|
Oral
Questions
April 1, 2009
Home
| In the House | Question
Period
MS
JONES:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
AbitibiBowater announced
this morning that their latest plan to swap old debt for
new debt has failed. They have also indicated, Mr.
Speaker, as I understand now, that they are unable to
file their annual financial statements.
I ask the minister: What
does this mean for the company? Are they headed into
bankruptcy? If so, what will be the impact for the
people in this Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, I saw on the news
today that Abitibi-Price had indicated that their
attempts to restructure their debt had been
unsuccessful, but there is no indication of what the
company’s next steps are, so at the moment the status
quo is in effect.
There are a number of
options that are available to Abitibi. There are options
under the proposal section of the Bankruptcy and
Solvency Act where they can seek protection. They can
seek protection under the Company’s Creditors’
Arrangement Act. They can also seek protection under
chapter 11, or section 7 of the Bankruptcy Code in the
U.S. Until such time as they make that decision,
government will wait and then respond accordingly.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Maybe the minister can
tell me, then: Under any of
those acts is there security there for the workers who
have been laid off at AbitibiBowater, in terms of
ensuring that they receive their severance and pension
benefits?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: I
cannot speak to the U.S. legislation but there are
provisions in the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act
where there is some protection for severance under the
WEPA, the federal government WEPA program, which can
provide protection up to $3,000, but apart from that
severance is not a secured debt under the legislation.
It would be an unsecured debt and there would be no
protection except for what is available under what is
referred to as WEPA.
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Are
there any actions that the provincial government can
take at this time to try and ensure that there is
security for those severance benefits to be paid out to
the workers who have been displaced in the Grand
Falls-Windsor area?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr.
Speaker, if we get into a situation that involves
protection under the Bankruptcy Act, or stays of
proceedings under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement
Act, these are federal legislation beyond the
legislative competence of the Province of Newfoundland
and Labrador.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
On June 12 of last year,
the Public Utilities Board approved an increase to
electricity rates across the Province due to adjustments
in the Rate Stabilization Plan. At that time, oil prices
were peaking at about $150 a barrel and that was the
rationalization that they used.
Today, we know that these
oil prices are one-third of that cost. Even groups like
Marine Atlantic has eliminated their fuel surcharge that
was being charged to its customers, but the people in
the Province are still paying high electricity rates
based on $150 oil.
I ask the minister: When
can we see those rates decrease to consumers in the
Province?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as most
people in the Province may know, the Rate Stabilization
Plan is a plan that is put in place to protect
ratepayers in the Province from high rises in the cost
of electricity. It accounts for the price of oil. It
keeps prices stable. Any deficit that has occurred goes
into the Rate Stabilization Plan and is adjusted after a
certain period of time. So, when the increase came, Mr.
Speaker, it was to pay off monies owed to the Rate
Stabilization Plan.
Mr. Speaker, as everyone
knows, electricity is regulated through the PUB, the
rate of return for Hydro is regulated by the PUB, so all
of these things are monitored very carefully and people
pay no more than the PUB allows to be earned by
Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
What the minister is
saying is that when they need money, the companies go
and they apply for increases. What
happens in the case of a surplus, when consumers are
still paying high electricity prices in this Province?
Is it up to the Consumer Advocate to file that
application on behalf of the people of the Province, or
is it up to the government to do so?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources and Deputy
Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
The Rate Stabilization
Plan is reviewed on a regular basis. As I said, Mr.
Speaker, the production of electricity in this Province
is regulated by the PUB. Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro
has a regulated rate of return, so there is no question
of that utility gouging ratepayers in the Province
because there is a decrease in the price of oil.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
At a time when we see
people in this Province being laid off from their jobs,
when we are seeing the cost of living increasing – as
per the consumer price indexing study that is out – why
is it that government is not prepared to look at some
kind of an interruption formula to give consumers in the
Province a break on their electricity at a time when
they need it the most?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, this
government looks at ways that we can help people reduce
their energy costs on a regular basis. We have done that
in Labrador, in terms of under the Northern Strategic
Plan where we continue to add money into that plan to
relieve the burden of the price of electricity on
ratepayers there. We have our Energy Rebate Program,
where we rebate energy users in this Province every year
because of the high cost of electricity. It is something
we are always mindful of, Mr. Speaker, and that we pay a
lot of attention to and we make significant investments
in.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, I do not see what the issue is. Consumers out
there today in the Province are paying for electricity
based on a rate calculation of $150 a barrel for oil.
Other entities - like I said, Marine Atlantic - are
reducing their prices based on the fact that the price
of oil went down.
I ask the minister: Why
is it that your government, why is it that the Consumer
Advocate, why is no one intervening with the Public
Utilities Board to ensure that these consumers get a
break now? You put Andy Wells over there. Are you afraid
to talk to him now that he is over there?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources and Deputy Premier.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I am not afraid to talk
to anyone, Mr. Speaker, including the Leader of the
Opposition. We can stay at this all day if she wants to.
Mr. Speaker, the
production of electricity and the provision of
electricity in this Province is a regulated activity - I
am surprised the Leader of the Opposition does not know
this - and the rate of return to Newfoundland and
Labrador Hydro is regulated by the PUB, so there is no
question in this Province, Mr. Speaker, of any ratepayer
being gouged or Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro having
windfall profits because the price of oil has gone down.
It is ridiculous, Mr. Speaker, to suggest it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, I know all about how electricity is regulated.
So are petroleum products regulated in the Province,
too. Under petroleum products there is an interruption
formula, I say to the minister, so why
aren’t you prepared to look at the same for
electricity?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I can only
continue to answer in the same way I have to the
previous questions. The amount of return that is allowed
to Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is regulated by the
PUB, one of the smallest rates of return, I might say,
of any utility in the country. This is a lean and
efficient operation we have in Newfoundland and Labrador
Hydro. I can promise you, and it is quite obvious from
any review of the documents, that there is no gouging
going on of ratepayers in this Province because of a
reduction in the price of oil.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
In 2007, as a prelude to
the election campaign and after about two years of
consultation and studies and so on, government announced
its infamous Energy Plan for the Province. Mr. Speaker,
the plan indicated that there would be a number of
components to the Lower Churchill Project, the first
being the damn and powerhouse to Gull Island, which
would generate around 2,000 megawatts of power.
I ask the minister: Has
this component now been costed, and roughly how much
will it cost?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we have
talked a number of times publicly, in this House and
through various news conferences and so on, about the
planning process that is going into the development of
the Lower Churchill River.
Mr. Speaker, we are using
a five-gate process. We are in the process of moving
from Gate 2 into Gate 3. There is considerable financial
information, pre-engineering information and so on,
being accumulated. That will be developed further in the
third phase of this project; and, of course, all of
these numbers are being calculated and released at the
appropriate time.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, is the minister telling me at this time that
her government has not costed what it is going to be to
construct - the capital cost of construction - the
powerhouse at Gull Island and the powerhouse at Muskrat
Falls, the transmission line that is going to run from
Gull Island back to Churchill Falls, if they are still
going to do that? These are the components that we are
looking for. There are several components, and I
ask the minister if she can table what the capital cost
is on each component of this project.
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we have
stated quite clearly, publicly, that this project is
going to cost anywhere from $6 billion to $9 billion,
depending on what configuration we use, what commercial
arrangements we have with the sale of power and so on.
That work is being done in Newfoundland and Labrador
Hydro and at the moment, no, we are not going to release
it.
All I can say is we
should all give thanks that the Leader of the Opposition
is not a general in some war, because she would be
posting regularly when her next surprise attack is
coming.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Leader of
the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, there is no trouble to get the dander up of
that minister. All you have to do is ask her a few
questions that she does not know the answer to.
Well, Minister, tell me
this: How much is it going to
cost to run a high voltage transmission line, running
from Muskrat Falls to the Coast of Labrador, across the
Strait of Bell Isle, down through a national park on the
Northern Peninsula and into Holyrood?
Surely, Minister, you
know how much it is going to cost for that transmission
line. You have already tabled the EIS on it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Indeed we do know, Mr.
Speaker, but contracts are going to have to be called;
and, like everything else we do, we are going to try to
get the best value for our money. So, no, we are not
going to post estimates around costs and so on.
Mr. Speaker, there is no
trouble to know that Roger has been around for the last
couple of weeks. The only problem is, Mr. Speaker, it is
great when they ask questions but it is just too bad
that they waited seven years to do so.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
The minister is going to
find out who is going to ask all the questions before
this is over. She is not out of the tangled web she is
weaving for herself yet, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
I ask hon. members to
respect and to listen to the questions being asked.
While we all like for Question Period to be
enthusiastic, I ask members to listen to the questions
and listen to the answers, please.
The hon. the Leader of
the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Energy
Plan also stated that government would investigate
options to address the Holyrood emissions. In fact, Mr.
Speaker, they said by 2009 they would make a decision as
to whether they would run the transmission line from the
Lower Churchill or if they would install the scrubbers
and the precipitators that were required to reduce
pollutants. We know now, in 2009, that the EIS portion
of the Lower Churchill line coming to Holyrood will not
be completed, so I ask the minister: Will
they now move to another plan to look at reducing the
pollutants there, or will they amend their Energy Plan
to reflect a new date for decisions?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Mr.
Speaker, I know the Leader of the Opposition spends an
awful lot of time listening to the radio - that is where
they get most of their questions for Question Period -
but she missed an exciting announcement again from
Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro yesterday when they
reduced again the sulphur content of the fuel that is
being used at Hydro.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE:
Three significant reductions have been undertaken since
we have taken power, and it has done much to clean up
the environment in that area.
Mr. Speaker, we announced
also last year that as we were doing our work and
progressing the development of the Lower Churchill we
would also progress work on precipitators to clean up
and scrubbers to clean up Holyrood if the Lower
Churchill did not take place, and we are continuing to
do that. We are not leaving anything to chance. One way
or the other, Holyrood is going to be cleaned up, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
The minister’s Energy
Plan also stated that the transmission of power from
Labrador across to the Island to Holyrood would provide
an excellent opportunity to partner with the federal
government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
I ask the minister today:
What discussions are ongoing
with the federal government on this matter, and has any
progress been made?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we have
discussions with a wide array of people in this country
and in the United States who are extremely interested in
the development of the Lower Churchill and what it will
mean in the provision of clean, renewable energy not
only to our own country but there is an opportunity for
the Americans as well.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy
to say that the federal government - the Minister of
Environment, the Minister of Natural Resources - have
expressed significant interest in this project and we
continue to have discussions around that issue with
them.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
It is obvious that there
is no imminent partnership with the federal government,
according to the minister. We have not heard any
announcements around it.
What I would ask is: In
the absence of the federal government investing, how
does the Province plan to finance this project?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Mr.
Speaker, this is one of the best, if not the best,
undeveloped hydro project in North America. The level of
interest in this project is significant, Mr. Speaker.
Everybody wants to talk to Newfoundland and Labrador. We
have a list of people who are anxious for the
development of the project and who want to talk to us
about commercial arrangements.
One thing that you can
count on, on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker, it
will be done properly, and it will be done in such a way
to benefit the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and
they will get a rate of return that they will be proud
of, and will be proud of, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
They have no idea how
they are going to pay for this project. No idea in the
world, Mr. Speaker. It is all smoke and mirrors.
Mr. Speaker, on January
14, 2008, the Nova Scotia Power Company, Emera, and
Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro signed an MOU to explore
the possibility of bringing energy from Lower Churchill
to the Maritimes and into the New England states.
Last week we were aware
of Irving Oil making an announcement, Mr. Speaker, that
they are going to access a power corridor into Maine and
into the rest of New England, including the construction
of a 1,200-1,500 megawatt transmission line.
So, Mr. Speaker, I ask
the minister today: Will these
latest plans for energy generation in the Maritimes and
into the New England states, and that power corridor,
have any effect on the proposal by Newfoundland and
Labrador to take the Maritime route?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
No, they will not have
any negative impact, in terms of our plans for
development of the Lower Churchill, and beyond that, for
wind development later on in this Province.
We have an energy starved
world out there; a world that is dependant on fossil
fuels. They have huge demands, and they forecast even
larger demands that they do not know how they are going
to meet. If we generate every hydro project, every wind
project in Eastern Canada, we still would not be able to
meet the demand that is out there.
Now, Mr. Speaker, this
energy plan has been lauded right throughout this
country and through the world as a visionary statement,
and lays down very clearly a plan for energy development
for the next forty, fifty years, Mr. Speaker.
I would suggest that the
Leader of the Opposition spend a little bit more time
with it and get some feedback from people outside of the
Province, and outside of her own office.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
We got lots of feedback
in the paper this morning, I say, from the Premier of
New Brunswick, minister.
Mr. Speaker, to construct
a Maritime route line from Labrador onto the Island and
across to the nearest point of Nova, which would be Cape
Breton at about 104 kilometres, we are talking a huge
voltage transmission line. The people of the Province
are already aware that government intends to build this
transmission line through Gros Morne Park in
Newfoundland and Labrador.
I ask the minister today:
The proposal for the Maritime
route, will that include a transmission line going
through Cape Breton Highlands National Park as well?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we –
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order
please!
I ask members for their
co-operation.
The Chair recognized the
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we will be
responsible for the generation and transmission of power
through Newfoundland and Labrador, and we are fully
engaged with Nova Scotia, with New Brunswick, with New
England, with Quebec. We will choose which route we will
go. All of these issues are being discussed and will be
dealt with in terms of the commercial arrangements that
are arrived at and whatever regulatory changes that are
required to facilitate the transmission of power.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, I ask the minister: Was there any agreement,
consent, or any agreement in principle in any way given
by the Province of New Brunswick for the transmission of
Lower Churchill Project power lines, because your
government has been spending a lot of money on this
route, promoting it, looking at different options?
I am just asking a
question: Did you get any
consent, any agreement from the Province of New
Brunswick that you could run power lines through their
Province before you started to spend taxpayers’ money?
MR. SPEAKER: Order
please!
The hon. the Minister of
Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, there is a
process in this country where you apply for access. We
have talked about that here in the House before. It is
called Open Access Transmission Tariff. We have
applications through Quebec looking for permission to
wheel power through Quebec, and we have applications in
Atlantic Canada, New Brunswick specifically, to wheel
power through New Brunswick.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Based on the comments
from the Premier in New Brunswick today, he is already
putting the marker in the ground, minister, that there
is going to be no transmission lines or development of
power through his Province without adequate compensation
for the people in New Brunswick.
I ask you today: How
is that any different from what was being asked for by
the Province of Quebec? You tell me if there is any
difference because I do not see any.
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we do not
mind any commercial arrangement that allows our partners
to get a fair return on their investment. We have,
because of commercial arrangements that, for example,
Quebec has in the United States of America, the right to
apply to wheel power through that province. If we can
get the best deal in Quebec we will be more than happy
to deal with Quebec, but if we get the best deal
somewhere else, than that somewhere else is where we are
going, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, I would say that the Maritime route is on life
support with that government over there right about now.
Mr. Speaker, it is the closest thing I have seen to life
support in a project in my entire life.
Anyway, I
ask the minister today if she will commit to table what
the government and Nalcor have spent on studies,
environmental preparation and promotion of the Maritime
route to bring power through Newfoundland and Labrador
and across the Gulf and through the Maritime provinces?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
We share this information
on a regular basis. It is important to us that the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador know what we are
doing. Not like the last deal, Mr. Speaker, not like the
last deal that these people tried to negotiate back in
2002. We have developed the expertise within Nalcor and
within Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to be able to
facilitate this kind of planning and to make these kinds
of commercial arrangements.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
MS DUNDERDALE: This
is not all being done from the Premier’s Office like
it was done under Premier Grimes Administration, Mr.
Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Member for
the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
The Province’s
agriculture industry brings in some $500 million of
revenue to our government and employs approximately
5,000 people, yet has been hit hard by this year’s
Budget. We saw $6.6 million cut from the Agrifoods
division of this Budget.
Given
the repeated recommendations to diversify the
Newfoundland economy away from dependence on
non-renewable resources and global concerns about food
security, how does this department justify these large
cuts?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister Responsible for the Agrifoods Agency.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
It runs right across the
full membership of the Opposition. They never let the
facts get in the way of a good story.
There has been no money
cut from the Agrifoods budget, Mr. Speaker, but we
didn’t move forward with a number of carryovers this
year, and that was around $6 million.
The reason for that, Mr.
Speaker: we introduced a number of new programs, and
because the programs were new there wasn’t a great
take-up at the front end of the year because people were
learning about the program and so on.
You know, even though we
are weathering the storm really well, this is a year
when we are running a deficit. We have good money in the
program. Even the President of the Federation of
Agriculture said in August: We have all the money we
need in this program. So, I don’t know what has
changed in four months. Well, I do know but I am not
going to talk about it here.
Mr. Speaker, we have a
very good agriculture program here and one we are very
proud of.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Mr.
Speaker, last year the department allocated $8 million
in Grants and Subsidies, in Production and Market
Administration fund, to provide support for direction
and administration of farmers, of production and
marketing activities. Only $800,000 went into the hands
of the farmers, and this year’s Budget cut the program
by over $2 million.
I ask the minister: Why
was it so difficult for farmers to access this fund, and
how does your department justify rolling this revenue
into other areas of government?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister Responsible for the Agrifoods Agency.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: Mr.
Speaker, there is nearly $30 million a year that goes
into agriculture in this Province, and I am happy to
point out – well I am not sure if I am happy to point
out. I am proud that this government puts more money
into agriculture than the federal government does in
this Province. We are the only province in this country
that can say that. We bring more money to the table for
our farmers than any other province in the country.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS DUNDERDALE: The
federal government brings more money to the rest of them
than they do to us.
We recognize the value of
agriculture and we continue to put money into programs.
There was no program cut
this year, Mr. Speaker. The only difference is, we
thought the carryover money could be better utilized
than dragging it forward. There is lots of money in the
program, we are excited about our new programs, and we
look forward to continued success of the industry here
in the Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The time allotted for
questions and answers has expired. |
