Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 11 April 2011 (46th General Assembly, 4th Session, Vol. XLVI No. 13)
2011-04-11
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
April
11, 2011 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS
Vol. XLVI No. 13
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!
Admit strangers.
Today, the Chair would like to welcome twenty-five members of the retired and
semi-retired professional business people's group who are part of a group known
as the Probus Club. The group is accompanied by chartered members Ms Dorothy
Rockwood, Ms Judy Dale and the club co-ordinator Mr. Doug Wells.
Welcome to the House of Assembly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Statements by Members
MR. SPEAKER: The following members' statements will be heard: the hon.
the Member for the District of Ferryland; the hon. the Member for the District
of Mount Pearl North; the hon. the Member for the District of Labrador West.
The hon. the Member for the District of Ferryland.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HUTCHINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize an outstanding
young person from my district, Raylene Mackey of the Goulds. Raylene recently
participated in the Miss Teen Newfoundland and Labrador Pageant where she placed
in the top ten and was awarded Miss Teen Friendship.
Raylene is fourteen years old, a Grade 9 student at St. Kevin's Junior High.
She excels in academics and is an honour student with a ninety-six average. She
is involved in singing, performing, song writing, plays several instruments,
public speaking and is involved in sports. Raylene has won various awards at
singing competitions with the Kiwanis Music Festival as well as public speaking.
On Thursday, March 1, I attended the speak-off at the Goulds Junior High where
Raylene took first place.
Mr. Speaker, I also had the opportunity to see and hear Raylene perform at
various locations in my district and she indeed a talented young lady and an
excellent performer, who has already released a CD of her own music. Raylene has
won singing competitions, public speaking awards, has placed at school heritage
and science fairs, has numerous soccer medals, and has participated in several
golf competitions.
She is a member of the church choir, Allied Youth, school leadership group,
church youth group, altar girl, breakfast club helper, member of St. Kevin's
has participated in school concerts, singing at senior citizen's homes,
performed in Christmas galas and St. Patrick's galas as well. Her many
accomplishments at such a young age are to be admired. Raylene is an exceptional
young lady who is a role model to all of our youth.
I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating Raylene on her numerous
accomplishments and wish her well in her future endeavours.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Mount Pearl North.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate the winners of the 2010 Best
in Business Awards in Mount Pearl. The twelfth annual awards banquet was
recently held at the Reid Community Centre in Mount Pearl and it recognizes
businesses and business owners alike for their dedication and commitment to the
community at large.
Mr. Speaker, each year the business community is recognized by the Mount
Pearl Chamber of Commerce for various reasons. Dedication to community
involvement, great customer service, innovation in business and new business
enterprises are some of the categories considered this past year.
I would like to take a moment to congratulate the following winners:
Scotiabank, both in Mount Pearl Square and Centennial Square locations on their
award for Community Spirit; AbbyShot Clothiers for the Innovation Award;
Donovans Irving Restaurant for the Small Business Award; Collision Clinic for
the Outstanding Business of the Year Award; Newfoundland and Labrador Credit
Union for the Customer Service Excellence Award; and Rose Parmenter from A & W
Mount Pearl for the Employee of the Year Award.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating the
winners of the 2010 Best in Business Awards, as well as the Mount Pearl Chamber
of Commerce for hosting this wonderful event. Special thanks to the organizers
and volunteers who make this annual event possible.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Labrador West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in this House today to extend congratulations to Alf Parsons of
Labrador City, one of the finest athletes of our Province and, indeed, our
country has ever produced. Alf, who was inducted into the Newfoundland and
Labrador Sports Hall of Fame in 2005, turned sixty this year and continues to be
a tough competitor at the provincial, national and world level in cross-country
skiing.
Alf has competed in his age category at World Cup events in Europe and North
American for the past number of years and has returned home with bronze and
silver medals, but up to now gold had always eluded him.
Last month, Alf competed in a series of races at the Master's World Cup held
in Vernon, British Columbia. In his first race, a fifteen kilometre event, he
led the way from the start but due to a tactical error in a sprint for the
finish line he ended up in fourth place, just 2.3 seconds back of first place.
His next race, he competed as a member of the four-man Canadian team in the
relay race and while the team finished in fourth place, Alf's five kilometre leg
of the race was faster than all other skiers from the eight top countries which
competed.
Alf's final race of the competition was the gruelling thirty kilometre
freestyle event. He was up against sixty-four competitors from ten countries.
Alf started out fast with the front pack in what would be a very tactical race
with a lot of jockeying back and forth for the lead. Determined not to repeat
the mistake of his first race, Alf broke away from the pack on a steep uphill in
the final lap, and to the cheers of hundreds of spectators charged across the
finish line 5.6 seconds ahead of his closest competitor to take the gold medal.
His finishing time of one hour, twenty-eight minutes for thirty kilometres
works out to a speed of 2.9 minutes per kilometre, or 20.3 kilometres per hour,
certainly an amazing feat for a sixty-year-old.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating Alf Parsons
on this his latest in a long list of sports accomplishments. Truly a phenomenal
athletic!
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, National Wildlife Week is being celebrated from
April 10-16 and highlights the importance of wildlife to Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians. It also provides an opportunity to reflect upon the importance of
healthy wildlife populations and habitat to our social and economic well-being.
Newfoundland and Labrador's wildlife resources are at the heart of the
Province's heritage and culture. Our vast landscape is diverse, as our wildlife
species that inhabit it. From the largest big game animals to insects and rare
plants, the Department of Environment and Conservation is responsible for
managing and conserving Newfoundland and Labrador's biodiversity and wildlife
resources for the benefit of present and future generations.
Good wildlife management starts with good research, Mr. Speaker. Studying
wildlife interactions, disturbances, populations and habitat use forms the basis
for sound wildlife management decisions. Without a clear understanding of the
biology of our wildlife species, we cannot plan appropriate management
strategies. This week is a time not only to celebrate the value of our wildlife
resources, but also the many individuals who are involved in the conservation
and sustainable use of wildlife and habitat in our Province.
During National Wildlife Week, provinces and territories partner with the
Canadian Wildlife Federation to inform and educate the public on environmental
and wildlife issues. Mr. Speaker, the Department of Environment and Conservation
is hosting a number of activities throughout the Province this week. Staff of my
department in Corner Brook and the Salmonier Nature Park is launching a number
of events for individuals and schools across the Province, focusing on wildlife
species and their importance to the environment. A list of these activities is
available on the department's Web site and has also been published in local
papers.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage the residents of our Province to participate in
National Wildlife Week activities, and join with me in celebrating this very
important week to Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement and to say,
truly, that it is very important that we have a healthy wildlife population and
habitat for future generations to come. Also, he mentions the value of our
wildlife resources. We know many of the outfitters throughout this Province, the
tremendous benefits that they make to bring tourists in to take
part in the
various hunts, which benefit our economy.
Mr. Speaker, it is good to see that the staff with the department is working
in conjunction with National Wildlife Week and taking
part in various functions
with the school children and otherwise. It is always good to visit the Salmonier
Nature Park, and I am sure they will enjoy this again this year.
Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the minister that only recently we heard a
senior environmental consultant mentioning environmental assessments and that
the deadlines are not met. We hear talk of the Auditor General referencing the
many contaminated sites throughout our Province. All of this is important to the
environment and to wildlife, Mr. Speaker.
I would also say to the minister that we are looking forward to when his
government can come forward with the outdoor bill of rights, which is very
important. It takes in all aspects of the habitat for the various animals. We
are waiting with anticipation for the $15 million study that was done on our
caribou herds.
Overall, Mr. Speaker, we commend the minister in taking
part in National
Wildlife Week and say that we wholeheartedly join in the celebrations.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement.
I understand that at the Newfoundland and Labrador Environmental Network's
annual conference this weekend, which I think the minister attended, people who
attended expressed concern about the serious loss of habitat for wildlife,
which, of course, is a very serious issue.
We do have some protected areas in the Province, but no fully protected new
areas have been added since 1994. The ones that exist are being degraded every
year. I think we are all aware of the serious problem, for example, with moose
destroying the habitat of animals and we have heard recently that Parks Canada
will be looking at that issue in the two national parks in our Province. At this
conference as well, there was a discussion about the caribou population on the
Island going on the endangered species list because their food supply is
diminishing due to industrial logging.
I encourage the minister to continue the work on these issues and to continue
consultations, especially like the consultations that were done on the
Sustainable Forest Management plan in 2003. I also encourage him to move ahead
with a provincial land use policy because this land use policy is what will be
needed for protecting further areas.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
Oral Questions.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, last week in our briefings with Nalcor, Ed Martin said there was
a good chance that none of the excess power from Muskrat will go beyond Nova
Scotia. The reason was simple: Nova Scotia has to come off coal as its main
source of energy, and we all know that coal is one of the dirtiest forms of
energy in the world.
Nova Scotia will get 20 per cent of Muskrat Falls power for free, and they
will have the ability, Mr. Speaker, to pay only half price for excess power
half the price of what Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will pay. We also know
that the Nova Scotia government will not be investing in this project.
So I ask the Premier today: Why is it that Nova Scotians will get clean,
green energy without their government even having to invest, yet Newfoundlanders
and Labradorians will have to pay more than anyone else who receives this power
source?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, let's first start with the most basic and stark fact. In 2016,
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will be paying 14.3 cents a kilowatt hour for
their electricity whether they remain on the isolated grid, as we are today, or
if we are taking our power from Muskrat Falls. Either which way, Mr. Speaker, we
are going to be paying 14.3 cents a kilowatt hour. The difference being, if we
are on Muskrat Falls power, our light bills will only be going up about 0.7 per
cent a year as opposed to 5 per cent a year that they will be rising, or more if
we have to increase capacity.
Mr. Speaker, we never intend to put 60 per cent of power out of Newfoundland
and Labrador, ever.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The reality is, Premier, that Nova Scotia is going green and Newfoundlanders
and Labradorians are going in the red on your power project, and you know it.
Mr. Speaker, the Nova Scotia government will not invest in the Muskrat Falls
Project. In fact, Mr. Speaker, they are depending upon Newfoundlanders and
Labradorians to foot the bill for a clean, green energy replacement in Nova
Scotia.
I ask the Premier today: Why is it that Emera is not only getting the
thirty-five years that you talk about in free power, but why is it they are
getting fifty years of free power within their thirty-five-year power contract?
Why was the deal front-end loaded to allow Emera to pay down their investment
earlier while Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will continue to pay for many
years to come?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, for the last several months we have heard the Leader of the
Opposition try to equate $1.2 billion as free power. Now, I do not know how
flawed your logical processes might be, but that does not make sense to anyone.
We could have taken the $1.2 billion, Mr. Speaker, and built the Maritime
Link ourselves, supplied the power to Nova Scotia and had a market for excess
power; not only for power from Muskrat Falls, if that is the power we want to
push through, but if we pull that power back to Labrador for industrial
development, we can fill that line with hydro and wind from the West Coast, Mr.
Speaker. This is a good investment for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Premier knows this has nothing to do with what she is giving away to
Emera and to people in the Maritimes.
This is where we are trying to go with this and the Premier knows it: Why
make the people in Newfoundland and Labrador pay while you are going to give
energy away? I ask you again today, Premier: Why not tell the people of the
Province why you front-end loaded Emera's contract to allow them to draw down
fifty years of power over thirty-five years so they could not only pay down
their investment but they could earn more money while we are stuck to pay the
bills in Newfoundland and Labrador?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, it would be a terrible story to tell, if
it were true. Despite the information that we continue to provide to Members of
the Opposition, through either the Department of Natural Resources or through
our Crown Corporation, Nalcor, they just cannot seem to get the basics right,
Mr. Speaker. Nalcor will own 80 per cent of the project, Mr. Speaker, 80 per
cent of the power. They will pay 80 per cent of the capital costs, 80 per cent
of operations and maintenance, Mr. Speaker. Emera will own 20 per cent of the
power will purchase 20 per cent of the power for thirty-five years, Mr.
Speaker. They will pay 20 per cent of the capital costs and 20 per cent of the
maintenance and operations.
Now, Mr. Speaker, we can say no to Emera, we are not going to sell you any
power whatsoever. We are still going to pay 14.3 cents a kilowatt hour in 2016.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Again, today the Premier is not answering the questions because she knows
there is no defence for what we allocate; she knows that, Mr. Speaker. Let us
talk about the fact that she says let us see if they can get it right. Well
there are a lot of people getting it right Premier. A lot of people getting it
right and you are not pulling the wool over the eyes of people in this Province.
Right now today there is not only the former PC Finance Minister who is out
there raising doubts, but there are many others there are journalists, there
are commentaries, there are lawyers, Mr. Speaker; they are prominent citizens in
this Province who know that this is not a good deal and the economics are not
adding up for the people of the Province.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier again today, we have asked her any number of
times in this House, many others are saying it: Why not produce the information
that shows where the energy rising demand is in Newfoundland and Labrador,
because you have yet to do it?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I tabled that document twice here in the House of Assembly, but
like many other documents we have tabled here, Mr. Speaker, we have no
confidence in the Opposition's ability to be able to do the analysis.
The point is, Mr. Speaker, in 2016, even if there is no growth in demand, not
one more kilowatt hour required in 2016, we will still be paying 14.3 cents a
kilowatt hour because the price of oil is going to be the main driver, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Premier knows there is nothing to back up the statement that she just
made.
Mr. Speaker, there is nothing out there and the government has refused to
table it. The information she says she tabled in the House of Assembly does not
speak to the demand of energy rising in this Province nor, Mr. Speaker, does it
speak to the case that the price of crude is going to ensure that the price of
electricity reaches 14.3 cents in 2016, and she knows the difference.
I ask you again today, Premier: Will you not tell the people of the Province
where you are getting your numbers, why you are inflating the demand of energy
in this Province, and why you are inflating the prices?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, electricity costs have risen by 36 per cent in the last ten
years in this Province. They are predicted to rise 38 per cent over the next ten
years. Mr. Speaker, everybody from the Conference Board of Canada, from Ernst &
Young, from the Board of Trade, from the Association of Independent Businesses,
from the President of the Federation of Labour and I can go on and on and on,
Mr. Speaker speak to the rising cost of electricity, particularly the price of
oil, predicted well over $150 a barrel, the main thing that we need to run
Holyrood; never mind talking about the cost of the environmental impact, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, she does not have to take my word for it, all she has to do is
look about her to the different statistical agencies in this country and she
will get her answer.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
But the Premier cannot forget that we live in this Province as well and we
have seen oil reach $150 a barrel, Premier, and we did not see our light bills
skyrocket by 36 per cent during that period of time. In fact, it was the
complete opposite we looked at an average of about 2 per cent a year in the
last five years, so your numbers are not adding up.
Mr. Speaker, the government and Nalcor have spent a tremendous amount of
money already on the development of this project. I ask the Premier today if she
will table all the expenditures in the House of Assembly that have been spent on
the Muskrat Falls and the Lower Churchill Project by her government and by
Nalcor on behalf of the people of this Province.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would be absolutely delighted to, because it is something that we have done
on a regular basis since 2003. Not only will we file ours, Mr. Speaker, which
will be for a successful project, we will file theirs for their two unsuccessful
attempts as well.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We will certainly wait to see the information.
Mr. Speaker, recently the government awarded a contract to a well-known legal
firm that is a friend of the PC Party. Under the freedom of information, Mr.
Speaker, it was confirmed that there was no proposal call, no expression of
interest nor any intent to call one.
It is common practice, Mr. Speaker, as we all know, for tobacco litigation in
other provinces to go through that particular procedure. However, in
Newfoundland and Labrador there was no record of any cost-benefit analysis, no
minutes of any meetings that discuss the issue, no internal letters, memos or
emails, and the Minister of Justice has refused to talk about it.
I ask the Premier today: Why would you award the contract for tobacco
litigation to a well-known PC-connected legal firm in this Province without any
documentation, any tendering, or any call for proposals?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, as has been pointed out on a number of
occasions, the previous government in 2002, I think it was, engaged a law firm
from Independence, Missouri to handle the tobacco litigation because of the vast
expertise they had at that time. Part of that agreement, Mr. Speaker, was that
they would retain local counsel in the Province of Newfoundland because they did
not have the certificate to practice law in the Province of Newfoundland.
Mr. Speaker, that company, the American firm Humphrey Farrington McClain,
they retained the firm of Roebothan McKay Marshall to be their agents in this
Province.
Mr. Speaker, when the time came to expedite this process and to file the
statement of claim, the American company still did not have the certificate to
practice so we had to engage in the firm they had retained to file their
statement of claim. It is as simple as that, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I say to the Premier, someone has to answer for the actions of
your government, and it stops with you, Premier. It stops with you. You have
awarded a contract un-tendered. There is no paper trace anywhere inside of the
government that allowed for this contract to be awarded or done appropriately.
I ask you today to stand in your place; you are spending taxpayers' money:
Why did you solicit this company un-tendered, who has connections to the former
Premier and is known as a former PC connected firm in this Province, Mr.
Speaker?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, this is really a simple and straightforward
matter. The previous government engaged the firm in Missouri, United States, and
quite reasonably so. They were experts in tobacco litigation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The Chair has recognized the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney
General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Justice.
MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, there was provision in that agreement that
that law firm would retain Newfoundland counsel to act on their behalf in this
Province. Mr. Speaker, they engaged the services of Roebothan McKay Marshall to
be their agent in this Province.
Mr. Speaker, about a month ago when we filed our statement of claim, we had
to engage with Roebothan McKay Marshall to do that for us because up to that
point in time the American company did not have the certificate of practice.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, we are not talking about what a legal firm in the
United States hired; we are talking about who the government opposite hired and
who they gave a contract to un-tendered, unsolicited, Mr. Speaker, using the
taxpayers' money of this Province.
I ask you, Premier, to stand up today in the House and answer for what you
have done in passing out tenders to a PC connected law firm in this Province,
un-tendered, without going through the public process.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, if the firm of Humphrey Farrington McClain
of Independence, Missouri, which is the company we initially engaged to head up
this tobacco litigation, retained a local firm in this Province, that is the
firm we were going to engage with to do the work on the ground. We were not
going to retain another firm on our own. It was a firm that was retained by that
firm. We had no choice but to do that. That is the normal matter of doing
things.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, this is a potentially multi-million dollar
contract that has been let to Roebothan McKay Marshall, and as we know, Mr.
Speaker, a former law firm of the former Premier and it was done without any
discussion or any analysis.
I ask the Premier today: Knowing that this law firm stands to gain a profit
to the tune of potentially hundreds of millions of dollars, will you not stand
and tell the people of the Province why you awarded it to this firm without
going through a public process? Stand in your place, you are the leader of the
government, and answer to the people of this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I will just reiterate. The main firm that
was retained for this file chose their own legal agents in this Province. They
chose their own legal agents in this Province which happened to be a very
competent law firm in the (inaudible) of Roebothan McKay Marshall. It was that
firm who put that process in motion. It is that government, Mr. Speaker, who put
that process in motion and we are just carrying through on it. It is as simple
as that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, maybe the Premier will stand and tell us when she
let the contract to Roebothan McKay Marshall, how much they are being paid, and
how much, Mr. Speaker, they are being paid in the long-term but also in the
immediate future on behalf of the people of this Province? Taxpayers' money is
being used, someone should answer for it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. the Opposition House Leader for his co-operation.
The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Order, please!
MR. F. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition knows
full well the details because they were the ones who entered into the contract
with the firm to start with.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. F. COLLINS: Having said that, Mr. Speaker, that firm, and rightfully
so, engaged the service of a topnotch legal firm within this Province to carry
out their work on the ground in this Province. They retained Roebothan McKay
Marshall. That was their firm that they retained. We entered into a contract
with that firm for purposes of expediting the process, filing the statement of
claim. They are a good law firm. The American firm made a great choice as far as
I am concerned.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I understand from the Coast Guard that there are still extreme
ice conditions in the Strait of Belle Isle and the ferry, the Apollo, has been
held up now for a week, and people are stranded. Mr. Speaker, there are not just
people from the Labrador Straits, there are people from all over Labrador, all
different parts of the Province, and even from outside of the Province. They
have been staying in hotels, buying food at their own expense, and, Mr. Speaker,
government, to date, has not even acknowledged the fact that there has been an
interruption in service in this particular area.
I ask the minister today: What are you prepared to do to address and
alleviate some of the personal and financial stress that has been faced by many
of these passengers, a lot of them, Mr. Speaker, who are travelling to St.
John's for medical reasons?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Yes, Mr. Speaker, as the Leader of the Opposition has
pointed out, we have a serious ice condition up in the Straits; not uncommon, I
might add. Except in the last couple of years, we have been pretty well
relatively ice free. In conditions such as these, the ferry cannot run and the
Coast Guard is doing everything they can to open up a passage so that we could
run back and forth.
In the meantime, again, I know it is a terrible inconvenience, as she has
pointed out, but we are handcuffed in trying to clear ice to make sure that
there is a passage across. As well, we are looking for alternatives and working
with the provider to see what we can do to alleviate the situation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I also have been talking to the Coast Guard everyday and I know the extreme
ice pressure that is there but it does not change the fact that people have been
stranded now for about a week, so have goods coming into the area. I will just
give you an example. Two litres of milk that was $4.49 last week is $6.99 this
week. People have signs on their coolers saying it is due to the fact that there
is no ferry service into the area.
I ask the government today: What is the contingency plan when areas of the
Province find themselves in a situation like the people in the Strait of Belle
Isle do today, and I ask you, what your government is proposing as a backup plan
for residents and passengers who are currently stuck?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the hon. member for her question. As of this afternoon a public
advisory has gone out to all the retailers down in that part of the coast that
the Air Foodlift Subsidy will start immediately, and I understand that certainly
milk is something that we subsidize 100 per cent.
We fully appreciate the challenges that we are having down in Southern
Labrador, but I just want to remind the hon. member, it was you and your
government that lobbied for the forty-one-year-old Apollo that is running in the
Strait of Belle Isle today.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I did not raise the issue today so the Member for Lake Melville could get up
and be cheap about it. I raised it, Mr. Speaker, because it is a serious issue
for the people in that area. I might remind them that in the last eight years
the people in that area have been asking for a new ferry, lobbying for a new
ferry and your government has not as much as blinked an eye in trying to deliver
on that particular service.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I will ask the government again, because we know that there
are thousands of pounds of freight stuck on the other side of The Straits, and I
appreciate the fact that they will fly it in, hopefully starting immediately
today, flying that freight into the communities where it needs to be.
I ask you again as well: What are you going to do for the passengers who are
stuck? What are you going to do for the lady from Lake Melville who is trying to
get to St. John's for her cancer treatment (inaudible)
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Again, Mr. Speaker, we realize the seriousness of the
difficulties that the people on both sides of The Straits are experiencing right
now. We cannot do very much about the ice and the ice conditions except to look
at other possibilities right now, and that is that we are looking, again with
the provider, to see if there is a contingency that we can perhaps get an
alternate port such as Corner Brook so that we can again keep that flow of goods
going back and forth.
We are right now, Mr. Speaker, in the second year of a pilot project of
trying to provide a twelve-month service, a vital service, to the people of
Labrador and to Newfoundland. We are looking into the future to try to make
sure, as a result of this pilot, to find ways that can alleviate situations such
as we are into right now.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We are also aware that the Apollo has only one propeller right now and
is due to go on dry dock within the next few days, I think Sunday is the date
they are looking at, so obviously the boat will come out of service. It is my
understanding that there is no other vessel to replace the Apollo right
now as a passenger and freight carrier for that service.
I ask the minister: How long can the people of the region expect to see the
Apollo off, and what is the contingency plan for providing services to
the people in that region and to all the people of the Province over that period
of time?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
With regard to that, we are again working very closely with the provider
because the Apollo unfortunately, as well, not only the ice, but the fact
that she picked up a rope going into the harbour the other day and destroyed one
of the propellers, she has to come into St. John's and she has to be lifted out
of the water. The company is in the process of getting the parts in. Sunday, I
believe, she will make her way into St. John's to begin that repair.
We are working very closely with the provider and looking at what we can
provide with regard to vessel service and air service. In this case, the Sir
Robert Bond is on dry dock and getting refit. The only one available would
be the Astron , and we are looking at that possibility, with air service,
to provide that vital service that is needed (inaudible) -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Cameron report of 2009 said patients and their families
should see peer reviews related to an adverse event affecting them, minus the
name of the reviewer or reviewers, of course. Last year, the Minister of Health
and Community Services said further work would be done on the issue and he would
consult other Health Ministers. The latest Cameron update indicates that nothing
concrete has happened since discussions with the Health Ministers last fall.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Could he please give us details of actual
work done this year on the peer review access?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The assumption made by the member opposite that no work has been done is one
that, I can tell you, is certainly incorrect. Mr. Speaker, we face a very
difficult situation with this issue of peer review. Under recommendations
thirty-three, thirty-four and thirty-five, there is a recommendation that peer
review be provided in all circumstances.
Mr. Speaker, I am informed by my officials, and the Canadian Medical
Association this would, in fact, jeopardize patients' safety. What we have done,
Mr. Speaker, is looked at the taskforce on adverse events, which has what I
would refer to as a middle ground in terms of the disclosure of peer review
reports.
The issue was discussed at the Health Ministers' meeting and we are still
working on this issue, Mr. Speaker. It is the most difficult issue that we are
facing in terms of the Cameron report, because while we have a recommendation
from a judge as to what should be done, we also have to look at patient safety.
I have to listen to the officials as to how it should be done and we are still
working that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the minister gave a similar answer when I asked questions about
this last year. So, what I would like the minister to do now is explain to us,
and to the public, in what way patients' safety is jeopardized by having access
to the peer reviews?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the answer to that is very simple. I am
told that if we bring in the Cameron recommendation as it is phrased, then no
one will do peer reviews. If no one does peer reviews, then patients' safety is
obviously jeopardized.
What we have to look at, Mr. Speaker, is a way of satisfying our
professionals that the work they do will be protected, while meanwhile providing
the public with the information they require. So, the taskforce on adverse
events has a middle ground, Mr. Speaker, one which allows for certain
information to be disclosed, while meanwhile protecting the integrity of the
peer review process. That is how patients' safety will be jeopardized if no one
does peer reviews, and that is what I am told will happen if we bring in the
Cameron recommendation as written.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Cameron update said, the recent one, that the department
will be giving direction to the health authorities in the near future - that is
what is in the update - regarding access to peer reviews.
So, based on what the minister just said, would he please tell us what it is
that they are going to be directing the regional health authorities about, based
on what he just told us here in the House.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is the role of the Department of Health to outline policy for the regional
health authorities in how issues are to be dealt with. They will then
operationalize them on a daily basis.
I can assure the member opposite that I will be making a decision on this
very quickly, and if it helps, in terms of time frames, before this House
finishes in this sitting, a decision will be made as to how we will approach
peer reviews. I will listen to the expert advice that has been provided to me,
Mr. Speaker. I will consult with my officials, and we will make a decision that
is in the best interest of the people of this Province, that protects patients'
safety, while meanwhile ensures that peer reviews are done and doctors are
protected also within the parameters of the law.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Cameron update also said that last year a consultant
reviewed labs in each health region and found that there is a need for staff,
equipment, and infrastructure to bring all of these labs up to the standard
needed for accreditation. Mr. Speaker, the update said that government is
working with the health authorities to invest in human resources, equipment, and
infrastructure to fix the problems.
Mr. Speaker, will the minister tell us when all requirements will be fixed so
that laboratories can be accredited?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Over the last two years, we have invested $100 million in capital equipment
throughout our hospitals and health clinics in the Province. Much of that has
gone to address recommendations of the Cameron report.
Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of what we have done in relation to the
Cameron recommendations. We have completed, or substantially completed, 92 per
cent of the recommendations. Forty-three are completed, twelve are substantially
completed, and five are left to complete. Mr. Speaker, what we are dealing with
is that we invested - a fact - over $26 million to respond directly to the
recommendations. By their very nature, Mr. Speaker, some of these
recommendations are ongoing, such as continuing education quality assurance
issues. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that in this House today we will be
bringing in a medical act which has a new
section dealing with quality assurance
which is directly coming out of the Cameron Report.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The time allotted for questions and answers has expired.
Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.
Tabling of Documents.
Tabling of Documents
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HARDING: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand today to table a report
to the Lieutenant Governor in Council concerning the position of the fund of the
Public Accountants Licensing Board for the year ended December 31, 2010.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further tabling of documents?
Notices of Motion.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will move that the House
resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider a resolution relating
to advancing or guaranteeing of certain loans made under the Loans And Guarantee
Act, 1957, Bill 26.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?
The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I give notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act
Respecting Forestry Professions, Bill 27.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?
The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill
entitled,
An Act To Amend The Health Research Ethics Authority Act, Bill 28.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?
The hon. the Minister of Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, I move the following private member's
resolution:
WHEREAS on November 18, 2010, Nalcor Energy entered into a term sheet
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HICKEY: Oh, sorry.
MR. SPEAKER: Is the hon. the Minister of Labrador Affairs presenting a
private member's motion in his own name?
MR. HICKEY: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. minister have leave?
Order, please!
Does the hon. minister have leave to present the private member's resolution?
MS JONES: Yes.
MR. SPEAKER: Yes?
MS JONES: Yes.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labrador Affairs.
MR. HICKEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you very much, I say to the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labrador Affairs.
MR. HICKEY: I move the following private member's resolution, Mr.
Speaker:
WHEREAS on November 18, 2010, Nalcor Energy entered into a Term Sheet with
Emera Inc. setting up a plan for the Muskrat Falls phase of the development of
the Lower Churchill's hydro-electrical potential and associated transmission
infrastructure; and
WHEREAS Newfoundland and Labrador has asked the federal government for a loan
guarantee to support this project, stating that it is financially, economically,
and environmentally sound and nationally significant, and the benefits of the
federal loan guarantee will accrue to the electricity rate-payers; and
WHEREAS the Members of the National Assembly of Quebec on April 6, 2011 voted
unanimously for a resolution that, when translated, states: "that the National
Assembly reiterates its opposition to federal financial participation in the
Lower Churchill hydroelectric project, considering Quebec has assumed on its own
and through the assertion of its own powers, the total cost of its hydroelectric
facilities"; and
WHEREAS the Conservative Party of Canada led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper
has stated on page 42 of its 2011 election platform, Here For Canada, released
on April 8, 2011:
"Stephen Harper's Government will continue supporting clean energy
initiatives to protect our environment and improve the quality of the air we
breathe.
"We will support economically viable clean energy projects that will assist
regions and provinces in the replacement of fossil fuel with renewable fuel
sources. The criteria for our support of a project will be whether it: has
national and regional significance; has economic and financial merit"
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HICKEY: "and will significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
"For example, we will support the Lower Churchill hydroelectric project,
through a loan guarantee or equivalent financial support. The project would
strengthen the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador's connection to the
continental grid and it would be a major regional environmental initiative.
"It is estimated the project would reduce carbon emissions by 4.5 million
tonnes annually the equivalent of removing 3.2 million cars from the road
every year.
"In addition to the criteria noted above, our support for any clean energy
project will be based on the principles of respect and equitable treatment for
all regions of the country."; and
WHEREAS the Liberal Party of Canada Leader
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HICKEY: - Michael Ignatieff stated in a radio interview in St. John's
on April 4, 2011:
"I think it is an important national project for all of Canada. One of the
great developments in the national eyes of the whole country is that
Newfoundland and Labrador is set to become a green energy superpower, and I
think it is appropriate for a federal government to work with Newfoundland and
Labrador - "
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HICKEY: "- and put that loan guarantee in place so the cost of
borrowing the money is lower and so that the ratepayers' energy costs are
lower.";
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that in disagreement with the National Assembly of
Quebec, this hon. House affirms its support for federal financial participation
in the Lower Churchill hydro-electric project
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HICKEY: - defined in the Term Sheet between Nalcor and Emera, and
commends the Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada and the Leader of the
Liberal Party of Canada for pledging federal support -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: - for this project through the provision of a loan guarantee
or equivalent financial support.
Seconded by my hon. friend and colleague, the Member for Labrador West, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Further notices of motion?
Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Petitions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I stand today to present a petition on behalf of the residents of Labrador
with regard to the Labrador highway. Mr. Speaker, hopefully we can get more out
of the minister for Labrador on this issue than we are going to get out of
Muskrat Falls from him I can say.
Mr. Speaker, the petition says:
WHEREAS the Trans-Labrador Highway is a vital transportation lifeline for the
Labrador communities, providing access, generating economic activity, and
allowing residents to obtain health care and other public services; and
WHEREAS Route 510 and connecting branch roads of the Trans-Labrador Highway
are unpaved, in deplorable condition and are no longer suitable and safe for the
traffic volumes that travel this route; and
WHEREAS Labrador cannot afford to wait years or decades for upgrading or
paving of their essential transportation route;
WHEREUPON the petitioners urge the House of Assembly to call upon government
to provide additional funding for much-needed improvements to Route 510 and
connecting branch roads of the Trans-Labrador Highway.
Mr. Speaker, people in Labrador are circulating these petitions and they are
doing so for a very good reason; the roads are deplorable. In fact, Mr. Speaker,
they are probably the worst roads that you can put a vehicle on anywhere in
Newfoundland and Labrador. I know that for a fact because I drove that highway
myself this past weekend. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that road was nothing
only potholes and ruts for the full eighty kilometres, or eighty-five kilometres
that I drove it. It was absolutely ridiculous.
Mr. Speaker, there are groomer operators out there trying to groom the road.
In fact, they are beating themselves up on a grader. They are out there grading
the road and they are beating themselves up on the graders because the graders
are hooking into the big rocks that are sticking up out of the roads, Mr.
Speaker, and they are actually jolting the drivers who are on these graders.
That is how bad the road is right now.
Mr. Speaker, the people in this area deserve to have a better transportation
system. The people in Labrador are no different than people anywhere else in
this Province, and anywhere else in this country. They are calling upon their
governments to do what is right and appropriate, and that is to pave those
sections of roads. They do not want a response like they got from the Minister
of Transportation and Works a few weeks ago when he said it is not on their
government's radar and will not be until 2014 before they start looking for
money to actually pave this
section of road. That is not acceptable, Mr.
Speaker, and nor should it be acceptable. I would challenge any member here - in
fact, Mr. Speaker, the Member for Lake Melville, every single time I get up on
this petition, does not stop babbling over on the other side. Maybe he should
stop babbling and do something about it, I say to you, Minister.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS JONES: You are collecting the big paycheque.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask members to my left for their co-operation.
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: He is collecting the big paycheque, Mr. Speaker, to be the
Minister for Labrador. Why should the people have to come to this House of
Assembly to petition and beg their government to have decent roads to drive
over? I say to you, Minister, quit the babbling and do something for the people
who sent you here.
MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?
The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay North.
MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am pleased this afternoon to be able to stand in this House again and
present a petition on behalf of the students of French Shore Academy.
I would like to read the prayer of the petition.
To the Honourable House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador in Parliament Assembled, the Petition of the Undersigned Humbly
Sheweth:
WHEREAS the students of French Shore Academy in Port Saunders from the towns
of River of Ponds, Hawke's Bay, Port Saunders, Port aux Choix and Eddies Cove
West appreciate the facility we currently learn in; and
WHEREAS unfortunately the sense of fairness and equality existing at school
is absent on the outside due to essential services not equally available in all
our towns; and
WHEREAS the lack of high-speed Internet in River of Ponds, Hawke's Bay and
Eddies Cove West put some students or our school in an unacceptable disadvantage
at learning today in the twenty-first Century;
WHEREUPON your petitioners call upon all members of the House of Assembly to
urge government to direct funding to ensure high-speed Internet services are
provided in these towns to allow equality and fairness for all members of our
student body.
And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.
This is the second or third time I have stood and presented this petition
here in this House and I will continue to do so because it is not only for the
students who are presenting it but it is an issue that is so important in rural
Newfoundland and Labrador. I am not sure what all of the other districts in the
Province are doing in terms of the lack of high-speed Internet but I can assure
you that along the Northern Peninsula in many small communities they have become
very frustrated, to say the least, in the lack of high-speed Internet access;
and not only the lack of high-speed Internet access but really not having an
understanding or a commitment from this government as to when they can
reasonably expect something to be done about it.
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting, if you watch television and look at some of
the ads. It was just yesterday afternoon, I believe it was, as I was watching
the Masters on television and you watch a mother with an electronic device,
iPod, whatever you want to call it, I am not really sure, but some form of
transmission and turning on the lights back in her home at some point for her
son who is doing his homework. That is the ability that is out there and yet you
come from there down to a place where there is not even high-speed Internet
available.
When a student in high school wants to access some records, some program,
some exam materials, whatever the case might be at his or her local high school,
they have to do it through dial-up. We all know that dial-up is very slow at
best. It is interruptive. It does not always stay connected and so on and you
get through the process of downloading a particular document at probably twenty
minutes in and then all of a sudden it is cut off and you have to go back and
start the process over again. We take it for granted, those of us who have
high-speed Internet and have the access to that in our communities. We kind of
forget the day, or have forgotten the day when high speed was the in thing. That
is where many of the communities in rural Newfoundland are left.
Again, we call today upon this government to not only identify the problem
but to speak to it and give us some idea of when we can expect this situation to
be corrected.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I stand today to present a petition on behalf of the people in the District
of The Isles of Notre Dame, in the area of Twillingate, New World Island.
Mr. Speaker, this has to do with their health care facilities in that
particular area and I will read the pray of the petition into the record.
WHEREAS there were fifteen acute care beds in the Notre Dame Bay Memorial
Hospital Health Centre; and
WHEREAS five of the acute care beds closed last summer and did not reopen in
the fall; and
WHEREAS the availability of acute care beds is critical to the people of
Twillingate and New World Island; and
WHEREAS the shortage of acute care beds is resulting in people being denied
admittance to Notre Dame Bay Memorial Hospital Health Centre; and
WHEREAS the people of Twillingate and New World Island do not want to see
their health care services cut;
WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly pray and ask the House of
Assembly to urge government to reinstate the five acute care beds in the Notre
Dame Bay Memorial Hospital Health Care Centre.
Mr. Speaker, just a little bit of history behind this because I know the
member for the area, the member for Twillingate and New World Island, is not
going to stand up in the House of Assembly and address this issue on behalf of
his constituents. It is only right and proper to tell what exactly happened
here.
This was a case, Mr. Speaker, where there were beds in this particular
hospital that normally, like acute care beds do in the summertime, they close
down a certain number of beds in hospitals all across the Province. That is only
because the intake is slower in the summer. A lot of our physicians, specialists
are on vacation, so they are not scheduling as many procedures as you would
normally do. It is not unusual for acute care beds to close in hospitals in the
summer. What is unusual is when they do not reopen in the fall. That is what
happened to the health centre in Twillingate-New World Island area.
In the fall, those acute care beds did not reopen. Instead, Mr. Speaker, the
government reallocated them to restorative beds, which, you need to recognize,
there was a need for restorative beds in that area as well. The people who were
lobbying for these particular beds, Mr. Speaker, people who were lobbying for
this type of care were doing so, but not to the point that they wanted to see
acute care beds closed. They wanted to see extra beds added to their facility.
That was the whole purpose, Mr. Speaker. They wanted to be able to ensure that
people who needed the various types of care would receive those particular types
of care. They did not want government to do this in an underhanded way, and that
is exactly what happened here. That is exactly what happened.
What they did was instead of reopening the acute care beds in that particular
area, they re-designated these particular beds to be used for restorative care
beds, Mr. Speaker, and they went out and had a big public announcement. The MHA
went in, the minister went in, Mr. Speaker, they had a big public announcement
telling the people they were going to add restorative beds to the health care
centre in the Twillingate-New World Island area. In fact, what they did is they
closed five acute care beds, renamed them to be restorative care beds, and this
was the health care plan that they offered the people of that area.
How gullible do you think people are? I say to the member: If you thought you
were going to pull the wool over the people's eyes in that district, you
certainly failed to do so, because thousands of them have signed petitions and
sent them to the House of Assembly to ensure that they get their acute care beds
back.
MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?
Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Acting Government House Leader.
MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Finance, that the House
resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider Bills 1, 11, 12, 13,
14, 15, and 19.
MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that this House now resolve itself into a
Committee of the Whole and that I do now leave the Chair.
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
On motion, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr.
Speaker left the Chair.
Committee of the Whole
CHAIR (T. Osborne): Order, please!
The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, I want to call Bill 19, please.
CHAIR: We are now debating Bill 19,
An Act To Amend The Urban And Rural
Planning Act, 2000.
A bill, "An Act To Amend The Urban And Rural Planning Act, 2000". (Bill 19)
CLERK: Clause 1.
CHAIR: Shall clause 1 carry?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
On motion, clause 1 carried.
CLERK: Clauses 2 and 3.
CHAIR: Shall clauses 2 and 3 carry?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
On motion, clauses 2 through 3 carried.
CLERK:
Be it enacted by the Lieutenant Governor and House of Assembly in
Legislative Session convened, as follows.
CHAIR: Shall the enacting clause carry?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
On motion, enacting clause carried.
CLERK:
An Act To Amend The Urban And Rural Planning Act, 2000.
CHAIR: Shall the title carry?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
On motion, title carried.
CHAIR: Shall I report the bill without amendment?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
Motion, that the Committee report having passed the bill without amendment,
carried.
CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, I would now like to call Bill 15,
An Act To Amend The Petroleum
And Natural Gas Act.
CHAIR: We are now debating Bill 15,
An Act To Amend The Petroleum And
Natural Gas Act.
A bill, "An Act To Amend The Petroleum And Natural Gas Act". (Bill 15)
CLERK: Clause 1.
CHAIR: Shall clause 1 carry?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
On motion, clause 1 carried.
CLERK: Clause 2.
CHAIR: Shall clause 2 carry?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
On motion, clause 2 carried.
CLERK:
Be it enacted by the Lieutenant Governor and House of Assembly in
Legislative Session convened, as follows.
CHAIR: Shall the enacting clause carry?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
On motion, enacting clause carried.
CLERK:
An Act To Amend The Petroleum And Natural Gas Act.
CHAIR: Shall the title carry?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
On motion, title carried.
CHAIR: Shall I report the bill without amendment?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
Motion, that the Committee report having passed the bill without amendment,
carried.
CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, I now ask that the Committee rise and report progress, please.
CHAIR: The motion is that the Committee rise, report progress, and ask
leave to sit again.
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
CHAIR: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
On motion, that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit
again, Mr. Speaker returned to the Chair.
MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!
The hon. the Member for St. John's South and Deputy Speaker.
MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole have considered
the matters to them referred and have directed me to report that Bills 15 and 19
have passed without amendment.
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair of the Committee of the Whole reports that the
Committee have considered the matters to them referred and has directed him to
report Bills 15 and 19 without amendment.
When shall the report be received?
MR. SKINNER: Now.
MR. SPEAKER: Now.
When shall the said bills be read a third time?
MR. SKINNER: Tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.
On motion, report received and adopted. Bills ordered read a third time on
tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Acting Government House Leader.
MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs,
second reading of Bill 18,
An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999, No. 2.
(Bill 18)
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
I move, seconded by the Minister of Human Resources Labour and Employment,
second reading of
An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999 No.2 (Bill 18)
MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded that Bill 18,
An Act To
Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999, No. 2, be now read a second time.
Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act,
1999 No. 2". (Bill 18)
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.
MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
I am happy to get up in my place in the House of Assembly today again in
regard to the Municipalities Act, 1999.
The municipalities in general, and Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador
have had a number of symposiums since three or four years ago that they brought
forward resolutions in regard to what they saw as amendments that were needed
within the Municipalities Act, 1999; amendments that were much needed by the
municipalities in regard to clarity, enabling them to transact their work and
provide the services to the people that they have been elected to serve, Mr.
Speaker.
I brought forward, last week, Mr. Speaker, another amendment to the
Municipalities Act, 1999, which addressed somewhere around eighteen or nineteen
amendments at that particular time; all worthwhile amendments to the
municipalities, all worthwhile to this government in regard to what we try to do
for municipalities in partnership with their elected people, Mr. Speaker.
This one is a very simple amendment and I might also say that I am proud of
my department in regard to the work that they have done for Municipalities
Newfoundland. This amendment was in response to a resolution in their last
symposium which was only in October. All of us members in the House of Assembly
realize that sometimes in regard to bringing forward amendments to the
particular legislation that we might have within our department, it takes time
to actually bring that through the process, have it approved by Cabinet, have it
drafted by Legislative Counsel, and then bring it back to this House for final
approval and discussion, Mr. Speaker. So that is a process we have to go
through. It is sometimes lengthy, but in this case here, my department and I, as
the minister responsible, saw this is a very simple amendment a worthwhile
amendment, actually. It is a little bit more significant than it might be
considered because it is addresses the issue of collecting revenue streams,
which is very, very important to municipalities all across Newfoundland and
Labrador in regard to their everyday operations and their financial means to
provide the services that they provide in their communities.
The bill will amend the Municipalities Act, 1999 and now will require
employers to provide municipalities with the addresses of their employees to
assist in the collection of poll tax. I might want to say right up front as
well, Mr. Speaker, that the proposed amendment does not grant municipalities any
additional taxation authority. So all this amendment does is direct employers to
now, besides the names of the particular employees that they have in their
company and besides any other information coming forward, include the addresses
of those employees as well.
The poll tax, just to explain that Mr. Speaker, is an annual tax of a fixed
amount which may be imposed by municipalities on persons eighteen years of age
or older who live in a municipality, persons eighteen years of age or older who
work in a municipality for ninety days or more in a calendar year, or persons,
corporations, partnerships, or associations who own real property in a
municipality.
Certain persons are exempt from paying poll tax as well, Mr. Speaker: persons
residing in a municipality who must pay property tax in a municipality, so that
people who are paying property tax already would not be subject to a poll tax;
non-residents employed in a municipality who must pay property tax, poll tax, or
a service fee to the municipality or local service district in which he she
resides; and a person whose income is less than the federal basic personal
exemption provided under the Income Tax Act.
Mr. Speaker, in Newfoundland and Labrador and elsewhere in Canada,
municipalities are faced with the everyday operation of their communities. In
order to deal with the everyday operation, they have to have revenue streams.
There are only a number of sources of revenue streams, Mr. Speaker, that they
can avail of and one of them is the poll tax. The others are property tax,
commercial taxes, and that sort of thing. Then, as well, some of them have
minimum taxes based on those kinds of things. Some of them may very well have
water taxes as well to provide a service.
People residing in these communities understand fully that the municipality
requires amounts of money in order to provide any of the services such as snow
clearing, any garbage collection, whatever it may be, Mr. Speaker; it has to be
provided and those things cost money. They have to employ people within their
municipality or they have to contract it out. Whichever way you look at it, Mr.
Speaker, that kind of a service is going to cost money, so they have to have
revenue streams in order to bring in the much-needed cash that they have to have
in their treasury, if I could name it that I guess, or in their bank accounts in
order to contract, or to buy equipment, or to hire people to provide that
service.
This poll tax is at the discretion of the municipality, as I just said, to
raise revenues. They do not have to charge it, Mr. Speaker. As I just mentioned,
they only have a limited number of issues or opportunities if I could say that,
in regard to creating that revenue stream and certainly one of them is the poll
tax. This is not a new tax; it has been around for a long, long time. As I said,
it is not practiced by all the municipalities in Newfoundland and Labrador; it
is only practiced in some of the municipalities that have issues surrounding
their revenue streams.
Where I can put it on record as well is that many of the municipalities in
Newfoundland and Labrador choose their main revenue stream as being property
tax. Property tax, as we all know, is based on assessed value of that particular
property. In my hometown of Gander that assessed value could equate into a fair
number of dollars in regard to the revenues coming into my municipality. If you
were to take some small community in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, the
assessed values of their property are much lower. Regardless of the house just
being built probably a few years ago, whatever it is, they are assessed at a
much lower value than most of the urban areas in Newfoundland and Labrador.
There are only so many households in that community as well, Mr. Speaker.
With that, the municipality in question would have to create other revenue
streams and one of the areas that they can consider is the poll tax, which a
number of municipalities have now instituted. I would not be able to say just
how many municipalities do institute this type of tax, Mr. Speaker, but I know
they are in existence. I know they are predominately in rural Newfoundland and
Labrador, as compared to the urban towns that we have in our Province.
Currently under the act, as I said, the employers have to provide the
municipality the names of the employees in the municipality and the dates in
which their employment began. That is another aspect they have to provide as the
act reads at this particular time without this amendment. They would, first and
foremost, provide a list of the employees of that particular municipality who
may work with their particular company and also the date of their employment as
well; which determines, as I said earlier in my speaking on this particular
amendment to the act, that would determine if they would have to pay or not
because they have to be employed a certain amount of time before the actual poll
tax would cut in.
Under the act, they do not have to provide the address of the employees.
Therein constitutes a problem in regard to sending out the different invoices
and the bills to those particular members of the municipality. I believe most
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians understand fully that in order to have
services, to be provided services they have to pay. That is a standard thing in
regard to the free world, Mr. Speaker.
Anywhere we go throughout this Province, every province in Canada, the
Territories, anywhere in the United States, anywhere in the free world really,
people pay taxes in regard to their municipalities and the services they
provide. I think that is a given. Most Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, I would
think, would have no issues in regard to paying taxes just as long as the
municipality governs itself in a financial, prudent, accountable and a
transparent way. Then each and every one of the residents and householders in
that particular municipality would have no issue in regard to dealing and also
paying those taxes.
Now, Mr. Speaker, with the adoption of that resolution back in the annual
general meeting of municipalities Newfoundland in October - when I first became
the Minister of Municipal Affairs shortly afterward, one of the first things I
reviewed were the resolutions that came on the floor of that particular Assembly
in October. I thought it was worthwhile to get this done. There were not a whole
lot of complications in regard to drafting an amendment. We could push this
forward as fast as we possibly can. I am quite happy to say today and stand in
my place today to see this as another amendment on top of the other eighteen or
nineteen amendments that were brought forward a week or two ago, which was
discussed, debated in this House and certainly agreed on by all the members of
the House, including the members of the Opposition parties as well.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I think I have gone over most of anything that I want
to say in regard to this amendment. I reserve what I am going to say here right
now actually because I think it is a thing of the past. One time we took all the
services that a municipality would provide the citizens in regard to what they
provide on a daily basis for granted. Just to name a few of the services that a
municipality would provide as services: fire protection; waste collection;
roads; water and sewer services; recreational facilities; planning, development
controls as well. It is all carried out by the municipalities.
We, as a Province and as a population, see the great work that has been done
by municipal leaders, councillors, mayors, professional administrators, clerks
and all the people who work with municipalities. We see the great work they do
for us as residents of our communities. As the Minister of Municipal Affairs, I
would like to commend them for the work they do. Most of them do it as
volunteers, Mr. Speaker. Most of them do not get paid as municipal councillors,
certainly the employees do.
In the meantime, when I travel across this Province - and I have been in
many, many communities in many, many municipal town halls, and I have met many
of the employees as well as the councillors. These people actually work long
hours, sometimes at their own expense, Mr. Speaker. They know full well the
revenues are not there to pay the overtime and all that kind of gear. They do
lots of work. They do lots of work home, at their own homes. Also, they will
work when they go out and grocery shop for their own family and they are
approached by a resident of the community. I commend all of those people because
they are certainly partners of ours in this government.
We have a great relationship with Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador.
We have a great relationship as a government with the municipalities, the
councils, councillors, and mayors all across this Province. We certainly have a
great relationship with the professional administrators and their association as
well. I spoke on Friday night to 200, 250 of them. Certainly, I was
well-received and they had great comments in regard to what we have done over
the past eight years for municipalities across Newfoundland and Labrador, making
them and their jobs easier to deal with. We will continue to do that, especially
in the next eight years, Mr. Speaker, because I cannot foresee us losing
government any time soon; especially in October, and certainly not in October,
2015, and probably not even in October, 2019. I might have to retire here a
very, very old man, probably in my nineties if all goes well.
Anyway, Mr. Speaker, with that being said, I am going to take my seat in the
House. I am looking forward to any of the comments in regard to providing the
addresses concerning poll tax from the employers of the employees who work with
the various companies in municipalities. I am sure it will be unanimous here in
the House of Assembly in regard to this issue.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER (Osborne): The hon. the Member for the District of The
Straits & White Bay North.
MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It a privilege this afternoon to be able to stand and speak for a moments to
Bill 18,
An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999 No. 2.
I have to speak to the minister's closing comments before I speak to the act
itself. I just hope he is not surprised I have to say, I think he is very
disillusioned, Mr. Speaker. Anyway, I hope it is not one of his last pieces of
legislation. We will let the electorate decide that for sure.
This amendment requires an employer to provide their employees' names and
addresses within two weeks after being requested by council. This amendment is
made to address the issue of increasing the effectiveness of the poll tax
collection process. Obviously, there could be a lot of residents and a lot of
workers in municipalities who the municipalities or the councils themselves
would have trouble, really, following them down and finding where they are, even
in terms of working, because of the fact that employers are not necessarily
providing that type of information to the municipality. This is a request, as
the minister acknowledged, that was made at the MNL last fall, 2010, at their
convention. The resolution was passed and it has been brought forward here today
for debate in the House of Assembly and to become entrenched in the law of our
Province in the very near future.
Municipalities, basically, complained that they could not collect poll tax
for some people, as they just did not have the right information. It is easy to
elude the tax man, so to speak, and when the tax man is a municipality then
obviously, I guess, it becomes easy to elude them as well. The current
legislation that we have today does not compel employers to provide the address
of their employees and the date they started, so it is harder to send a bill, it
is harder to collect, it is harder to send a summons, and any other collection
activity that the municipality might get involved in because they do not have
the correct addresses. The larger the municipalities would become or would be
then, obviously, the more difficult it would be to follow that process through.
Mr. Speaker, that, in essence, is the reason, as the minister suggested, why
this legislation is being put forward.
One concern that we would have with this particular piece of legislation, and
I would suppose that the minister and the department has already really
researched this and so on and would be certain that it is okay, but it is a fact
that the amendment may be subject to the privacy and protection act whereby this
information may be considered confidential. If that is the case, then the
municipalities may need the proper protocol or whatever in place to ensure the
protection is ensured for its citizens.
In the day in which we live, it is easy to request information from someone
but there are always repercussions to doing that. So, in this case, whether this
breaches the privacy and protection act, that would be something I would ask the
minister and probably he could speak to that in his concluding remarks or in
Committee, whatever the case might be, as to what concerns municipalities might
need to have as they go and request this information from the employers. There
may not be any at all, but I ask the question simply because it is an issue that
we need to be concerned about.
Municipal Affairs noted that Port aux Basques was one of the municipalities
that recently asked that this amendment be made so that the town could secure
addresses of those who work in that town. It was the Town of Wabana that
actually put forth the resolution at the convention last fall.
It should be noted that this piece of the amendment, though, does not address
the second part of the MNL resolution, which requests that government provide
the means for the poll tax to be collected when a poll tax delinquent taxpayer
applies for his or her renewal of their motor vehicle registration. That was a
part of the resolution that was put forward at the MNL by Municipalities
Newfoundland and Labrador, and it was omitted in this legislation.
So, again it is something that I would ask the minister if he could speak to,
to give us further detail and further clarification as to why the amendment is
only covering half of the resolution. Because it was requested in the addresses
and it was also requested in the case of delinquency that there be a mechanism
in place whereby it could be collected upon the renewal of a motor vehicle
registration. That is not included, so I would certainly appreciate, Mr.
Speaker, if that could be spoken to at a later time in this process.
The new amendment does not give any new tax powers to the municipalities, but
it provides them with a better mechanism to provide the core services for which
they, as a municipality, are responsible when it comes to collecting the
revenues they are entitled to collect. The whole issue of poll taxes is
problematic for municipalities, Mr. Speaker. The issue of delinquent taxpayers
is one of the concerns that are associated with this tax.
When we look at the statistics of the census for municipalities in
Newfoundland and Labrador for 2007, we see that 80 per cent of the communities
in our Province as I read that, I thought about it for a moment, it is an
extremely high number of the municipalities in this Province that, during a
census, would suggest they have problems in collecting their taxes. That is very
surprising. It is 88 per cent, I believe it is, in smaller towns, and somewhere
around 78 per cent or so in the larger communities. Those statistics were given
at the municipalities convention last fall by Professor Wade Locke from Memorial
University when he did his presentation for those who might have been there to
see it - I did sit in on it and was very interested in what he had to say. To
recognize that 88 per cent of the communities in this Province today are dealing
with or having to wrestle through, if you will, problems when it comes to
collecting taxes from their tax base, I think is phenomenal.
In fact, the whole issue of municipal sustainability is a high concern. That
was put forward at MNL as well, voiced by many of the municipalities that were
there. They tried to impress upon government for years just the whole crisis
that they are going through and the sustainability really being questioned for
municipalities and so on.
The minister mentioned in his comments that we accept that we have to pay for
the services that we want and that are provided. There is no doubt about that.
We certainly all do accept that. There are municipalities in this Province that
are finding it very, very difficult to offer these services, to bring them to
the taxpayers that they have. In many municipalities, their tax base has been
shrinking, which I would suggest most of the municipalities throughout this
Province has seen their tax base shrink over the past number of years, yet they
are required to provide that same level of service.
Municipalities are really stymied, if you will, by the lack of revenue
options and so on. I will just give you an example. If you look at a local
service district, I met with local service districts in my district over the
past couple of months and they really have no revenue base. They have no MOGs,
Municipal Operating Grants. They have no gas tax credit that they can take
advantage of and so on. So, they are very limited to what they can do in terms
of providing services to the districts, to the LSDs, and to the residents that
they are responsible for. It certainly is a great challenge.
If we look at the declining tax base, as I said, that they have in terms of
the number of residents and so on, the number of taxpayers that they can draw
on, we look at the downloading of services to municipalities whether it be from
the federal government in some cases, from the provincial government in other
cases, we know that we are trying to get the municipalities to take on more
services, yet we have seen tremendous cuts in the Municipal Operating Grants.
Again, it is one of the things that they presented at the conference last fall.
If we go back to 1991, there was about $41.5 million, approximately, in
Municipal Operating Grants; twenty years later, it is somewhere in the area of
$17.8 million, I believe, it is..
I realize that different grants and so on have come in place that may
eliminate some of that and alleviate some of that pressure, but municipalities
provide services that are some of the most important in our daily lives. We take
it all for granted at times, really. When we see the garbage collection person
coming every Thursday, Friday, or Monday morning, or whatever the case is, we
take it for granted that when we lay it by the side of the street as we leave
home, when we come back it is going to be gone. If we come back and it was not
gone, we would be very upset because by that time it has become a part of our
landscape, basically. Yet, these are very important services. They are not
services that can be provided without cost, obviously. When we talk about water
and sewer, unfortunately a lot of us, a lot of communities in this Province, do
not have good potable water. Some have been on boil orders for years, some for
decades. Yet, there is a responsibility to try and maintain the systems and the
sewer systems as well.
One of the most important things that our municipalities provide for us is
fire service. Where would we be if we did not have our volunteer fire services
in our communities, our paid firefighters and the equipment they have and
whatever? If you consider snow removal, this winter in my district the amount of
snow we have had has just been tremendous. Yet, the streets have been cleaned so
well in our towns, in St. Anthony and other communities in the area. Our high
roads that are worked on and covered by the Department of Transportation and
Works, and service people, they have just done a tremendous job of keeping the
system going; yet, at the municipal level, often under great restraint. It is
important that they are able to collect their taxes effectively and so on.
What is interesting, Mr. Speaker, to note is that unlike provincial and
federal governments which can benefit from annual growth and revenues,
municipalities have to provide essential services even if the cost of doing so
increases much faster than their tax base does. That is one of the things they
wrestle with as well, that the tax base has been decreasing, the cost of
providing services has been increasing.
Property taxes are certainly not providing the level of funding that is
really needed to be able to allow municipalities to address the issues that are
important to them. That could be because of collection issues and other issues
as well. That is why I believe it is so important that government put a chase on
creating a new fiscal arrangement with the municipalities as they have been
promising to do so for a number of years.
In fact, the strategic plan of the Department of Municipal Affairs states
that its goal is to develop a new fiscal arrangement by 2009. Of course, here we
are in 2011 and clearly government has not achieved what it had promised to the
municipalities. I would challenge the government, I would challenge the
Department of Municipal Affairs, as we work through things and put legislation
in place, to ensure that the addresses and things of taxpayers are provided by
employers in municipalities that larger things are there, that we give the
attention to that which is needed and so on and we get it done.
Mr. Speaker, the issue of collecting poll tax, as this amendment deals with,
really kind of only skims the surface of what needs to be done to address the
issues of ensuring that our municipalities are more sustainable. It is a step
forward, it is something that needs to be done, and certainly we have no issue
with supporting this legislation. We look forward to greater things coming as
well.
I am optimistic as well, Mr. Speaker, I have to say, like the minister. I
look forward to being around for many years when a lot of legislation is
presented by our government. I do not know where the minister will be at that
time, but I am sure there will be someone else scratching for his seat or
whatever the case might be. Until then, we will challenge and we will critique
their policies as much as possible. As an Opposition, we are certainly looking
forward to October, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you very much.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. PEACH: Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to stand here in this
hon. House today in my place as the Member for the District of Bellevue and
speak on this amendment. It certainly is a very important amendment to the
councils throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.
We have been wrestling with this for years, Mr. Speaker. Being a previous
Mayor of Norman's Cove-Long Cove, I have seen many times where we have had
written letters to employers asking for addresses of their employees and very
seldom did we get the response that we should have gotten at that time. It is a
lot of work involved for our town clerks out there in the offices and it is a
lot of red tape that you have to go through in order just to get an address to
find out if there is an employee working with that employer.
In these small towns, the revenue that comes down through poll taxes in a lot
of the small towns is very, very important. I have thirteen towns in my district
and there are only probably three or four of the towns that charge property
taxes. The others rely on the revenue coming in from poll tax. In most cases,
these small towns really have great difficulty in collecting the poll tax. They
do not need anything like this to hold them up in trying to get the revenues
that they need to operate their town.
As was said earlier, it is very important for these small towns because they
have all kinds of services that they have to provide. If you have a water system
in, you have to have the chlorination system. In order to purchase chlorination
for the chlorination system, it is very costly. In the wintertime they have the
roadwork that they have to prepare the services for, sanding, and out on the
road plowing the roads and what have you.
Also, Mr. Speaker, there is the whole thing of running the town with regard
to their employees and making sure they can meet the payroll everyday. If you
are only operating on half the revenue in your town and the other half are not
paying, then it is certainly a great difficulty for the towns to be able to look
after their town properly and provide the services to the people that they
expect.
Mr. Speaker, this amendment deals with the addresses to be sent back to the
towns. I know of an instance, when I was a previous mayor that we had, that the
Town of Norman's Cove sent out to an employer about seven times looking to find
out if this guy worked with that company. We could not tell because there were
three guys with the same name working with the company. We could not identify if
it was the same person that we were trying to tax because we could not get the
address out of the employer. It is very, very important, and it is a very, very
important amendment.
I want to commend the minister, too, for bringing in this amendment and also
to say that it shows how our government works with Municipalities Newfoundland
and Labrador and the speedency in getting this bill through. Also, of our
minister knowing the importance that it is to the municipalities throughout
Newfoundland and Labrador to have this amendment brought forward.
I also want to say about the poll tax itself, how it is being applied in the
communities. In some communities we have the property taxes but also we have a
poll tax in that same community. Somebody mentioned earlier that if you are
paying a property tax you do not have to pay poll tax. That is so, but if you
have four people in a household and the homeowners are paying property taxes and
the son and daughter is working, those people too have to pay poll taxes in a
lot of cases. Some towns opted out of that but most towns do have it, depending
on the type of revenue they have and if they can afford to carry on with the
revenue they have.
This is where the problem comes in, in collecting poll taxes. A lot of young
people are in the community or in the towns for perhaps six months out of a year
and then they move on to other jobs across Canada, throughout Newfoundland and
Labrador and then they are back again for another six months out of the year.
They feel they should not have to pay the poll taxes because they are only
living in that community for half of the year, but that is not so, Mr. Speaker.
If you are living there for six months or more and you earn the amount of money
more than the basic tax exemptions, then you are eligible to pay a poll tax to
that town as well. This is where a lot of the towns are struggling in trying to
get their revenues for their town councils. It certainly is a necessity to get
the message out to those people that the town needs your support as well by
paying your revenue that you owe to the town in order for it to be able to
supply the services throughout the whole town. This is not a tax that is being
levied on people, Mr. Speaker; this is just merely an amendment to help the
towns in trying to collect the taxes to help the towns
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. PEACH: - to get the message out there to be able
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. PEACH: - to contact the employers and say do you have John Joe'
working at your plant, or do you have such a person working at your industry.
Then they can come back and say yes, here is the address of this person. Then
after that then they can take the appropriate measures to make sure that those
taxes are given to the the right advice is given to the employer so that they
can deduct the taxes as required by the town.
Mr. Speaker, I certainly will be supporting this amendment, it is very
important to the towns in my district and throughout Newfoundland and Labrador
as well. I am sure it is a very important amendment for Municipalities
Newfoundland and Labrador. I want to endorse the minister's request to put
through this amendment and I look forward to hearing more debate on it later.
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I am glad to have a few moments to speak to Bill 18,
An Act To Amend The
Municipalities Act, 1999 No. 2. As has been said already by the minister and by
other speakers, this act basically is being put in place to make it easier for
municipalities to collect their poll taxes.
It seems like quick action was taken by the minister after the Annual General
Meeting of Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador, who passed a resolution
that MNL should lobby the provincial government to effect changes to facilitate
more effective means to collect poll taxes that would include. Well, I have to
say MNL must be one of the most effective lobby groups in the Province because
they received pretty quick action from the minister on this one. I am sure they
will be very happy. The minister says that he always looks after his
municipalities and MNL. I am sure they appreciate that.
If we are going to have a poll tax, the amendment makes all kinds of sense.
There are no privacy issues for those who may wonder are there privacy issues
because the information that the towns are looking for can be gotten through
other means. It is not like it is information that is not accessible. It is
accessible; it is just that it would make life a bit easier for them, since they
can get the names of the employees from the employers; it just makes it easier
for them then to also be able to get the addresses from the employers. So it
facilitates the process.
There is an issue that I would like to bring up and I would like this
government to think about, and that is the issue of poll tax itself. Poll tax is
aimed at tenants. In municipalities, we have property taxes and property taxes
are aimed at property owners. Poll taxes are aimed at tenants. However, the poll
tax is really a double tax on the tenant because landlords who own property and
pay taxes on those properties, they build in the cost of their taxes into the
rent.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS MICHAEL: When they build the cost of taxes into the rent, then that
rent is paid by the tenants so they are contributing to the property tax that is
paid by the landlord.
When you put a poll tax on top of them, then you are adding a second tax to
the tenants. So it really is an unfair tax from that perspective. I really
believe that this government needs to look at this. Some municipalities, I would
imagine, feel forced to do poll taxes because they have had such cutbacks by
both the federal government and the provincial government in money to help them
run their towns. So I think we have take the onus off the tenant here tenants
who are already paying into the property tax of the landlord. We have to take
the onus off their backs and see that municipalities are getting the adequate
support they need to get both from the Province and also from the federal
government.
This is one of the things that concerns me. The previous speaker did talk
about the fact that in a rental property you may have multiple people and that
you are trying to get poll taxes from these multiple people. When we look at
property tax, we do not determine property tax based on how many people are
living in a house.
So if young people, the young people who were referred to by my colleague
prior to me, for example, were from a family where the family owns their own
home, then those young people can live in the home of their parents and not have
to worry because the parents are paying property tax. If the young people do not
come from a family who is able to own their own home and a family that is
renting, we are expecting them to pay a poll tax because they live in the rental
property. Just as the owners of the home, who are paying property tax are
probably paying a mortgage, and they are paying their property tax and the
younger people who live with them do not have any responsibility for it, well it
is the same way for the parents who may be renting. They are paying their rent.
That rent includes the property tax of the landlord so why should we expect
other people living in the house to have to pay a poll tax and why should we
expect those paying the rent to have to pay a poll tax either.
It brings up for me that extra question of why we have poll taxes; why we are
really making things more difficult for people in rented properties. This then
goes to the issue of affordable housing because one of the issues around lack of
affordable housing in this Province is the way in which rental properties have
gone up, residential rental properties. While the amendment itself is an
innocuous amendment, and I certainly support, I really do ask the minister and
this government to consider the fact that the poll tax itself is an unjust tax
and not fair to people who are renting. Very, very often people who are renting
are renting because they cannot afford to own, not always but that is one of the
reasons. We are putting an extra onus on them to pay taxes when, as I said, it
really is a double tax for them.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs, if he speaks now
he will close debate.
The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.
MR. O'BRIEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I look forward to answering some of the
questions with regard to my closing comments on second reading of this very
important act and the amendment as well.
It might be just a simple change with regard to having the employers of
people living in municipalities to provide the address of their employees to
that particular municipality, but it is a very important tool in regard to
municipalities having the ability to collect that tax.
That is what this is all about, Mr. Speaker, and yes MNL are a great bunch of
people. I have really grown to respect each and every person on the executive of
MNL, also the executive director and anybody else who works with MNL. They are a
great bunch of people. We work in partnership with them as we work in
partnership with all municipalities across Newfoundland and Labrador. I think
this government has forged a relationship with municipalities across this great
Province of ours in no other way as in previous years with previous governments.
I have had that said to me on numerous occasions. I have had it said to me on a
couple of events and in regard to the speaking of people connected to MNL, as
well as municipal leaders, referencing that they had not seen it in their twenty
or so years, or whatever it may be, on serving on council the relationship that
they currently have with this government.
As to the number of things that was brought forward by my hon. members across
the House, one of them is in regard to the protection of that particular
information. As with any other government entity, Mr. Speaker, municipalities
must collect, store, and use this information under the guidelines of the Access
to Information and Protection of Privacy Act. So, that is taken care of, they
have to protect, and they have to respect that information, Mr. Speaker.
They do this in other cases as well in the collection of property tax and all
of the other good things that they might have instances to use the particular
addresses and the particular information surrounding the citizens who live in
their municipality. They cannot share that information with outside third
parties, Mr. Speaker. That is protected by the act under the Municipalities Act,
under the access to information act as well. To clarify that, that was brought
up by the hon. member across the House, so I just wanted to bring that forward.
He also referenced he was glad that we were bringing this amendment forward,
that it was brought forward shortly after the symposium they had in October.
Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador gathered here in St. John's in October
and this was one of the resolutions, but this is only part of the resolutions
that they brought forward. One of the things that he referenced was in regard to
the collection of taxes that we might consider attaching that collection process
to driver's licence. Mr. Speaker, yes, that will be considered in the future by
this government, certainly by the current Minister of Government Services, which
was my past post, and we have done a certain amount of work in regard to that.
There is a policy issue surrounding that particular request that has to be
considered by government. Also, it requires software and programming issues to
be addressed before we could actually do that, Mr. Speaker.
What I am saying is that it is a lot more complicated than just attaching
that to a person's driver's licence. A lot of other things come into play
regarding that. So, that is something that is going to be considered by
government in future years, on a go-forward basis, but it is not something that
we can address here as quickly as we could address this particular amendment.
So, we have this forward. We will take any and all resolutions that come
forward from MNL and their symposium that they have each year as serious
requests. We will research it, Mr. Speaker, and certainly, we will bring forward
any amendments to the Municipalities Act that we possibly can in as fast a
manner as we possibly can.
The other piece that was referenced by the hon. member was the Municipal
Operating Grants and how important it is for municipalities to have the
necessary revenues to carry out their everyday operation. Well, this government,
like no other, has recognized all those issues surrounding municipalities. They
do need the revenue. They do they have to provide services to the citizens that
they serve and the people who have elected them as municipal leaders in their
own right.
As well, I just want to give you a little bit of history in the Municipal
Operating Grants. The Municipal Operating Grant formula was developed back in
1992 under the Wells government. I guess they brought forward that formula in
regard to the amounts of money that were considered at that time and transferred
to municipalities across Newfoundland and Labrador with all the goodness in
their hearts. The one thing that they did not have was any vision in the
viability of that particular program at that particular time in history, Mr.
Speaker, because in subsequent years, shortly after the introduction of the
Municipal Operating Grants, they were cut, and cut drastically. As a matter of
fact, one of the largest cuts came in 1996, because they did not have the vision
to understand that it is great to bring in something like a Municipal Operating
Grant formula, but it is another thing to be able to afford it in the out years.
The one thing that I can say as I speak in this House, after eight years in
this hon. House as the Member for Gander, Mr. Speaker, I will tell you one
thing, when we brought forward things in regard to all our past budgets, we
looked at the sustainability of those particular programs in the out years. As a
matter of fact, going out as far as twenty and twenty-five and thirty years,
could we afford it? Could we afford it if the price of oil goes down? Could we
afford it if the oil production went down? Could we afford it if we had a glitch
in our mining industry? Could we afford it in regard to our forest industry?
Could we afford it in regard to any of the revenue streams that we might have as
a Province?
So, not unlike municipalities, we depend on revenue streams as well to
provide the services that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador expect, also
that they require and certainly what they need. In order to provide that, we
have to have the revenue streams that offsets that cost. Sometimes there are not
enough revenues coming into our Provincial Treasury to provide all the things
that people might expect.
We have to make choices, hard choices, and we have made hard choices over the
years.
These are the kinds of things in regard to Municipal Operating Grants, and I
am not going to shy away when the hon. member brought that forward that we also
had reductions to Municipal Operating Grants to nineteen of our largest
communities. We had a three-year plan in regard to those reductions because we
did not know what was coming at us in the out years. We projected them, but we
only reduced them in the first two years and then froze them in the third year,
and they have been frozen ever since.
We have done a lot of work within my department with regard to understanding
that formula, understanding the revenue stream and how important it is to the
municipalities. Certainly I, as the minister, now have a good appreciation of
Municipal Operating Grants and we will continue to work with municipalities and
Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador in regard to that.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I believe that I have spoken to most of the issues
surrounding this act and this amendment that was brought up by the hon. members
across the House. Again, I welcome their comments and I also recognize that they
fully agree with the amendment as has been brought forward here this afternoon.
They see it as a very worthwhile thing, a good tool to the municipalities in
regard to collecting this very important tax. I agree sometimes you do not want
to have poll tax, but sometimes you just have to have it because you have to
have that revenue stream.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I will take my seat in the House. If there are any
other questions, I would be glad to stand in my place and answer them during
Committee stage.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 18,
An Act To
Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999 No.2, be now read a second time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
Carried.
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999 No. 2. (Bill
18)
MR. SPEAKER: This bill has now been read a second time.
When shall the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House?
Now? Tomorrow?
MR. SKINNER: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.
On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999 No. 2", read
a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House on tomorrow.
(Bill 18)
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources and Acting
Government House Leader.
MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I now call Order 12, second reading of Bill 20,
An Act To Amend
The Highway Traffic Act.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HARDING: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. the Minister of
Transportation and Works, that Bill 20,
An Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act,
be now read a second time.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that Bill 20,
An Act To Amend The
Highway Traffic Act, be now read a second time.
Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act".
(Bill 20)
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is a pleasure for me this evening to stand and introduce Bill 20,
An Act
To Amend The Highway Traffic Act. What we are talking about here today is,
again, what we refer to on a number of occasions as housekeeping. What we are
doing is streamlining the current language that is in the legislation and
removing some duplication in some sections of the act.
Mr. Speaker, while I say it is housekeeping, nevertheless, any time you are
talking about the Highway Traffic Act, you are talking about a very serious
piece of legislation in our Province. With respect to the changes, Mr. Speaker,
there are no changes regarding policy itself. It is just streamlining some of
the current clauses that are in the legislation.
As most people are aware in the Province, Mr. Speaker, the Highway Traffic
Act is a very significant piece of legislation. It has more than 215 provisions.
It has a detailed scheduled as well as eighteen associated sets of regulations.
The act has been amended on a fairly regular basis since its enactment. Mr.
Speaker, it is like most everything else, as times change, as circumstances
change, so the need for legislation to change. As a result, in this particular
case it requires occasional housekeeping, as we call it, to ensure that, number
one, it is as clear as possible and also that it reduces the type of repetition
which may arise from policy changes being made at different points in time.
Mr. Speaker, in this particular bill, the amendments we are seeking are to
consolidate common references to two classes of drivers. One of these classes is
what we call regular drivers; they are drivers like ourselves who have been
driving for a number of years. The other class is novice drivers. That simply we
can class as young drivers who are just about to gain experience to get their
regular driver's licence. The two provisions that we are talking about with
respect to these two classes of drivers relate to the surrender or suspension of
licences and also the screening for alcohol and or drug impairment, as well as
the various periods for licence suspensions. Basically, what we are saying is
consolidating these two references. In particular, for one
section that might
apply to a regular driver with respect to the suspension of their licence. Right
now it is separated, regular drivers and novice drivers. What we are talking
about is just combining the two into one.
The bill, Mr. Speaker, creates new sections to combine existing but separate
sections for both regular drivers and novice drivers, as I just mentioned. These
revised sections outline the requirements for testing for impairment of alcohol,
drugs or a combination of drugs and alcohol, and also the limits at which
penalties are imposed. For example, Mr. Speaker, for regular drivers now under
the legislation, and this will not change - for regular drivers having fifty
milligrams or more of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood, or what we would
class as .05, will get an automatic seven-day licence suspension. If a person
has eighty milligrams or more in 100 millilitres of blood, what we class as .08,
this will automatically mean a ninety-day suspension. Mr Speaker, as I said,
that is not a change in the legislation. That is what we impose ourselves under
the current Highways Traffic Act. Of course, in addition to that, there is also
licence suspensions if someone is convicted under the Criminal Code of Canada
for impaired driving over .08, then also additional sentences would apply. That
is for the regular drivers, Mr. Speaker.
Under the current legislation, with respect to novice drivers, the test
certainly is much more restrictive, as it should be, because a new driver
getting their licence certainly do not want to be involved in being charged with
impaired driving or anything like that. Certainly, we have to try to discourage,
wherever possible, young drivers from becoming involved in that kind of thing. I
just want to give you an example, Mr. Speaker, for novice drivers. The presence
of any alcohol at all, anything above zero in 100 millimetres of blood attracts
an automatic suspension of two months for the first offence. It is four months
for the second offence, and six months for a third or subsequent offence. A
novice driver having eighty milligrams in 100 millilitres, or .08, provides an
additional ninety-day suspension. Again, Mr. Speaker, there are also additional
licence suspensions if someone is convicted under the Criminal Code of Canada.
Also, Mr. Speaker, with respect to both types of drivers, whether you are a
regular driver or a novice driver, if you fail to provide a breath or blood
sample, or if you refuse to provide a sample, that automatically carries a
ninety-day suspension, plus any other suspensions or penalties which might be
applicable under the Criminal Code of Canada. As I said before, Mr. Speaker,
while these are not new penalties they are combined in a way which reduces the
amount of separate references in different sections of the current legislation
and hopefully, will provide a format which law enforcement officials will find
clearer and easier to understand and to administer.
In addition to these consolidations, Mr. Speaker, we are also including a
reference to
section 255 of the Criminal Code of Canada, which governs
punishment for impaired driving, especially for offences causing serious injury
or death. This addition is made to ensure that a police officer has clear
authority when requesting surrender of a person's driver's licence.
Mr. Speaker, before we drafted this legislation we did speak to the RCMP and
the RNC, and both of these police forces are very much supportive of what we are
doing today to help clarify the situation with respect to their job out in the
field.
Mr. Speaker, on that I would like to finish my remarks now and leave it open
for any of my colleagues who would like to address this piece of legislation.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes the hon. Member for Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I say it is a pleasure to be able to stand today and make a few comments with
regar