Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Members' Statements; Statements by Ministers — 22 March 2011 (46th General Assembly, 4th Session, Vol. XLVI No. 2)
2011-03-22
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
March
22, 2011 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLVI
No. 2
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!
Admit strangers.
Today I would like to ask hon. members to welcome a new Page to the House of
Assembly, Mr. Jonathan Moore, who will be serving with us during this session.
Welcome.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would also like to welcome and recognize the town
council from Hant's Harbour accompanied by their mayor, Mr. Don Green.
Welcome to the House of Assembly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The following members' statements will be heard: the hon.
the Member for the District of Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune; the hon. Member for the
District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair; the hon. Member for the District of Baie
Verte-Springdale; the hon. Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay
North; and the hon. the Member for the District of Grand Falls-Windsor-Green Bay
South.
The hon. the Member for the District of Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS PERRY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in this hon. House today to deliver accolades to the Town of Harbour
Breton and the Sunny Cottage Corporation for an outstanding summer of events and
activities in 2010 that marked the 100 th Anniversary of Sunny
Cottage, a prestigious, historical merchant's home that stands proud and tall in
the centre of the community.
Sunny Cottage is a Queen Anne style residence that was built by Mr. John Rose
in 1910, one of few in this entire Province. The registered heritage structure
tells the history of the families who lived there and offers a glimpse into the
era of resettlement along the South Coast. Guides in period costumes provide
tours of this magnificent structure and tell you the many stories associated
with the home.
The anniversary was celebrated during a 100-day period from May 1 to
September 9. Among the activities that took place were school tours, local
entertainment at the tea room, a garden party, a museum day, a Stewart family
day, and a birthday party with everyone invited. The volunteers did a remarkable
job, and I would particularly like to thank Mr. Doug Wells, a local historian
and Chair of the Sunny Cottage Corporation, as well as Ms Heather Blackmore who
was quite busy all summer fulfilling her role as Miss Sunny Cottage.
I had the pleasure of attending the Pea Soup day as well as the Stewart
Family dinner, along with the hon. Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs who is
responsible for the Volunteer Sector. We had a great evening with lots of
stories about this wonderful place that has become an icon in the cultural
heritage of the entire Coast of Bays region.
I ask all members of this hon. House to join me in congratulating the board
and town for a job well done!
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au
Clair.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in the House today to congratulate the Labrador Straits Development
Corporation on recently receiving a Newfoundland and Labrador Community Economic
Development Award.
Mr. Speaker, this award was presented at the Newfoundland and Labrador
Regional Economic Development Association, known as NLREDA, awards event that
was held in Gander this past fall. NLREDA is an organization that works as a
unified voice for the nineteen regional economic development boards in the
Province and awards outstanding initiatives made by individual regional boards.
The Labrador Straits Development Corporation received the Newfoundland and
Labrador Community Economic Development Award for its intercept campaign, a
campaign that involved an invitation and discount coupons for 50 per cent of
businesses from Cartwright to L'Anse au Clair being distributed Labrador-wide.
It was hugely successful and certainly provided added economic activity and was
a tremendous marketing campaign for the region.
I want to recognize the Chair of the Labrador Straits Development
Corporation, Mr. Gaius Trimm, their board and their staff, Barb Marshall, Bruce
Moores, and Doreen Belben for the tremendous work that they do in that region.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of the House to join with me in extending my
congratulations to the Labrador Straits Development Corporation on their recent
accomplishments.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Baie
Verte-Springdale.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. POLLARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise in this hon. House today to offer congratulations to the Mings Bight
Volunteer Fire Department upon celebrating its thirty years of service to the
community. On March 4, I had the privilege to witness the outstanding support
and appreciation that the Town of Mings Bight demonstrate to their dedicated
firefighters. Approximately 118 residents of this small town packed the town
hall to recognize the extraordinary dedication and commitment of the
twenty-member volunteer fire department.
Mr. Speaker, the Mings Bight firefighter department spend countless hours of
raising funds for personal firefighting equipment, engage in training to keep
them abreast with current technology, and unselfishly serve their community with
passion and with pride.
At their thirtieth fireman's ball, it was gratifying to see Fire Chief Boyce
Mitchell and Fireman Eugene Regular honoured for their thirty years of service,
along with Deputy Chief and Mayor Danny Regular who was honoured for twenty-five
years of service. In addition, the firefighter of the year award was captured by
Evan Haas.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. colleagues to join me in congratulating the award
winners, and also in applauding the Mings Bight Volunteer Fire Department upon
reaching the thirty-year milestone of dedicated, unselfish, fire protection, not
only to their town but also to their region.
Thank you very much.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of The Straits & White
Bay North.
MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to congratulate Tracy Pittman, a
former resident of Cook's Harbour who recently received the Dominion Command
Bursary from the Royal Canadian Legion. Ms Pittman was one of two provincial
recipients who were presented with this annual award. Recipients must be
enrolled in a two-year program and be a child or a grandchild of a member of The
Royal Canadian Legion. The bursaries are presented across Canada and come from
the Poppy Trust funds.
Ms Pittman is currently studying midwifery at Ryerson University in Toronto
and plans to return to the Province to work when she has completed her course.
The $1,000 bursary will be used towards her studies.
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this House to join with me in
congratulating Ms Pittman on receiving this bursary and to wish her well in all
her future endeavours.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Grand
Falls-Windsor-Green Bay South.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, hon. colleagues, I rise in this House to congratulate Dr.
Michael Bland of Grand Falls-Windsor for being inducted into the Atlantic
Agricultural Hall of Fame.
Dr. Bland was born in England, served in the British Navy, and then went on
to become a veterinarian. In 1970 then moved to Newfoundland and Labrador, where
he worked for the Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Agriculture as the
first large animal veterinarian in Central Newfoundland.
He opened and operated Exploits Valley Animal Hospital, a commercial egg
layer production operation called Hamer Farm, and also started Elixir Organics
Ltd. which produces 4,000 sea-buckthorn trees, and is also raising organic beef.
Dr. Bland has been a member of many boards, such as, to name a few,
Newfoundland and Labrador Egg Producers Board, Newfoundland and Labrador Egg
Marketing Board, Central Newfoundland Mid-Island Egg Producers Co-op, the
Director of the Newfoundland and Labrador Veterinary Medical Association,
President of Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Agriculture, and President
of Wooddale Agriculture Society.
I would ask my hon. colleagues in the House of Assembly to join with me in
congratulating Dr. Michael Bland as being a very worthy inductee into the
Atlantic Agricultural Hall of Fame.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would also like to welcome two other guests who
are visiting us here today from the Town of Bishop's Falls, Mayor Bob Hobbs, and
the town manager, Randy Drover.
Welcome to the House of Assembly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS POTTLE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to acknowledge a
tremendous achievement.
Yesterday, it was my great honour to be on Parliament Hill in Ottawa to
represent the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and our Premier at an
historic announcement that marked a giant step forward in reaching a land claims
agreement with the Innu. I witnessed the completion of a financial agreement
between the federal government and the Innu Nation, signed by the hon. John
Duncan, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, and Joseph Riche,
Grand Chief of the Innu Nation.
Mr. Speaker, this agreement advances the Innu land claim agreement into the
final stages of completion, and it also serves as a major step forward for the
Lower Churchill Generation Project. I understand the Innu Nation is now making
preparations to bring the agreements arising from the Tshash Petapen or New Dawn
Agreement reached between the Innu and the Government of Newfoundland and
Labrador to its membership for a ratification vote.
Mr. Speaker, I must confess I am not sure there are words to express how I
felt standing in Ottawa yesterday, taking
part in an announcement that means so
much to the Innu people, to Labrador, and to our entire Province. As an
Aboriginal woman, I have some understanding of the great weight of
responsibility that lies on the shoulders of the Innu leadership in securing a
land claim. While they negotiate with the provincial and federal governments,
these dedicated men and women have to weigh what is best for their communities,
their loved ones families, husbands, wives, children and grandchildren while
acknowledging the proud legacy of their ancestors who walked Labrador for
thousands of years. A land claims agreement must take all of this into account,
and more.
As Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, I commend the Innu leadership and the
provincial government delegation which accompanied the Innu leadership to meet
with Minister Duncan to discuss and advocate for progress on the Innu land
claim.
Mr. Speaker, today, here we are, just a short time later, and history has
been made. I ask my hon. colleagues to join me and acknowledge this tremendous
accomplishment for the Innu people.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I am not clear if the standing ovation was for the minister who read the
statement or for the Innu Nation on achieving such a milestone after twenty
years.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, let me just say that we are very proud to
congratulate the Innu Nation of Labrador today on the tremendous milestone they
have reached. It has not come easy for them or for their people.
I remember the late 1980s when I worked in Goose Bay as a journalist, and I
saw the struggles of the Innu people then when low-level flying was starting to
take off in Goose Bay. They would camp at the end of the runway to make their
plea known to government: This is our land, and we deserve to be treated with
respect; and we deserve, Mr. Speaker, to be compensated for the impact that
civilization is having on the world as we know it.
I witnessed that for many years, Mr. Speaker, having lived in Labrador,
living amongst all three Aboriginal groups. I know and understand the tremendous
significance of the financial agreement that was reached yesterday between the
Mr. Speaker, the importance and the significance of the lawsuit that is being
launched today by the people of NunatuKavut, simply because they are today where
the Innu was nearly twenty years ago in demanding respect from their governments
for the occupancy and the developments of their lands.
Mr. Speaker, this is an historic milestone in many ways and I want to
congratulate Grand Chief Joseph Riche. I want to congratulate some of his
predecessors, Mark Nui and Peter Penashue who have been strong leaders of the
Innu Nation for a tremendous period of time; people like Ben Michel, who is no
longer with us but certainly made the presence of the Innu people known in
Labrador, in the Province and across the country. They have had tremendous
leadership in their community which has helped them reach the milestone they
have today.
Mr. Speaker, government likes to tie this to the Muskrat Falls deal, but I
want to give them a word of caution, this does not mean that the Innu has
already ratified a deal on the Muskrat Falls. I want you to pay close attention
to what they have said in their environmental hearings, the fact that they feel
there is more to be gained for their people, the fact that their communities,
like Natuashish, have been left out of any power plans for the future in that
region.
I ask the government to keep an open mind, keep your ears open to what the
demands of the Innu people are, because I think you will hear a lot more in the
days to come. Mr. Speaker, we congratulate them on this significant agreement
they have reached today.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy of her statement.
It is more than a pleasure to stand here today and to congratulate the Innu
people. I feel very privileged as a person from the Island of Newfoundland, that
my relationship with the Innu people goes right back to 1970 actually, when, as
a principal here in St. John's, I went into a school that had accepted four
young women from Davis Inlet to go to school in St. John's. One of those was Ms
Katie Rich. They have come a long way since that day forty-one years ago when
children were being sent out to go to school. It has been a long struggle for
them.
In the 1980s I was also privileged to be involved with them in a lot of
solidarity work as they did their efforts. I, too, am privileged to know how
much work has gone into this by the Innu Nation and the tremendous leadership
that these people have shown, and continue to show. I congratulate them on their
patience and on the long road that they have hoed as a people in Labrador, an
Aboriginal people of Labrador.
This is what yesterday was about; that if the Innu people become involved
with the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, with regard to Muskrat Falls, it
will be on their terms, it will be on their land, and it will be the way that
they want to do it. So I encourage us with patience as they go through that
process because patience is something one does have to have as people struggle
to find their voice and to make sure that their voice is heard.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, each member of this House of Assembly will
acknowledge the significant role municipalities have, and the important
contribution elected councillors and municipal administrative staff make to our
Province. Our government certainly recognizes the importance of these
individuals and has made a strong commitment to work with our partners,
Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador, the Combined Councils of Labrador, the
Professional Municipal Administrators and others to provide training on a wide
variety of matters important to the functioning of a municipality.
Last year, we provided approximately $100,000 in funding, including Matched
Training Funding to the Municipal Training and Development Corporation, to
provide training to councillors, town managers and town clerks. Financial
assistance for those working with a municipality so they may attend training
sessions throughout the Province was also a part of this funding.
The Department of Municipal Affairs is leading the way in the training which
is offered to the municipalities. We have stepped to the forefront and provided
sessions on important matters such as the Gas Tax Program, municipal budgeting,
Integrated Community Sustainability Plans, and Public Sector Accounting Board
Standards programs critical to the financial health of municipalities across
the Province. As well, my staff offered training sessions regarding water
quality, emergency response planning, the roles and responsibilities of
councillors and other topics as requested of us by our partners and their
membership.
In the last number of years, Mr. Speaker, we have organized approximately
ninety training sessions which have been attended by over 2,000 people. This is
no small feat but one I believe is having a direct impact upon our
municipalities.
Recently I had the privilege of attending the swearing-in of the inaugural
council of the Town of Fogo Island. At the community ceremony, Municipalities
Newfoundland and Labrador was represented by Mayor Al Hawkins of Grand
Falls-Windsor who stated that this government has had a better relationship with
municipalities than any he has experienced.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Such a statement is an important one and I believe is a
result of the engaging and collaborative approach we have undertaken with our
municipalities.
In the upcoming months, Mr. Speaker, more training opportunities are being
made available on topics such as councillor roles and responsibilities, and
municipal infrastructure roles and responsibilities. I encourage each of the 275
municipalities we have in Newfoundland and Labrador to contact the Department of
Municipal Affairs for further information and to take
part in these sessions.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for the District of The Straits & White Bay
North.
MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
First of all, I would like to thank the minister for an advance copy of his
statement. Certainly we want to acknowledge, as he suggested in the statement,
that as a Member of the House of Assembly, the significance of municipalities
and the important contribution that elected councillors make and in most cases
they are volunteers and the administrative staff as well that work in these
municipalities is very important to the functioning and the overall health and
well-being of the residents that they represent. Certainly, we want to
acknowledge that contribution today.
From the perspective of training, again, certainly training is critical in
any aspect of life. For the municipalities and their staff that are often under
resourced, the training dollars that are made available and the programs and so
on that the training encompasses are very important to their future and to their
well-being.
I would also suggest, to improve the health of municipalities, this
government needs to bring forth what it has been asking for, for some time: a
new fiscal arrangement with the municipalities, with MNL. Certainly, that would
be important to them.
I also would like to just make a note of other unincorporated municipalities.
This statement mentions water quality. I had the opportunity to meet with a
local service district just this past week. They have been on a boil order since
1997, continuing to have their water sampled and so on every thirty days,
whatever the timeline might be.
So there is a lot out there to be done. We acknowledge that training is a
good part of that, and certainly we would want to see us doing more.
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. Obviously what he
is announcing today is good, because the work that is being done by
Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador is essential work for the development
of our Province and especially for the smaller communities in our Province. So
money going into training for people who are involved in governance is
absolutely essential to the development of a basic municipal structure in this
Province.
We know that a lot of responsibilities have been put on municipalities, small
and large. At the same time that that has happened over the years we have had
the funding arrangement with municipalities change. So, I encourage this
government, and I encourage the minister, to look at the need for going back
into municipal grants and to making sure that the municipalities have enough
money to do the work that we expect of them.
Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador is certainly working with the
communities to help develop the ways in which they can work together. Even as
they come together in regional groupings and cooperate regionally, they still
need more resources to be able to do the work that we expect of them.
We cannot expect the smaller communities, for example, to be able to do the
upgrades to water and sewer. Even with the 90/10 it is too much for some of
them. Water is certainly the serious issue. Today is the World Water Day and I
know that the Minister of Environment has made a statement about it but we
still have approximately 230 communities who are regularly on boil water orders
in this Province. So, when we see that ended, then I will stand and congratulate
the minister.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?
The hon. the Minister of Labrador Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HICKEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise to inform hon. members of a unique and thrilling sporting event that
continues to attract international attention to Labrador the Cain's Quest
Snowmobile Endurance Race.
For countless generations, Labradorians have travelled throughout the Big
Land to trap and to hunt, to gather supplies and provisions. Today, the region
provides adventurers worldwide an opportunity like no other to celebrate this
proud heritage in a contest that is exciting, challenging and gruelling to the
extreme. A true test of the human spirit in the Labrador wild. One that serves
as a tribute to the men and women who walked this land before us.
The Cain's Quest Snowmobile Endurance Race is a 2,300 kilometre contest that
takes competitors on a course through some of the toughest, most rugged and
breathtaking, beautiful terrain in existence. It was pleasing to see so many
competitors from North America, and even as far away as France, take
part in
this competition. A total of twenty-six teams participated, also featuring a
strong representation from Labrador. Starting from Labrador City-Wabush, racers
headed to Schefferville, Kuujjuaq, back to Churchill Falls, before returning to
Labrador City.
With every race, there is a winner, and each competitor should be proud for
taking
part in such a challenging competition. Robert Gardner and Richard
Knipping of Maine were this year's winners. The finish was indeed exhilarating,
with the first and second-place teams only minutes apart. I was particularly
pleased to see the Labrador West team of brothers Gary and Chris Travers place
second, even after an accident at Churchill Falls caused some bruised ribs for
Gary. Congratulations, gentlemen, on a very fine showing. All of Newfoundland
and Labrador congratulates you.
Mr. Speaker, an event of this calibre is a tremendous undertaking that takes
months of co-ordinating, planning and preparation. The Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador is proud to partner with the Cain's Quest Snowmobile
Endurance Race event. Our investment of $130,000 is assisting Cain's Quest to
showcase Labrador far beyond our provincial borders, both for extreme sports and
adventure tourism.
This world-class competition continues to break new ground for extreme
sporting in Labrador.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the hon. minister for an advance copy of his statement, and certainly
we are pleased to see that government funds events like Cain's Quest Snowmobile
Endurance Race in Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, this particular race started out like a lot of other events in
our Province but has grown to be one of the most popular snowmobile racing or
endurance races in North America. It attracts people from all over, and not just
people to compete but people who come to watch, people who come to be
volunteers, people who come to get engaged in the whole process of competition
like that.
We are very proud of this event in Labrador, Mr. Speaker, and I want to
congratulate all of the people who have been involved in organizing it. I think
that snowmobiling right across this Province, Mr. Speaker, is an industry that
is yet untapped in terms of its tourism potential. I find it very disheartening
when I hear of people like the Snowmobile Federation talk about the challenges
they have had this year, because the reality is that snowmobiling brings money
into rural communities right across Newfoundland and Labrador. It is a great
winter tourism activity. It is one that we need to continue to invest in. I
think we need a strategy in this Province, Mr. Speaker, in terms of where we
will take the snowmobile industry in tourism context over the next few years. I
think we need to invest in our trails and in our infrastructure so that we can
afford to have events like this, not just in Labrador but in other areas of the
Province, an event similar to it.
Mr. Speaker, I am glad to see the race went off good in Labrador again this
year. I congratulate those who took home awards as a result of it. I am glad to
see there were twenty-six teams participating because it shows that the interest
is continuing to grow.
Mr. Speaker, Labrador, not unlike the rest of the Province, has some gaps in
its snowmobile trails. Because the government opposite withdrew funding for many
of those trails across Labrador, there were places this year where we did not
see the trails groomed, we did not see the trails open and marked in the way
that they should have been. Mr. Speaker, we think it is a step backward, not a
step forward, and I would ask the government to have more vision than that and
start looking at this as a real icon in the tourism industry, and not just an ad
hoc piece that we leave to others to develop with no leadership (inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement.
I think everybody in the Province now follows very closely Cain's Quest when
it is taking part. I am sure when it first started it may only have been people
in Labrador. I think two years ago I was actually in Labrador when it was
starting and staying in the home of parents of one of the participants. That
certainly got my attention going. It is a wonderful event. It is something that
is very important for winter tourism, especially in Labrador, and it is the kind
of thing that government should continue to fund.
I do want to take this opportunity to congratulate Gary and Chris Travers, in
particular, being the two from this Province who came in second, and a very,
very close second. It is good to know that people are interested in keeping this
going and that we had so many teams taking part this year.
I will use this opportunity to give a message to people here on the Island,
that the Big Land is a wonderful place to visit, whether it is summer or winter.
I encourage people here on the Island, when looking at taking a holiday just do
not stay here on the Island, think about going to Labrador. There are certainly
more snowmobilers here on the Island who probably should think about taking
part
in Cain's Quest as well.
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.
My question is for the Premier. In the Throne Speech yesterday you wrote
that, "Every year, we generate a good portion of our electricity on the Island
from the oil-fired plant in Holyrood." A good portion was the words that you
use, but is it not true that just 15 per cent to 20 per cent of the Island's
electricity comes from Holyrood and most of that is used in the winter months?
I ask the Premier today: How much of our electricity is actually generated at
Holyrood and at what periods?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted with the question because in her reply to the
Speech from the Throne yesterday there was so much misinformation and
contradictions, it would have been hard to pick anything out of that to respond
to.
Mr. Speaker, what happens in Holyrood depends on a number of things. One of
the most important things that it depends on is the hydrology, which means how
much rain we have in this Province. The more rain we have, the less amount of
electricity that has to be generated in Holyrood. Mr. Speaker, it changes year
over year. It has been affected, the last number of years, by the fact that we
have two pulp and paper mills shut down and we have had a lot of rain.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Maybe we could get to the facts and get a straight answer from the Premier.
Is it true that only 15 per cent to 20 per cent of the consumption of power on
the Island actually comes from Holyrood, and is it true that most of that power
is consumed during the winter months?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Yes, Mr. Speaker. We have power on the Island
generated from hydro and also generated from Holyrood. Mr. Speaker, more power
is consumed in the winter months in Newfoundland and Labrador because that is
when the greatest demand is, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Either the Premier does not know the answer and is misleading the people in
the Throne Speech, Mr. Speaker, -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS JONES: -or she is refusing to provide the information here in the
House of Assembly. Mr. Speaker, the truth of the matter is that most of the
electricity consumed on the Island portion of the Province is clean, green
hydropower; power that comes from Cat Arm and Bay d'Espoir and other hydro
sites.
Mr. Speaker, my question is this. Last week when Emera President, Chris
Huskilson, told a business group in Halifax that Newfoundland only needs Muskrat
power in the winter, I ask you Premier: Was he lying or did he have his facts
straight?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, the use of Holyrood is very much
determined by the amount of rainfall; but, yes, Mr. Speaker, Holyrood is used
primarily in the winter. Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the fact that we
generate most of our electricity in Newfoundland and Labrador from green energy
sources. Mr. Speaker, that is one of the reasons why we want to develop Muskrat
Falls, so that continues. As demand grows, Mr. Speaker, we want to be able to
provide electricity to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, in not only a
cost-effective way but in an environmentally friendly way as well.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, given the fact that we use less than 20 per cent
of the energy coming out of Holyrood is what we consume, given the fact that we
use most of it only in the winter months, confirmed by the CEO of Emera and by
the Premier today, given that, I ask the question: Isn't $6.2 billion a lot of
money to pay for 20 per cent of the electricity we need for only a few months
out of the year?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition's lack of
vision is never more clearly demonstrated than in the statement she just made.
Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador is growing; the demand for electricity
is growing. Mr. Speaker, they are so proud of Voisey's Bay. We need 85 megawatts
of power for Long Harbour.
Mr. Speaker, what is her answer? How is she going to grow Newfoundland and
Labrador? Because anybody who listens to her, there are no answers, no vision,
in anything that she presents.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We will not grow Newfoundland and Labrador based on gouging the people of
this Province, I say to you, Premier, like you are about to do: jacking up their
light bill, leaving a debt in this Province for the next five generations of
children to have to pay down. That is the kind of actions that your government
is taking.
You want to talk about vision, Mr. Speaker? Yesterday in the House, the
Premier heckled that the only way to decommission Holyrood was Muskrat Falls. We
know that there are other options for clean, cheaper power, Mr. Speaker. Is she
not aware of an inventory that was commissioned by Newfoundland and Labrador
Hydro in which 160 small hydro sites, with a total capacity of 850 megawatts,
were deemed feasible on the Island portion of the Province? All, I say to the
Premier, could be developed and provide cheaper power to the people of this
Province.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, I do not know where she is getting her
information, but she really ought to check her sources.
Mr. Speaker, if we do not develop Muskrat Falls, we will have to develop
Island Pond, Round Pond; we will have to bring on some wind, and we will have to
build more thermal generation. We will have to do precipitators and scrubbers at
Holyrood. The price tag of that alone is $3.3 billion, Mr. Speaker, and we are
still tied to oil, which is forecast to continue to rise.
Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro did its research. Mr. Speaker,
Nalcor knows of what it speaks, Mr. Speaker. Muskrat Falls is the most
cost-effective green energy solution for the demands of 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.
Nalcor might have done their homework, but the Premier did not do hers,
because if she had, she would know today that in Newfoundland and Labrador
Hydro's own documents is the exact information I am providing in the House today
on the assessment of other hydro projects in the Province. Mr. Speaker, it also
states what the capital cost is of developing these particular projects, and
that they range anywhere from $3 million to $5 million per megawatt, compared to
the $7.5 million per megawatt for Muskrat Falls power.
Premier, why do you insist on stating that Muskrat Falls is the only and the
cheapest way to decommission Holyrood when, clearly, it is not and it is in your
government's own documents?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, Nalcor Energy is required, by
legislation in this Province, to provide to the Public Utilities Board a plan
for meeting the energy needs of today and into the future. They have to do that
in the most cost-effective way, Mr. Speaker. That plan is laid before the PUB,
analyzed by the PUB, and would not be accepted by the PUB if a more
cost-effective solution was available.
Mr. Speaker, we have spent ten years planning this project. Nalcor knows of
which it speaks, so does the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr.
Speaker. Muskrat Falls is a good project 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.
It is actually laughable when you hear the Premier say we have been ten years
planning this project. They have only been in government for eight of those
years, Mr. Speaker, to start with. The other piece of it, if that is the best
they could come up with in ten years, I suggest they take another ten years and
go and have another look at it because the project they are proposing is going
to gouge the taxpayers of this particular Province, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the Throne Speech the government
talked about the fact that replacing Holyrood was going to be somewhere between
$600 million and $800 million. We heard the Premier today say that cost was
going to be somewhere around $3 billion. We have heard a number of figures out
there in the media, everything from over $1 billion to $3 billion, to $300
million which was in one of their submissions to the PUB.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member to pose her question.
MS JONES: I ask the Premier today, for the record, for the people of the
Province: Can you tell us what the number is today to do the work that needs to
be done at Holyrood?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am glad she had the name of the CEO of Emera right today, but
the rest of it is incorrect.
Mr. Speaker, it will cost between $600 million and $800 million to install
precipitators and scrubbers and to do some renovations at Holyrood. Mr. Speaker,
that does not clean up the greenhouse gas problem we have there. Within the next
several decades, Holyrood will have to be replaced completely. The $3.3 billion
includes the development of Round Pond, Island Pond, the precipitators and
scrubbers in extent and renovations for Holyrood, as well as some wind and
thermal generation, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, they toss around numbers that suit them on any
given day to try to sell their concept to the people of the Province. Mr.
Speaker, one day we are talking about cleaning precipitators and replacing them
at Holyrood, the next day they are talking about replacing the plant which is
something that might occur twenty, thirty, or forty years into the future. Mr.
Speaker, they are confusing the people of the Province with their numbers.
Let me ask you this question, Mr. Speaker, because she talks about her good
friend Mr. Huskilson in Emera Energy, the President of Emera Energy, the one we
are giving all the power to and the good deal; grateful, appreciative
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that we are. Mr. Speaker, he said in his
remarks that there is no capacity to move excess power from Muskrat Falls
through the Maritimes and into New England. According to him, Mr. Speaker
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member to pose her question and if she would kindly refrain
from reading direct from a document that was written by others.
I ask the hon. member, if she has a question, to pose it now.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, but these are notes that I wrote myself
and I am just referring to them.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. member to pose her question.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is to the Premier and it is this: If the CEO of Emera is saying
that they do not have the transmission capacity to transport Muskrat Falls
power, how do you expect to get it to market without building new transmission
lines across the Maritimes?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the Opposition is doing
to Mr. Huskilson what she does to me on a regular basis, I can tell you that
what she has put forward has likely never fallen from the man's lips.
All I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, is that the Maritime link has the capacity
to carry over five megawatts of power from Muskrat Falls. Mr. Speaker, the one
terawatt of power that we have sold to Emera will use 33 per cent of that
capacity. The remaining 67 per cent of that capacity is available to
Newfoundland and Labrador to wheel power through that system into the Maritimes
and into the United States, Mr. Speaker. We know that capacity exists.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
If the Premier wants to confirm what her good friend in Nova Scotia is saying
the one she is giving the power to she can look in TheChronicleHerald
because all of his speech is outlined there, I say to you, Premier.
Mr. Speaker, he is saying if they had to move 60 per cent of Muskrat power at
any time they could not do so because they do not have the capability to do
that. He is also saying that to build more transmission lines across the
Maritimes would be too expensive.
I ask you again, Premier: Tell the people of the Province how you expect to
transport that power and to sell it to the US, which is what you and your
counterparts of Nalcor have been saying?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we have an agreement with Emera that we can use their
infrastructure to move the 1.9 terawatt of power through the Maritimes and, Mr.
Speaker, have access into Maine because of their commercial arrangements and the
fact they own an electricity company in Maine.
Mr. Speaker, on top of that, unlike any other place where we would have to
wheel power, we would have to pay for that capacity all year. In this agreement,
Mr. Speaker, we only have to pay for that transmission when we are using it,
saving millions and millions of dollars for the people of Newfoundland and
Labrador.
On top of that, Mr. Speaker, Emera has committed to us to build redundancy in
their line so that if some extraordinary situation arose where we could not get
it along one pathway, they will build the second pathway for us at no cost, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Again, we do not have a clear answer as to how you are going to get that
power to market. We know there is no customer and I guess the reason there is no
customer is because there is no way to get it there. When the President of Emera
is in TheChronicleHerald saying that they do not have the capacity, it is
hard to sit here and believe that all of a sudden all of this has been worked
out in advance. Why would the president be out there saying that today, Premier,
if that was not the case? Why would they be saying the capacity does not exist
and that there is not an access if indeed there was one?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition assumes
that the same amount of ignorance exists on this side of the House, or within
Nalcor, as exists in her office.
Mr. Speaker, we understand very well what the transmission capacity is, not
only in Newfoundland and Labrador but in the Maritimes and through Quebec and
Ontario. We have spent years doing those studies. That is all part of the open
access transmission tariff process. You have to understand how much capacity
exists in order to apply for it, Mr. Speaker, or to commit to build it new. Mr.
Speaker, we are not going to commit to markets in 2017 today. We are not going
to negotiate it. If we developed everything in Eastern Canada, we would not be
able to supply 25 per cent of the demand in New England today.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Premier might try and sell a bill of goods to her own crowd on the other
side but she is not selling me a bill of goods, Mr. Speaker, because we know the
difference.
Again, Mr. Speaker, we are getting more information out of Emera, our good
friends we are giving power to in Nova Scotia, than we are from Nalcor or the
Premier.
Mr. Speaker, my question is this: Under the term sheet that was signed in
November it is clearly stated that Emera Energy will be the 100 per cent owner
of the Maritime link running from Newfoundland to Nova Scotia. Given that Emera
owns the link outright, why would you and your government agree to pay half of
all the cost overruns on Emera's $1.2 billion line?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, Emera will own the line for thirty-five years, at which point it
will be turned over to Nalcor; the people of Newfoundland and Labrador will own
it after thirty-five years. Mr. Speaker, they will use 33 per cent of the
capacity on that line for thirty-five years. Mr. Speaker, we will own 67 per
cent of the capacity on that line for free for thirty-five years. Then we will
own 100 per cent of the line.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Why would you, Premier, and your government agree to pay 50 per cent of the
cost of the overrun on a line that Emera Energy is going to own? Why should the
taxpayers of Newfoundland and Labrador have to foot the bill for 50 per cent of
the overrun cost?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, that is not the total arrangement on overrun. The first 5 per
cent of the overrun will be paid by Emera Energy, the second 5 per cent will be
paid by Nalcor, and beyond that they will split the cost 50-50. So you really
should get your facts straight.
Mr. Speaker, as I said
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: 33 per cent of the line will be used by Emera
Energy for their one terawatt of power; 67 per cent of that line is under the
total control of Nalcor and will be used to transmit our electricity to markets
in Atlantic Canada or in the Eastern United States.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Why would you agree to cover 50 per cent of the overrun cost on a line that
Emera is going to own? Why would you want to do that, to guarantee the profit of
a private corporation in Nova Scotia, and have the taxpayers in this Province
pay for it?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, effectively, we will own 67 per cent of
that line from the day it comes into operation for thirty-five years for
thirty-five years at which point we will own 100 per cent of the Maritime Link
the Maritime Link, Mr. Speaker. Sixty-seven per cent is completely under the
control of Newfoundland and Labrador; after thirty-five years
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: we own 100 per cent of the line.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, for thirty-five years, a private corporation in
Nova Scotia is going to own the Maritime Link. They are going to get free power
for the customers of Nova Scotia because of it. If they go over their $1.2
billion in building that line, we are going to pay for half the cost here in
Newfoundland and Labrador. Get this, Mr. Speaker, get this, because not only are
we talking about cost overruns here, but if the operating costs on the Maritime
Link comes in at 20 per cent more than Emera can recover from taxpayers in Nova
Scotia, Nalcor has agreed to cover the shortfall.
Will you confirm that is true, Premier?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, this project will provide 824 megawatts
of power, of which 20 per cent will be going to Emera, 80 per cent will be under
the control of Nalcor, and therefore the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, the capital cost breakout: 80 per cent for the people of
Newfoundland and Labrador, 20 per cent for Emera. Mr. Speaker, the maintenance
and operation cost breakout: 80 per cent for the people of Newfoundland and
Labrador, and 20 per cent for Emera over the life of the project.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
All great spin, Premier, you know, sell the bill of goods; do whatever you
need to do. But let me ask you this question: Why are we guaranteeing a rate of
return for Emera to the point that if there is 20 per cent more that Emera has
to recover from its ratepayers that we are on the hook in Newfoundland and
Labrador? We are going to cover the shortfall. Why did you agree to that?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Mr. Speaker, as I have said time and time again in
this House, the costs of this project have been allocated fairly between Emera
and Nalcor. Twenty per cent of the cost, 20 per cent of the operations, 20 per
cent of the power goes to Emera. Eighty per cent of the cost, 80 per cent of the
maintenance and operations, 80 percent of the power comes to Newfoundland and
Labrador.
It is a great deal for Emera, there is no question about it. We believe in
fair deals. We know what unfair deals do to relationships, Mr. Speaker. We are
not going to negotiate such a deal with anybody Mr. Speaker, but we are going to
negotiate fair deals protecting the resources of the people of Newfoundland and
Labrador. That is what we have done in Muskrat Falls.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we have a lot of questions on this, and we will be getting to
them over the course of the session of the House.
Mr. Speaker, this Premier has been trying to distance herself from the
secrecy of her predecessor, and her first decision was the secret appointment of
Ms Elizabeth Matthews to the vice-chair of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador
Offshore Petroleum Board. Now, Mr. Speaker, government usually floods the world
everyday with press releases and announcements and statements in the media, but
we never heard a word of this one. Not one.
So I ask the Premier today, what was the process for considering Ms Matthews
for this appointment, and did you discuss this with the former Premier before
making the appointment?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
PREMIER DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, Ms Matthews is a highly competent, intelligent, articulate,
skilled individual, and I make no apologies for making her nomination to the
C-NLOPB. Members of the Opposition certainly should be familiar with her many
talents, given that she worked for them for a number of years, and as I
understand it, was a very valued employee.
Mr. Speaker, they also ought to know that any appointment to a
vice-chairmanship or chairmanship is a two-step process. You first nominate to
the board, then, because it is a joint decision on the vice-chairmanship, it has
to go to the federal government for concurrence. Once that is received, Mr.
Speaker, an announcement will be made in due course.
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, after the tragic Cougar Flight 491 crash in 2009, Sikorsky
brought out a newly designed replacement main gearbox which must be inspected
every ten hours because it still cracks. In December of last year, an
international aviation magazine reported on Sikorsky's plans to introduce a
third main gearbox, but last month Sikorsky said this new gearbox will not be
available for a couple of years.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier, if safety truly is the number one priority of
government, as she claims, then what is government doing to address the
continuing serious problems with the Sikorsky S-92?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SKINNER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, this government has endorsed the Wells Commission
recommendations all twenty-nine recommendations in response to the
unfortunate tragedy with the crash of the Cougar helicopter. As we are aware,
there was a Transportation Safety Board report that we are reviewing, and we
have also initiated our own separate independent review through Captain Mark
Turner.
So in terms of answering the question, what are doing to ensure safety, all
of those, and anything else that we see that we can do, we will certainly do in
consultation with the other regulatory bodies to make sure that the offshore is
as safe as possible for the people who work there.
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.
I point out to the minister that I was asking a specific question with regard
to safety and the Sikorsky helicopter. He mentions the Transportation Safety
Board. Yes, Mr. Speaker, the Transportation Safety Board did have
recommendations, one of which was that all category A helicopters, including the
S-92A, prove that they are able to fly for at least thirty minutes following a
massive loss of main gearbox oil. Mr. Speaker, Sikorsky will not specify the
run-dry capability of its latest gearbox, and that will not be ready anyway for
at least two years.
Mr. Speaker, workers in the offshore must be protected; they are asking for
the protection. They must have reliable helicopters. So I ask the Premier, if
safety really is the number one priority, as she continues to say and the
minister has just said, then will she demand that replacement helicopters be
brought in?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, let us be clear: safety is the number one priority and the
actions of this government have shown that we are concerned about safety and
that we are responding to safety by the adoption of the twenty-nine
recommendations that we have.
Mr. Speaker, I appeared before a committee of the House of Commons to discuss
safety and had a discussion, which the member opposite was also present at, with
people about safety down there, made a number of recommendations. We will
continue to respond as we have in a very proactive way to ensure that the
offshore and the people who work offshore are as safe as they can be given that
they are working in a very challenging environment. We have endorsed all of the
recommendations of the Wells Commission, I have said. We have our own separate
Turner Report that is out there. We are doing what we can to ensure the safety
of our workers, Mr. Speaker.
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, I am receiving phone calls and e-mails from workers on a daily
basis and they do not feel safe. They are saying that they do not feel that
going back and forth in Sikorsky helicopters is safe for them, so I ask the
Premier: If this knowledge is public and it is, I am able to find this
information about Sikorsky why is this government keeping the continuing
serious problems with the gearbox of the S-92 helicopter from the public? Let
people know this is a serious issue and deal with it.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SKINNER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, this government, as I have already indicated I am not quite
sure where the member is coming from that we are keeping some information from
the public, I am not sure exactly what she references by that we have already
said publicly that we support the twenty-nine recommendations of Justice Wells.
We have said that we support the separation of the C-NLOPB regulatory and safety
agencies, so we are supporting a separate safety agency. We are engaging with
the federal government on the creation of that separate safety agency and we
will do everything that we can within our power to ensure that the workers who
are working offshore are as safe as they can be. I also have spoken to workers
who are working offshore and they are very happy with and very supportive of the
actions that this government have taken and are asking us to continue to stay on
the same course that we are on.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
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.
MR. HARDING: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand today to table the
2011-2013 Business Plan for the Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Further tabling of documents?
Notices of Motion.
Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.
Petitions.
Orders of the Day.
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board, to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The
Labour-Sponsored Venture Capital Tax Credit Act, Bill 3, and I further move that
the said bill be now read a first time.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the hon. the Government House
Leader shall have leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The
Labour-Sponsored Venture Capital Tax Credit Act, Bill 3, and that Bill 3 be now
read a first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 3 be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board to
introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Labour-Sponsored Venture Capital Tax
Credit Act", carried. (Bill 3)
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Labour-Sponsored Venture Capital Tax
Credit Act. (Bill 3)
MR. SPEAKER: Bill 3 has now been read a first time.
When shall Bill 3 be read a second time?
MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 3 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of
Government Services, to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend
The Public Accountants Act, Bill 4, and I further move that the said bill be now
read a first time.
MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded that Bill 4,
An Act To
Amend The Public Accountants Act, be now read a first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 4 be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Government Services to introduce a bill, "An
Act To Amend The Public Accountants Act", carried. (Bill 4)
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Public Accountants Act. (Bill 4)
MR. SPEAKER: Bill 4 has now been read a first time.
When shall Bill 4 be read a second time?
MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 4 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Health
and Community Services, to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To
Amend The Smoke-Free Environment Act, 2005, Bill 5, and I further move that the
said bill be now read a first time.
MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved by the hon. the Government House Leader
that Bill 5,
An Act To Amend The Smoke-Free Environment Act, 2005, be now read a
first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 5 be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services to introduce a
bill, "An Act To Amend The Smoke-Free Environment Act, 2005", carried. (Bill 5)
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Smoke-Free Environment Act, 2005.
(Bill 5)
MR. SPEAKER: Bill 5 has now been read a first time.
When shall Bill 5 be read a second time?
MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 5 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Municipal
Affairs, to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The Standard
Time Act, Bill 6, and I further move that the said bill be now read a first
time.
MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded that the hon. the
Government House Leader shall have leave to introduce Bill 6,
An Act To Amend
The Standard Time Act, and that Bill 6 be now read a first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 6 be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs to introduce a bill, "An
Act To Amend The Standard Time Act", carried. (Bill 6)
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Standard Time Act. (Bill 6)
MR. SPEAKER: Bill 6 has now been read a first time.
When shall Bill 6 be read a second time?
MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 6 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Municipal
Affairs, to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To Amend The
Municipalities Act, 1999, Bill 7, and I further move that the said bill be now
read a first time.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved by the hon. the Government House Leader that
Bill 7,
An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999, be now read a first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 7 be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs to introduce a bill, "An
Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999", carried. (Bill 7)
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999. (Bill 7)
MR. SPEAKER: Bill 7 has now been read a first time.
When shall Bill 7 be read a second time?
MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 7 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Justice
and Attorney General, to ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,
An Act To
Repeal The Law Reform Commission Act, Bill 8, and I further move that the said
bill be now read a first time.
MR. SPEAKER: It is properly moved and seconded by the hon. the Government
House Leader that Bill 8,
An Act To Repeal The Law Reform Commission Act, be now
read a first time.
Is it the pleasure of the House that Bill 8 be now read a first time?
All those in favour, aye'.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.
The motion is carried.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to introduce a
bill, "An Act To Repeal The Law Reform Commission Act", carried. (Bill 8)
CLERK: A bill,
An Act To Repeal The Law Reform Commission Act. (Bill 8)
MR. SPEAKER: Bill 8 has now been read a first time.
When shall Bill 8 be read a second time?
MS BURKE: Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Tomorrow.
On motion, Bill 8 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I wish to inform the House that I have received a message from His Honour the
Lieutenant Governor.
MR. SPEAKER: I ask all members to rise.
The letter is dated March 21, 2011.
As Lieutenant Governor of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, I
transmit a request to appropriate sums required for the Public Service of the
Province for the year ending 31 March 2012, by way of Interim Supply, and in
accordance with the provisions of
section 54 and 90 of the Constitution Act,
1867, I recommend this request to the House of Assembly.
Sgd.:______________________________
John C. Crosbie, PC, OC, ONL, QC
Lieutenant Governor
Please be seated.
The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice
and Attorney General, that the Message, together with a bill, be referred to the
Committee of Supply.
MR. SPEAKER: The motion by the hon. the Minister of Finance and President
of Treasury Board is that the Message, together with a bill, be referred to a
Committee of Supply 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 on
Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.
Committee of the Whole on Supply
CHAIR (T. Osborne): Order, please!
We are now considering the related resolution and Bill 2,
An Act For Granting
To Her Majesty Certain Sums Of Money For Defraying Certain Expenses Of The
Public Service For The Financial Year Ending March 31, 2012 And For Other
Purposes Relating To The Public Service.
Resolution
"That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide for the granting to
Her Majesty for defraying certain expenses of the Public Service for the
financial year ending March 31, 2012 the sum of $2,669,600,600."
CHAIR: Shall the resolution carry?
The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Before I get into my remarks on Interim Supply, I would like to offer my
congratulations as well to the new Premier on becoming the new Premier. She was
the Premier during the last session when we were here, and since that time she
is now unanimously selected by the members of my party, and the members of this
side of the House, as being the new Premier. I want to wish her well as the
first woman Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, and point out the fact, as the
Leader of the Opposition mentioned yesterday, there are now three women leading
the major parties of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We enter upon a
very new and interesting age, and based on Question Period today, I am sure that
the days ahead will continue to be interesting.
I want to join with those in welcoming back to the House of Assembly the
Leader of the Opposition. She was certainly missed, and the fact that she is now
back, I am sure that
MR. KENNEDY: I did not miss you, Yvonne.
MR. MARSHALL: Well, apart from the Minister of Health, most of us are
very pleased to see the Leader of the Opposition back in the House again. The
Leader of the Opposition has always impressed me by her ability to come into
this House on any given day and get up and make five or six speeches on many
different topics. I was kind of disappointed yesterday when I saw her actually
read a speech. I was going to yell out I wonder who her speech writer was. I
think she should fire him because I think he probably goes by the name of
Herbert Hoover, based on what I heard yesterday. Anyway, we will leave that
debate for another time.
I want to congratulate the hon. Member for Conception Bay East & Bell Island
on his election to the House of Assembly -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: - and his taking his seat here in the House. He is no doubt
an excellent public speaker and I certainly look forward to hearing from him on
many occasions as he fights for the people of his district.
Again, I want to congratulate my neighbour from the other side of the border
in Corner Brook from Humber West. As you saw when he came into the House
yesterday, he is the type of man who lets nothing get in his way. When he was
walking up to be introduced to the Speaker yesterday the table and chairs were
in his way and he threw them out of his way and he got where he wanted to get. I
say the people of Humber West are going to be very ably served by the hon.
Member for Humber West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: I enjoyed the Speech from the Throne yesterday. I like the
concept that we built a foundation over the past eight years, a tremendous
foundation under the leadership of the former Premier. That foundation has
enabled us to run surpluses in this Province instead of deficits, and those
surpluses in turn, those five surpluses - we have had four, and I can tell you
as I said at midyear, this year will be the fifth. Out of the last six years,
there will be five surpluses which enable us to lower our debt, which has been
lowered by one-third. It has allowed us to make our tax system competitive. It
has given us reliable infrastructure, minimal red tape, progressive public
services. We now have the fiscal capacity that we can do a very important thing,
and that is to leverage our non-renewable resources from the oil and to leverage
those into revenues coming from renewable resources such as the hydro potential
of the Lower Churchill, Muskrat Falls, Gull Island and then eventually we will
see the power from the Upper Churchill be repatriated to the people of this
Province.
When we started this process today - this is the process of Interim Supply -
the process could not start without the approval of the Lieutenant Governor.
That is set out in the Constitution of Canada, the Constitution Act of 1867,
which says it is not lawful for - with the wording of
section 9, it would not be
lawful for this House to pass a resolution, an address, a bill and an
appropriation of any part of public revenue that has not first been recommended
to the House by a message from the Lieutenant Governor. I learned that for the
first time last year, and that was the message that His Honour, the Speaker
read.
Now we are into Interim Supply. As everyone knows - and I will say this for
the benefit of the new members and for people who may be in the galleries and
people who are watching it on television - this government cannot spend any
money unless the appropriations are first approved by the elected
representatives of the people elected to this House of Assembly. What we have to
do each year, we come in with what is known as the Budget bill, more formally
known as the main Supply bill. We bring the main Supply bill before this
Assembly and we ask the people of this House, the elected representatives of the
people, to approve our spending for the year. The year means the fiscal year,
which is from April 1 to March 31 of the following year. For the year 2010-2011,
the fiscal year we are in right now that will come to an end on March 31; money
will run out on that day. That is the Budget bill, the Supply bill that was
passed last year, or I should say this fiscal year.
The Minister of Finance will bring forward the main Supply bill, the Budget
bill. Then that Budget bill is going to be debated for, I think it is about
seventy hours. I looked at my notes from last year and it said seventy-five
hours. I do not think that is correct, it is seventy. There will be lots of
debate and there will be the Estimates seventy-five. There will be Estimates,
committees will meet to discuss the Estimates and debate will take place. At
about seventy-five hours we will ultimately have a vote on spending for the
year; but, of course, in the meantime the money runs out. So we are here today
asking for what is called Interim Supply, which is money to pay the bills of the
government for the next three months while we debate and ultimately pass the
main Budget or main Supply bill.
We are seeking this year, in Interim Supply, the sum of approximately $2.7
billion which represents about 36 per cent of the 2010-2011 budgeted Current and
Capital Account, Gross Expenditures. This, of course, will provide departments
and public bodies with sufficient cash flow dollars to manage expenditures for
the period April 1, 2011 to June 30, 2011, which is the first quarter of the
fiscal year. More than one-quarter of the Budget is required for those items
which will need to be expended early in the year, as well as to provide for the
calling and the awarding of tenders and the encumbering of funds.
Mr. Chairman, this is an increase of $271 million, or 11 per cent to Interim
Supply being requested this year over what was requested last year. This
includes provision for increased infrastructure spending, annualization of the
2010-2011 Budget decisions, salary increases and other program growth. Again,
the money is to keep the government going with ongoing housekeeping
expenditures, including funding for six pay periods and funding requirements
applicable to the 2011-2012 fiscal year.
I am advised by the Comptroller General that this legislation needs to be
passed and receive royal assent by March 24, 2011 in order to allow sufficient
time to meet the payroll, to meet the income support cheques, and other cheques
that will have to be sent out to rural parts of the Province and Labrador in
time for April 1, 2011.
Mr. Chair, in getting ready for the Budget and of course, the Interim
Supply monies that are approved here in this House will be subtracted from the
monies that are approved in the main Supply bill, which of course is the Budget.
In preparing for that, it is customary for the Finance Minister to travel around
the Province and hold what are called pre-Budget consultations. This year, I
continued that practice. I know that there are people in the media, particularly
The Telegram , that every year write the same editorial which says that
this is a waste of time, that the Budget is already done; and they are wrong.
They are wrong, Mr. Chair.
I had the opportunity to go to Labrador West and to Happy Valley-Goose Bay. I
like to mix it up; I do not like to go to the same places every year. So, this
year I went to Port Saunders. We did Corner Brook, Stephenville, Deer Lake,
Grand Falls, and Gander. We went down to St. Alban's for the first time this
year. We went to Marystown, Clarenville, and there were two sessions held here
in St. John's
MR. F. COLLINS: Placentia (inaudible).
MR. MARSHALL: - and Placentia, of course. Yes, the hon. the Minister of
Justice we did go to Placentia and had a very good meeting there.
Last year, I went to Springdale for the first time. What I heard in
Springdale was different from anywhere else I heard in Newfoundland and Labrador
because they said they did not want any money. They said: Balance your books.
They said: Tell us what the rules are, then get out of our way and let us create
jobs and employment for the people of the Province. That was Springdale.
This year, I went to Baie Verte and heard representations from their very
talented Member of the House of Assembly who talked to us about the need for
medical facilities in that community.
Mr. Chair, we have, as I indicated, around four consecutive surpluses and we
are going to have another one this year. At the beginning of this year,
2010-2011, we forecast a deficit of $194 million, but by mid-year, based on
steps that we had taken in 2009, 2010, and 2011 by my colleague the present
Minister of Health and steps we took in this Budget, our economy started firing
on all cylinders. As a result of that, more and more revenues started coming in.
As our Gross Domestic Product went up because our economy was growing, after
losing 10 per cent the previous year, growing by about 5.4 per cent this year,
what had happened is that our fiscal revenue started increasing because the
economy was growing. We had more personal income tax than we expected, higher
sales tax than we expected, higher corporate income tax than we expected. As a
result of that, instead of a $194 million deficit, we were forecasting at
mid-year a $12 million surplus, and we all know what has happened since that
time.
Well, I can tell you what you do not know, and that is that the revenues
increased even more, because of the economy, because of the fact that the
Newfoundland economy was recovering. You may recall, I know the Government House
Leader would remember last year when we were doing this, when we were at this
stage, we were not sure what was going to happen. The previous year we had seen
a major recession, but we did not know what was happening at the beginning of
this year. We knew we were back in recovery, but we kept hearing words like
uncertainty, that the recovery was very uncertain. Then it was increasingly
uncertain and that it was fragile and that there was not much traction.
As a result of that, we were trying to determine what the best fiscal policy
for the people of this Province was, and whether we should continue to stimulate
or whether we should go back to a balanced budget or a surplus. We decided that
we would continue to stimulate the economy, and we deliberately planned a
deficit of $194 million in order to provide jobs and opportunities for
Newfoundland and Labrador families. Fortunately, things worked out, the economy
grew. We did not have to raise taxes; we did not have to cut spending to balance
the books. The economy grew. Because the economy was growing, it generated new
income and enabled us to have a surplus now the fifth surplus in the last six
years.
Mr. Chair, in addition to that, we lowered our net debt by about a third. It
was $12 billion. That is what the taxpayers of this Province owed, $12 billion.
It has gotten down now to $8.2 billion, reduced by a third. The surpluses that
we ran have now given us a flexibility to do things that we could not do before.
The federal government, and other governments in the country, are running
deficits this year. They are making efforts to attempt to get back to surplus,
and intend to do it over a number of years. The federal government is having
that problem. Well, fortunately for the people of this Province, we do not have
that problem. We are running a surplus this year, and it will be substantially
more than the $12 million I said it would be at mid-year. The Auditor General in
his most recent report acknowledged the significant surpluses and the reduction
in debt and the substantial improvements in the Province's fiscal capacity.
I should mention that the Leader of the Opposition criticized us, she
criticized us for spending too much money on health care, which is a criticism I
do not really understand. So, we will look at what the outsiders have to say. We
will look at what the world experts have to say. I refer to a report that came
out in March from Standard & Poor's. This is a global credit portal from a
credit rating agency and here is what they said: We are raising our long-term
issuer credit and senior unsecured debt ratings of the Province of Newfoundland
and Labrador from A to A+. The highest credit rating that this Province has ever
received from that particular company.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: " The upgrades reflect our view of Newfoundland's much
improved economic standing, declining debt burden, solid budgetary performance,
and strong liquidity position."
Mr. Chair, in addition, Standard & Poor's also talked about our spending. In
light of the comments by the Leader of the Opposition, they have pointed out
that the Province achieved solid operating surpluses in recent years that allows
this Province to stockpile liquidity, repay debt, and deliver tax relief thanks
to tight cost management and the emergence of offshore oil tight cost
management.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: Again, Newfoundland has a strong liquidity position
reflecting its past operating surpluses and, listen to this, Mr. Chair, prudent
spending practices.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. MARSHALL: That is what Standard & Poor's said.
Mr. Chair, in addition I should say
CHAIR: Order, please!
I remind the hon. member that his time for speaking has expired.
MR. MARSHALL: A minute to clue up, Mr. Chair?
CHAIR: Does the hon. member have leave?
The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board, by leave.
MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Chair, I just wanted to add that the
Canadian Federation of Independent
Business just released a report expressing concern about the spending
practices of provincial governments right across this country, but what they
also pointed out was the two provinces that were leading the country in fiscal
prudence was Saskatchewan and the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Thank
God we are doing very, very well, and as the Premier said in her remarks
yesterday: The best is yet to come.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
CHAIR: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate an opportunity to have a few remarks in debate of Interim
Supply. The process, as outlined by the minister, is fairly straightforward. Of
course, government needs to operate and pay the bills after April 1. In order to
do that, you need approval of the House of Assembly to spend, usually, about
one-third of what the Budget will be in the forthcoming year if they put it into
Interim Supply, and that gives them authority, because the Budget itself
probably will not get approved until sometime in May or June. So, that is the
process.
The good thing about Interim Supply, from the point of view of the Opposition
of course, number one, it is a money bill, which means that the latitude of the
things you can talk about are a bit broader than if you were doing a legislative
bill. You have more latitude in what you say and the type of issues that you can
talk about. We have been somewhat restrictive in the House in recent years as to
what you could or could not say. When I first came here, it was pretty wide open
years ago. You could say what you wanted pretty well whenever you wanted it, but
the rules have been tightened up a fair bit in the last number of years.
This is indeed a money bill and gives you a lot of latitude as to what you
can say. This is a great opportunity, because normally, other than putting out
press releases, doing what you can through the media, whether it be through
letters to the editor, Open Line shows and so on, Oppositions do not often get a
chance to challenge their government. On TV, for example, when everybody is
listening, question the government, not only in Question Period but throw out a
lot of stuff that people were not aware of, and God knows, there is a lot of
stuff that the people in this Province are not aware of from this, the most
secretive government in the history of Newfoundland and Labrador. Bar none, the
most secretive government in our history, and we are going to peel some of the
pieces off the onion in the next few weeks.
I only have fifteen minutes here today but over the course of the next couple
of months of course I get a fair amount of time to respond to the Budget itself,
usually up to about three hours; depending on who speaks first, another hour
here or there. I sense, Mr. Chairman, they do not like to hear me speak a lot of
times. Some people told me it is because the truth hurts. Others have said it is
because they do not like the way I do it. They think that sometimes I am
lecturing, they think that other times I am being too rough on them; but,
unfortunately, that is the way it has to be because the people need to know the
truth. As much as it might hurt, you have to face it and you have to deal with
it.
First of all, many people are quite surprised that we are back here because
this government, in addition to being secretive, does not like to be in the
House of Assembly; does not like to be in the House of Assembly.
MR. KENT: We love being in the House.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: I see the Member for Mount Pearl over there saying we
love to be in the House. Well, I can tell by how many times he has been on his
feet in the last four years just how much he loves it here. You might have seen
him up on his feet maybe two or three times; usually to congratulate and pat the
back of the former Premier, but we will see how often he is up in this session.
We will gauge it. We will see how often he is up on his feet in this session
telling us what he thinks.
MR. KENT: Stay tuned.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Stay tuned, cannot wait for it. The Minister of
Finance actually said that to me the first time years ago. He said stay tuned,
when I asked him a question one day stay tuned. Guess what? Since 2003, I am
still tuned in waiting for the answer to that question which he never, ever
gave.
Anyway, in seriousness but before I get totally serious, people have often
asked me, because I often refer to Joe Chesterfield. People say: why do you
refer to Joe Chesterfield? Well, there is actually a Joe. There is a Joe who
lives in my district. He is a human being, very much a human being; a very
compassionate, knowledgeable, informed human being. I just use the word
chesterfield because that is where Joe likes to sit when he actually watches the
proceedings of the House of Assembly, and he never misses them. I have actually
left here and he will call me and say: I was interested in what you were saying
today but I did not fully understand all of it. Could you give me the rest of
it, what is it about? I get called when I am at home: What about this I heard in
the media? He is a very interested, concerned citizen. Of course, I do not want
his privacy to be infringed upon so that is why I call him Joe Chesterfield, as
if he is representative of everybody in this Province who sits intently and
wants to understand what is going on.
You can be sure Joe Chesterfield is out there again today listening and he
will be listening for every day that this House is open. I am only going to get
an opportunity in this short fifteen minutes nine minutes, fifty-seven seconds
that is left actually to gloss over some of the things that we will be getting
into as the debates go on. There are surely a lot, we will not get our heads
around it all. I am sure the government wishes we did not bring up some of that,
but there is going to be a lot of it. This government, since 2003, have
progressed from being proud to be the government, happy to be where they were,
to a state of almost absolute arrogance in the last year or so, in the last
couple of years actually.
The people of this Province, they do not mind people being successful. They
do not mind seeing a government that does well. In fact, this Opposition has
given this government credit whenever credit was due because you just cannot be
a critic. If it is justified and something that someone does and they deserve
credit, they should certainly get it. As an Opposition member, you have a
responsibility as well to point out the things that the government does not want
the light shed on. There is always a little bit of mould and sometimes there is
a lot of mould. In those cases you need to turn on the light, you need to find
out where the dirt is and you need to get rid of it. As much of that mould that
a government can keep hidden, the better they like it. That is our job
sometimes, to show there is a little bit of rot there. They might be good in
some things but they are not so good in other things, and we want to point out
what those other things are. The people, of course, look at the balance factor.
Some people might say: Yes, I like what they did, but do they have to be so
arrogant about doing it? Do not tell me I am so good; do not tell me I am good
in everything I did.
As the Leader of the Opposition mentioned today in one of her questions,
there has been no government in the history of this Province that inundated the
airwaves and the media with spam, I call it; a lot of the news releases and
press releases, some were good, but some of the stuff we have seen come out of
this government in the last four or five years virtually anything. If they have
a birthday, they put it out that it is their birthday. I do not think they have
missed anything that you could possibly and not only that, they do not put it
out once, they repeat it.
We had, for example, the announcement on the hospital that was going to go in
Lab West - not six, as Mr. Smallwood would say, not seven, not eight, not nine,
but ten different announcements on the same hospital in Lab West. Now I do not
know if they thought people were not aware of it; I am sure the people of Lab
West were aware of it. No, the government had to make sure: We have to keep
pushing this because that was a good thing we did. So we have to keep telling
them.
We are going to have an opportunity to talk about some of the Auditor General
stuff in the next few weeks. That is the words they hate, by the way. The
government hates to hear the words Auditor General, and boy did he have a
fistful. I think he highlighted fifteen different things. I think he highlighted
fifteen different items.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
CHAIR: Order, please!
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Mr. Chairman, you know you have struck a chord when
they start to respond. That is good, because I take encouragement from that.
When I see the government ministers start to respond to what I am saying, that
means you have struck a chord. I am going to strike as many chords as I can
throughout the spring, never you mind.
Now, beside the Auditor General, of course, there are a lot of other things.
The Throne Speech yesterday, there was a lot of stuff in there, a lot of good
stuff in there for debates about where this new Premier is going to take us.
There are a lot of things she wants to do Muskrat Falls, of course. I strongly
encourage every member of the government, and I will bet my bottom dollar to
this day if they were all truthful, that not every one of them over there read
the documentation on Muskrat Falls. Guaranteed, they have not read it; and, Mr.
Chairman, they are going to go out around this Province, they are going to go
out around this Province and try to convince the people of this Province that we
have a good deal here. This is good. You should accept without question the fact
that we are going to double your light bill. We are going to double your light
bill. Not only every resident in this Province and I say to Joe Chesterfield,
get out your light bill that you got from Newfoundland Power and look at it and
see what you paid for this month, and Joe, in 2017, when this deal is supposedly
done, your bill is going to have been doubled. You are going to be doubled.
Now that is the first bill of goods you are trying to sell to people. Buy
into this because your bill is doubled. By the way, there are all kinds of other
things there. The Premier, by the way, I noticed today I found her a bit uneasy.
She could not answer or would not answer any of the questions that the Leader of
the Opposition put to her. Not a good sign. Not a good sign, because if you try
to sell this to the people only along the treetops, you have a serious problem.
People are going to say, just a minute, wasn't that a straightforward question
that the Leader of the Opposition asked the Premier? That was a pretty simple
question. How come the Premier could not give a simple answer? How come? I must
not be hearing things right, Joe is saying out there. Joe is saying she asked
this and she did not answer it. Now, why is she not answering it? There must be
some reason that she is not answering it.
That is only Muskrat. We have hours and hours of Muskrat to come. We have
some issues, not only in my district, for example, issues that come from other
members' districts. We sat here last year, for example, and put in petitions on
behalf of one member who would not put the petition in on behalf of his
constituents. They went to him, he would not do it. We had to put in petitions
from his district. Now that says a lot about representation. I have stood up
here in this House when I was a member of the government and put in petitions
that the government was on paper as being against. Never mind do I know where
they do or do not stand, because as an MHA your responsibility to your
constituents comes first and foremost.
You are here as an MHA when you stand on your feet, and some constituent of
yours you do not have to say I agree with the petition; you are bringing the
petition on behalf of your constituents. To say that you do not even have the
intestinal fortitude to bring it here, that is just unfortunate. That is most
unfortunate when the members do not do that. The member knows who I am talking
about; in fact it was the Member for Port de Grave who had to put it in for him.
He does not mind speaking out, not only for his own constituents in Port de
Grave, he does not mind who he has to speak out for but deserves to be spoken
out for. That was not lost by the way. I travelled to that member's district
three times since that happened and on all three occasions I had that pointed
out to me. I had that pointed out to me - very unfortunate.
Speaking of lunch, the Minister of Natural Resources brings me to another
nice topic we have had in the media and we will get to that one, about the
famous dinner. We are going to have lunch, let's have dinner. There was a famous
movie one time, I believe 1968, starring Sydney Poitier, Spencer Tracy and
Candice Bergman cost $7 million to make and he turned a profit of $54 million.
Guess what it was called folks: Guess Who's Coming To Dinner . Well, I
have a new movie we are going to make now shortly, on April 1; it is called
Guess who is not coming to dinner. Guess who is not coming to dinner.
Now I should not bring that up, of course, and just for Joe-public, Joe
Chesterfield needs to know. I am sure you are confused about what I am talking
about here. What that is about, for the interest of the people of course
watching is, they are having a big convention and the former Premier was
supposed to be guest actor but he has announced he will not be there.
MR. BUTLER: An honorary dinner.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: An honorary dinner in his honour and he does not want
to accept the honour. Going to give him the key to the city, the key for life to
the party, but, nobody knows why he is not going. Now I thought the Minister of
Natural Resources was pretty coy in the media today, he is the chair of that
dinner. Can you imagine folks you are hosting a dinner, you are the host of the
dinner and somebody says they are not going to show up. Now if you are such an
important host I think the first thing I would say was, excuse me I am having
this dinner for you, you are not going to show up? What is the problem? You do
not like what is on the menu or you do not like the company? I am just curious
because that particular host, who is the Minister of Natural Resources, he says,
I do not know.
CHAIR: Order, please!
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: I do not know. Anyway we will follow up on the dinner
later.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, I will certainly not ask for leave, my time is up but I
will be back.
Thank you.
CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SKINNER: Mr. Chair, it is my pleasure to stand today. We are doing
government business on this side and we will continue to do it. We have done it
now for seven-and-a-half, eight years. We have done it very well, the people
have shown that. Yesterday, we had another example of the good work that this
government is doing when the Premier walked in with two more MHAs who will sit
on this side of the House.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SKINNER: We make no apologies on this side of the House for doing
good government business, I tell you that. Now, if the members opposite want to
continue to get up and be nasty that is what I will call it, being nasty
talk about what is going on in outside circles, party business; if that is where
they are going, they are not going to go very far. The House of Assembly should
really be about doing the people's business. When you bring in partisan politics
to people's business, I think you are a little bit off-track I think you are a
little bit off-track.
I will not go any further with that because I do not want to go down that
track myself. I just want to make the point; I just want to advise the members
opposite of where their focus should be. I would have thought after having a
whole winter to think about what they wanted to come into the House and speak
about, the last thing they would have been coming in to talk about would have
been petty partisan politics, but obviously that is where they are. We will
leave it at that we will leave it at that.
What I want to talk about are the things that this government is going to be
doing. We had a great Throne Speech yesterday. I am just going to take a second,
if I could, to have a quick look. When I was listening to the Throne Speech
yesterday, I had three little Post-It Notes here that I was just jotting down
some of the wonderful things that the Throne Speech referenced. I went as far as
thirty-one items on my three Post-It Notes and guess what happened? I ran out of
Post-It Notes but there was still more in the Throne Speech. Had I had more
Post-It Notes I would have been able to get more information down.
I just want the people of the Province to know that when we get up in this
session of the House, as the member opposite just alluded to, there is a lot to
talk about; I am going to talk about thirty-one positive items that are
referencing what the people of Newfoundland and Labrador want us to be doing
while we are in the House. They will come from the Throne Speech document. I am
not going to be out looking for news clippings out of The Telegram to see
what some guy said yesterday about some partisan political event that is going
on. I am going to be in here doing the people's business, and that is what the
people want us to do and that is what we are going to do while we are in this
House.
The members opposite talk about and I am trying to understand where they
are coming from with this they talk about us being a very secretive
government. We have been in the House two days and I bet you I have heard it
four or five times in two days. Right after I hear that secretive government, I
hear them talk about a flood of news releases. This government is always putting
out news releases about the things they are doing, telling people all the things
they are doing, telling people all the stuff that they are involved with. Well,
if we are doing all of that, I am having difficulty understanding how we can be
considered to be secretive. We are telling people about what we are doing, but
we are being secretive. It does not match up with me. I am having difficulty
understanding how it matches up.
Then they talk about having to try to - convince people I think were the
words that were just used convince people that they should support Muskrat
Falls. I state for the record right now, Mr. Chair, we are not going to try to
convince people to support Muskrat Falls. That is the last thing this government
is going to do. What we are going to do is bring the information out for the
people to see. We have a load of it posted on the Web site of Natural Resources,
there is a load of it being posted on the Web site of the environmental
assessment process that is going on right now in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and
there will be lots more information that will come out.
What will happen is people will make up their own minds. They do not need
Shawn Skinner, anybody on the government side, or anybody on the Opposition side
to convince them what they should do. They will come to an informed decision. I
have enough confidence in the people of the Province and enough respect for the
position and the opinion of the people of the Province to say that I am not
going to try to convince them. I am going to give them the information and let
them make up their own minds. That is what is going to happen: people will make
up their own minds on this.
Let's just take a second to talk about the Muskrat Falls project and see what
it is that people are going to be getting when the Muskrat Falls project comes
to fruition. Right now, we have no connection to the North American grid as a
Province. We are the only Province in Canada that does not have that direct
connection. We do not have a redundancy. We would be isolated. Basically, we are
called an isolated system here in the Island portion of the Province.
One of the responsibilities that Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro has is to
continue to monitor the electrical needs of the Province to ensure that we have
a sustainable and reliable supply of electricity, and that we get it at the
least cost possible. So, there have been a number of studies that Hydro has
undertaken and a number of options that have been looked at. When they have
looked at those - and I will not go into it now because I do not have time, but
I will come back to it because it is important that people hear it and I want to
say it here on the floor of the House of Assembly. Suffice to say for now that
they fall into five broad options. When those five options were looked at, one
of those options came out to be the best option in terms of least cost, in terms
of reliability, in terms of sustainable electrical power, and in terms of making
sure that we are connected to the Canadian power grid. That option was the Lower
Churchill Project.
It is really two phases: Muskrat Falls and Gull Island. I have people say to
me they sometimes get confused when we talk about Lower Churchill because we
talk about Muskrat, then we talk about Gull, and then we talk about the Lower
Churchill. They are all the same; it is just that the Lower Churchill Project,
for the people who are out in TV land listening to us, really consists of two
phases. The first phase being Muskrat Falls and the second phase being the Gull
Island portion.
Now, what is Muskrat Falls? What is it that we are attempting to do here? We
have gone with a generation station that we are going to build that is going to
capture for us, or create for us, 800-plus megawatts of power. Those 800-plus
megawatts of power is going to satisfy the demand increases that have been
projected in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The work that is being
done by Hydro shows that our demand is going to increase into the future. It has
been mentioned by the members of the Opposition that our demand has tailed off a
little bit in the last few years. That is quite correct, by the way. There is no
denying that.
It has tailed off because, basically, we have lost two paper mills; that is
why. There are number of factors relating to it, but the two big users of
electricity are the paper mill in Grand Falls-Windsor and the paper mill in
Stephenville. So they have closed, and because they have closed, there was less
demand for power. That little dip that we had is now starting to come back up
again. It is coming back up because every one of us in this room, in this House
of Assembly, and everyone out who is watching us on TV is using more power. As
we grow as a Province, we are using more power.
In the forecasting that Hydro is doing, we are looking at things like Vale in
Argentia. They are going to need - I think the number is around sixty or seventy
megawatts of power. That will come on in a year's time. We will need to have
that power available. When we look at some of the mining developments that are
happening in Labrador. An underground mine in Voisey's Bay, for instance, might
be something that will happen. They are going to need significant amounts of
power. We cannot meet that power now unless we do something.
We looked at all the options we had available to us, and the something turned
out to be because it was least cost, because it met the needs of the power, and
because it was something that was green, and it was something that was reliable
and sustainable, was Muskrat Falls. So, we are going to do Muskrat Falls. We
will build a generating station. We will run a power line that will come across
the Straits into the Island, down into Holyrood. We will then run another line
and do some upgrades back across to the west end of the Province. We will run a
maritime link, as it has been referred, and we will have 824 megawatts of power.
We are going to, as my hon. colleague says, the Minister of Finance, we are also
going to shut down Holyrood. We are going to get rid of all that dirty emission.
So, there are a whole bunch of things I could talk about, but I just want
people to understand that the reason we are looking at doing Muskrat Falls is to
ensure that people have reliable, sustainable green energy at a cost that they
can afford. When people talk about the electricity rates going up, they are
quite correct. If we do nothing, if we do not build Muskrat Falls, guess how
much our electricity rates will go up in the next five years? Thirty-seven per
cent if we do nothing; that is what going to happen. Muskrat Falls is not the
problem here, Muskrat Falls is the solution.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SKINNER: Because if we do not build generation facilities, our cost
will continue to increase. So, Muskrat Falls is what we need to build so that
the spike that is going up like this, which is our energy costs, it is going to
continue for the next five years, there is nothing we can do about that because
we have to build generation; but, in five years' time, instead of continuing
straight up like this, it will go up for five years and then it will continue on
a much, much more gentle increase. Point seven per cent increase, less than 1
per cent, is what we anticipate after Muskrat Falls versus 4 to 6 per cent,
which is what is happening now without Muskrat Falls.
I will come back to this, Mr. Chair, I see my time has expired and in
recognition of the other individuals who wish to get up and speak. I just wanted
to lay that out and I will come back to it at another time.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
CHAIR: The hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I am happy to have this opportunity to stand this afternoon and speak to the
bill that is on the table, an important bill, Bill 2, because it is a bill that
will have us approve monies to be spent on the government works, the government
departments, in the interim between now and the approval of a Budget when that
happens sometime in April.
The money that we are approving covers all of the different aspects of
government expenditure, everything from administration, physical infrastructure
in the Province, resource development, and right through to our social programs.
Because of that, because it is a bill dealing with government expenditure, which
covers all aspects of government, we can speak to various issues under this bill
that concern us.
With this discussion coming right on the heels of the Speech from the Throne,
I think it makes a lot of sense to look at what the government promised
yesterday when we heard the Lieutenant Governor deliver the Speech from the
Throne.
It is always interesting to get these speeches because they give you some
sense of where government is heading. That is why I was rather disappointed in
some of the things that I heard in the Speech from the Thorne. One, in
particular, was with regard to what government is calling a comprehensive child
care strategy for Newfoundland and Labrador. When I first saw those words I
said: Well, that is good. I really want to have a comprehensive child care
strategy in this Province. I want to have a universal child care program in this
Province. So let us see what government is going to do, what is their strategy.
Naturally the first thing I hoped was that I was going to hear that this
government was going to be producing more child care spaces, so I was hopeful. I
thought, oh, this is great maybe we are going to get more child care spaces.
I also hoped that I would hear something in the Speech from the Throne that
showed that this government is committed to working towards a public child care
program for this Province, universally accessible and public. I have to say, Mr.
Chair, that so far what I have seen is not encouraging me. The Speech from the
Throne, when it finally made a statement about child care, said that the
government is going to announce a significant initiative in child care with a
focus on infant care with the potential to increase child care spaces. I
honestly had to say, Mr. Chair, what are they talking about? It says that "the
beauty of this initiative is that it will benefit families not only in larger
centres but also in rural regions where child care spaces are especially
scarce." So now I have to sit and wait to see what is going to be in the Budget
that might potentially increase child care spaces.
What really stymied me was that the Speech from the Throne says that there is
going to be a focus on infant care. Now that really made me question, why a
focus on infant care? First of all, if we are talking about a woman who has been
in the paid workforce and has had a child, that woman can use EI in order to
take maternal leave. So the mother is at home for the most part whether she is
a working mother outside the home or a woman who is working only within the home
the mother is home for the first six months at least of the child's life.
Then, in many cases, men are able, fathers are able, to take time as well to add
to the time that the mother has taken. So, why is it first of all that whatever
they are coming up with this initiative that they are talking about is going
to focus on infant care? I am really curious and I am dying to find out what
that is going to be.
What really disturbs me is that we are being told that this initiative
which is this nebulous idea out there, we have no idea what it is that this
initiative could potentially increase child care spaces. You know, Mr. Chair,
the parents in this Province, and especially the women in this Province, are not
interested in being talked to about potential child care spaces. What they are
saying is we need child care spaces and we need them now. We need more child
care spaces, many more than the child care spaces that we have. Yes, there is a
need in rural Newfoundland and Labrador and there is also a need in urban
Newfoundland and Labrador. We have waiting lines in urban Newfoundland and
Labrador; people not able to get their children into facilities, having to find
individuals to come into their home whether they want that to happen or not
because they cannot find a child care space.
This thing of possibly creating new child care spaces with this new
initiative that we know nothing about really boggles the mind. What is the game
that is being played here by government? They use the language, it makes it all
sound nice and fancy; strategy, it is comprehensive, and it is a nice initiative
that has potential. When all is said and done they told us nothing yesterday
about their commitment to child care and to the creation of new spaces. I am
willing to bet that whatever it is that comes out in the Budget, when the Budget
comes in April, I am not going to be very happy with. My mind is already looking
at potential things that the government could be talking about. If they were to
come up with some of the things that my mind is thinking about, such as having
money maybe so that grandparents can take care of a child, then I am really not
going to be very happy, Mr. Chair, I have to say. That, I have to wait for
that I have to wait for.
What really disturbed me about the Speech from the Throne was, again, another
example of lack of clarity of language. The Throne Speech talks about providing
opportunities for parents and removing barriers to their full participation in
the workforce. Well you know, Mr. Chair, you know the parent who has the biggest
problem with barriers to being in the workforce having children and being
barriers in the workforce is not the male, it is the female; it is the women.
It is the women. It is the mothers who have the problem being in the workforce.
I am really disappointed to have a Throne Speech which is afraid to say that it
is women who are disadvantaged when they become parents and are trying to be in
the workforce. It is mostly mothers who are missing out because of the scarcity
of child care spaces.
In a recent report from Stats Canada, and it came out in December 2010, it
said that 13.4 per cent of women working part-time in 2009 cited caring for
children as the reason they did not work full-time. Only 2 per cent of male
part-time workers cited this reason. So this is not just a problem for parents
in general. Not having adequate child care spaces is not just a problem for the
family in general; it is particularly a problem for mothers. It is particularly
a problem for women. I am really disappointed to hear this government afraid to
say that it is an issue for women.
We hear in my office, I am hearing over and over, of young mothers who are
deciding to stay home because they cannot find adequate child care. They cannot
afford it or they cannot find it. Afford is one of the big issues. As long as we
continue to have the majority of our child care spaces in the private sector,
where they are being run by organizations who also are trying to make a profit,
then child care in this Province is not going to be affordable and this
government, according to what I heard from the Throne Speech yesterday, does not
sound to me like they are going to come up with any great plan that is going to
change that, Mr. Chair. Not only that they are not even going to come up with a
plan that is going to give us new spaces in the present. They might have some
spaces in the future.
Mr. Chair, I am really, really disappointed with what I have heard so far. We
know that having adequate child care and having good child care, having
accessible child care, having a universal program is not only good for families,
it is not only good for mothers, it is also good for the economy.
I see my time is coming to an end so I will wait till the next time I get to
stand, Mr. Chair, to go into how having a full blown universal child care
program is good both socially and economically.
Thank you.
CHAIR: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, I want to start by congratulating the Premier on her first day in
the House in terms of Question Period and I do commend her on the work that she
is doing and the leadership which she has taken, Mr. Chair.
It is good to see, as someone mentioned yesterday, the Leader of the
Opposition back here. After today, I think it is safe to say that she is in full
form. There is no doubt about that.
I want to welcome the two new members to the House. I have to say, my first
time coming to the House and my first time speaking, it was a bit of an
intimidating experience. While some of us complain about having to be in here,
there are times when we would rather be out of it, but it is the people's House
and we are here to do the people's work.
Mr. Chair, I think I would be remiss, from the fishing sector, if I did not
mention Japan. Any of us who have watched the media as of late have seen the
devastation. Japan is such a trading partner with Newfoundland and Labrador
around our seafood, that certainly I think everyone in the Province, our
thoughts and our prayers are with the people of Japan. I really do think the
rest of the world can learn a lesson from how they have handled this earthquake
and this tsunami.
Mr. Chair, I thought I had more than ten minutes. I thought I was going to
hear the "f" word from the Leader of the NDP. I thought she was going to say
fish, but she did not, Mr. Chair. She did not say it, but I am sure somewhere in
this session she will say it.
Mr. Chair, we are at a pivotal point in this Province in terms of the
fisheries. Some people have accused me of taking a hard stand, but, Mr. Chair, I
make no apologies for it. I make no apologies for it, and I do so on the grounds
of a couple of points. One, I think the Opposition need to look back to 1998
when they were in power, 2003 when they were in power, when a fellow by the name
of Vardy wrote a report on the crab and shrimp sector. While there were many
things contained in those reports, the words that came through it again and
again were structural changes. In 2003, again, there was another report that was
commissioned. There had been commissioned reports: Eric Dunne did a report;
Jones did a report; Gregory and Broderick did a report around implementation of
the shrimp, how we are going to reorganize and implement changes in the shrimp
industry.
Then, if we go on and we look to the Fishing Industry Renewal Strategy, when
the fishing summit was called the key point at that particular time was that
status quo was not an option. We f