|
Oral
Questions
April 29, 2009
Home
| In the House | Question
Period
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
On March 31 I asked a
number of questions regarding the Inland Fish and
Wildlife program of government. We certainly saw through
our Access to Information Request that there were
significant problems with the program and the morale
amongst officers.
Since hearing the
comments of the Minister of Natural Resources in the
Legislature, we have received even more calls from
workers who believe the minister is out of touch with
what is happening on the ground.
I ask the Premier: Can
he tell us which department at the present time is
actually in charge of the Inland Fish and Wildlife
program, whether it is the Department of Justice or it
is the Department of Natural Resources?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr.
Speaker, inland fishery enforcement is part of the
Department of Justice, and has been for the past number
of years.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I appreciate the
clarification, because we have been some months now
checking through the Access to Information requesting
information on the program. I have correspondence here,
which I am certainly prepared to table, from both the
Department of Justice and the Department of Natural
Resources, saying they do not know anything about the
Marshall report which was dealing with inland inquiries.
Anyway, now we have some clarification that it is over
in the Justice shop.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Bill
Marshall was supposed to submit a report on this program
three years ago. We know the Premier received a 100 page
preliminary report with recommendations three years ago
from Mr. Marshall. We have tried to pry details out of
government through access laws, but even contrary to the
advice of the Information and Privacy Commissioner, this
government refuses to give the full details of Mr.
Marshall’s preliminary report.
I ask the Premier, we
have been three years waiting for a final report: Can
the Premier tells us why this report is still
outstanding after three years, when he expects to
receive the report, and will it be released when it is
received?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr.
Speaker, I do not believe the Opposition House Leader is
still fully aware of what is happening here.
There is the wildlife
enforcement, that is number one; there is inland fish
enforcement, and that is number two. Inland fish
enforcement is with the Department of Justice, wildlife
enforcement is with Natural Resources.
Retired Justice Marshall
has been asked to do a report and to make
recommendations to the government on the future of those
programs. He will take what time he needs in order to do
his work, and we look forward to the receipt of his
report and his recommendations, which will help guide
and inform government’s direction in the future.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Mr.
Speaker, the officers involved were promised that Mr.
Marshall would complete his report some three years ago.
They are continuously asking for the report so they will
have some stability and direction in their employment,
but are being stymied and told it is not ready. A
private sector company would certainly not get these lax
timelines.
I ask the Premier: Why
have you not demanded action from Mr. Marshall to
provide the final report that is three years overdue?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr.
Speaker, I have already answered the hon. member’s
question.
We have asked Mr. Justice
Marshall to provide us with his guidance in this area,
and he will take whatever time he needs to do the
report. It is not a question of how quickly you do it;
it is a question of taking the necessary time, doing the
necessary work, and providing us with his advice and his
recommendations as we go forward.
Mr. Justice Marshall’s
report is for the benefit of the government in order to
structure the programs. The employees of the department
will be managed by the officers of the department.
What is important here is
that we have the benefit of Justice Marshall’s
recommendations as we move forward with how we are
handling these two aspects, these very important parts
of government policy which involves the enforcement of
those who breach our wildlife and our fisheries laws in
this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Whether the minister
knows it or not, these officers are being shuffled from
the Department of Justice for six months of the year to
the Department of Natural Resources for six months of
the year and have been waiting for three years to try to
get some stability. They are good public servants who
deserve some kind of answer rather than being shuffled
back and forth.
Mr. Speaker, in documents
obtained through access to information, Mr. Marshall
advised the Premier in a 2006 personal letter that he
had, and I quote: troubling image; a troubling image of
an area of the public service with the potential of
imploding on itself, his words. From speaking with
officers, they are totally frustrated with
government’s lack of leadership in resolving this
matter.
If the
Premier is not prepared to deal with Mr. Marshall’s
tardiness, can he give us an undertaking today that he
will give some direction to the Department of Justice,
or the Department of Natural Resources, to step up to
the plate and do some work on this file?
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Minister of
Justice and the Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr.
Speaker, it is quite incredible that the Government
House Leader is not aware of the great success that
Inland Fish Enforcement has had in this Province. It is
certainly an excellent program.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr.
Speaker, they have won awards. I think the East Coast
salmonoid committee provided with one award. They won
the Ches Loughlin award from the spawn preservation
society in Western Newfoundland. This association has
done tremendous work, but again, you have to distinguish
between Inland Fish Enforcement and inland wildlife
enforcement. As far as the fish is concerned, this has
been a tremendous program that has done very well in
protecting the resources when the federal government
would not provide the resources to protect the fish in
this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
We know quite well the
distinction between the programs and the nature of who
is supposed to enforce them and who undertook to enforce
them. The question is that the officers are being left
hanging in the balance, that is the question here, and
when are you going to let them get some stability?
Mr. Speaker, we also
learned this week that the same Mr. Marshall was
contracted three years ago to conduct another report,
this time a review of the Province’s Crown
prosecutors’ office as a result of a recommendation
from the Lamer Inquiry. Again, it has been three years,
yet no report.
I ask the Minister of
Justice: What is the status of
this report on the Crown prosecutors’ office, which
was initiated three years ago, and why have we been
waiting three years to get it?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Recommendation from the
Lamer report was that the government have an independent
review done to ensure that steps have been taken or will
be taken to eliminate the Crown culture that contributed
to the wrongful conviction of Gregory Parsons and was
also evident in the prosecution of Randy Druken.
The government also did
its own independent review and as a result of that,
government has put many additional resources into the
Crown prosecutors’ office. We have also developed and
published the guidebook of policies and procedures for
the conduct of criminal prosecution. All of this has
been to develop a better working model for a modern and
efficient Crown attorney’s office.
There have been new
prosecutors hired in Corner Brook and in Labrador and in
St. John’s. Paralegals have been hired to assist, and
we brought back article clerks which had been
eliminated. Justice Marshall will take the time he needs
to do his report to ensure that that culture no longer
exists and we look forward to his report when it is
ready.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
We know full well about
what the Lamer Inquiry was. This individual initiated
the Lamer Inquiry. The concern now is seeing the follow
up on some of its recommendations.
Mr. Speaker, a review of
the Crown prosecutors’ office was cited as a priority
by this very minister and this government in 2006. The
word immediate was used back then when it was talked
about, yet here we are three years later with no action
having been done vis-à-vis the report.
I ask the minister again:
How long do we expect, and is
it reasonable to have someone out doing a report that
was considered a priority and was considered to be
immediately needed back then, three years ago?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. T. MARSHALL: Mr.
Speaker, there was immediate action. There was immediate
action taken by the Government of Newfoundland and
Labrador, and as I said, there was a major injection of
funds. There was new support staff hired. There was
additional money put in for training for prosecutors. We
hired article clerks, which had been something that had
been put off for many years. We have hired additional
paralegal assistants. The work has been done. What
Minister Marshall has been asked to do is to come in and
to ensure that the culture that existed, the Crown
culture was no longer there. Now, if you came in right
away there would not have been time to make sure that
that culture no longer existed. When he comes in now he
will give us the insurances that the steps that we have
taken have in fact accomplished what Commissioner Lamer
wanted accomplished.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, it was
reported in the media that the provincial government
gave $182,000 to GB Seafood International to do some
work on a waste water treatment system for the Gaultois
fish plant and that the money has now gone missing.
Can
the Minister of Fisheries tell us who the shareholders,
directors and operators are behind GBS Seafoods
International, and when these public funds were advanced
by your department?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Mr.
Speaker, the funds that we are talking about are part of
a program with regard to the aquaculture. We made a
commitment to make sure that the waste water coming out
of plants in the proximity of aquaculture sites would be
treated as to ensure the biosecurity that we need.
In this particular case
there is an active file open with regard to the Gaultois
plant, that we have made provision to the operators of
that plant to carry out the necessary work to get that
done. A consultant was hired. Money was advanced to pay
that consultant to get the equipment. Up to this point
in time, Mr. Speaker, the work has not been done. As a
result, we are obviously pushing to make sure that the
work is done so that plant can be opened and that
business as usual can be carried out there.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Since
the minister did not answer it, or perhaps he did not
hear me, can you advise us who the shareholders,
directors and operators are of GBS Seafoods, and what
was the date when your department advanced the $182,000?
Do you have that information available?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Mr.
Speaker, with regard to the names of directors, and that
sort of thing, I would assume it is in the registry
somewhere but I do not carry that information around. I
certainly would look it up, as anyone can do, and I
would advise you probably to do the same thing. I do not
have that information right out of my back pocket.
All I am saying is that
we are dealing with the operators of that plant, which
is the company which has been mentioned here, and we are
doing due diligence to make sure that the contract that
company made with this government is carried out. That
is the point of it all, that we did enter into a
contract with this company, we did advance them funds
–
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
I ask the hon. minister
to conclude his answer.
MR. HEDDERSON: -
and we fully expect that the work that we contracted
will be carried out.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I see this minister is up
on his files and his briefing notes as much as the
Minister of Health.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Mr.
Speaker, can the minister tell us, then, when he first
became aware that this $172,000 of provincial money,
$182,000 of taxpayers’ money, went missing? Can you
tell us when you first became aware that it went
missing, and what you and your department have done
since that time to recover these funds?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Mr.
Speaker, again I reiterate, we entered into a contact
with this company to carry out the work that is
required, as we did with other plants. It is standard
procedure, of course, when you ask a company to do it,
that you advance the funds. The funds have been
advanced, and they have been giving us assurances that
the work will be carried out. It has not been carried
out up to this point in time. We continue to press and
to make sure.
Of course, we do have
some options. One of the options is to make sure that
their licence is revoked, which we have done, and
indicating to them that we will go further, if
necessary, to ensure that this work is done and that the
people of Gaultois can be assured that there will be a
plant there operational when the need arises.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
It is clear that the
minister is not up on the details and the specifics of
this file.
I ask will ask the
minister a more generic question, then. Can
the minister tell us what guidelines are in place in
your department to protect public funds, to ensure that
companies such as this are held accountable for the
funds that they receive? That is pretty
generic stuff you ought to be aware of, I would think.
I also ask the minister: What
due diligence have you done throughout this process to
verify whether this money was being appropriately used,
and can you tell us who has the money now?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Mr.
Speaker, I find it a little bit difficult getting up and
telling a former lawyer that a legal contract is a legal
contract, but I am telling you right now a legal
contract is a legal contract. If that is not due
diligence, what is?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
It appears that is all
the minister knows, that he has a contract, because it
is obviously evident that he does not have a clue what
was in it.
Mr. Speaker, on another
issue for the minister: Minister, yesterday, regarding
the Fish Processing Licensing Board, it was made quite
clear that Mr. Richard Cashin no longer feels the board
is independent, and government no longer feels he is fit
to be chair because they did not renew his appointment.
Mr. Cashin has stated in
today’s paper, and I quote: the minister "… is
a nice man and has undoubtedly got as much knowledge
about the fishery as I do about life on the moon."
Mr. Cashin also stated that the deputy minister, Mr.
O’Reilly, ran the department.
Given
Mr. Cashin’s comments, was it you or Mr. O’Reilly
who made the decision regarding the shrimp licence for
Valleyfield?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. HEDDERSON: Let
me be absolutely clear, unequivocal, and any other
adjective that you want to put, I made the decision
there with regard to that, and as the minister of that
department I take exception to your indication here that
I am not making the decisions.
I tell you, I have a
responsibility given to me by the Premier of this
Province, representing the people of this Province, and
I take that seriously, I say to the member!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I say the minister need
take no exception to anything I have said. These lips
did not utter it. It was done by one Richard Cashin who
said it, not myself. It is Mr. Cashin that he has the
problem with.
Mr. Speaker, on Monday I
asked a number of questions regarding former PC Party
Leader Ed Byrne’s illegal use of public funds for
party activities. I inquired as to whether the party
would reimburse these funds, and the Deputy Premier
responded on Monday –
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: –
and I quote, "…we were more than prepared to pay
back the funds from Party resources but we understand
that the courts have ordered Mr. Byrne to repay these
funds."
I ask the Deputy Premier:
Can you tell us who you were
referring to when you used the word we in that
statement, and if you still stand by that statement
today?
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
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.
Mr. Speaker, the
government and the PC Party of Newfoundland and Labrador
have been told that Mr. Byrne – it is our
understanding that Mr. Byrne has been ordered by the
courts to repay these monies.
If that is not the case,
Mr. Speaker, let there be no doubt about it, I can tell
you right here today, that the PC Party of Newfoundland
and Labrador will repay those funds in full.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Opposition House Leader.
MR. KELVIN PARSONS: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
A minister who gives
definitive answers, that is just great stuff to see.
Mr. Speaker, contrary to
the belief of the Deputy Premier that the courts have
ordered Mr. Byrne to repay these funds, Crown Prosecutor
Frances Knickle, who we checked with, says that the
restitution order made against Mr. Byrne for $117,000
does not include the monies that were referenced in the
statement of facts.
Given that piece of
information, I am wondering if
the Deputy Premier or the Premier would confirm, if that
is the fact, that it is not included, that the party
would repay the funds.
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.
It is certainly obvious
that the Opposition House Leader is going to stay to
script. Whatever questions he was given before he came
down, those are the ones he is going to ask.
I am glad that you are
referring to me as the minister of social services, and
not echo – because that is what we have to do over
here, echo our answers over and over again.
Definitively, we have just said in this House that if
Mr. Byrne has not been ordered by the courts to repay
the $3,000, then the PC Party of Newfoundland and
Labrador will repay that amount.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Mr.
Speaker, in February 2008 the Minister of Environment
announced a five-year caribou strategy to address the
declining woodland caribou populations on the Island of
Newfoundland and the role of predators in that decline.
Very little information has been released about this
monitoring study thus far, and our office has been
contacted for more information since the plan was
announced, not only by outfitters and environmentalists
but also by employees of the wildlife division.
I ask the Minister of
Environment and Conservation: When
will you release information on the first year of the
action plan to the public?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS POTTLE: Mr.
Speaker, we are hoping to have public documents
regarding this strategy out in the next couple of
months.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Mr.
Speaker, from estimate peaks of over 90,000 caribou in
1996, the current population is estimated at 3,700
representing a decrease of 60 per cent. For this reason
the hunting license quota has been reduced from 7,700 in
2001 to 880 in 2009. This has a devastating financial
impact on the outfitters in our Province.
I ask the minister: What
consultation has your department had with the Outfitters
Association of Newfoundland and Labrador on the caribou
action plan, and do you intend to do anything to assist
them?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS POTTLE: Mr.
Speaker, there have been extensive consultations with
the outfitters and different stakeholders who have shown
interest in the woodland caribou herd here on the Island
portion of the Province. This is the reason why we did
this five-year initiative to study the herd and invested
$15 million into the program.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Back
in February 2008, Mr. Speaker, when information on the
caribou action plan was first released, the department
said it would be primarily focusing on the role of the
black bear in addressing the caribou decline.
I ask the minister: How
do you respond to the claim of hunters, trappers and
wildlife enthusiasts that your department is making a
black sheep out of the black beer while paying less
attention to their observations of the destructive
impact of the coyote on the caribou herds?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
I ask members for their
co-operation.
The hon. the Minister of
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS POTTLE: Mr.
Speaker, this five-year caribou strategy, with an
investment of $15 million, is used to gather scientific
information which we as a government feel is very
important in making informed decisions. That is what we
know we will gather from this, is the scientific
information we need to make those decisions.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I guess finally the
public of Newfoundland and Labrador found out we have
lots of sheep on the other side.
Mr. Speaker, every
province -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The Chair is having
difficulty hearing the hon. member ask the question and
the answers that are coming from the hon. minister. I
ask for your co-operation.
The hon. the Member for
the District of Port de Grave.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)
pull the wool over when (inaudible).
MR. BUTLER: I
say we will pull the wool over when they get the sheep
sheared.
Every province, Mr.
Speaker, in the country has a caribou action plan of
sorts due to the caribou’s threatened designation
under the Canadian Species at Risk Act.
We know that in 1996 a
habitat study on Woodland Caribou in Jasper National
Park said that radio collars weaken the animal and
caused mortality rates. Has
your department looked at these studies and considered
the effects of collar use?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh,
oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Minister of
Aboriginal Affairs.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MS POTTLE: Mr.
Speaker, this is going to be a very thorough strategy
that is ongoing, and I must tell you, all this talk
about caribou is making me hungry. Being an Inuit woman,
it is the main part of my diet.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The hon. the Member for
the District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we learned
in our office this morning that AbitibiBowater has begun
sending registered letters to the widows of former
AbitibiBowater workers, as well as to pensioned workers,
informing them that the unfunded portion of their
pensions are at present and indefinitely suspended.
Mr. Speaker, the letter
which I have with me today is an absolute disgrace.
AbitibiBowater is sending very brief letters with little
explanation and without sensitivity for the recipients,
especially for widows, some of whom are in their late
seventies and in their eighties. My staff has been in
contact with AbitibiBowater officials in Montreal who
have confirmed that the cessation of payment is part of
the court ordered bankruptcy process because they asked
for creditor protection.
Mr. Speaker, does the
government have an answer for the widows and the
pensioned workers who received these awful letters
today, some of them are oncoming, and as to what part of
their pension they are losing because the letter is not
clear? It says unfunded portion. They do not know how
much of their pension is the unfunded, and when is this
going to take place?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural
Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SKINNER: Mr.
Speaker, AbitibiBowater has in fact sent out a letter to
people who are receiving retirement allowances and
people who are receiving pensions indicating that they
will stop sending the cheques to these individuals,
based upon the fact that they have entered into creditor
protection.
I would like to assure,
first of all, Mr. Speaker, anybody who is into a pension
and a registered pension, that their pension payments
will not be affected. The people who are receiving
retirement allowances and the people who are in the
pension plan - two different sets of people. For the
people who are affected, Mr. Speaker, we have been in
touch with AbitibiBowater officials. We have a number of
questions that we have asked and we are trying to get
answers to.
The final thing I would
like to say, Mr. Speaker, is that the decision that has
been made by Abitibi will be challenged in court
tomorrow by the Quebec regulator where the pension plans
are registered.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill–Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, another
letter that went out – it is not really a letter, it
is a four-page document regarding a meeting of creditors
that is taking place in Delaware on May 14, and there is
a deadline for filing a proof of claim.
One of the widows that we
spoke to today called the number that is on her letter.
They referred her to the – no, she called the number
that was on this document about the meeting. They
referred her to the number on the letter. Nobody could
give her any answers and her question – she is
seventy-nine years old, and her question that she wants
me to ask of government is: Who is going to be there to
file a claim for her when she has been told that she is
not going to get her unfunded pension? Is this
government going to be there for her and for the other
widows?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Innovation, Trade and Rural
Development.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SKINNER: Mr.
Speaker, the legal standing that would be accorded under
the creditor protection program, as I understand it, the
employees or the spouses, widows of former employees,
will be handled by the unions who will have legal
standing, as I understand it, in that creditor
protection program.
We have been working with
and have been in discussions with union officials in
terms of these matters as they have been unfolding over
the last number of weeks. It will be our expectation
that the unions will certainly be representing their
current members as well as their former members when
this issue finally gets to the legal stage.
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.
I will be watching
closely what is happening both with the government and
with the union on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, a question
with regard the Janeway remediation. The Department of
Government Services sent in an Occupational Health and
Safety inspector yesterday to the old Janeway work site,
a site that is in my District of Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi,
to investigate the presence of hazardous materials due
to a report that workers were feeling sick on site.
Mr. Speaker, can the
minister provide the House today with the update on this
work site report from the OHS inspector?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Transportation and Works.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. TAYLOR: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as part of
the demolition at the Janeway site, Occupational Health
and Safety officials have been very frequently and
regularly visiting the site to monitor the demolition,
to ensure that the contractor was in compliance with
Occupational Health and Safety guidelines.
The member is right;
there were some suggestions the day before yesterday of
possible hydrocarbons in a couple of tanks that were on
site. My understanding is the testing that was done
yesterday showed up negative.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The time allotted for
questions and answers has expired. |
