Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 17 May 2006 (45th General Assembly, 3rd Session, Vol. XLV No. 22)
2006-05-17
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
May 17, 2006 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLV No. 22
The House met at 2:00 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Hodder): Order, please!
Admit strangers.
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: This afternoon, we have members' statements as follows:
the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Falls-Buchans; the hon. the Member
for the District of Conception Bay South; the hon. the Member for the District
of Grand Bank; the hon. the Member for the District of Windsor-Springdale; the
hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue; and, the hon. the Member for the
District of Lake Melville.
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Falls-Buchans.
MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Advertiser , who recently
won five awards at the Atlantic Community Newspaper Association Convention held
May 4-6 in St. John, New Brunswick.
The Advertiser came back with five awards - first place going to the
paper's advertising staff for Best Graphically Designed ad, "Celebrate
100 Years"; first for Best Special Section, one hundredth anniversary
supplement; second place for editor Natasha Carberry for Best Local Editorial;
third place for sales associate JoeAnn Sooley for Best Original Ad Design, and
third for Best Community Service.
Mr. Speaker, judges commended Ms Carberry for her editorial on the cancer
clinic in Grand Falls-Windsor, stating it was clear that it was a topic the
writer was passionate about and those feelings were communicated effectively.
Mr. Speaker, editor Natasha Carberry said she is pleased with the newspaper's
showing in the competition, adding the staff's success is well-earned
recognition for their dedication to publishing a quality newspaper.
Transcontinental Media's Newfoundland papers took home thirty-six awards
this year.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this hon. House to join with me in
congratulating the Advertiser on receiving five awards from the Community
Newspaper Association.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Conception Bay
South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Last Saturday, I had the privilege of attending the one hundred and
thirty-fourth annual meeting and banquet of the Grand Orange Lodge of
Newfoundland and Labrador. This event was hosted jointly by the Prince of Orange
Lodge No. 23 of Kelligrews and the Hopewell Lodge of Upper Gullies. Mr. Speaker,
I would like now to congratulate those two lodges on a remarkable job in
bringing all these people together.
In attendance were several hundred guests from all over our Province,
country, and indeed the world. The Loyal Orange Association has made a
significant contribution to the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador through
their commitment to educational scholarships and various fundraising
initiatives, including those in aid of cancer, diabetes, and many, many more.
Also present was the Imperial Orange Council of the World President, Mr.
Gerald Budden. Mr. Budden is a resident of Conception Bay South and is finishing
out the last year of a three-year term as president.
I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating the Grand Orange Lodge of
Newfoundland and Labrador on their one hundred and thirty-fourth anniversary,
and recognize Mr. Gerald Budden for his contribution in leading the World
Organization for the last three years.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to thank the staff of the Blue Crest Seniors Home in Grand Bank,
and those individuals who comprise the Golden Journey Cyclist Team, for taking a
leadership role and helping to raise the entire amount of money needed to
purchase a new vehicle for the residents of the Blue Crest Seniors Home. The
total cost of the bus was over $107,000.
When it became obvious that repairs were no longer an option for the bus in
use, the Burin Peninsula Health Care Foundation assisted the Blue Crest Vehicle
Committee with a project by securing grants from Ballard, VOCM and the
Coke-A-Cola Foundation. A special fundraising sub-committee of the foundation
was put in place with Don Hollett of Grand Bank serving as chairperson.
The foundation and sub-committee worked co-operatively with the staff of the
Blue Crest and put in place a fundraising strategy that saw a series of
fundraising campaigns launched to raise the necessary funding. Staff organized
such events such as bake, ticket and book sales, barbeques and auctions. They
also launched a pledge campaign which will become an annual event, known as the
Planned Giving Program, for those wishing to assist with funding for projects to
benefit the residents of the Blue Crest Seniors Home.
The hard work and dedication of all involved resulted in the completion of a
project that will make a significant difference in the lives of the residents of
the Blue Crest. It means the residents can, once again, experience the freedom
that comes with being able to move outside the confines of the living quarters
and enjoy attending social and recreational events on the Burin Peninsula,
shopping and visiting with family members and friends. This project is yet
another example of what determined, caring individuals working together can
accomplish.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in thanking all
involved in seeing this project to fruition.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Windsor-Springdale.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House to congratulate a well-deserving
constituent of my district, Mr. Juan Roberts.
Last month, Juan was selected as Aquaculturist of the Year by the
Newfoundland Aquaculture Industry Association. He was born and raised in Triton,
and lives there today with his family. He has been an aquaculture farmer for
eighteen years and has nurtured a small family company called Badger Bay Mussel
Farms in Triton into a brand name co-operative with producers all over the
Island. In 2004, Juan started Iceberg Select, a brand name connected to high
quality of mussels only from the Province of Newfoundland.
Mr. Speaker, hon. colleagues, please join with me to congratulate Juan
Roberts as Aquaculturist of the Year, as well as another success story in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.
MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to congratulate
Brittany Warren of Chapel Arm, a Grade 7 student at Crescent Collegiate, who
received one of the two awards in the prose junior division at the fifty-fourth
Annual Provincial Arts and Letters Awards.
Since its inception in 1952, the awards program has received tens of
thousands of submissions. The competition is open to amateur or professional
artists who are residents of Newfoundland and Labrador. Applicants are required
to submit creative pieces to either the Senior or Junior (E. J. Pratt) Divisions
of the Awards.
The Junior (E. J. Pratt) Division is open to ages twelve to eighteen years
and includes the areas of Literary Arts, which has two sections: poetry and
prose; Musical Competition, and a Visual Arts Section. The prizes in the Junior
Division are valued at $200 each.
Brittany, along with the other recipients, attended a celebration dinner for
the fifty-fourth Annual Provincial Arts and Letters Awards at The Rooms on May
Mr. Speaker, I ask all Members of the House of Assembly to join with me in
congratulating Brittany Warren and wish her continued success in her writing
adventures.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: Thank you, very much, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in the House today to recognize the achievement of Judy Kippenhuck of
Happy Valley-Goose Bay, who was recently presented with the Newfoundland and
Labrador Organization of Women Entrepreneurs "Entrepreneur of the Year
Award" for the Labrador region.
Mr. Speaker, twenty-three years ago, Judy started Midway Garden Limited,
Flightline Caf
and Gifts Limited, both located in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. Through hard work,
determination, and sixteen-hour days, Judy - along with her husband Edgar and
staff of thirty - have grown a first-class operation.
Part of Judy's philosophy of good business is to reward those who help
along the way. She strongly believes in promoting a healthy and happy workplace
through respect and dignity. She has earned a reputation as an employer who is
willing to give everyone a second chance. On the twentieth anniversary of the
business she even recognized the loyalty of one long-term staff member with a
new car.
Judy's commitment to her employees, her business and her customers, has
earned her the reputation of running a first-class business, and is just part of
the reason she was selected as the recipient of the 2006 NLOWE Entrepreneur of
the Year Award for the Labrador region.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join with me in congratulating Judy on
her great accomplishment as NLOWE's Entrepreneur of the Year for the Labrador
region.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Before we proceed to Statements by Ministers, I would like to welcome in the
public galleries some members of the Bonavista Town Council. I believe we have
Councillor Barry Randell, and we have Deputy Mayor Hedley Butler.
Welcome to our House.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to pay tribute to a gentleman who has served our Province for
over thirty years and will be ending a distinguished career in the public
service of Newfoundland and Labrador on August 31, 2006.
Mr. Speaker, John Noel, Q.C., was born in Twillingate, the son of William and
Marion Noel. He was educated at Prince of Wales College and Memorial University
in St. John's. He continued his studies at Carleton University where he
completed a Master of Arts in International Affairs, and in 1973 he graduated
from Dalhousie University with an L.L.B. The following year he was admitted to
the Bar of Newfoundland.
John, you and I shared some classes, actually, at Dal, if I remember
correctly. I was there in 1972.
Mr. Noel's career in the public service began, once he obtained his law
degree, when he joined the provincial Department of Justice. He served in many
capacities in that department including: Legislative Counsel; Law Clerk of the
House of Assembly; and Assistant Deputy Minister. In 1991, he was appointed to
his current position as Clerk of the House of Assembly.
John Noel has brought a degree of professionalism to the position of Clerk
that is unparalleled. He performs his duties tirelessly and without
consideration for politics or party stripe. All members of this hon. House are
treated equally by Mr. Noel, and for this he has earned our mutual respect.
Recognition of this professionalism extends beyond the walls of our Chamber.
Mr. Noel has served with distinction with the Society of Clerks-at-the-Table in
the Commonwealth, as president of the Association of Clerks-at-the-Table in
Canada and he is a member of the Association of Parliamentary Counsel in Canada.
Mr. Speaker, I have always considered my time in the Legislature as an MHA to
be an honour, and I am proud to say that I have served with someone who has the
dedication, the intelligence and the integrity that Mr. John Noel has
demonstrated throughout his tenure.
I ask all members of this House to join me in recognizing his contribution to
the House of Assembly of Newfoundland and Labrador and thank him for his
unwavering commitment and dedication. We wish him and his wife, Ruth, our very
best as they embark upon a new
chapter of their life.
Thank you, John.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise on behalf of my colleagues in the Official Opposition to echo the
comments and the sentiments made by the Premier regarding Mr. Noel, an
individual who spent thirty years in dedicated service to the people of the
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
I have known John now for, I guess, close on sixteen years in one capacity or
another and there was always something that I liked about him, but I could not
put my finger on why it was until today. That is the fact that he was born in
Twillingate.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, on a more serious note: Mr. Noel has carried out
his duties in this Legislature for quite some time in a very professional and
dedicated manner. As a rookie politician, and I guess as a seasoned one as I am
today, his advice and assistance has always been appreciated and always been
given in a manner with the utmost respect.
John, I say that we are going to miss you in the House of Assembly.
We, on this side of the floor, would like to thank you for the service that
you have provided, not only to us, but the people in this Province. I wish you
and your wife all the best in future endeavours.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The fact that we could not wait to hear all of the speeches to break into
spontaneous applause and acknowledgment of the Clerk is a measure of the esteem
in which he is held by members of this House.
Mr. Speaker, the Office of the Clerk of the House of Assembly is a
distinguished parliamentary office going back to the year 1363, I am told. In
fact, the note of the high office held by the Clerk is the fact that the book
that we use, the House of Commons Procedures and Practice , Marleau and
Monpetit , is actually the work of a clerk and deputy clerk of the House of
Commons of Canada. Indeed, in addition to their roles in the particular
functions of the House, they are also the experts on parliamentary procedure,
and advise you, Your Honour, and all members of the House, on what the proper
parliamentary procedures are, what you can do and what you cannot do, or as some
would say, what you can get away with and what you can't.
I have to say, in my years in this House, the Clerk, or the [Kl Y :rk]
as one former Government House Leader used to refer to this office, the Clerk,
John Noel, has been in this office since just shortly after I arrived here in
1990, so my experience in the House of Assembly has been with him as Clerk. I
have to say, and echo the words of the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition,
he has served this office of Clerk with great distinction, with incredible
impartiality, and shall we say, with great discretion. One could approach the
Clerk and ask his opinion on parliamentary procedure and, in fact, potentially
reveal strategies or things that you thought you would want to do and might like
to do, and he has been very wise in offering his advise and sometimes his
counsel against something that was unwise. He has been very helpful to, I think,
all members of the House, in advising us as to how we ought to conduct ourselves
in this great tradition of Parliament.
I want to add my own personal appreciation for John and all his help and
assistance over the years. I know he will be extremely difficult to replace as
the principal Officer of this House next to you, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank
him for his great dedication, commitment, knowledge and service to this
Parliament and to the Parliamentary Association.
Thank you, 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.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the Premier.
Mr. Speaker, with plants closed in Marystown, Fortune and Harbour Breton,
plants closing in Port de Grave, St. Joseph's and Anchor Point, because of
financial difficulties being experienced by one of our largest seafood
processors, and other plants such as those in Little Bay Islands, Englee and New
Ferolle not open this year, we are facing a crisis in our fishing industry.
This, coupled with the hardship that our harvesters are experiencing as a result
of reduced quotas and low prices for crab and shrimp, shows there is a crisis in
the fishery the likes of which we have not seen in recent times.
Mr. Speaker, as a result of this, I ask the Premier: Will he forgo his
government's private member's motion today to hold an emergency debate on
the state of the Province's most important industry, the fishing industry?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I agree with the hon. gentleman opposite, there is a very
serious situation going on in the fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador, and we
are doing everything we can to stay on top of it and to assess it.
Our caucus met this morning and had discussions on it, discussions with the
provincial Minister of Fisheries this morning. I spoke directly with the federal
Minister of Fisheries. We have a lot of actions moving on a lot of fronts.
As hon. members opposite are aware, we are looking at, now, with the
Department of Justice, amendments to the FPI Act to deal with the evolving
situation there, to try and have some say and some control on what is going on
with the board of directors and the direction of that company.
I discussed, this morning, with the federal Minister of Fisheries, and
suggested that we have a stakeholder summit at a high level immediately, within
the next week, in the Province, whereby the federal government, the federal
minister, provincial minister, deputy ministers and officials and myself would
participate in an initial summit to assess the situation and get the best advice
that we can get from people who are out there on the ground and have a direct
involvement.
We are proceeding on the Cooke Aquaculture file, making favourable progress
on that, to attempt to alleviate the situation in Fortune and to bolster up the
aquaculture industry which we feel has a great future in the Province. I have
spoken to a clerk today with regard to environmental issues in Harbour Breton,
to move that along so that the community of Harbour Breton can move forward and
hold FPI's feet to the fire on the issues with Harbour Breton.
With regard to the charges against FPI, it would be improper for me, as
Premier, to interfere with those charges. My understanding is, from my minister,
that is moving along, and that will be dealt with as expeditiously as possible.
If charges are to be laid, they will be laid; if they are not, they will not,
but that matter is proceeding.
We are staying on top of it, and the minister's department has been
involved with the labour issues in Marystown, so we are doing a lot of things on
a lot of fronts.
At this point, to have a debate, a political debate in the House of Assembly,
will not add anything to that process until more evolves.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We have seen this crisis coming for quite some time and we have been accused
of fearmongering. Well, I am glad to see that the Premier finally realizes that
a crisis is upon us and that he is beginning to talk to people in the industry
and to the federal government.
I ask the Premier: Why has it taken so long? Why did you have to assault us
for asking questions about it for the past few months?
Mr. Speaker, last week in the House of Assembly, when I asked about an action
plan to deal with the possibility of more plant closures in this Province, the
Minister of Fisheries stated, and I quote: I can tell you that this government
is very, very much aware and on top of what is happening in the fishing industry
in all parts of Newfoundland and Labrador and in all sectors.
Mr. Speaker, in light of these statements, can the minister advise us when he
first heard of the financial difficulties being experienced by the Daley group
of companies, and what action plan he is going to be rolling out to deal with
the crisis that company is now experiencing - and, more importantly, the people
who work for that company in this Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In response to the question by the Leader of the Opposition, officially, in
terms of hearing from people involved in the company, it was yesterday. In terms
of hearing from people who are creditors of the company, I believe it was the
day before. Now, you know, there has been talk on the street, I suppose, but one
has to weigh how much attention one pays to that.
In terms of where we go, now that a petition is made to have the Sea Treat
and Daley Brothers move into bankruptcy, of course, we are assessing the
situation in the three communities where they are operating: Port de Grave -
they haven't operated in Anchor Point so far this year. They told us last week
that they were getting ready to operate there, but they have not, and I do not
think they have operated in St. Joseph's. La Scie and Little Bay Islands: La
Scie is operating now under another company, and Little Bay Islands may operate
further down the season, but we are certainly assessing the situation in the
communities where they were operating in the past and even this year.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I say to the minister that the rumours have been around now for quite some
time, and that is one of the reasons I asked you the questions about the
potential plant closures last week.
Mr. Speaker, we understand that the plant in La Scie that was operated by the
Daley group of companies is currently opened under the name of Cold North
Seafoods.
I ask the minister: When did this new company receive a licence to operate,
and what impact do you think the financial difficulties that Daley's are
experiencing will have on the operation of that plant in La Scie?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Leader of the Opposition, I think,
would know that the policy framework within the Department of Fisheries and
Aquaculture is such that, if you are operating a fish company and you want to -
there is no other material change in the company, other than the change of name.
In other words, if you want to change it from Daley Brothers Limited to north,
whatever it was, limited. There is no other material change. There is no
material change in shareholders or anything of that nature then that is
considered, under the policy framework, to be an administrative matter, does not
have to go to the board and is signed off either by the deputy, maybe even the
minister, I am not quite sure. That is my understanding of how that came about.
In terms of whether there is any difficulty in the long-term - or the
short-term, I suppose, for that matter - in terms of the operation at La Scie,
my understanding is that they are operating. They are operating today with as
many employees as they were operating yesterday and last week. The same amount
of activity is going through there.
This new company is financed through a different banking situation than the
other two companies were and it is our understanding from the company that they
have adequate credit lines and credit facilities in place such that this
operation does not appear to be in any jeopardy.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
According to the statement the minister made today, and the statement that
the Minister of Human Resources and Employment made to me yesterday, is that
Daley Brothers still own the plant in Little Bay Islands, even though Eveleigh's
operated the plant there last year, the same company we were discussing
yesterday that owed the government approximately $500,000 in Workers'
Compensation fees.
Can the minister tell me how many employees were employed there last year and
whether or not he anticipates that plant is going to operate this year, and if
so, when?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, my understanding of the Little Bay Islands
situation is that the plant is, in fact, owned by Daley Brothers, or some
company controlled by Daley Brothers, and that a number of years ago - I do not
know how long, I could find out - they entered into a lease operation with a
company controlled by the Eveleigh's, or the Eveleigh's family. That
company, in that situation, have operated for the last number of years on Little
Bay Islands. They have not begun operating this year. Whether they will or not,
I do not know. I understand that when Mr. Daley was in to visit with the
department over the last several hours, that he is looking at a potential
operation on Little Bay Islands, but what problems that might ensue and what
difficulties might have to be overcome, I really do not know.
In terms of the employment level, we can find out, but I am not sure what it
was. Little Bay Islands is not a large community. As a matter of fact, I believe
last year they had to bring in employment from off the Island. Certainly, the
employment level's there, if it were operating, would not be insignificant.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, shrimp fishermen last year did not harvest the
entire quota of shrimp because they found difficulty in finding a processor that
would buy it off them late in the season.
I ask the minister: What impact do you think the closure of the shrimp plants
in St. Joseph's and Anchor Point will have on the ability of harvesters this
year to find someone to buy their catch? Now that there is going to be more
shrimp than processors to buy it, do you think that might negatively impact the
price offered to shrimp fishermen this year?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, these are difficult questions to answer in any
definitive way. I suppose all one can do is give a general answer.
The fact that St. Joseph's and Anchor Point is certainly not going to
operate in the near term is obviously going to impact on harvesters who had
traditionally landed and sold their fish and was processed in those facilities.
On the other hand, those harvesters have arrangements with those very same
companies who are operating and have arrangements with other operators in the
Province. So whether it will be a real disaster from the harvester perspective,
I guess remains to be seen.
In terms of price; price for shrimp is atrocious, worse this year than it was
last year, and God knows it was bad enough last year. Has the market bottomed
out, and whether there will be any improvement, is there going to be any
progress made on the 20 per cent European tariff? All these are questions, Mr.
Speaker, impossible to answer. So what affect, leaving fish in the water - I do
not think it will have a positive affect, but how negative the effect will be of
leaving fish uncaught certainly is speculative and something that I cannot give
a definitive answer to.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We have heard a lot about Plan B's from the Premier with regard to
Stephenville and Harbour Breton. Can the Premier rise today and tell us about
what his Plan B is for Fortune, Marystown, St. Joseph's, Port de Grave, Anchor
Point, Little Bay Islands, Englee and who knows what other community that will
fall into this same position in the weeks to come?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I could repeat the answer that I gave in
the beginning as to what we are doing. We are doing absolutely everything we
can. We are extremely worried about it, as a government. We are dealing with FPI.
We are dealing with Fortune. We are dealing with Harbour Breton. We are dealing
with Marystown. We have made a commitment on early retirement. We basically said
that we would put $30 million into early retirement. We are waiting from an
answer from the federal government in that perspective. We are putting extra
money into aquaculture. We put significant money into research in the
department. We are exploring all opportunities.
I think this summit is an extremely important development next week, where we
are engaging the federal government. This is a very serious situation, which is
comparable to the farming situation in Western Canada. We need to have the
federal minister involved. He is very co-operative. He wants to get involved. He
is very knowledgeable on the fishery. He is going to bring his officials in here
next week. I understand he is going to be in St. John's all next week. So we
are hoping that some time during the week, next week, there will be a joint
release from both departments and from my office, that the federal government
will be engaged and we are going to be talking to people who are in the know,
who are on the ground in the fishery. We certainly welcome the Leader of the
Opposition to come and make a presentation, and the Leader of the New Democratic
Party. We are open to all views. We want to find solutions for the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador. We are very concerned and we are going to come up
with answers.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, we just heard the Premier say that he has been
dealing with this and he has been dealing with that and he has been dealing with
something else. The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, the Premier and his
government have been dealing with Harbour Breton for eighteen months. They have
been dealing with the Town of Fortune for twelve months. They have been dealing
with the Town of Marystown for six months. They have been dealing with the Town
of Stephenville for fourteen months. But, what have we seen? What results have
we seen? Absolutely none, Mr. Speaker! Absolutely none! Talk is cheap, we need
to see action. That is what we need to see on behalf of the people who have been
negatively impacted and driven from this Province.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in this House of Assembly I referenced the
approximately $500,000 that Workers' Comp was owed by two companies, Ice Cap
and North Atlantic Seafoods, companies owned by the same individuals and who are
permitted to continue with processing fish even though they owed that large sum
of money to government.
I ask the minister responsible for Workers' Comp, in which one of these
plants operated: What did you do, or your government do, to try and collect that
money?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, what we do not need here is cheap and
dirty politics being played.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: What we need here is a joint call to action, whereby we
all come together and we all try and act together.
Now, when we were on that side of the House we participated in an all-party
committee; we co-operated with you; we went to Ottawa; we did absolutely
everything we could. The line of questioning, the first five or six questions,
very good. I even turned to my colleague here and said: You know, there is a
different tone over there. At least he is asking good, solid questions - but
then the nastiness and the dirtiness and the politics comes out. We are here for
the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and there was a line of questioning here
yesterday on New Ferolle, implying that we were hiding information, that there
was going to be no openness and accountability.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: There is a process in place, Mr. Speaker, whereby we
followed the process. We followed the thirty day procedure, we went to the sixty
day extension. A third party request came in saying they objected to releasing
of the information on behalf of Mr. Doyle. We then went to an appeal process.
That appeal process is taking place and that is the proper way to go. The same
way with the Griffiths Guitar, openness and accountability. We followed the
process. You know that we cannot release Cabinet information, Cabinet
confidences, so you are playing small, petty politics to try and taint a very,
very serious issue in this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, anyone who watches this House of Assembly, you can
always see it is just under the surface with the Premier. He has to contain
himself on a daily basis from lashing out into personal attacks against those
opposite when we ask questions.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, we have a Minister of Finance who is trying so
hard to collect school tax, those who are in arrears in school tax, that he even
sent threatening letters to dead people in the Province. Yet, it seems perfectly
acceptable to allow a company to owe $500,000 and remain operating a fish plant
in this Province.
I ask the minister responsible for workmen's compensation, or the Minister
of Finance: Why are you breaking the rules for this company while no other
individual in the Province is getting the same treatment with regard to school
tax or student loans?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: The Leader of the Opposition, who sat in Cabinet, should
know, and if he follows the Auditor General reports or if he follows any
statement of government he should know, that workers' compensation, the
Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission is not an entity of
government for reporting purposes on the books. They are arm's-length,
independent. They set their fees, they collect them - not interfering with the
Province. We are not obligated to collect it.
According to the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants, under generally
accepted accounting principles, we are including every entity of government in
our accounting procedure, something they hid for decades over there - they never
did. We are truly accountable. We are not responsible for it. They set their own
(inaudible).
For a Leader of the Opposition to say to government - to stand and pretend he
knows it, and mix these together, it is misleading the people. It is
misrepresenting that, nothing but a political motive. It is wrong, it is
incorrect. It is factually incorrect, financially incorrect, and anybody in
Canada who knows one thing about finances knows the difference - that they are
trying to confuse them.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I know now what drives them into personal attacks.
When they do not have answers, they result to attacking the person asking the
questions.
A simple question for the minister: Regardless of who is responsible for
workmen's compensation, what efforts are being made to collect that $500,000?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
He will have to direct the question to an arm's-length agency that does not
report to government, that does not file a report to me, that we are not
responsible for. It is not under the financial statements. It is not reflected
in our financial statements. Their liabilities or surplus are not reflected in
our statements, and should not be; it is not done. The Auditor General agrees
with that statement, and everybody else, and that person cannot even see the
answer to that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It has already been noted here this afternoon, last evening the Province
learned that another large fishing company in this Province was in financial
trouble and that thousands of workers were to be left out of work. Approximately
350 of those workers, Mr. Speaker, work at the plant in Port de Grave.
I ask the Minister of Fisheries: What has he done to work with the company to
possibly avoid the closure of this plant, or has he been in contact with other
potential operators of the plant?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I want to correct some information in the
preamble of the member's question, first of all.
If there is one person that is affected here it is one too many, but it is
not thousands. There are about 300 employees in Port de Grave, 180 in Anchor
Point when it was working, and 200 in St. Joseph's. They are all important.
One is important, but it is not thousands.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the other part of the hon. member's question
was, what have I done to work with the company? There are two parts of an answer
to that, Mr. Speaker.
We found out about this information yesterday and the company is, if the
court agrees today, in bankruptcy. There is a receiver that comes in, and the
receiver looks out to the interests of the creditor, in this case Scotiabank.
When the receiver is appointed, Mr. Speaker, we have already indicated, I have
already given instructions, that we want to sit down with the receiver and the
bank to see what their plans are for those assets on a go-forward basis.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
There has been speculation in this Province for quite some time that this
company was in financial trouble. In fact, last week in the House, the Leader of
the Opposition asked questions pertaining to the closure of other plants.
I ask the minister: What will he do to protect the interests of the employees
of this company, and is he prepared to intervene and see that none of the assets
or equipment at the plants closed are removed and taken to other facilities
operated by the owners of this particular business?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I think I said to the hon. gentleman in the
previous answer that when the receiver is appointed then we intend to sit down
with the receiver and the creditor to talk about -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. RIDEOUT: The receiver is not appointed.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. JOYCE: (Inaudible) on the Fisheries Broadcast Friday.
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair had recognized the Member for Port de Grave to ask the question.
The Chair gives the opportunity to the Minister of Fisheries to give his answer.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member for Bay of Islands said I was
on the Fisheries Broadcast on Friday, yes, talking about difficulties facing
this company. I meant, Mr. Speaker, the union negotiations they were having. I
never said anything about financial difficulties, Mr. Speaker. We became
officially aware of this yesterday.
Now, no theatrics or posturing or anything else by the hon. gentlemen and
ladies opposite can make a silk purse into a sow's ear.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the people of the District of Port
de Grave and the workers of that plant, I am not standing here today posturing,
Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the workers of these plants are obviously concerned about their
future. Many of them find themselves in difficult circumstances, with their EI
having run out and not having enough hours to qualify for EI this year. Many of
them have no income and need assistance immediately.
I ask the minister: Will he offer some assurance to those workers that the
government will act immediately to deal with the situation, and can he provide
details on what emergency assistance will be made available to these workers?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, what I can assure the hon. gentleman and his
constituents and the people in Newfoundland and Labrador in other communities
that are effected by the announcement yesterday, is that the government is
continually assessing the situation in communities around the Province where
plants are either not operating or where they were operating and then either
shut down or slowed down or whatever. Now, as a result of the news that came
yesterday, I can assure the hon. gentleman and his constituents that Port de
Grave is part of that process.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, the upheaval that has taken place in my district
because of the closure of the fish plant in Fortune by FPI is taking its toll on
the people affected. In the next three months, 196 more people will be without
any income. The information requested by the government has been submitted but
there has been no word as to when any support will be forthcoming.
I ask the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture: When can they expect to
receive the support promised by the government?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows that we have been working
very diligently as a government with Cooke Aquaculture. We should be in a
position to respond to that in a public way very, very soon. We have also
Service Canada, and I understand they have been on the ground in Fortune talking
to the people whose EI is going to run out in the short term.
As we speak, Mr. Speaker, this government is currently involved with
assessing the role that we can play in providing further assistance, and when we
are ready to do that, Mr. Speaker, we will certainly be making the communities
and the people affected aware of it, Mr. Speaker, despite the objections of the
Leader of the Opposition.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, time is not a luxury that these
people have. It is about time, I guess, you recognize the seriousness of the
situation and move to do something about it.
Is it true that the government is reviewing the guidelines for the Community
Enhancement Program, otherwise known as Job Creation Program, and may not be
advancing any money to anyone for another three months?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to any program that the government puts out there,
we are always reviewing the programs themselves to see how they operated in
previous years. To be quite up-front with you, yes, we are looking at the
guidelines but there is no talk about delaying it for three months. It is the
first I heard of that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Watching this government deal with the fisheries problems is like watching a
train wreck, big, strong and powerful but heading for disaster.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier should know that dealing with Harbour Breton,
Fortune, Marystown and now Daley Brothers as short-term emergencies - and even
an emergency stakeholder meeting will not solve the problem. Will the Premier
acknowledge that what is required here is a long-term vision and a long-term
strategy to prevent the final death of rural Newfoundland and Labrador, neither
of which is apparent to this government to date?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, as the current Minister of Fisheries knows
and the previous Minister of Fisheries knows, we made every attempt last year to
put in place one long-term strategy, which was the RMS strategy. That was
rejected by the various stakeholders in the industry. This government is trying
all the time. It is reviewing it. We have presentations going to Cabinet over
the next couple of weeks with regard to a long-term strategy. I think the hon.
member will agree, though, I mean, this is the tip of the iceberg. This is the
evidence of what is actually going on here in this Province, the serious
problems with the fishery. But there are a lot of things over which we have no
control. We do not have any control over the dollar. We do not have any control
over the Chinese labour market. We do not have any control over the dropping of
the price of crab. We do not have any control over the shrimp tariff. We do not
have any control over foreign over fishing but we are trying to do something
about each and everyone of them when we are working with the federal government.
So, we are developing a long-term strategy to the best of our ability but the
sands keep shifting here and, you know, what happened to Daley's is evidence
of what is going on in this industry. I mean, just listen to the people of the
Province. Listen to them on Open Line. They are aware of what is going on out
there. They know there is a problem, and we are working with solutions. I can
only acknowledge that we are very concerned and we are very worried about it,
and we are going to work with the people of this Province to find the best
solutions that we possibly can.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am pleased with the response of the Premier in that he is regarding -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I am asking the co-operation of members on both sides. The Chair has
recognized the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi. I ask members to permit him to
put his question.
The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As I say, I am pleased to hear the Premier respond in that manner and
recognize that we have a major structural problem in our fishing industry.
Mr. Speaker, why then would the Premier want to just make some modest
amendments to the FPI Act rather than recognize that in 1984 when we had a
similar, major, structural crisis in the fishing industry, FPI was recognized as
a vehicle for long-term solutions and could, still today, be a potential vehicle
for a restructured Newfoundland and Labrador fishery and solve many of the
problems that are coming on us? As we say, we may not have control over very
many things but we do have, in this Legislature, control over FPI. Why doesn't
he see that as a potential vehicle to solve some of our structural problems,
some of our marketing problems, and some of the management problems in our
fishery?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, we do acknowledge that is a vehicle. We
are proposing amendments. The amendments have not yet been tabled and have not
been proposed. So, I do not know how the hon. gentleman can say that they are
modest amendments. They have not even been tabled yet. They are not even
finalized. We are getting advice from the Department of Justice.
That is one vehicle, and if we present amendments to the House of Assembly,
or when we present amendments to the House of Assembly on Tuesday, we will
proceed with those amendments with the will of the House and the majority of the
House. If there are subsequent amendments that have to be done, then we will
proceed with that. We are prepared to call the Legislature back at a moment's
notice to deal with emerging issues.
The stakeholder summit next week fully engages the federal government. They
have to be part of the solution on this. They are a big, big part of the
solution. I am willing to hear what you would have to say at a presentation
there and would listen intently; would even listen to the Leader of the
Opposition, as hard as that might be. We are prepared to do whatever we can. We
are prepared (inaudible).
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the Member for Grand Bank for a very short question.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, in October of last year the union at Grand Bank
Seafoods, which is owned by Clearwater, requested a meeting with the former
Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture to discuss Clearwater's decision to move
one of their product lines to China. They did not get that meeting. In December,
the union, and my office, made the same request of the present Minister of
Fisheries and Aquaculture and to date, five months later, the minister has not
agreed to meet with them.
I ask the minister: Given the bad news that we are hearing of yet more plant
closings, will you agree to meet with the union sooner and hear their concerns
about the future of the Clearwater plant in Grand Bank before it is too late?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, about four or five Friday's ago the
Industrial/Retail Council of the FFAW had their council meeting in St. John's.
I went over and sat down with every single local. That included Grand Bank, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The time for Question Period has expired.
MS FOOTE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: A point of order has been called by the Member for Grand
Bank.
MS FOOTE: The minister knows that there was a particular request and what
he has done is not answer the request. You have not met with them. We spoke with
them this morning. You have not even acknowledged their request.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Members know that points of order -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Colleagues and parliamentarians, the Chair is reluctant to start naming
people but I will if I have to.
The Chair and members know that you should not engage in points of order to
continue debate or to continue Question Period. Therefore, there is no point of
order.
Before we proceed to other routine proceedings, I have been advised that the
Mayor of Bonavista, Ms Betty Fitzgerald, is also in the gallery today. We
welcome Ms Fitzgerald to our House.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Tabling of Documents.
Tabling of Documents
MR. SPEAKER: As Speaker of the House, I am pleased today to table the
Report of the Commission of Internal Economy for the fiscal year April 1, 2004
to March 31, 2005.
Further tabling of documents?
Notices of Motions.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we had a great debate on Bill 6 the other night, the Tobacco Tax
Act. I anticipate that we are going to have another one sometime tomorrow when
we call it, but in the event that -
MR. REID: Do you have a spontaneous one planned?
MR. E. BYRNE: No. I say to the Leader of the Opposition, he just asked a
question: Do you have a spontaneous debate planned? No. I say to the Leader of
the Opposition though, given that it is a finance bill, and given the fact that
you can have latitude in talking about any subject matter, we look forward to
the same sort of latitude that you had the other night.
Having said that, Mr. Speaker, it is important for government to gets its
agenda through. In the event that the Opposition want to continue to filibuster,
I have to provide some insurance for government's agenda, Mr. Speaker. So I do
move that, pursuant to Standing Order 47, further consideration on the
resolution in Bill 6, respecting a measure to impose taxes on tobacco, shall not
be further adjourned and that further consideration of any resolution or
resolutions, clause or clauses,
section or sections,
schedule or schedules,
preamble or
preambles, title or titles, or whatever else might be related to
Bill 6, shall be the first business of Committee of the Whole on Ways and Means
and shall not be further postponed.
Mr. Speaker, I only put that down, not that I wish to use it, probably I hope
that I don't, but in the event I have to we certainly will.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: Further Notices of Motion.
Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank.
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Grand Bank who is presenting a
petition.
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the people in the District of
Grand Bank, but more importantly on behalf of all of the people who worked at
the fish plant in Fortune and on behalf of all of the people who are affected by
the callous and cruel actions by FPI to close down the plant in Fortune.
This petition, Mr. Speaker, is calling on the government to acknowledge that
there is a serious issue here and to ensure that whatever happens, the quota
that has been traditionally processed at the fish plant in Fortune will continue
to be processed there.
The prayer of the petition is signed. It says here, "...to recognize and
respect the importance of the fishing industry to the area, and to take whatever
action necessary to ensure that the quotas traditionally processed by Fishery
Products International (FPI) for this area remain within the region for the
benefit of the people and their communities."
Mr. Speaker, this petition has been signed by people from Fortune and Grand
Bank. It is in keeping with the petitions I have been presenting in this House
for the past couple of weeks, signed by people from all of the communities
impacted by the decision of FPI to close down the plant in Fortune.
Mr. Speaker, I hear daily from people who are having to leave and leave their
families behind, many of whom will, when school closes, move their entire
families with them. What we will see is what we have been seeing since FPI took
these callous actions in other area of our Province, we will see out-migration
like we have never seen before. Communities like Fortune, like Grand Bank, like
Lamaline, like Point May, Point au Gaul, Grand Beach and Garnish, all of these
communities, what we will see happening there is what we have seen happen in
Harbour Breton on the Connaigre Peninsula. People will continue to leave and,
unfortunately, we will not see them returning.
It is very costly for someone to uproot from their homes, uproot their
families and move to another part of the country. Mr. Speaker, there is no
support for them. They are having to do this, a lot of them, as I mentioned
earlier, whose EI has run out or will run out by the end of August. We are
talking about another 196 people who really do not know where to turn. They will
not have income once their EI runs out.
It is so important for the government to do whatever it can, whatever it can,
to ensure that the fish quota that has been traditionally processed in Fortune
continue to be processed there, and they can do that under the present FPI Act.
I am calling on the government again to do this so that people will not have to
continue to leave, that they will be able to look ahead and say, well, something
is going to happen here. If FPI does not want to be here then maybe someone else
will be here, but they need that quota to attract another party. Even if it is
Cooke Aquaculture, I know that Cooke Aquaculture is into aquaculture, but they
have indicated that if they had a quota of groundfish then they could continue
to do more than just aquaculture at that site. I understand, as well, they just
do not want it for the interim until Cooke Aquaculture can get established, but
they would like to have it for the long term.
So, I am hoping that the government -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time has expired.
MS FOOTE: Time to clue up, Mr. Speaker?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Time has been granted to the hon. member.
MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am hoping that if the government would make that happen, ensure that quota
remains in Fortune, that Cook Aquaculture, who I understand are looking at a
number of sites in the Province, would, in fact, see that as an enticement and
make a commitment to Fortune so that people can continue to work and live in
those rural communities that are so important to Newfoundland and Labrador.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans.
MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I guess we have witnessed today, in our House of Assembly, the entire
Question Period was about rural Newfoundland and Labrador. It is frightening,
what is happening around us; however, there is one bright spot in Central
Newfoundland and it is connected to our natural resources. It is all about
mining and also processing barite, a material that is used for our offshore oil
industry.
Yesterday, I had the pleasure of being one of the Members in the House of
Assembly listen to the Minister of Natural Resources talking about permits that
were granted for prospecting in areas around Newfoundland and Labrador, and most
of that activity is happening in Central Newfoundland. It is unfortunate that
today I must stand on my feet and say to this House of Assembly that we do not
have a good road to bring out that ore next fall. We do not have a good road to
bring out the barite. We have three new drill rigs that are in there for Messina
Minerals, and they are transporting all that equipment on flatbeds. There is
logging going on there, there are paper trucks hauling logs over there, over the
Buchans Highway, and the edges are broken off the pavement. There are ruts in
the road.
These are the same industries that are providing millions of dollars to this
Province so the government can, in turn, help areas like we heard about today,
help areas like Harbour Breton, like Fortune, like Stephenville and the three
areas that are going to be affected by the closure of the Daley plants.
We do not know what is coming down the tube when it comes to the fishing
industry in our Province. There are some serious things happening, but when you
look at the fact that in Central Newfoundland right now we have three industries
that are contributing to the public Treasury, I want to ask the Minister of
Transportation and Works to think hard about this. Think hard about this. We are
not asking for something out of the ordinary. We are asking for a commitment to
put a good road there.
I have not even mentioned the fact of public safety, which is uppermost on my
mind as well as all the people who travel over 100 kilometres, where there is
not even a service station in case they break down. There are no lines on the
pavement, and there are lots of moose.
Apart from all of that, we have an area that is contributing to our
provincial economy. I know that this government will need the revenue, the money
that is going to come out of those industries in Central Newfoundland, to help
the fishing communities around our Province, but I do not hear any of them say -
even though I heard the Minister of Finance casually talk yesterday about
$300,000 was a minuscule amount to give to Griffiths Guitar, how the Premier had
overridden the recommendations of two Cabinet ministers. Yet, I do not see any
money coming forward for a highway that leads to an industry-based economy that
will help the Province in general.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to leave government with this thought: Are they
making the right and responsible decision here? You decide.
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: It being 3:00 o'clock, under our Standing Orders, the
Chair is obliged to call the private member's resolution.
MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible). Go ahead, I don't mind.
MR. SPEAKER: I do believe there is agreement that we will have a further
petition.
The Chair recognizes the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
If the Opposition have another petition that they feel obligated, or wish to
get in today, I do not mind providing the opportunity to do so, or giving leave
on this side of the House to do so, if that is what they desire.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the Government House Leader
for giving me leave to present the petition on behalf of residents of the
Northern Peninsula who are experiencing a crisis in their fishing industry, as
we all know, in communities like New Ferolle, Anchor Point, Englee and Black
Duck Cove. I understand today that Black Duck Cove may be open, thanks to Pat
Quinlan and his group of companies.
Mr. Speaker, the petition reads: The petition of the undersigned residents:
WHEREAS the Great Northern Peninsula has suffered extreme amounts of high
unemployment over the last five years; and
WHEREAS the fish plant operations have been the primary employment generator
along the Northern Peninsula; and
WHEREAS many fish plants have been closed as a direct result of government
action, such as in New Ferolle, Englee, Black Duck Cove, Anchor Point, as well
as others; and
WHEREAS this has put fish plant workers out of work; and
WHEREAS the current operating fish plants are teetering on the edge of
bankruptcy - I might add, since this petition came in, Mr. Speaker, one of them
has gone bankrupt - and this is attributable to government action or inaction;
WHEREUPON the undersigned petitioners humbly pray and call upon the House of
Assembly to strike an All-Party Committee of the House of Assembly to come and
meet with the Great Northern Peninsula Concerned Citizens Committee.
That is duly sworn and bound by the attached signatures, Mr. Speaker.
I am calling on the government today, on behalf of these residents - this is
my second day in a row - to strike an All-Party Committee of the House of
Assembly and do as the residents of the Northern Peninsula wish, and that is to
go up there and meet with the Concerned Citizens groups on the Northern
Peninsula to discuss the severe problems, economic problems that they are
experiencing.
Mr. Speaker, I have been asked to present the petition, because obviously the
two members who represent the Northern Peninsula - or three, I might say,
because there is one who is in Humber Valley East, is it? who represents the
Rocky Harbour area - there are three MHAs who represent the Northern Peninsula,
and the residents up there -
MR. JOYCE: Humber Valley.
MR. REID: Humber Valley, I should say.
We have to wonder why they have not been presenting the petitions themselves.
I have been told by residents of the Northern Peninsula that it is no good to
ask them. They either will not do it or are afraid to present a petition on
their behalf because they are afraid that which happened to Fabian Manning will
also happen to their members if they question -
MR. JOYCE: What happened to Fabian Manning?
MR. REID: Fabian Manning got the flick simply because he asked the
Premier if he would reconsider a raw material sharing system or at least have
discussions with the FFAW. As a result of that, he received a silver bullet sent
from Houston, Texas. He is no longer with us, but thankfully, I guess for Fabian
Manning, he has gone on to greater and better things.
So I say to the members from the Northern Peninsula, maybe they should do the
same thing because I can't image that they appreciate having to sit idly by
while a member of the Opposition presents a petition on behalf of their
constituents. The people in that area are finding it very, very difficult
because they feel abandoned.
Right in the petition they say, because of actions -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time has expired.
MR. REID: Leave to clue up?
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been requested.
AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been denied.
Orders of the Day
Private Members' Day
MR. SPEAKER: It being Private Members' Day today, I do believe notice
was given that the Member for the District of Gander will be presenting a
petition. I call upon the hon. member now to begin his discussion.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: It gives me great pleasure to rise in this House today in
regards to the private member's resolution I presented and tabled a couple of
days ago.
Before I start, I just want to make a small correction in regards to the
Orders of the Day. I will not read it completely, but in the third
whereas there
is just a small typo error. It says here, "... the maximum benefit of
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians is an initiative led by the Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador and Labrador Hydro." It should be: Newfoundland
and Labrador Hydro. So I just wanted to make that one correction in regards to
the Orders of the Day.
Mr. Speaker, I was at that announcement on last Monday. I went over to the
announcement, along with the Premier, and a couple of other members from here -
the minister was in Labrador. I took great pride being a part of that and being
there, a monumental day, as I would see it, in regards to the announcement for
Newfoundland and Labrador to go forward in regards to developing their project
of the Lower Churchill and it being a Newfoundland and Labrador led project in
conjunction with Newfoundland Hydro. I thought it was a great day. It gave me
great pride.
Also, I might point out, that the minister responsible was in Labrador at the
time, along with the Member for Lake Melville, which I have been in consultation
with and talking to because I have a great interest in this project, not only as
an MHA, but as a Newfoundlander and Labradorian because I would like to
understand the project. I am not an engineer. I am not an electrician, but I
certainly would, very much, like to know lots about the project, being in
consultation with the member.
I might also point out, Mr. Speaker, that we currently have Bill 1 in front
of the House which really enables Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to expand its
mandate and to take advantage of the emerging energy opportunities, including
the Lower Churchill Development, and the Lower Churchill will be one of its main
priorities.
I must say, right up-front, that I certainly take great pride and support the
direction that government is taking in developing this significant resource for
the benefit of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. It is, and will be, a
Newfoundland and Labrador led project. It ensures that we take control of that
development and that resource and it will result in great benefits for the
Province in the future. The decision pursued, a Newfoundland and Labrador led
project, does not mean that a final decision has been made. That announcement
was purely made to map out the path that the Province will be taking, along with
Newfoundland Hydro, in developing that resource. It does not mean that the
project will certainly go ahead but it means that we will take control of that
project, as we should, and as a result, will take the benefits that should be
ours in regards to that resource, it being a natural resource.
There is a significant amount of work that has to happen before a final
decision is made and I think as we move along in regards to the developing of
that project, that decision we expect to be made by 2009, with first power in
2015. So, it is a long process yet. I mean, it is only 2006 and we have three
years to develop the project to the point of construction and then on to 2015
with the first power. We have to look at the feasibility of the development. We
will continue to study it on various fronts, the financial, the technical, the
environmental and also the configuration and various market options in regard to
where the power will go.
There was a process that we followed in determining the final outcome and the
path that we were going to take. We did that through the Expressions of
Interest, and we short-listed that. We had those analyzed by the people over in
Newfoundland Hydro and various people in the industry, and it became obvious
that this will be a better project if we led the development of that project
ourselves, and then we would maximize the benefits for the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador in regards to that resource. But that is not saying
that we will not seek out partnerships in regards to developing that project.
There will be partnership opportunities and various components of the project.
They will probably be in financing, construction, market access and market
options. One of those, Mr. Speaker, an example of that will be on the financial
side. A financial institution may very well and the financier may very well
offer preferred financing in regards to that project and take an equity share in
it, in lieu of providing the financing at a lower cost than the traditional
financing.
I also want to say at this point, that the total equity of the project will
stay here. It will not go elsewhere. This will be a Newfoundland and Labrador
owned and Newfoundland and Labrador controlled project. We certainly want to
maximize the benefits of both the development and the operational phases of the
project. We certainly want to make sure that the Province and Labrador has the
access of the power to meet the provincial requirements in the future. As we go
into and grow economically, we have to make sure that we have the power there
that will meet the needs of the people and the manufacturers or whoever we might
be servicing in regards to growing that economy.
The decision to have Hydro lead the potential development is a good one.
Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is the fourth largest utility in Canada, and
which Churchill Falls operates the eighth largest generation station in the
world. Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is certainly led by a great team of
executive and staff. They have the expertise. They have been in the business a
long time. They certainly have the whereabouts and the knowhow and also the
tools to develop this resource. So, it will be led by Newfoundland and Labrador
Hydro, along with and in conjunction with the Newfoundland government, the
Cabinet, the minister and the Premier.
I agree with the Premier, the minister and the Cabinet in regards to the path
that we have taken. It is a path to be the masters of our own destiny in regards
to that potential project. Hopefully, as we move it along, we will see - and it
will develop. I think it will. I firmly believe that it will under the direction
of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and the government. I see it as probably more
beneficial to Newfoundland and Labrador than even the Atlantic Accord. I know
that the oil and gas industry is very, very important to our economy but
certainly, this one here is probably one of the biggest and probably one of the
last of the biggest projects for North America in regards to hydro-electrical
power.
So, at this point in time, I am not going to belabour the comments that I am
going to make. I will have time to come back a little bit later and make further
comments. I will sit at this particular time, Mr. Speaker. I am interested in
hearing each and every one of the Members of the House of Assembly view. I would
hope that they will support this resolution, because I think not only myself but
most of Newfoundland and Labrador does. As I said before, I think this is
something that we mapped out in our Blue Book. We are going to be masters of our
own destiny. We are going to not be led; we are going to lead.
Mr. Speaker, I will leave it at that and I welcome any other speakers on the
resolution.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Further speakers to the motion?
The hon. the Member for Lake Melville.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in this hon. House of Assembly today and
speak on this private member's resolution. I want to say, I was pleased to sit
with my colleague, the Member for Gander, as we looked at this resolution and
moving it forward.
Mr. Speaker, in our election Blue Book, and since we have formed the
government, we have been very clear and very consistent on our objective in
developing our natural resources. The exploitation of our natural resources has
to achieve maximum benefits for the people and the communities of our Province
of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker.
It is a position that has the support of the people of our Province, which
was very clear in the energy plan consultations held around the Province by the
Minister of Natural Resources earlier this year and is ongoing and a work in
progress, Mr. Speaker.
The Premier and the Minister of Natural Resources announced on May 8 that the
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro will
take the lead on the potential development of the Lower Churchill, with
Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro as the lead proponent, Mr. Speaker,
Mr. Speaker, the Premier said that day, and I agree with him wholeheartedly,
that we have the experience, the knowledge and the capacity to take on a project
of this magnitude. We are recognized as world leaders in hydroelectric
operations and in hydroelectric development. Newfoundland and Labrador is the
fourth largest utility in the country, Mr. Speaker, running the eighth largest
generating station in the world. I can tell you that, having spent my time with
Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro for some-twenty-five years, that company has the
expertise and the personnel, some 1,100 employees with Newfoundland and Labrador
Hydro that have the experience and the knowledge to move this project forward,
Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, the Premier put the importance of the
development into perspective just last week in this hon. House when he reminded
people of the Province that the power from the existing Churchill Falls station
is sold to Hydro-Quebec for a quarter of a cent per kilowatt hour. Residents of
the Province are astonished when they hear that Hydro-Quebec then turns around
and resells that power for some twelve point five cents. This means they are
making fifty times the profit.
With the development of the Lower Churchill, Mr. Speaker, we want that profit
to remain in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador; a very, very important
point, a very, very important lesson that we must learn from our history.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, the Province embarked on a process a year ago to
identify the best approach of developing the Lower Churchill Hydro resource that
would ensure the maximum benefits and return to the people of the Province and
indeed to the people of Labrador.
After a thorough assessment of the proposals that were presented through the
Expression of Interest process, it became clear to the government that a
Newfoundland and Labrador-led development is best suited to meet the provincial
government's objective; that is to develop the Lower Churchill in a way that
maximizes the benefits and the returns for our Province and indeed our people.
Mr. Speaker, I wholeheartedly support the decision that the potential
development of the Lower Churchill be led by Hydro. Hydro is the best route to
take in realizing real and tangible benefits. I believe this is a good public
policy and a good business decision. It is important that the Province control
and lead this development, and that is exactly what our government and our
Premier will do.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, it is important to note that government's
decision to lead the Lower Churchill development does not mean that a final
decision has been made to proceed with that development. A significant amount of
work and assessment remains before any final decisions are made, but I am
confident in the decision for the Province to lead this development and I am
equally confident that any decisions will be made in the best interest of the
Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and its people. There will be no more
giveaways, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, within the new broader mandate of Newfoundland
and Labrador Hydro, the Lower Churchill project is one of the main priorities. I
am very excited about the opportunities before us in the development of the
Lower Churchill resource, and it must be developed, Mr. Speaker, on our terms.
I am particularly pleased, Mr. Speaker, with the ongoing discussions with the
Innu Nation and President Ben Michel. I am particularly pleased to note that
those discussions are ongoing, and they have certainly been a work in progress
for the last number of months.
I am also pleased to add, Mr. Speaker, that as we consult with the people of
Labrador we are not following the road of past governments and past leaders. The
Premier has been in Labrador, the Minister of Natural Resources has been in
Labrador, the energy plan consultations are ongoing, and we will continue to
support the process of consulting with our stakeholders as we move forward with
the plans of this project into the future.
Mr. Speaker, this is indeed a great project for our Province. It will again
instill the pride that we have in the abilities of our citizens, of our
employees with Newfoundland Hydro and that particular company, to move this
project forward. I want to say, I am very pleased today, as the Member for Lake
Melville and the only member on this side of the House from Labrador, to support
this particular initiative, Mr. Speaker.
You know, when I look at the history, Mr. Speaker, of the hydro development
in Labrador - and as I have said in this House a number of times, I was
particularly blessed to have the opportunity to move to Labrador in 1962 when my
dad moved his family there. My first job, as a teenager, was with Twin Falls
Power, working in the summertime on the transmission lines between Twin Falls
and Labrador West. I had the unique opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to also live up in
that part of the big land called Labrador when the Churchill Falls development
came on stream. I can tell you, I watched that particular project to its
completion, and now I am very happy to be able to stand in my place today to
represent the people of my district to say that indeed this is another great
project.
The difference between this project and the Upper Churchill is, we plan on
doing this ourselves, having control of this project ourselves for the benefit
of our Province and for its people, Mr. Speaker. I think it shows great
leadership on behalf of our Premier and great leadership and foresight on behalf
our government, and I want to congratulate the Member for Gander for bringing
this particular private member's statement and resolution forward.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am pleased to rise and have a few words on this motion. I am a little bit
surprised that it is coming from the Member for Gander and not necessarily the
Member for Lake Melville who, as we all know, is the only Labrador member on the
government side of the House of Assembly. That was a little bit surprising to
me, Mr. Speaker, but no doubt I have some comments that I would like to add to
the motion, Mr. Speaker.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, if the Government House Leader would like to get
up, I can sit down and wait my turn; that is not a problem.
MR. E. BYRNE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
A point of order has been called by the Government House Leader.
MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I certainly made no attempt - I was not speaking to the member opposite. I
was speaking to my colleague to the left of me, the Member for Lake Melville. If
my discussion with him interrupted her, I certainly do apologize but there was
no attempt to interrupt the hon. member.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I do want to have a few words on this motion, because I think the motion is
intended to fall in line with the announcement that the Premier made a few days
ago or a week ago, I think it was on May 8, that basically government would take
the lead in a potential development of energy resources on the Lower Churchill.
I heard my hon. colleague just speaking and saying that we are doing this
ourselves. It is do it ourselves. That is certainly not what the motion says.
The motion says that the government would take the lead on this particular
project, and one would hope that any developments in the Province, when it comes
to natural resources of this calibre, that government is always the entity that
takes the lead, Mr. Speaker. I do not think that comes as any surprise to any of
us.
You know what comes as an absolute surprise to me though, Mr. Speaker, is
that, I think it was on December 7, I debated a private member's motion in the
House of Assembly that I brought forward myself with regard to the Lower
Churchill. Basically, it talked about the fact that Labrador should be the
primary beneficiaries of this resource, and that if the project was to go ahead
that there were certain conditions that Labradorians themselves had laid upon
the table, that they felt needed to be dealt with and needed to be met as part
of any development initiative. None of the things in my resolution of December 7
came as any surprise to the government or the members opposite, because they had
all been raised with each of the appropriate ministers, the Premier, and had
been discussed and full commitment had been given. Yet, my motion was defeated
by the government members.
Let me just read to you what the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture said
at the time. He said: We are committed, Madam Speaker, to the principles that
are in this resolution. We have put them in front of the people, we have heard
them from the people, we have said that is exactly the approach we are going to
take, and we are going to continue to develop them....
He went on the say that he supported the resolution. Yet, every government
member voted against it. The reason they voted against it is, he said: We do not
need any political camouflage in the form of a resolution to make us do the
right thing for the people of Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, the minister of the government of the Crown thought it was
absolute foolishness - absolute foolishness - to be bringing in a resolution
like that. Yet, today we have the members opposite in that very Cabinet minister's
own government bringing forward the same type of a resolution that has already
been committed to by the government, that has already been responded to. It is
quite obvious that they have no problem doing it when it is appropriate for
them.
Mr. Speaker, I heard the announcement made by the Premier the other day, but
what I did not hear was a reiteration of the commitments that were made by the
Conservative government back in the election of 1999, and in 2002 and 2003
leading into an election. I am going to tell you what these are, now, because
one of the members opposite who just spoke talked about the Blue Book
commitments. Well, let me tell you, in 1999 the Blue Book commitment on the
Lower Churchill was quite specific, and that was that it said that there must be
redress on the Upper Churchill before there is ever a deal on the Lower
Churchill. That is what it said. It said the only meaningful way to amend for
the wrongs was through compensation of that deal.
In 2002, the Premier, who is the Premier today, was the Leader of the
Opposition, and this was his take on the Lower Churchill deal. He said there had
to be redress. If a deal was to be negotiated with Quebec, it must address the
inequities of the Upper Churchill that is believed to be the most lopsided
agreement ever negotiated in the history of North America.
Mr. Speaker, on five different occasions he said the same thing. This is what
he said: I say those who do not learn from the lessons of history are doomed to
repeat them. Nobody wants to see this Province walk away from the only lever we
ever had to seek redress for the Upper Churchill, and I will accept no other
position.
The Premier said this five times, five times, leading into an election in
2003, that, unless there was redress on the Upper Churchill, there would be no
deal on the Lower Churchill. Have we heard anything about it since, Mr. Speaker?
Not a word. Not a word. As the government goes along and talks about the Lower
Churchill development project today, that we are going to take the lead - and,
of course, you should take the lead; you are the government of the Province. Who
else should take the lead but the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador? How
silly that is. How silly that is.
Do we hear any talk today that there will not be a Lower Churchill deal if
there is no redress on the Upper Churchill, like the Premier said five times in
2002 going into an election? Don't hear a word about it now, Mr. Speaker, not
a word, so things have changed.
Let's talk about the loan guarantees that are going to come with this deal.
In the House of Assembly last week, the Premier was asked about the loan
guarantees from the federal government. This is what he said: This particular
Prime Minister came back and said that he would seriously consider a guarantee.
I am quite prepared to do that. Now, that is a definitive commitment and we will
hold the government to that commitment.
That is what the Premier said in the House of Assembly last week. Do you want
to hear what the Prime Minister said in the House of Commons? He did not even
respond to it. When he was questioned by the Member of Parliament for Labrador,
the Prime Minister, in the House of Commons, did not even stand to respond but
rather the Minister of Natural Resources stood and said: The government is
committed to working with them - meaning the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador - on regulatory reform to ensure there is full co-operation.
Not one word about a loan guarantee or any financial guarantees whatsoever,
although the Premier indicated to us in the House of Assembly that the
commitment was there. So, I had a look at the letter from the Primer Minister to
the Premier right before the federal election. Was there any commitment in that
letter? Indeed not. In fact, this is what the Prime Minister said. He said: We
support the proposal in principle - but we all know that the Minister of
Fisheries and Aquaculture supported my resolution on December 7, in principle,
but voted against it.
The Prime Minister said: We support this proposal in principle and believe it
is important to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to have greater control
over its energy mix. He said a Conservative government will welcome discussions
on this initiative and would hope that the potential exists for it to proceed in
the spirit of past successes, such as the Hibernia project. Was there any
commitment there, Mr. Speaker, for a loan guarantee or financial guarantees?
Absolutely none! None!
Then, Mr. Speaker, on April 12, 2006, the Prime Minister was asked in a press
conference in Newfoundland and Labrador: Are you prepared to give the Province a
loan guarantee if they choose a development option that exports the power out of
Canada and does not use it for domestic consumption? Do you know what the Prime
Minister said? He said: I think that is a bit premature. That is what he said.
Not one word about a loan guarantee or a commitment from the federal government
to the Province when it comes to the Lower Churchill, but if you read the
Hansard of what the Premier said in the House of Assembly you get an entirely
different outcome. An entirely different perspective when he says that the Prime
Minister came back and said that he would seriously consider it. When he was in
St. John's at an interview at CBC - the same interview, I guess, that I just
read to you - he said: I am quite prepared to do that now. Now that is a
definitive commitment and we will hold the government to that commitment. Well,
you know what I just read, Mr. Speaker. The Prime Minister said it was a bit
premature. Absolutely no commitment!
We are here today with a motion, Mr. Speaker, that speaks the principle that
says government should take the lead on the Lower Churchill. I do not know who
else would take the lead if government did not take the lead and Newfoundland
and Labrador Hydro. Mr. Speaker, we do not hear any talk anymore about the
redress on the Upper Churchill as a condition of this deal like it was touted
time and time again going into an election in 2003. We do not hear a lot being
outlined in terms of what the benefits are going to be, or what the mandatory
benefits are going to be. It is all right to go out and say that Newfoundland
and Labrador is going to take the lead but in taking the lead, does that mean we
end up with 5 per cent of the equity or 100 per cent of the equity of a project?
Those are questions that we have no answers to, Mr. Speaker, none whatsoever.
Do we know who the partners are going to be? Do we know if there is going to
be buy in into this agreement? Do we know any of the details? We know absolutely
nothing at this point, Mr. Speaker. Maybe there is not even a negotiation that
is going on. What we do know is that it is going to be registered for an
environmental assessment. We do know that there are going to be ongoing talks
with the Innu people of Labrador, fully excluding the Metis Nation, who have
land claims in that area and have been fighting for rights, who are traditional
users of the land in that region. So far they have been excluded from this
process, and that is not acceptable. That is not acceptable because the
commitment in the gymnasium at the college in Goose Bay was that there would be
inclusion of all people in Labrador and that is not occurring. When you have one
singular negotiation going on with one group of Aboriginal people and no
negotiations with any other groups, that is not full inclusion, Mr. Speaker, and
I indeed have a problem with that.
Mr. Speaker, I am more interested in knowing from Newfoundland and Labrador
Hydro today, who is going to be taking the lead with the Province on this
project, what their intentions are for the people of Labrador. We are a region
of this Province that is running out of available energy. Not only in places are
we running out of available energy, but you have districts like mine and my hon.
colleague for Torngat Mountains, who have energy that is unaffordable to people
at this particular time. And what do we have? Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro
going out again looking for another rate increase on the backs of people who
already pay the highest electrical prices of anywhere else in Atlantic Canada,
that is what you have.
Even if you read Hydro's own glossy document that they just sent out with
all the adjectives that describes how wonderful their new management team is,
well their new management team may be just fine, but there was a management team
in Hydro for many years that kept utilities going in this Province and kept the
entire Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro corporation alive and surviving and
thriving. So when I look at the new glossy document with all of the adjectives
and the staged pictures of the board of directors, it does not give me any more
confidence that the people in my district are going to enjoy cheaper electrical
rates over the next little while. Certainly, from what I hear, a bill to the
House of Assembly that gives them all a big wage boost over in Newfoundland and
Labrador Hydro corporate offices, does not give me a whole lot of confidence
either that the people in my district are going to have cheaper electrical rates
out of all of this. The fact that the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador is
taking the lead, of which I would expect no one else to do on this particular
development, does not mean that the people in my district are going to enjoy a
transmission line that is going to give them cheap electrical power. It does not
mean that they are going to have their issues around electricity dealt with in
the next short term. These are the issues that I have, Mr. Speaker.
I would say to the members opposite, if you want to bring in - I say to the
Member for Gander, if you want to bring in a resolution in the House of Assembly
to debate on the Lower Churchill, let's bring it in and talk about where the
real benefits of this project should be going, like to the people of Labrador
who live adjacent to this particular resource, I say to the hon. member.
There is nothing wrong with the principle of the resolution, I say to him,
nothing at all. It is pretty much motherhood. It is pretty acceptable. It is
pretty well understood. No one in the Province expects anything less than what
is in that motion. Not one person that I know of expects anything less, but you
know what I expect, Mr. Speaker? I expect to have a real debate. Let's have a
real debate around where the royalties should be going of excess power that is
being sold on the Upper Churchill today, with $50 million a year going into the
general revenues of the Province, Mr. Speaker, because the people in my district
are not getting a break on electricity right now, not at all. In fact, we are
going to be out there pretty soon fighting the Public Utilities Board and
Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to try and keep the rates where they are instead
of having them increase further.
Mr. Speaker, in Hydro's own document they say the availability and the
reliability of power at a reasonable cost can attract businesses to the
Province, impact how we earn our living, and ultimately how prosperous we can be
as a society.
I agree wholeheartedly, Mr. Speaker, but when is the opportunity going to be
allowed and afforded to other people in the Province who right now do not have
that luxury? There are twenty-seven different utilities in this Province that
are on an isolated system. Fifteen of them, Mr. Speaker, are in Labrador,
adjacent to where this mega development initiative is being proposed to take
place, being led by the government, Mr. Speaker. Fifteen of them are there.
The business that is attracted to that region, Mr. Speaker -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time has expired.
MS JONES: May I have a couple of minutes to clue up, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: By leave?
AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.
MR. SPEAKER: Leave has been granted.
MS JONES: As I was saying, Mr. Speaker - with the interruption, of
course, I have lost my train of thought.
What I was saying is, with regard to the cost of electricity there, it is
very hard to attract business, to attract business when you are paying almost
twenty cents a kilowatt hour for power, which is three times greater than a
business on the Island would have to pay. So, while I agree with the principles
outlined by Hydro in their new glossy document, Mr. Speaker, it is really hard
to fulfill when you have a region like I have.
Mr. Speaker, the only other thing I am going to say on this Lower Churchill
piece is that I guess we are just going to have - to use a phrase from the
Minister of Justice - we are just going to have to stay tuned. Because there are
no details, there is nothing here that tells us, even though the Province may
take the lead and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro may take the lead, there is
nothing here that tells us who will have the equity shares in this new
development. There is nothing to that. Nobody says that this is going to be
owned 100 per cent by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Taking the lead
on a development and owning it, Mr. Speaker, are two very different things. We
do not know if there are any loan guarantees from the federal government. The
Prime Minister certainly has not committed to any of them.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of questions that still need to be
addressed, a lot of answers that are not forthcoming, but I would have to say
that this is a motherhood resolution. It really does not have a lot of teeth,
Mr. Speaker. It is just speaking to the principle in terms of the government
taking a lead, and there is very little there to debate in terms of the context
of any agreement - if there ever is an agreement - and what percentage of it the
government will own.
MR. SPEAKER: Further debate?
The hon. the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It certainly gives me pleasure to rise in the House of Assembly today to
speak to this private member's resolution.
Just before I go into some of my comments, I want to say to the Member from
Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, she said that she was quite surprised that it was
not the Member for Lake Melville bringing this forward. I want to assure her
that there is not a day goes by that the Member for Lake Melville doesn't
bring up issues for Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: In fact, Mr. Speaker, I think it is quite admirable that the
Member for Gander brought this forward, because it just goes to show that every
single member on this side of the House realizes the benefits and the value of
this to Labrador. It is certainly a team effort over here.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, this government has been very clear from day one
- since being elected, and even going back into the Blue Book - about our
objective when it comes to the development of our natural resources. We want to
achieve the maximum benefits for the people of this Province. Certainly, to use
the words of the Premier: No more giveaways, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, it is very welcome news that the Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro will take the lead
on the potential development of the Lower Churchill Hydro resource, with
Newfoundland and Labrador as the lead proponent.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair would ask members for their co-operation.
I am having difficulty hearing the hon. Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde. I
ask members for their co-operation.
The hon. the Member for Trinity-Bay de Verde.
MS JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your protection.
Mr. Speaker, as the Premier and the Minister of Natural Resources indicated
during the recent press conference on the potential development of the Lower
Churchill, as part of its new mandate, Hydro is making the Lower Churchill one
of its priorities. Certainly during the expression of interest process this
government embarked upon a year ago to identify the possible options in the
development of the Lower Churchill, it became very clear at that time that a
Newfoundland and Labrador led development is the best option for the people of
this Province and certainly the best option in achieving out objective of
maximizing the benefits for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador in the
development of this resource.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to note that this is the very first time
the Province has given this kind of consideration to leading the development of
this resource, and I think that is very significant. The possibility of the
Province leading this development is certainly an exciting time in our history,
and really it is about taking control of our own future. Certainly as the
Premier has said, it is about being masters of our own destiny.
Mr. Speaker, it is certainly clear, it is overwhelmingly clear, in fact, that
the people of the Province also believe that this is the right approach in this
Province for developing the Lower Churchill.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, this is something that is important to each and
every single Newfoundlander and Labradorian. Being at different functions in the
district recently, since this announcement, it is quite clear that there is a
renewed sense of pride and hope in this Province. This announcement certainly
falls in line with our new attitude. In fact, the national media has also made
reference to the new kind of attitude here in Newfoundland and Labrador. It also
goes to show that we are continuing down the road of self reliance in this
Province, Mr. Speaker, and, as I said, it is a very exciting time in our history
here.
Mr. Speaker, we are definitely headed in the right direction with this public
policy decision, and it is certainly a good business decision that we have made.
No doubt, government and hydro will continue to assess and to scrutinize every
single aspect of this project to ensure that the decisions that are made are
informed decisions and they are responsible decisions on behalf of the people of
this Province.
Mr. Speaker, Hydro, as you know, will complete due diligence on the
feasibility of the project. Certainly, a timeline has been developed that will
see a project start date of first power certainly by 2015. I know 2015 may seem
like a long time in the future for some members to grasp, but really it is only
nine years away.
I am very proud to be part of a government that is starting this process, and
I look forward to the day when the first power comes, in 2015, and certainly
look forward to being around when we reap the benefits of that power. That is,
of course, if the people in my district see fit to keep me here.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, there is a timeline and there are some initial first
steps that have to be done. This includes negotiations with the Innu Nation of
Labrador on an Impact and Benefits Agreement there. Another thing that needs to
be done is laying the groundwork and the framework for the environmental review
process that is to take place for the environmental impact study that will be
started by the fall of 2007.
Mr. Speaker, as you know, government is continuing to consult and work very
closely with the Innu Nation in Labrador. This government recognizes the Innu
Nation should most definitely benefit from the development of this resource.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, this government is committed to engaging and
consulting the people of our Province and, particularly, Labradorians on this
resource. Our commitment to the people of Labrador, that they should benefit
from the development of the Lower Churchill remains, and this government
believes the best way to achieve that objective is to pursue a Newfoundland and
Labrador led development.
Mr. Speaker, it was mentioned earlier that Newfoundland and Labrador will
have significant ownership in this project. However, we did say also that
government and Hydro are open to partnerships, partnership opportunities for
various components of the project. While having said that, that government is
open to considering partnerships - whether it be in equity, financing or
construction or what have you - it is very important to note that this will be a
Newfoundland and Labrador owned and controlled project, and it is very important
to note that total equity will not go anywhere else. It is Newfoundland owned.
It is Newfoundland controlled and we are in the driver's seat on this one.
Mr. Speaker, the bottom line, if the Province moves forward with this
development option, will be to maximize benefits during both the development and
the operation phases of the project. The development of our resources must
achieve maximum benefits. If that is not to happen, then there just will not be
any development. I take comfort in the assurances of the Premier that government
will not do a deal for the sake of doing a deal, and I think that is very
important.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that this is the right approach. It is the
responsible approach and this is the approach that, I believe, has full support
of the people of this Province and that is why I am pleased to support this
private member's resolution.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MADAM SPEAKER (Osborne): The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak on this resolution before the
House today. Madam Speaker, leaving out all the
whereas', some of which are
basically pumping up the government, we have in a statement: THEREFORE
BE IT
RESOLVED that the Honourable House of Assembly support the Province's
decision, as announced on May 8, 2006, that the Government of Newfoundland and
Labrador Hydro will take the lead on the potential development of the energy
resources of the Lower Churchill.
Obviously, Madam Speaker, there is support throughout the House for this
resolution. But, that is not what I thought we were announcing on May 8. In
fact, I got a call from the Premier on May 8 before he had his press conference.
What he said to me was that we have made a decision that we are going to do it
ourselves. We are going to go it alone. That is what I understood the Premier to
say on May 8. I did not hear, take the lead.
Madam Speaker, if you look at our offshore oil and gas industry, we see the
Terra Nova project out there. We see Petro-Canada taking the lead on the Terra
Nova project. They are what is called in the oil and gas industry the operator.
They do not own the whole project. They own a percentage of the project. I
forget exactly what it is now. It may be 25 per cent, it may be 27 per cent.
Other partners have a share. They have varying percentages. ExxonMobil has a
significant share. Norsk Hydro, I believe, is in on that one. Various other
partners have a share, all adding up to 100 per cent. Petro-Canada is known as
the operator. They take the lead and the other partners take their share of the
product. Petro-Canada is the lead or the operator on the FPSO for Terra Nova.
ExxonMobil is the operator or the lead on Hibernia. Husky Oil is the operator or
the lead on the White Rose Project. Each of them only have a share, and the
other partners take their percentage share as a percentage of the oil that is
produced. Well, I hope, Madam Speaker, that is not what the government means
when they say take the lead.
I just listened carefully to the previous speaker and I heard her use what
have become cliches of this government: maximum benefits, no more giveaways,
take the lead, as if all of these three things guaranteed that Newfoundland and
Labrador was going to have a positive experience in the Lower Churchill as
opposed to the Upper Churchill. Making a decision to develop the Lower Churchill
by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is a positive step, but when I hear the words
"take the lead" it sounds like a code for something else. What is that
something else? I do not know. It does not seem to me to be much of a vision to
say that we are going to be the guys who let the contracts. It does not seem
much to be a lead role if we say we are going to invite in partners to have an
equity participation and we will be sharing the equity, the profits and the
benefits, to a whole series of private partners.
That is not how Hydro-Quebec was built, Madam Speaker. When Hydro-Quebec
formed a Quebec energy corporation, they took over a whole series of small power
corporations in Quebec and created Hydro-Quebec. When we had a debate in this
House ten years ago and a number of members opposite were prominent in that
debate, including the current Minister of Mines and Energy - prominent in that
debate - we, on this side of the House, and certainly I, articulated a vision of
Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro that was similar to the vision that Hydro-Quebec
and the role that Hydro-Quebec has played in Quebec.
We, in the New Democratic Party, said that the opposite to the privatization
of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro should be happening; we should, in fact, be
nationalizing Newfoundland Power, creating a single energy corporation that
could have control over distribution and generation of electricity so that we
could have an engine of economic growth and development for our Province the way
Hydro-Quebec has been for Quebec.
That was the vision that was enunciated then, that we were going to be, or we
should be - have a body like Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro in the new form
that would have expertise, would build expertise within this Province, as was
done in Quebec, a group of engineers, a stable of engineers, planners, financial
experts, and all of those people who had the ability to undertake and execute
major projects.
The Lower Churchill is a very important next step in hydroelectric and energy
development in Newfoundland and Labrador. The first step, the Upper Churchill,
one of the first steps, the Newfoundland government took the lead in that.
Unfortunately, they made a contract with BRINCO, and BRINCO had its own agenda.
Its agenda was fairly simple: We want to build a project, and the financiers,
Rothschilds, the banks, they wanted to get a return on their investment. As long
as that was accomplished - I think it was fifty-year or sixty-five-year bonds,
in some cases - as long as they were getting their return on their investment
they were satisfied. The Newfoundland government, it could be said, was the lead
operator in that. Premier Smallwood, of that day, persuaded BRINCO to be
created. In fact, he assisted in the creation of BRINCO. The agreements were
made. The Newfoundland Government was party to the agreements. Negotiations were
done with Quebec by Premier Smallwood.
A lot of these things happened with the government of the day taking the
lead, so I say, Madam Speaker, that taking the lead as a phrase does not mean
that we are in control of the ship any more than Petro-Canada is in control of
the FPSO. They may be doing the administration, they may be in charge of the
day-to-day decision-making, but the power and the ownership is shared amongst
the partners.
I am not sure, Madam Speaker, that we can accept that taking the lead means
any more than saying we are going to do exactly what Joey Smallwood did, in a
structural way. I would hope that they would be more careful; but, you know,
back in 1967 and 1968 and 1969 when that Upper Churchill deal was signed and the
contract was approved, it was a unanimous decision of the House of Assembly to
approve that contract. The Conservatives of the day unanimously supported the
bill and the decisions that were made in the House of Assembly to approve that
deal. Nobody saw it coming, Madam Speaker. You cannot necessarily blame it on
Joey Smallwood. Nobody saw that coming. In fact, it has been suggested that
Hydro-Quebec was worried about the price that they were paying at the time for
energy in that kind of a world. A world that changed very quickly, Madam
Speaker, in four or five years when we had a world oil crisis and the price of
energy went up.
So, it is important that we know what we are saying. Yes, of course, the
Newfoundland Government should take the lead, but I would be more concerned, Mr.
Speaker, that not only do we take the lead but we, in fact, do the development,
like we did the Bay d'Espoir development, like the other developments that
have been done by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro since then. It is obviously a
bigger project.
come with conditions that require us to share the project with others if we don't
want to. There is an awful lot of work to be done, both in preparation and
execution of this particular great project. It is a big project, an expensive
project. A lot of engineering has to be done, a lot of work has to be done, to
make sure this project works. There are dangers, there is no question about
that. There can be cost overruns. I think everybody is aware that in the
building of Churchill Falls one of the remarkable things about that project - it
was the biggest, largest underground power station every built at that time - it
was a project that came in on time, on budget, a very successful project. We
certainly hope to emulate the Upper Churchill in that regard, Madam Speaker,
that we are going to have a project that is able to be managed and controlled in
such a way that there aren't cost overruns. There are dangers and we must face
them.
As far as redressing the Upper Churchill goes, Madam Speaker, I don't have
the same difficulty. I know it has been a political statement by the Premier,
that the Lower Churchill deal would require a redress of the Upper Churchill
deal, and I don't frankly see that in the cards. Doing a deal with Hydro
Quebec or the Province of Quebec that actually, literally redresses the Upper
Churchill it not likely in the cards. When you go back to the time of R ne
L vesque as
Premier of Ontario - R ne
L vesque was
a Social Democrat, a believer.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Ontario.
MR. HARRIS: The Premier of Quebec. My colleague tells me I said Ontario.
As Premier of Quebec, R ne
L vesque was
a man of principle. What did he say about the Upper Churchill? He said it in
you are going to renegotiate that contract, what are you going to give up to do
it? I will guarantee you, you are going to have to give up something to do it.
You might save face by making it look good. The Government of Quebec might save
face by giving up and making it look like they are getting something, but they
will get something back in the other hand. I don't really think you can
renegotiate the Upper Churchill without giving up something of equal value to
the Upper Churchill. We have to find other solutions for that problem, and I
think they are there. I won't get into that now.
I don't think, Madam Speaker, that these two need to be tied together, and
if the Premier tied them together in the past so be it. This is a go-it-alone
project, as far as I am concerned, and it should stand or fall on its own
merits, and we have to recognize that. But, and there is a big but here, the
stars are lined up in our favour and this is a very opportune time for the
Province of Newfoundland to be able to achieve this type of project on its own.
The stars, as follows - I see I only have a couple of minutes, Madam Speaker,
but I will just outlined some of the stars that I think are lined up: The great
need for power in Canada and the political will, I believe, in a number of
the NDP, nationally, is very much in favour of that, and on record as supporting
a national power grid; the issue of wielding rights which our neighbours to the
south in the United States have solved for us, the problem that existed in 1969
of getting through Quebec because the Province of Quebec, Hydro Quebec, will not
be allowed to sell any power into the United States grid unless they abide by
the rules which allow anyone else to sell power through them, and that is a
rigid rule not affected by Canadian politics; three, the world oil prices
situation which is going to stay, by anybody who analyzes these things, and, I
guess, you do not need to look much further than a guy like Wynn Dyer who will
tell you that the world oil price is going to stay up in the range of $70-plus
for a fairly long time to come, and it may go even higher, that is in our
favour; and, of course, the whole issue of climate change, something to which
many people have not yet woken up. It is real, it is upon us, it is a big train,
like a freight train, moving slowly but very determined. It is going and it is
going and it is going and we are seeing the effects now.
Some people have their heads in the sand like the President of the United
States. Others have their heads in the sand and are pretending that it does not
exist. Even Mr. Harper in Ottawa has just cancelled $1 billion worth of programs
that have been designed to assist people respond to climate change. That is very
real. Fortunately, outside of certain governments, there are very many people in
civil society, a lot of municipal leaders, a lot of political leaders, a lot of
business leaders believe it or not, who are way ahead of certain political
leaders on the issue of climate change. It is real and it is a star that is
lined up in our favour.
The other star is the ability of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and
their government, and there is some mention of confidence there -
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HARRIS: If I may have one minute, please?
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HARRIS: May I have leave for a minute to just clue up?
AN HON. MEMBER: Leave.
MADAM SPEAKER: By leave.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you.
The last star - I do not know how many I had here now, but the last star that
is lined up is the ability of Newfoundland and Labrador buoyed up by world oil
prices and by the changes in the Atlantic Accord to have the confidence, as a
people and as a government, to be able to undertake such a project. That is an
extremely important part of this deal, a very important part of the stars being
lined up to favour Newfoundland and Labrador going in alone.
Every time I hear, take the lead, from now on I will won