PDF Version

November 24, 2016

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVIII No. 48

The

House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Osborne):

Order, please!

Admit

strangers.

Yesterday there was a point of order raised by the hon. Member for St. John's

East Quidi Vidi. I have reviewed the transcripts. I had indicated yesterday

that I thought it was simply a disagreement between two hon. Members. After

having read the transcripts, I am satisfied with that ruling, that it is simply

a disagreement between two hon. Members.

I would

encourage Members, I know during the thrust of debate and sometimes heated

debate, emotions get high. I would remind all hon. Members to maintain a level

of respect and decorum in the House, but yesterday was simply one of those

thrusts and cut of debate.

I would

like to welcome to the Speaker's gallery, Norma Reid. Norma will be the subject

of a statement a little bit later.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by

Members

MR. SPEAKER:

For Members' statements

today, we have the Member for the District of Virginia Waters Pleasantville,

Topsail Paradise, Exploits, St. George's Humber, Bonavista, and

Stephenville Port au Port.

The hon.

the Member for Virginia Waters Pleasantville.

MR. B. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House today to congratulate the St. John's Regional Fire

Department's High-Angle Rescue Team Platoon A, who recently won the Firefighters

of the Year award from the Rotary Club of St. John's. The eight-member team

includes Gerry Locke and David Wheeler, who are both residents of Virginia

Waters Pleasantville.

The

award was created last year to recognize bravery and service to the public by

members of the St. John's Regional Fire Department. The High-Angle Rescue Team

stood out among the excellent work of their colleagues for the rescue of Andrew

Picco, who fell from a 300-foot cliff on Signal Hill last June. They managed to

rescue Mr. Picco in the dark. He has since made a full recovery from his

injuries, and is playing hockey in the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League.

I ask

all hon. Members to join me today in congratulating members of the High-Angle

Rescue Team, as well as the entirety of St. John's Regional Fire Department, and

indeed all firefighters across Newfoundland and Labrador for their tireless work

in protecting all citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Topsail Paradise.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, the first Bell of Hope was unveiled at the Dr. H. Bliss Murphy Cancer

Care Centre in April, 2015 as part of the National Cancer Awareness Month. For

cancer patients, there are many milestones along their journey with their

disease, and this is why the Dr. H. Bliss Murphy Cancer Care Centre Foundation

launched the Let Hope Ring in partnership with Newfoundland Power's, Power of

Life. It gives those with cancer a special way to celebrate milestones in their

life, to celebrate and enjoy the big events that are important.

I had

the pleasure of taking

part in the first time the bell was rang with 30-year-old

breast cancer patient, Nikki Parrell. With the installation of the first Bell of

Hope, word quickly spread among cancer patients and families all over this

province. Cancer patients in communities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador

were looking for a Bell of Hope to be installed in their local chemotherapy

clinics so that they could celebrate milestones with their own cancer care

teams.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask all Members to join me in congratulating Newfoundland Power and

the Dr. H. Bliss Murphy Cancer Care Foundation, and cancer care teams across the

province who now have a Bell of Hope at all of our province's 14 cancer care

sites.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Exploits.

MR. DEAN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise

in this hon. House to recognize the Bishop's Falls Knights of Columbus, an

organization that recently celebrated its 50th anniversary of service to the

Town of Bishop's Falls and surrounding communities.

The

Bishop's Falls Knights of Columbus council serves the community of Bishop's

Falls and Botwood, and as far away as Fortune Harbour, and they've done so for

over half a century. This is a significant milestone that marks five decades of

dedication to making their communities a better place to live.

The

Knights of Columbus have served in churches, schools and the community sector

steadily and faithfully and, oftentimes, far from the public view. This humility

and selflessness is to be admired and celebrated and so is their long-standing

legacy of service and good works in their communities. They have touched the

hearts and lives of so many people over the years.

I ask

all Members of this hon. House to join with me in congratulating the Monsignor

Finn Council 5904 of the Knights of Columbus for 50 years of great work in the

communities of Bishop's Falls, Botwood, Fortune Harbour and beyond.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for St.

George's Humber.

MR. REID:

Mr. Speaker, in every

community around this province there are individuals who make things happen

through their volunteer work. Today I want to pay tribute to two of these

individuals: Frank Bonnell of Pasadena and Dave Rex of the Bay St. George area.

These

two individuals were recently recognized by Lions International as recipients of

the president's leadership development recognition award. This award is designed

to acknowledge and honour Lions who contribute to the future vitality of the

Lions Clubs International and demonstrate dedication to excellence in training

and leadership development.

As the

people of these communities are well aware, Frank at the Pasadena Lions Club and

Dave at the club in Stephenville, have been driving forces behind these very

active clubs for years. They exemplify the motto of the Lions Club which is, We

Serve. They have set an example for others through their actions, and through

their mentoring they have ensured the long-term viability of the Lions Club they

are involved in.

Both

these individuals, through their work with the Lions Club, have made communities

and indeed the whole province better. I call on all Members to join me in

recognizing the tremendous contribution of these individuals.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for the

District of Bonavista.

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

honoured to stand here today to recognize an extraordinary person who may be the

oldest in the province. Mrs. Emma Hookey, or Amy as she's known to most,

celebrated her 107th birthday on Saturday, November 19, at Golden Heights Manor

in Bonavista.

Born in

Champney's East, Amy became a resident of Champney's West after marrying her

husband of 66 years, Alonzo. They lived a very simple life by choice until Lon's

passing in 2001, with Amy only moving to the manor after a fall left her unable

to walk.

Surrounded by friends in five generations of her family, Amy shared stories of

her life, including the years she worked in St. John's for a wealthy family. Her

quick wit and humour was present when she recounted the story, stating, You

didn't just tell them when dinner was ready, there was a gong you had to ring,

and was it ever loud!

Just

prior to her 106th birthday, Amy voted in the provincial election, something

women didn't have the right to do when she was born.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. KING:

I ask all hon. Members to

join me in congratulating Mrs. Hookey on this milestone, and give her wishes for

many more.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Stephenville Port au Port.

MR. FINN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge 21-year-old Jillian Forsey of Kippens.

Jillian is an exercise physiology student attending West Virginia University in

Morgantown, West Virginia and has excelled as a member on the West Virginia

Mountaineers cross-country running team.

A recent

second-place finish in a field of 198 athletes at the NCAA Mid-Atlantic

regionals qualified Jillian to represent West Virginia U at the NCAA national

championships. The November 19 championship was the third time Forsey qualified;

however, it was the first time she would qualify as an individual competitor.

Despite

a fall early in the six-kilometre race, Jillian bounced back and finished with a

time of 20 minutes and 49 seconds, placing her 97th in a field of the top 250

female cross-country runners from across the United States.

Jillian's remarkable fitness and passion for running is also complemented by her

academic success, as Jillian was recently named to the Mid-Atlantic Conference's

All-Academic Team for maintaining a GPA above 3.6.

I ask

all Members to join me in congratulating Jillian on her outstanding athleticism

and academic achievements and wish her all the best in future competitions. I

know this is not the last time we'll hear about Jillian.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

I thank the indulgence of the

Members of the Legislature. I'm sure that Members who came in through the scrum

area today noticed the beautiful murals carved out of wood that are on display

in the scum area. One of those murals is of schooners in the St. John's Harbour,

with the mouth of the harbour in the background. The other is of a salmon

fisherman, probably on the Humber River.

When I

became Speaker, one of the goals that I had set was to try and recover items of

historical significance to the Legislature. We see the wooden mace up in the

visitor's area, as you enter the visitor's gallery, and that was almost lost. In

fact, a staff member from one of the parties a number of years ago had noticed

that in storage in Pleasantville and it's the only reason we have that on

display here today.

My Clerk

had informed me that she was aware of chairs and tables that were once used by

Members of the Legislature at the Colonial Building being used in a caf on Bell

Island. Earlier this year, I had heard that Murray's Pond had a number of items

that had come from the Colonial Building and I contacted Darryl at Murray's Pond

to see if we could get some of those items back, as I believe they would add to

the historical significance of the Colonial Building, once restored.

To my

great pleasure, Darryl had informed me that they, in fact, had still a number of

items originally belonging to the Colonial Building and were happy to donate

those items back. So I'd like to thank the board of directors, and we have our

guest Norma Reid in the Speaker's gallery from Murray's Pond. Their president is

Dr. Wayne Gulliver, Vice-President Howie Young, honorary lifetime member Noel

Hutton who are proud to present these wall-mounted carvings back to their place

of origin.

When the

Legislature had moved from Colonial Building to Confederation Building, these

wall mountings were gifted by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to

Murray's Pond Fishing and Country Club. For almost six decades, these beautiful

pieces of art graced the walls of the club and were viewed by hundreds of people

with awe and admiration.

So we

thank all members of Murray's Pond Fishing and Country Club for returning these

beautiful pieces of historic art back to government. I understand that Murray's

Pond also has a number of other items, originally from Colonial Building, and

they're in the process of gifting those items back to the province as well.

I'd like

to thank Dean Brinton and his team at The Rooms

who cleaned the mold from the wall murals and have offered as well to

restore them.

Now, I bet you're still wondering about those tables and

chairs that went to Bell Island.

Those chairs and tables were used by Members of the Legislature post-riot

but pre-move from Colonial Building to Confederation Building.

I made

contact with the Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island and asked for his

help in recovering those items. He's been very helpful in trying to facilitate

that process. So I thank him.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

I understand from the Member

that we're hoping to have one of the desks and chairs for display as early as

next week.

While we

do have these important items of historical significance to be able to hopefully

someday display at Colonial Building, there are many other items that were

either gifted by government after the move from Colonial Building to

Confederation Building or were taken during the riot or maybe some still in

storage.

I guess

I'm putting a plea out there to the general public, if you know of any other

items of significance to the Legislature, we would be absolutely honoured to

accept those back as gifts as well.

encourage all Members to view the wall-mounted murals in the scrum area at some

point during the day.

Thank

you again for your indulgence.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by

Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Finance and President of Treasury Board.

MS. C. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to highlight the fact that Dominion

Bond Rating Service, or DBRS, confirmed the province's credit rating at A (low).

The rating confirmation is based upon the rating agency's view that credible

action is being taken by this government to address the province's fiscal

situation.

I'm

encouraged, Mr. Speaker, that DBRS advised us of our rate confirmation in

advance of the Muskrat Falls loan guarantee being finalized. DBRS acknowledged

our commitment to our fiscal targets established in

Budget 2016 and which were reiterated as part of the fall Fiscal and

Economic Update.

Mr.

Speaker, DBRS noted the fall Fiscal and Economic Update demonstrated the fiscal

performance was tracking ahead of budget. DBRS listed the province's strengths

as being significant energy resources, a commitment to restoring fiscal

discipline and a low reliance on federal transfers.

I would

also like to point out, Mr. Speaker, that Moody's Investor Services also

recently provided an update which stated that the province's 2016-17 fiscal

performance, as well as preliminary details on an addition to the federal loan

guarantee for Muskrat Falls, were both credit positive for this province.

Mr.

Speaker, our government recognizes the challenges that remain and will continue

to take the actions necessary to meet our short-term and long-term financial

targets. We are very pleased that we have improved our fiscal performance with

respect to our budget targets and will continue to practice strong fiscal

management on behalf of the people of this province.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the minister for an advance copy of her statement. Mr. Speaker, while the

minister would like to highlight the recent Dominion Bond Rating Agency

confirmation of a rating at A (low), I would like to remind her and all Members

of this hon. House that each of the three bond rating agencies downgraded our

credit rating since this government has taken power almost a year ago.

January 29, 2016, Standard & Poor's downgraded our credit rating from A+ to A;

the Dominion Bond Rating Agency downgraded our credit rating from A to A (low);

in July, Moody's downgraded our credit rating from Aa2 to Aa3. All three ratings

were downgraded under the watch of this current government.

Mr.

Speaker, the government opposite has been in power for a year and still hasn't

demonstrated a realistic plan to guide our province's fiscal policies. The

government has done nothing to boost the economy, nothing to ensure the

stability of our province's finances and nothing to ensure the future of our

province.

Mr.

Speaker, adding taxes and fees is not a plan.

The Way Forward vision is not costed and has not demonstrated a

commitment to fiscal responsibility.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I thank

the minister for the advance copy of her statement. While we all in this House

recognize the role of companies such as DBRS and Moody's, this announcement

means little or nothing to the average person in this province. Government has

the disaster 2016 budget and beyond created a mood of fear and uncertainty in

this province.

Good

news regarding our credit rating may cheer the Premier and his ministers, but

when are they going to do something to give the same comfort to the people of

the province?

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

The hon.

the Minister of Fisheries, Forestry and Agrifoods.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the winners of the Daphne Taylor Milk

Quality Awards of Excellence and Merit. The awards, which commemorate Ms. Taylor

who passed away from cancer, were created in 1997 to recognize excellence in the

production of quality milk.

Mr.

Speaker, the Daphne Taylor Milk Quality Awards of Excellence were presented at

the Dairy Farmers of Newfoundland and Labrador's Annual General Meeting last

week in Corner Brook by my colleague, Minister Joyce. The winners were Riverbend

Dairy Ltd., Lethbridge; Sunrise Dairy Ltd., Musgravetown; Connors Farm, Torbay;

and Beauty View Farm, Port Blandford.

The

Daphne Taylor Award of Merit was presented to Pond View Farms and Burnt Hill

Farms, both of Goulds, and WhiteClift dairy of Robinsons.

Government supports the farming industry through research and development

initiatives focused on decreasing the cost of production. Through

The Way Forward , our vision is to streamline and significantly speed

up applications for Crown lands for agriculture use.

Mr.

Speaker, I applaud the award winners for their achievements. Our government will

continue to work with our farmers and producers to further strengthen our dairy

industry.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. K. PARSONS:

The beautiful District of

Cape St. Francis, Mr. Speaker.

I want

to thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. We join with

government in congratulating this year's winners of the Daphne Taylor Milk

Quality Awards of Excellence as well as the Daphne Taylor Award of Merit. We

commend all of the people in the dairy industry for their dedication.

This

industry is a vital part of Newfoundland and Labrador's economy, particularly in

rural parts of our province. Our administration was focused on growing the

industry and supporting local farmers and producers, so it's good to hear a

similar message from this government.

It's

troubling, however, to hear of the recent closure of the Scotsburn facility in

the province with little or no reaction from this government, over 160 employees

out of work.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. K. PARSONS:

Many serious concerns from

industry stakeholders regarding the impending negative impact this will have on

our province.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I thank

the minister for the advance copy of his statement. I'm delighted to join with

him in congratulating all the winners of the Daphne Taylor Milk Quality Awards

of Excellence and Merit.

It truly

is an exciting time for the dairy industry with successful initiatives such as

forage self-sufficiency boosting their bottom line. But with almost 200 jobs

lost when Scotsburn closed its ice cream facility in St. John's, dairy farmers

now are looking at shipping 2 million more litres of milk off the Island.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements by

ministers?

Oral

Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, Bill 46,

An Act Respecting Procurement by Public Bodies, is being

debated before the House.

I ask

the Premier: Will you make a draft copy of the regulations pertaining to Bill 46

available to Members of the House before a vote takes place?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As we

know, this procurement act, I think the Reid Report was done in 2008 eight

years ago that this government committed to bringing it in. In 2012, it was Bill

1 the signature bill that they were going to bring in was never brought in.

Mr.

Speaker, we worked very hard with all the partners. We had many consultations

over the last year, and I know the previous government had many consultations

also. We had great ideas. We're trying to protect the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador. But as the former premier knows, he knows very well to the Leader of

the Opposition this is the first step but once you get this done, you can

bring in the regulations. He's well aware of that. He was a minister. He knows

we set up the bill and the regulations will come later.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What's

actually before the House is simply a framework. As is quite often said, the

devil's in the details, but there are no details in the framework. And actually

the bill allows for government, for Cabinet and the minister, to create 20

aspects of the bill through regulation, which the House will have no say in, Mr.

Speaker. This deals with $4 billion dollars in spending a year.

So I'll

ask the minister again: If you want the House to make informed decisions, will

you bring the regulations to the House before this is asked to be voted on?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, this bill is for

the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and helps savings of their money and

helps small communities, which was endorsed by MNL.

I find

it very odd that he, who was the minister at the time in 2012, wouldn't bring it

forward, and he's asking for the regulations. I didn't want to make this

political and I won't, but I will have to read something from

Hansard .

Reading

from the Hansard of May 20, 2014, and

I quote the former deputy premier, We are establishing an arm's-length,

not-for-profit corporation but we will retain authority for Cabinet to appoint

the board of directors, to approve or alter the telephone levy, to make

regulations relating to civic addressing, and to approve any borrowing or

pledging of its assets. He knows ask his former deputy premier that the

regulations were made once the act was brought in.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'll

remind the Premier, as my questions are going to go to the Premier, but I'll

remind the Premier that it was the current government who came to the House on

numerous occasions, and I'll be quite happy to bring forward examples of that

when time permits me to research them and I will bring them forward. And said

that they should have all the information available, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

They

said Members of the House should have all of the information. Mr. Speaker, this

is about $4 billion of spending according to the minister's own assessment

when spoke on the bill $4 billion of taxpayer spending each and every year.

What they brought to the House is simply a framework. It's not a bill; it's not

decisions. We don't know when the act applies; we don't know what the rules will

be. That will be in regulation.

MR. SPEAKER:

I ask the Member to get to

his question.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Premier I ask you: Will you

bring the regulations to the House so Members have the information before

they're asked to vote on it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, I can see why

this was never brought in before. He does not understand the procedure and he

was the minister. I want to say if you don't understand procedure, ask the

Member for Mount Pearl North about the procedure.

Mr.

Speaker, we committed, the first thing the Premier said we're going to bring was

procurement. We're bringing this in. Go ask MNL do they agree with this here and

help out communities of the province. Go ask a lot of the associations that we

met with do you agree with what we are doing to protect the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador. Go ask many of the groups that we met with do you

agree with this.

Everybody that we met with had input in this. Everybody understands this is the

first step. Regulations will come in. We gave some guidelines what we're going

to bring in. We will have consultations on the regulations as they ask for it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm glad

the minister is telling us that everyone in the province agrees with this bill

because the people who have contacted me in the last couple of days are

concerned about it because the details have not been presented in the bill.

Now, the

minister talks about regulations. This is $4 billion of spending each and every

year; $4 billion is what the minister said when he rose and presented this bill.

Mr. Speaker, that's significant. And 20 regulations will decide what the rules

will be and when they apply and how they apply to each circumstance. It's not

contained in the bill, Mr. Speaker; this is simply a framework. That's all they

have brought forward.

Will you

provide the regulations and the details so all Members of the House will know

what it is that they are voting on?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to

the Leader of the Opposition if you have some groups who have concerns, call me

and we'll have a meeting and we'll discuss it. I'm open to any discussions

whatsoever on the regulations.

Mr.

Speaker, these regulations will be made in consultation with all parties

involved. They will be made public and they will be brought into the spirit of

the act. When this act was brought in and they are well aware of the procedure

regulations will follow. There are parameters that will guide us.

Mr.

Speaker, the majority of the people that we met with, the majority there was

one or two who are saying, well, we'd like to have more consultations just on

the regulations, which we agreed to, to the person agrees that this is great

for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. That's who we're standing up for

here, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. P. DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask

the minister: Will you allow those meetings to take place before a vote is

called?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Municipal Affairs.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, we're after

having numerous well, I'm not sure. Seven years that they were in, how many

meetings did you have in seven years and couldn't bring it in?

The

number of groups we met with are pleased with this legislation. For the Member

now to try all of a sudden to make this political because he was the minister

who would not bring it in; I would be embarrassed also. I would be embarrassed

if I wouldn't bring it in either.

Mr.

Speaker, I remember Bill MacKenzie, Clerk of the House, they took the Clerk of

the House to bring in a procurement act. Guess what? It's being brought in now

by this government here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE:

I call tell you, Mr. Speaker,

people will be consulted on the regulations. People are pleased with this bill.

The people of Newfoundland and Labrador are pleased with this bill. I'm not

going to sit on this for another eight years, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

I ask the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development: What is the total number of children

and youth currently receiving services from your department?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, there are

currently, approximately under 1,000 children receiving services.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

I ask the minister if she can elaborate. Of those 1,000, how many are considered

under government's care because, of course, as you are aware, not all children

and youth receiving services are under government's care. So of those, how many

are under government's care?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

I'm not quite clear on the question. All the children who are receiving services

are receiving in-care services from government.

I guess

the Member means how many children are actually in care?

MS. PERRY:

Yes.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

About 170.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Minister.

Have

there been any children or youth who have died or have suffered serious injury

while in care or receiving services from your department over the last 12

months?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, I can't give those details here in the House, but what I can say is

that we have been reporting all deaths to the Child and Youth Advocate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

In October of 2015, the department of child, youth and family services signed an

historic agreement with the Sheshatshiu and Mushuau First Nations which

recommended joint committees.

Can the

minister tell this hon. House if the joint committee process has been

established yet in each community?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Yes, Mr. Speaker, the committees have been established. I, in fact, as the

minister, have been in Hopedale and Sheshatshiu myself. We have developed a

great relationship with the Aboriginal community.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

I ask the minister: How many matters have you referred this year to the Child

and Youth Advocate?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, just to be clear

on the question, how many matters have been referred to the Child and Youth

Advocate. Well, all deaths have been referred to the Child and Youth Advocate,

Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Can the minister give us an

update on the status of the development of the Innu risk prevention program?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I met with

the Nunatsiavut Government. And as I just said earlier, I was in the community

of Sheshatshiu and Hopedale and everything is on

schedule and going well.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

What is the current client to

social worker ratio in the province?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm sure

they probably know the number, that it's 1-20; however, in Labrador we are

having issues with keeping social workers, recruiting social workers. So the

number is a bit higher.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Can the minister provide for

us what that number ratio is for Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

No, I can't report exactly

today what the number is because it is fluid, it's changing and it varies. It

depends on what part of Labrador you are asking about.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Minister.

I ask if

you could table the most recent numbers you have from your officials in this

hon. House.

I also

would like to ask the minister: How many children are currently in independent

living arrangements?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

The Member for Fortune Bay

Cape La Hune is asking questions that perhaps we could sit down and have a brief

on.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask

the Minister of Education: How does a ballot box go missing for over 12 hours

with no one questioning its whereabouts?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education.

MR. KIRBY:

I don't know how that

happens, Mr. Speaker. I haven't heard that, that happened anywhere. I think the

Member might be referring to the school board election results in Zone 12. There

was no ballot box that went missing there.

I heard

He was very apologetic. He said it was a technical error with their fax to email

system, where the fax failed and the information failed to transmit. So that

information was not included in the preliminary results of the election. As I

pointed out yesterday the election results were preliminary until everything was

finalized. Now the results are finalized, basically.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Mr. Speaker, another example

of how the minister is not on top of the situation that he's responsible for

obviously.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

Why were not all ballot boxes

accounted for prior to declaring candidates elected? You were responsible for

this election.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

I'm not aware that happened,

Mr. Speaker. The deputy returning officer in Zone 12 at that poll did their job.

The returning officer did his job.

It's

unfortunate that the total result was not available, or the result that's public

now was not available that night. I know staff worked very hard well into the

night to get as much done as possible. There was a lot of pressure to get the

result announced.

As I

said, the returning officer has been very apologetic to the individual who

subsequently was reported to have lost the election. These things happen from

time to time. It's been seven years since we had a school board election. We'll

use the learnings from this one to improve the process next time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Mr. Speaker, another example

of how the process of due diligence wasn't done by the minister and his

department.

I ask

the minister: Will the newly elected school board have the authority to reverse

the decision to close Whitbourne Elementary?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, the school board

trustees have the authority that's vested in them under the

Schools Act to administer primary,

elementary and secondary education in the province.

I find

it galling to take lessons from the Member opposite on due diligence when his

ferry fiasco has basically resulted in the taxpayers of this province being

overcharged something like $15 million. This election did not go over budget.

That

Member over there put taxpayers in this province on the hook for $15 million

because of his incompetence. I'm not taking any lessons from him on due

diligence, I'll tell you that much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

(Inaudible) hasn't been able

to do due diligence in education. Now he wants to be the minister of TW. Maybe

the Premier will make a shuffle in the coming months.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

I ask the minister: Will the

newly elected school board have the authority to reconsider the decision to

cancel the school at Witless Bay?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, every year the

boards of trustees of the school districts make recommendations to government on

what their capital requests are every year. The government then considers those

requests. I'm surprised this gentleman was minister of Transportation and Works

and he doesn't even know the process for capital projects in the province. He

doesn't know basically what it was his job to do when he was the minister.

It's

surprising to me, Mr. Speaker, but in any case, government then decides which

capital projects are going to proceed, which ones are considered and so on. But

I'm surprised to hear he doesn't know this because he was the minister

responsible for that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

You're right; I was the

minister responsible. All I do know about seven schools were completed, two

ferries were arriving here and three wharfs got built; the last one will be

finalized by my colleague there the Minister of Transportation and Works.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL:

I ask the minister: Will you

respect and support the new school board's decision that they make over the

coming years?

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I've

recognized the hon. Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

I ask the minister: Will the

new school board have final decision-making authority?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Mr. Speaker, the

Schools Act is pretty clear about the responsibilities, roles

and the authorities of these school boards of trustees. I know why the Member is

upset, Mr. Speaker. The people went out and decided who they wanted to be their

boards of trustees. They elected their own people, instead of the practice of

the Members opposite which was to pick the people they thought the people should

have as their boards of trustees.

They're upset that we have had a democratic process, which

basically removed the people that they appointed to be school board trustees. I

make no apologies for that. These people have a big job to do. I congratulate

them all for coming forward to run.

I'm going to let them do their job, as I've said about 100

times. I'm not going to strong-arm them or interfere, like the previous

government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The

hon. the Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL: It's

only the Member that seems to get upset. You haven't seen me upset other than

one time when you cut all the libraries.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BRAZIL: The

past history of this minister was not to meet with previous school boards. I ask

the minister: Will you commit to meet with the newly elected school board?

MR. SPEAKER: The

hon. the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY: Mr.

Speaker, I met with the previous board of trustees. In fact, the first meeting

that I had as minister was with the board of trustees. I met regularly with the

CEO and the chair, Mr. Peach. We had a great working relationship. I expect I'll

have the same relationship with the incoming board of trustees. Of course, I'll

meet with them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The

hon. the Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

I hope they'll also commit to

meet with all the other stakeholders that have a real role in the education

system here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Budget 2016

cancelled the desperately needed expansion to Riverside Elementary. There has

been lots of talk and consultation since.

Can the

minister update on the new proposed plan?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development.

MR. KIRBY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I was

out at Riverside Elementary for Remembrance Day a few weeks back. I have to say,

it's a great school, great teachers there, a lot of great things being done. I

had an opportunity to tour the school, look at the requirements there. I think

one of the major concerns is around space for lunch time. They have to have a

couple of different sittings.

We've

added a number of modular classrooms there. That seems to be working well. Over

the course of the next few months, I understand the school district is going to

be reaching out to parents in the surrounding communities to see what their

preferences are for moving forward. We'll take that information and we'll go

from there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, Eastern Health

revealed today that patients who have had open-heart surgery in this province in

the last four years could be at risk of infection. Eastern Health found out

about this problem from Health Canada in October.

I ask

the Minister of Health and Community Services: Why the one-month delay in

publicly disclosing this?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

This is

part of an international recall affecting Europe and North America, including

the United States. The information was passed from Health Canada. Eastern Health

have set up a database and have now contacted all 2,500, or thereabouts,

individuals who had used on them in open-heart surgery this disposable heater

cooler system.

The

public service announcement today, in line with recommendations from Cameron,

was to ensure that anybody who may have missed that communication was also

contacted. They will continue to work through with these individuals to deal

with any problems that may or may not be related to it, and I have confidence

that's going ahead well.

Thank

you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

I thank the minister for the comprehensive answer; however, in line with the

recommendations from Cameron, events such as this should be disclosed relatively

quickly.

Why did

it take a month?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Mr. Speaker, the situation was that this is a very low incident. Less than 0.1

per cent has been reported internationally.

The

system Eastern Health chose to adopt was based on best practices, which was to

set up a database, a central number to contact the patients individually after

contacting their primary care practitioners. PSA, at the end of this process, is

a safety net as recommended by Cameron.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, this week the

Town of Wabush has written the Minister of Health and Community Services

identifying a mental health crisis following a number of tragic suicides in

Labrador West in the past few weeks.

I ask

the minister: What proactive measures are being taken to address these concerns?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much for the

question, Mr. Speaker.

It is

unfortunate that such an event as this has occurred. There have been five

suicides in that region in the last eight months. Labrador-Grenfell has reached

out to the community. I have been in contact with Labrador-Grenfell, as has the

Member for the district there.

There is

a link with IOC in that most of the people involved recently have been employees

there. Labrador-Grenfell has put extra counselling resources in place. IOC are

bringing in counselling resources of their own, and IOC are working hard to look

at that workplace environment.

So I

think at present the response is appropriate, and we'll keep an eye on that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Mr. Speaker, I thank the

minister again for his response. I would acknowledge that the Labrador-Grenfell

Health team, the mental health staff on the ground, are doing a great job. I'm

pleased to hear that extra resources have been allocated.

I ask

the minister to comment specifically on what additional resources have been

allocated on the ground, and how he's going to work to improve access to mental

health services to help individuals and families deal with this crisis.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Mr. Speaker, thank you.

Labrador

West now has slightly more counsellors per capita than would be normal. There

will be 11 on the ground when the IOC appointed counsellor is added to that. In

addition to that, the counselling staff will actually be working evenings and

weekends. In addition to that, there is the Mental Health Crisis Line and 811.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

I thank the minister once

again for the response. The Town of Wabush and other community partners aren't

aware of some of what was just outlined.

I ask

the minister respectfully: Would he commit to meeting with the town and other

partners in the community to discuss some of the immediate actions that are

being taken to help address these concerns?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. Minister of Health

and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

The

Member for Labrador West has already met with and will meet again. I received

communication in actual fact within the last hour and a half from the mayor of

Lab West. We are, as we speak, organizing a meeting for them to come in and talk

to the department.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you.

I thank

the minister sincerely for the responses to the questions today on a couple of

very serious issues. We're hearing concerns from people on the Burin Peninsula.

I ask

the Minister of Health: Can he confirm that there are plans to reduce X-ray and

blood collection services at the Grand Bank medical centre?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I spoke

with the Member from the district yesterday. I can confirm that there are no

plans to change the level of services at Grand Bank currently.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl North, for a very quick question.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Minister.

I ask:

Can we anticipate changes to the location of services, or even the removal of

services in some rural areas in the province in 2017?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services, for a quick response.

MR. HAGGIE:

The short answer is if he

reads The Way Forward he will see that

Burin, in particular, will be getting a primary health care team added to the

area in 2017.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, in 2012, the

former government undertook a review of the

Residential Tenancies Act. The report

of the hearings was submitted that same year with a promise of revised

legislation by spring 2013. It did not happen. It's been almost five years and

still no revised act.

I ask

the Minister of Service NL: He's had a whole year to work this out; where is his

act, what is his plan?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Service NL.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, I agree that the

former government did commit and were in consultations with bringing in the act.

It had been brought to my attention 11 months ago that we need a new

Residential Tenancies Act . Our department is in consultation now to

start changing the Residential Tenancies

Act .

It will

take time. I agree there is a need to change a lot of the residential amendments

in the act. We are committed to do that. It will be done. There will be public

consultations on the act. I can't give any time frame of when it will be done,

but I can assure I'll inform the Member when we start, where the public

consultations will be, and we're open to improve the

Residential Tenancies Act .

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Mr. Speaker, again, no clear

commitment as to when we're going to see a new

Residential Tenancies Act .

Mr.

Speaker, at the residential tenancy review hearings social workers, community

workers, mental health and addiction workers all reported on the deplorable,

unhealthy and substandard conditions in many boarding houses.

I ask

the Minister of Service NL: Will he commit to including the critical and

long-overdue regulation of rooming and boarding houses in the new act?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Service NL.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The

Member is correct that boarding houses are not included in the

Residential Tenancies Act as we speak. That is a concern of the

department. In the bigger picture of the whole act, that will be one of the

pieces of the review that we will have, to have it included, to see how we can

include it.

It is a

concern that has been brought to our attention. It is a concern that we will be

looking at. I can assure the Member if I give a timeline, six to eight months,

and it's missed I can guarantee you one thing that if I commit that we're

going to review the Residential Tenancies

Act , it will be done and there will be public consultations open for

anybody.

Mr.

Speaker, there is no one on this side of the House who don't want the best for

the residents in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and (inaudible)

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

It is

well known that poor housing conditions lead to serious health problems which

are a cost to the health care system.

I ask

the Minister of Health and Community Services: Has his department done an

analysis of the health care costs in this province of people living in

sub-standard, unhealthy boarding homes?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Service NL.

MR. JOYCE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank

the Member for the question. The people on this side of the House understand

that boarding houses and living conditions are just not an issue for government;

it's for landlords and for the City of Corner Brook. And I can assure the Member

that under the review of the act, we will look at all scopes of the act.

understand that there are some people, landlords, who aren't keeping their

properties up, but we have to work together. Under the legislation and under the

review that is going to take place, we'll have it pretty broad, we'll have a

wide scope, we'll take in all ideas, all suggestions, because we are committed

to bringing in the residential act and we are committed to make it better for

residents to live in better conditions and ensure that there are standards that

we need to keep and maintain.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A 2013

accreditation report on Eastern Health stated that sub-standard housing is a

significant issue for many clients. It recommended that Eastern Health work with

the Department of Health and Community Services to develop minimum housing

standards and public health legislation as it existed in other provinces.

I ask

the Minister of Health, has he started working on that recommendation with

Eastern Health.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Health and Community Services.

MR. HAGGIE:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

I would

refer the Member opposite to The Way

Forward document which references health and all policies. As part of the

discussions from my colleague, the Minister of Service NL, the issue of social

determinants of health and how our new regulations, our new legislation, will go

forward will be viewed through a health lens with the aim of remedying these

kinds of issues.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

There's about 15 seconds left

so we'll

MS. MICHAEL:

(Inaudible.)

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi, you weren't recognized on the camera, if you want to

ask the question again very quickly.

MS. MICHAEL:

I wonder if the Minister of

Health could give us a timeline for these wonderful ideas that he has, Mr.

Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Service NL.

MR. JOYCE:

As we said earlier, we're

going to review this. One of the things that has been brought to attention, and

I know the Member is very concerned, is the in-house assessment for seniors,

which we do now. That is part of this government, in-house assessment for

seniors. So we are making improvements.

Can we

change everything in 11 months? Of course not, but I can assure you that this

government is going to stand up to make lives better for the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador in every way we can.

The Way Forward is giving us a path forward and we will live to the

recommendations and the standards that we set for ourselves.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Select Committees.

The hon.

the Minister Responsible for Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

I stand on a point of order,

please.

MR. SPEAKER:

The Minister of Children,

Seniors and Social Development on a point of order.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

When I said 170, it was 170

children receiving level four services. The number of children in care is 982.

The number of children receiving

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

This is

not a point of order. If the minister wishes to stand when we come to Answers to

Questions for which Notice has been Given, I'll permit her to provide her

answer.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Presenting Reports

by Standing and Select Committees

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Yes, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

happy to stand here and indicate to this House that as Chair of the Standing

Orders Committee, our committee has had a number of meetings over the past few

months and I'd like to thank my colleagues who sit on that committee: the MHA

for St. John's West, the Minister of Natural Resources; the MHA for St. George's

Humber; the MHA for Mount Pearl North, as well as the MHA for Conception Bay

East Bell Island, and the Member for St. John's East Quidi Vidi.

We think

we've had very productive meetings. Meetings that are intended to advance and

improve the Standing Orders of this House; and, as such, I hereby table a report

of the Standing Orders Committee for this House.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further reports by standing

and select committees?

Tabling

of Documents.

Notices

of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Mr. Speaker, I give notice

that I will tomorrow move the following motion in this House of Assembly as

follows: and I'll apologize for the length of it, it is quite lengthy but I

have to read it through for the record.

That the

Standing Orders of the House of Assembly are amended to come into force on the

date of their approval:

Standing Orders 12 to 14 are deleted and the following substituted:

Quorum

12(1) The presence of at

least 10 Members, including the Speaker, constitutes a quorum for a meeting of

the House for the exercise of its powers.

(2) Any Member may direct the

Speaker's attention to the fact that there is not a quorum present.

(3) If at any time a question

of a quorum arises, the Speaker, upon determining that there is no quorum, shall

sound the division bells for five minutes, and then following this account if

the Member shows that there is no quorum, the Speaker shall adjourn the House

until the next sitting day.

(4) While the Members in the

House are being counted the doors remain open and Members can come into the

House during the whole time occupied by the counting.

(5) While in Committee of the

Whole, if a question of a quorum arises, the Chair shall count the Members

present and if 10 Members, including the Chair, are not counted, the Chair shall

rise the Committee and report the lack of a quorum to the Speaker who shall then

follow Standing Orders 12(3) and (4).

(6) Whenever the Speaker

adjourns the House for lack of a quorum, the time of the adjournment, and the

names of the Members who were present shall be inserted into that day's Journal.

2. Standing Order 15 is

deleted and the following is substituted:

Lieutenant-Governor arrives

15. When the Sergeant-at-Arms

announces that the Honourable Lieutenant-Governor is at the door or announces a

messenger from the Lieutenant-Governor, the Speaker shall take the Chair whether

or not there is a quorum present.

3. Standing Orders 22 and 23

are deleted and the following are substituted:

Withdrawal of Strangers

22. If a Member takes notice

that one or more strangers are present on the floor of the Assembly Chamber, the

Speaker, or the Chairperson (as the case may be), shall, if he or she considers

it proper and without permitting any debate or amendment, order that strangers

withdraw.

Conduct

of Strangers and visitors

23. Any

stranger or visitor admitted into any part of the House or galleries, who

misconducts himself or herself, or who does not withdraw when directed to do so

while the House or any Committee of the Whole House is sitting, shall be taken

into custody by the Sergeant-At-Arms and no person so taken into custody shall

be discharged without a special order of the House.

4. Note

1, headed Parliamentary Calendar of the Appendix to the Standing Orders of the

House of Assembly is deleted.

AND

FURTHER THAT the following changes to the Standing Orders be implemented for the

sittings of this House of Assembly for the 2017 calendar year and that the

replaced provisions of the Standing Orders be held in suspension for that same

period as follows:

5(1)

Standing Orders 8 to 11 are deleted and the following are substituted:

Annual

Calendar

8(1)

Unless otherwise ordered, the House of Assembly shall meet each year

(

a) for

the Winter-Spring sitting, commencing not later than the first Monday in March

and concluding not later than the first Thursday in June; and

(

b) for

the Fall sitting, commencing not later than the first Monday in November and

concluding not later than the first Thursday in December.

(2) The

House shall not meet on the days which are paid Government Holidays.

(3) During the sittings held under Standing Order 8(1), there shall be

(

a) one

constituency week for every three sitting weeks unless varied by the calendar

provided by the Clerk under Standing Order 8(5); and

(

b) a

break commencing after the end of the sitting day on Maundy Thursday until the

third Monday following that date.

(4) In a

calendar year in which there is a general election, the Government may indicate

to the Speaker that the commencement of a sitting will be postponed or varied or

that there will not be a sitting and the Speaker shall inform Members.

(5) On

or before January 31 of each calendar year, the Clerk, following consultations

with the Government House Leader shall distribute to all Members a calendar

indicating the intended sitting days for the next calendar year.

(6) On

or before January 31, immediately after the commencement of this Standing Order,

the Clerk shall also prepare and distribute in accordance with Standing Order

8(5) a calendar for the sitting days of the current calendar year.

(7) If

the Government advises the Speaker that the public interest requires the House

to meet at any time because of emergency or extraordinary circumstances, a

reason for the recall must be provided and the Speaker shall

(

a) advise Members that the House is to meet at the specified time; and

(

b) advise Members of the reason for the recall.

(8) The

Winter-Spring or Fall sittings of the House referred to in Standing Order 8(1)

may be shortened or extended by the passing of a motion with notice made by the

Government House Leader which motion shall be decided without debate or

amendment.

Daily Sittings

9(1). The time for the meeting of the House is

(a) 1:30 p.m. until 5:30 p.m. on Mondays, Tuesdays and

Thursdays inclusive;

(b) 10 a.m. until 12:30 p.m. and 2 p.m. until 5 p.m. on

Wednesdays.

(2) At

5:30

p.m. on Monday, Tuesday and Thursday the Speaker shall adjourn the House.

(3) At 5

p.m. on Wednesday the Speaker shall adjourn the House.

(4) When

the House adjourns on Thursday, it stands adjourned, unless otherwise ordered,

until the following Monday.

Business

to stand over

10. All

business not disposed of at the termination of a sitting day shall stand over

until the next sitting day when it will be taken up at the stage where its

progress was interrupted.

Extended

sittings

(1) The Government House Leader may move that the House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m.

on Monday, Tuesday and Thursday afternoons but notice of this motion must be

given at a previous day's sitting and once put by the Chair is not debatable.

(2) Notwithstanding

Standing Order 11(1), at midnight on Monday, Tuesday and Thursday, unless the

Closure Rule (SO 47) is in operation, the Speaker shall adjourn the House.

(2) Standing Order 24(3) is deleted and the following is substituted:

24(3)

On Wednesday except when otherwise ordered by the House, after motion, of

which due notice shall have been given, the following shall be the order of

business:

(

a) from 10 a.m.

until 12:30 p.m., Motions of which notices have been given by the Government and

Government Orders;

(

b) from 2 to 5

p.m., following the

ordinary daily routine of business

(

i) Motions of which notices have been given by Private Members;

(ii)

Motions of which notices have been given by the Government;

(iii)

Member's Orders;

(iv)

Government Orders.

That is

the motion.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

Answers

to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Answers to

Questions for which Notice has been Given

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

Children, Seniors and Social Development.

MS. GAMBIN-WALSH:

Mr. Speaker, when asked a

question by the Member across, I said 170. In actual fact, 170 are the Level 4

children placements that we have. The number of children in care is 982, Mr.

Speaker. The total receiving services is just under 6,000 and there are 40 ILAs

at present.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further answers to questions

for which notice has been given?

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's Centre.

MS. ROGERS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the

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

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

government has once again cut the libraries budget, threatening the closure of

54 libraries; and

WHEREAS

libraries are often the backbone of their communities, especially for those with

little access to government services where they offer learning opportunities and

computer access; and

WHEREAS

libraries and librarians are critical in efforts to improve the province's

literacy levels, which are among the lowest in Canada; and

WHEREAS

already strapped municipalities are not in a position to take over the operation

and cost of libraries;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your

petitioners, humbly pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge government

to keep these libraries open and work on a long-term plan to strengthen the

library system.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, this particular batch of petitions has been signed by the people in

Bishop's Falls and in that surrounding area. The Bishop's Falls public library

is planning to hold an art exhibit next year to celebrate its 50th anniversary

as an important pillar of the Central Newfoundland community, if it is still in

business by then. There have been no guarantees by this government because

they've hired a consulting firm, an accounting firm, to see whether or not we

need our libraries.

Well,

Mr. Speaker, Bishop's Falls is one of 54 public libraries in rural communities

placed on the chopping block in the wake of last spring's budget. Like nearly

half these

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MS. ROGERS:

54 libraries, the Bishop's

Falls facility is housed in a main municipal building in the town. That means

there is no cost to government for rent, no cost for utilities, no cost for snow

clearing. It's a bargain, Mr. Speaker. It's a gift horse that the Minister of

Education and Early Childhood Development decided to look in the mouth.

Now,

Bishop's Falls is a community with no Boys and Girls Club. The library is an

important part of their lives. It is a community with a significant number of

low-income earners, many of whom don't have a computer at home because they

can't afford one. So they come to the library to upgrade themselves, check the

job market and use the Internet and the like. Because so many of the costs are

covered by the Town of Bishop's Falls, the library costs government relatively

little, but its closure would indeed, Mr. Speaker, impoverish the lives of the

people who use it on a regular basis.

So, Mr.

Speaker, I urge government to rethink its ill-advised attack on literacy so that

the people of Bishop's Falls don't end up marking the 50th anniversary of the

facility with a wake.

It's

rather ironic, Mr. Speaker, when you think that the town values this library so

much because they know how important it is to the health and well-being of the

library, and they implore the Minister of Education to save this library, to not

close it and take away from the people of the town.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further petitions?

The hon.

the Member for Conception Bay East Bell Island.

MR. BRAZIL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the

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

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

Budget 2016 closed the Advanced

Education and Skills office in Bonavista; and

WHEREAS

the residents of Bonavista and surrounding communities require and deserve the

appropriate level of service;

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

of Assembly to urge government to reconsider the decision to close the Bonavista

Advanced Education and Skills office.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, as I mentioned last week, I've been getting a lot of inquiries from the

Bonavista Peninsula about the cut in services and the impact it's having on the

residents there; particularly those who have some inquiries around the services

that are offered by Advanced Education and Skills, and now Labour, which there

are numerous ones.

Great

programs were developed over the last number of decades to meet the needs of

individuals, particularly those that may be struggling from low-income

situations, from some health-related situations, from social issues, but also

from education issues. They see the benefits, and they've seen the benefits for

decades of what those services can provide and how it can give clients and

residents a hand up. They're not looking for a hand out.

Unfortunately, with the closure and not being able to provide those services

that were normally supplied through that process, and the indications that this

was a stepping stone to other services that may be available. Not having that

bridge is detrimental. Not having direct access to information to be able to

determine what is out there, what programs or services, what kinds of support

mechanisms are there, is detrimental.

There is

no doubt, when you look at the geography of the Bonavista Peninsula, just that

in itself dictates that you need to have a centre where the surrounding

communities, a hub, can fill into, particularly around if Bonavista is the key

area in that part of the peninsula where a lot of the other services are being

offered, the health care is there, obviously, the post-secondary education is

there, it would only make sense that as you come to avail of some of those

services you would have another mechanism that would provide you with adequate

services. It would provide you with advice, it would steer you in the right

direction.

It would

also be a gathering place where if there were certain concerns about programs

and services that are not yet developed or not offered in that particular area,

they could be then generated through the staff. Because as we all know, as a

former civil servant for over a quarter of a century, I realized and knew that

programs and policies get driven based on the information we get from the

grassroots. And the best people to be able to get the information from the

grassroots are those who represent the government.

When I

say represent the government, are those civil servants who provide services.

Because if there's a crack or if there is some way people are slipping those

cracks, or if there's a type of program that is now necessary, then that can be

developed. If there's a program that has done its ride, has done its benefits

and no longer is necessary, that frees up the ability for government to put a

new program in place, then that's necessary.

So, Mr.

Speaker, again, we'll be asking the government to reverse the decision that's

made and it's detrimental.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

MR. K. PARSONS:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

To the

House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador assembled, the

petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly

sheweth:

WHEREAS

the recreational ground fishery is part of our culture, history and heritage;

and

WHEREAS

the federal government is proposing a tag system for the recreational ground

fishery in 2017; and

WHEREAS

participants would have to purchase a licence and purchase tags in order to

participate in the recreational fishery;

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

of Assembly to urge the federal government not to implement a cost or fees for

those participating in the recreational ground fishery in 2017.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, I listened to the Minister of Fisheries last week and one of the

answers he gave me was that he wants Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to be

treated just like the rest of Atlantic Canada. So next year, there is no tag

system that is going to be implemented in any of the Atlantic Provinces.

I urge

the minister to talk to his counterparts and to talk to the federal government

and his good friend, Judy Foote, to cancel this program and have us equal with

the rest of Atlantic Canada.

The big

thing about the tags and we understand, as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians,

we want to make sure whatever we do when the cod comes back that we do it

properly, that it's managed properly and that the proper stats are kept and

everything else. But we also want to be treated fairly.

I think

there are other ways rather than a tags system that's charging people money. If

you talk to most people that are involved in the recreational fishery, they do

it for the right reasons. There are very, very few people out there that are not

doing it the proper way. They'll get caught. If not, people that are in those

communities will report them because we want this done properly. I know most

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians enjoy a day on the water. They enjoy the

privilege and it was something that we have in our heritage, something that

we've done for years to catch a codfish.

To me,

there's no better feeling to be out a day on the water and you know too, Mr.

Speaker catching a codfish. This is part of who we are as Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians. But to put a cost to it and put a cost to our people if they want

records kept, if DFO needs the records of what fish are caught, perhaps they

should hire people to be on the wharves. In one week, you could have a good

estimate of how much fish is actually getting caught. You'd have an idea of what

fish is taken out of the water.

I'm

sure, knowing what I've heard from fishermen and what I heard when I went to the

consultations at the Capital Hotel, that we're a very low percentage. The

percentage of the recreational cod fishery and the number of cod that's taken

out of the water, the talks that night the minister asked me to get the

figures, because nobody knows. But the talks that DFO and the people did, that's

around 1 per cent.

We need

to make sure Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are treated fairly. We're not

criminals. We'll do what needs to be done. And if we need to make sure there's

something in place that shows how much fish is taken out of the water, we'll do

it.

Thank

you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Opposition House

Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr.

Speaker, I'm pleased today to rise and present a petition. To the hon. House of

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

the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and Labrador humbly

sheweth:

WHEREAS

the change to busing times, routes and schedules are negatively impacting the

lives of students and their families;

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

of Assembly to urge government to reconsider their ill-informed decision and

implement a system that better reflects the needs of students and their

families.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr.

Speaker, this was a decision that was made in the 2016 budget in regard to

busing and reduction in the actual amount of buses, and what's resulted in many

cases is double-streaming now, buses taking double routes that they hadn't done

in the past. At the time, certainly in the filibuster that we had here in the

House and through other capacities, through Question Period, we had a tremendous

outpouring of information and concerns from residents where this was directly

affected.

Certainly, in my district, in the District of Ferryland, we heard it from many

parents and caretakers. I met a number of times with concerned groups, whether

it was in the Goulds-Petty Harbour region for that school bus system, whether it

was from Bay Bulls to Bauline school bus system for the Mobile-Witless Bay

school system, about that changes that has made to families and to students. In

particular, the early rise, the early hours in regard to busing and picking up

younger children and, as well, leaving school at an earlier time for the younger

kids, as well for the older students, the high school students that are leaving

later.

It's has

huge implications on families in regard to daycare, having to get other means

for daycare. It's an extra cost for families. It's been devastating for routines

in families in regard to the operations of their household and getting kids to

and from school.

Since

that time, I've spoken to parents and I continue to hear from parents, where

it's having an effect on the very younger kids in that they're up earlier in the

morning. In the evening time, because of the longer days these younger kids at

school, it's having an effect on their learning ability in regard to doing

homework in the evening and those types of things.

So this

is an ill-conceived plan. There were reductions in the school buses which are

not conducive to servicing our school systems, servicing our education and we're

seeing the results of that now, as we've starting with this in September,

started with this reduction in school buses. There's a huge concern coming with

the weather in regard to can we meet the capacity if a school is closed because

of inclement weather. It's something this government certainly needs to revisit

and revisit now.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St.

John's East Quidi Vidi.

MS. MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr.

Speaker.

To the

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

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland

and Labrador humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS

government has once again cut the libraries budget, forcing the closure of 54

libraries; and

WHEREAS

libraries are often the backbone of their communities, especially for those with

little access to government services where they offer learning opportunities and

computer access; and

WHEREAS

libraries and librarians are critical in efforts to improve the province's

literacy levels, which are among the lowest in Canada; and

WHEREAS

already strapped municipalities are not in a position to take over the operation

and cost of libraries;

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

of Assembly to urge government to keep these libraries open and work on a

long-term plan to strengthen the library system.

And as

in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

This

petition, Mr. Speaker, is signed by many residents from Lumsden, another

community that was totally shocked when they got word their library was closing.

The

public library is an integral part of this small but bustling community.

Programs offered at this library include programming for children, for teens,

for adults and seniors. Residents use the library to set up their e-readers, to

troubleshoot any problem they have with their e-readers or computers, to help

them set up email accounts, do online banking or get connected with social

media.

The

volunteer local library board arranges to have books delivered to seniors who

are unable to go the library. The library in Lumsden is busy during all seasons,

especially in the summer when its services are widely used by tourists.

Mr.

Speaker, the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Development in trying to

rationale his ill-advised decision to close these libraries said it wasn't much

of a service if a particular library was only open 15 or 20 hours a week. Mr.

Speaker, the library in Lumsden delivers all the services and programs I've just

described based on a budget that covers wages for only 13 hours a week.

If the

minister feels these are insufficient hours, you should increase the funding,

not close this valuable and highly valued facility.

Thank

you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to

call from the Order Paper, Motion 3, Bill 46,

An Act Respecting Procurement By

Public Bodies.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Conception Bay South.

MR. PETTEN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So a

continuation I ran out of time the other day on procurement. Mr. Speaker, I

spent a lot of time speaking about sections 28 and 29 of the act. I guess

there's a lot of conversation and we've been reading up on it and reviewing it.

I think there's a lot of uncertainty within this legislation that it is

incumbent upon us, as an Opposition, to highlight for the public.

As has

been stated many times, this is a very important piece of legislation. The

public, us as a former administration, everyone is aware our current P ublic

Tender Act needed updates; no one questioning that. Our attempt there too is

to highlight some possible shortcomings within the legislation and make it a

better piece of legislation.

We're

looking at over $4 billion in spending regarding this bill. As the minister

referred to in his response in Question Period, he was talking about a municipal

act or numbering, something about regulations come after. We have to compare

apples to apples.

All due

respect, this procurement legislation, when you're looking at like $4 billion

worth of spending a year for the economy for the province, I mean for a

government that has a budget of around that's almost half your budget. It's

probably more disingenuous to compare it to a municipal act because that's not

what we're talking about. We're talking about a very serious, a very important

piece of legislation actually.

The way

it appears to me, as we review, you get all these regulations or all these

issues, like you have your thresholds. There's a list in

section 28 and 29. It's

almost like you're not sure where to fit them to, so you'll throw them in there

and Cabinet, not the House as has been stated, decides. That to me is a huge

issue I think that needs further debate and discussion.

personally believe the public. I know the public and a lot of groups out there

that are very keen on this legislation are doing their own work on it. I think

that the public needs to be aware of you have a very important piece of

legislation with a lot of regulations that's going to have a huge impact on how

this functions throughout the business community, throughout anyone that's doing

business with government. Yet, they won't see the regulations until six months'

time, who knows, whenever Cabinet decides to sit down and decide what the

regulations will be and what will be the guidelines.

That

brings an element of doubt and uncertainty. There's no one questioning anyone,

but when you're doing something behind the closed doors of Cabinet, that does

draw questions. I mean this is the House of Assembly; this is the people's

House. This is where most stuff like that should be debated.

We're

debating a bill that hasn't got all of the guts to it. A lot of that bill was

already drafted by the former administration, but the major details the devil

is in the details they say. A lot of the details we won't know for another so

we're passing a piece of legislation that we won't know the real guts, the real

important stuff that a lot of people want to know for months out.

So it's

an odd occurrence. What are you debating? You're debating a partial piece of

legislation that has $4 billion worth of spending attached to it, and that's

significant, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like

to point out

section 7 of this legislation. There are important issues that

should be brought up. It says: Notwithstanding

section 6, the

Lieutenant-Governor in Council slash Cabinet may exempt procurement from

the requirements of this Act where it is in the best interest of the economic

development of the province.

That's a

pretty broad statement to make, the best interest of the economic development

of the province. With all due respect to the current Cabinet, is that a

decision they should be making? Isn't that a decision that the 40 elected

Members of this Assembly should sit down and decide, debate what is the best

interest of the economic development of the province?

That's a

huge statement to have in there. The strength of this legislation is being

watered down by having statements in there like that because this could mean

anything. The legislation could become a very weak piece of legislation.

Another

issue, Mr. Speaker, as my time is winding down that I'd like to highlight, too.

A procurement officer and the advisory council to the procurement officer the

advisory council will be decided by the minister. The procurement officer will

go to the IAC, but we all know about the IAC. That will end up going to the

Cabinet room. So regardless of whom the IAC pick, Cabinet will get the final

decision.

I'd like

to point out and be on record; I heard yesterday in the media, there was a

comment said: If there's one snip of patronage in the chief procurement officer,

this piece of legislation is almost worthless. It's a very strong statement but

when I heard it, I said you know that makes a lot of sense.

Again,

you're dealing with all government purchasing procurement, $4 billion. We're not

talking about a $50,000 consulting contract to do a marketing plan for a certain

aspect of a division within a department; you're talking about $4 billion. These

decisions will be picked ultimately by the minister and Cabinet; but, then

they're going to follow the regulations and the guidelines that are decided by

Cabinet, not the House.

The

minister thinks, he's so proud, that we're all going to jump up and clap for his

legislation, but in actual fact we don't know what we are going to what are we

voting on? What are the regulations? Lay the regulations out, lay the thresholds

out, lay everything on the table then we'll have a sensible debate. Then we may

be able to say we are in agreement with that.

Right

now, we're in agreement with a pie in the sky. We don't know what we're voting

on. How can you expect the House to sit there and in clear conscience vote for a

bill that's going to affect $4 billion in spending when you don't know the rules

of the game?

For

government it's fair to say be proud and raise the flag, you have a great piece

of legislation, but we need facts before we can really get into serious debate

on this bill, Mr. Speaker.

Thank

you very much.

MR. SPEAKER (Warr):

The hon. the Member for

Mount Pearl North.

MR. KENT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm

pleased to join with my colleague today in speaking to Bill 46,

An Act

Respecting Procurement by Public Bodies.

government Members like to remind the hon. House in recent days, this is

something the previous government was working on for a long time. I have to say

in all sincerity, Mr. Speaker, that a great deal of groundwork was done.

There

was a first reading of the procurement by public bodies bill given in 2012, but

the legislation was not ever introduced in this House. I'll speak to that during

my time to speak to Bill 46 today.

I want

to start by saying, though, that I believe in public procurement reform. I

support it, I believe it's necessary. I will acknowledge that it's long overdue,

but I think there are also good reasons for why it has taken some time to get to

this place where we are.

I think

because of the approach the new government has taken with its proposed public

procurement legislation, I think we're at risk. I think there are some real

concerns that need to be fully discussed and debated in this House before we

could lend our support to the bill. But many of the principles that are in this

bill, in this proposed act, are principles that I certainly support, and I

believe some of my colleagues, if not all, support as well. Reform is needed, no

doubt.

The

strongest objection I have, and I suspect others have as well, based on what

I've heard in second reading so far, is that there are some holes that are yet

to be filled. I recognize, as the minister pointed out in Question Period today,

that these holes are often filled through regulations after the fact. In this

particular case, the holes are so significant in terms of the spirit and the

intent of the legislation, and given how complicated and how large this

procurement reform initiative is, the holes in this case need to be discussed

can simply lend our support to this bill.

So I'm

glad we're having a debate about it. I suspect there will be Members who raise

some more specific questions about this in second reading sorry, in Committee

of the Whole stage of the bill. I look forward to those discussions.

For a

brief period of time in 2015, I was the Acting Minister Responsible for the

Government Purchasing Agency. For that reason, I do have a little bit of

knowledge about what my intentions were, anyway, when it came to procurement

reform. There are some things in this bill that I do support in principle, that

I do think make a lot of sense. So I'd like to comment briefly on some of that

and then talk about some of the specific concerns that I do have with the

legislation.

I am

really pleased to see a focus on best value. I think when it comes to public

procurement reform, that's a principle that we should all get behind and

support. I think one of the things I would like to see in the legislation is a

reduced burden in terms of administration on public bodies, and also on

suppliers. I'd like to see public bodies, ultimately, as a result of procurement

reform be more proactive when it comes to public procurement, which is a bit of

a mouthful, Mr. Speaker, as you can tell.

While I

know the approach of this bill calls for an increase in standardization, which I

think makes sense, I think there's also a need to be much more proactive in

managing relationships with suppliers. As the Leader of the Opposition pointed

out in Question Period today as well, Mr. Speaker, we're talking about billions

of dollars of spending annually not one time, but annually. So there is reason

to ask questions and to be concerned.

I think

that exceptions to open calls should be defined in the legislation. I recognize

and I respect the fact the minister is saying, well, that will be in the

regulations, but in this case some of these things are so significant in terms

of billions of dollars of spending that I think we need a bit more clarity on

what exactly government's intention is. So yes, it's not uncommon to bring in

regulations after the fact, that's normal practice, as the minister quite

rightly pointed out today; but, in this particular case, there are some more

questions we have and we don't feel it's simply good enough to say, well, don't

worry, it will all be covered in the regulations, trust us.

exceptions to open calls is one example. Another example relates to supplier

performance management. While it will be contained in regulations, I think

that's something that needs to be fully discussed while we're debating this

legislation.

There

are also some concerns that hopefully we'll have a chance to talk about in the

Committee stage related to public reporting of exception reports and award

information as well.

One of

the things I didn't find in the legislation that I thought I would see, just

based on my brief time as the acting minister and as someone who was keen on

seeing this advance, I didn't see reference to annual procurement plans. I just

recall from my time as the acting minister that that is something that should be

required within government, and government departments and agencies should

identify opportunities for consolidation of purchases which would lead to lower

prices and increased value.

So I'd

ask the minister to comment on that perhaps when he closes debate, or maybe

during Committee stage; perhaps that's being addressed somewhere else, but I

can't see it in the legislation that's proposed.

I also

acknowledge that the supplier complaint process will be contained in regulations

or it will be determined by Treasury Board. And I have some real concern with

that as well. To me, I think at this stage that should be clearly defined.

realize that the final text, the final wording of the regulations may not be

available or not be finished at this point in time; I suspect that those

regulations are drafted. I would hope those regulations are drafted and I would

hope that the minister in his comments could talk about what government intends

when it comes to the supplier complaint process. And maybe through the course of

debate, he'll be able to give us some more confidence that some of these issues

where we have big questions right now will actually be addressed, and some firm

commitments around some of those issues may help.

I'm also

concerned about timing. I think it makes sense to address the timeline for full

implementation of the act and the regulations that are yet to be revealed. The

legislation doesn't appear to give guidance on that. I understand that

government is committed to full implementation in 2017. There's a lot of work to

be done, a lot of change that needs to be managed.

Thankfully, I do know for a fact that a lot of ground work has been laid, so

it's not like this is a complete surprise or shock to, for instance, people

who've worked with the Government Purchasing Agency in government, who know that

this has been in development for some time. But some clarity around timelines

for implementation is something else that I would personally like to see some

more about.

I want

to talk about a couple of the sections of the act. I will be able to ask

specific questions in Committee about various clauses, but I want to give the

House and the public a sense of some of the issues we feel need to be better

addressed and clarified before we could support this legislation. Because

frankly, for me it's not about what's in the bill. I think much of what's in the

bill is actually really good and it's consistent with what I would have

envisioned in a bill that I hope we would have brought forward.

But it's

not just about what's in the bill; it's about what's not in the bill. That's

what I'd like to speak to in a little more detail this afternoon. We don't know

what the process is going to be when it comes to the regulations and when the

act is applied and when it's not going to be applied. Cabinet appears to have a

lot of discretion.

I think

my colleague for Conception Bay South made a really good point about the chief

procurement officer. It's one thing to say a recommendation will come through

the Independent Appointments Commission and then Cabinet will make a decision.

Based on the activity through the Independent Appointments Commission so far, we

have real concerns about whether we will end up with someone who is truly

non-partisan in that role.

I think

as a radio show host commented recently, and as the Member reiterated today, the

person in that position has to be absolutely impartial and non-partisan in their

role and in their work, and I'm sure government would agree with that. But based

on what we've seen through the Independent Appointments Commission process now,

to date, we're concerned. We're legitimately concerned about where that might

go.

I draw

your attention to some of the things that government may make regulations about

after this bill has passed and the act comes into existence, but issues that are

not addressed directly in the bill today that cause us concern: The

Lieutenant-Governor in Council may make regulations (

a) respecting the manner in

which public bodies procure commodities; (

b) respecting when an open call for

bids is not required respecting the procurement of commodities .

That's

significant, Mr. Speaker: respecting when an open call for bids is not required

respecting the procurement of commodities . So Cabinet will decide at some

point about when exceptions can and will be made. I understand that government

has a right and a responsibility to govern, but when we're talking about

billions of dollars of taxpayers' money, I believe there's a need for a greater

level of transparency.

Hopefully in the regulations that eventually are brought forward, those concerns

will be addressed. But they're so significant at this point in time, Mr.

Speaker, that we don't feel we can simply just say, okay, we'll trust you to

make good decisions about a whole list of things that are outlined in

section

28, for instance, of the legislation.

Another

one is (

c) respecting alternative procurement approaches for the procurement of

commodities; so alternatives to the prescribed approach (

d) respecting the

manner in which public bodies shall maintain records respecting procurement of

commodities; (

e) respecting when annual procurement plans shall be required from

public bodies, and the form and content of those plans .

Sorry,

so there is a reference. There is a reference right there to the procurement

plans but it's not specified. It's not guaranteed that they will actually be

required. I find that troubling. I thought the act would spell that out and be

clear that it is actually indeed required.

Also,

(

f) respecting the manner in which bids are to be evaluated; (

g) respecting the

manner in which contracts are to be awarded; (

h) establishing the processes to

be followed for the submitting and treatment of supplier complaints; (

i) respecting supplier performance; (

j) establishing monetary amounts at which an

open call for bids is required .

That's a

real concerning one, Mr. Speaker. Those thresholds, those monetary amounts at

which an open call for bids is required, I would have thought when we finally

got to the day where we'd be debating public procurement reform in this House

that there'd be some clarity around that.

I didn't

see the minister's press conference, but I did see some of the media coverage

and I do believe there was some discussion in the presentation about those

thresholds, those amounts; yet, it's not being addressed in this House in

debate. So, hopefully, as we move into Committee stage we'll be able to get some

more clarity around government's intentions in some of these areas.

Another

one, (

k) establishing monetary amounts below which there is no requirement to

issue an open call for bids; (

l) governing the form and content of the

electronic notification system; (

m) defining the scope, content and limits of

policies respecting the procurement of commodities that may be established by

the chief procurement officer; (

n) defining the information about procurement

activities that shall be published .

There is

not even clarity at this stage around what information will actually be

published and disclosed. So that causes concern for sure; (

o) establishing time

periods for the required publication of information .

These

are issues that we feel we need more clarity on before we can support the

legislation. Even though, as I said in my opening comments, there's lots about

this bill that I think is great and it's consistent with what I would have hoped

we would have brought across the finish line.

Before I

go further, and in case I run out of time, let me speak to that a little bit

more. A previous Progressive Conservative government brought forward the first

public procurement reform with the Public

Tender Act in 1984. While the act has been updated numerous times

since then, including in 2009, we've acknowledged many times that the act is

really in need of reform. So I'm pleased that that's moving forward.

Those

original moves did bring a level of integrity and fairness and good value and

transparency to public procurement. That's why we were working on it, but any

legislation that comes forward is going to be imperfect and the needs of

government and the needs of society are going to evolve over time.

The

trade and the business and the procurement environments have changed a lot since

back in 1984, even since 2009 when changes were made to the

Public Tender Act . So in the trade environment, things are

continuing to change rapidly. These are issues that are always influx. That was

some of the challenges we had. It wasn't just about resolving some of those

issues I just raised, which was an ongoing piece of work that the previous

government was engaged in. It was bigger than that. It was about responding to

the changing needs of the business environment, of the trade environment we

found ourselves in.

For

instance, CETA is just happening now. The Agreement on Internal Trade is being

renegotiated, and it includes procurement and could potentially impact what

we're doing here.

Donald

Trump makes things interesting as well when it comes to NAFTA, and where trade

agreements could end up related to the Asia-Pacific regions and so on.

Trade

issues also end up before tribunals and the courts. That, too, can change the

rules and the environment. So the legislation anticipates some of those

challenges, but I speak to all of that, Mr. Speaker, to illustrate there is a

lot changing. For that reason, it has not been easy to get to this stage. I do

commend government for bringing forward this legislation. In light of all that's

going on in that changing environment and some of the challenges we've seen in

recent years, there's a need for some more clarity on some of those points that

we've already raised and will continue to raise.

Some of

the parts of the bill are so vague and so open ended that people can only guess

where this will lead. This is not what we were promised when the Liberals in

their recent election campaign promised to bring forward procurement

legislation, because it's not decisive and there are so many questions that

still need to be answered.

This is

a good framework. I think there are lots of things about it that are quite

reasonable and some are actually quite progressive, but there are more answers

that are needed in order to give us confidence, more importantly to give the

public confidence, that we're doing the right things for the right reasons here.

I think the logic and the purpose behind public procurement reform is sound for

the most part, and much of it is stuff that I can support, to put it simply.

I only

got a couple of minutes left. I said at the beginning of my remarks that I

really like the shift in this bill from the principle of least cost to best

value. I know the minister has spoken about that in his news conference and in

presenting this bill to the House. Best value is the concept of selecting the

bid that'll give the greatest return in terms of quality and cost over time.

That's a good thing. That's something we can absolutely support, and I suspect

other Members who will speak to this will elaborate on that as well.

The lack

of detail pertaining to regulations is what's most concerning. The framework

that is presented still leaves a lot of questions, and we don't know what's

going to be in the regulations that will be brought forward. We also don't know

when they'll be available.

Government has said sometime in 2017, which is good, but in my view, and I think

in the view of some of my colleagues, that's not good enough, because we need

answers around when an open call is not required. We need answers around how

records are going to be kept. We need answers around how bids are going to be

evaluated. We need answers around establishing when and how a call is to be

conducted. We need answers for sure on what information is going to be made

public. So these are some of the issues we have.

commend government for bringing forward this legislation, but I'm hopeful we can

get some answers to these questions, and they're the very questions that I know

I was struggling with during my brief period of a few months as the acting

minister responsible for the act; that and the changing trade environment speaks

to why it has taken us so long to get to this place.

Mr.

Speaker, I'm glad to have the opportunity to speak in second reading, and I look

forward to continued debate.

Thank

you.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for

Fortune Bay Cape La Hune.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Once

again, it is an honour and a privilege to stand in this hon. House and speak to

this very important bill that has been brought forward, and I thank the minister

for bringing it forward,

It's

certainly a bill that many people in the province have been looking forward to

and recognize the need for modernization, Mr. Speaker. Of course, our role here

in Opposition is to scrutinize bills, and on behalf of the people of the

province, ask the questions that need to be asked to ensure that any bills which

are passed are truly in the best interests of the people as a whole. So that is

what we will be doing over the course of the next few days.

This

bill will replace the current Government

Purchasing Agency Act , the

Intergovernmental Joint Purchasing Act and the

Public Tender Act , along with some

public tendering regulations. It also makes updates to various other pieces of

legislation as they relate to procurement.

And the

aim of this bill, according to the minister responsible, is to help modernize

the procurement process. That is something in principle that we can all support,

but as many of my colleagues have already stated in their speeches thus far, the

devil is in the detail. A grave concern for all of us is the lack of detail

outlined in the bill pertaining to exactly how decisions will be made and

contracts will be awarded.

The

process which this bill outlines is based upon the Reid & Associates report of

2008, along with public consultations. Municipalities, health boards, school

boards, Crown corporations, agencies and commissions, and core government will

all have to follow this framework. And like many of my colleagues who have

already spoken, one of the things that we do like in particular about this bill

is the option of best value.

Certainly as a Member who represents a cluster of small rural communities, you

do find yourself in situations sometimes where the lowest cost bid is not

necessarily the best value bid. If I could pick a service arbitrarily, something

like garbage collection, you want to ensure that the contractor awarded is

someone you know who will get the job done, has reliable equipment; but, in some

instances, you could find yourself in the situation where the lowest bid doesn't

permit you to acquire the best value. So these are some parts of the bill that

we see as having some merit.

Here's

another example: say if there are two bids for a printer receipt, one printer

costs $100 and is expected to last for two years and the other printer costs

$300 but is expected to last for 10 years. The taxpayers' dollars are best put

to use if the contract is awarded for that $300 printer because you won't find

yourself having to spend $200 again in two years' time; you'll actually get 10

years from it. And that can happen a lot, Mr. Speaker. So that part of the bill

is something that we think will benefit the taxpayers of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

It also

allows bids to be judged based on quality not just price. And if a bid is

received from a provider who has a documented history of not providing quality

service, then the purchaser can choose another bid as the successful bid.

I should

also mention that those bidders who are not successful are able to sit down with

the chief procurement officer to review their bid and to see where their bid

fell short. And this mechanism, I'm sure, will help industry build better bids

in the future.

Mr.

Speaker, while we agree that procurement needs to be reformed in this province,

as I started out in my opening comments, we are concerned about the lack of

detail contained in this bill. The framework here leaves many holes to be

filled. The indication is that these holes will be filled through regulations,

but the unfortunate problem we have is that those regulations are not yet

available. So we, here in this hon. House, are going to be asked to support a

bill that we really don't have full knowledge or awareness of what we are

supporting and what the people of the province will have to face.

These

regulations that we hope to see before the vote comes to the House and we

certainly hope that government gives that very serious consideration they're

going to cover things such as when an open call is not required, how records are

kept, how the bids are going to be evaluated, which is something in fairness to

the bidder, the bidder should know these parameters upfront.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I ask

hon. Members to lower the volume of their conversations, please. I'm having

trouble hearing.

Thank

you.

MS. PERRY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Establishing when and how a call is to be conducted, establishing what

information will be made public and when and more, Mr. Speaker in total, there

are 20 regulations that the Members of this hon. House are being asked to vote

blindly on. Not just Members of the Opposition but Members of the backbench.

We're all being asked to vote blindly to support something that we may or may

not be aware of issues our constituents will have with them.

They are

all listed in sections 28 and 29 where the legislation gives ability for the

regulations to be made. These items which will not be contained in the

legislation, not debated in the House of Assembly and will only be made public

after the decisions have been made and regulations determined cover a great

deal of the procurement activities.

As our

leader talked about in Question Period earlier today, $4 billion worth of

contracts, Mr. Speaker, is what this legislation covers $4 billion. That's $4

billion of the taxpayers' money for which we all have a responsibility in this

hon. House to ensure is spent in the fairest, most equitable manner to all

persons of this province. Regardless of their political stripe, regardless of

who their friends are, this legislation should cover equally each and every

person and each and every business person in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

As we

all know, Mr. Speaker, there are some businesses, particularly in the capital

city, whose sole existence rely on government contracts. They should not have to

now worry about playing politics to acquire a contract. So it's an open worry

that's out there and it's something that we really need to have addressed in the

best interest of the taxpayer of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I'll

talk again now a little bit about the regulatory power, such as when an open

call is required. Depending on what Cabinet decides not even Members of

government opposite, Mr. Speaker, Cabinet only decides. This will have a great

impact and it can have some very negative consequences. That is a decision which

should be debated here in the House and not at the Cabinet table because the

hon. House and we all take our responsibilities here very seriously is a

place where we have to first and foremost have the well-being of the citizens of

all of Newfoundland and Labrador as our uppermost priority.

cannot truly determine the effectiveness of this bill without knowing what the

details of the regulation will be. We're all very gravely concerned about being

asked to vote on a bill and not knowing the details, Mr. Speaker, of what we're

actually voting on.

We also

cannot determine how transparent this process will be without seeing the

regulations, Mr. Speaker. For many of us I will use the Independent

Appointments Commission as a case in point. While Members opposite talk the good

talk, actions speak far louder than words. The Independent Appointments

Commission, thus far, has resulted in anything but independent appointments. So

we have the same worry that this will also happen when it comes to calling

tenders. It's one of things that I often marvel when I see Members opposite

stand up and talk about the IAC with a straight face.

Mr.

Speaker, in terms of consistency, one of the benefits to a new procurement

framework is that all public bodies will be using a consistent approach; health

boards, school boards, municipalities, government commissions and all others

will be using the same process to purchase their supplies. This will help the

industry.

This

will help bidders to write better bid documents and this will help industry to

take feedback and incorporate into future bids. But again, the devil is in the

details, and at this point in time we have no knowledge of what those details

are. We certainly will continue to call upon government to bring those details

forward to the people of the province and to the people's House before they ask

for a vote on this most important bill that affects $4 billion worth of business

for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

As we

all know, we're in a time of fiscal constraint. We can't afford to be subjected

to political favouritism. This has to be a fair process. Business people in this

province have to have fair and equal opportunity to the contracts that are let

by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, regardless of who is in power.

While

this legislation is being passed today and we have a Liberal government,

governments change. Every four years the opportunity for government to change is

there. Certainly, I strongly believe that the people of the province will hold

government accountable. This legislation will apply to all future governments as

well. So that's something that I'm sure they will take into consideration.

Nalcor

and the Research and Development Council will also be subject, Mr. Speaker, to

this new piece of legislation, but it does carve out exemptions for each of

these entities. Within the Research and Development Council,

section 33 allows

activities which are not daily activities of the Research and Development

Council to be exempt from the procurement framework. This means procurements

that are used specifically and only for research and development can be

purchased outside of the act. However, these exceptions have to be reported to

the minister within six months and the exceptions made public via the

procurement website.

Regarding Nalcor, there are three circumstances where Nalcor would not have to

follow the procurement process as outlined. These are: where the purchase or

procurement is related to energy or energy products; second, where it is acting

in a strategic partnership, joint venture or equity investment with other public

bodies or private sector entities; and thirdly, where it is meeting the

requirements of a benefits arrangement.

So like

the Research and Development Council, all of Nalcor's routine purchases like

furniture, vehicles and the like, would have to go through the procurement

framework. Also, like the Research and Development Council, anything purchased

outside of the procurement framework would have to be reported to the minister

and made public within six months of the purchase.

Mr.

Speaker, there are some broad exemptions here in the bill. I'd like to look at

section 7, in particular, of the legislation which states: Notwithstanding

section 6, the Lieutenant-Governor in Council may exempt procurement from the

requirements of this Act where it is in the best interest of the economic

development of the province.

Again,

Mr. Speaker, I will go back to the whole issue of trust, or lack thereof that

people in this province have for the current Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador. It will be a handful of people who will be making a decision as to

what is in the best interest of economic development in the province.

It is a

very, very broad definition, Mr. Speaker, and I truly hope we won't see an

onslaught of businesses whose doors are closing because of unfair treatment or

favouritism as a result of the regulations which we do not see in this act. It's

a grave concern, and I'm sure if Members opposite were sitting here in our

chairs in Opposition, they would be raising these same concerns, of that I have

no doubt whatsoever, Mr. Speaker.

It's

quite a bit of discretionary power for Cabinet. The power can be defended if it

allows the province to protect local interests, but will this clause withstand

the challenge before a trade tribunal for example? Some things are very

important, Mr. Speaker, that we need to consider.

This

proposed bill also creates a chief procurement officer and a procurement

advisory council. The chief procurement officer will have a variety of duties,

powers and responsibilities. They are outlined in

section 16 of the legislation.

He or she will administer the procurement agency, supervise the procurement

process and all those entities which will have to follow it, publish the

information which is made public, develop standard procedures and so on.

The

chief procurement officer will also have the ability to review the practices of

public bodies and make recommendations, and may limit the ability of a public

body to make a purchase. They will be appointed for six years by Cabinet and can

be reappointed multiple times.

The

procurement advisory council is outlined in

section 25 of the legislation before

the House. The advisory council will consist of provincial public sector

employees. They will make recommendations to the minister about procurement

processes and this framework.

Other

than that, the legislation does not give a full picture of their involvement.

Will their recommendations be binding? How often will they meet? Will they

review procurement activities as the chief procurement officer will? Again, a

lot of issues here in this bill and we're very gravely concerned about the

absence of details that we're being asked to vote on.

Section

31 of this bill gives the Independent Appointments Commission the responsibility

for recommending people for the chief procurement officer position, but as

section 15 makes clear and the

Independent Appointments Commission Act makes clear as well the Cabinet

retains the authority to appoint. And as the

Independent Appointments Commission Act

indicates, the Cabinet is not bound to choose from the list of people that the

IAC committee recommends. Again, one of the reasons why I marvel at how they can

stand up and support the IAC with a straight face because it talks a good talk

but it certainly doesn't walk the walk.

Cabinet

may already, for we know, have a chief procurement officer in mind, and nothing

the Independent Appointments Commission does will prevent them from appointing

the chief procurement officer that they want with the legislation as it is

currently written, Mr. Speaker. I truly hope that future governments will be

strengthening that legislation and get rid of a lot of the loopholes that are

there.

The

actions of recent weeks demonstrate that this government has no commitment to

take politics out of appointments. As I said a little while ago, they give a

great lip service but actions s