|
Oral
Questions
November 27, 2008
Home
| In the House | Question
Period
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday we
raised the issue of poor air quality at the Seal Cove
Campus of the College of the North Atlantic. Media
reports have indicated that yesterday’s closure was
the result of two trucks that were idling outside the
building. However, this does not explain the complaints
that we received on Monday and the other problems that
were experienced prior to that.
I ask the minister: Has
your department determined the scope of the problem, and
have you had a chance to review the quality air
inspections that were completed on the facility, and are
you ready to table them at this stage?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, back in
2007-2008, there was some fairly extensive work done on
the building at Seal Cove. There was approximately
$800,000 worth of work done on the roof and some
interior work done on the building.
Early in 2008, the
College of the North Atlantic took it upon themselves to
do some air quality testing, and testing for mould
within the building. The results of that determined that
the air quality in the building, from spores in the air
perspective, was better than it was outside of the
building. The people who did the work determined that
there was no issue with air quality at the building.
There were two sites where mould was identified and
remediation was recommended.
Over the course of the
past number of months the Department of Transportation
and Works, in consultation with the college, have done
the necessary remediation and removed those places where
mould was present, from a surface perspective. The
building assessment that was done yesterday determined
that there was no problem with the boilers. There does
not appear to be an air quality problem with the testing
that was done from Occupational Health and Safety.
As the member said, the
fumes appear to have come from two delivery trucks that
were diesel operated parked near the air intake on the
–
MR. SPEAKER: I
ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer.
MR. TAYLOR: Yes,
Mr. Speaker.
The air quality issues
yesterday, the fumes were from two diesel operated
trucks that were parked near the air intake for the
ventilation system of the building, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, we were also advised that those trucks only
arrived at that campus at 8:30 yesterday morning and
stayed for a short period of time.
I
guess my question would be, in light of that, were there
any other problems that were found there with regard to
where the fumes would have come from? I ask the
minister, if there are any carbon monoxide detectors in
that building that would have picked up that there was a
problem?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr.
Speaker, no matter how many times the member asks the
question, I can only tell her and others the results of
the work that was done. The results have shown that
there does not appear to be any air quality issues at
the College of the North Atlantic Campus in Seal Cove.
The issues around surface mould that were identified
last winter have been remediated.
As for the length of time
that the trucks were parked outside the door, Mr.
Speaker, you know, I guess in some respects it is
irrelevant how long they were there. The people who did
the work on the building yesterday, who inspected the
building yesterday, determined that in their best
estimate the fumes that were present in the building did
not come from the new boilers that were installed, they
came from the exhaust fumes from the idling of those
trucks that were parked in the vicinity of the air
intake for the building, and that is all I can tell
them. As for any other issues and why people are
complaining, Mr. Speaker, I can only tell you what the
results of the work have shown.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, last night I was advised that government had
sent officials out to the Seal Cove Campus to do air
quality inspections.
I ask the minister: What
was the scope of that inspection, and can he provide the
results of it to us?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Mr.
Speaker, it is obvious that the member needs to move to
her next set of questions because that is the same
question she asked now for three times, and the same
answer.
The Occupational, Health
and Safety people went out there yesterday, they did
their testing. She did ask previously if there were any
carbon monoxide monitors in the building, that I am not
able to tell her right now but I will endeavour to find
out after Question Period and report back to the House
in as quick a fashion as I can.
As for the scope of the
air quality testing, I would imagine, Mr. Speaker, that
it is the same as we would do whenever we are made aware
of air quality problems in a building, that if there is
a presence, or appears to be the presence of fumes,
petroleum fumes or otherwise, Mr. Speaker, but again, I
will endeavour to find out exactly the scope of the
testing that was done out there yesterday and report
that back to the House in as timely a fashion as I can.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
That is what we wanted, a
copy of those reports and those air quality inspections
that were done.
My next question for the
minister - he talks about the air quality assessment
that CONA did themselves, at the campus - I just want to
clarify: Is it the obligation
on the college campuses to do those inspections, or is
it part of the regulatory regime of government through
Works, Services and Transportation under Occupational
Health and Safety?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as most
people would know, and I assume the member knows, the
Department of Transportation and Works is basically the
landlord of the building. Our department is responsible
for the building envelope, for the management of the
building and what have you. Now, if the College of the
North Atlantic want to take it upon themselves, we do
regular testing as is required or deemed to be required
by our staff in our various facilities. If they identify
a problem or believe there is a problem then certainly
they have the ability and the right and the
responsibility to go through the proper channels within
the department to get whatever testing they believe is
appropriate, work with the Occupational Health and
Safety people. As the Minister of Education said
yesterday, whenever we become aware of a problem we try,
to the extent that we can, to deal with it in as timely
a fashion as possible.
Having said that, in this
case the College of the North Atlantic decided that they
wanted to do air quality testing and wanted to do an
inspection for mould in the building. They contracted an
outside firm to come in and do that work, Mr. Speaker,
and they provided us with the results of that work and
we did the necessary remediation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, if the College of the North Atlantic did their
own inspections based on complaints, as I heard, from
students and staff out there - was what prompted them to
do it - when Works and Transportation did the
inspection, why didn’t they pick up that there was
mould in this campus, or did they not do any inspections
at all?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, first of
all, as I said, when the group that were contracted by
the college did their work, they did not find any
problem. There was no appearance of airborne spores in
the building, in excess of what you would find in the
normal atmosphere outside of the building. As a matter
of fact, the air quality in the building was superior to
the air quality outside the building. Mr. Speaker, you
cannot improve much on what Mother Nature gives us. So,
Mr. Speaker, that was that part of it.
As for the surface mould
that was identified, there were two small pieces of
surface mould, in my understanding, in proximity to a
couple of the windows. This building is in excess of
fifty years old. That is not uncommon, Mr. Speaker. My
understanding is that the report indicated that there
were no problems with this, but that Level I remediation
should be done in any event; and that, Mr. Speaker, was
done.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, we have also been advised that the Department
of Transportation and Works is completing structural
inspections on the Seal Cove facility as well.
I ask the minister: When
were these inspections done? What was the scope of the
inspections, and can you table the results of those?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the
department does regular inspections on building
envelopes. The member is right; as part of the work that
was completed by the college last winter, we were
advised that a building envelope assessment should be
completed. That work has been undertaken. It is not
completed yet, Mr. Speaker. I expect that some time over
the course of the next couple of months we will have a
report on that, a draft report or a final report. Once
we have that, we will have an understanding of what the
condition of the building is.
As I said, we spent
$800,000, approximately – well, $795,000 - on that
building last year. My understanding is, over the course
of the past couple of years, we have spent in excess of
$1 million on this facility, in upgrading it and
retrofitting.
Mr. Speaker, if problems
are identified - this building is in excess of fifty
years old, as I said previously, we would expect that
there would be some problems - to the extent that we
can, within our fiscal capacity, we will move to try and
address those issues, as we do in all other buildings,
within reason.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Leader of
the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, in September, both Frank Roberts Junior High
and St. George’s Elementary in Conception Bay South
closed due to mould and air quality issues. This seems
to be an annual occurrence with schools in our Province;
yet, government is unwilling to conduct mandatory air
quality inspections.
I ask the minister: Why
is government so adamant against conducting mandatory
air quality inspections in the schools in the Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Education and Government House
Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS BURKE: Mr.
Speaker, we are working diligently to deal with air
quality issues in our schools. One thing I would like to
note is that in St. George’s Elementary we did have an
air quality test done that showed us that there was poor
air quality in just one classroom of that school. We
felt that an air quality test was not sufficient to give
us the information we need to truly look at that school
and determine the scope of work that was needed. So, in
addition to the air quality testing, we also had an
enhanced inspection done of that school which led us to
see that the problems were far more than what we would
have picked up strictly from the air quality test.
Mr. Speaker, it is not
that we are against mandatory air quality testing. We
feel that is just one tool that we can use, when we need
it, which is an air quality test, but we feel sometimes
the more intrusive tests, like the enhanced inspections,
are needed and give us better results.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, this year we had two schools in Conception Bay
South that ended up closing. Last year in it was a
school in La Scie. The year before that it was schools
in Corner Brook and Upper Island Cove. It is obvious,
Minister, that the current process is not working,
whether it is a tool there that you can use when you
feel like it or not.
The issue here is
mandatory inspections and air quality testing for these
schools, and I ask today: Will
your government commit to make those a mandatory
requirement in this Province for schools?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS BURKE: Mr.
Speaker, I would not want the general public to think
that this government does not take the air quality of
our schools seriously.
Since 2004, Mr. Speaker,
we have spent in excess of $47 million to address air
quality projects in our schools in the Province of
Newfoundland and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS BURKE: We
have done 446 air quality projects in 186 schools, or 66
per cent of the schools in this Province.
Mr. Speaker, that
includes $28 million for 168 roofing projects. It also
means that we did 128 building envelope inspections for
over $11 million.
In addition to that, Mr.
Speaker, we have had carpet removed from schools, we
have eliminated chalk boards, and we have had
ventilation projects completed.
So, Mr. Speaker, we may
not do mandatory air quality testing but we are doing
more intrusive testing. We are certainly putting money
in, and we have done 446 projects.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
The minister well knows
that a lot of that money was invested as a result of
poor quality that was found in schools, after schools
opened.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
MS JONES: The
minister knows that many, many years these schools are
opening –
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
MS JONES: –
and they are not repaired in the way they should be, to
(inaudible).
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Leader of
the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, if the minister feels that such great work is
being completed in these schools, why
is it that her department is refusing to release the air
quality and the inspection reports of schools in this
Province, under a Freedom of Information Act, to the
Opposition Office, but instead looking for us to pay
$600 to access that information?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Minister of
Education and Government House Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS BURKE: Mr.
Speaker, I think I need to clarify what the Leader of
the Opposition just said.
We have not refused to
release reports. Under the access to information there
is a schedule set up when there is an excessive amount
of information that looks at the cost and a formula
because it certainly includes a number of hours of work
and photocopying of reports. What we have done is we
have done an assessment of the amount of information
that has been requested, and according to the formula,
we advise the Opposition of what they would need to pay
in order to have this information processed and sent
over to them.
We have not denied that
request, Mr. Speaker. We have responded to it
appropriately and we feel that if they want the
information as set out under the legislation that they
will continue with their request.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Leader of
the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to remind the
minister that her government has already committed to
place water quality inspections on the Internet. You
have agreed to put food inspection reports on the
Internet. Why will you not put
the inspections of air quality in schools on the
Internet?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Education and Government House
Leader.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS BURKE: Mr.
Speaker, the hon. member makes it sound as if we take
these air quality reports or reports that we have on our
schools and somehow keep them secretive, which is far
from the truth.
Mr. Speaker, as we do
reports for schools and the Department of Education, we
share these with the school board. The school board has
trustees that are elected and they have school councils.
They do up plans and work plans on how they are going to
address these issues. These are not reports that we hold
in the Department of Education only to be shared amongst
ourselves. These are reports that are done, they assist
the school boards in doing their priorities every year
and if anything, they are certainly not kept secret.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
They may not be secret
but they want $600 from our office in order to access
those reports.
Minister, if you are so
forthcoming and you are so willing to provide the
information, why not provide it right here-
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
MS JONES: -in
the House of Assembly so that the people of the Province
–
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Leader of
the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Why
not provide it right here in the House of Assembly so
that the parents, the children, the people of the
Province can see what inspections have been completed
and what the results of them are?
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Government
House Leader and Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS BURKE: Mr.
Speaker, I guess the hon. member did not understand what
I said in my last answer.
What I have said is that
these reports are done for the school boards that they
can share with their school councils and with the
parents. It is reviewed by the trustees. It sets their
priorities for a year. She kind of gives the impression
that we take these reports and we deal with them
primarily from a government or departmental perspective.
We do not, Mr. Speaker. They are out there. They are
available for the stakeholders who need these reports. I
want the parents to be assured that when these reports
are done the boards use them each and every time to help
set their priorities, to help us as well as we look at
the budget and we are able to determine what work is
done in any given year.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: The
minister sits on the Management Commission, Mr. Speaker.
She knows that we do not have the resources to access
that kind of information. She knows it, Mr. Speaker, and
she is refusing to provide it in the people’s House.
My next question is for
the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Leader of
the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, my next question is for the Minister of Health
and Community Services.
Yesterday I asked the
Minister of Health about a Statement of Claim against
Eastern Health for a lack of mental health services for
youth in the Province.
I ask the minister: Now
that he has been given an opportunity to review this
Statement of Claim, is he concerned that his
government’s lack of mental health services to young
people in this Province is going to cause legal bills to
the government and to Eastern Health?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Over
the last couple of days, Mr. Speaker, I have laid out in
this House some of the initiatives and some of the
investments our government has made in mental health
services. I talked about some of our plans for the
future, some of the commitments we have made to ensure
that we make future enhancements in mental health
services for the people of the Province.
What I do not have a
control over, Mr. Speaker, and no one in this government
has any control over, is what private citizens may
decide to sue health authorities or sue government. That
is those individual’s choices. That is why we have
courts, if individuals have recourse and they should
pursue those. I have no way of controlling that, I say,
Mr. Speaker.
What I do have some
control over though, and some influence as a government,
we have some influence on, is the kinds of investments
we make in health services. When we look at our record
for the last five years, I stand here today very proud,
indeed, Mr. Speaker, of the investments we have made in
health services. I am proud to be able to stand here
today and make a commitment that we will continue to
invest in health services, we will continue to make
improvements in not only mental health services, but an
array of health programs throughout Newfoundland and
Labrador, I say, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I guess the thing is, if
government was fulfilling its requirement to provide
mental health services to all youth in this Province up
to the age of eighteen, then we would not have a legal
suit on our hands.
I ask you, minister: Isn’t
it more proactive and more effective to be putting the
money into those services and not be risking lawsuits
against the government and Eastern Health?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: I
don’t know how many more times, Mr. Speaker, I can say
what I just said a moment ago and over the last couple
of days.
We have continued to
invest in Health care, we will continue to invest in
health care, we have made significant improvements in
health services, and I pointed out to the member
opposite yesterday that back in the middle of October
the Advocate herself acknowledged the tremendous
improvements we have made in health services. She, along
with myself, acknowledged that there is need for
continued improvements. I have made the commitment on
behalf of government that we will continue to enhance
programs.
Now, what private
citizens do with respect to their option to take legal
action because they feel aggrieved in some fashion, I
can’t restrict that. That is why we have courts and
individuals in this Province have the right and freedom
to do that, and I welcome them to do that.
I say, Mr. Speaker, with
respect to the investments that we have made in health
services, and mental health services in particular, we
have made significant improvements particularly in the
mental health area in the last three years.
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
I ask the hon. member to
conclude his answer.
The hon. the Leader of
the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, suicide is a major public health illness and I
think we all know that, but it is also a largely
preventable one. In the last three years we have had
eighteen youth suicides in this Province.
Minister, given the
statistics, given the situation that we find our youth
in, in this Province today – they are crying out for
help – can you at least lay
out some kind of a mental health strategy that we can
work with to be able to achieve better treatment and
better services for these people sooner and not later?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Mr.
Speaker, the member opposite raised a very serious issue
and I want to make sure that the people of Newfoundland
and Labrador fully understand and appreciate the kinds
of investments we have actually made in mental health
services. She is asking for a strategy. I indicated to
this House a couple of days ago that in 2005 we
developed or rolled out for the people of the Province,
because it was developed in concert with many
stakeholders, we rolled out a framework for mental
health services in this Province.
The following year we
created the legislative framework and the regulatory
framework for that body of work to be implemented. We
have started that process, Mr. Speaker, and in the last
three years we have invested over $15 million of new
money into mental health services for this Province.
Only yesterday I met with
the Canadian Mental Health Association to talk about how
we might work together on a couple of very significant
projects that will continue to make improvements in
mental health services.
I say, Mr. Speaker, we do
have a strategy. It is rooted in the 2005 framework and
I direct her attention to that. It is on her website. I
also direct her attention to the kinds of investments we
have made in mental health services in the last three
years.
We acknowledge, though,
Mr. Speaker, there is continued room for improvement and
we are committed to work in bridging some of the gaps
that currently exist in services. We, too, are very
conscious of the issues she has raised and I want to
assure the people of this Province that we take this
issue seriously; we take our responsibilities seriously.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
The minister knows, by
his own government statistics, that there are well over
1,000 attempted suicides by teenagers between fifteen
and nineteen years of age in our Province annually. We
talked to the RCMP; their statistics are telling us that
they received nearly 1,300 calls for mental health
issues last year, and most of these calls were attempted
suicides.
Based on that
information, based on the fact that we spend the
second-lowest amount per person, per child, on youth
mental health, of any other province of Canada, based on
the fact that our number of people in care outside the
Province is growing on an annual basis, again, Minister,
I feel the 2005 framework is not addressing the need
that is there today.
I have to ask you again: Are
you prepared to move towards a treatment facility in
this Province with proper services to be able to address
the growing need that exists with our young people and
our youthful generation of this Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Again
I want to acknowledge how serious an issue the member is
raising. To be posing questions on the floor of the
House to suggest: Will government commit to build a
building tomorrow? I don’t think that is an
appropriate kind of decision process that we want to
make, an investment that we want to make, in such a
significant program.
What I have said in this
House, and we are committed to, we are committed to
revisit the question of having a residential program in
this Province. I have indicated to this House two days
ago that the report that was developed in 2003,
officials of my department have been tasked with
reviewing that report, to update the data that is in
that, to determine whether or not the issues and
assumptions and recommendations that were made at that
time were valid.
I indicated just a few
moments ago that I met with the Canadian Mental Health
Association yesterday to talk about that and other
issues, and we talked about a process that we would
engage in to actually revisit that report, to talk about
how we might address some of the residential
requirements of people who are in this Province.
So I say, Mr. Speaker, to
ask the question here today - if we are asked for an
immediate question - there are some very complex issues
at play here and we need to make sure that we deal with
it right, we deal with it seriously, and we bring the
appropriate partners to the table to help us with it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill-Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, in April
2007 there were draft changes made to the Occupational
Health and Safety Regulations, and I understand these
have been under discussion and consultation over the
last year. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, while the
regulations currently reflect a commitment to protecting
workers who work with or around machinery, the proposed
changes to the regulations weaken protection for workers
who are at risk of industrial disease.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the
Minister of Government Services: Why is the government
undermining the rights of workers who become ill from
occupational disease, sometimes long after leaving the
workplace?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Government Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Mr.
Speaker, the regulations entailed in Occupation Health
and Safety have been under review for a long time now
– probably a year-and-a-half or so. The proposed
changes within the regulations are hailed as being some
of the most stringent in other jurisdictions, especially
in Canada, and in no way – and I want to be very clear
here on the floor of the House – do we want to
infringe in regard to occupation disease.
What the hon. member is
talking about is the removal of what is called section
24, that was entrenched into the regulations some forty
years ago. It is a very, very broad section of those
regulations that really, actually, devalues the actual
registry surrounding occupational health and disease.
Since this time – and
it has not really been enacted or capitalized on over
that forty years – what we have done with the Wabush
Mines and Lab West and other areas is develop codes of
practice. In regard to Wabush it is the Silica Code of
Practice, which includes a registry and a history of the
people who work in regard to those mining.
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
I ask the hon. minister
to conclude his answer.
MR. O'BRIEN: This
code of practice, Mr. Speaker, is hailed around the
world as being the template, as being one of the best in
the world. As a matter of fact, it is used by Australia
itself. It certainly –
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL:
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I am well aware of the
new code of practice that is in place in Labrador West.
The Minister of Government Services in 2006, the
minister at the time, brought that code of practice in,
and at the time said that it was going to become a model
for the Province itself, and recognized at the time that
silicosis and other complications may arise years after
someone has stopped working.
I want to know: When is
this government going to extend the protection to future
generations of mining and other industrial workers, and
put the Silica Code of Practice in place for all workers
who work in comparable situations?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Government Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. O'BRIEN: Certainly,
Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we are trying to do,
because section 24 is very, very broad, it is
impractical, it is forty years old. At any given time,
as the Minister Responsible for Occupational Health and
Safety, I can establish a registry, another code of
practice. It can be a code of practice in regard to any
industry or developing industry in this Province, be it
petroleum or be it whatever it is.
The Silica Code of
Practice actually is specific and that is exactly what
we want to do, to be specific to specific diseases, to
specific industries, to specific issues within that
industry. That is exactly what we are trying to do.
Section 24, in regard to
the way it is written, on the broad sense, I have to
start a registry for 35,000 workplaces for every single
worker, and that includes every retail outlet in
Newfoundland and Labrador, and that is the way it is
written. This way, I have the ability to start a
registry at any given time, if it is justified. I can
start a code of practice whenever it is justified, and
we have the template to work out of. |
