April

20, 2010 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVI No. 7

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Fitzgerald): Order, please!

Admit strangers.

Before we begin routine proceedings, I have the pleasant task of formally

welcoming a new member who has been duly elected in the by-election of March 16,

2010. The new member is Mr. Paul Davis, representing the District of Topsail.

I have been advised by the Clerk of the House that the member has taken the

Oath of Office, the Oath of Allegiance to the Crown, as required by the

Constitution, and has signed the Members' Roll.

While we are briefly interrupted here, the Chair would also like to welcome

the following members' statements today to the House of Assembly: the hon. the

Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair; the hon. the Member for

the District of Kilbride; the hon. the Member for the District of The Straits &

White Bay North; the hon. the Member for the District of St. John's East; and

the hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.

[The new member, escorted by the Premier, enters the Chamber and approaches

the Chair.]

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair would like to welcome the new Member of the House

of Assembly, accompanied by the Premier, Mr. Paul Davis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present to you Mr.

Paul Davis, the Member for Topsail, who requests the right to claim his seat.

MR. SPEAKER: Congratulation, Sir.

Allow the hon. member to be taken to his seat.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Cartwright-L'Anse au

Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in this House today to recognize two Junior Canadian Ranger Patrols

from my district and two individual Junior Canadian Rangers who recently won

awards at the JCR Provincial Air Rifle Marksmanship Competition.

This is the second time this provincial competition took place, and JCRs from

all thirteen Newfoundland and Labrador Patrols participated. The competition was

a great opportunity to demonstrate their skills and would qualify the top two

patrols to attend the national competition being held this May in Yellowknife in

the Northwest Territories.

The Port Hope Simpson JCR Patrol finished in first place and members of the

Patrol included Maria Russell, Daniel Sampson, Nikita Penney, Brett Clarke,

Randy Russell and Master Corporal Roxanne Notley.

I would also like to congratulate the Mary's Harbour Patrol on their second

place finish. Members of the Patrol were Daniel Johnson, Jerome Bradley,

Nicholas Cumby, Cassandra Pye, Billy King, and Master Corporal Brad Rumbolt. I

would also like to recognize the team from Churchill Falls for their placing

third in the competition overall.

Mr. Speaker, the top individual scorer for the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador was Maria Russell of Port Hope Simpson, and runner-up top scorer was

Daniel Johnson from Mary's Harbour Patrol. I commend them as well for their

outstanding efforts.

I ask all members in the House to join with me in extending congratulations

to these Junior Canadian Ranger Patrols, not just from the District of

Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, but all of those who participated from across the

Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Kilbride.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Bishops College on its fiftieth anniversary.

Bishops College has been providing quality education to students from my

Kilbride district for years. There was a time during the denominational school

period in this Province when non-catholic students from Goulds, Kilbride and

Petty Harbour went to Bishops College.

During its fifty-year history, Bishops College has been the home for many

thousands of students and staff. More than 10,000 of the Province's best

citizens have graduated from Bishops College. Many have distinguished themselves

in the field of arts, medicine, law and education here in this Province and in

many other parts of Canada and the world. Many nurses, doctors, teachers,

lawyers and trades people have used their education at Bishops College as the

foundation they have built their present lives upon.

On October 22, 23 and 24 of this past year, students and staff joined with

present-day students and staff to celebrate Bishops College's rich past.

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

congratulating the fiftieth anniversary committee at Bishops College, past

students and staff, and present-day students and staff on this joyous occasion.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of St. John's East.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUCKINGHAM: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise in this

hon. House to highlight the achievements of a young resident of St. John's East.

Ms Phillipa Gosine, a student at Gonzaga High School, is having quite a

senior year as she prepares to graduate Grade 12.

Beginning last summer, Phillipa received a scholarship from Shad Valley

International to participate in the prestigious Shad Valley science program.

Next, she was awarded a Youth Science Canada scholarship to participate in an

Arctic expedition with students from across Canada and internationally. The

program is called: Students on Ice, and provides students, educators and

scientists with a world of educational opportunities in the Arctic or the

Antarctic to help them foster a new understanding and respect for the planet.

This past November, Phillipa was named one of the two provincial

semi-finalists for the 2009 Loran Award. This award, for graduating high school

students, goes just beyond academics as the essential criteria for consideration

also includes - and I quote - "a firm commitment to character, service and

leadership; breadth in academic and extra-curricular interests and

entrepreneurship, strongly developed inner-directedness and a high level of

personal autonomy".

From over 4,000 applicants, Phillipa was selected to the final national group

of seventy-two who were interviewed in Toronto earlier this year. While Phillipa

was not one of the thirty students to receive a full scholarship, she was

awarded a $3,000 finalist scholarship. She has also been selected as a national

finalist for the University of Western Ontario Scholarship Program.

This April, Phillipa was presented with the Gold Award of Achievement for the

Duke of Edinburgh awards program. This is the highest award program available in

this very rigorous youth program.

She is also active in her school music program and with Shallaway, an award

winning community youth choir that has represented our Province and Canada

internationally. During July and August she will be travelling to China with her

choir to represent Canada at the International Society for Music Educators World

Conference.

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

Phillipa Gosine for her many successes over the past year, and to wish her well

in all of her future endeavours.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for the District of Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PEACH: Mr. Speaker, this being the week of the volunteer, I rise here

in this hon. House to speak of a long time volunteer from the great District of

Bellevue, Mrs. Barbara Barrett of Arnold's Cove.

Mrs. Barrett is a retired school teacher of twenty-nine years, and she has

been very active since her retirement.

Today, she is the President of the Golden Years Manor Board in Arnold's Cove

and has held that position for twenty-two years. Presently, she is the President

of the Arnold's Cove senior citizens housing and has held that position for

twenty-two years, and she is the President of the Bayview seniors centre in

Arnold's Cove, a position which she held there for over thirty years.

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Barrett served as a member of the Arnold's Cove Town

Council for twelve years, a member of the Newfoundland and Labrador Pensioners

Association for over twenty-five years, and a member of the seniors' citizen's

federation for over twenty-five years.

Mrs. Barrett is a woman with a fine character who has dedicated much of her

life to assist others. She is an outstanding constituent of the Bellevue

District. Mrs. Barrett has been a long time advocate for the seniors throughout

our Province.

I ask that all hon. members join me in thanking Mrs. Barbara Barrett for many

years and hours of volunteer work, and her dedicated leadership she has

demonstrated to all committees and organizations to improve the community and

the lives of others.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SKINNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, Newfoundland and Labrador's craft industry is home to creative,

innovative men and women who are creating valuable products that not only

capture and preserve our culture, but significantly contribute to our provincial

economy.

Today, it is my pleasure to rise in this hon. House and congratulate

representatives of the sector, whose excellence was recently recognized at the

Atlantic Craft Trade Show in Halifax, Nova Scotia.

Ms Gloria Hickey of St. John's, a well known curator, arts writer, lecturer

and mentor, won the Industry Leader-Supporter award for a thirty year career

dedicated to developing and promoting the works of professional craftspeople.

Cara Kansala and Pam Dorey, owners and operators of Cara's Joy in Upper

Island Cove, won the Excellence in Product Design award for their

three-dimensional, hand-carved wooden wall-hangings depicting Newfoundland and

Labrador scenes.

Mr. Speaker, we celebrate their accomplishments and commit to continue our

partnership with the craft community to lay the groundwork for future success.

In addition to cultivating this creative industry through financial investments,

we are supporting craftspeople through a series of direct training initiatives.

The Department of Innovation, Trade and Rural Development facilitates a

number of professional development workshops across all regions of the Province

to help artisans fine-tune their skills and build careers in the same hometowns

that inspired their craft in the first place. Recent workshops include

metalsmithing, photography, caribou hair tufting, product pricing, and cultural

product development. We also support initiatives that directly link artisans

with potential buyers, encouraging a greater level of entrepreneurship within

the craft sector.

I recently attended the Buyers Marketplace Provincial Craft Wholesale Show,

and was fortunate to meet some of these remarkable artisans and see their

impressive products. For the past sixteen years the wholesale show has been a

useful networking opportunity, connecting craft wholesalers with retailers to

create business opportunities.

Mr. Speaker, this government is making its vision for a vibrant craft

industry a reality. It is an industry that provides significant employment to

over 1,600 producers and contributes more than $32 million to our economy each

year. It is also an industry that adds immeasurable value to the Province's

cultural tourism brand.

Our department will continue to work hard to showcase these people and their

products that tell our story, celebrate our culture and bring economic benefits

throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I would like to say thank you to the minister for an advance

copy of his presentation. Certainly, it is exciting for all of us to see the

recognition being given to the members mentioned there in the industry, as

noted. We are very much aware of the fact that the majority of new jobs come

from small businesses, and while they may seem somewhat insignificant alone,

when the numbers are put together they are very, very important. Really, the

presentations play to our strengths and to pre-existing skills in crafts in our

Province, and it is great for rural Newfoundland and Labrador in particular. The

fact that we can do local production and place it on global sales, with the

potential that it has, is a tremendous thing. I would certainly commend the

department as well for the professional development workshops that play a vital

role in their development and, again, it is good to see that today.

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

Vidi.

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

I thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. I am quite pleased

to stand with the minister today in recognition of the individuals with whom he

has mentioned. These people are really indicative and representative of the

tremendous talent that we have in this Province. I have met people who have

participated in the professional development workshops, Mr. Speaker, and they

have found these workshops to be extremely helpful on every level. Newfoundland

and Labrador is just full of talented artisans and craftspeople. Craftspeople in

the Province have, for a long time, had their own vision for a vibrant craft

industry. Over the years they have presented two major strategic plans to

enhance product design and marketing. I think we are seeing the results of that.

Government has played and should continue to play an even greater role in

helping craftspeople develop and market their products for export and provide

more venture capital to the industry. The crafts industry is labour intensive

and predominantly rural based. Any investment by government will go a long way

and I think the minister recognizes that in mentioning the contribution that

they make to the economy. So, any work that is done with these people is not

just something that is a handout, it is far from that. It is an investment in

the future of the industry itself and in the lives of the people involved in the

industry.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and Minister Responsible

for the Volunteer and Non-Profit Sector.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DENINE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge April 18-24 as National Volunteer

Week. Volunteer Week is an opportunity to recognize and celebrate the great work

of the volunteers across our Province and across the country. Their impact on

our Province is invaluable and the volunteers and non-profit organizations in

our communities contribute to a strong and vibrant Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, there are approximately 197,000 volunteers that contributed 35

million hours a year of valuable unpaid time to their communities and community

organizations. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, currently in Newfoundland and Labrador

there are almost 23,000 people employed by the volunteer and non-profit

organizations in a concerted effort to make our Province stronger.

Mr. Speaker, this year's theme, "Volunteers Connect Communities", represents

the kind of impact volunteers can have when they come together for the

betterment of their communities. I encourage all Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians to take time, especially during Volunteer Week, to think about how

much we depend on volunteers and non-profit organizations. They make the lives

of people healthier, happier, and provide a quality of life in this Province

that we have come to expect.

I would also like to take time to recognize how volunteers and non-profit

organizations from this Province are not only connecting with communities in our

Province, but also around the world, specifically Haiti. In Haiti, Mr. Speaker,

they are facing a long road ahead of them as they try to heal from that

devastating earthquake. I am very proud of how this Province has stepped up and

gone to great lengths to help these people who so desperately need help. The

people and organizations that have given to this effort, and continue to give,

are to be commended.

Mr. Speaker, government recognizes that increasingly we rely on community

based organizations for advice, information, and delivery of programs and

services that the people of our Province depend on each and every day. A

volunteer's tireless and unwavering commitment to helping those in their

community is outstanding, and we are thankful for their dedication.

During this week, I will be taking

part in celebrations across the Province.

These events will lead up to our URock Volunteer Awards Gala, which recognizes

the tremendous volunteer work of our young people. I ask, Mr. Speaker, that all

hon. members join with me in honouring the valuable work that the voluntary and

non-profit sector continues to give to our Province.

Mr. Speaker, volunteers do make a difference, so get involved and connect

with your community.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

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

Official Opposition, would like to join with the minister in extending

congratulations to all the volunteers of our Province and to thank them for the

countless hours that they do contribute to our Province.

Even this past weekend, of course, the Junos for example, it takes money,

yes, to do that, but also thanks to thousands or hundreds of volunteers at

least, that make such an event successful. We see volunteers in our schools; we

see them in our hospitals, societies, such as the Autism Society, the Arthritis

Society and so on, and in our recreational facilities. Our Province could not

function properly and to the level that it does if we did not have these

volunteers and they certainly do deserve to be thanked. This is just the

official recognition week of thank you, but of course people who live in this

Province thank them each and every day for the work that they do contribute to

our Province.

I would like to pay particular attention and thanks to the fire departments

of our Province. We do have some paid fire brigades in this Province but for the

most part they are volunteers and they, or course, are the ultimate volunteers

in the sense that they offer themselves not for a recreational pursuit or a

cultural pursuit but actually for the protection of our property and the lives

of the people of this Province, and they do so because they want to do it. They

are concerned about their communities; they give of their time, not only to

actually do the fire fighting but of course to undertake the training that is

necessary in order to do it properly.

I had the benefit Saturday, the privilege of attending the fire brigade

annual banquet in Port aux Basques and again, you have thirty-five members, for

example, who give countless, countless hours to protection of their community.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would again like to thank all of the thousands

of volunteers we have and I would encourage them to stay involved, encourage

those who are not involved to get involved, particularly the youth in our

Province.

Thank you.

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

Vidi.

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

I too thank the minister for an advance copy of his statement. I am very

pleased to stand with him and recognize and congratulate the thousands of

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who give their time and their skills for the

benefit of their local community, their Province, and as the minister has

pointed out for places beyond our Province, places in other parts of the world.

We all know that we have thousands of people in this Province who are giving

of their time unstintingly. We do not get an opportunity very often to thank

them. I had thought about making a member's statement about my district and I

thought well I could really get in trouble if I did that because we would leave

out somebody, because I think all of our districts, my own is the same, have

thousands of people.

When I think about - the Opposition House Leader has mentioned it but I want

to mention it again because it is true in my district as it is everywhere. I go

into the schools, I go into community organizations; there are social justice

groups, the arts community. No matter where we go, we have people who are doing

volunteer work. I think one of the biggest things we can do for them is not just

recognize them on a day like today or a week like this week, but also to make

sure that we have adequate money going into the not-for-profit sector as well so

that there are staff to back up the work of the volunteers because I think one

thing has been proven by successful groups that I know, and I am sure the

minister knows some of them as well, that the groups that are the most

successful in getting their work done are not just the groups who have

volunteers only but when they have staff to back them up also. So I encourage

the minister to continue in ensuring that adequate money is going to the

not-for-profit sector to back up the work of the volunteer sector.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further statements by ministers?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the crab industry is on the brink of a collapse this season and

there has been an impasse between the processors and the harvesters for a number

of weeks now. We understand that they have been asking government to lead the

charge to find a solution.

I ask the minister today: We understand that there are proposals that have

been submitted to your department and we ask if you can tell us what is

contained and if government is prepared to look at implementing some solutions

to this impasse right now?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is one thing that is certain, that government cannot force harvesters

to harvest nor can they force processors to process. One thing that we can do

and one thing that we have done, is to encourage both parties to sit down at the

table and come forward with a proposal.

It is about two weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, that I called together the

representatives from the ASP and from the FFAW. For the very first time those

parties sat down at a table to try and find some resolution here. They came

forward last week and asked for meetings. One of the things that I did indicate

to them is that I wanted something and I wanted it in writing. I did not see the

point of meeting until they had something on paper that we could discuss and

react to.

Mr. Speaker, as of 2:30 on Friday they submitted that proposal. We went back

on Sunday morning with a series of questions and to that point we have not

gotten a response, but, Mr. Speaker, I can inform the people here and the people

watching that I intend to meet with both parties as of 2:30 today, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The last time I asked the minister questions in the House with regard to this

industry he was on his way to meet with the groups involved and I think that

meeting lasted about ten minutes, Mr. Speaker, and then he threw his hands up in

the air and walked out of the room.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: So we will see what happens this afternoon.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, we understand that the questions that the minister

had with regard to these proposals had to do with issues such as pricing in the

marketplace, what the risk would be for government investment, what the

accountability and transparency measures would be if there was to be some form

of initiatives or programs allocated.

I ask the minister today: Why you are not engaging in face-to-face to find

the answers to these questions -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MS JONES: - to find the answers to these questions as opposed to

providing

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to pose her question.

MS JONES: Why has the minister been waiting since Friday, in the middle

of a crisis knowing what this means to communities and families all across the

Province and not responding to it?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I do not know if she did not hear the last part

of my response or not, but I said we are meeting at 2:30 p.m.

The other thing, Mr. Speaker, is it seems that she has substantial inside

information as to what was in the proposal. I have no intentions, Mr. Speaker,

of distributing that to the media. It seems that some of the discussions that

she is having, she may want to disclose as to what is in there.

Mr. Speaker, I am meeting with the people as of 2:30 p.m. From Friday until

today, Mr. Speaker, we have been in the office reacting and analyzing the

proposal that has come forward. We are waiting for the response, and I assume,

Mr. Speaker, that they will have a reply to some of the questions as of 2:30

p.m.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What the minister has been doing is absolutely nothing only pushing paper and

stall tactics in this industry, and waiting for all the parties to wear

themselves out and hope that the industry will open at the end of the week. That

is the kind of action that the minister has been taking.

I ask the government, Mr. Speaker: In light of the fact that many of these

workers today, in this industry, are receiving their last cheque, the last bit

of income that they will get for the rest of the season, what has your

government done to look at the impact on communities as a result of this

industry not opening? Because at the rate it is going now, Minister, you are not

making a lot of progress to make that happen. What will be the impact on those

communities, and how are you going to respond to it?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, her lead-in could not be better.

I spoke to an individual last week, a plant worker, who, the year before

last, his bi-weekly income was $506. Last year, it was $367, Mr. Speaker.

Ask her to go and speak to some of the plant workers. One lady told me if you

want to see how things are working in the plant, look at the lunch cans to see

how many bottles of Tylenol are in them so that they can get through a day.

Mr. Speaker, we cannot continue with drivel like this, we have to see action,

we have to see change, it is incumbent upon us, but is also incumbent upon the

other two parties to make sure that they lay themselves open to make progress,

Mr. Speaker. She can be a part of making that happen, instead of being

continually criticizing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do not need that minister or any minister on the other side to tell me what

the impact of this industry is, and what the income loss has been to plant

workers and fishermen.

Mr. Speaker, what this minister needs to do is take some action. Your

government has had six years to start dealing with the problems in the fishing

industry in this Province, and you have raised your head above it and ignored

it.

I ask you today, Minister: You are going to the meeting at 2:30 p.m., what

are you bringing to the table? What investment is your government willing to put

on the line for the fishing industry in this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I think if you check back through the years it

is a bit naive to think that she can lay it at our feet. Mr. Speaker, I heard

tell of licenses being passed out at the Glacier at one point. I can assure you

we will not be at that.

Mr. Speaker, what we are going to start to do, if the other parties will

engage, this MOU process has the opportunity to make significant changes within

this industry; and that is what all of this process is about, it is about

ensuring that those parties sit with us to make changes. We cannot snap the

fingers and change it. It has not happened for the past 500 years, but we are

more than willing to sit with all parties to see what it is we can do.

I am hoping, Mr. Speaker, that both sides will come forward with something as

of 2:30 p.m., because, as I have said before, up until about two weeks ago these

two important parties has not even sat at a table.

One thing that we can say that we have achieved is that over the past week,

or week-and-a-half, they have sat pretty regularly, and I hope that they come

forward with a good offer, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister talks about what the other groups are bringing to the table.

They have been pushing paper through your office for weeks, proposal after

proposal, and initiative after initiative.

The question to you, Minister, is: What are you bringing to the table today?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, I can tell you one thing that I am not going to

put to the table - I said it on Friday - and I have said to both of the parties:

I am not interested in bringing forward to this government or the people of this

Province a huge sum of money that will open a fishery for this year and that we

find ourselves back in the same situation next year. We have done that for year

after year after year, but, Mr. Speaker, what has it accomplished? It

accomplishes that every spring we are back in the same situation, so something

has to be done different.

Hopefully, the both sides that I am going to meet with at 2:30 p.m. will sit

with us and that we can find a way forward, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe if the minister and his government had done something year after year

we would not be in the situation we are in today either, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the government commissioned two studies this year: one that was

done by Deloitte & Touche for the harvesting sector to look at cost structures,

and the other one by Grant Thornton to look at the processing sector and cost

structures.

I ask the minister: Why are these documents not being released to people in

the public and in the industry so that there can be engaged a full public debate

about what this industry is all about? You have the information; why are you not

releasing it?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN: Mr. Speaker, more importantly than that I have the

information, it is equally as important that the harvesters and the processors,

those being the ASP and the FFAW, have the information.

Mr. Speaker, at this particular point, I am not ready to release that, and on

some advice, that we not do that. The most important thing in both of these

reports, Mr. Speaker, shows that the viability of plants and harvesters are not

sustainable and they are not viable under the current environment. Mr. Speaker,

that is what the MOU process is all about. We have to do things differently.

This information will direct us and as such, at some point, maybe the people

that she is speaking to might want to advise her if she is getting some of that

information, but at this point, Mr. Speaker, I am not ready to release that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Seven weeks ago, the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association submitted

a written proposal to government outlining their position as it relates to

contract negotiations. At the time, the Minister of Finance stated that a

written response would be forthcoming. Seven weeks have passed. We understand

nothing has been received.

I ask the minister: When will you respond to the offer by the Newfoundland

and Labrador Medical Association?

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

Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just to correct the premise of the hon. the Leader of the Opposition's

question, there was a letter dated March 3, but the letter contained a number of

requests for further discussions. So the letter could not be responded to until

the further discussions took place. One of those discussions was set for late

March; that meeting was cancelled. When Treasury Board tried to reschedule the

meeting, we were told that they wanted a written response to the letter, and

that response goes out today, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, over the past two weeks, the Newfoundland and

Labrador Medical Association has held a number of information services regarding

the workload and staffing challenges that are facing internists, emergency room

doctors, and family medicine physicians in the Province. They are claiming that

we are reaching a crisis stage unless there is some recognition and action from

government to look at these problems.

So I ask you, Minister: In your response today, will you be coming forward to

meet some of the demands of the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association?

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

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, as I said, the letter goes out today. The

letter will respond to the proposal the doctors prepared, dated March 3.

Out of courtesy to the doctors, I would like them to see the letter before I

state what is in it, out of courtesy to them, but I think it is fair to say that

the offer the government is making is in the range of the $80 million that the

doctors had announced they were seeking at their recent press conference. That

is in the range of Atlantic parity, and I will ask the doctors to return to the

table so that we can continue discussions to complete an agreement that is fair

and reasonable -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MARSHALL: - to the doctors and recognizes concerns they have raised,

but at the same time, is fair to the taxpayers of the Province of Newfoundland

and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in the absence that negotiations between the Newfoundland and

Labrador Medical Association and the government is not concluded in a timely

manner, under the Canada Health Act it allows for provinces to settle

negotiations with physicians through binding arbitration. This is something that

the government to date has refused to look at in dealing with physicians in our

own Province.

I ask the minister today: Is there any particular reason why the provisions

of the Canada Health Act are not being considered or implemented in the absence

of an unsuccessful negotiation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, government has already indicated that it

is not prepared to consider binding arbitration. We worked very hard on a

counter proposal now, which the minister has indicated will be ready this

afternoon. There is now an information process going on with the NLMA whereby

they are bringing out doctors and showing some of the hardship, and we are very

sympathetic to the hardships that are being demonstrated and we are doing

whatever we can to alleviate them.

I want to let the hon. members know that not everything is well within the

NLMA. I had an e-mail from a doctor, representing a group of doctors, who has

indicated " not all physicians working in this province agree with the

statements made by the NLMAWe have been legislated to be members of the NLMA

hence are forced to accept their decisions whether we are in agreement or

not...we are subjected to what is essentially mob politics, being outvoted in

any decision which we object to."

So these things need to be sorted out within the NLMA, between themselves,

among the doctors, among the executive, to make sure that they are onside. When

they get a uniform position and they are united in their position, it will be

much easier for us to come up with a resolution. In the meantime, in the absence

of that we will certainly be proceeding and that letter will go out today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The fact that government did settle with certain groups of doctors outside of

the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association is probably no wonder why

there is some conflict within their own organization, Mr. Speaker.

My next questions are for the Minister of Natural Resources. I ask the

minister: If she can confirm for me today that the Province, through Nalcor,

does own a King Air aircraft located in Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources and Deputy

Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: The answer to the question, Mr. Speaker, is yes, they do.

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe the minister could tell me what that aircraft is used for, what the

purpose of it is, and how many hours are logged on it in flying time throughout

the year?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resource and Deputy

Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS DUNDERDALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to think that I am pretty good at my job but there

is certain information I do not have at my fingertips. The King Air is

used for the business of Nalcor in the Province and sometimes outside of the

Province, that I do know, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, in terms of the other questions that she has put in terms of

flying hours, I will get that information and provide it to her.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is our understanding that this aircraft has been used for air medevac

services out of the Churchill Falls region in the past. I would like to ask the

Minister of Health and Community Services, in reviewing air ambulance services

and being able to provide for approved services in the whole Province,

especially in Labrador, I ask the minister: If any consideration was ever given

to using this aircraft, which is already owned by the Province, to have it based

in Labrador as a third air medevac for Newfoundland and Labrador?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In a letter today to the Leader of the Opposition, I outlined or attached

statistics for the last number of years in relation to the use of planes in this

Province in air ambulance. I have seen - and these are statistics compiled by

our department. It shows search and rescue, The Commander was the

previous plane in St. Anthony. The King Air in St. John's, the King

Air in St. Anthony, helicopter and charter wing fixed aircraft which were

provided by private companies. I see no reference nor do I have any reason to

believe that the Nalcor plane which belongs to Nalcor was utilized for air

ambulance. It is certainly not on this list but I can tell from the question

that she has obviously been speaking to some of the people of Lab Grenfell, so

they will probably answer the question for her.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I feel that the aircraft is owned by the people of the Province through

Nalcor.

I ask the minister: Why was this plane not taken into consideration when

looking at the reconfiguration of air ambulance services? It was based in

Labrador. It was able to be used, and why was that not part of the consultants

review in improving the services to the people of the Province?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last week, or the last couple of weeks, I forget when exactly, I met with the

provincial director of the air ambulance service and I met with both the medical

director and the paramedic in charge of air ambulance service, and I discussed

with them how many planes do we need for this Province. The indication given,

Mr. Speaker, and the premise upon which the report was prepared was that we need

two air ambulances in this Province, based on statistics we now have with the

numbers. We need the Twin Otter located in Labrador, to go to the Coast of

Labrador, particularly the North Coast, and, Mr. Speaker, we need to have

charter companies available to do both in-province transfers and out-of-province

transfers. For example, Mr. Speaker, over the last number of years there has

been contracts with both Provincial Airlines and EVAS Air.

So the short answer to the question, Mr. Speaker, is that air ambulance as

configured right now, in terms of the numbers, require two dedicated aircraft,

the King Airs , it requires a Twin Otter and the availability of charter

services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Will the minister admit that the truth of the matter here is that this review

of air ambulance services was done ad hoc? It left out whole areas of terms of

reference. It did not look at all of the options within the Province to be able

to provide for a better service.

I ask you, Minister, will you not go back and consider all of these

particular options before you implement any movement towards air ambulance?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, over the last period of time I have met

with the Town of St. Anthony on three occasions, as late as last week. They were

difficult meetings, Mr. Speaker. I indicated to the Town of St. Anthony at that

time that we would not be reviewing this decision. I met with the MHA for The

Straits & White Bay North prior to coming into the House today, and again, I

indicated that the decision was made and we would not be reviewing the decision.

Mr. Speaker, in a letter written to the Premier some time ago the Leader of

the Opposition referred to a diminished service in the rest of this Province, or

the Island portion of the Province, as a result of moving of the air ambulance

to Labrador. Mr. Speaker, in 2009, approximately 61 per cent of the air

ambulance flights in the Island portion of the Province, not including St.

Anthony, were done out of St. John's, and 13 per cent were serviced by charter

aircraft. So, 74 per cent, Mr. Speaker, of that 603 other, referred to by the

member opposite at one point, were done out of St. John's and will continue to

be done that way.

Most importantly, Mr. Speaker, now all areas of this Province, including Lab

West, will be within sixty minutes of an air ambulance service; something that

did not happen, Mr. Speaker, when the plane was located in St. Anthony.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, according to briefing notes prepared for the Minister of Health

back in September, a committee was formed to review all air ambulance services

in the Province, including air ambulance. This committee consisted of senior

employees of the Department of Health, Department of Transportation and Works,

Eastern Health, Labrador-Grenfell Health and other key stakeholders.

So, my question to the minister is: Why was the work of this provincial

committee put aside and instead an independent consultant hired to review one

aspect of that overall service?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, that committee that is being referred to

was put together as a result of incidents that have occurred in Lab West, I

think, around July 15, and then subsequently in Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

It dealt with, Mr. Speaker, how the services were delegated, not how they

were provided by aircrafts. For example, Mr. Speaker, if a referring facility

needed an air ambulance they would call the medical communication centre at

Eastern Health. The medical communication centre would then deal with Government

Air Services over the Department of Transportation and Works. So, we had these

various agencies: We had the referring hospital, Labrador-Grenfell, Eastern

Health, Government Air Services, this committee was put together to study

whether or not as Mr. Drodge indicated in his report, and he did recommend

that they should be under one umbrella. Mr. Speaker, that committee was not put

together, nor were they asked to look at the issue of where the location of the

airplane should be. When you look at the recommendations of Mr. Drodge, they

outline, Mr. Speaker, the location of the airplanes, but also other avenues for

improving the delivery of air ambulance services in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, will the minister confirm that the Terms of

Reference in the scope for this provincial committee was much broader than given

to the consultant and will he also confirm that a preliminary report has been

completed by that committee?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

One of the issues we are still looking at is how to best organize the air

ambulance service in terms of the placement of calls, whether or not it should

be done through Eastern Health in terms of the dispatch. I am not aware of any

report having been completed by that committee, Mr. Speaker. However, I am

aware, from discussions with the Eastern Health personnel, that they feel the

best way to deal with the air ambulance would be to have a medical decision

made, especially when it comes to the utilization of charter services because

there is one plane that is faster than the other.

Mr. Speaker, what we have is a committee that was an intergovernmental,

interdepartmental, interagency committee that was looking at the question of how

air ambulance should be dispatched.

Mr. Speaker, that is something that Recommendation 6 of the Drodge report, he

states, "The air ambulance service should be organized as a single program with

a single administrative structure." That is something we are certainly looking

at.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Mr. Speaker, in the October 13 edition of the Northern Pen ,

the minister, just taking over the department at the time, stated that a lack of

consultation on the proposed cuts to the Flower's Cove Health Care Facility was

a problem and he promised to consultant more of the people of the region.

So I ask the minister today: If you are truly going to live up to this

commitment, why was there so little consultation with stakeholders on the

Northern Peninsula as it relates to this service that you are taking away today?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If the member remembers correctly, on December 15, 2009, the Leader of the

Opposition presented a petition to this hon. House with 3,000 names asking to

have the air ambulance service moved to Labrador.

So, in light of the incidents that have occurred, Mr. Speaker, my meetings in

Lab West and Happy Valley-Goose Bay on November 27, then debated in this House

of Assembly on December 15 and 16, we had to have this matter reviewed, as I

indicated I would, on December 14, 2009.

Mr. Speaker, we moved forward. There was consultation in terms of reviews

with the Towns of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, St. Anthony, and Lab West, but when it

comes to making government decisions, Mr. Speaker, we hired a consultant. The

purpose of the consultant's report was to ensure that the recommendations were

objective and reflected what was necessary and best for the people of this

Province, but more particularly the people of Northern Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, the numbers speak for themselves. We did not make these up. We

have been accused of playing politics. The numbers indicate that there are twice

as many flights out of Labrador as there are out of St. Anthony, Mr. Speaker,

and the population in Labrador is approximately twice that of the St.

AnthonyPort au Choix region.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

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

Mr. Speaker, earlier in Question Period, the Premier stood in this House and

quoted an individual doctor saying that he or she is not pleased with the NLMA.

This action is not unlike the kind of divisive actions taken by the Premier and

the former Health Minister in 2008, Mr. Speaker.

I am going to ask the Premier: When will he stop playing these kinds of games

and grandstanding and deal with the issue, which is a crisis in our health care

system because of their lack of coming to an agreement with the doctors?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, if this e-mail ended up in the hands of

the Leader of the Opposition, she would question me on it and then would ask me

why we were not being open and accountable and transparent.

The reason for disclosing this is to indicate that the NLMA does not have its

act together, that they are not united among themselves. It is very difficult,

and I do not know if you have had any involvement or any experience in

negotiation, but it is very difficult to negotiate with an executive who does

not know what it is doing. If it does not have a strong mandate from its own

people, then how in the heck do we possibly, as a government, try to come to

terms with them?

So, I have a letter from a doctor, representing a group of doctors, who said

that he does not agree with the statements that are being made by the NLMA. He

is also making a suggestion here that there is mob rule in the NLMA. This is

internal; this is not something I am making up. This is something the public

needs to know. We want to get this finalized, we want to get this negotiation

settled and we want to bring peace to this whole situation, but for you to try

and allege that I am doing something wrong.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MS MICHAEL: I hope for his sake, Mr. Speaker, the day does not come when

the Premier has somebody from his backbenchers saying something against him and

his executive, because he will say it is not the individual you have to listen

to, it is the executive you have to listen to.

I saw and heard the Premier pull exactly the same kind of grandstanding up

against the nurses, yet eventually he had to bow down and they had to come to an

agreement. He pulled the same tactics.

Is the Premier going to stop grandstanding and deal with the issue of

negotiating with the elected representatives of the doctors through their NLMA?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Thank you for the Sermon on the Mount. That was

lovely; I really appreciated it. I do not need a lecture from you or anybody

else, I can tell you that much.

We are trying to get this resolved. There is a letter that is going out this

afternoon that is putting $79 million of public money on the table and offering

close to Atlantic parity which is exactly what the doctors have been looking

for. What more do you want?

You are just trying to grandstand, you are trying to make small-p politics

out of it, you are trying to make us look bad and everything else, when we are

trying to do the best thing, we are trying to protect the public purse. All the

social things that we have done in this Province, whether it is in health care,

it is on the municipal side, it is on the education side, it is in human

resources and poverty reduction, it is never enough for you! There is never

enough money around because all you want to do is criticize; get on the

bandwagon!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

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

When it comes to the issue of the impasse that the government is in with the

doctors at this moment and based on public comments the Premier has made, I do

not have to do anything to make him look bad because the public sees the things

that he has said. He has done it himself, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, during this

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to pose her question.

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

Mr. Speaker, during the last seven weeks at least one thing has happened, we

have had doctors speak out about what they are experiencing; the difficulties

they are experiencing as family physicians, as ER doctors, as internists. The

stories have been out in the media; they are telling us what they are going

through.

When will this government stop dealing with things piecemeal and acknowledge

that we have major problems in our health care system and need an external

review of this system, Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, what did we do when the ER-PR situation

came up? What did we do when the oncologists wanted to meet? What did we do when

they wanted to have a raise? We acted immediately. We gave them a significant

raise which virtually put them close to Ontario parity. So we stepped up

immediately.

What have we done as a government? We are now up to, I guess, close to $2.6

billion or $2.7 billion. That is what we have done; we have dramatically

increased it. We have put money into information technology. We have put money

into equipment. We have put money into long-term care facilities. We have put

money into nurses.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) nurses.

PREMIER WILLIAMS: Yes, we have settled the nurses. Are you trying to get

my goat because we bowed down? I will bow down to anybody if we want to get an

agreement. This is about getting an agreement and bringing good health care to

the people of the Province; not playing cheap, dirty politics like you do.

Holier than thou, the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time allotted for questions and answers has expired.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Tabling of Documents

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

Board.

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker; I know I have something to say

here.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to

section 26.(5)(

a) of the Financial Administration

Act, I am tabling four Orders in Council relating to funding pre-commitments for

the 2010-2011 to the 2015-2016 fiscal years.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further tabling of documents?

Pursuant to

section 10 of the Public Tender Act, I hereby table the report of

the Public Tender Act Exceptions for the months of December 2009 and January and

February 2010, as presented by the Chief Operating Officer of the Government

Purchasing Agency.

Further tabling of documents?

Notices of motion.

Notices of Motion

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

MS BURKE: Mr. Speaker, ordinarily we would have a private member's motion

put forward on Monday before the Wednesday of the week in which the private

member's motion would be debated; however, because we did not sit yesterday, we

would like to put forward our motion, our private member's motion, for tomorrow,

being Wednesday, by our private member; and, of course, we are asking leave to

do that because the House was not open on Monday.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. YOUNG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

WHEREAS the provincial government, on June 5 last year, released "Oceans of

Opportunity", a five-year, $28 million strategy to expand our Province's ocean

technology sector; and

WHEREAS Newfoundland and Labrador's ocean technology sector is a cluster of

more than fifty world-class institutions, companies and industry organizations

which are harnessing the power of innovation and entrepreneurship to achieve the

common of goal of growing the industry's value by 600 per cent to $1 billion

with more than 6,600 employees by 2015; and

WHEREAS this strategy builds on the Province's investment in the School of

Ocean Technology at the Fisheries and Marine Institute of Memorial University to

advance technology transfer and applied research in ways that provide

opportunities for both our graduates and our Province to take a leadership role

in this sector; and

WHEREAS this strategy includes provisions for the Ocean Technology

Development Fund with components to advance the work of private sector

enterprises, post-secondary institutions and industry associations;

International Marketing Assistance; the Polaris Program; Business Incubation;

and the Northwest Atlantic Ocean Observation System Partnership;

BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House express confidence in this government's

initiative to position Newfoundland and Labrador as a global leader in ocean

technology by putting into action "Oceans of Opportunity: Newfoundland and

Labrador's Ocean Technology Strategy".

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

By leave, I would like to give notice regarding the Committees for Estimates

and the composition of these Committees.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice and by leave move that the following committees be

comprised of the following members for Estimates:

The Resource Committee will consist of the following members: Bonavista

North; Burgeo & La Poile; Grand Falls-Windsor-Green Bay South; Cartwright-L'Anse

au Clair; Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi; The Isles of Notre Dame; The Straits & White

Bay North; Labrador West; and Lewisporte.

The composition of the Government Services Committee will consist of members

for: Exploits; Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi; Burgeo & La Poile; Kilbride; Port de

Grave; Bay of Islands; The Straits & White Bay North; St. John's East; and Baie

Verte-Springdale.

The composition of the Social Services Committee will consist of the members

for: Ferryland; Port de Grave; Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair; Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi; The Straits & White Bay North; St. John's North; Port au Port; St. Barbe;

and Cape St. Francis.

Mr. Speaker, I also give notice and by leave will give the composition of the

different committees themselves.

The following Heads of Expenditure will be referred to the Resource

Committee: Business; Environment and Conservation; Fisheries and Aquaculture;

Innovation, Trade and Rural Development; Newfoundland and Labrador Research

Development Council; Rural Secretariat; Natural Resources; Status of Women; and

Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

The following Heads of Expenditure will be referred to the Social Services

Committee: Child, Youth and Family Services; Human Resources, Labour and

Employment; Municipal Affairs; Justice; Education; and Health and Community

Services.

The following Heads of Expenditure will be referred to the Government

Services Committee: The Department of Finance; the Public Service Commission;

Office of the Chief Information Officer; Government Services; Government

Purchasing Agency; Transportation and Works; Newfoundland and Labrador Housing

Corporation; Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs; Intergovernmental Affairs and the

Non-Profit Sector.

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow the Social Services Committee will meet in the House at

6:00 p.m. to review the Estimates of the Department of Child, Youth and Family

Services.

MR. SPEAKER: Members have heard the names of individual members who will

make up the different committees of the House of Assembly, and the composition

of those particular committees.

All those in favour of the motion, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'.

The motion is carried.

Motion carried.

MR. SPEAKER: Further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

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

Bay North.

MR. DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is an honour for me today to stand and present this petition for the

members of my district, The Straits & White Bay North, on maintaining our air

ambulance service. I would like to read into the record the prayer of the

petition:

To the Honourable House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned residents

humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS it has been brought to our attention that the air ambulance service

is being removed; and

WHEREAS St. Anthony Airport can provide the most optimal service to the whole

of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador;

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

House of Assembly to support and maintain the air ambulance service in the St.

Anthony area and furthermore will proceed with strengthening the service with

the placement of a Flight Specialist Team located in St. Anthony.

And as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray. It is dated April 11,

Again, there has been a lot of debate in the House in the last couple of

sessions on this atrocity of moving this air ambulance service from St. Anthony

into Goose Bay. The more that we consider it and the more that we consult and

look at the numbers that really speak truly about the service and so on, the

more we realize that this is really disenfranchising the operation of air

ambulance in the Province, and that this move is not the move that needs to take

place. It does not improve the service, as government would want us to believe

today. Certainly for our own district, the area of the Northern Peninsula and

Southern Labrador in particular, it puts us at a disadvantage.

Just this weekend, on Friday night, we had an air medevac out of St. Anthony,

as we often do this time of the year, in the wintertime, when the aircraft left

under conditions that it quite simply would not have been able to get into the

area due to the low ceilings and so on.

This is one of the main concerns for us in removing the service, that locally

we have an airport that is unmanned from 5:00 in the afternoon until 7:00 in the

morning. The air ambulance has operated out of that airport for the past number

of years that it has been there, and it has done a lot of air medevacs from the

local area and has been able to do so without any problems, in conditions that

really would not allow someone to come in and take it out. It is the only

aircraft in St. Anthony at 5:00 o'clock in the evening or 2:00 o'clock in the

morning. There is no other aircraft. It is the only aircraft that is available.

When that aircraft is away and an aircraft cannot come in and do that air

medevac then we are left with the option, basically, of transporting that

patient to Deer Lake, which is a four-and-a-half to five hour ride. So I would

suggest that while we would want to sing praises of the decision and that it is

improving air ambulance services in Labrador, it certainly is not improving it

on the Northern Peninsula. I certainly would also argue that it is not

presenting it in many parts of the Island as well.

I am pleased today to be able to present this petition, and I would ask that

the House would give consideration and certainly many more signatures attached

right now. Just in the past few days there have been over 5,000 signatures that

have been collected along the Northern Peninsula, Southern Labrador and other

parts of the Province as well, that are calling upon government to back away

from this, to reconsider and to maintain the air ambulance service in St.

Anthony.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Further petitions?

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

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

MS BURKE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We will continue with the debate that we were having prior to our break for

Easter. So therefore, from the Order Paper, I will call Motion 1.

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

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

I appreciate an opportunity to have a few words in continuation of the

response to the Budget Speech which was given by the Minister of Finance a few

weeks ago. Of course, under the rules the Opposition critic for Finance gets up

to three hours to respond. I think I took that period of time the last day that

I spoke, which was March 30. Of course, the House adjourned at that time for the

Easter break, but we are back here again today and we are continuing the debate

on the Budget.

That is an opportunity, of course, for the Opposition members to speak as to

what they find good about or what they do not find so good in the Budget that

has been presented. Actually, the Easter break served a purpose here. Because

the Minister, after actually delivering the Budget in the House on Budget Day,

took the opportunity I have been following through the media to address

certain bodies throughout the Province, in Western Newfoundland and the Corner

Brook region, for example, and the Board of Trade here in town, in St. John's,

to explain, from a government perspective, what was good about the Budget.

Well, of course, like the old saying goes, there are always two stories.

There is one side that is their side, there is our side, and somewhere in

between lies the truth probably, and the Budget document is no different. The

government, of course, would tout that it is an all good thing. The Opposition,

contrary to what government members would suggest, we do not only suggest that

it is all bad things. We have in fact alluded to - this member has alluded to

some things in the Budget that were in fact good. I referred to some things on a

provincial basis but also specifically some things that were good in the

District of Burgeo & La Poile, which I represent. I am pleased to say as well -

I will come back to one of those references, that being the dialysis, that I had

the opportunity over the Easter break to speak to several people in my district

concerning that particular initiative, both in the health care sector as well as

individuals who currently have to travel to Stephenville and Corner Brook for

dialysis services, and to get their reaction to that announcement by government.

We ended off the last day, which was March 30, as I say the House closed

shortly after that, and we ended off with this member giving a non-confidence

motion. Now, some people might say: what is this all about, a non-confidence

motion? What it is basically, it is in all democratic societies, where you have

a budget put forward by a government. The Minister of Finance of course has

moved that the House would accept the Budget. We in the Opposition, of course,

and the government members, get an opportunity to speak to the contents of the

Budget over the course of several weeks. Ultimately, there will be a vote, but

wrapped up in that process as well is that you just do not get to speak to the

Budget. If you are opposed to it you get an opportunity to propose motions of

your own, and this member proposed a non-confidence motion back on March 30,

which the Chair, the Speaker, found to be in order. It is that particular motion

that I am speaking to today, the non-confidence motion.

Now, some people might say: well, how could you be pleased on the one hand

with some things in the Budget that put money into your district and yet you are

up proposing a non-confidence motion in the government? Well, that is not all

that unusual. In fact, it is not unusual at all in the parliamentary process and

the democratic process of budget debates. Just because certain things in a

document are good, does not mean that you accept all the document, because I am

sure there will be members on the other side who in the course of the next few

weeks will stand and say: How could the Member for Burgeo & La Poile be up

criticizing the Budget when he liked the piece about the dialysis? How could he

be up criticizing it when he liked the piece about the infrastructure in Isle

aux Mort? Well, that is the whole point about this. It does not mean that you

have to have - just because you like certain pieces of it does not mean you like

everything and it means that you still have some concerns about the Budget, not

only this particular Budget but the policy direction and the economic policy

direction and fiscal policy direction in particular that the government is

moving towards. If you have some suggestions to offer, that is always very

helpful as well.

Now, of course, the non-confidence motion that was put forward by this

member, just so that we know exactly what we are talking about here, it says

specifically - the motion is that we would strike out certain words and replace

it with the following, and I quote: "This House condemns the government for its

failure to develop and present fiscally responsible programs to address the

economic problems of rural areas of this Province and bring forward a plan that

generates sustainable economic growth that builds on the projects developed by

previous Administrations."

This government would be the first to stand up and say: We have a plan. They

are quite adept at telling us what they do not stand for; they are quite good at

telling us what they disagree with. For example, they do not agree with binding

arbitration for medical people; they make certain moves on air ambulance without

considering all the information. They tell you what they do agree with, or do

not agree with, but they are not so good on giving you the plan. In fact, they

tried so many times that it has become a bit of a joke, because they do not even

use the word plan and they have not used the word plan since 2003, folks. They

have used the word strategy. We have a strategy to deal with this. It sounds

good. It sounds like you are really on the ball and that you are going to do

something: We have a strategy. If you ask them, and they do not actually have a

plan, they invent a strategy: Do not worry about it, we have a strategy or we

will get one pretty fast for you on that. Particularly if there is a polling

period; if there is a polling period around the corner or about to start, you

can be sure there will be a strategy and there will be a press release about the

new strategy in jig time.

I noticed today, for example, even in the Question Period of today, you talk

about reactionary governments and ministers and Cabinet members, we had

questions asked there today that have been lingering here in this Province for

weeks weeks. You do not hear the government out ballyhooing about what they

did on that until they actually get pressed with a question, and of course then

they have their pet answer.

I am referring, first of all, to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture

who today was asked questions by the Leader of the Opposition about the sad

state of affairs that we currently have in our fishing industry. His reaction

was: Oh, I am having a meeting at 2:30 p.m. - a miraculous cure. I wonder what

strategy he is taking down to the meeting he is having at 2:30 p.m. He obviously

did not have any strategy two or three weeks ago. He sat on this all over the

Easter vacation. He could not tell us today where he thinks he is going to go

with the strategy, but I am telling you, I am going to have a meeting. That is

my strategy: I am going to have a meeting. I cannot tell you anything, but I am

going to have a meeting. It is so convenient that the meeting was scheduled for

today, Tuesday, April 20, at 2:30 in the afternoon when the House of Assembly

happens to open and he happens to be getting a question about it at 1:30 p.m. It

is so ever convenient.

Another example today, the Minister of Finance - we have had these ongoing

negotiations with the NLMA for weeks and weeks. I believe the letter the

minister talked about was dated March 3. He said the meeting was cancelled. I do

believe it was government that cancelled the meeting, by the way. He said: Well,

we could not answer the letter because we thought we needed some negotiations

and get some information so we could go and respond to them. Well, he admits

today that is not exactly the case. They came back to us and said: No, you

should respond to our March 3 meeting, and you can, and you ought to. Lo and

behold, when the question is raised today, the Minister of Finance says: Oh yes,

by the way, the letter is going out this afternoon.

However so convenient: The government that responds when the flame hits the

foot. When the fire is around the feet, that is when they move. They do not tell

you anything else that is going on because you might learn something. The people

in this Province might get some idea about where things are going.

In the midst of all that, today, probably, I would think, one of the most

serious negotiations ongoing at the moment, the NLMA, what does the Premier

choose to do? The old strategy of divide and conquer again - divide and conquer.

There is no such thing as respectful negotiations between two parties: You have

your position and I have my position; let us go behind closed doors and go at it

and see where we end up. That is not the strategy of our Premier. Our Premier's

strategy is to take an e-mail that he has from somebody who is in the NLMA, a

member of it, disgruntled with how his executive, no doubt, is negotiating, and

lets that be known.

Well, folks, that is not that uncommon either. I cannot remember any group

that has never had a dissident somewhere within. When you are off negotiating

for hundreds of people, to think that you might have a person who is not

particularly pleased with the approach that the executive has taken, I do not

think that is reflective of an incompetent, or poorly organized, or non-united

executive. I do not think that means that at all.

If we were to take every expression of somebody's dissatisfaction as meaning

that the group is not together, I think we would all be in a serious problem. I

think we would all be in serious trouble. I will give you one example if you

want to correlate that with something. For example: When the former Member for

Placentia & St. Mary's, Mr. Manning, got offside with the government on the Raw

Material Sharing thing that was the same situation. Here was a member of a

group, the government caucus, who was offside with his executive, the

government, the Cabinet, and he expressed his dissatisfaction, expressed his

dissatisfaction and said: There are people in my district who disagree with

that, I cannot be supportative of it, and I must ask questions about it and

speak out for my people and their concerns and so on.

Well, the Premier dealt with that one pretty good; they turfed it. I believe

the Premier was down in Houston at the time. Mr. Byrne was back here and word

came back from Houston that Mr. Manning is not going to be sitting in that

caucus when I get back, or if so, I will not be there. Lo and behold, the former

Government House Leader, the Member for Kilbride, he pulled the trigger. There

is no doubt about it, he pulled the trigger and the Member for Placentia & St.

Mary's ends up on this side of the House. Now that is how they dealt with

dissent at that time. That is how dissent was dealt with.

All members, of course, of the government caucus are aware of that. They know

exactly what the consequences are of disagreeing with the boss, disagreeing with

the executive, but yet, the Premier thinks that is okay for the party that he is

a leader of. Yet, in the NLMA somebody is allowed to go out and express

dissatisfaction, and because they expressed their dissatisfaction the whole

executive of the NLMA is wrong. That seems like a hypocritical type of approach.

That is not a case of what is good for the goose is good for the gander; that is

a case of you do what you want to do with your crowd, or let me do what I want

to do by my crowd, but I am going to tell you what to do for your crowd as well,

and I am going to cause some dissention amongst you. Now that seems like a

pretty nifty, cute approach. This is on the same day, by the way.

We will see where this going, I guess, after today or tomorrow when things

come out because it seems kind of cute by half, I guess, the former Premier

Grimes used to always say, too cute by half, that you get the Premier with a

particular piece of paper in his hand today during Question Period, cannot wait

to get on his feet to mention this e-mail after the Minister of Finance has

gotten up and said: We have a very good, conciliatory, great offer on behalf of

the taxpayers of this Province to the NLMA great presentation.

So here we are, we have, as the Minister of Finance says - who everybody in

this Province takes at his word - we have a great letter here; we have a great

deal for these people. It is cognizant of their needs; it brings them pretty

close to the range of dollars they were talking - $80 million. It puts us

somewhere in the range when it comes to Atlantic parity, and away we go, the

letter is going out this afternoon.

Lo and behold, we could not resist - the Premier could not resist to let the

letter go and see what was going to be the reaction no, sir. He had to take a

swipe at the NLMA executive before they ever got the letter, because the

minister says it is not gone out yet. So, he had to have that little swipe

today. It is not necessary, I would put it to.

Now, I come back to my thing about the plan, and I said that most people talk

about plans. This government tends to talk about the strategy. I actually had a

call from someone in my district after March 30, and they said: You have to be

kidding. You have to be kidding. You did not have an actual list of forty

different government strategies. I said: Yes -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is having great difficulty hearing the hon. Opposition House Leader

deliver his speech. I ask members to my left for their co-operation and take

their conversations to the outside.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank you. I appreciate that, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe if the members want to have a conversation, they can take it outside

the House, as you suggest. That would be most respectful.

Notwithstanding the attempts to drown out the speaker by their conversations,

Mr. Speaker, the most important people, of course, to hear this, and this

information, is the people who watch it on TV. Fortunately, the background

conversation does not interfere with their ability to listen and hear it -

fortunately.

I come back, Mr. Speaker, to the issue of the strategies. The government, as

the non-confidence motion suggests, does not have a plan, particularly a plan

for rural Newfoundland. I went on the Web site on March 30 in the morning,

trying to get a few notes and things, wanting to address this plan issue. I

never had an opportunity to get into it in detail back on March 30. I put the

word strategy into the search vehicle under the government Web site just to see

how often the word strategy would jump out at me, because I have been hearing

the word since 2003, continuously.

When you hear of some of the strategies of this government - now, by the way,

besides calling it a plan they call it a strategy - when you hear about these

forty strategies you wonder, is there anywhere that all of these strategies are

supposed to get tied together so that they are all supposed to be helpful to

each other? That neither is in conflict with the other? That maybe somewhere

they might mesh, and instead of one hand not knowing what the other hand is

doing, that the strategies might be somehow interrelated so that we get the

benefit of them? I have not seen that one. I guess that comes under the Blue

Book. I guess that is where the big master plan was, the Blue Book; and I will

come back to that because there have been a few changes made in the text of that

book since it was printed in 2003 and 2007.

Anyway, we got an Internet Strategy. Now, I will have to go back, of course,

and get the actual details as to every minister who is responsible for every one

of these individual strategies, and the departments, but just running down

through some of them you get an idea of how the government is reactionary as

opposed to proactive.

The Internet Strategy, now, I guess that must fall under the Minister of

Innovation, Trade and Rural Development. I would think that probably has

something to do - I hope it has to do - with the connectivity issue when we

talked about putting high-speed Internet services in rural Newfoundland.

Anybody, of course, who was alive and breathing in this Province, is aware of

the great investment that the Province jumped to make, of $15 million, back some

years ago. There happened to be a fire at an Aliant building on a Saturday

night, and come Monday morning we had $15 million going into Persona, just like

that. We are going to have high-speed Internet in everybody's living room. Never

mind just the schools and the courthouses and the social worker offices; we are

going to have high-speed Internet everywhere. Memorial University is going to be

connected to every nook and cranny in this Province. Have no fear, we are going

to get back - I believe it was actually tossed around that this $15 million

investment was going to get this Province back, on its own government services

alone, something to the tune of $400 million. Wicked numbers that we were being

told was going to come back to this government over time.

That was in 2003 or 2004 this was starting. We had the investment, we rowed

about it for three or four years, the money was gone out the door, and we are

sitting here now in 2010, or actually back a few months ago, in 2009 - and we

have been asking this question, by the way, in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and we

are saying: Minister, where is all this high-speed Internet stuff in rural

Newfoundland?

I know I have had numerous inquiries in my district, from people in Ramea,

people in Burgeo, for example, and people in Grey River who say: When is this

coming? Can we get it?

They even talked about the lines being run; it is going to get energized in

certain areas. Like in Rose Blanche, for example, it was going to get powered

up, and it was going to get powered up again in Burgeo, and powered up at

certain other sites down the coast. I had people calling me saying: This is

great. You cannot criticize government for this because we are all going to be

able to hook on to this high-speed Internet. This is great stuff. Why would you

ever criticize government for that?

I said: Well, I am not criticizing government for doing the project. I am

just concerned: are we ever going to get what we are supposed to get for our

money? They are putting $15 million in; you are supposed to get high-speed

Internet. You are supposed to get all these savings on government services. You

are supposed, for example, to be able to go to your social worker office in

Burgeo, when this was all done, and the social worker in Burgeo was going to be

tied in with the social worker office in Port aux Basques. Port aux Basques was

going to be tied in with Corner Brook; Corner Brook with Grand Falls; Grand

Falls with St. John's. All of these offices - whether you needed a government

social worker, whether you needed to talk to somebody in a courthouse, whether

you needed to talk to a police agency, medical issues and health authorities -

all tied together.

What does the minister tell us? I asked him here last spring, in 2009. I

said: What is the situation on the money we invested? Oh, we have put out an

RFP. We have all the proposals in, and we are going to let you know soon.

Lo and behold, last fall we get a press release come out of the minister's

office. I am not sure if it was on a Friday. I would have to double-check to see

if it was on a Friday because normally, when you are the bearer of bad news,

that comes out on a Friday some time after 3:00 p.m. when everybody is pretty

well shut down for the weekend. That is normal. I have to double-check and see

what the timing was on the release, but that is normally when you see that

happen.

I do know that nowhere did the heading suggest that we were not getting our

high-speed Internet any more - nowhere. Lo and behold, down in paragraph four or

five, hidden away, was a little pronouncement that the contract was not going to

be awarded and the project was scrapped, done, no high-speed Internet.

You have not heard anybody say: Well, we are sorry that we pumped all this

money in and it is blown. By the way, the company that we pumped the money into,

Persona, just in case government members do not know, that company flipped

itself a few months after. It flipped itself, which means it sold itself to

someone else; gone, never to be heard from again, as far as us taxpayers know

about.

Now, I do not see the government out ballyhooing about that one, that

particular strategy; that is their Internet Strategy. My constituents down in

Ramea and Burgeo are no better off today when it comes to high speed than they

were in 2005 when the money was put in none whatsoever and no sign of it.

That is the sad point: no indication from the minister as to where we are going

to go. If it took you five years to go from when the money was put in to

deciding that you were going to scrap it, how many years in the name of God is

it going to take to get this back on track, back on the rails, so we can

actually see this service being provided? That is a government that is dealing

with a plan, too; that is very proactive.

Now, the other strategy is the Tourism Marketing Strategy and I have to say

kudos to the persons and the agencies who designed some of the tourism ads that

I have seen. In fact, I have watched them and it is not a ministerial thing.

That is not a ministerial thing. They happen to engage, and I say hats off to

the government for increasing the tourism marketing budget over the years.

Tourism is very, very important to this Province, not only in St. John's, for

example, which just this past weekend benefitted from the Junos. I believe we

put in $750,000 to bid for the Junos, and we put in so much more to assist with

the cost of the celebrations on George Street and so on. In my view, and in the

view of the Opposition, it was money well spent because it came back tenfold. It

came back to the bars, it came back to the hotels, and it came back to the

musical talent of this Province and the artists of this Province who benefitted

from it. A good move, similar to the fact that we had good moves back when he

had the days of Soiree and the days of the Matthew visit and so on

great initiatives. The marketing campaigns that were done in terms of photos and

the ad campaigns were just super. I think they have even won awards. I not only

think, I know, because successive Ministers of Tourism have given Ministerial

Statements here saying so.

That is an example, by the way, of the Opposition not being afraid to say

that government has done some good things; because, as an Opposition member, you

just cannot be critical all the time and say: Oh, you do not do this, and you do

not do that. That is an example where this government did something proper and

deserve a pat on the back for it: the Tourism Marketing Strategy. Every time you

spend $1, if you encourage someone to come here from outside this Province and

spend $10 that is a pretty good investment. That is a fantastic investment.

There is no doubt, there is no other province in Canada I have seen them from

all across Canada have had the superior ad campaigns that this Province has

had. Then again, no disrespect to the other provinces, but they do not have the

beauty to show that we do anyway. So we get a head start, because as far as I am

concerned we have the most beautiful scenery and the beautiful people in the

country anyway. So, anyway that is our benefit.

Some of the other strategies: Provincial Solid Waste Management Strategy;

now, there is a good one. You want to talk about a plan or a strategy that is on

the paper, and that is about it. It has not gotten off the paper. You ask any

member here, government or Opposition member: Where is the provincial government

Solid Waste Management Strategy in their district? Where is it in their

district? The Minister of Environment and Conservation plays a role, for

example, the incinerators. The Minister of Municipal Affairs plays a role. I

remember asking questions in this House last year, the year before, saying: by

the way, minister - and they would play footsie with it. If I asked the minister

a question, of the Minister of Municipal Affairs or the former minister, I

should say, he is now the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. Sometimes he

would give me an answer, other times he would play footsie and flip it off to

the Minister of Environment. He would flip it off to the Minister of

Environment. If she thought the question was too hot, she would flip it off to

Municipal Affairs. Cat and mouse stuff. The bottom line was, people were

watching, and people saw that the questions were not being answered.

I will give you an example of a government that is, in terms of direction,

where this government is not at. On the waste management, for example, towns in

my district were told: your incinerator shall not work after June 30. Shut them

down; close them down, that is it. So I came to this House and I asked questions

of the Minister of Environment. I said: Did you consult with your colleague, the

Minister of Municipal Affairs? Because if you have just told Port aux Basques

that they cannot use their incinerator after June 30, they do not have any plan

for the garbage. What are they going to do with it? Well, she said, that is not

our concern. She just talked about all these furans going into the atmosphere

and how bad it was for the public health. I said, well that is fine, that is

great, nobody disagrees with that piece, but did you talk to the Minister of

Municipal Affairs? Before you tell the town to shut down their incinerator, do

you think there is a plan that people can take their garbage to on July 1, the

day after you shut it down? Well, that is not my job, she says. That is not my

role. I am just here to protect the environment. Okay. So I asked the Minister

of Municipal Affairs: Now that your colleague has shut it down, what are you

going to do to help the towns put their garbage to the day after? Oh, he says,

we are working on it, we are working on it. Guess what, folks? They are still

working on it three years after.

All of those letters that the Minister of Environment was so firm and stood

on her feet here and said: We are shutting them down. That is my job and we are

going to shut them down. Well, guess what, folks? Only Saturday past I dropped

my garbage off at the incinerator in Port aux Basques. I dropped mine off. They

are not shut down now. Somebody must have changed their mind. Somebody must have

changed their mind. That is where it comes back to this thing about plans and

strategies. A perfect example of one hand either does not know or does not care

what the other hand is doing. Instead of getting their act together and the

Minister of Municipal Affairs talking to the municipalities and saying: okay,

what can we do to solve this problem of waste management; work out the strategy

as to where we are going to go, bring environment in and do all the timing

pieces on this to get it done properly and have the alternatives. Instead of

that we get the Minister of Environment flipping off all of these letters.

I will give you an example, another - and you wonder if somebody who lives

inside the overpass sometimes has any concept of what happens and how people

live outside. I represent a little community called Grey River on the South

Coast of this Province, maybe 130 people there. Over to one side of the

community they have a little incinerator and for years and years that is where

they take their refuge, over to the incinerator. They have no problem with

having a waste management strategy. They would love to have some alternative so

they do not have to burn their garbage, no problem whatsoever. They have been

educated as to the environmental impacts of it and the health consequences of it

and they have no problem with it, but they made a simple request - and by the

way, they are not a municipality. They do not have a town council. These are

people - they are called local service districts. A different level of

government, but yet they took it upon themselves, they went to Municipal Affairs

and said: Can you tell us what we can do, what are our options, what do you

think we should do in this little community? So the off-the-cuff response - now

to somebody living in St. John's this might seem pretty reasonable, but their

off-the-cuff immediate response to the local service district of Grey River was:

you hold your garbage; you get some kind of bin to store it in on your wharf; do

not burn it; you pile up your garbage in a bin down on the wharf and once a week

we are going to ship that garbage by boat, boat or barge, up to Burgeo.

Now, that is a five hour boat trip for anybody who is not aware of that. We

are going to ship that up to Burgeo. He said: Okay. Well, what happens to it

then? Oh, well, we will look after that when we put it amongst the Burgeo

garbage, when we figure out what we are going to do with the Burgeo garbage. I

said: Okay. They said: What boat are we going to put it on? Are we going to put

it on the provincial ferry, because there is a contracted service to move people

back and forth? So, once a week do we take this garbage bin and put it on a boat

with these people? Oh, we do not know that. We have not figured that piece out

yet. Okay, what are we going to store it in down on the wharf? Is there anything

we should store it in rather than just have the smell and the stink of the

garbage there? It might be okay in the wintertime but on the South Coast of the

Province in May, June, July and August, having your garbage stored upon the

wharf might not be such a good idea in a bin. We do not know; we have not

figured that piece out where you are going to store it while you are shipping

it. I said: Oh, by the way, who pays the cost of shipping it? Oh well, we have

not figured that out either.

Guess what, folks? To make a long story short, the people of Grey River are

still waiting for answers from the Department of Municipal Affairs and the

Department of Environment: What do we do with our incinerator? No answers have

come from this government, and I am not talking about needing a month to decide

or six months to decide. This question has now been floating for three years;

three years and no answer. That is the strategy. That is just Provincial Waste

Management, and I am only down to number four on my list yet of strategies of

this government.

The Atlantic Groundfish Strategy, now there is a good one. That is a pretty

important one, given that the minister has gone off for a meeting at 2:30 today

on the fisheries. It will be interesting for somebody to go back and dig that

one off the shelf and blow the dust off that strategy and see where we are with

the Atlantic Groundfish Strategy. That might have some relevance to what we are

talking about today. I know today is mostly about shellfish industry but knowing

where we are with the groundfish might be important.

The Provincial Geomatics Strategy, the Certification Strategy, the Cod

Recovery Strategy. This government, to its credit, has put a lot of money into

aquaculture in this Province. The Cooke enterprise is down on the South Coast,

the Burin Peninsula area, the Connaigre Peninsula, even out west, I understand,

in the Stephenville, Port au Port area. Government deserves full credit for

putting money into the aquaculture industry; there is no doubt about it. They

deserve kudos for putting their money there to assist these industries.

Unfortunately, I guess, for all parties concerned, for government, for the

companies, for the people in those areas, some of these technologies yet just

are not proven to be successful.

I understand Cooke has shut down their cod farming operations on the South

Coast. That has come to an end. By the way, that is not a thing that is only

unique to this Province. I was in New Brunswick last week visiting with

relatives and reading the local media there. Cooke is having the same problem in

New Brunswick and other companies as well. So, albeit good intentions, sometimes

we meet market circumstances and technology and science that just will not let

it work to the full extent that we would like it to work. There is no doubt in

the future that is the way we have to go when it comes to the fishing industry.

The Regional Diversification Strategy - now that is an interesting one. That

is going to be very, very beneficial to us. Regional diversification - it sounds

great, but I do not know what diversification has taken place in rural

Newfoundland on the watch of this government. I see lots of reactionary stuff.

I had an e-mail only a couple of days ago from a gentleman involved in the

fishing industry. I guess it is the frustration that sets in. He is in the

fishing industry and he has been watching this unfolding between harvesters;

processors; calls for government to get involved; still at a meeting stage up to

2:30 p.m. today; no resolution of it; the shellfish industry has started; we are

not going; the pricing is an issue; inventory is an issue; marketing is an

issue; the value of the dollar is an issue and so on.

This individual, trying to make a living, is frustrated. He says: I do not

understand it. I saw this government, when Abitibi closed out in Grand Falls,

strike a special committee. They pump millions and millions of dollars, he said,

into severance packages, into trying to help the people of Central Newfoundland.

He said: We saw in the Budget this year that the government has committed $30

million over two years to Kruger.

Now, let's not fool ourselves as to why the government has put their money

into Kruger. We had three pulp and paper mills in this Province. We had the one

in Stephenville which does not exist anymore. We had the one in Grand

Falls-Windsor which does not exist anymore. Both of which, by the way, happened

on the watch of this government, both of them happened to close. I am not

suggesting that government closed them, obviously not, but since that three or

four-year period, the forest industry in the world has been in a serious,

serious situation with marketing, with cost, of access to materials, valuations

of the dollar, disputes that have gone on between different countries over

bringing in the resource and so on. The bottom line is you might not be able to

control what happened if it is external, international forces or global forces

that caused it, the question that people test you on and grade you on is: How

did you deal with it once it happened?

Well, we saw in Stephenville there was not much of a solution. It is gone. We

have not seen much to replace it from an industrial point of view. You might see

some ad hoc government suggestions: Oh, we are going to put this little agency

there or that there. Other than that, no real economic boosters or industry

brought to the Province. It is the same way in Central. We hear the minister get

up every now and then and talk about we have a few jobs here and a few jobs

there and whatever. Again, certainly no master plan, no big initiatives to bring

any industries here.

The Youth Retention and Attraction Strategy; the Ocean Technology Strategy;

the Protected Areas Strategy; the Forest Ecosystem Strategy; the provincial

branding strategy; fine arts and culture strategy; the Minerals Strategy;

Northern Agrifoods Development Strategy; Workforce Adjustment Strategy;

Provincial Immigration Strategy; rural development strategy; caribou herd

recovery strategy we saw that unfolding up in Labrador recently, caribou

recovery; Graduate Recruitment Strategy; Vessel Replacement Strategy; Cultural

Connections strategy; Strategy for Crowded this is one that I actually had

somebody call me and ask me was I serious when I said this. Yes, I am quite

serious. There is a provincial strategy called the Strategy for Crowded Wormseed

Mustard. Now, I will get the details at another time.

Craft Industry Development strategy; recreation and sport strategy;

Excellence in Mathematics strategy; provincial cancer control strategy; Economic

Growth, Innovation Strategy now, I do not know how that one, number

thirty-two, by the way, differs from number three which is Innovation Strategy.

We have an Innovation Strategy and we have an Economic Growth, Innovation

Strategy. Recovery Strategy for endangered Low Northern Rockcress; Early

Childhood Development in the Northeast Avalon; provincial Wellness Strategy;

Fishing Industry Renewal strategy. Now, I am sure the minister had that one

tucked into his briefcase when he went to the meeting today at 2:30 p.m.,

because that is exactly what he was talking about when he answered the

questions. We need something in this Province to renew the fishing industry.

Now, he did not have to go down, according to my list, and invent this since

Friday or Saturday when he got his proposal from the fishing industry. This

strategy has existed for some time. I am wondering if maybe he would like table

a copy of the strategy and explain to us exactly what steps were taken from the

time that it was created, just to show how proactive he was and where we have

gone on that Fishing Industry Renewal strategy since it was created.

Tobacco Reduction Strategy; provincial Energy Strategy; and Wind Generation

Strategy so, we have forty that I am aware of. We definitely have forty. There

are probably forty more that I never even scratched the surface with yet. The

question is: Where does all this tie together in a plan? You have certainly

covered the map of a lot of different areas, but where is the master plan as we

say? Where is the overall master plan? That is the part that we have not seen.

Some people would say that I only talk about things that happen in other

places in the Province and not my own district, but I want to take a few minutes

to talk about the District of Burgeo & La Poile and some of the things that

happen there, some of the things that are very good and some of the things not

so good and that we still need help with. For example, I have alluded to the

dialysis piece. I spoke to some individuals over the Easter break. They are very

pleased. Some of these individuals, of course, they are very much aware that it

is going to take maybe a year or eighteen months to actually put a facility in

place, to put the training in place, but it will be there once it is done. We

all realize that it takes time to do that and are very appreciative of the fact

that government is, in fact, going to do that. I notice the same thing is being

done in Lab West and that is very nice to see, because they are probably the two

most isolated areas in the Province now when it comes to medical services. If

you are in Lab West you just cannot walk down the street and get your services,

nor can you if you are in the Southwest part of this Island very easily,

particularly in the winter months. That is good to see.

Some of the roadwork that is getting done - it is outside of my district but

everybody in the district uses it. The Crabbes River bridge, for example, is, I

believe technically, in the district of the Government House Leader. That is

going to be very beneficial to not only the truck traffic that rolls off Marine

Atlantic but everybody in my district who travels out of town. That is very,

very beneficial, and that is great to see.

Some municipal infrastructure, for example, in the Town of Isle aux Morts,

they have been after for several years trying to get a facility. They had a

problem. You talk about environmental concerns. They actually house their fire

department in the same building that houses the town hall. You can imagine if

the firemen came in for training and started up the fire truck, and started to

use their equipment, the town hall is not a very good safe place for the workers

to be working. We finally got that fixed. An individual who was a former

resident of the town donated property across the street. The town took that

offer. We have managed to get the engineering done, and now under this year's

Budget we got some funding allotted to actually do the construction. Then, of

course, the old fire hall, town hall building will be used totally for fire

department services. That is a very good initiative.

We have roadwork being done constantly. We know you cannot get everything you

want every year. People understand that. You have your basic road maintenance of

potholes and so on. I must say, in fairness to the workers for the Department of

Transportation and Works, I have an excellent working relationship with the

people on the west coast who run that department. It is simply a matter, they

ask every year, give us a list of where you have problem areas, tell us what

your priorities are in terms of concerns and we will try our best in the

forthcoming year to get it done. We did not get it all done in one year.

Sometimes we have to go back in year two or even year three to get a crack at it

and get it looked after. That has been done, and much appreciated.

Fire departments, that is a touchy one. I noticed in this year's Budget by

the way, and I was very pleased to see it in the Budget this year, that there

are going to be additional monies put into the Department of Municipal Affairs

fire budgets. You talk about fire protection infrastructure. We had a statement

made here today by the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs about volunteers in

this Province. I alluded to the fact that probably, and it not fair I guess to

characterize any volunteer being more important than another, but in terms of

the actual service that you provide, firemen have to rank right up there in

terms of they undergo the training to put their own lives on the line. A lot of

volunteer effort does not involve your own personal safety, but being a

firefighter in this Province involves actually putting your life on the line to

protect your fellow citizens.

This year, the government has announced that there are two pots apparently,

one is going to be for a fire truck acquisition. They have increased that to

$2.5 million this year. Also the other pot of money, what we call firefighting

equipment upgrades and replacements, they have put it up to $1 million this

year, which is basically a doubling. We have two separate pots. Yes, we have

some extra money. The fire chief for one of the major towns in my district, Port

aux Basques for example, Mr. Musseau, is actually the western director on the

Newfoundland and Labrador fire fighters association. He was present when the

fire fighters association made their presentation to government earlier on and

he is very pleased to see that we have in fact seen these funding increases, and

I am very pleased to see. It is a great move.

According to the information that is in the Budget, there are 6,200 volunteer

fire fighters in this Province. Now some communities, for example, take it for

granted. Like maybe the City of St. John's, for example, and the City of Mount

Pearl and Labrador City, Grand Falls-Windsor, Gander and Corner Brook, the

bigger places. Some of these have paid fire departments, firefighting

departments, and they build it in as an automatic part of their budgets every

year of course, that we need a fire truck. We go looking for it, for government

assistance no doubt but they have a tax base much larger, much more affluent in

a lot of cases in order to do that.

Whereas some communities are not blessed

with that, particularly if you are a local service district as opposed to a

community.

For example, I have a community of Cape Ray, a local service district, not a

lot of people, got no tax base. Yet, they still have fires. So they are always

scraping. They have their fundraisers, everything from soup sales to turkey

suppers to cold plates to dances to crib tournaments, you name it. They do

everything under the sun to try to get a few dollars to buy the equipment,

because even if we go to government and government say: Okay, we can give you a

certain amount of funding towards equipment, for example, they still have to

raise their portion. It is pretty tough doing it, but I must say, hats off to

the people in these local service districts because they realize it is their

community. They realize they have to pay their share, and they are more than

willing to pay their share. Fire services are one of the things that most

citizens in most communities are more than happy to help pay their share with.

Now, I do believe as well that that is a pretty insignificant amount overall.

I realize there are limitations with government when it comes to: Do you put it

into health care? Do you put it into education? Do you put it into fire

fighting? Do you put it into municipal infrastructure, like roads and water and

sewer? There has to be some priority list drawn. Where do you draw the line?

Some people would suggest that there are some other things of maybe a cultural

or a recreational nature that should not take priority over firefighting

equipment and that these communities ought to have the firefighting equipment

but in any case, it is good to see that government is committed to funds in that

regard.

I know it is usually - the process I find has been done fairly fair. You end

up with all the communities putting in their wish list I call it and they are

prepared to pay their share of the funding, and that finds its way through the

Fire Commissioner's Office and Emergency Measures to the Minister of Municipal

Affairs and eventually a decision gets made. I must say, in fairness to any

minister I have dealt with, they have usually been pretty fair. They understand

and respect the priority list that is usually provided. Sometimes there is a

little quirk. We had a little quirk last year in my district between the

community of Rose Blanche and the community of Burnt Islands, but those things

you have to talk through. You have to understand why the decision got made, and

usually if all parties are reasonable and rational, which they were, and the

department, you usually try to work out some format and process so that on a

go-forward basis you can hopefully see those types of issues resolved. I look

forward to hopefully seeing that resolved later this year when we deal with the

minister again.

The other issue that is of particular importance to my district, of course,

and that is ferries. I do not know if that is the right word to use when I am

talking about Marine Atlantic, because I have the ships, Marine Atlantic, but I

also have the provincial ferry service. I have, for example, the communities of

Grey River serviced by the provincial ferry service. It runs from Burgeo down to

Grey River. I also have a service that runs from Burgeo to Ramea on a daily

basis. I also have a service that runs from Rose Blanche down to La Poile.

So provincial ferries are very important, and you always get your problems.

You always have issues. People are understanding when the issue relates to

weather or ice conditions. If the ice is there and the skipper says you cannot

go because the ice is down, you cannot go. That is understandable. We have had

the case in the past where we could not do the service because of weather

conditions or ice conditions, for example, and government has agreed to provide

helicopter transport for anyone who needed medical service. That is very

acceptable, and people understand that. These people living in these rural

communities, they generally understand that you just cannot up and run whenever

you want to. They are used to living in isolated communities. They want the

service, and as long as it is a respectable, decent service, it is usually

pretty good. Barring weather and so on, they understand that as well.

Problems come about when sometimes government puts a ferry on the service

that is totally inadequate to that area. That is where you have problems, when

you do not have consultation. You have a Department of Transportation who have,

I believe it is run out of Lewisporte when it comes to the ferry service, and

you might end up with a vessel going to service Burgeo to Grey River, and it is

not the usual one and there has been little consultation, for example, and

somebody says: How come we have this boat now? We have the Eagle instead

of the such-and-such, and there was no consultation. Then people get all upset:

She can only carry twelve people; the other one carries twenty-five. She cannot

carry any cargo unless you put it out on deck and it gets wet, those kinds of

things. Usually, it takes some discussion and some communication back and forth

between the parties and we usually get it walked through.

Now, hopefully the new vessel replacement program that the Province has

announced - I believe they have announced this one now about twelve times. We

see some money being put into the vessel replacement piece by government again

in this Budget, and that is a good thing. It is a bit late. Again, I guess you

can only do it when you get your money in your hand or you know you can bank on

the money, but they have committed a substantial amount of dollars to replace

six vessels over a period of time.

Now, we do not exactly know over what period of time. We do not know exactly

that they are going to pay for all six of them because the funding does not

relate to all six. I believe it only relates to two or three at the present time

based on the dollars that are there. It was interesting to see - and this is

probably one of the few occasions when government listened, but it took a

by-election for them to listen. It is amazing what can get done by government

when there is a by-election on. I am referring, of course, in the case of the

ferries to the Terra Nova District by-election fascinating! Government had

this strategy to build these new ferries, fund them, but somewhere between the

jigs and the reels they forgot to say that they were going to be built in

Newfoundland and Labrador, or to even make any provision that it be built in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Now this is the government who touts itself on no more giveaways. No more

giveaways, you are not getting our oil out of the ground, under the ocean. You

are not taking our minerals. You are not getting any of that unless it benefits

us, but yet we are going to put millions of dollars into vessel construction but

we did not say it had to be constructed here. Now that was a big piece missing.

Despite the fact that people screamed about that, nothing was done. They did not

say: Yes, we are going to stick that clause in there and we are going to give

the dockyard in St. John's a chance to bid, the fabrication facilities in

Glovertown, or the fabrication facilities in Marystown or Clarenville. We have

lots of places, but government did not say we are going to give our own

tradespersons a chance to do that; it was not there.

Lo and behold we get a resignation, there is a by-election out in Terra Nova,

whop, all of a sudden that is reversed; we are going to get our vessels built in

Newfoundland and Labrador. It is a good move, but it should not have taken a

by-election to get it done. That is called listening. It is called listening and

when you only listen because you are pressured to - can anybody tell me, in

government, what was wrong with that decision to allow Newfoundland and Labrador

companies to bid on the process or insist that they be done here? Was there

something wrong with that?

I remember the former Minister of Transportation, the former Member for The

Straits & White Bay North, standing up and giving us ten reasons in this House,

when it was asked in the House here in Question Period, why it could not be

done. He gave us ten reasons why it could not be done. Lo and behold, when the

by-election is on, all those reasons disappeared, and now it can be done. What

was wrong with having it done in the first place? If you could find the will to

do it in the fall of 2009, why could you not find the will to do it when you

announced it?

That is what confuses people sometimes. It certainly does not tie in with the

comments like the Member for Baie Verte-Springdale when he talked about: We

care! Yes, that was a we care'; we did not care to listen. That is an example

of we care', all right. Anyway, those kinds of things are confusing.

Back to the big ships which is more in my turf - Marine Atl