Source: http://www.assembly.nl.ca/business/hansard/ga44session3/01-04-11.htm
Timestamp: 2017-11-23 16:56:13
Document Index: 560452927

Matched Legal Cases: ['§409', '§806', '§807', '§808', '§820', '§760', '§761']

April 11, 2001 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 16
MR. SPEAKER: On a point of privilege, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
I have been informed this morning by the Member for Cape St. Francis, who is also Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, that members of the Public Accounts Committee on the government side have refused to meet with the Public Accounts Committee until the Chairman apologizes for an incident that occurred in December of 2000.
It is important to review exactly what took place during that time. There were points of privilege raised before you, and points of order, and you brought down the following ruling: In the opinion of the Chair, the Member for Cape St. Francis, in remarks he made, imputed motives to three members who raised points of privilege, and imputing wrong motives has often been ruled unparliamentary.
You went on to say: I refer the member to Beauchesne's 6th Edition, §409.(7) which states, "A question must adhere to the properties of the House, in terms of inferences, imputing motives...", et cetera. You went on to ask the member to withdraw his statement, which he refused.
You again, on two other occasions, asked the member to withdraw and he refused. At that time, you named the member. He got up and said, while respectful of your decision, in all good conscience he could not withdraw his remarks. He accepted the punishment of you naming him and left the Legislature for that day.
Mr. Speaker, there is a legal term called res judicata which is important in terms of the principle that is at stake today. In Latin, it essentially means that this matter has been dealt with. Yet, this morning, the Vice-Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, which is the only standing Committee of this House and is an arm of this Legislature, indicated to the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, the Member for Cape St. Francis, that they would no longer meet until an apology was given to them.
I refer members to Beauchesne, page 221, the types of committees that this House has. One: "Standing committees..." - Public Accounts is the only standing committee of this Legislature and therefore an arm of this Legislature - "...are appointed under the Standing Orders to examine and report on the general conduct of activities by government departments and agencies, and to consider and report on the Estimates." It is an accountability function that this Legislature provides to the public. "They may, however, be ordered to conduct such investigations or inquiries as the House may direct. These committees exist throughout a Parliament. Since 1985, standing committees have been given permanent general orders of reference which empower them to initiate examinations, and to report their findings to the House."
I reference that, Mr. Speaker, just to demonstrate the importance of the Public Accounts Committee. On page 223 it is important to note that Beauchesne goes on to say, "It is the duty..." - parliamentary duty - "...of all committees to give the matters referred to them due and sufficient consideration."
Mr. Speaker, on page 230, I can refer hon. members to section §806. It deals with Quorum. It says, "The general rule establishing a quorum for committees is contained in Standing Order 118(1). A majority of members of a special, legislative, or..." - in this case - "...standing committee constitutes a quorum."
Mr. Speaker, the Public Accounts Committee cannot move forward with its work on behalf of the public unless there is a quorum. Section §807 goes on to say, "Although not obligated to do so by the Standing Orders, it is a courtesy for the Chairman to wait until a representative of each party is present before commencing a meeting."
This morning, the Chairman did exactly that. He and other members of the Public Accounts Committee were at a meeting where they were informed by the Vice-Chair that they would be there shortly. They waited fifteen to twenty minutes longer, upon which time the Vice-Chair showed up and said to the Chairman that they would no longer be meeting until he issued an apology.
Mr. Speaker, it is important to note that section §808.(3) is very clear when it comes to this committee. It says, "No motions may be put by the Chairman (although notice may be given of proposed motions) nor divisions taken during committee sittings held under a reduced quorum." In other words, the business of the Public Accounts Committee has come to a standstill because government members refuse to go there, even though it is, in our view, an issue that you have dealt with, and that this member has taken his punishment and left - before, in December.
If you go to page 232, when it deals with Order and Decorum, I think it is very clear; §820.(1) and (2) are what is relevant. (1) "The Chairman of the committee is responsible for order and decorum in the committee. Disobedience to the orders of a committee, provided those orders are within the scope of the committee's authority, is a contempt..." - and that is the key word in this case - "...of the House by which the committee was appointed." It goes on to say, that judges the actions of the Vice-Chair and his committee members in this way, because again it is very clear: (2) "A committee has no authority to punish one of its members or other persons for an alleged offence committed against it. Only the House can decide that an offence has been committed."
Mr. Speaker, the House has decided. You, as Chair of this House, have decided. This member has accepted the ruling of the House in December, and in our view the members of the Public Accounts Committee who sit on the government side, by not showing up, by not fulfilling their obligations and duties as outlined in Beauchesne, as outlined for all of us, are, in fact, holding this Legislature in contempt.
We see a remedy for this in two ways: First of all, we would ask you to instruct, on the one hand, members of the Public Accounts Committee, who presently sit there, to go back and fulfil their duties and if they cannot, then ask the governing party to appoint four new members so that the business of the Public Accounts Committee, which has the ability to investigate, call to witness, to go into any department or Crown agency in government, to ask any questions of anybody dealing with public institutions so that they can get on with the business of doing the public's job.
Secondly, Mr. Speaker, the second remedy, either one or the other, or a combination of both; that you find and rule that the members on the government side, who sat on the Public Accounts Committee, are holding this Legislature in contempt for not allowing the Public Accounts Committee to continue to do the work that they so valuably do on behalf of the public of the Province.
MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I would submit that it is not the members of the Public Accounts Committee on the government side that is holding the House in contempt. It was the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee that held the House in contempt by not following the instructions of Your Honour. Even though the penalty was imposed, the hon. member had no choice but to follow that. One has to understand the role of the Committee and the role of members to understand how members on the government side feel about this particular situation and about this offensive language that was used by the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee.
Just let me quote, Mr. Speaker, some sentences and some phrases, re the operation of the public accounts. It says that the Public Accounts Committee should operate if it is to be effective, should operate in a nonpartisan fashion if it is to effectively conduct a searching and rigorous scrutiny of government expenditures.
Secondly, Mr. Speaker, it says the work requires cooperation of all committee members regardless of party affiliation if the PAC is to be effective. If committee members try to bring partisan politics into the work of the PAC it will be disruptive and will reduce the PAC's effectiveness and credibility.
Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to Your Honour that is what the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee has done. He has introduced partisan politics into this situation and as long-
MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, the hon. members cannot expect that they can breach the rules of the House and nobody -
MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I want to say I heard the hon. Leader of the Opposition in his submission and never uttered a word.
I would suggest that members of this side felt so offended by the offensive language that they were accused of not being able to use their own minds in voting that they were instructed to do what the Premier bid them to do. I would suggest it is very offensive, and I would suggest to you that the matter has not been sufficiently dealt with. Most times in this House, I have rarely seen it otherwise, when somebody has uttered an unparliamentary language that they just get up and withdraw the offensive language. If the hon. member had done that, that would have satisfied all members on this side and the Pubic Accounts Committee would be in operation today. But no, the member insists that he wants to stand by his words and taking the political stance that the members on this side were instructed to vote as the Premier told them to vote and that is not correct and it is not doing justice to the members on this side of the House.
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition; I will hear his comments then I will take the point in question.
MR. E. BYRNE: I will make two points, Mr. Speaker. First of all, I heard exactly the same speech in December from the Government House Leader, and I say that with no disrespect to the Government House Leader.
The matter that he just raised was dealt with by you, as Speaker and Chair of this Assembly. The matter was dealt with. The member accepted the punishment put forward by you and left. But, there is no way around this fact, that what is happening right now is that members of the government, who sit on the Public Accounts Committee, have taken a punitive action which is clearly in violation of Beauchesne, and I will repeat for your consideration again: That a committee has no authority to punish one of its members or other persons for an alleged offence committed against him. Only the House can decide that an offence has been committed. You have decided that, Mr. Speaker, it has been dealt with. The issue before you now is a new issue and must be dealt with so the important work of the Committee of Public Accounts, the important work they do on behalf of the public, can continue because clearly, without a quorum, it cannot be done.
MR. SPEAKER: To the point raised. First of all, the Chair wants to make it quite clear that the ruling the Chair made was on a comment and an incident that happened and occurred here in this Chamber, not something that occurred in the Public Accounts Committee.
I want to refer members to Beauchesne again, page 222, it says: "§760(2) Committees receive their authority from the House itself and the authority of the House overrides that of any committee."
Under (3) "The Speaker has ruled on many occasions that it is not competent for the Speaker to exercise procedural control over the committees. Committees are and must remain masters of their own procedure."
Under (4) "On one occasion, after a grievance was raised in the House concerning procedure in a committee, the Speaker undertook to write to all committee chairmen pointing out that when a grievance is not resolved satisfactorily in committee it often results in the time of the House being taken when the grievance is raised in the guise of a question of privilege."
"§761. It is the duty of all committees to give the matters referred to them due and sufficient consideration." And I suggest, that is what the committee do at this time.
This year the Town of Labrador City celebrates its 40th anniversary. As part of the celebrations, the town, in conjunction with other stakeholder groups will host a series of events acknowledging our appreciation and recognition of the importance of the mining industry within our community, Province, and throughout the world.
Celebrations will commence on April 23, with the arrival of the Great Canadian Mining Show, and conclude on May 12, with the Provincial Mining Week Celebrations.
Mr. Speaker, the Great Canadian Mining Show is a mobile, self-contained, hydraulic expanding trailer which utilizes digital technology to bring the story of mining to the surface and to showcase mining excellence.
Other events include exhibitor displays at the Labrador mall, mining career opportunities for junior and senior high school students, including students who will be visiting from elsewhere in Labrador. Mine tours, public and professional presentations will also take place.
Mr. Speaker, no one can doubt the contribution that mining makes to our Province and I am sure that this hon. House joins me in wishing every success to the Town of Labrador City and the organizers of the celebrations that will take place there.
MR. SWEENEY: Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate the International Year of Volunteers, I would like to pay tribute to one of the Province's best known volunteers, Mary French.
A founding member of two branches of the Women's Institute of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mrs. French died at her Victoria Street home in Harbour Grace March 28, at the age of seventy-nine.
Mrs. French was a very unique individual. A recipient of the Red Cross Volunteer Award for her service in the Second World War, Mrs. French also volunteered throughout her lifetime with the Carbonear Hospital Ladies Auxiliary and was known for her loyal and dedicated service.
Mr. Speaker, her personal highlight was meeting Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, at a garden party in Buckingham Palace in 1996. Mrs. French, a staunch monarchist, received the invitation after the Queen read a publication about the Victoria Manor Heritage House in Harbour Grace.
Mrs. Mary French was a colorful individual with a magnetic personality. I send my condolences to her husband Gordon, daughter Joy, and the rest of her family and friends. She will be sorely missed.
I rise today to give tribute to an event that took place in my area this past week, the Proclamation 2001 held at Grace United Church in Coley's Point.
The Canadian Bible Society, in cooperation with the churches from Georgetown to Carbonear sponsored the public, oral reading of the Holy Bible from the verse of Genesis to the last verse of Revelation. The reading took place between the hours of 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. each day from March 28 to April 6, 2001. A ‘Festival of Praise', also a significant aspect of Proclamation, was held at Grace United Church on Saturday evening, April 7, with approximately 500 people in attendance. Rev. Sandra Tilley, District Director of the Bible Society, was present at this gospel Sing Along and spoke of the work of the Bible Society throughout the world.
During the ten days of Proclamations 1,675 people registered and participated at this event either as a reader, listener, spent time in a prayer room, helped at the display table and served food in the hospitality room, or a combination of two or more activities. Seven hundred and thirty participants read God's word during these ten days, in something like fifteen different languages.
The fourteenth hour of the tenth day of Proclamation was most rewarding and uplifting. It had a significant impact on those who attended, approximately 200 to 220 people in attendance.
The oldest reader at the Proclamation was Pastor Eric Janes from Clarke's Beach. Pastor Janes is in his eighty-sixth year. He read from a Bible that had been the property of the Presbyterian Church at Harbour Grace from 1840 to 1941.
Kindra Bowering, the four-year-old daughter of Perry and Marie Bowering, stood in the pulpit and recited Psalm 23, she was the youngest reader.
Proclamation at Coley's Point clearly demonstrated that there were no religious barriers among denominations that participated. Proclamation was a unique opportunity to demonstrate the unity of the Christian community in the Conception Bay North area.
I extend congratulations to Ms Norma Bonnell, Branch President of the Canadian Bible Society from the Georgetown-Clarke's Beach area, Mr. Harold Stanford, Branch President of the Canadian Bible Society for the Bay Robert's area, and, indeed, Mr. Speaker, all the volunteers who made this event the success it was.
I rise today to recognize a very important celebration which will take place throughout Canada during the week of April 22 to 28, 2001. I am referring, of course, to National Volunteer Week which recognizes the many people who, by volunteering in their communities, make our lives richer and more secure. I also want to recognize that this year, 2001, has been designated by the United Nations as International Year of the Volunteer, to recognize globally the immense importance of volunteers.
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador recognizes the important role volunteers play in our social and economic growth. In our Province, volunteers contribute nearly 80 million hours a year in formal and informal voluntary work time: helping people who are sick, elderly or disabled; providing first aid and counseling; helping with Brownies, Big Brothers/Big Sister, the Children's Wish Foundation and literacy programs; coaching sports; fighting fires, caring for the environment; organizing church picnics; and helping make their communities better places to live in countless other ways.
Mr. Speaker, volunteer work in this Province has been valued at $1.1 billion a year. That's the equivalent of about 12 per cent of our provincial Gross Domestic Product. However, even though voluntary work contributes directly to our well-being as citizens and makes our communities strong, voluntary work is invisible in the economic growth statistics used to measure our progress and social well- being.
In Canada, Mr. Speaker, residents of Newfoundland and Labrador are the second largest per capita contributors of formal and informal volunteer hours. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, fifteen years of age and older, contribute an average of three and one-quarter hours per week in voluntary work time, well about the Canadian average of approximately two and one-half hours.
In Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, our commitment to the Strategic Social Plan requires that the health of the voluntary sector and of community service in general be given top priority. Our volunteers are a precious resource, and their work is essential to our well- being as a people and as a Province.
Mr. Speaker, as a government we have done a number of things to honour and strengthen the voluntary sector. First, as we announced in December of last year, the government allocated $100,000 to the Community Services Council to support a range of initiatives throughout 2001 to celebrate locally the many volunteers in our Province.
Second, Mr. Speaker, the government has also announced that a Volunteer Service Medal has been struck to officially salute our Province's volunteers.
Third, Mr. Speaker, during this year the regional steering committees of the Strategic Social Plan will be organizing volunteer conferences in the Cormack-Grenfell and Eastern regions to help develop networks between the voluntary sector, develop volunteers' skills and to celebrate the contribution of volunteers. In the Central region, a full-time volunteer coordinator has been hired to assist in developing a number of small forums which focus on developing the skills and addressing the needs of volunteers as well as recognizing the contribution of the voluntary sector and encouraging new people to become involved in their communities as volunteers.
Mr. Speaker, as minister responsible for the Strategic Social Plan, I am pleased to have this opportunity to acknowledge and pay tribute to the contributions of volunteers and the voluntary sector that form such an important part of the social and economic fabric of our Province. The Strategic Social Plan, itself, grew out of extensive consultations with the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Many of the people consulted were volunteers, as are many of the people associated with the regional steering committees, and it is their vision for their own future and that of the Province that the plan embodies.
That vision, Mr. Speaker, is of a "healthy, educated, distinctive, self-reliant and prosperous people living in vibrant, supportive communities within sustainable regions."
Mr. Speaker, there is no single factor what makes a greater contribution to "vibrant, supportive communities" than the selfless work of volunteers. National Volunteer Week is an opportunity for all of us to acknowledge publicly the exceptional work of volunteers in Newfoundland and Labrador. As a volunteer, the job is not always easy, but I do know from personal experience how rewarding it can be.
Au nom du gouvernement de Terre-Neuve et du Labrador, je vous remercie do vos efforts soutenus pour améliorer la qualité de vie dans notre Province. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de la contribution inestimable que vous apportez dans nos vies, à tous et à toutes.
On behalf of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, thank you for you untiring service to make our Province a better place in which to live. We applaud your invaluable contributions to all of our lives.
I would like to thank the minister for providing me with a copy of his statement in advance. I would like to join the minister today in expressing as well my gratitude to all the volunteers in our Province. Every day thousands of volunteers across Newfoundland and Labrador are making a difference to the people around them and to their communities at large. A lot of the time their work goes unnoticed and unheralded. Volunteer Week is a perfect time for each and every one of us to say a sincere thank you to our volunteers for their significant contribution to our Province.
It is interesting to note, and I said this last year when I responded to the statement, and I would like to get this in, that National Volunteer Week was first proclaimed in 1943 to acknowledge the vital contribution that women made to the war effort, and in the 1960s this week was expanded to include all the volunteers in our society. As the minister said, a sizable number of our population is involved in volunteer activities. That is 180,000 volunteers, which represents about 35 per cent of the population, providing training and leadership development, all of which provide direct economic and social benefits to our Province.
So, once again, I would like to take this opportunity to thank all of our volunteers and to encourage more people to become involved as a volunteer because it certainly enriches the lives of the people you help as well as yourself. Je parle français seulement un peu; so, on behalf of the Opposition, to our francophone volunteers, I say merci.
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr .Speaker.
I am happy to join with the minister and the Member for St. John's West in recognizing National Volunteer Week and the important contribution that volunteers in all sectors of society make to our communities, to our national fabric. It is many, many hundreds of thousands of hours each and every year to provide service to their fellow citizens and to care for others in important ways through their activities. It is something that our communities would not be the same without, and they deserve our recognition and congratulations.
I would only say that there is a caution to governments who wish to withdraw from important roles that we think government should continue to play; not to expect volunteers to do the things that government should be doing in the area of health care, in the area of home care, in the area of caring for the sick, and in childcare. So, we have to be careful and recognize that there is a role for volunteers but that should not be used by governments as an excuse to get out of and avoid their responsibilities in important social areas.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I understand - if I could, just for a moment - there was a mixup. There are a couple of more Ministerial Statements, and I want to just make a note.
This being Private Members' Day, we must begin Private Members' Day at 3:00 p.m. I wonder if I can ensure from the Government House Leader and Premier that the half-hour period for Question Period can go beyond 3:00 p.m. if necessary. I am certainly willing to revert to Ministerial Statements for two other ministers, if we have compliance of the Chair.
It is my understanding there are other Statements by Ministers.
I say to the hon. members who are so enthusiastically awaiting my arrival as to get up, that I had designated this role to my colleague, the minister from Gander, in the event that I could not get back in the House from another engagement. I was somewhat thrown off by being here and not knowing I was here.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to provide the House of Assembly with an update on the Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro Wind Energy Demonstration Project.
First of all, I am pleased to announce that Hydro has selected the NeWind Group to undertake a Wind Energy Demonstration Project in the Province.
NeWind is a consortium of firms including CHI Hydroelectric Company Inc., fga Consulting Engineers Limited and Quadratec Inc. The latter two are locally owned and established Newfoundland companies. This group has extensive experience in wind project assessment and development.
This project is designed to determine if the wind potential in Newfoundland and Labrador may be used to our advantage through the generation of electricity.
This green, environmentally friendly energy source is used extensively throughout the world and has the potential to be a very successful generator in our coastal climate. We hope that wind generation will be added to our list of future energy sources.
Mr. Speaker, this selection of NeWind is the result of a Request for Proposals which was issued in December, 2000, by Hydro. This project will be carried out in two stages:
The work in stage one is comprised of a feasibility study which will be funded by the NeWind Group. The focus will be on site assessment and system optimization to determine if wind generation is feasible here.
The second stage will only proceed if wind generation is determined to be feasible and if a power purchase agreement is negotiated between Hydro and the NeWind Group. The project size, in the five to twenty-five Megawatt range, will be determined to balance the total cost and the cost per kilowatt-hour of electricity. When the Power Purchase Agreement is signed, work will begin to construct the demonstration project.
AN HON. MEMBER: It is long-winded.
MR. MATTHEWS: It is, much wind.
The NeWind Group will be responsible for the ongoing operation of the project as well as data collection.
Mr. Speaker, it should be noted that Hydro is not putting any capital into the project. NeWind will recover its cost through energy sales as the demonstration project proceeds. Nor will Hydro be guaranteeing any payments to NeWind; the company is accepting all the risk should the project fail to live up to expectations.
Utilizing this form of electricity generation in Newfoundland and Labrador has been made possible by new technologies which have lowered costs. Wind generation is now considered to be a proven source of reliable, renewable energy and is in widespread and rapidly growing use in North America and elsewhere.
In addition to establishing whether wind is a potential future generation source, it is also possible that, depending on future oil prices, wind power could be used to offset fuel consumption at the Holyrood generating station on an economic basis.
The project will provide information and experience which will assist Hydro in evaluating the potential for wind power for other remote communities.
Government will continue to evaluate future energy alternatives based on technology, economics, environmental concerns and demand forecasts.
Mr. Speaker, in summary, this project is considered to be a prudent approach for evaluation of an alternate future energy source. The project will enhance the provincial capability to meet future electricity requirements in a timely and cost effective manner.
I have to say that, at the outset, it is indeed entirely appropriate that a Ministerial Statement from members opposite deals with the subject matter of wind.
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, my first comments are to obviously congratulate the consortium of firms. Many of these individuals are local Newfoundland firms and, from that point of view, we wish them well; however, there are some general comments that I wish to make and perhaps have more to do with government policy.
Number one, this type of project is experimental in nature. Generally speaking, this type of energy plan does not generate major points of power. Generally, it is more suitable for small demand and very often is quite costly. But I say, Mr. Speaker, isn't it ironic that with all the hydroelectric resource potential in this Province; and, secondly, with all the gas resource potential in this Province we are reduced to experiment with wind energy to meet our needs?
This government will be remembered for many failures, but perhaps one of the greatest failures I would submit is the fact that it has never, in the past number of years, and certainly recently, put its mind to the development of a comprehensive energy plan to meet the needs. It will be remembered for many failures but this is an abysmal failure. Generations of Newfoundlanders to come will perhaps remember this government for its unwillingness and inability to deal with energy needs for the people of our Province.
With all of the wind generated in this Province - mostly outdoors but some indoors - it is long past the time when we start getting involved and experimenting with how to do this. Some European countries have up to 10 per cent of their electricity from wind. I would like to see this develop as a situation where we are involved in the technology, and the development of technology, so that we may develop expertise and be part of not just buying expertise from somewhere else, but also generating that expertise and perhaps supplying it to others. It could be an important part of the mix, particularly in light of the KYOTO Agreements. Always a small part, but important that we proceed with this as part of a larger, comprehensive energy policy; as the Member for St. John's East has mentioned.
MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker
I rise today to inform hon. members of the House and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador about two important events that took place in Happy Valley-Goose Bay late last month.
The Combined Councils held its annual general meeting on March 27 and 28. I had the pleasure to provide the organization with an overview of the new Department of Labrador & Aboriginal Affairs. I also had the opportunity to participate in a round-table discussion, along with the Member for Labrador West.
The Combined Councils of Labrador held its first meeting in Makkovik in the mid-1970s to bring the concerns of northern Labrador communities to government. In 1979, the organization expanded to include all coastal Labrador communities. Today, it is comprised of representatives from all Labrador communities.
The AGM was followed by Directions North, a major conference sponsored by the Combined Councils. Similar conferences were held in 1970, 1980 and 1990. Its purpose was to bring together Labrador communities with the intent of setting direction for the region for the next ten years.
The discussions at both events centered about land claims, the importance of finding the right deal on Voisey's Bay, and on the mining, forest, tourism, and fishing industries. It also focused on finding a solution to the high cost of electricity on the Labrador Coast, on transportation, health, education and social needs.
With respect to Voisey's Bay, the hon. Member for Torngat Mountains spoke about the need to ensure the people of Northern Labrador benefit from this valuable resource.
As well, Fred Hall and Ben Saimat of the Labrador Inuit Development Corporation gave a very informative presentation on a trial quarry at Igiak Bay, south of Nain. This is an exciting project that is expected to create twenty-five new jobs in a region that has been adversely affected by the downturn of the groundfish industry.
Dr. Axel Meisen of Memorial University also spoke eloquently on the challenges facing rural students of post-secondary institutions. Many other participants expressed their desire for more and more relevant education and research for Labrador. In that regard, the university, with the support of government, will create the position of Labrador Associate at its Labrador Institute. This position will bring to bear the university's scholarly capabilities on the needs and opportunities of the people of Labrador.
MR. McLEAN: Bob Simms of the College of the North Atlantic spoke about the need to address shortfalls regarding the recruitment and retention of professionals in Labrador, particularly as it relates to teachers, doctors, nurses and social workers.
Mr. Speaker, I also had the privilege to speak at the official launch of Smart Labrador, held during Directions North. This project, one of twelve in the country - as part of Industry Canada's Smart Communities initiative - will result in the establishment of twenty-two satellite or wireless sites that will provide a wide range of services to the people of Labrador.
By ensuring broadband Internet access to all regions, Smart Labrador will connect Labradorians to the world. We value the importance of ensuring Labrador becomes a world leader in the development and use of information and communication technologies for economic, social and cultural development.
During the closing banquet of Directions North, we had the pleasure to have the Government House Leader give an inspiring speech on some of the issues facing Labrador and to outline government's commitment to the region.
MR. McLEAN: I also wish to acknowledge the participation at the conference of my colleague, the Member from Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, who acted as a facilitator for discussions on the Strategic Social Plan during the meetings.
Overall, Mr. Speaker, Directions North was a tremendous success. I want to publicly thank all of the organizers, presenters and sponsors for making it possible.
In closing, I want to tell this hon. House that my department will work closely with the Combined Councils, and other groups and organizations in Labrador, to ensure that the concerns of Labrador's communities are not only heard but addressed.
I would like to thank the minister for an advanced copy of his statement today. I would like to join him in congratulating the Combined Councils and organizers of Directions North, and especially the people who organized the bid for Smart Labrador, on a very successful couple of days and successful Smart Labrador launch.
Having thanked him for a copy of his statement, it sort of reminded me, honestly, more of an excerpt from his diary. The only thing I was wondering about is he did not mention if he went on Saturday afternoon to the German Wilderness Camp for a barbecue.
MR. TAYLOR: You did? Good.
Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I had hoped that the minister would update us today in his ministerial statement a little bit more on discussions relating to matters of utmost importance to the people of Labrador; like the Trans-Labrador Highway, what is happening on that and their discussions with the federal government; an update on what is happening with discussions with the Aboriginals on land claims; an update on what is happening with Voisey's Bay; an update on what is happening with wharfage in Blanc-Sablon, and St. Barbe, and the infamous Apollo; an update on the basic problems associated with Labrador.
I, too, would like to thank the organizers and congratulate them on the conference and particularly, Combined Councils input into that. As the minister indicated, we did have a round-table discussion that was very worthwhile and drew some good discussions. I agree with the minister, that land claims are fundamental to the further development of Labrador. But I would like to say that the earlier conferences that were held during the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, while worthwhile as far as conferences go, has done very little to improve opportunities for the people who live in Labrador, particularly our youth.
Mr. Speaker, that is not a reflection of the hardworking people who volunteer in all the communities but it is certainly indicative of government's approach and attitude towards Labrador over the years. People in Labrador believe that the home of the Voisey's Bay Smelter should have been in Labrador. The expansion of the pellet plant in Labrador West should have taken place in Labrador West, not Quebec.
Increased tourism activity, we should be paying more attention to, and much more. Mr. Speaker, the minister is aware that the Combined Councils meeting a resolution -
AN HON. MEMBER: They are afraid of the truth. They do not want to hear the truth.
MR. COLLINS: I just want to make the point, Mr. Speaker, that this is indicative of the attitude towards Labrador that I was speaking about earlier.
I rise with pleasure this afternoon to inform my hon. colleagues about an exciting and dynamic program, which hundreds of high school students from across Newfoundland and Labrador are currently enjoying.
Encounters with Canada is a nation-wide Canadian studies program which brings together young people aged fifteen to seventeen from across the country for a week-long stay at the Terry Fox Canadian Youth Centre in Ottawa. Participants gain a better understanding of Canada's legal, political and cultural institutions. The program, established in 1982, offers nine different one-week programs which address such subjects as sports and fitness, science and technology, and arts and culture.
Each year, 200 professionals and industry, and even world leaders contribute to this program's success. Some prominent people who have participated include: Prime Minister Jean Chrétien; Canada's first female astronaut Roberta Bondar; and His Royal Highness, the Prince of Wales. This year the Department of Education contributed $25,000 to allow students from Newfoundland and Labrador to take part in this wonderful program. While this amount usually guarantees an attendance rate of 144 students, this has been an extraordinary year as a total of 275 young Newfoundlanders and Labradorians were able to go to the Terry Fox Centre. Encounters with Canada also welcomes teachers from throughout the country to participate in the sessions. Six teachers from this Province have participated as monitors since September 2000.
The Youth Services Division, which is now with my Department of Youth Services and Post-Secondary Education, has participated and supported this program since its inception.
Encounters with Canada is an exceptional learning experience for both the students and teachers and we are very pleased to contribute to this very worthwhile program.
I would like to thank the minister for forwarding a copy of her statement to me today. We, on this side of the House, are very pleased with the program, Encounters with Canada. It gives Newfoundland young people an opportunity to travel throughout the country, to meet people from all walks of life and all the provinces within the country. What better way to learn about Canada, to learn about the problems that our youth are having and to get together to find some solutions.
At the same time, I am also concerned about a program that I would like to call, Encounters within Newfoundland and Labrador. It is a concern that we have here with a major lack of meaningful youth employment initiatives by this government; a major problem with extraordinary high amount of student debt in this Province; a major lack of a comprehensive plan that would work to assist our recent graduates from post-secondary education; and cutbacks in musical and physical education programs in our schools. These are the kinds of concerns that the young people of this Province have.
MR. MANNING: These are the types of concerns that the young people would like this government to address, and address soon.
I guess if I praise this statement I can speak as long as I want. Having said that, this is a good program. It is a good initiative. I am sure that many young people around our Province have benefitted greatly over the last number of years by participating in programs such as this. It is one thing to read about things in books, but it is altogether different to travel and learn from people about different regions of our country that they come from and interact with people from other countries with different cultures. Many times we learn more that way than we do through formal learning and books, and things of that nature. So, it is a good program. I wish the students every success.
A little over two weeks ago, I stood in this Legislature and asked the Premier questions related to the ongoing activities and a dissident slate of board of directors, and the impacts that would have on rural Newfoundland and Labrador. His infamous statement outside the House is now a matter of public record. At that time the Deputy Premier stood, when I asked a question - was he concerned about the possible violations of the legislation and existing law and regulations enacted by this Legislature, was there a possible violation? - the Deputy Premier, in a direct question that I asked, said that the Premier's office had instructed the Department of Justice to look in and report back.
Now, I heard the Premier yesterday indicate that they have hired an outside legal firm. I want to know first, before I get to that question: Has the Department of Justice reported back to your office about this situation? If they have, what did they tell you? In telling you, would you be prepared to table today in this Legislature, and through this Legislature for everybody to see, what the Department of Justice response to your request was?
MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition asked a very valid question, and perhaps his colleagues should listen for the answer.
Yes, there was indeed a review undertaken of the legislation concerning Fisheries Products International. There are various pieces of legislation, in fact, that are in play here. We have the securities regulations; we have the Corporations Act; and, of course, we have the Fisheries Products International Limited act itself, which created FPI.
The government, of course, through the Premier, indicated at that time that government would not become involved in the shareholders meetings vis-à-vis their corporate maneuverings, and I believe everyone to date has recognized that it is not the role of government to be intrusive with regards to the corporate shareholders meetings. Those things are unfolding in conjunction and in conformity with the existing laws.
With regard to the other issues of what remedies and options government would have in the event that certain things did happen, yes, there has been extensive review undertaken. We have reached a level of confidence, after our review, with the assistance of in-house counsel as well as counsel from Stikeman Elliott in Toronto, that FPI is indeed a creature of this Legislature, and there are certainly many, many options available through actions in this Legislature if government deems it appropriate to protect the interests of the communities in this Province.
AN HON. MEMBER: He didn't answer the question.
MR. E. BYRNE: No, he did not answer the question, and I will ask it again. I want to make this point. Not everyone adheres to what the Minster of Justice just said. For example, whether we like it or not, the Premier made a statement on radio yesterday saying we do not normally involve ourselves in a free market enterprise.
FPI is not, according to the term and the way the context they put it in, a free market enterprise. It is a creature -
Wouldn't the minister admit that FPI is a creature of legislation enacted here, and is he not concerned that the same players that made an unsuccessful bid to take over FPI are now the same players who have bought up the shares? Is he concerned, or has he been given any advice from his Department of Justice? This is an important question, and the answer is important, because people want to understand clearly, and they do understand what is at stake. Has he been given any advice that the activities that are now ongoing, that this group may be, in fact, in violation of the act? Has any advice been given to you on that matter, Minister?
MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, this is indeed a very serious matter. There were meetings held yesterday involving the Premier, the Minister of Fisheries and myself, and there is a meeting scheduled for later today involving the members of the union who are in the gallery today. This is indeed very serious and government is treating it very seriously.
FPI came about as a result of a piece of legislation here and a restructuring agreement between the federal government and the provincial government. The purpose of the FPI act was to put in place protections to strengthen the fishery here in this Province. The question that the Justice Department looked at was, given what is happening, and if certain things happened, and we do not like, as a Justice Department, to deal in the realm of speculation, but were the proper legislative provisions in place in that act to protect and ensure that FPI continues, that the communities of this Province could be protected, that the plant workers in this Province could be protected, and the fishing industry in this Province could be protected? On our review of that legislation, it is patently clear that if there is any concern whatsoever about what is currently in the legislation from a protection point of view, there is ample ability in this Legislature to do whatever needs to be done to afford the protections that this Province needs to protect the industry and the communities and people who are involved in it.
The answers provided by the Minister of Justice are certainly a little bit more forthcoming than what has been provided by the Premier.
I want to ask him this question: You talk about remedies. You talk about what if this, what if that. Are you not concerned that should the actions that are now taken occur, that in fact before you make a decision or before a decision is rendered, that the status, structure and nature of FPI may, in fact, be already put at risk if you fail to act now and only act after the situation has occurred? Is that not a fear or consideration that you and your government have?
MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Leader of the Opposition should not confuse what is government's concern, as is every citizen's concern in this Province, with what the options are. The review that we undertook was to determine what options would be available if certain things did happen. We do not want to get into speculation but we wanted to be sure of what exists today and what was capable of being done later, should it need to be done. In fact, the express legal advice is that we should not and ought not interfere in the shareholding's corporate maneuverings that are happening today. They are in conformity with the existing Corporations Act. In fact, the Leader of the PC Party, in a recent interview with CBC Fisheries Broadcast, made the following comment, and I will quote: I think it is an internal corporate battle. You cannot get involved in exactly what goes on in the Board of Directors.
That is the position of the government here as well in the sense that you cannot get involved in legitimate corporate maneuverings, but the protections are there in the legislation, if and when the need arises, to undertake whatever protections need to be afforded to the industry.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, the Government of Iceland, for example - if we were acting in accordance with the best interests of the industry, the best interests of the socio-economic impact upon our citizens, might we not consider what the Government of Iceland has done in their own Legislature? I ask the minister: Is this one of the remedies that you are considering, that in terms of foreign ownership within a Newfoundland and Canadian enterprise, that part of the amendments that the Premier talks about - and this is the question I am asking - is this one of the remedies or levers or tools that you might be considering? Because the Legislature has this power, if it chooses, to limit the amount of shares that a foreign company outside the jurisdiction of the country might own in an enterprise so as to protect the best interests of Newfoundland and Labrador and rural communities in their daily struggle to survive in this Province. Is that one of the remedies that the government may be looking at?
I do recognize how desperately the Leader of the Opposition would like to try to play politics with this issue. It is a bit too serious for politics. The fact of the matter is this, the legislation that exists today that created Fishery Products International, that was put before this Legislature by a Progressive Conservative Administration, was very, very critically questioned by members of the New Democratic Party who sat in the House at the time, Mr. Fenwick, and by members of the Opposition who were Liberal members at the time. They asked these kinds of questions: What kind of assurances do we have that the kinds of things you are willing to speculate about today might happen in the future?
Guess what, Mr. Speaker? The fisheries minister of the day, Mr. Rideout, who sits a couple of seats down, the Premier of the day, Mr. Peckford, who stood in this place, stood up and said, on the very issue that you just raised about the shareholders: Look, there are provisions in here that give us the protections that we need. Trust us; they are all there. The 15 per cent restriction is here which will protect the interests of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. The shareholders themselves and the board members themselves, two-thirds, if not three-quarters of them must be residents of Newfoundland and Labrador. So they are the kinds of protections that are there. The Opposition of the day was saying: Some things might happen in the future; some things might change. The government of the day was very proud to say: There are protections in this piece of legislation so the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, the people in the rural communities, the people in the fishing communities, should not worry about it because the protection is already in the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, if those protections are not there to the level that need to be, we have indicated we will either have a voluntary undertaking from the board of directors, whether it is the current one or a new one, or we will come to this Legislature and do the job that crowd did not do when they were here.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I have to ask the question, is this the same guy, who is trying to lecture me today, who went outside this Legislature and said: Frankly, I was not interested enough to ask a question? Is this the same man? I have to ask that.
MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I have to ask him this question. Here is a news flash. I know it has been difficult for you to do the job, but guess what? Do you realize that you are the Premier now and that you can take some action to protect what is happening to the people in the Province?
The question is this, Premier: In terms of what is taking place, what level of assurance - because you have provided none yet to anybody - can you provide to the people of the Province that marginal plants will not be closed down, that quotas will be protected to keep rural communities alive, that people will not be allowed to contravene the act as it currently exists, in spirit or intent? What assurance can you, as Premier, give to the people of the Province that none of that will happen?
I would expect that maybe the Leader of the Opposition has taken the time to check with the representatives of the mayors from the communities that met with us yesterday. My understanding is that they feel somewhat assured and, actually, quite assured, that this government, unlike somebody who said it last weekend, will stand on guard for these communities in case the crowd opposite fell down on the job.
My question is to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.
Minister, just a few short months ago, the Prime Minister, the Leader of the federal Liberal Party, apologized to the people of Canada for bringing financial hardship on seasonal workers by denying them access to EI benefits while the fund generated billions of dollars. This was obviously an election ploy, since there is no change in a bill that is now finding its way through the House of Commons as it relates to the length of time needed to qualify, the deviser rule and the duration of benefits.
I ask the minister, if he has made representation to his federal cousins to express the changes that he would like to see to reflect on the need in rural Newfoundland and Labrador by seasonal workers?
MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman can rest assured that he is not the only person in Newfoundland, the only person in this House, concerned about the unemployed or about Employment Insurance. He can be assured that it is not only the people over there. He can be assured that these people over there do not have a monopoly, they do not have a monopoly on sensitively and caring.
MR. LUSH: Neither, Mr. Speaker, do they have a monopoly on shouting and substituting lungs for logic. We can do just as well over here.
MR. FITZGERALD: What gibberish, I say to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.
MR. FITZGERALD: What gibberish!
MR. FITZGERALD: Minister, the EI system was implemented to help workers and their families maintain a source of income between jobs. Many people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador work at seasonal occupations. I think particularly of the fishing industry and the fish plant workers.
I ask the minister if he is aware what changes to the EI system will now have on seasonal workers, and is he also aware that there are fish plant workers and seasonal workers today, in this Province, having to access social services because of the changes that were brought about by your former leader?
MR. LUSH: I say again, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to awareness, that the hon. gentleman does not have a monopoly on awareness.
MR. LUSH: I understand EI as well as the hon. member, I am as concerned about EI as the hon. member, and I make the necessary approaches to ensure that our people are treated fairly in this manner and that we have an EI that is just -
I ask the hon. the Government House Leader to conclude his answer now.
MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, yes, I am aware, and not only aware, but doing something to ensure that the levels of Employment Insurance offer an equitable living for the people who have to go on it, offer an assistance that gives them a standard of living that they are entitled to have in this Province.
I say to the minister: Minister, fish plant workers don't decide when they start work or when they finish. This year will see many fish plant workers, and fishermen, placed in very difficult circumstances due to ice conditions and other reasons beyond their control.
I ask the minister if he will commit here today to meet with his federal cousins to bring some relief to this group of people who are presently unemployed in the rural areas of this Province?
MR. LUSH: Now that the hon. gentleman has toned down, Mr. Speaker, I will follow accordingly.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, we are concerned about those fishermen, so concerned that, again, we have initiated action. The Minister of Fisheries has taken action on this and this action will be supported by the Intergovernmental Affairs Department. I can tell the hon. gentleman, he need not worry that Intergovernmental Affairs will be found to be wanting in this particular case.
Minister, reaction against your planned move to decrease instruction in music, phys ed, social studies and religion has not abated. As a matter of fact, it has intensified. You had assured all there would be no adverse effects, especially regarding allocation of music specialists and registration at MUN School of Music. I think the words you used was ‘a stretch'. Minister, are you prepared, in light of the intensification of this reaction, to revisit this issue, to look at what you are doing in the primary section of our schools today?
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, let me set the record straight because the hon. member obviously has not been listening.
MS FOOTE: I am not sure what he has been listening to, but he certainly has not been listening to the answers that have been given in this House and outside with respect to language arts, Mr. Speaker.
For the record, let me say again there will be no cut in music programs, there will be no cut in physical education programs, there will be no cut to art programs.
MS FOOTE: In fact, Mr. Speaker, what we will see is an enhancement of these programs because we will be focusing on language arts and components of those programs as well as 30 per cent of language arts programs.
Today in the school system we have 25 per cent of the time being spent on language arts curriculum. Let me, for the hon. member opposite, spell it out for him. There is a 10 per cent optional in the school program. That is 35 per cent being spent on language arts in our school system. Today, in many cases, we are looking for and we have been assured by those who work with us in collaboration in developing this initiative that we can get an additional 5 per cent by looking at music, by looking at phys. ed., by looking at art, and asking teachers to focus on literacy initiatives in those particular subjects as well.
At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, the 40 per cent that we are looking for would come from the 35 per cent total focus on language arts programs and the other 5 per cent being focused on by the teachers in those other subject areas.
MR. HEDDERSON: Once again I say to the minister, you are telling me that you are increasing language arts to 40 per cent. Where are you going to get it? I am asking you, where are you going to get it? You have to take it from somewhere, and it is obvious where you are taking it from.
MR. HEDDERSON: Let's get back. I asked you, Minister, about the effects that taking away from music and other subject areas are going to have. Now, recently a world renowned music specialist conductor for the system, Ms Susan Knight, resigned in protest, claiming you are out of tune, Minister; you are out of tune with the real world of primary education. You no longer understand.
MR. HEDDERSON: Can you stand in your place today and, in light of this resignation, still say your rationale is sound, that you have consulted properly, that you have acted appropriately?
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I could go through it again but obviously math is not one of the strong subjects either, so I will not go there.
Mr. Speaker, let me say again, we are not doing anything to the detriment of music, phys. ed., or art. The hon. member should know that when you look at music, there is a component of music where you have to read. You obviously, if you are in a choir, have to read the music. There are all kinds of things we can focus on in these other subject areas to highlight language arts; and, if I ever needed proof that we need to spend more time on language arts, it would come from a letter that I received from one of the students at one of the schools in the Province.
Mr. Speaker, I will table this letter, because if you want proof of the importance of focusing on language arts so our children, when they graduate from the primary grades - and we are just talking primary, when they graduate from the primary grades -
MS FOOTE: - can actually read and write at the level they are supposed to, this speaks for it, Mr. Speaker, and I would like to table the letter.
A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.
Again, this is coming from a minister who is looking at four hours in the instructional day for primary when 90 per cent of our schools are at five hours even as we speak. So, when you talk about rearranging, I think you should know what is going on in your schools.
MR. HEDDERSON: Minister, you have made a serious error in judgement. You are sacrificing music and cultural content in our schools for a common Atlantic curriculum. You are like the CBC, Minister.
MR. HEDDERSON: Is everything now going to be produced in Halifax? I say to the minister: Will you change course and become a defender of our culture in our primary schools today, a defender?
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, the last one I need lessons from on appreciating our culture and the value of music, as a former music teacher, is the hon. member opposite, let me tell you that.
MS FOOTE: I suggest, Mr. Speaker, he learn how to play his tie and then he may know something about music.
The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi-Vidi.
My question is for the Premier. It appears that the Premier has now lost his total indifference to the proposed takeover of FPI by his competitors, and now realizes that existing legislation is inadequate to protect the interests of this Province, but so far he only wants to protect existing plant operations at their existing level. Will he go further and revise and strengthen the FPI act to ensure FPI continues to be controlled and operated in the Province and in the best interests of the people of this Province and not the best interests of Iceland, Nova Scotia or New Zealand shareholders who are actual competitors and want to weaken, not strengthen, the role and importance of FPI to this Province?
PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I would not want the public record to show, and for people to start getting carried away with the representation that the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi just portrayed.
What I did say yesterday, and what the media reported accurately, was that if, and it was an if - it is not that we are going to change the FPI act to do anything - if we do not get the voluntary undertakings from the Board of Directors, the current board if they are still in place after the shareholders' meeting, or from a new board if that should be the case. I think we are all now agreed - certainly the new leader of the Progressive Conservative Party is agreed - that there is no role for this Legislature in trying to decide who the board is. I think we are all agreed with respect to that, and there will be no politics played with that issue. We can check with the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi. He can stand up and tell us his view if he wants.
Mr. Speaker, what I did say is that there are not voluntary undertakings to continue on with the FPI board regardless of who the members of the board of directors are, then the Legislature, because we have clear advice that we can do so, would intervene; but it is not our preference. It is not our preference to intervene in the fishing sector any more than any other sector in this Legislature to have us, as parliamentarians, decide which plants will open and for how many weeks, which communities will have a plant operating and which ones will not in any one year. I do not think anybody in here wants to take that role upon themselves on a day-to-day basis, a week-to-week basis, a month-to-month basis or a yearly basis; so that is not what I have said, and we are not contemplating using the Legislature unless we do not get the undertakings from the board of directors that the people of the Province deserve.
Clearly the legislation is inadequate if he needs to get voluntary undertakings from the board. Is the Premier prepared to try to find a role for the public pension plans of this Province which have combined assets in excess of $2 billion, in exercising important influence through strategic investment in corporations such as FPI to ensure, as does the Government of Quebec through the caissse de dèpôt, that companies as important to the communities and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, as FPI, stay here and act in our economic interests and not those of that and others?
There has been a lot of interest and concern expressed this afternoon about the situation concerning FPI, but I would like to make it clear that I have been sitting here now - tomorrow will be two weeks - and in those two weeks there has not been one question directed at this side of the House concerning FPI.
Had the minister been here for the entire session, he would have known that there were many, many questions asked on FPI.
MR. E. BYRNE: If you are going to get up and make references, then you had better well do so on the facts and on the truth, I say to the minister.
I ask the hon. minister now to quickly conclude his answer.
MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, it will be two weeks tomorrow since a question was asked in this House on FPI. I would also like to remind the hon. gentleman opposite that yesterday afternoon we had a delegation of some thirty-five -
I ask the hon. minister to quickly conclude his answer.
MR. REID: Yesterday afternoon, we had a delegation of thirty-five to forty members of councils from FPI towns here in this building, and there was not one question asked of me or this side of the House. In fact the critic for me, the fisheries critic in the House, stood and asked the Minister of Tourism a question rather than discuss FPI.
MR. REID: If you are looking - I will answer your question. This government is unequivocally committed to the long-term survival of FPI.
MR. SPEAKER: It being Wednesday, I call on the -
MR. LUSH: I am sorry to interrupt, Your Honour, but I notice you are about to call the next order. I thank hon. members for their cooperation today. We have had some abnormalities. I spoke to the hon. the Opposition Leader, and I spoke with the leader of the NDP yesterday regarding this matter. There are a couple of things I would like to do to expedite matters for our business during the Easter break, when we come back, so I wanted to give first reading to a motion and also to introduce a resolution setting up this committee that we talked about, if hon. members would agree.
Motion 5. It asks first reading to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Provide For the Recovery of Tobacco Related Health Care Costs," Bill 9.
MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that the Minister of Justice and Attorney General -
The Chair is putting a question.
Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to introduce a bill, "An Act To Provide For The Recovery Of Tobacco Related Health Care Costs," carried. (Bill 9)
MR. LUSH: The next thing I want to do is to give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following resolution;
WHEREAS the government has announced and is implementing a comprehensive strategy to reduce the consumption of tobacco products, in particular by young people; and
WHEREAS there is a significant body of evidence that tobacco consumption causes serious forms of illness and even death; and
WHEREAS health care costs associated with the treatment of tobacco related illness constitutes a significant burden on the fiscal resources of the Province;
AND WHEREAS this hon. House has given first reading to a bill entitled, "An Act To Provide For The Recovery Of Tobacco Related Health Care Costs";
AND WHEREAS it is expedient to receive the opinions of interested groups respecting this component of governments comprehensive strategy;
I MOVE that a select committee of this hon. House consisting of the following members be appointed to hear from these groups and to report back to this hon. House: The Member for Trinity North who shall be the Chairperson; the Member for Bay of Islands; the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair; the Member for Torngat Mountains; the Member for Ferryland; the Member for St. John's East; the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
I FURTHER MOVE that the committee receive representations from the following groups: Alliance for the Control of Tobacco; Association of Registered Nurses of Newfoundland and Labrador; Bankers, Confectioners, Tobacco and Grain Millers Union; Canadian Cancer Society, Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers Council; Heart and Stroke Foundation of Newfoundland and Labrador; Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador; Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, JTI-MacDonald Corp.; Lung Association of Newfoundland and Labrador; Newfoundland and Labrador Health Care Association; Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association; Non-Smokers' Rights Association; Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada; Rothmans Benson & Hedges Inc.; Teen Tobacco Team.
I FURTHER MOVE that the committee may receive written representations from other interested groups on or before April 27, 2001.
I FURTHER MOVE that the committee conduct its hearings between April 30, 2001 and May 8, 2001 and report back to this hon. House not later than May 14, 2001.
MR. OTTENHEIMER: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
For clarification purposes, I understand what is being proposed is a select committee of the House. However, in addition, what the hon. member just indicated were some limitations or restrictions with respect to oral presentations before the committee and, secondly, prescribed dates on which the committee is to sit and conclude.
My question then, Mr. Speaker, for clarification purposes, is: Being a committee of this House, isn't the committee given some authority and discretion to make those determinations on their own?
MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I was consulted as to whether I would participate in the committee, but I am not prepared to participate in a committee who is told that they shall only hear oral representation from certain specified people. If the committee is not to have some discretion as to allow other people to speak, I am not prepared to sit on it.
MR. PARSONS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I assumed from my -
MR. E. BYRNE: If I may, to that point of order.
MR. E. BYRNE: It is a valid point that member has raised and it has been raised with the Minister of Justice, particularly on our side of the House. My understanding is that they have prescribed it, that if there are many other requests from people from around the Province, that opportunity, the committee will have to deal with that. If it must go on further than that, it must, but it depends on the volume of requests that are coming forward. That is the understanding we are operating under. Is that correct, Minister?
MR. PARSONS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the committee was put in place to allow an opportunity to various stakeholders on both sides of this issue of the tobacco legislation to have an opportunity to voice their concerns. Hence, the names you see listed in the list today is fairly comprehensive. In fact, those persons and groups will be contacted. We do not know if they all want to participate or not at this time. We have identified what we think is a fairly wide-ranging group who might have an interest in appearing. They may or may not wish to appear.
Consequently, we do not even know yet, at this point, how long persons or groups will speak to the committee because we do not know exactly what the numbers will be. Obviously, if there is an interest from other persons who are not specifically listed and they make representation to the committee to be heard, I see no difficulty here.
The purpose of trying to get the committee formulated and on the go at this time is because, as the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi would be aware, this particular piece of legislation was on the Order Paper back in the fall session and did not make it through, so we put it back on the Order Paper here. In fact, we have had some, shall we say, extreme positions put to government that we should proceed in a timely fashion with the piece of legislation and with the hearings themselves. That is what we are trying to accomplish here, so that these groups can have their say and speak to this piece of legislation. By all means, if persons come forward who want to have some say, I see no difficulty in accommodating them.
As one of the names proposed on the committee too, if numbers do not come forth in the time frame that was mentioned - in fact, I suggested on a time frame that was earlier, but pushed it back to that date on the 14th already, to give sufficient time for hearings that are listed. If people come forth, as a member of the committee, I think, we would move that we would come back to this House and have an extension. If we see the response is fairly great and we cannot cater to the numbers that are there, we do not want to be compressed on the time that we have, and that is one of the concerns. We may have written submissions by people who may not wish to attend. We may have a lot of reading to do on it, listen to presentations and go back over these things. I certainly do not want to be limited in the time.
I think we could probably make that determination, certainly, at that time, when we see what the response is. Actually, I mentioned that to the minister prior to that, and it is one of the concerns that I had. If it cannot be done adequately on the 14th, with the lists that are there - if sufficient numbers do not come forth, it may well be able to be done in that time frame. If not, I will certainly be requesting an extension of time to be able to report back at a later date.
I appreciate what the minister has said, but clearly if there is any hurry to do this the minister, or certainly the Government House Leader, knows that Standing Order 79 permits draft legislation to be referred to existing Standing Committees of this House, Legislative Committees. This has been going on since January, if there was any concern about time frame. I recognize that we have chosen the Select Committee group, but on the undertaking given to this House that the committee will not be restricted to those listed, who are invited, to make oral presentations, then I would be prepared to go along with that.
As I indicated, the text of this resolution was not made available to me. I don't know about the other members on this side of the House. I had no awareness that there was an attempt to keep it in a truncated fashion. As long as the committee has the authority to hear from other interested people who may not have a written submission on April 27, but may wish to make oral presentations, then I am satisfied that we should go ahead and broaden the time frame if need be.
MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, with regard to the comments of the hon. Opposition House Leader, that is certainly my understanding as well. The intent here is to get the committee started. If the time periods need to be expanded to allow for representation from other parties, for extra readings, or to have the hearings done, that is not a difficulty. The thing is to get the committee up and underway and whatever has to be done to make it work efficiently and proper, that is what we are striving for.
MR. SPEAKER: Is the House ready now for the resolution?
We have heard the resolution as put forward by the hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Trinity North.
MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure this afternoon that I stand and move the following motion:
WHEREAS the recently released Final Report on the Renewal Strategy for Jobs and Growth has identified knowledge based industries as a strategic growth opportunity; and
WHEREAS information technology is changing many aspects of society and it is being predicted that there will be continued change of both a technical nature and a structural nature; and
WHEREAS many government services can be provided online and the availability of information and communication technology are becoming important ingredients in economic development; and
WHEREAS the Department of Development and Rural Renewal and the Department of Industry, Trade and Technology have been combined to form a new Department of Industry, Trade and Rural Development;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly supports the priority of ensuring all regions of the Province have access to modern telecommunications infrastructure to participate in the knowledge based economy.
Mr. Speaker, before I get into the content, I think, for all the members of the House, if you have not already done it, this new report, this final report on the Renewal Strategy for Jobs and Growth is a significant document, and I commend the minister and her staff for having the insight and the vision to be able to develop, through a consultation process, such a comprehensive strategy for rural renewal and a focus on creating new jobs in growth industries in Rural Newfoundland.
Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of parts of this motion that I think are important for us to distinguish. One, where we start talking about, and we have always talked about, the expansion of IT relate industries in the Province. Mr. Speaker, we have had some rapid expansion of the number of IT companies that exist in the Province.
Just to give you some data directly from this new strategy. The information technology sector alone averaged more than a 10 per cent annual growth from 1992 to 1997. Mr. Speaker, from that date, and for the last three years, that sector has experienced a 25 per cent growth. Right now we have, in this Province, some 200 IT firms with over 4000 IT professional people and, do you know what, they are generating some $600 million in sales around the entire world.
Mr. Speaker, one of the operative terms and phrases there is, around the entire world, because these companies are able to operate and work out of Newfoundland and Labrador while providing a service and having clients worldwide. That is one of the fundamental benefits of having a very comprehensive communication infrastructure available in the Province. That is one piece of the thrust here, is IT related companies.
The other major thrust of this strategy, Mr. Speaker - and it is the focus of the motion - is a move to establish a comprehensive telecommunications infrastructure around the entire Province. That is what becomes important. Mr. Speaker, one of the keywords - that changes then from building and creating IT industries to using a keyword called enabling. This communication infrastructure will enable many types of industries, some traditional like the fishery and the forestry, and some of the non-traditional industries, to be able to expand. They are able to use that communication infrastructure to be able to expand their business. It enables the expansion of an economy.
Mr. Speaker, just to touch on that for a moment, and just to talk about some of the examples. I just shared with you some of the growth that we have experienced with IT companies, but in this new strategy that we have identified, the minister and his staff have identified twelve major areas of the economy that these strategies are focusing on expanding and developing.
Just to highlight a couple of them, Mr. Speaker. We are talking about strategies to rejuvenate the fishery. Now, when we start talking about having a communication infrastructure, lets talk about the fishery for a moment. When you think about the fishing industry you tend not to think a lot about communication infrastructure.
Right now, Mr. Speaker, there is a group in my district of Trinity North who, for the last twelve months, have been working in partnership with a number of provincial and some national organizations to develop a comprehensive fishery management strategy. If we have within this Province the ability to be able to link the harvesters and the processors and the marketing side of people using information technology we are going to be able to - a fisherman or a fisher person on a boat anywhere of the coast of Newfoundland, as that catch is landed, we are going to be able to know that catch is landed and be able to gear up in the processing sector to accommodate that. We are going to be able to know where that fish is going to be sold when it is processed because we are going to be able to communicate with each other because of that kind of communication infrastructure.
That is the kind of strategy, in addition to enhancing to a great degree the ability to be able to manage our stocks, have a handle on our inventory, know what is coming out, know the kinds of conditions that exist when we harvest that product, that is the kind of implication this kind of communication infrastructure can have on a traditional industry.
One of the other areas we talk about in this strategy is tourism. In my district of Trinity North, there are many bed and breakfast operations, but there are two in particular that cater to an international market in the Trinity area. These people picked up a significant part of their business through the Internet, because they are wired to the entire world through the Internet.
One of the challenges, though, is because they are removed from the main infrastructure, communication infrastructure, the speed in which they are able to access the Internet is much slower using a dial-up method than they would if they had access to high speed Internet. Mr. Speaker, one of the things, as we focus on rural Newfoundland, and focus on using communication as a means to enhance and to expand the economy, we need to have that kind of communication infrastructure.
One of the other areas we talk about in this strategy is some of the social aspects of our society and gaining some economic benefit from the social programs we provide. Let's just take two for example. Health care: we have talked about it in this House many times, the priority that the people of this Province and the people of this country place on our health care system. One of the things we will be able to do if we enhance and expand the communication infrastructure that exists in this Province, we will be able to make major improvements in the quality of care that we provide.
Just let me use a couple of examples: This Province, for many years we were leaders as we developed a new telemedicine strategy. We became a world-known leader in that area. One of the things we now have the ability to be able to do is to use that kind of infrastructure to expand it, and to use Internet technology to be able to have - whether you have an X-ray taken on the South Coast of Labrador where you may not have a radiologist, you are able to have a radiologist who is in Corner Brook, Gander, Clarenville, or in St. John's, work with that physician, nurse practitioner or other health professional on the South Coast of Labrador to be able to provide a quick, ready diagnosis. That is the ability that we are going to be able to have when we expand the infrastructure.
One very simple thing. As we look at health records, if you go into a hospital in St. Anthony and you live in St. John's, or you live in Harbour Grace, your health record is in that facility. That doctor needs to have access to your health information. Through an established communication infrastructure we will be able to facilitate that kind of ready-quick access to the kind of health information that will help us improve and provide much better and much more highly qualified care to our patients.
One of the other things that will be critical, as we heard in this House during the Budget Speech, we heard the minister reference it, the Province is committed to implementing the recommendations of the Ministerial Panel on Education. One of the key recommendations of that panel's work, when it was introduced last year, they made a recommendation and this government has made a commitment to follow through with that recommendation and establish a new Centre for Distance Learning and Innovation. Just let me read for you from the Jobs and Growth Strategy: That Centre for Distance Learning and Innovation will assume responsibility for the development and delivery of an expanded slate of Distance Education courses to rural students, new Internet-based professional development tools for teachers.
Mr. Speaker, if we are going to be able to effectively implement that recommendation - and keep in mind that the focus is on rural Newfoundland - we are going to need to establish major communication infrastructure throughout the entire Province. With these kinds of initiatives, it is no longer reasonable to assume that those communication infrastructures will stay on the main Trans-Canada corridor through the Province, or that it will focus only on the major centres across the Province, but we need to ensure that kind of infrastructure is able to reach out and touch all parts of rural Newfoundland.
Just recently, we had the launch of the Marconi celebrations from Signal Hill marking an event using wireless technology. We are able to now - and there are companies in this Province today who are providing access using wireless technology to be able to hook up many parts of Newfoundland through the Internet by using wireless, more advanced than the Marconi age, but more advanced wireless technology to allow us - it gives us one more tool to expand that kind of communication infrastructure through entire rural parts of this Province and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, I think this becomes a critical focus for this government if we are, in fact, to be successful in fully implementing the major recommendations of this report on Renewal Strategy for Jobs and Growth.
Again, I want to commend the minister for the work that he has done in bringing forward this major piece of work which gives us the blueprint and establishes a direction for us as we start to create new jobs in Newfoundland, rejuvenate rural economies and to create very successful economies in various regions throughout this entire Province.
I want to rise today to have a few comments on this particular motion put forward by the Member for Trinity North because I agree on a lot of the points that the member has made. It certainly is critical. It is critical in this day and age, in this year, that we move forward as far a telecommunications in this Province. As a matter of fact, in this particular Province, more so than any other province of Canada, I say to the member, it is even more critical that this Province get on board when it comes to wireless and through telecommunications technologies, because of the simple fact, the obvious fact, that we are an island Province and also with the huge landmass and, of course, the lack of transportation systems and so on within the area of Labrador. So, yes, Mr Speaker, it is absolutely essential and critical that this Province keep on top of, and not only on top of but probably ahead of other provinces when it comes to developing our modern telecommunications in this Province.
Yes, as a matter of fact, it has given us some benefits for the people who are involved in the IT sector. They are already realizing the benefits, and what they say basically is that it makes the world a smaller place to do business. Because of our communications systems now in place, if we look back in history in this Province, we have had the obvious problem of communications especially with transportation when it comes to the ferry service in this Province, and the way that we travel around this country. We have an obvious disadvantage, but the telecommunications systems have brought us closer together not just within Canada but around the world. When a young child can get on a computer at home and get any information that he wants, and communicate with anybody in the world, for that point, we understand how important that is and we do need a strategic plan to follow through on that.
I also say to the member, Mr. Speaker, and I have said it here many times before, the strategic plans, job renewal and so on, that this government has put forward, I will even go so far as to say there are some very good points and some very good ideas; but, as I said, throughout this Province when he is talking about the various boards throughout the Province, the plan is not worth the paper it is written on unless we can implement and execute the plan. I have seen some very good plans. I always use the analogy as a coach of a team: You can have the best play on paper and you can have the best players to do that play, but unless they can execute the play it means nothing. It is the same with the strategy that we have on jobs and growth in this Province. It is good to have a glossy book and all kinds of great plans and roundtable discussions, and everything put on paper, but that does not mean anything unless at the end of the day the end result is that we have additional jobs, new jobs added to especially rural Newfoundland and Labrador.
That is why in particular this particular motion today, I think, although it speaks to the entire Province, it speaks more critically and more crucial for rural Newfoundland and Labrador for two reasons. First of all, we know that rural Newfoundland and Labrador has certainly fallen behind the more urban parts of this Province, like St. John's, Corner Brook, the Ganders and so on, but also because of the lack of opportunities in the smaller communities around Newfoundland that have been devastated by the cod moratorium and the closure of the fishery. So, simply put, it is more critical and crucial, especially in rural communities, that this type of modern telecommunications base is up to scratch, even in smaller things like cell phones usage and a good phone line. Students are now, in some areas of the Province, are finding out more about computers because they have a better phone service and telecommunications.
Over the last two, I have certainly lobbied Newtel in this Province to bring up to date and up to scratch the infrastructure throughout the Province that would enable our young people to access Internet and computer services. That is what is important. Also the wireless - and this is a point I would like to make to the member today as he brings forward this motion. This summer we have a very golden opportunity when we talk about the Marconi celebrations. We should be highlighting even more our potential in this Province for the wireless. The eyes of the world could be on us this year, Mr. Speaker, certainly many countries, when we celebrate the Marconi celebrations, and what a time to promote the wireless industry in this Province at that particular time. I think we could do more to sort of promote, I guess is the best word, Newfoundland and Labrador and the benefits of coming here to do business.
There is one other point I would like to strike on today, and that is when the member talked about the IT sector, the students, and the people who have chosen professions in the IT sector. I know many of them and it goes right on back to the root of our problem that we talk about so often: the fact being that students who do IT technology courses in this Province, it costs so much that they end up with a $30,000 or $40,000 debt because it is very expensive to do it. When they end up with a $30,000 or $40,000 debt load, and they have finished all their courses, at the end of the day we are back to the same old problem. The students of this Province cannot stay to continue in their profession because they are gone to Alberta. I know a group, a bunch of people, personally, who have finished the IT course in this Province but have to end up in Calgary and Edmonton, especially in the Alberta area, in order to pursue their profession. That is the shame of it.
We can talk about development and infrastructure and all of those things which are critical, but we can have all the infrastructure in the world, everything we need, but if we do not have the young people who are continuing in the studies of the IT sector, we will not have the people here in this Province to continue on in this profession that is going to enhance modern telecommunications.
It is all joined together, I say to the member. Yes, we need the infrastructure. Yes, we need the highlight and the information technology, but until we maintain the students and the people who have chosen this as a career, if they have to leave and go to Calgary, Alberta, we can have all the infrastructure we want, it is not going to work. So we are back to the same old problem, student debt load. That is how it is all connected.
These students who have left just recently, who have finished IT courses throughout Newfoundland and Labrador and in Nova Scotia - I know many Newfoundland students who went to Nova Scotia to do this particular course, IT - they have ended up in Calgary and Edmonton. So we can talk all we like about infrastructure, but unless we maintain our students who have chosen this profession, we are not going to advance.
I think with three of those points in mind, Mr. Speaker: the fact that, first of all, yes, we do need to promote our Province; secondly, we need to have the infrastructure in place so that we can carry on information technology; but most importantly - most importantly, I say to the member who brought this motion forward today - the most critical and crucial aspect of this entire development of modern telecommunications in this Province is the fact that we have to keep the people in this Province who have chose to make a career of information technology or anything to do with modern telecommunications. Until that happens, we will not rebound in this Province. Until we get the people who have finished, the young people between twenty-five and thirty-five years old, who have made a choice - I say this in all sincerity, not just dealing with telecommunications in that particular sector - until we keep the age group of twenty-five to thirty-five years old, they are the people who are just settling down in life and starting a family, they are the ones who spend money on new homes, new cars, they are the people who drive the economy, until we maintain those people in this Province, I do not believe it will ever recover to its full potential.
Mr. Speaker, we support the motion. We always support any initiatives that will take us into the future, as we hit the new millennium, but certainly we have to keep in mind that we have to maintain the people in Newfoundland and Labrador. That is our best resource. I think it has been said by members on both sides of this House many, many times: our best resource is not Voisey's Bay, it is not Hibernia, it is the young people who choose to be professionals and then to be able to stay in the Province to make sure that they continue to live here. That is the key, I think, to the recovery of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, we support the motion, we support the concepts. We do believe that the plan is there, but we have to be able to implement and execute that plan if we are going to get anywhere in this Province, ever. We have to believe that the young people of this Province who are about to settle down in life and have children, that they are the ones who have to stay in this Province, they are the ones who spend the money, and they are the ones who are going to rebound our economy.
They spend a lot more than people who are getting ready to leave this Province or retire. We have to have those people maintain residence in this Province if we are ever going to get anywhere with the plan that we have to execute on behalf of Newfoundland and Labrador.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank you for the time today.
MR. SPEAKER (Mercer): Is it the pleasure of the House to receive the motion?
It being Wednesday, this House does now stand adjourned until tomorrow.
[The House adjourned for the Easter break and is expected to resume sitting on April 30, 2001.]