,

in a province of Canada. It is not because they are a foreign worker, Mr.

Speaker, it would be because they were registered with an occupation covered

under the labour mobility act.

One of the other questions raised this morning, Mr. Speaker, was with

reference to a government having some dealings now with setting the standards

for particular occupations and whether, in fact, we would now become a part of

setting the standards and setting the bar for occupations that would be covered

under this particular bill. Mr. Speaker, there may have been a little bit of

confusion there, but this particular piece of legislation does not require or

state or stipulate that government will now become in that particular process;

we will not. Regulatory bodies that govern things like massage therapy, or like

nursing, or doctors and chiropractors, they have regulatory bodies that set

their standards, Mr. Speaker, and they will continue to do that.

What this legislation does is allows that a person who becomes certified, as

a chiropractor, for example, in Newfoundland and Labrador, will be able to move

and practise in another part of the country, without, as I said a few moments

ago, Mr. Speaker, without having to go through any particular upgrading, or any

particular new training, or any particular new administrative kinds of

activities that often tends, Mr. Speaker, to delay their ability to gain

employment and to move elsewhere. Often, Mr. Speaker, we have heard of

situations where people just become so frustrated with the kinds of things they

have to do and the hoops they have to jump through, that they just give up on

it.

Mr. Speaker, this does not engage us in the regulatory side of things with

respect to occupations and how they govern their members. What it does, though,

it allows for labour mobility across the country.

Mr. Speaker, the other point I wanted to make, with respect to this, is there

is a provision for exemptions here and this was raised as well, this

morning, by one of the members of the media, about whether or not there will be

any potential in this legislation for us to be lowering the bar or to be

watering the expectations and the requirements that we have in particular

occupations. Mr. Speaker, we need to be clear on that, this bill does not do

that, but it does provide an exemption. For example, Mr. Speaker, if there is a

level of practice and a level of qualifications that currently exists for an

occupation in Newfoundland and Labrador, for example and I will use the

chiropractic one as an example, and I do not know if that is a good example, but

I will just use the name, the chiropractic one. If, currently, they have a

higher standard of qualifications or, Mr. Speaker, if the duties of a

chiropractor in Newfoundland and Labrador are such that they are different, for

whatever particular reason, than the same occupation in another Province, then

they can apply to government for an exemption to be exempted from this

particular labour mobility act.

So there is no requirement, Mr. Speaker, for a regulatory body to lower their

standards, at all. The requirement is that all regulatory bodies will adopt and

put into practice, full practice, this labour mobility act once it is passed and

adopted and given assent here in the House of Assembly, Mr. Speaker.

If they feel, as I said before, that there are challenges for them because

they feel that they have to lower their standards they can apply to government

for an exemption. In applying for the exemption, Mr. Speaker, it would be

required of them to demonstrate to government why they feel they cannot allow

full labour mobility.

As I have previously said, Mr. Speaker, the expectation would be that they

would demonstrate to government the qualifications and-or the scope of practice,

in particular the scope of practice for that particular occupation in this

Province is such that those in other Provinces do different kinds of work.

Therefore, it would not be a straight lateral move from one Province to the

other that would be in the best interests of the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador. If that is the case, Mr. Speaker, there is certainly a provision here

for the regulatory bodies to make application to us and have that considered

and, in fact, can be exempted so that there is not mobility for one particular

occupation.

Mr. Speaker, certainly as part of, I guess, the rationale for bringing this

forward, we recognize the tremendous needs in the Province, we recognize the

value of the workforce here. We also recognize the value to make sure we have

access to trained, quality individuals who are able to come here and work here

in the Province and fill jobs that they are qualified and trained to do.

Mr. Speaker, another point perhaps I might add that I meant to mention

earlier. With respect to whether or not this labour mobility provides an

opportunity or encourages perhaps, Mr. Speaker, individuals to leave the

Province, now that they can gain easier access to jobs in the occupation or the

trade for which they are qualified in another part of the country. Mr. Speaker,

I guess my response to that would be that if you look at the working patterns of

the majority of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, most tend to want to work

home. Even when they leave, Mr. Speaker, they leave for a particular reason and

they want to come back.

Mr. Speaker, if this bill provides an opportunity for someone to leave the

Province in the short term to gain easy access to employment, at which time they

are going to gain experience and greater qualifications that will then allow

them to come back home and make a greater contribution to the workforce here and

to more easily gain a full-time, permanent position within their occupation back

in this Province, Mr. Speaker, then we see that as a tremendous gain for the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador because it opens up opportunities for the

Province and it opens up opportunities for individuals right here that do not

currently exist in some of the occupations that we are discussing here within

Chapter Seven.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will conclude my remarks by simply saying that I

think this is just a real good, solid piece of legislation and I think, as I

mentioned, one of my constituents from St. Lawrence and their experiences with a

family member working away. I think there are countless examples like that, Mr.

Speaker, where people will see a tremendous benefit of having full labour

mobility for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador with the rest of Canada.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits &

White Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just a few words first of all about the bill. I would like to commend the

minister for bringing it forward and say that labour mobility leads to more

efficient labour markets and more opportunities for workers and employers. In

that sense, I certainly would see it as a good thing. It also provides for a

sense of unifying of the different provinces in our country and our social

unions and so on. It is good to see it coming forward finally after the

agreement was signed back in 1994. It is essentially a good bill and one that I

would expect that we would support and would think that it is an important act,

one very necessary.

My only concern I guess really would have already been addressed by the

minister, and that would be the exemptions or restrictions that might be

attached to the process. Certainly, while it lowers the barriers for workers

wanting to work in other provinces, we would not want it to result in

Newfoundlanders competing for jobs in their own Province. We believe that there

are restrictions enough and the process is secure enough to be able to look

after that.

Certainly, not too much to say other than I would hope that the list of

occupations covered by this Chapter, I understand that some of them have been

identified and the exceptions and restrictions and so on have already been

identified and that in short order that list would continue to include the

trades people and other occupations in the Province and throughout the

territories that are important to us. Again, we see it as a positive bill and

would look forward to supporting the bill in the House.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

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

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to Bill 55,

An Act To Implement

Labour Mobility. We are grateful to the minister for seeing that there was a

briefing with regard to the bill so that we had a full understanding of where

the bill was coming from and what it was dealing with, and if we had any

questions those questions could be answered. Obviously, the bill is helping us

move into this year, into 2009, in a way that we stand tall with regard to the

agreement on internal trade that was first signed back in 1994.

There are two chapters in that agreement that we really have not been dealing

with here in Newfoundland and Labrador,

Chapter Seven and Seventeen, which are

very important. They deal with two different things that are very essential to

having an agreement of this nature which involves all provinces and territories.

One

chapter deals with the mobility issues themselves and the issues of

standards, and the second one begins with dispute resolution procedures. Both of

these chapters are extremely important for an agreement to be put in place. It

is important that Newfoundland have its own act that outlines what will happen

here in Newfoundland to be incompliance with

Chapter Seven and

Chapter Seventeen

of the agreement on internal trade.

I will not go through all of the things that the minister said because he did

a good job in outlining what the act is about, but I think that it is important

to recognize the potential good with regard to becoming compliant totally with

the agreement on internal trade, especially around the issue of standards. It is

very, very important that we have common standards in the country but these

standards should be the standards of the highest order, not of the lowest common

denominator. I think that we have read, and I am satisfied that the mechanisms

that are in the proposed bill do help deal with making sure that standards will

be kept on a very high level.

The ability for a Province to name exemptions, and to have exemptions named

against it, is a process whereby people are encouraged to work to the highest

order, and there is a mechanism for dispute resolution in case people do not

agree. It is one thing to say as a Province we are exempting, for example,

Quebec lawyers, as currently we are doing, but if Quebec does not agree than we

need a way in which to resolve that dispute, and there seems to be a very solid

dispute resolution mechanism in the bill.

I was very, very pleased to see the level of consultation that went on in

putting this bill together. I know there are various groups who were involved

who were very pleased with the level of consultation that happens. I think it is

an example of when there is real consultation, you do end up with a bill that we

can all look at and say, this is good.

With that, Mr. Speaker just one other point. I noticed that in the bill,

as well, in the dispute resolutions, this notion of consultations continues,

because the dispute resolution mechanism allows for consultations between

government and the regulatory bodies who might be affected in a particular

dispute. Then, of course, a panel gets put in place which makes decisions based

upon the consultations. So, this notion of continuing the consultations is

extremely important if the spirit of the agreement itself, the agreement on

internal trade, and if the spirit of our act is going to be maintained.

So, with that, I thank the minister for the work that has been done in his

department in order to get this bill to the table.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of

Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a pleasure to stand and have a few words on the minister's bill

today,

An Act To Implement Labour Mobility. I certainly appreciate members

opposite for their comments. I particularly appreciate the Member for The

Straits & White Bay North for his support for this bill, and obviously,

recognizing the importance of it to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador,

particularly the labour in this Province, and indeed, recognizing that support

for this bill supports the great initiatives that our government has been able

to do to support labour and support opportunities in this Province in recent

years.

Mr. Speaker, this discussion on this bill is as a result of discussions that

took place, I guess, with the First Ministers back in January of 2009, where

they endorsed amendments to the Agreement on Internal Trade which focused on

particularly

Chapter Seven which is the

chapter which addresses labour mobility

in the country. What it does, essentially, they are endorsing ability for

workers to have the freedom to be able to move from one province to another in

their chosen field of work.

This revised

chapter will provide that any worker certified for an occupation

by a regulatory authority of one province or territory is to be recognized as

qualified for that occupation by all other provinces and territories.

Mr. Speaker, when we look at labour mobility, there are three main areas when

we look at labour mobility that is addressed in this chapter. One is residency

requirements. The primary one is that certain practices and professions

regarding occupational licensing, certification, registration, which includes

training and education, is a barrier. As well, as some of the differences in our

occupational qualifications are recognized. Under

Chapter Seven, and I guess the

removing and reducing of some of the issues in

Chapter Seven, which we will see

through this bill, will certainly improve on these barriers.

It is important, Mr. Speaker, as the minister outlined when we look at labour

mobility in our Province, it is important, both to the individual to be able to

have these opportunities, to be able to move from province to province, but it

is also equally important for our economy, particularly here in Newfoundland and

Labrador, as it will provide strength to our economy and provide opportunity for

our economy to adapt to change, to develop new technologies, to be innovative

and certainly to be able to build on our growth and to be competitive in the

global market. An ability to attract strong, qualified people, the ability for

our own people to be able to move from province to province to gain experience

will certainly be beneficial to our Province in the future.

Mr. Speaker, when we specifically talk about some of the restrictions,

occupational mobility can certainly be restrictive when it comes to particular

regulations. Things like licensing and training and education are requirements

that would prevent the flow of labour from one province to another. In

particular, Mr. Speaker, in many cases, it prevents one province or another to

be able to address some of the labour needs in a timely fashion. For example,

restrictions limit the supply of physicians and their specialities given the

specialized training and licensing that is required in that particular field of

work. Through agreement in

Chapter Seven on labour mobility, we should see some

improvements in this area, certainly in times of need and times in which we have

to address it in a timely manner.

Mr. Speaker, what this particular bill addresses is

Chapter Seven of the

Agreement on Internal Trade and this

chapter applies directly to regulatory

bodies that have the legislative power to provide an individual with a licence

to practice an occupation in another jurisdiction. We are talking about

occupations that include the Allied Health Professionals, we are talking nurses,

doctors, optometrists, chiropractors and the list goes on; there is an extensive

list.

Specifically to

Chapter Seven, if I might just point out for those who are

listening, the difference in

Chapter Seven that we are seeing now compared to

previously is that in

Chapter Seven previously it took a best efforts approach

to address labour mobility

whereas now these changes, these legislative changes,

will ensure that the

chapter points out there must be a full compliance

approach. With the best efforts approach, certified individuals could be

required to undergo additional training, experience, examination or assessment

when moving to another jurisdiction. This is certainly not in keeping with the

spirit and intent of the chapter, which is to achieve full labour mobility.

The full compliance approach requires that individuals be certified in a

regulated occupation in one jurisdiction will have the certification recognized

in all other Canadian jurisdictions barring the approval of an exemption such as

the protection of public health and safety. As the minister alluded to

exemptions, there is a process, a detailed process, there are fines involved,

and there is some protection there to ensure that the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador who want to go to another province can be protected, just as we will

protect people from other provinces coming to Newfoundland and Labrador.

Specifically, the key changes to

Chapter Seven, in

section 703, addresses the

extent of obligation, which is now changed from best efforts clause to a full

compliance clause. We see in

section 706 that licensing and certification and

registration of workers was non-existent in the previous

chapter and the new

chapter now outlines allowable certification practices and requires automatic

certification unless an exemption is approved.

Section 708 recognizes legitimate objective which was non-existent, but now

requires that exemptions only be approved where there are material differences

in knowledge, skills and ability. In

section 710 there is a dispute settlement

clause that has not really changed but in

Chapter Seventeen there have been some

changes that will see penalties for unnecessary exemptions.

Mr. Speaker, it is very detailed, it is very important for the labour people

in this Province and across the county. Within that as well, I think as the

minister had outlined, and I would certainly like to give some detail, that

through this process, like so much of the things that we do as a government, it

is important when we move forward with legislation, when we talk about changes

in the Province, when we talk about improving the Province, it is so important

that we listen to the people, we engage with people directly involved in some of

these decisions. In this particular case, Mr. Speaker, there has been extensive

consultation taking place over the past few months, and the past year or so,

that would allow industry, regulatory bodies and post-secondary institutions to

have their input in this particular bill.

To give you some example, in July of 2008 regulatory bodies and

post-secondary institutions participated in a half day consultation session

where we sought their input and suggested changes to

Chapter Seven. Again, Mr.

Speaker, in February 2009, regulatory bodies and post-secondary institutions

were briefed on the negotiated changes, they were advised of their

responsibilities under the

chapter and informed that the legislation would be

required to bring the act governing regulated bodies into compliance.

In April of 2009, the unions representing workers certified in regulated

occupations, including the construction unions represented by the Newfoundland

and Labrador Building Construction Trades Council were consulted and offered

input into this, as well. In October of 2009, the Strategic Partnership

Committee was advised of the changes to the chapter, and that legislative

amendments would be required. Then, finally on December 5, 2009, three briefing

sessions were held with regulatory bodies, unions, post-secondary institutions,

advising them that the legislation was drafted and may be introduced to the

House of Assembly in this particular session. Key elements of the bill were

discussed, and the reaction was very positive.

Mr. Speaker, I think we have seen from industry, we have seen from

professionals in this Province, particularly when government engaged them in

serious matters that would not only enhance their position and their

opportunities, but enhance the Province, we found that they have certainly been

appreciative of the opportunity to have input, and the stakeholders thank

government for their efforts to engage them during the past eighteen months, and

are certainly anxious for this legislation to be introduced as they see a true

and real benefit to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, in terms of the timelines and the regulatory bodies, they have

been working on amending their bylaws, they have been working on policies, and

have submitted their request for exemptions to government. Through the exemption

process, government will determine what is to be approved - probably by early

summer - and the jurisdictions then have the opportunity that they can challenge

each other for non-compliance as of this date in which some other province will

be able to challenge this Province; but, likewise, this Province will be able to

challenge some of the other jurisdictions with respect to non-compliance, with

respect to the exemptions, and ultimately, through a negotiated process,

hopefully open up the doors so we have absolutely, totally full compliance right

across the country.

Mr. Speaker, certainly in conclusion, we see this as another opportunity to

continue on the recent successes that we have seen, not only in education, but

the opportunities and the successes that we have seen to build a progressive

province where all are able to contribute.

Today's legislation on labour mobility will ensure compliances

Chapter

Seven of the Agreement on Internal Trade and support even greater advances in

the labour force by making it easier for individuals and regulated occupations

to receive licences and to be able to avail of work opportunities right across

this country.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to stand today and speak to the second reading of the

bill,

An Act To Implement Labour Mobility, Bill 55 as we know it in this

Legislature.

Mr. Speaker, I have a great interest in this bill. This bill is, I believe, a

very positive and a very forward looking bill. My background, before I came to

the House of Assembly, was in adult education for about twenty or so years. One

of the things I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that frustrated people the most was

when they would go and get some training in whatever area that they were looking

at, work for awhile and then decide that they wanted to move, to advance their

career, to pursue new opportunities or whatever, move to another jurisdiction

within the country and find out that they had to then be recertified because

they were moving to another part of the country and we did not have similar

certification standards. So you were working as a massage therapist, or you are

working at whatever it may have been in the Province of, say, Newfoundland and

Labrador and you wanted to go somewhere else to take advantage of opportunities

that presented themselves, and you would find that you would have to go back for

a licensing exam, or do a course for upgrading or something like that.

The same would happen if people wanted to move from Ontario into Newfoundland

and Labrador, for instance. The jurisdictions did not all necessarily have the

same set of standards and certifications. This bill, the labour mobility act,

allows that to happen. It brings those kinds of standards, and those kinds of

synergies back into the occupation so that it allows for people to freely move

between jurisdictions, between geographic boundaries, while still practising the

trade, the craft or the skill that they have been trained in and have been

working at for some period of time.

What I like about it, besides the fact that it allows people to get on and

earn a living, what I like about it is the fact that it allows for what I would

call: labour efficiencies. One of the things, as an employer, you want to see is

that people that you hire and believe me, Mr. Speaker, over the years I

hired many dozens of people in some companies that I owned and operated. You

want people to be productive as soon as they can when they come into your

organization, when they come into you workplace. This will allow for that to

happen. If somebody wants to come and work in a certified occupation from

another province, they will be able to do that.

There are exemptions, as some of the other speakers have referenced, but they

will be just that; they will be exceptions and exemptions that may be challenged

and may be allowed. For the vast majority of people who are looking for

employment in other jurisdictions, it will now be seamless. It will now allow

for workers to be able to move freely about the country and to be able to find

employment wherever they may want to do that.

Mr. Speaker, if I could, I am going to give just a little example - a little

personal example, because I find sometimes it helps people understand the

purposes of legislation if we give examples of what can happen. I am going to

give an example that I came across just this spring of a young Newfoundland and

Labrador woman who was here in this Province and decided that she wanted to

become a massage therapist.

She left the Province to go to Nova Scotia to get her training. She went

there for personal reasons. She potentially could have done her training here in

the Province, but there were reasons that brought her to Nova Scotia. She went

to Nova Scotia and she spent over a year up in Nova Scotia, studied, at great

expense to her because she had to have a place to live and all those kinds of

things. She was away from her family - her mother and father and her siblings

who are here in the Province. She was away from them for really the first time

in her life for any extended period of time. She worked very hard and did very,

very well at the course that she took at an institute in Nova Scotia.

She graduated as a massage therapist, received her paperwork from the

institution that she attended and she took the exams that were required to be

taken up there and passed them, got accepted, got certified, got licensed to

practice, I guess you would call it, and worked, worked for almost a full year

up there. She decided this past spring that now was the time for her to move

back home. She had gotten herself an education. She had created for herself a

work history. She had spent about a year working in Nova Scotia in the field for

which she was trained and decided she wanted to come home and do that same

thing. When she came home, unbeknownst to her at the time, because this

legislation was not in effect in the spring, when she came home, she was told,

you cannot practise here. You are going to have to now go and do some skills

upgrading and write a test and so on and so on.

The experience I will not give you all the gory details but the

experience for her, to put it bluntly, was very bad. It was an experience that

at the end of the day, she did not end up getting the licence to practise in

Newfoundland and Labrador. She stayed home with her family for two or three

months, trying to work her way through the hurdles, I would call them, the

barriers that were presented to her. She never did, at the end of the day,

getting licensed to practise here. We had discussions about that in some of our

meetings the ministers, when we were discussing this labour mobility

legislation earlier in the spring. I referenced her case, because it just

happened to come to my attention at that time.

Do you know what that young lady did, Mr. Speaker, after three months of

being home here? She went back to Nova Scotia. She went up to Nova Scotia and

went to work, because she could not afford to stay in Newfoundland and Labrador

the Province that she was born and raised in. She went back to Nova Scotia.

There is a good ending to the story. The good ending is she went back and got

a little bit more money, and came back, knowing the kinds of barriers that she

was going to face, because we did not have this kind of legislation in place,

she came back a more informed person, and when she came back, she was more

prepared to tackle those barriers and they were not barriers, by the way,

that people were deliberately putting in place for her, it was just the systems

had evolved. So, when she came back, she was more prepared, she knew what the

barriers were, she tackled those barriers, knowing what it was she needed to do

to succeed, and she ended up getting certified here in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, and is working here in the Province of Newfoundland

and Labrador.

So it is a good ending to the story, but I point it out just because if we do

not have legislation like this, people could still encounter those kinds of

barriers. So this legislation will allow for people who want to move throughout

our country, throughout the provinces and territories in our country, to be able

to do that. It is about regulatory bodies saying if the Province of Newfoundland

and Labrador certifies somebody, recognizes somebody, licenses somebody as a

person who can work in occupation (a), (b), or (c), then so should all of the

other provinces in Canada who have similar standards. If you believe that you

should not license that person because of life safety reasons or health reasons

or whatever it may be, then you can file an objection. There are ways that you

can stop people from coming into your province to work if you feel they do not

have the necessary skills. They would be the exception more so than the rule. I

think that is a good way of handling things. I think that, in our country,

people who go to educational institutions where we have industry associations

that licence and train people and certify people, I think it is only right that

people have the option of pursuing their dreams and pursuing their goals. Young

people today do have dreams and do have goals and do want to get out and explore

other parts of our country. I think that is a good thing, and a lot of them will

come back maybe to Newfoundland and Labrador. Some of them do, some of them do

not, but that happens in all provinces.

I was at an event yesterday, Mr. Speaker, with a young technology company

here in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador that the provincial government

was supporting. The owner of that company called his employees into the room we

were in, while we were doing the announcement, to be a part of the announcement.

I am not that old, Mr. Speaker, I do not believe. I am less than fifty; I will

say that to you. When I looked around the room, I think I was the oldest person

in the room yesterday in that company. There were people there who looked to me

like they were twenty, twenty-two, twenty-four, and twenty-five. When the formal

part of the event was over and I was going around the room talking to people -

there were a lot of people there from Newfoundland and Labrador, a lot of people

there who had come in from other parts of the Province into St. John's to

work. I was really glad to see that.

There were people there from Newfoundland and Labrador who were working in

Ottawa, who came home to work with this company. I met one young man who came

from Ontario. Born and raised in Ontario, who came to work with this company and

work in Newfoundland and Labrador. He wanted to experience working in

Newfoundland and Labrador. So making it easier for people to be able to move

freely about the country and pursue their dreams and experience the kinds of

experiences that they want to experience, I think is a good thing. This kind of

legislation is very, very positive. We are attracting people back to the

Province who have left. We are also attracting people to this Province from

other provinces. Having legislation like this that allows for ease of movement,

ease of movement of bright, young minds, professionals, skilled tradespeople,

certified, registered, practicing professionals is a very positive thing.

I am glad that the Minister of Education, through his department and his

officials, in consultation with the unions, in consultation with the business

associations, in consultation with the strategic partnership. His officials have

done a ton of work on this. For this paper to land here now today there has been

a ton of work done before this gets here. I am glad that it has finally made it

here to the House of Assembly. I think it is a very positive piece of

legislation. I think it is something that we as a Province should encourage. The

fact that all the other provinces are signing onto it says that right across the

country we believe this is a good thing. The people who are out there who now

want to be able to move from jurisdiction A to jurisdiction B and C will be able

to do that without having to worry about, what I would call artificial barriers.

It is hard enough to go to a new location and find work without being barred by

artificial barriers like: well, you came from somewhere else geographically, so

you can't work here. That does not make a lot of sense. If you have the skill

sets, if you have the education, you have the training, you have been recognized

by another professional body in another part of this country, you have some work

experience, and you have a work history, then I think it is a positive thing.

We had a report done, Mr. Speaker, not too long ago, a couple of years ago.

One of my colleagues, the MHA for St. John's North was heavily involved with

it, a skills task force. It talked about trying to make sure that we had enough

skilled labour available to us for the kinds of work and the kinds of projects

that we saw coming. This piece of legislation will help facilitate that. This

piece of legislation will help our unions and our professional bodies and our

regulator bodies in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador ensure that we

have the kinds of people we need here in this Province to be able to make sure

that we have a very vibrant, a very positive and a very productive economy here

in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

So, Mr. Speaker, I will stop there. I just want to say that I am very happy

to see it finally hit the floor of the House of Assembly. There has been a lot

of work done by a lot of people. I want to recognize the work that our officials

did in the various departments to get this legislation put before us. I want to

recognize the work that the community in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador, the consultations that went on. There was a lot of community

involvement in this and I want to also - as I heard some of the members opposite

speak, I heard them indicate that they felt it was positive and they would

support this legislation and I think that is a positive thing, that this House

in a unanimous way will support this legislation so that people can move

throughout the country.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Osborne): If the hon. Minister of Education speaks now he

shall close debate.

The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR. KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I want to thank my colleagues who had the opportunity to speak

to this particularly important piece of legislation, my colleagues on this side

of the House, the Minister of Innovation, as well as the Parliamentary Secretary

to Education, and of course the Member for The Straits & White Bay North and

the Leader of the New Democratic Party. I want to thank them all for their

comments and for the thoughtful way that they have expressed support for this

piece of legislation.

It is clear from my perspective, that people in the House, all of us here

understand the importance of this particular bill, Mr. Speaker, the importance

of passing this particular bill today, or moving it forward today, I should say.

It is clear that people understand the importance of this piece of legislation

to be enacted so as to be a contributor to the continued growth of the Province

when it comes to labour and labour mobility and labour development.

I remind people, Mr. Speaker, that the purpose of the bill, just to reiterate

some of the things that have been said but to be clear for everybody. The

purpose of the bill is to have us sign on to

Chapter Seven of the Agreement on

Internal Trade, which will essentially bring us on with the rest of the country,

with the rest of the provinces and the territories, and it will provide, once

enacted, for individuals who become certified in an occupation in another part

of the country, Mr. Speaker, to have access to labour mobility and allow them to

come to Newfoundland and Labrador to work. That is important, Mr. Speaker. That

is very important for us. We have a number of occupations here where we are

challenged to recruit people, recruit qualified candidates, and all of us on

both sides of the House, Mr. Speaker, on any given day - any given day in

Question Period we have discussions about health care in particular, and our

ability, or inability in some cases, or our challenges to attract enough

qualified candidates.

Mr. Speaker, for the record, let me just say that some of the occupations we

are talking about - to give people a sense of what this is all about, we are

talking about architects, accountants, chiropractors, dental hygienists, early

childhood educators, lawyers, licensed practical nurses, massage therapists

is an example I used, and my colleague used a few minutes ago - physicians,

pharmacists, physiotherapists, veterinarians, social workers. There are

countless, countless occupations that are governed by regulatory bodies that are

a part of this process. Once we adopt this bill, individuals in those

occupations - we will be able to go out, where need be, to recruit individuals

to come to work here and help us to fill jobs that we are having difficulty

filling right now.

The reverse is also true, Mr. Speaker. We must remember that this opens up

opportunities for residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, individuals who on

occasion, for whatever particular reason, will gain training, post-secondary and

other kinds of training and skills in a particular area but have difficulty

finding employment. We have had discussions here, and we have had some really,

really positive investments in apprenticeship and the Red Seal Program, but

there is often the occasion where individuals are challenged to find employment,

Mr. Speaker. This provides an opportunity that if an individual is trained in

one of the occupations that I just mentioned; it provides an opportunity for

them to seek employment in a neighbouring province in Canada.

As I said in my opening comments, Mr. Speaker, we all know that nine times

out of ten individuals who leave Newfoundland and Labrador for employment, do so

only for employment and to gain enough experience and training that will allow

them to secure a job back here in our Province. This, Mr. Speaker, opens the

door to endless possibilities that might not have previously existed for

individuals in our Province.

I say, Mr. Speaker, it is a very, very good piece of legislation. It is a

piece of legislation that we believe will be very supportive of many of the

objectives we have been working toward in this Province with respect to growing

our economy and offering support to labour in particular.

I want to touch for a couple of moments, Mr. Speaker, on the issue of

exemptions in this, just to remind people exactly how the exemptions work, and I

will speak to one sort of specifically that was raised by a member opposite.

This may come up again in Committee, I am not sure, but the issue was raised, I

think, around if we exempted lawyers from Quebec and whether or not the Province

of Quebec could block that.

When an exemption is filed, Mr. Speaker, it is the government who makes the

decision whether to accept the exemption or not. If we accept the exemption,

another province cannot block that exemption. They can challenge it, and they

can question, and they can wonder why we have enacted the exemption, but they

cannot block it. So, if it is a decision of the government based on a request

from a regulatory body of this Province, such as the lawyers, the regulatory

body for lawyers, if it is the decision here, as a government, that we want to

exempt lawyers from another province, such as Quebec, because, through

legitimate reasons, the argument can be made and the case can be stated clearly

that their scope of practice, or the requirements of their job, is at a level

less than what we expect in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, this

legislation provides us, as a Province and as a government, the opportunity to

approve that exemption without interference from anyone else.

I say, Mr. Speaker, for the House, and for a matter of record, that this does

not require or entail or suggest that we are going to lower standards in our

Province. It gives us control over whether or not we will exempt other

occupations from coming here to practice their scope of work. That, indeed, is a

good thing. It is a good thing because it allows us to maintain control over

what we are doing.

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that we continue to talk about as a

government, one of the decisions made early on in our mandate, is the fact that

we recognize that education is the cornerstone for us. It is a pillar to the

continued growth and development of the Province, and to the continued growth

and development of individuals within the Province.

We have continued, Mr. Speaker, to focus on that as a priority for

government. Mr. Speaker, relative to that I want to just make mention that one

of the things we did to have a review of labour requirements and educational

requirements was the Skills Task Force that my colleague, the Minister of

Innovation, Trade and Rural Development, spoke about.

That, Mr. Speaker, was a significant piece of work, a significant piece of

work that we undertook, but very clearly what that piece of work did was, it

identified for us some of the needs that we will have in this Province over the

coming years for skilled trades in particular. It identified for us where we are

potentially going to experience shortages, and what occupations we need to focus

on to ensure that we have the appropriate number of qualified and trained

individuals to fill those jobs as we see the development and the growth and the

moving forward of some of these megaprojects and the natural resource projects

and the oil and gas projects.

Mr. Speaker, that report, when it was completed - and one of the hon. members

on this side chaired that committee - had fifty recommendations, fifty

recommendations, Mr. Speaker, that we were asked to consider. The fifty

recommendations not only applied to government, Mr. Speaker. We do own some of

them, I submit. A great number of them were targeted toward government; and, Mr.

Speaker, without being totally off base, I think we are somewhere in the area of

90 per cent-plus having implemented the recommendations that we were asked to

move forward with. More than 90 per cent of what we were asked to do as a

government, Mr. Speaker, we have done.

There were also recommendations for industry and for labour. It was a

collective effort. This Skills Task Force Report came about, not because of work

done by government, not because of work done by industry and labour but it was a

collective effort, Mr. Speaker. It was a collaborative approach where all of us

sat down and we took the opportunity to dialogue and to look to the future and

to research, and the result of that was that particular report.

Mr. Speaker, I am certainly very pleased to say that we have moved forward

with that; and, as I said a few moments ago, we are not resting on our

successes. We recognize that we have done some good things as a government. We

also recognize that some very good things have been happening in the workforce.

We have gotten tremendous co-operation from labour and from the many trade

unions and others who have a very strong, very vested interest in labour trends

and labour development in this Province. So we are very pleased with that, Mr.

Speaker.

I also want to recognize all of the groups who have been a part of this

process, this particular process on the labour mobility legislation here today.

We have been engaged with discussions - we as a government, and our officials -

with unions, unions representing workers in the various certified regulatory

bodies as it pertains to the occupations identified. We have had discussions

with the post-secondary education representatives, the Strategic Partnership

Council, other regulatory bodies, and I want to say thank you to those groups,

Mr. Speaker, for all of those who participated.

As my colleague, the Member for The Isles of Notre Dame, said a few moments

ago, we have had a lot of consultation, a lot of discussions, a lot of formal

sessions where we have invited groups and individuals in to share information

with them exactly about this bill and what it means, and how it will work in

practice once it is adopted by the Legislature. There has been tremendous

interest and there has been tremendous feedback.

We have grown, Mr. Speaker. As we have gone through this process we have

grown and we have made changes, and we have adjusted the course that we have

been on, all in response to the feedback that we have received from our partners

our partners out there in industry and in the private sector. It is all

because it has been a positive relationship, a collaborative relationship, Mr.

Speaker.

It is why I am pleased to say, as I said before, to acknowledge the members

opposite and to see that on this particular legislation that is so, so important

and will play such a vital role to not only allowing us to attract qualified

individuals in hard-to-fill positions, but it opens up so many opportunities for

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

It is for that reason, Mr. Speaker, that I am so pleased to acknowledge that

my colleagues opposite from the two other parties clearly have indicated they

see the importance of this bill and clearly indicated their support for this

particular piece of legislation. I thank them for that, Mr. Speaker.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I am going to conclude my remarks by simply saying

that I thank all hon. members who have had some input into this bill. It is an

important piece of legislation. This is a good day for labour in this Province,

to finally have this piece of legislation on the floor of the House of Assembly.

I look forward, Mr. Speaker, to moving this forward through to Committee stage

and to finally having the legislation passed so we can move forward and get on

with actually enacting the bill from an operational perspective.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 55,

An Act To

Implement Labour Mobility, be now read a second time?

All those in favour, 'aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, 'nay'.

Carried.

CLERK: A bill,

An Act To Implement Labour Mobility. (Bill 55)

MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a second time.

When shall the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?

Now? Tomorrow?

MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Implement Labour Mobility", read a

second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House on tomorrow.

(Bill 55)

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I call Order 14, second reading of a bill,

An Act

To Amend The Rail Service Act, 2009. (Bill 60)

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to introduce a bill that amends the Rail Service Act, 2009, Bill

Mr. Speaker, it is a housekeeping item and the bill would amend the Railway

Service Act, 2009 to allow the minister to cancel a permit to operate a railway

where the permit holder fails to comply with an agreement between the permit

holder and the government respecting the operation of the railway. The amendment

will come into force on the day the Railway Service Act, 2009 comes into force.

Mr. Speaker, the regulation of the construction and operation of a railway

that operates completely within provincial boundaries is the responsibility of

the Province,

whereas regulation of railways that cross provincial boundaries is

a federal responsibility. Now, in the Province currently there are three

federally regulated railways in the Province, and as a result of significant

mineral deposits and exploration in Labrador, there is a possibility of perhaps

as many as three additional railway services been established in Labrador. We do

not know for sure how many. However, we do know that the Bloom Lake Railway is

currently under construction. It is important that we, as a Province, have the

necessary legislative framework in place to enable us to have a regulatory

regime to govern any such operation. This was the purpose of the Rail Service

Act, 2009, and indeed the amendment that we are debating here in the House

today. This amendment is simply intended to strengthen that regulatory regime.

This bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Rail Service Act, 2009, Bill 60, has

the following amendments. "Subsection 13(3) of the Rail Service Act, 2009"

which I might add, outlines the conditions under which the minister may cancel

or suspend a permit "is amended by adding immediately after paragraph

(

a) the following: (a.1) the permit holder fails to comply with an agreement

between the government and the permit holder pertaining to the operation of the

rail service." Of course, this act, as I have already mentioned, Mr.

Speaker, comes into force on the day the Rail Service Act, 2009 comes into

force.

Mr. Speaker, essentially, this amendment is a housekeeping item to ensure

that the Rail Service Act, 2009 does what it is intended to do and ensures an

appropriate agreement enforcement mechanism for the Province. Of course, most

members can recall that the Rail Service Act was passed in the House of Assembly

last spring, and this act was passed to better enable government to regulate the

construction, operation of a number of the proposed railways in the Province.

Again, since the passage of that act, government in consultation with justice

officials have decided that this amendment should be passed to give government a

mechanism by which to revoke the operating or construction permit of a rail

service operator who fails to honour an agreement with the Province pertaining

to the operation of a rail service.

I think it is pretty well straightforward, Mr. Speaker. I have outlined it

and I give others a chance in the House now to look at the amendment and perhaps

enter the debate.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to take a few minutes with regard to Bill 36,

An Act To Revise

The Law Respecting Rail Service. As the minister stated, why the amendment to

the act is brought in today is to regulate, I guess, more so the three

applications. I think there are three applications that are pending, and as the

minister stated, one of them is already in the construction stages. Mr. Speaker,

with regar