|
Oral
Questions
April 30, 2008
Home
| In the House | Question
Period
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the
Minister of Health and Community Services.
Yesterday, a lot of hype
was made of increasing the threshold for single
individuals to qualify for the Seniors’ Benefit. We
now realize that a number of these seniors will benefit
from the changes and will receive the one-time benefit
paid out on an annual basis.
I ask
the minister if qualifying for the Seniors’ Benefit
automatically now qualifies you for home care services,
or will the current thresholds that have been applied
for assessing home care still remain in place?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The short answer is, no,
there is no connection, but I think it is important to
understand, as I said yesterday in the press scrum, that
we are, as part of our development of a long-term care
and community support strategy, re-evaluating our Home
Support Program to look at the financial assessment tool
we now use.
We want to make sure, Mr.
Speaker, that the programs and services that we offer to
our seniors are not only accessible but are affordable
and available to all of the people who live in
Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
If I am a senior citizen
today who has worked all my life in this Province, I own
my own home -myself and my spouse - I have an annual
income of $25,000, and I have not been able to put any
monies away for RRSPs over the years, I have just been
assessed for home care and I have been told that I need
to pay $1,100 a month, out of my $25,000 salary a year,
to access that home care, I ask the minister: Can
he tell me if there was anything in the Budget yesterday
that would be able to further accommodate these
individuals?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, in
yesterday’s Budget there was a $10 million figure that
we allocated to increase the capacity for home support
services in this Province.
The second piece that was
in that Budget yesterday, there was going to be a
revision in the financial assessment tool for home
support services. Where, at one time, we used to
consider RRSPs as a liquid asset, as of yesterday’s
Budget that criteria has now changed and we will no
longer be considering RRSPs as part of liquid assets.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN:
I want to repeat something I just said a second ago, on
the previous question. These are two initiatives that we
brought forward yesterday that will impact home support
services and will impact seniors in this Province.
I want to repeat again,
because it is important, this is one piece of an ongoing
strategy development that we are involved with. If you
were to look into the future, I say, Mr. Speaker, the
people of this Province will see some announcements of
further enhancements in future years to home support
services for the seniors of this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Pat and Shirley Connors
have become the face of thousands of seniors who find
themselves confined to their homes, and cannot afford
home care services in this Province.
I ask the minister: Does
he think it is acceptable by today’s standards that
they would have to pay $12,000 of their $25,000 annual
income in order to get the home care services they
require, simply because they cannot care for themselves?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Mr.
Speaker, I think it is very important, as we look at
supports for seniors, or supports for persons with
disabilities, that we need to take a very comprehensive
look at all of those programs and services – and that
is exactly what we are doing. We are looking at home
support services, long-term care homes, personal care
homes, other models of care that might be more
appropriate for the future than we have historically
known in this Province.
All of those things are
currently under consideration. They are part of the very
in-depth analysis we are doing of our long-term care and
community support system. I have indicated before, we
are very much in the middle of developing a long-term
strategy for those initiatives. One of the pieces of
that is a re-evaluation of the financial assessment
tool.
We want to make sure,
rather than react to individual circumstance, we want to
make sure that we have a comprehensive strategy for the
future that includes models of care, includes an
appropriate financial assessment tool –
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
I ask the hon. minister
to conclude his answer.
MR. WISEMAN: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Through that process we
will identify an appropriate level of contribution for
clients to make to services they get, but we want to do
it when we are concluded the (inaudible) exercise.
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
The financial assessment
tool that the minister keeps referring to - it has been
ten years since it has been revamped or even looked at,
from my understanding. Mr. Speaker, under that
assessment tool - maybe the minister is aware - they
only allow a couple living in their own home to be able
to keep $583 a month as a living allowance, to look
after their food, their clothing, their personal care
and their household maintenance costs.
I ask the minister: How
much longer will it be before this financial assessment
tool is looked at, revamped, and these people can get
some adequate coverage for home care?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I am glad the member
opposite referenced the fact that this has been on the
go for a long time because the tool that is now being
used was developed by the members opposite when they
were in government. The dollar amounts may have changed
because when they developed the policy in the first
place they tied the dollar amounts to certain
benchmarks. So, it was the policy that we are now using,
was developed by the members opposite when they were in
government. This is the first time our Administration,
for the first time ever, has taken a look at this whole
system. We are, in fact, as I said a moment ago,
re-evaluating the whole program. The financial
assessment tool is one of the pieces that we are now
giving consideration to and deciding what might be an
appropriate mechanism to have on a go-forward basis. So,
I remind the member opposite, we are working with the
tool that you handed us four years ago and we are
finally doing something about it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, I need to remind the minister, when that tool
was being used four and five years ago the price of
gasoline was at about eighty-nine to ninety cents a
litre. Today it is up to $1.34 and $1.40 in places in
our Province. Home heating oil was at about sixty-nine
cents a litre, today it has risen to $1.10. These people
cannot afford services in this Province but they
desperately need them.
I ask
the minister to give me a timeframe in which he will
revamp the program and put the proper indicators in
there to do the assessments for home care patients in
this Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I just want to bring
everybody’s attention to all the lists that the member
opposite just gave us as to reasons why we should do
something. These are the reasons why we have reduced
personal income tax; the reason why we have increased
the rebate on fuel each year; the reason why we just
announced yesterday the increase in the seniors’
benefit. These are all of the reasons why we as a
government have acted responsible, recognized the
pressures that many people in Newfoundland and Labrador
have.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Mr.
Speaker, we recognize the challenges that many seniors
who live on fixed incomes have. That is why our Minister
of Finance stood in this House yesterday and read out,
for the second time on his tenure, a budget that
recognizes the dilemmas that many people in Newfoundland
and Labrador have and put more money back in their
pockets to be able to spend to support themselves and to
live comfortably in their own homes.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Like the CBC online poll
said: Thank God for the oil revenues, I say in
Newfoundland and Labrador, minister. Thank God for the
oil revenues, not because of the deals that your
government has inked.
Mr. Speaker, in
yesterday’s Budget new money was allocated for
hospital infrastructure upgrades. In a press conference
the Minister of Finance stated that some of this money
will go towards the construction of a new acute care
facility in St. John’s.
I ask the minister: Does
government have any plans to replace any of the
hospitals that currently exist in the St. John’s
region?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Yesterday’s
announcement - in the Budget we announced that we were
going to build a new hospital in Corner Brook. We only
have one there now, so when we announce something over
there it is easy to announce a replacement.
In St. John’s we have
the Health Sciences Centre, we have the Waterford
Hospital, we have the St. Clare’s hospital and we have
the Miller Centre, all providing acute care services. In
yesterday’s Budget the minister announced $1 million
that will help us develop a strategy, help us define and
identify what is an appropriate model for delivery of
acute care services in St. John’s, for two reasons.
One, St. John’s is the area where we have our major
tertiary centre for the Province, and we need to
understand what the entire Province needs by way of
tertiary services.
In the greater Avalon
area, they have a need for secondary level acute care
services. We need to identify what that should be on a
go-forward basis. When we get that analysis done, and we
better understand the programs and services that are
needed, then we will be able to define the kind of
physical structures, the kind of facilities that we need
to have -
MR. SPEAKER:
Order please!
I ask the hon. member to
conclude his answer.
MR. WISEMAN: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
So, we need to do a piece
of work before we are able to talk about whether we are
going to build, modify, renovate, change, or tear down.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I was looking for clarification on what the Minister of
Finance had said in the media scrum yesterday, and I
understand that there was no commitment to replacing or
building a new acute care facility in St. John’s, from
the minister’s comments there.
Mr. Speaker, $33.5
million was allocated to address upgrades to hospitals
across the Province. We know that from a report on
conditions of four hospitals in the St. John’s area
that approximately $100 million has been identified as
needed in critical upgrades for those facilities alone.
I ask the minister: Why
is there no long-term strategy accompanying your
investment yesterday to deal with all of these problems
that were identified in our major hospitals in the
Province?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
If she was looking for
clarity on her previous question, let me give it to her.
Fundamentally, what I did say yesterday is when we
develop, when we better understand the future needs of
acute care services in St. John’s we will then respond
and provide the appropriate facilities for that. That
was my summary.
Now, to get to the
question she just posed with respect to the $33 million.
What we said yesterday, Mr. Speaker, was we identified
$33 million in this year’s Budget to be able to
respond to the issues identified by the fire
commissioner, respond to those issues identified by our
four authorities, issues that they needed to respond to
on a priority basis. We gave consideration to two
things. One, what was the capacity of the health system
to manage a repair maintenance budget? Secondly, looking
logistically at how we would actually go about carrying
out extensive renovations to hospitals and health
facilities while they still (inaudible).
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Leader of
the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Obviously, the $33.5
million that has been allocated will not deal with all
the critical upgrades and safety issues that were
identified in the four St. John’s hospitals alone.
I ask
the minister, if he can table for us an outline of what
that expenditure will include, what hospital facilities
will be included and the kind of work that will be
undertaken?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
We, too, would
acknowledge that $33 million will not do each and every
single thing that needs to be done in each and every
building throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. What it
will do, Mr. Speaker, it will deal with all of the
priority issues, it will deal with the life safety
issues that have been identified by our four
authorities.
We said earlier, and I
said earlier in this House, that the issues identified
by our four authorities as needing repairs, the critical
upgrades to the health facilities that we have, we are
committed to ensuring that the people of Newfoundland
and Labrador, the patients who use our health
facilities, the visitors who use them and the people who
work there are going to be working in safe environments.
We will provide them with the necessary technology they
need to do their job and they will be working in
buildings that are adequate to supply and support the
services that they provide, and that is the commitment
we make.
The $33 million we
announced yesterday will be a start towards that, and
that is as much as we can spend and accommodate in this
fiscal year.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Over the last couple of
weeks I also raised some issues in the House of Assembly
with regard to patients who had surgeries cancelled
because of lack of ICU beds.
I ask
the minister, because he did say that they would deal
with this particular problem: Is there any monies in
this Budget at this time for the allocation of expansion
of acute care beds and ICU bed availability in St.
John’s hospitals?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Again,
the short answer is, yes. I refer her to the comments I
made a moment ago about the announcement yesterday.
There was $1 million announced in yesterday’s Budget.
So, there was money announced yesterday that will start
to address the issue that she raises. That $1 million
will be used to allow us to better understand the acute
care needs of St. John’s and the greater Avalon and
the tertiary needs of our Province.
With that money, we will
be able to identify the kind of facilities that we need
on a go-forward basis. When we know that, when we know
what it is we need to have in place by way of physical
infrastructure, our government is committed to
responding to it and making sure that it is available to
the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
My next questions are for
the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women.
Mr. Speaker, the $1,000
baby bonus was announced yesterday in the Budget, and
some of the details we were not clear on.
I ask the minister: Will
women who had their babies before January 1 but remain
on maternity leave today, will they now receive the $100
monthly payment that was announced yesterday, until the
end of their maternity leave?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
That program announced
yesterday will be effective January 1, so those
individuals who will have children delivered after
January 1 will be entitled to the benefits announced in
yesterday’s Budget.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I understand that if you
are on maternity leave today - you had your baby in
December - I know you will not get the $1,000, but you
are going to be on maternity leave for the next ten
months. Will you be entitled to
the monthly reimbursement of $100 after January 1?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
MR. WISEMAN:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, you will.
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES:
That is why it is important to get clarity, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, there is
also some clarification required on whether the baby
bonus and the $100 monthly payments are excluded from
social benefits and maternity EI benefits.
I ask the minister: Will
the baby bonus payments that are allocated be subject to
clawbacks from unemployment insurance or social
assistance programs?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
They will not be subject
to any clawbacks of any program the provincial
government has.
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Leader of
the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, I am wondering about the maternity EI program.
Most women who take maternity leave after they have
their children qualify for a twelve-month maternity
program under the Employment Insurance program. I
am wondering if there has been any negotiation for
exemption of this monthly $100 allowance under that
program.
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
As I understand, it is
structured in a fashion that it will not be, but I am a
little bit hesitant to commit on behalf of the federal
government. What I will do is have officials get a
little more clarity for you. We cannot seem to get a
commitment from the federal government that stands for
any length of time.
I do not want to speak on
behalf of federal government programs, and anything they
may want to do in response to something a province might
do, but I will have officials provide a little more
clarity as to the degree of assurances that we do have
from the federal government.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
My question, under the
circumstances, I guess, would be for the Premier.
Mr. Speaker, government
has allocated $100 million into debt reduction at
Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to improve the
corporation’s debt-equity ratio.
I ask the Premier: Why
is this investment being made, if Hydro just recently
announced that it had a $70 million profit?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr.
Speaker, the problems at Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro
have occurred over the years because previous
governments kept sucking the dividends out, rather than
leaving the money in the corporation. They kept draining
it out, and draining it dry. As a result, their debt to
equity ratio was poor - very, very poor.
We are trying to build a
super corporation here, a corporation which
Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will be proud of.
It was a previous Liberal
government that wanted to actually privatize Hydro. This
particular government wants to strengthen Hydro, wants
to make it a very valuable corporation: a corporation
that will ultimately pay significant dividends back to
the people of this Province; a corporation that perhaps
some day may have enough value in its assets overall as
a result of the Hebron deal and the White Rose deal,
possible Hibernia deal, possible deals on gas, possible
deals on oil refineries and other exploration projects,
where hopefully we might be able to sell it some day and
pay off all the debt of this Province, and that would be
a good thing.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Opposition
House Leader.
MR. PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, Hydro has
just made an application to have a 6 per cent increase
in power bills to the consumers of this Province. Now
government has just put $100 million into Hydro. We know
they have a $70 million surplus they just announced. Why
are the consumers going to be gouged for another 6 per
cent when we have that profit and now $100 million being
put into Hydro?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr.
Speaker, there is the Hydro Corporation, which is the
utility corporation which regulates the cost of hydro in
the Province, and then there is a separate corporation
which for the time being is being called ener. corp.,
but there is a new name going to be attached to that
corporation. That will be a completely separate
corporation that will be the corporation that will
manage the oil and gas assets, or wind assets or other
assets that are separate from the electricity
regulation.
So, as a result, we are
basically trying to strengthen up the other corporation
to put that in a better position on an international
stage. Our goal is make this corporation as strong or
stronger than Quebec Hydro or Norske Hydro or other
major power corporations thought the world. So that
would, in fact, be a subsidiary of Newfoundland and
Labrador Hydro but the whole power utility regulation is
a completely separate entity.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I understand, from the
legislation that we passed in this House just recently
concerning the creation of the energy corporation, that
energy corporation, in and of itself, has been
authorized to borrow up to $600 million, I think it is.
I ask the Premier -
because we saw yesterday, in addition to the $100
million that went into Hydro we are seeing $215 million
going into the energy corp to be used to purchase the
equity stakes in Hebron and Ben Nevis and White Rose, as
I understand it. This $215
million that you put into the energy corp, will that be
a one-off deal or is it government’s plan, on a
continuing basis, to take surplus cash that we have and
put it into the energy corp?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr.
Speaker, the energy corporation on its own doesn’t
have the money to fund those kinds of purchases. That
particular purchase, round figures, the price of oil
that was arrived at in order to acquire those equity
assets, would have been in the $40 to $50 range. Oil
now, as you know, is at $120. Any money we put in to buy
those assets - for example, if we pay $100 million to
buy those assets at today’s oil prices that purchase,
the equity, is probably worth $240 million. These are
actually good investments, so any time we can infuse
$100 million or $200 million and get back $400 million
or $500 million or $600 million of value we will do it
every single time.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. PARSONS: Thank
you, Premier.
That is exactly where I
was leading with my questions. When I read the press
releases on White Rose and on Hebron, I believe it was
$110 million that was going to be the cost of the equity
for Hebron and $44 million for White Rose, which would
mean $154 million. That was why I was a bit confused as
to we are putting in $215 million and we needed $154
million.
I take
it now that those figures of $110 million and $44
million that were talked about at the time of the press
release, that was just based upon the price of oil?
There was no fixed purchase price at that time for our
equity stake in those ventures, it is going to be paid
for now at today’s oil prices?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: The
final agreement hasn’t been done on Hebron yet. The
oil price is fixed from a Memorandum of Agreement
perspective. It is a question of quantity. For example,
on the White Rose agreement it is a question of what the
proven reserves are. The only thing that could vary
would be the quantity of oil as opposed to the price of
oil. The price of oil has been set, so we are not on
escalating scales similar to the Upper Churchill deal or
anything like that. We get the benefit of the upscale on
the oil price and we also get the benefit of the upscale
on the reserves as well.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. PARSONS: Thank
you, Premier.
During the pre-Budget
consultations, the Minister of Finance emphasized the
need for debt reduction, and in fact we saw a fair chunk
of the surplus from 2007-2008 used for debt reduction.
Yet, we don’t see – and the minister acknowledged
this yesterday in the media – we don’t see any
long-term plan for the debt reduction.
At
what stage is it exactly, this plan for long-term debt
reduction, so that we are not on a yearly basis just
figuring out where we might like to put some cash? What
is the long-term plan and when might we see the
long-term plan for debt reduction?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr.
Speaker, the long-term plan for this government, for the
combination of smart acquisitions and smart investing in
oil and gas projects that are owned by Newfoundlanders -
we have wind projects that are owned by Newfoundlanders
and Labradorians, and gas projects, and any other good
energy projects, is eventually to erase the debt in this
Province.
Now, from a debt-planning
perspective, how can we be expected to plan when the
price of oil varies dramatically? Last year our
forecasts from Pira, who are the best forecasters in the
world, were out by between 35 per cent and 40 per cent.
I met with John Lau yesterday. They are unable to
predict where the price of oil is going on a short-term
or a long-term basis.
The money that we would
have available for debt, a significant portion of that
would come from windfall profits from oil, for want of a
better term. So if the price of oil is fluctuating all
over the place, we cannot have a specific plan of an
amount of debt repayment, because if we lock in the
amount of debt repayment, then we will have the Member
for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi all over us because we are
not putting enough money into social spending, we will
have the Leader of the Opposition all over us because we
are not putting enough money into sprinklers and repairs
for hospitals -
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: So,
it is a moving target. As a result, we will take a
significant portion and put it on debt, providing we are
meeting all our other social spending obligations in the
Province.
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. PARSONS: Thank
you.
I appreciate the comments
and the clarity, because I read the comments that the
media printed about the minister’s statement
yesterday, the Minister of Finance. He certainly,
clearly left the impression that: yes, there will be a
plan; yes, it is in the works, but we just have not got
it ready yet. So that is not on all four squares, what
the Premier just said. I agree with your comments about
being so fluid that you might not be able to have a plan
- that is why we are seeking the clarification.
With regards to a
balanced budget legislation, Premier, we have had over
the course of the last three or four years, some
apparent wavering. Your former minister - who used to be
the Member for Ferryland, I believe - said we would be
seeing, from this government, balanced budget
legislation. Where does the
government stand on that issue right now?
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr.
Speaker, if you look at the charts that are contained in
the Budget document - and I assume it is okay to refer
to the Budget document?
MR. SPEAKER: I
would suggest to the Premier, just refer to it, rather
than show it.
Thank you.
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Well,
okay.
From the Budget document
perspective, since we have come into office the deficits
have gone down. So, they have actually shrunk in the
first year. Then in the second, third, fourth and fifth
years, our surplus has gone up and up and up, and they
continue to climb. Hopefully, it would be nice if they
climbed even higher again. However, our projection is
for half that this year.
The dollar is moving. The
dollar is changing in its value. Oil production could
change in value. Oil prices could change in value. So
from our perspective, at this point in time, it is not
wise to come in with a balanced budget. We have to,
basically, do our best estimate. What we have done this
year, is we have looked at the average right across
Canada, taking the best guess. We have gone even higher
than Alberta. So, we are not looking at a balanced
budget on a go-forward basis at this particular point in
time because it is a moving target, and that is what we
are having to deal with.
MR. SPEAEKR:
Order please!
I ask the hon. Premier to
conclude his answer.
PREMIER WILLIAMS: It
is a good problem to have.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the government knows that there will be
recommendations coming from the Cameron Inquiry.
However, in yesterday’s Budget there was no new
announcement regarding funding to implement anticipated
recommendations over and above the $2.3 million that was
already announced this past February.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the
Premier, why the government has not put more money aside
for the cost of implementing recommendations that will
surely come from the Cameron Inquiry?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Unfortunately,
Mr. Speaker, I do not have the same crystal ball that
the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi has, even though I
do feel like I should jump up and down after the Budget
yesterday.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: From
our perspective, we are spending 37 per cent, 38 per
cent, if I remember correctly, on health care. The
health care minister can inform me, of course, that we
are spending $2.3 billion a year on health care. This
year, in new money, we are spending $266 million on an
annualized basis on operation. This year we are spending
another $133.1 million on capital on an annual basis;
total $2.3 billion. This year in new money alone, $400
million. That is a lot of money spent, but we cannot
predicate what Madam Justice Cameron is going to say.
MR. SPEAKER:
Order please!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: What
we are doing is incrementally spending a lot of money.
The other thing, just
from a general perspective -
MR. SPEAKER:
Order please!
I ask the hon. the
Premier to conclude his answer.
PREMIER WILLIAMS: -
because I have heard your comments, the overall Budget,
70 per cent of what we spend in our Budget is on health
care, education and social services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to point out
to the Premier that the percentage of the total budget
for health, education and social assistance has gone
down. The percentage of the total budget has gone down
from last year. I would like to point that out.
I will put the next
question to the Premier based on what he said. Premier,
if the recommendations from the Cameron Inquiry require
that new money, over and above what you have already
budgeted, has to go into putting recommendations into
effect, will you start that in this fiscal year?
MR. SPEAKER:
The hon. the Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
PREMIER WILLIAMS: Mr.
Speaker, again, I cannot predict what these
recommendations may be. We called the inquiry; we asked
the inquiry to get to the bottom of the problem. I
assume, because Madam Justice Cameron is one of the most
competent jurists we have in the Province right now, she
will come up with good recommendations. We will
implement her recommendations, providing they are
reasonable and appropriate, and I would suggest that I
don’t think for one minute they won’t be.
Those recommendations may
not have to be done in the first year. She may recommend
a phase-in of recommendations, and we will do that
within our budgetary limitations, but we will certainly
treat them with urgency and priority, I can assure you
of that. |
