Assemblée Législative de la Nouvelle-Écosse

Les travaux de la Chambre ont repris le
21 septembre 2017
























HALIFAX, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1994



Fifty-sixth General Assembly



Second Session



2:00 P.M.



SPEAKER



Hon. Paul MacEwan



DEPUTY SPEAKER



Mr. Gerald O’Malley






MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. We will commence this afternoon’s sitting at this time.



PRESENTING AND READING PETITIONS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou West.



MR. DONALD MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to table a petition signed by 118 people, People
Against Casinos in Nova Scotia. These are generally from the Colchester North area and I am pleased to table
it today.



MR. SPEAKER: The petition is tabled.



PRESENTING REPORTS OF COMMITTEES



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Justice.



HON. WILLIAM GILLIS: Mr. Speaker, as Chairman of the Committee on Law Amendments, I am
directed to report that the committee has met and considered the following bill:



Bill No. 121 - Special Places Protection Act.



and the committee recommends this bill to the favourable consideration of the House without amendment.



MR. SPEAKER: Ordered that this bill be referred to the Committee of the Whole House on Bills.



5013

 

TABLING REPORTS, REGULATIONS AND OTHER PAPERS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Health.



HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to officially table to the House,
the Nova Scotia Provincial Health Council’s Annual Report for this year.



MR. SPEAKER: The report is tabled.



The honourable Minister of Supply and Services.



HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I am tabling the answers to questions put yesterday by the
Leader of the Opposition with regard to the explanation of the situation concerning the acquisition of
professional architectural services.



MR. SPEAKER: The report is tabled.



STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS



GOVERNMENT NOTICES OF MOTION



INTRODUCTION OF BILLS



Bill No. 129 - Entitled an Act to Amend Chapter 371 of the Revised Statutes of 1989. The Public
Highways Act. (Hon. Richard Mann)



Bill No. 130 - Entitled an Act to Amend Chapter 12 of the Acts of 1994. The Regional Health
Boards Act. (Dr. John Hamm)



MR. SPEAKER: Ordered that these bills be read a second time on a future day.



NOTICES OF MOTION



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



RESOLUTION NO. 1083



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Minister of Municipal Affairs is already suffering from a credibility problem with the
municipal leaders of metro; and



Whereas the minister has tied to make amends by apologizing in a round about way for her errors in
judgment; and



Whereas the minister, in her local newsletter, cast shadows once again over the minister’s
interpretation of events - in her own constituency - when she touted her “Hard nosed negotiations . . .” to
obtain funding for the extension to “Alderney Drive”;



Therefore be it resolved that the minister brush up on details on her own constituency and the
importance of Akerley Boulevard and the new extension to Dartmouth and the Burnside Park before she ever
jumps forward on municipal amalgamation.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.



RESOLUTION NO. 1084



MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption
of the following resolution:



Whereas the Premier and his Cabinet colleagues deliberately created and fostered the impression that
the Minister of Municipal Affairs acted alone when she awarded an untendered contract to Grant Morash of
Deloitte & Touche; and



Whereas the Premier went even further, telling this House that his misunderstanding with the minister
took place on the eve of his departure; and



Whereas the Premier and senior minister have now admitted they knew days before he left for China
that Deloitte & Touche were to receive an untendered contract for Mr. Morash’s services;



Therefore be it resolved that this House urges the Premier to make a statement setting forth the whole
truth as to his involvement and that of his Cabinet colleagues in the decision to break the tendering rules and
ignore the conflict of interest laws, in the rush to award an untendered contract to Deloitte & Touche for Grant
Morash’s services.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Kings North.



RESOLUTION NO. 1085



MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas Canadian National can be a strong catalyst for continued economic growth in Atlantic
Canada and is one of this province’s most important building blocks for job creation; and



Whereas the National Transportation Authority will soon hold public hearings into the proposed
purchase of CN’s eastern rail lines by Canadian Pacific Ltd. at a cost of $1.4 billion; and



Whereas any takeover by CP of CN rail lines in Eastern Canada would see the Port of Halifax turned
into a regional port because CP is committed to using the H&D Railway on the East Coast of the United
States;






Therefore be it resolved that the Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency, the Minister of
Transportation and the Premier get a firm commitment from Prime Minister Chretien that the federal
government will block any attempted purchase by CP Ltd. of Canadian National’s eastern rail line.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Bedford-Fall River.



MRS. FRANCENE COSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I think perhaps because of the din in
the House, the Speaker may have missed the fact my colleague, the honourable member for Kings North, at
the beginning of reading his resolution indicated to the House that he was proposing to ask for waiver of
notice on the resolution and I wonder if it might be possible to return to that matter?



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I have difficulty with those type of
requests, for example, the Prime Minister of Canada is not on that committee which is appearing. We are
scheduled to appear and make a presentation so I can pre-empt this and say the answer will be, no.



MR. SPEAKER: Well, if there is a denial of unanimous consent then the notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Bedford-Fall River.



RESOLUTION NO. 1086



MRS. FRANCENE COSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the community’s church is the focal point of worship and fellowship; and



Whereas the Bedford United Church celebrated its 126th Anniversary on November 20, 1994; and



Whereas the Bedford United Church congregation is blessed with Reverend David Hart’s guidance and
ministry;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extend congratulations to Reverend Hart and the
congregation of the Bedford United Church during this milestone year.



I would ask, Mr. Speaker, if the House would be willing to waive notice and to pass this motion
without debate.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice to that congratulatory motion.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Is the House ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary
minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.



RESOLUTION NO. 1087



MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas improved, expanded pre-hospital emergency care, home support and nursing home care are
among the essentials to replace the services of the North Cumberland Memorial Hospital in Pugwash; and



Whereas almost 8,000 residents, virtually a majority of those served, have petitioned to express concern
about the future of their essential health services, including emergency care, laboratory, x-ray physiotherapy,
occupational therapy, nutritional services, diabetic education and foot care clinics; and



Whereas the government has inflexibly and arbitrarily demanded that the hospital close on November
30th, regardless;



Therefore be it resolved that this House urges the Health Minister to rescind his inflexible and arbitrary
order closing North Cumberland Memorial Hospital on November 30th, so the community can first develop
and implement alternative community-based health services, closing hospital services, when they are no
longer needed.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Hants West.



RESOLUTION NO. 1088



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the level of Workers’ Compensation premiums is an obstacle to business profitability and
economic growth in Nova Scotia; and



Whereas last spring the Minister of Finance requested the Voluntary Planning Taxation Committee
to review the tax system and recommend tax reductions that would implement the “growth dividend” referred
to in the 1993 Budget Address; and



Whereas the Taxation Committee of Voluntary Planning recommended to this government in
November 1994, that the provincial government direct the “growth dividend” to reducing the accumulated
deficit in the Workers’ Compensation Fund;



Therefore be it resolved that the provincial government explain why it has ignored recommendations
of the Taxation Committee of Voluntary Planning with respect to alleviating the financial burden on small
businesses in Nova Scotia.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Halifax Bedford Basin.

 

 

RESOLUTION NO. 1089



MR. GERALD FOGARTY: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Port of Halifax is a major world-class port; and



Whereas international trade is the key to our future economic prosperity; and



[2:15 p.m.]



Whereas exports through the Port of Halifax are up one-fifth over last year, while a new shipping line
will operate out of Halifax, creating 250 jobs;



Therefore be it resolved that members of this House promote the Port of Halifax as the key to future
prosperity in the region.



Mr. Speaker, I would request waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



I hear several Noes.



The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Lunenburg.



RESOLUTION NO. 1090



MRS. LILA O’CONNOR: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Lunenburg Fisheries Museum welcomes visitors to our community from around the world;
and



Whereas the November issue of the Museum’s Dory Mates Newsletter reports that 97,254 visitors
toured the museum; and



Whereas this year’s attractions included Bluenose II, which was tied up at the museum’s wharf most
of the summer;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extend congratulations to the Fisheries Museum
staff and volunteers who gave so generously to make 1994 the most successful season to date.



Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Dartmouth-Cole Harbour.



RESOLUTION NO. 1091



MR. ALAN MITCHELL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas Deputy Prime Minister and Environment Minister Sheila Copps unveiled a new national
computer program from Environment Canada before an auditorium full of Cole Harbour High School
students; and



Whereas the Green Lane on the information highway gives users access to: Environment Canada
programs, services and events, phone lists of environmental experts, regional weather information, Canadian
environmental laws, and publications and press releases; and



Whereas Cole Harbour High School was chosen as the site for the national unveiling of the Green
Lane, due to their established Internet connections and capabilities;



Therefore be it resolved that this Assembly extend congratulations to the Cole Harbour High School’s
administration, teachers and students for being part of the unveiling of this new scheme on the information
highway.



Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



RESOLUTION NO. 1092



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Education and Community Services Ministers appear regularly with Lloyd Axworthy to
announce pilot projects to help social assistance recipients and others get into the work force on a secure basis;
and



Whereas the Supervisory Career Paths Program has done just that for some 50 black Nova Scotians
who, with its help, have overcome unemployment and limited education; and



Whereas the success of this program has been met with a denial of provincial funding and cancellation
of the federal funding that made it possible;



Therefore be it resolved that this House urges the federal and provincial governments to demonstrate
the good faith of their many “pilot” programs, to improve labour force opportunities by securing the financial
base of the successful Supervisory Career Paths Program.



Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Cape Breton South on an introduction.



MR. MANNING MACDONALD: I would like to bring to the attention of you, Mr. Speaker, and to
members of the House, the presence in the Speaker’s Gallery today of Mr. Angus MacDonald from Sydney,
the former Managing Director of the Cape Breton Post, distinguished citizen of Cape Breton South, and his
wife, Jean. I would ask them to stand and be recognized and be accorded the usual compliments of the House.
(Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: I would like to welcome the MacDonalds here myself this afternoon. I am very glad
to see you both here.



The honourable member for Shelburne.



RESOLUTION NO. 1093



MR. CLIFFORD HUSKILSON: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move
the adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the lobster industry contributes millions of dollars to the economy of Shelburne County; and



Whereas Shelburne County is the lobster capital of Canada; and



Whereas this Monday marks the beginning of the Shelburne County lobster season for this year;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly recognize the hardworking men and women of
the fishing industry and extend wishes for a safe and successful lobster season.



Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Digby-Annapolis.



RESOLUTION NO. 1094



MR. JOSEPH CASEY: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption
of the following resolution:



Whereas a Tall Ship parade will take place in Halifax in the year 2000; and



Whereas Digby has a deep water harbour which, during wartime, was an assembly point for Allied
convoy ships, many of which were at least 10,000 ton registry; and



Whereas the Annapolis Basin has been used as a safe harbour since the arrival of Champlain and party
in 1604;



Therefore be it resolved that plans begin to ensure that Digby-Annapolis area share in this historic
event by having a goodly number of these Tall Ships call on the surrounding waters, which would add
mightily to the influx of tourists.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable Minister of Transportation.



RESOLUTION NO. 1095



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the presence of fungus at Isle Madame District High School and Isle Madame Elementary
forced the closure of those schools over one year ago; and



Whereas these closures have resulted in students and teachers being moved to other schools, busing
difficulties and students attending class at unconventional times as well as a loss of class time and extra
curricular activities; and



Whereas these problems have created many obstacles and other problems that students, teachers,
parents and employees of the school board and the school board themselves have to overcome for the benefit
of all;



Therefore be it resolved that this House offer congratulations to all those involved in addressing the
problems created by the closure of the two Isle Madame Schools.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable Minister of Education.



RESOLUTION NO. 1096



HON. JOHN MACEACHERN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Cape Breton Development Corporation is key to the economic well-being of industrial
Cape Breton; and



Whereas there is significant strain on labour-management relations of the Cape Breton Development
Corporation; and



Whereas all parties involved in the Cape Breton coal industry are concerned with securing the future
of the industry;



Therefore be it resolved that the House of Assembly express its support to the Cape Breton
Development Corporation and the United Mine Workers of America in their efforts to identify and remedy
any causes of dispute.



Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Kings North.






RESOLUTION NO. 1097



MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas Westinghouse is the latest employer to pull up stakes in Nova Scotia and move to Moncton;
and



Whereas the Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency said last evening that the New Brunswick
unemployment rate is definitely lower than Nova Scotia’s; and



Whereas the Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency campaigned vigorously on the issue that his
government could bring as much industry to Nova Scotia as Frank McKenna could do in New Brunswick;



Therefore be it resolved that the Minister for the Nova Scotia Economic Renewal Agency table in this
House a document showing the industries which have located in this province since June 11, 1993, compared
to the jobs which have been created in our sister province.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.



RESOLUTION NO. 1098



MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the tragic murder of Kim Singer of Pictou County by her husband, and his subsequent suicide,
have painfully reminded Nova Scotians that many women and children are not safe in their own homes; and



Whereas the circumstances preceding this horrible murder underscore the importance of the ministerial
directive that “the alleged assailant is to be arrested if the police officer has reason to believe that there will
be a continuation or repetition of the offence”; and



Whereas these deaths underscore the urgency of the efforts now underway to increase public awareness,
train law enforcement officers and improve the quality of each police officer’s response to spousal assault;



Therefore be it resolved that this House observe a minute of silence in respect of the memory of Kim
Singer and of all other victims of spousal assault, and in recognition of the need to be unwavering in the
struggle to end these tragic, needless assaults and deaths.



Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The motion calls for the observance of one minute of silence and I will ask the House now to rise.

 

 

[One minute of silence was observed.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs.



RESOLUTION NO. 1099



HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas John Martin Junior High School, located in Dartmouth North, being badly in need of repair,
especially the roof, walls and window areas; and



Whereas the temperature control within the building, both summer and winter, has been a constant
problem for both students and teachers alike; and



Whereas the classroom requires new desk equipment, new computer materials and the school had
requested additional library books and equipment to better assist the students;



Therefore be it resolved that this House congratulate the Minister and the Department of Education
in supplying the necessary funds to complete this project, enabling the staff of John Martin Junior High School
and the surrounding community to build a first-class school, which we are all striving for.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Argyle.



RESOLUTION NO. 1100



MR. ALLISTER SURETTE: Monsieur l’Orateur, j’avise par les présentes que je proposerai, à une date
ultérieure, l’adoption de la proposition suivante:



Attendu que le premier ministre, M. Jean Chrétien, a nommé M. Roméo LeBlanc comme notre
prochain gouverneur-général; et



Attendu que M. LeBlanc, natif des Maritimes, à l’honneur d’ être le premier Acadien appointé
représentant de Sa Majesté la Reine; et



Attendu que cette désignation envoie un message clair et précis qu’il existe, aux maritimes, de
dynamiques communautées francophones;



Par conséquent, qu’il soit décidé que cette chambre applaudisse la confiance que M. Chrétien place
dans l’expérience et ascendance acadienne de M. LeBlanc.



Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice on this motion.



MR. SPEAKER: There is a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Oui. Contre, Non.



La proposition est adoptée.



The honourable member for Hants East.



RESOLUTION NO. 1101



MR. ROBERT CARRUTHERS: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move
the adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Nova Scotia Rural Beautification Committee recognizes individuals and organizations
who have made an outstanding contribution to the enhancement of our rural communities; and



Whereas these individuals and organizations take pride in the natural beauty of our scenic countryside;
and



Whereas two recipients from the Hants County area received recognition in 1994;



Therefore be it resolved that this Assembly congratulate the Rawdon 2 Way 4H Club for placing first
in the Nova Scotia Youth Competition and for receiving the Leonard D’Eon Trophy, and Ivan and Margaret
Stinson of Maitland who placed first for outstanding Home Ground Recognition.



Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice on the motion.



MR. SPEAKER: There is a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.






RESOLUTION NO. 1102



MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption
of the following resolution:



Whereas the community served by the Western Kings Memorial Hospital in Berwick have no
government response to their plan for the facility to be part of a reformed, community-based health care
system and it will be months before the regional health board and a community health board can consider such
issues; and



Whereas the government did order termination of the Western Kings Memorial staff without a cent
of severance pay, unlike fired deputy ministers; and



Whereas delegates from across Nova Scotia at the NDP Provincial Council meeting in Kentville
unanimously supported just treatment for these loyal health care workers, and the Western Kings Memorial
Hospital community;



Therefore be it resolved that the Health Minister should ensure an immediate, thorough response to
the proposal for continued use in community-based health care of Western Kings Memorial Hospital and a
continued role in the reformed health care system for the hardworking employees of that hospital.



[2:30 p.m.]



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Guysborough-Port Hawkesbury.



RESOLUTION NO. 1103



MR. RAYMOND WHITE: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas Robyn Maghar has competed in tract nationally and internationally, winning a silver medal
at the Commonwealth Games in British Columbia; and



Whereas the Town of Mulgrave has followed her running career with great pride; and



Whereas the Town of Mulgrave has commissioned a sign to be erected stating that this is the home
of Robyn Maghar;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly congratulate Robyn Maghar for her many
achievements and commend the Town of Mulgrave for recognizing Robyn as a role model for young people
in the community.



Mr. Speaker, I would request waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Pictou East.



RESOLUTION NO. 1104



MR. WAYNE FRASER: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas it has been 25 years since the opening of Generator No. 5 at the Nova Scotia Power station
in Trenton; and



Whereas Generator No. 5 was the first 150-megawatt generator in Atlantic Canada; and



Whereas since the plant first opened in 1969 it has produced over 20 million megawatt hours in over
176,000 hours of operation;



Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House congratulate all those employees who have
contributed to the success of the Trenton power plant in its first 25 years of operation.



I would ask for waiver of notice, Mr. Speaker.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Nova Scotia Federation of Labour, United Mine Workers, Halifax-Dartmouth, Pictou,
Valley and other injured workers’ groups and many other representatives of workers and injured workers have
all asked the Labour Minister to permit enough time for his WCB plans to be properly considered; and



Whereas it is workers, injured workers, widows, widowers and surviving children who stand to lose
if every single WCB benefit is quickly and arbitrarily reduced;



Therefore be it resolved that this House urges that the Labour Minister accept the widespread
suggestion from worker and injured worker representatives and provide the several months of time he has
promised for them to consider WCB changes.



MR. SPEAKER: Unfortunately, I have to rule that resolution out of order as it seeks to debate a matter
now before the House, a Public Bill for Second Reading.



The honourable Minister of Finance.



RESOLUTION NO. 1105



HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move
the adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Cape Breton County Economic Development Authority presented a strategic economic
action plan for Cape Breton County on August 12, 1994; and



Whereas this plan was the result of hard work by people dedicated to the economic rebirth of a
depressed economic region; and



Whereas community action is necessary if we are to build a renewed economy province-wide;



Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House encourage other regions of the province to
develop their own strategic economic action plans.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.



RESOLUTION NO. 1106



MR. RUSSELL MACNEIL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Canadian Weightlifting Association reversed their decision on Jim Dan Corbett; and



Whereas Jim Dan Corbett dedicated his life to acquiring skills in the sport of weightlifting; and



Whereas Jim Dan Corbett excelled in his sport and was proud to represent Nova Scotia and Canada;



Therefore be it resolved that this House wish Mr. Corbett continued success as he resumes his beloved
sport of weightlifting.



Mr. Speaker, I would request waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Bedford-Fall River.



RESOLUTION NO. 1107



MRS. FRANCENE COSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Bedford Basin Yacht Club was awarded the William Abbott Trophy by the Canadian
Yachting Association at their annual meeting held in Halifax this year; and



Whereas the award recognizes outstanding innovative programming over the years; and



Whereas programs include a pilot program to provide training for the 15 to 18 years age group, a
program for women in sailing and a pilot program created to introduce sailing through high school Phys. Ed.
classes;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extend congratulations to the Bedford Basin Yacht
Club for having the best Learn to Sail Program in Canada.



Mr. Speaker, I would request waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice, which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Shelburne.



RESOLUTION NO. 1108



MR. CLIFFORD HUSKILSON: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move
the adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas an 11 year old Sandy Point girl will skate with the Nova Scotia team at the Canada Winter
Games at Grand Prairie, Alberta this winter; and



Whereas Shaira Gorham qualified for the Canada Games by capturing the Pre-Novice Ladies title at
the SunLife Provincial Championships in Dartmouth; and



Whereas a second skater from the Shelburne County Figure Skating Club, 13 year old Linda Ross, of
North East Point, won a silver medal at the Dartmouth competition and is an alternative for the Canada
Winter Games;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extend congratulations to these fine young skating
competitors from Shelburne County and wish them every success at the Canada Winter Games.



Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice, which requires unanimous consent.



Is there consent?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.



MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, through you and to all members of the House, I would like
to introduce former hardworking Halifax County Councillor from District 19, Barry Barnet. I would ask you
to afford Barry our usual warm welcome. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Digby-Annapolis.



RESOLUTION NO. 1109



MR. JOSEPH CASEY: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption
of the following resolution:



Whereas Mr. Gerald Handspiker served our country at war in the Royal Canadian Navy and in the
Canadian Merchant Navy; and



Whereas Mr. Handspiker displayed excellent seamanship while serving with the Bayview Lifesaving
Station; and



Whereas Mr. Handspiker recently retired from the Council of the Municipality of the District of Digby;



Therefore be it resolved that this House extend congratulations to Gerald Handspiker for a lifetime of
achievement and thank him for dedicating his time to our community and also to our country.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable Minister of the Environment.



RESOLUTION NO. 1110



HON. ROBERT HARRISON: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Municipality of the County of Annapolis is about to construct the first ever solar-biological sewage treatment plant in Canada, in the Village of Bear River; and



Whereas this biological method of waste water treatment is cost-effective, environmentally responsible
and uniquely suited to Nova Scotia communities and climate characteristics; and



Whereas this technology has been adapted for application in our climate by Applied Environmental
Systems of Halifax;



Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House applaud the Municipality of the County of
Annapolis and the developers of this solar-biological waste water treatment system for their innovative
solution to an age-old problem.



Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There is a request for waiver of notice, which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.



RESOLUTION NO. 1111



MR. RUSSELL MACNEIL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas 1994 was a banner year for Cape Breton tourism, with occupancy rates up an average 7 per
cent, with some tourism operators reporting an increase as high as 25 per cent; and



Whereas according to Enterprise Cape Breton’s tourism division, every 1 per cent jump in occupancy
generates $750,000 in revenue; and



Whereas the 7 per cent increase for the summer of 1994 translates into a cash value of $12 million;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extends congratulations to Cape Breton tourism
operators, staff and volunteers, whose diligent hard work paid off during the summer of 1994.



Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



Order, please. I cannot recognize the honourable member for Bedford-Fall River because there is a
quota of two notices of motion per member today on the strength of the Speaker’s ruling of 1977 made by Mr.
Speaker, George Doucet, after Mr. Ron Wallace, MLA for Halifax Citadel, stood up and moved 38 notices
of motion, one after another. Since that time, there has been a Speaker’s ruling that there is a quota of two per
member, per day.



The honourable member for Victoria.



RESOLUTION NO. 1112



MR. KENNETH MACASKILL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move
the adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas Cape Breton is a snowmobiler’s dream because of its beautifil, rugged terrain and heavy
spring snows that last well into April; and



Whereas the members of the snowmobile clubs formed the Inverness County/Victoria County Trails
Federation to cut and interconnect trails through rough woods and difficult terrain to accommodate grooming
equipment and prepare signs; and



Whereas the economic impact of snowmobilers is making itself evident in Cape Breton’s winter
accommodation business, at gas stations, in snowmobile dealerships and maintenance services, with
community groups such as the UCW and CWL who provide food;



Therefore be it resolved that this Assembly recognize the inspired work done by members of the
snowmobile clubs who have volunteered many hours necessary to bring trails in Cape Breton to a world-class
level.



Mr. Speaker, I seek waiver of notice and passage without debate.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable Minister of Transportation and Communications.






RESOLUTION NO. 1113



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the protection of wetlands is vital to the well-being of our province’s environment; and



Whereas the public-private partnerships can be forged in a multitude of areas as witnessed by the
Eastern Habitat Joint Venture Agreement; and



Whereas Stora Forest Industries recently announced that it would set aside five sites in northeastern
mainland Nova Scotia for wetland protection;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly applaud Stora Forest Industries, the Department
of Natural Resources and all organizations involved for their commitment to preserving wetlands in Nova
Scotia.



Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable Minister of Education.



RESOLUTION NO. 1114



HON. JOHN MACEACHERN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the coal industry continues to be the economic heart of industrial Cape Breton; and



Whereas hundreds of millions of dollars of preparatory work was done on the Donkin Mine; and



Whereas technical difficulties at one of the two operating mines of Devco have refocused the attention
of the Cape Breton mining communities on Donkin;



Therefore be it resolved that the federal government be encouraged to announce its plans for the
Donkin Mine so that the mining communities can plan their future.



Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



L’honorable, le ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Commercialisation.



HON. WAYNE GAUDET: Mr. Speaker, an English copy of this following resolution has been
circulated to all members of the House.



RESOLUTION NO. 1115



M. WAYNE GAUDET: Monsieur l’Orateur, je désire informer cette assemblée que j’introduirai à une
date ultérieure la résolution suivante:



Attendu que la culture acadienne est une partie très importante de notre patrimoine national; et



Attendu que le gouvernement fédéral a jugé bon d’appointer un Acadien, l’honorable Roméo LeBlanc,
comme notre prochain Gouverneur Général;



Qu’il soit résolu que ce gouvernement offre au gouvernement fédéral notre sincère appréciation du fait
que cette nomination reflète une reconnaissance de la place prépondérante qu’occupent les Acadiens et les
Acadiennes au Canada.



Qu’il soit résolu également que cette assemblée offre ses félicitations à Roméo LeBlanc.



Mr. Speaker, I would request a waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.



MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: . . . cette annonciation avec les mots parce qu’il a donné de la service
très loyale au Parti libéral pendants les années. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Ceux qui veux voterait pour la proposition dites Oui. Contre, Non.



La propostion est adoptée.



The honourable member for Yarmouth.



[2:45 p.m.]



RESOLUTION NO. 1116



MR. RICHARD HUBBARD: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas athletics are an integral part of life in schools throughout Nova Scotia, made possible by the
volunteer efforts of teachers and associates; and



Whereas there are numerous benefits for students who participate in school athletics, including higher
self-esteem; and



Whereas the Nova Scotia School Athletic Federation is celebrating its 25th Anniversary this year;



Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House congratulate the members of the Nova Scotia
School Athletic Federation, including teachers and associates, for the great service they have provided
students in Nova Scotia over the past 25 years.



Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Guysborough-Port Hawkesbury.



RESOLUTION NO. 1117



MR. RAYMOND WHITE: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Nova Scotia Rural Beautification Committee recognizes organizations who have made
an outstanding contribution to the enhancement of our scenic rural countryside; and



Whereas these Nova Scotians take pride in the beauty of our natural areas; and



Whereas one organization in Guysborough County has worked hard to enhance nature’s beauty;



Therefore be it resolved that this House extend congratulations to Gloria MacKeen of Greenfield Sports
Centre in Aspen for placing second in the Provincial Community Facility Award.



Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley



RESOLUTION NO. 1118



MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Premier is not the only government member being shunned by members of his own Party;
and



Whereas the Government House Leader, the Minister of Transportation and Communications, survived
a vote taken by members of the Antigonish County Liberal Association to be their guest speaker at their
November 19th annual meeting with a majority of one; and



Whereas a senior member of the Liberal Party in Guysborough-Port Hawkesbury recently said, the
Minister of Transportation is the most despised person in that constituency since Al Capone ruled Chicago;



Therefore be it resolved that the honourable member for Richmond stop spending so much time
defending his noble Leader at every turn in Halifax, and return to his grass roots and begin assisting
individuals who enabled him to serve as a member of the government.



Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



I hear several Noes.



The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Pictou East.



MR. WAYNE FRASER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce to you, and through you to the House,
the presence in the Speaker’s Gallery of a former employee of this House, Varina. I would ask Mrs.
Sammurtok to please rise and receive a warm welcome from the House today. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honorable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.



RESOLUTION NO. 1119



MR. DENNIS RICHARDS: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Leader of the Opposition and his band of merry men attracted a mere 40 people to a
public town hall style meeting on Wednesday, November 16th; and



Whereas the member for Kings North expressed his disappointment at the turnout in a hall made for
300 people; and



Whereas the Leader of the Opposition hoped the size of the crowd would have been greater;



Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House recognize that the Progressive Conservative
Party is a spent force in this province and in Canada as a whole. (Interruptions)



MR. SPEAKER: I will recognize the notice as tabled.



The honourable Minister of Community Services.



RESOLUTION NO. 1120



HON. JAMES SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption
of the following resolution:



Whereas young Canadians have much potential and resources to offer our country as we climb out of
economic recession; and



Whereas young people often do not have the opportunity to access much-needed job experience; and



Whereas the federal government’s Youth Service Canada and Nova Scotia’s Links Program are two
examples of programs that give youth the experience they require in order to gain meaningful employment;






Therefore be it resolved that in the opinion of this House that this House applaud the federal and
provincial governments in their programs for youth that lead to meaningful employment.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable Minister of the Environment.



RESOLUTION NO. 1121



HON. ROBERT HARRISON: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas community economic development is a strategy that promotes sustainable economic
development and to facilitate community-based economic planning and decision-making; and



Whereas the Eastern Valley Community Economic Development Transition Group’s founding
conference will be held at the Old Orchard Inn in Greenwich, Kings County, from November 24 to November
26, 1994; and



Whereas an inclusive new Regional Economic Development Agency committed to community-based
economic renewal will be formed;



Therefore be it resolved that members of this House encourage this new agency to pursue innovative
strategies for local economic development and rejuvenation.



Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Victoria.



RESOLUTION NO. 1122



MR. KENNETH MACASKILL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move
the adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas many Nova Scotians take pride in the natural beauty of rural communities; and



Whereas the Nova Scotia Rural Beautification Committee recognizes organizations that have worked
hard to enhance our scenic rural countryside; and



Whereas the Nova Scotia Rural Beautification Committee has recognized one fine organization in
Victoria County;



Therefore be it resolved that this House extend congratulations to Wilma Senyshyn and the Iona 4-H
Club for placing second in the Nova Scotia Rural Beautification Youth Competition.



Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for wavier of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable Minister of Agriculture and Marketing.



RESOLUTION NO. 1123



HON. WAYNE GAUDET: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame recognizes outstanding contributions that individuals
have made to agriculture; and



Whereas these contributions were recognized by his peers to benefit agriculture in Nova Scotia and
Canada; and



Whereas Dr. Herb MacRae, retired Principal of the Nova Scotia Agricultural College, was recently
inducted into the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame;



Therefore be it resolved that this government congratulate Dr. Herb MacRae for his accomplishments
and being inducted into the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame.



Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Hants East.



RESOLUTION NO. 1124



MR. ROBERT CARRUTHERS: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move
the adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Leader of the Opposition has said that he believes there is a better way than “tired, old
tactics of confrontation and political polarization” when he requested that a free vote be taken on the matter
of casinos; and



Whereas the Leader of the Opposition is on record as being in support of casinos; and



Whereas the Leader of the Opposition gives Nova Scotians the impression that he is against casinos;



Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House of Assembly urge the Leader of the Opposition
to confirm his support for the casino project.



MR. SPEAKER: Well, I think that is a little borderline. There is a bill concerning that matter before
the House, which has passed second reading. I will take it that the resolution in no way refers to that bill?



MR. CARRUTHERS: That is right.



MR. SPEAKR: Then the notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Pictou East.



RESOLUTION NO. 1125



MR. WAYNE FRASER: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the Bioregional Resource Recovery has a long history in the Pictou County area providing
composting for the food industry, produce a marketable product and address regional waste management
concerns; and



Whereas composting results in a fine texture that is soon to be marketed for landscaping and land
reclamation projects; and



Whereas participants with Bioregional Resource Recovery project include the Sustainable Economic
Development Agency, Scott Paper, the Pictou Solid Waste Commission and Scotsburn Dairies;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extend congratulations to all participants who
have instead of waste problem, a resource recovery plan.



Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.

 

 

The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.



RESOLUTION NO. 1126



MR. DENNIS RICHARDS: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the
adoption of the following resolution:



Whereas the member for Kings North considers it important for an Opposition Member to be
constructive; and



Whereas the Leader of the Opposition probably thought he was being constructive when he supported
the concept of casino gaming on Wednesday, April 20, 1994; and



Whereas recent statements by the Leader of the Opposition regarding casino gaming have been
something less than constructive;



Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House, including the member for Kings North,
recognize the Leader of the Opposition as less than principled in his flip-flop on the matter of casinos.



MR. SPEAKER: Well, again, it seems somewhat borderline to the Chair.



The notice is tabled.



I would admonish the honourable member not to make reference to the principled or lack of principled
qualities of another honourable member. It seems a little provocative.



I have a request from the honourable Government House Leader to revert to the order of business,
Statements by Ministers.



STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Natural Resources.



HON. DONALD DOWNE: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to advise members of the House that, effective
December 1st, services and staff of the Department of Natural Resources currently located in Torrington Place,
Burnside, will be relocated at Founder’s Square here in Halifax.



This relocation is consistent with our government’s objective to provide more efficient service to the
public at a cost taxpayers can afford. As a result of this move, total savings to the department will exceed
$300,000 per year. It also means that department services in the metropolitan area will be available at one
location.



Personnel and services from the Land Resources Division, the Crown Land Records Centre, the
Geographic Information and Cartographic Section, and the Map Library at Torrington Place are being moved
to Founder’s Square.



In order to eliminate duplication and overlap of services, responsibility for the sale of topographic maps
and aerial photographs has been transferred to the Department of Municipal Affairs. Aerial photographs and
topographic maps formerly available from the Department of Natural Resources will now be available from
the Department of Municipal Affairs and Land Information Centres. They are located in Halifax, Sydney, New
Glasgow, Lawrencetown, and at the Geomatics Centre in Amherst. Geological and forestry maps, as well as
historic land records, will continue to be maintained and available from the Department of Natural Resources
in Founder’s Square.



The relocation will allow the department to store historic land records, which provide invaluable
information on Nova Scotia’s land grants, in a climate-controlled environment.



The amount of space currently occupied by the Department of Natural Resources at Torrington Place
is 23,000 square feet. Only 17,000 square feet will be required at Founder’s Square. This reduction of 6,000
square feet is a result of sharing of common areas such as library, boardrooms and reception areas.



In addition to saving taxpayers more than $300,000 and providing services more effectively, the
consolidation of Department of Natural Resources staff in the metropolitan area at one location will improve
internal communications and efficiency. The relocation and consolidation of services is being achieved with
a minimum disruption to the department staff and the public they serve. Only one person is being transferred
to another department as a result of this relocation. The staff transfer stems from the transfer of the
responsibilities of the sale of maps and aerial photographs to the Department of Municipal Affairs in Halifax.



[3:00 p.m.]



Bringing all department services available in the metropolitan area under one roof will be more
convenient for the general public, Mr. Speaker. It is also consistent with the department’s objective to reduce
expenditures and streamline operations as part of our government’s four year fiscal recovery plan outlined in
the publication, Government By Design. Any disruption in services to the public during the transition period
of this relocation should be only minimal. The relocation to Founder’s Square is effective December 1st and
newspaper ads advising of the move will be published this weekend.



Mr. Speaker, this relocation is a very positive move because it provides a public convenience, it
delivers department services more effectively, and it will save taxpayers more than $300,000 a year. Thank
you. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.



MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I welcome this statement from the Minister of Natural
Resources and I commend him for consolidating services and staff. Near as I can tell from the minister’s
statement, no staff have been displaced. I did note, however, that one has been transferred and this will result
in $300,000 savings for the department and the Nova Scotia taxpayers, so I certainly welcome that.



Mr. Speaker, this minister does operate, and I am a little hesitant to ask the question but after some
of the goings on in this House regarding public tendering and so on, I would like to know if the 17,000 square
feet at Founder’s Square was put out for public tender.



So, I do welcome the statement and I do think that there will probably be some initial confusion when
people go to obtain or view aerial photographs and maps of topography because now we have to go to
Municipal Affairs Land Information Management Service. There will be some confusion at first. I am
concerned about the public tendering process but as I did state, the minister usually does abide by the
Premier’s guidelines.



With those few brief comments, Mr. Speaker, I welcome the statement.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, before I respond to the minister’s statement, I would like
to make an introduction.



Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your attention and all members, Bruce Macdonald, Business
Manager for Local 56 of the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and
Pipefitting Industry of United States and Canada, a member of the Canadian Federation of Labour.



Mr. Speaker, undoubtedly you have seen Mr. Macdonald here in the Legislature in the gallery in the
past. He is an avid follower of politics and of the goings on here in the Legislative Chamber and I would ask
all members, as Mr. Macdonald rises, to give him the warm welcome usually afforded to guests of the
Legislature. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, with respect to the minister’s statement, I do not have a
whole lot to say about it. It appears to make some sense. I have not had the opportunity to look at who it is
that is serviced by these different locations that will be affected by the relocation. But in terms of the savings,
of course, it makes sense to combine services in departments that may make it more efficient, that also makes
sense. I guess the previous speaker said, it would be interesting to know whether in fact there was an open
tendering process in order to acquire the 1,700 square feet, I believe it was.



But anyway, Mr. Speaker, it seems to make sense to me. I know there have been concerns raised in this
House and across the province at various times with governments who have overly centralized their services,
their offices and jobs and so on in Halifax, but that is a matter undoubtedly that will be brought to the
member’s concern by people that feel that that is an important issue.



With those few comments, I thank the minister for making his statement.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency.



HON. ROSS BRAGG: Mr. Speaker, today I rise to make a statement but I must apologize to my
colleagues, I didn’t have time to prepare something for them but there is a significant important event
happening in Trenton today that I think the House should be aware of.



Today, a company called Greenbrier has signed a letter of intent to purchase the assets of Trenton
Works to ensure the future of that facility. (Applause)



Greenbrier is the largest manufacturer of rail cars in the United States. They currently own a fleet of
36,000 leased cars and are very anxious to have the capacity and production of the Trenton plant to add to
their inventory.



We have been working on this project for some time. As you know, Mr. Speaker, we took over this
facility after the owners went bankrupt in Ontario and sort of through a negotiation with the Ontario
Government, the Nova Scotia Government has owned it in trust and has been intent on finding private sector
buyers.



Greenbrier will have significant Canadian and Nova Scotian ownership in the facility in Trenton and
Mr. John Fitzpatrick will stay on as President and CEO of the facility. The deal is tentative at this time but
it looks very promising and will provide a secure future for the up to 500 people who are employed there.



As you know, the work force there is at 500 and the future for car manufacturing, right now is very
bright. With the addition of Greenbrier and this facility, it will make the future of this plant very successful
and hopefully will provide work for the people in that area for many years to come. Thank you. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.



MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, I know and all Nova Scotians know about the great
capability of that plant because they are the organization that has been building the double-stacked rail cars,
as we all know. Those double-stacked rail cars that they have been building in Pictou County have proven to
be the best available in North America.



The member for the area is sitting to my right and I would like to defer the rest of the comments on
that announcement to him.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou Centre.



DR. JOHN HAMM: Mr. Speaker, I thank my honourable confrère for allowing me to say a few words
about this announcement.



Certainly, all Pictonians welcome the announcement that in fact the ownership of Trenton Works has
been established. As all members in this House are aware, for the last number of months, Trenton Works has
been operating without real ownership and operating with the support, first of the previous government and
now of this government, in terms of providing an operating credit with the bank to allow Trenton Works to
continue in business. Without established ownership, they did not have any borrowing power to allow them
to carry on business.



The enlightened management, a very effective management at Trenton Works has carried and in fact,
the order book at Trenton Works is well filled with work that will carry us well into 1995. The work force,
as the minister indicated in his remarks, is presently in the order of 500. There certainly is enough work on
the order book to continue to maintain almost continuous steady employment for some 400 to 500 people for
the months ahead.



So, this is one of these occasions when I certainly congratulate the minister for his announcement. I
certainly thank the minister, he has been most supportive of Trenton Works and most receptive to any
suggestions that have come forward on behalf of Trenton Works. I have encouraged in the past the minister
to come up and have a look at Trenton Works and again, I will do that. I certainly hope that when the new
owners take charge, that they will let us in the plant door, I am sure they will.



For years, the Trenton Works has been the backbone of the Pictou County economy and while it is
much smaller than it used to be, I think if we can stabilize this industry at some 400 to 500 workers and keep
them reasonably steadily employed, that it will be a tremendous assistance and have a very positive effect on
the Pictou County economy. Again, I congratulate the minister for bringing us this good news at this time.
I certainly would hope that Greenbrier Companies’ association with Trenton Works is a long and prosperous
one. Thank you.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, let me say at the outset that any ownership of Trenton
Works or any other operation in this province that would ensure a certain level of stability and long-term
security for jobs in this province is appreciated. We certainly don’t know, at this point, a lot about the
Greenbrier Companies in terms of what their labour- management practices are. I do see that they have a
subsidiary in the United States who also manufactures double-stack intermodal rail cars. I guess just seeing
that makes me a little concerned that Trenton might in the future be subject to closure as a result of the fact
that they wouldn’t want to have two subsidiaries competing against one another.



So, those are, I guess, a couple of brief concerns that I might have and we will certainly check out
Greenbrier Companies with a little more opportunity, a little more time, a little research. But again, let me
just say that any change in ownership that is able to continue, the level of success that Trenton has shown
themselves lately, to be able to get further manufacturing contracts would certainly be an asset to not only the
work force of Trenton car works but also to the province as a whole. Thank you.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Oh, never mind, Mr. Speaker, he is not here.



MR. SPEAKER: If there are no other items under the daily routine to come before the House, that
brings us to the conclusion of the daily routine and we will now advance to orders of the day. The first item
on which is Oral Questions Put By Members. The Oral Question Period today is an hour and a half long, I
will call the time now 3:13 p.m. which will mean that the Question Period will go until 4:43 p.m.



ORDERS OF THE DAY



ORAL QUESTIONS PUT BY MEMBERS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.






MUN. AFFS. - HFX. METRO AMALGAMATION:

 

MIN.-PREMIER - MEETINGS



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier. Last Tuesday, November
15, 1994, the Premier indicated in this House and I quote him, Hansard Page 4445, “The Minister of
Municipal Affairs and I, obviously, were not communicating the day before I left.”. The Premier was referring
to any discussions he may have had with the Minister of Municipal Affairs on the day before he left for China.
Later on that same day in this House on the 15th, Hansard Page 4447, the Premier said and I quote him again,
“. . . I had meetings with her on Tuesday and Wednesday generally confirming that the conflict of interest
issue, because of the two married people, was understood . . .”.



It appears to me that not only did the Premier contradict himself in those two statements but he also
contradicts the Minister of Municipal Affairs. I ask if the Premier will clarify today if he did or did not have
meetings with the Minister of Municipal Affairs on Wednesday November 2nd, the day before he left for this
China trip and on that occasion discuss the conflict of interest issue? Did he or did he not?



HON. JOHN SAVAGE (The Premier): I can’t actually remember. I certainly did on Tuesday,
November 1st but I will have to check and see whether on Wednesday, November 2nd I did. I really don’t
recall.



MR. DONAHOE: The Premier said on several occasions that he wasn’t aware before he left that the
minister would award the contract to Mr. Grant Morash and if that is the case I wonder why it is that if his
memory now fails him as to whether or not he had discussions with the Minister of Municipal Affairs on
November 2nd, to discuss conflict of interest issues. He did have discussions with her, he says, on that date.



[3:15 p.m.]



If he was not discussing conflict of interest issues with her on that date, relative to this proposed
contract, I wonder if he could dredge his memory and inform this House what was he talking to her about
relative to this issue on November 2nd?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I am being honest. I cannot recall whether I did or did not. I do know
that I spoke to her on Tuesday, November 1st, and on Wednesday, November 2nd, I certainly had contact
through my chief of staff. But I do not recall any other contact, but I will check my records and see.



MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, the Premier has said that a number of candidates were allegedly
discussed with the minister as potential candidates for this particular position. I wonder if the Premier could
recall for the House whether or not any of those other candidates, by his recollection, posed any conflict of
interest risk that appeared to be present in connection with or consideration with the potential appointment
of Mr. Grant Morash?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, one of the issues that we did discuss on November 1st, was the fact that
there were three or four names and three or four companies. The fact also was discussed that some of those
companies may very well be involved in municipalities and would, therefore, not be available for the
competition. That is the memory that I have.



In addition to that, I do remember discussing with the Minister of Municipal Affairs the whole issue
of conflict of interest and how, as a municipal politician, we had avoided it when I was in municipal politics.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.



PRIOR. AND PLAN. - HFX. METRO AMALGAMATION:

 

UNTENDERED CONTRACT - MINS. INVOLVEMENT



MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, through you, my question is to the Premier. I would like to ask the
Premier why it is that he waited until yesterday to inform this House and Nova Scotians that he himself was
a participant in the Priorities and Planning Committee meeting of November 1st, at which it was decided to
appoint Mr. Grant Morash and why it is he has tried to leave the impression that the Minister of Municipal
Affairs was acting alone, instead of in concert with the Premier and his colleagues?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, the deductions that the honourable member is making are totally
erroneous. It is perfectly obvious and I have explained in this House that we left this meeting with two
different impressions, the minister and myself. So it is perfectly obvious that I never concealed the fact that
I was at the meeting because, obviously, I was.



I carefully explained that we left the meeting with indeed different views of the same issue. We have
gone over this at least 15 to 20 times and the answer remains the same. I was there. We had different views
of it and I have made it abundantly clear that this is where the crux of the matter and the misunderstandings
between the minister and myself have arisen.



MR. HOLM: If my deductions are erroneous and if things are as the Premier says, that there was no
decision made at the Priorities and Planning Committee to sole-source the contract, why was it, I ask the
Premier through you, Mr. Speaker, that he felt it so necessary that he call his Chief of Staff at 6:50 a.m. to
get in touch with the Minister of Municipal Affairs to inform her not to sole-source the contract?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I have already explained that at the Priorities and Planning Committee
there are often issues discussed without decisions being arrived at. The real decision arrives when the piece
of paper arrives the next week. In this particular case, I called because I wanted it to be abundantly clear that
I had left that meeting with a clear impression that there was a call for proposals. The names of at least three
or four of those people were the ones that we had discussed the day before. I have been consistent in my
rendering of this, that I called because I wanted the call for proposals to proceed with the names of those
people who had been discussed at the meeting on the previous day.



MR. HOLM: If, and I am sure the Minister of Municipal Affairs must know the rules, so one wonders
why the Premier would have to call to reinforce what the rules already are. My question to the Premier is
simply this, is it not true that the real reason why the government or the Premier and other members of the
Priorities and Planning Committee, instructed the Minister of Municipal Affairs to contact some others, after
the fact, was to cover your backside? And what was really happening is that the Minister of Municipal Affairs
is being hung out to dry alone, for being a loyal servant and doing those things she was instructed to do by
the Premier and the Priorities and Planning Committee?






THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I refuse to be taunted into the kind of answer that he is obviously
searching for. I have explained this issue many times. My answers have been consistent from the time that
I first stood in this House, when I said that mistakes had been made. I said quite consistently, all the time, that
I believed that, in effect, there was a process in calling for proposals, that is the difference that we have
between us.



This is absolutely the impression with which I left the meeting. I have explained this, Mr. Speaker,
and I have explained it consistently and I have not varied in this answer, despite the frequency and the
difference of questions that fly over from the other side.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



MUN. AFFS. - HFX. METRO AMALGAMATION:

 

UNTENDERED CONTRACT - PRIOR. AND PLAN. AUTHORIZATION



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Of course it relates
to the same matter. Yesterday, the minister stated in this House, in reference to the November 1st meeting of
the Priorities and Planning Committee, and I will quote her, “I left the Priorities and Planning meeting early
and I left with the understanding that I would be able to approach Grant Morash.”.



So she is in this meeting, the Premier is there and the Minister of Finance is there, and others are there
and she says she left early. She is a pretty smart person, I think, Mr. Speaker, and she leaves with the
impression and the understanding that she was able to approach Grant Morash.



We know the Premier was there at that meeting; we know that the Chairman, the Minister of Finance
was at that meeting. I ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs this, will she tell this House and all Nova
Scotians, who was it specifically in that meeting who gave her, the Minister of Municipal Affairs, the
understanding that she could, indeed, leave that meeting and go off to approach Grant Morash, to offer this
contract to him?



HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think I have answered this question on a number of
occasions. As I have said many times, in actual fact, there was a discussion at the Priorities and Planning
Committee with regard to a number of names of individuals who would be capable, qualified and able to serve
in the position of the coordinator. I think I have mentioned that to the honourable member on a number of
occasions.



It is quite correct, as I said yesterday, that I left the meeting early. My understanding was that of the
names discussed, that Grant Morash was a name that I felt very strongly about, that I felt very secure in
having that individual do the job. I left that meeting with the understanding that I could approach Mr. Morash
on that basis.



MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Yesterday the Minister of
Finance, the Chairman of the Priorities and Planning Committee, outlined the process for the way in which
decisions are apparently taken at the Priorities and Planning Committee meetings. He said that it comes by
way of memorandum and a decision is made; there was no such memorandum, there was no such request for
a decision, nor was one made.



I wonder if the Minister of Municipal Affairs could, first of all, confirm for me that indeed, that was
the case at the Priorities and Planning Committee meeting of November 1st?



MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, in actual fact that is the case. I went to Priorities and Planning with an item
that I needed to discuss with that committee. That committee makes a number of different decisions. I have
an opportunity to go there on occasion when there is a decision that needs to be made on something of a
certain magnitude.



We had just announced the amalgamation of the metropolitan area. I knew there was going to be a
requirement for a person to lead that process. I went to the committee with a number of names of individuals
who I thought could, in actual fact, do that job. We had a general discussion and I got what I felt was approval
to approach a particular, individual, one of the names that we had discussed at that time. Certainly I would
have to find out if that individual was even willing to do the job before I would have to go back with a
memorandum and recommend that this individual is the person who would, in actual fact, take the job on.



So, typically, Mr Speaker, what I try to do is to go to the Priorities and Planning meeting, if I have this
type of incident, talk with the individuals who are at that meeting, get some direction, get some approval, get
some idea of whether I am on the right wave length and in actual fact then try to enact an understanding that
I have from the meeting. As the honourable Minister of Finance has already said, there is a process. I followed
the process and when I went back on November 8th, after having talked with Mr. Morash and having his
agreement that, in actual fact, the next meeting of the Priorities and Planning Committee were not able to
approve the memorandum that I brought forward at that time.



MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister of Municipal Affairs will tell us, just so that
we are absolutely clear, who else was at the Priorities and Planning meeting of November 1st? We know that
the Premier and the Minister of Finance were present. Would she advise the House who else was present?



MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I don’t think that I am in a position to do that. They are ongoing meetings.
I was at the meeting early. There could have been people who came after I was there. Those meetings are
confidential meetings.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition on a new question.



MUN. AFFS. - UNTENDERED CONTRACT:

 

PRIOR. AND PLAN. - DECISION (01/11/94)



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Yesterday, this
minister, the Minister of Municipal Affairs, said, in connection with the untendered contract awarded to Grant
Morash, she said, the original decision was reinforced after the briefings and once I went through the
curriculum vitae. Is the minister, when she says those words, referring to the decision she thought was made
on November 1st at the Priorities and Planning meeting?

 

 

HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, number one, I just want to reclarify that there was no contract.
There has been no contract signed between Mr. Grant Morash and the Department of Municipal Affairs. I just
want to clarify that.



With regard to his discussion after I had had an opportunity to review the CVs of a number of
individuals, I went back to my original intention which was that Mr. Morash, of the individuals who had been
reviewed on November 2nd, that Mr. Morash was the most qualified individual to do that job of the people
who would certainly allow their names to stand.



MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Yesterday the Minister of Finance
said that the Minister of Municipal Affairs came to the meeting of Priorities and Planning to raise the matter
and discuss it but that no decision was sought or given. That was interesting. I presume they were just going
to have a little chat over tea or coffee, not looking for a decision.

 

 

AN HON. MEMBER: Impression. Perhaps they were looking for an impression.



MR. DONAHOE: Or an understanding. I wonder if the minister could tell us, please, how she squares
her answer that she went to Priorities and Planning to get a decision when the chairman says that she was not
looking for a decision?



MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I think, as I have already answered the question, I had gone to Priorities
and Planning with a number of individuals who I thought might be available to do that job. There were names
of other individuals who came up during that discussion. I go to Priorities and Planning to get some direction,
to get some assistance and in actual fact, I came out of the meeting early with the understanding that I could
approach Grant Morash.



MR. DONAHOE: So that we are clear, the Priorities and Planning of November 1st was this informal
discussion. There was no, as the rules according to the Minister of Finance are, for Priorities and Planning,
there was no memorandum. There was no written request. There was no decision asked for, apparently. There
was no decision made, but there was an understanding or an impression secured by the Minister of Municipal
Affairs from that discussion without any of the normal rules of Priorities and Planning being followed that
she could leave that meeting, which she did early, leaving the Premier and others behind her, and that she
could go to the phone and call Grant Morash and offer him a $225,000 contract for this job. Is that, in fact,
the minister’s total recollection of the events of her day of November 1st?



[3:30 p.m.]



MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, that is part of the difficulty here. We are talking about this over three or
four weeks. He is already pulling into the November 1st date things that have been outlined, that had been
discussed well after that date, such as the contract of $225,000 which was not awarded (Interruptions)



MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.



MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, if the honourable member would like the answer, I am more than prepared
to give it. I have been on my feet for the past three weeks any number of times answering these same
questions.



As I stated, Mr. Speaker, I went to the meeting with an idea, a thought, something that we were going
to have to look at, a direction that we were going to have to go because we, in actual fact, needed a coordinator
to handle the amalgamation issue. The combination, the contract that was not awarded but the amount of
money that we could have looked at was $225,000 and those discussions that I had certainly were well after
the Priorities and Planning meeting of November 1st.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Queens.






MUN. AFFS. - HFX. METRO AMALGAMATION: COMMISSIONER - NEGOTIATIONS



MR. JOHN LEEFE: Mr. Speaker, my question, too, is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs. I don’t
know if the minister finds this line of questioning vexatious but it is a matter which is of great importance to
Nova Scotians and we do all very much want to get to the bottom of it.



Mr. Speaker, the minister has confirmed that she left Priorities and Planning on November 1st, she
returned to her office in order to phone Mr. Grant Morash to confirm to him that he was going to be appointed
as the commissioner for metro. She also invited him to come the next day, that would be November 2nd for
a briefing. On that next day, on November 2nd, Mr. Morash came to her office for the briefing as did Mr.
John Morash, later in the day. We have two Morashs, Grant Morash and John Morash.



My question to the minister, Mr. Speaker, is this, why, since she had already told Grant Morash that
he was going to be appointed, did she then invite Mr. John Morash to come to a briefing meeting for an
appointment which she already knew was not going to be given him?



HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I had finally got hold of Mr. Grant Morash on November 1st
and asked if he would allow his name to stand for the coordinator of the metro amalgamation. Mr. Grant
Morash was very interested in that job, certainly interested in having his name stand but as in all people, you
would want to have a briefing, an idea, knowledge of what the job actually entailed. As I have said on many
occasions, this job is a very tough job and for many people it is a very long-term job. This job is up to 18
months and it is not something that a person just takes over the phone. I had called and asked him to come
to a meeting Wednesday morning in order to have a technical briefing on what the job entailed.



MR. LEEFE: Mr. Speaker, a few moments ago this minister said, and I am asking her which version
is correct, that she had left, and she said it before, Priorities and Planning with the clear understanding that
she was given the authorization to offer the position to Mr. Grant Morash and now she is telling us that she
called him to see if he would like to be briefed in the event that he might be interested in it. Now, perhaps the
minister would clarify which is correct?



MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, one of the difficulties here is that they keep telling me things that I have
said. This is one of the difficulties. Each time they get up, they change from a different opportunity to another
opportunity. I think as I have said on many occasions that I left the Priorities and Planning meeting with the
understanding that Mr. Grant Morash, if he was willing to take on the job, that I, in actual fact, would be able
to offer the job to Mr. Grant Morash. That was my understanding when I left the meeting.



But, Mr. Speaker, after I left the meeting I certainly had to contact Mr. Grant Morash to see if he was
interested in the job. I would not presume that just every individual would be interested in this type of job
because, as we can see, it is a very large job.



MR. LEEFE: Well, it gets curiouser and curiouser, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday the minister said that her
deputy minister received a call from the Premier’s chief of staff, Ms. Shannon, which was relayed at 6:50 a.m.
I am sure we all make phone calls on a routine basis at 6:50 a.m., on routine matters. That was relayed to the
minister by the deputy minister, telling her to contact a few other people about this appointment.



I want to know why she called Mr. John Morash and Mr. Bill Hayward on November 2nd, one day
after she phoned Grant Morash and confirmed to him that he had the job?



MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I think as I have stated on a couple of occasions as well, that there was a
misunderstanding from Priorities and Planning between what I was going to do when I left that meeting and
what the Premier thought I was going to do when I left that meeting.



Obviously, the sense that I was going in a different direction must have focused at some time later and
there was a call made to me. Actually, Ms. Brenda Shannon tried to get hold of me but unfortunately I had
already left my home at 6:30 a.m., that morning and so she was not able to contact me. She then called the
deputy minister of the department and relayed the message to him that she wanted to ensure that a call for
proposals was going forward.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



PRIOR. AND PLAN. - HFX. METRO AMALGAMATION:

 

COMMISSIONER APPOINTMENT - MIN. INVOLVEMENT



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, maybe we can settle this by going to the Chairman of the
Priorities and Planning Committee. I would like to ask the Minister of Finance, as the Chairman of the
Priorities and Planning Committee, if he could answer for us if the Minister of Municipal Affairs was acting
completely alone in this, in isolation, in complete defiance of a decision, as explained by the Premier, made
at the Priorities and Planning Committee, that this proposal to appoint a commissioner for the amalgamation
would be tendered?



HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, let me say that on the particular date in question,
November 1st, the meeting of Priorities and Planning was a routine meeting. These meetings are held weekly.
There were probably 20 or 30 items on the agenda. Item one, at 8:00 a.m., when the meeting started, was a
discussion of the amalgamation and the commissioner. That item was brought forward by the honourable
Minister of Municipal Affairs, who does not normally sit on that committee. However, she appeared at the
meeting for the purpose of that one item. That item was discussed and there was not a decision. Some items
come to Priorities and Planning for discussion, some for decision. That is the routine and the honourable
Leader of the Opposition knows that, but that is a routine matter.



After that discussion took place, which I would say must have concluded before 9:00 a.m., on Tuesday,
November 1st, I am not aware of Priorities and Planning having any further involvement in the matter. I can
tell you from firsthand experience, I had none.



MR. CHISHOLM: Okay, well, that is helpful, Mr. Speaker. So again to the Chairman of the Priorities
and Planning Committee, the Minister of Municipal Affairs came there looking for a decision on this issue.
She made her presentation and then she left.



I want to ask the Chairman of the Priorities and Planning Committee, what did he do to implement
or otherwise communicate the decision, discussion, whatever it was, whatever he wants to call it, that the
matter of the appointment of a commissioner on the amalgamation was going to be fully tendered? How did
he ensure that that was communicated to the Minister of Municipal Affairs, immediately following Priorities
and Planning?



MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, I think the honourable member is into a touch of theatre in his
question. The fact of the matter is, the matter was brought forward to Priorities and Planning for discussion.
It was a very important issue, it was one that had some time imperatives with it in order that it should proceed
and the honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs brought it to that committee, to receive the views of her
colleagues.



Now, she left the meeting with one view of what had occurred, the Premier left the meeting with
another view of what had occurred. The Priorities and Planning Committee, itself, after about, as I say, 9:00
a.m. on Tuesday, November 1st, did not deal with it again until the week following. I was not involved in that
so, in my case I did not deal with it again, period.



MR. CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, not to be overly theatrical on this, but the Minister of Finance
responsible for Priorities and Planning, said to us, first of all, that we didn’t make a decision and then he said
to us that the Minister of Municipal Affairs left with one impression, the Premier left with another impression
about the decision that was made.



I ask the minister again, why did he or one of the other senior ministers there, not take responsibility
to communicate to the Minister of Municipal Affairs who had made a presentation on a matter involving
$225,000? Why didn’t he ensure that she knew what was going on?



MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, again, the honourable member misrepresents what he has been told
across the floor and then claims that he has got some shocking revelation to share with the world. This is a
typical approach.



What I said and I will answer the question very clearly, on the morning of November 1st, Priorities
and Planning, at the request of one of the ministers of this government, the Minister of Municipal Affairs,
had that as item one on an agenda of 20 or 30 items. It dealt with that item, there was a discussion of the item,
the item was there for discussion, the honourable minister wanted the views from her colleagues, it was
discussed and she left the meeting, period. And that was it in terms of Priorities and Planning.



SOME HON. MEMBER: What was the decision?



MR. BOUDREAU: I believe I have already said that there (Interruptions) was a decision. Mr. Speaker,
I find it difficult with the honourable member hollering across the floor to respond.



MR. SPEAKER: I find it very difficult too. Could we have some order, please.



MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, there was a decision made by Priorities and Planning. It was made
a week following.



AN HON. MEMBER: Oh.



MR. BOUDREAU: The honourable member has discovered something new, now. It was made a week
later. Oh! (Interruptions)



MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.



AN HON. MEMBER: I think he’s got it, Mr. Speaker.



MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, I am sure the honourable member is seriously interested in these
answers and let me simply say to him, as I think I have said many times before, there was a discussion, it was
a general discussion and, in fact, two people left the meeting with different impressions. Now, that is the long
and the short of it.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Queens.



MUN. AFFS. - HFX. METRO AMALGAMATION:

 

MIN.-PREMIER - COMMUNICATIONS (02/11/94)



MR. JOHN LEEFE: Mr. Speaker, my question is also to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. The
minister has told us that on Wednesday, November 2nd, her deputy minister received a telephone call from
the Premier’s Chief of Staff, that would be Brenda Shannon. Ms. Shannon suggested that the minister contact
other persons with respect to the appointment of a commissioner for metro amalgamation.



My question to the minister, and I want her to think carefully about this, is what time was the message
from the Premier’s Chief of Staff relayed to the Minister of Municipal Affairs by the deputy minister? Just to
make sure she is clear on my question, what time was the message from the Premier’s Chief of Staff relayed
to the Minister of Municipal Affairs by the deputy minister.



HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I would have to say approximately 7:30, 7:25, somewhere
around that time.



MR. LEEFE: I thank the minister for her response. My second question again is to the Minister of
Municipal Affairs. What time, on November 2, 1994 did the minister and the deputy minister brief Mr. Grant
Morash?



[3:45 p.m.]



MS. JOLLY: I think, Mr. Speaker, as I have answered that question on any number of occasions, Mr.
Grant Morash was invited to come in for a meeting at 8:00 o’clock on November 2nd.



MR. LEEFE: I take it that is 8:00 a.m? My second supplementary, what time on November 2nd did
the Minister of Municipal Affairs invite Mr. John Morsh to attend a briefing respecting the position of
commissioner for the metropolitan amalgamation, and at what time did that meeting take place? So we have
two times there.



MS. JOLLY: Well, in actual fact it was the deputy minister who invited Mr. Morash who had spoken
with Mr. John Morash and had Mr. John Morash come in for a technical briefing, I believe it was in the
morning of that day.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



MUN. AFFS. - HFX. METRO AMALGAMATION:

 

MR. GRANT MORASH - QUALIFICATIONS ANALYSIS



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: To the Minister of Municipal Affairs. When the Minister of Municipal
Affairs said earlier that it was on the basis of an assessment of curriculum vitae that she came to the
conclusion that Mr. Grant Morash was the appropriate appointment as far as she was concerned, we are now
learning today that she didn’t conduct the interview with Mr. John Morash but did with Mr. Grant Morash,
so that her analysis or assessment of curriculum vitae and qualifications and so on was done, on the one hand,
part by herself and on the other part by her deputy and then she made her decision after discusions with her
deputy. Is that what she is now saying?



HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, as I have said all along, there was a technical briefing with Mr.
Grant Morash and there was a technical briefing with Mr. John Morash. I knew these individuals personally;
I have known them for some time; I had reviewed their CVs; and those were the meetings that were held.



MR. DONAHOE: I wonder if the Minister of Municipal Affairs could tell - my colleague, the member
for Queens asked about the timing of certain events on November 2nd - this House whether or not she told
Mr. John Morash and/or Mr. Bill Hayward on November 2nd, or her deputy, that the job in question was
already confirmed to be going to Mr. Grant Morash, and at what time the communications were made to that
effect to those individuals?



MS. JOLLY: In actual fact, in the discussion that I had with Mr. Grant Morash on that Wednesday
morning after Mr. Cramm had done the technical briefing, I advised Mr. Grant Morash that there were other
people being considered for the job.



MR. DONAHOE: My final supplementary is to the Chairman of the Priorities and Planning
Committee. That minister said a few moments ago, in describing the process of how Priorities and Planning
meetings are conducted, that an agenda is prepared and that a minister will produce a memorandum and make
a report and then the discussion will ensue and then a decision will or won’t be taken. A moment ago the
Minister of Finance, in that capacity, indicated that on November 1, 1994 this issue that we have been
discussing here today was the first item on the agenda. I wonder if the minister could tell us how it got to be
the first item on the agenda when, earlier, he and others have acknowledged that there was no memorandum,
there was no submission, there was no report, there was no paper work at all? How did this matter come to
be the first item on the agenda of the November 1st meeting?



HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, very simple. There is not a memorandum for every item
that appears on the agenda. There may be many items. We may want to discuss university rationalization, and
that item will appear on the agenda and that discussion will ensue. In fact, that was what the situation was
here. If you want the Priorities and Planning Committee to approve a decision, you come with a
memorandum. The memorandum is specific and the Priorities and Planning Committee approves it, or
doesn’t.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.



HUMAN RES.: DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR - APPOINTMENT



MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the honourable
Premier, in the absence of the Minister of Human Resources. The Premier will know that the appointment
of a new Coordinator of Human Resource Development takes effect on Monday. The essence of this Human
Resource Coordinator job is to ensure that fair treatment and equal opportunity is given to every government
employee in this province, and I quote, “to develop and utilize skills and abilities”, in rendering service to
Nova Scotians.



Can the Premier then explain why this job has been filled without an open competition, in total
violation of his government’s supposed fair hiring policy?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I am afraid I cannot answer that question at this point but I am prepared
to find out and submit again by tomorrow.



MS. MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I would not have thought it would take until tomorrow for the
Premier to find out but perhaps it is reasonable for him to take an hour or two to familiarize himself with this
latest violation of his government’s fair hiring practices.



I wonder, while we wait for some further information, if the Premier could indicate in what
circumstances his ministers and deputies have permission to circumvent the fair hiring policies and open
competition requirements in filling positions?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, the vast majority of contracts, tenders for services, are, in effect,
tendered. So the assumption so glibly contained in the question, that most of them are broken, is, of course,
inaccurate. There are some 11 points on the question of sole-sourcing that are contained in the policy I
furnished to this House last week.



MS. MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, we are talking about hiring practices, not tendering practices, I
would remind the honourable Premier, as I proceed to my final supplementary. An internal notice in June
advised that the Human Resource Development Coordinator position would be filled internally, by
secondment. My question to the Premier, and I will table that notice, is it acceptable to the no-patronage
Premier that five months later this job has been filled by going outside the Civil Service, to hire a former
colleague of the deputy minister, without the benefit of either an open competition or a merit-based selection
process?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, the insinuations continue. Unfortunately, I cannot give you an answer
specifically on that but I will find it for tomorrow.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.



HEALTH: HEALTH MINDER (IBM) - CONTRACT



MR. GEORGE MOODY: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. Looking at a House
Order that the minister returned on June 30th, regarding LifeSmart or Health Smart or Health Minder, I
noticed reading through the key events in chronological order that on July 7th, the presentation of their
proposal from Health Minder and IBM was made to the minister and on July 29th, three weeks later, the
contract was accepted and signed by the Minister of Health.



I would ask the Minister of Health on what authority he accepted and signed that contract?



HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I think this refers to a year ago July. It certainly was
discussed, this was aired in this House. This was an exploratory examination of a particular type of contract
and a particular type of service. We submitted it to a committee for vetting. This has all been aired in this
place and we, in fact, have decided not to go forward with that proposal at all and it is not on the table
anymore.



MR. MOODY: It may not be on the table any more but I asked the minister in his letter to Mr. Steve
Stairs of IBM and Health Minder, There are several issues which have been discussed relative to this decision
including the present status of the original contract, the KMPG study and the $250,000 default clause. I would
ask the minister if, in fact, this government did have to pay with regards to that default clause?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, as I have said in the past, on this issue, that is a very early version of
our earlier discussions. We decided not to proceed with this. We had it vetted by a committee headed by Ms.
Mary-Jane Hampton. We looked at every aspect of it and decided, no, this was not indeed the way to go
forward and there was no contract awarded. There was no kind of intent on the Minister of Health to pursue
this specifically.



MR. MOODY: Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary, and I ask the minister, again, why did he sign
a letter indicating there was a contract and a default clause if there was no such thing?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, the discussion to which he refers, and I haven’t the letter in front of me,
so I will have to assume the dates and content, the very fact that we were discussing a default clause and the
amount that he quotes was not satisfactory to us and we deferred it, asked for an opinion from the committee
in terms of our health reform process. We decided, along with the committee, that this did not fit, and, in fact,
we negotiated further and did agree not to go forward with that proposal.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.



SUPPLY AND SERV.: TRURO-BIBLE HILL SCHOOL - CONTRACT



MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Supply and Services.
What date was the decision made to award the $8 million contract to build and design the new school in
Truro-Bible Hill to the architect, Mr. Connell?



HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate the material I tabled here earlier today in
response to questions yesterday. There was no date of a contract award with respect to that school.



MR. ARCHIBALD: Well, I guess, we are fooling with, has it been indicated to the gentleman that he
will be the person in charge of the design and the construction of the school, without the formal contract being
signed yet, but has the intention been sent out to Mr. Connell that he is to commence work on this program
with a contract to follow?



MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, the gentleman who the member names as the person who has been asked
by our department to present to us, if you will, the procedures, the kinds of subs that will be used to develop
that school project, he has submitted that to the department. It is now being reviewed, and we have not had
a word as to whether we accept that proposal yet or not. We will be doing that very shortly.



MR. ARCHIBALD: The minister is being just as vague as he possibly can. I am not sure why, and I,
certainly, do not appreciate it. (Interruption) I will ask the question and this is very serious. How was public
notification ever given that this job was going to be considered to build a new school in Truro-Bible Hill so
that firms and individuals who are interested in the construction project could express an interest to you and
your government. Was there public notice given?






MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I want to be very clear in the procedure in the arena of procuring
professional services is a bit different than some of the other avenues of public procurement. I did table today
an explanation of the process which we go through to make sure that there was no confusion in that
delineation of experiences. I want to say that for the procurement, if you will, of professional services, we have
a staff committee in design and construction services who do, based on current recommendations by the
architect industry, review those architectural contractors who have demonstrated the ability to perform
comparable projects to the projects that we have on the books. In this case there were two that we identified
or that this committee has identified and approached the two of them. They found one to be stronger than the
other one.



Mr. Connell, as you mentioned, is the successful person to have been asked to present to us how he sees
the prescription, if you will, of that school, how many subs will be needed, the scope and the dimensions and
what have you. That is the procedure.



[4:00 p.m.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North on a new question.



SUPPLY AND SERV. - TENDERS: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - NOTIFICATION



MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, through you to the Minister of Supply and Services. My
question was simply, earlier, was there public notification given for people to express interest. I think, after
listening, that we can assume there was no public notification so that people in the industry could send in their
expression of interest to you.



Now if there was no public interest, could the minister explain to us please how he arrived at simply
asking two firms. How did he decide those were the two individuals? How were those two people arrived at
if there was no opportunity for people to know you were even going to build a school?



HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, the public interest is certainly widespread. I am well aware
that certainly for the past 12 months, we have consulted with practically every architectural firm in the
province. That is part of the recommendation they wanted to see as a remedy, compared to past practices of
friends of government being sole-sourced for all those kinds of contracts. (Applause)



Mr. Speaker, I want to say as clearly as I can that these firms have enunciated very clearly to me
directly, as well as to my staff, what they went through in the past being denied the opportunity and they have
welcomed this exercise whereby it provides them the opportunity in a fair and open manner. (Applause)



MR. ARCHIBALD: Could you tell me please why you did not advertise for the jobs?



MR. ADAMS: Again, Mr. Speaker, I think he missed the point that we are working in an arena that
is separate from the general contracting arena. We are dealing with specifically the professional services
segment of the community and that is part and parcel of their request, plus our observations of the past versus
how we want to see things proceed in the future. It is part of a policy that we are now developing and now
moving toward the final stages of that input.



When you say the public has not been aware, they are aware. This is the procedure that the majority
of architects have asked us to employ. (Interruption) Mr. Speaker, I want to make the point clear, to make the
difference so he will understand it better. The professional services are exempt from the normal procurement
procedures of the policy. I think the member realizes that because he was part of that change in his former
government. (Applause)



MR. ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, I know that the minister has been working with the professional
services very rigorously for the last several months. He has had correspondence that I think he furnished today
that was dated last January. In April, the professional services that he is referring to corresponded with him
indicating some certain guidelines they wanted to follow. It has been April until now and he still has not seen
fit to adopt the recommendations.



But one of the primary recommendations that the professional services he is referring to were making
in the proposal was that in a job of this size and magnitude, at least public notification be given. Public
notification be given is what they are asking for and what you are going to agree to, and select between two
to four firms to be in the final selection process.



MR. SPEAKER: Question, please.



MR. ARCHIBALD: I am trying, but I am getting a lot of interference. Why, on the recommendation
of the professional services - they said they wanted public notification, two to four firms in the selection
process - why did you avoid doing that?



MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that two is two out of four. (Interruption) There is no policy
that says that. He says a job of that size, they want four. I would refer the member to the guideline which he
introduced, the Provincial Procurement Policy, if you will, Section 4.3 and perhaps we can read it. The types
of services covered by this policy include the many, but may not be limited to those listed in Appendix A,
consistent with the Maritime Procurement Agreement, professional services will be exempted from public
advertising. His words, Mr. Speaker. (Applause)



That was published by the government in 1992. We are going to work to make it better, more open.
(Interruption) Just to make the point, I think it is relevant that we read that into the record because that is the
practice that was initiated two years ago. But I have a file which supplies me with all kinds of notes in terms
of the past practices and I think it is a little bit dangerous, I think, to be asking those kinds of accusing
questions of how we do not or do open our exercises. Perhaps we may hear from the Opposition how architects
were chosen for the Cape Breton Regional Hospital and the new Halifax Infirmary and perhaps how the fees
were arrived at, to reach $6 million. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.



SUPPLY AND SERV. - ARCHITECTS: TENDERING POLICY - COMPLY



MR. JOHN HOLM: Somehow I can’t help but conclude that the minister is sweeping with the same
broom as the former government. I refer to the minister’s memorandum of . . .



MR. SPEAKER: Is this a question to the Minister of Supply and Services?






MR. HOLM: To the Minister of Supply and Services, on tendering . . .



MR. SPEAKER: Very well.



MR. HOLM: . . . dated November 29th, 1993. The minister in his memorandum of that date says the
use of preferred lists for professional services has been notorious. Bang on, he is right. But he also said
effective immediately all department of government are to withdraw from the use of any and all existing
preferred lists of services and supply contractors.



My question to the minister is quite simply this, aren’t architects used to bidding on private contracts?
There are all kinds of businesses out there, Mr. Speaker, that employ the services of architects and they bid.
Those architects are quite used to bidding on those contracts. How can you expect to receive the highest
quality of service if all you are planning to do is share that service or those awards around?



HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I have no record in any of my deliberations where architects
are used to tendering for opportunities. They made it very clear to me the day I first met with the first three
that they have no business in the arena of tendering for low costs. But they encouraged us in every meeting,
every step of the way, the encouragement was strong, that we look for quality in the contractor we would pick
to do the services we require because we do set the price on this exercise, professional services, not general
goods and services.



MR. HOLM: I would suggest that in the private sector, architects are used to bidding on contracts and,
I would suggest, in the private sector they also look for the quality of service that they are going to get with
the architects they hire. I refer to the call for proposals for legal services in relation to the public/private
venture, Highway No. 101, Western Alignment, put out by the Department of Justice for the Department of
Transportation.



Under that they list all kinds of point systems against which the proposals will be judged. One is cost.
They also look at experience, they look at qualifications, management, organization and so on.



I ask the Minister of Supply and Services, if you are truly interested in getting the best bang for the
buck, the highest quality of service, why haven’t you instituted a similar kind of policy for the awarding of
contracts for architects?



MR. ADAMS: I will repeat, as I said earlier, we have not shied away from consultation. The message
to me is very clear from that industry and what procedures and practices they want to be employed in the
recruitment and search of work opportunities. We are complying with that, Mr. Speaker. We are not going
to change the rules at the whim of an outside idea.



MR. HOLM: Let me get it straight then, it is obviously the rule or the policy of this government that
if a particular segment, if a particular industry, tells this government how it wants the government to award
contracts, the government is going to follow that route . . .



MR. SPEAKER: Is that the question?



MR. HOLM: . . . instead of following the tendering policies and a fair, level playing field for all
industries, all businesses involved in that trade. So in other words, you take your directions from the architects
instead of looking after Nova Scotians.



MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, we take the direction as a blend, if you will, of experiences from across
this country in this particular case. The acquisition of professional services is not something that can or should
be acquired by tender. The selection of a professional must consider factors other than, as I said before, lowest
price. The risks to the public are significant if the design of the structures depends simply on cost or the low
bid. You want, indeed, the person who is best qualified to meet the requirements of the project and the
professionals who have expressed their concerns on tendering on many occasions to me personally, as well
as to my staff. And that includes the engineers as well as the architects.



There is no doubt in my mind the position they see themselves in today, compared to where they were.
We are going to work to make it better before we make it a policy that is official.(Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



SUPPLY AND SERV.: CONSULTANT SELECTION - ENDORSEMENT



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Supply and Services. I
wonder if the Minister of Supply and Services will acknowledge that his department, presumably with his
involvement, prepared a statement of principles for consultant selection policy and procedures, and they did
so in association with the Nova Scotia Association of Architects, the Nova Scotia Consulting Engineers
Association? Those organizations extended their endorsement, in principle, to the document prepared by the
Department of Supply and Services. Would the minister acknowledge that that is so?



HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I believe the honourable member was talking about the draft
policy of the Architectural Engineering Consultant Selection Process?



MR. SPEAKER: Yes.



MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, yes, both the industries have written support letters which we tabled today
along with my statement in support of our activities and the refinement of that policy. As of this morning
there were several phone calls with further endorsement.



MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the minister then, patting himself on the back that he has
had endorsations all over the place for this policy, from the professions affected in the province; why is it that
he learned as long ago as April 25th, from the president of the association of architects, that the draft policy
was supported by that association and as he has indicated, it has been supported by others? Why is it this is
not now the policy? Why is it still draft, and why is it not the policy for the selection, as it is described, the
Consultant Selection Policy and Procedures? Why is it not the policy, if his department recommended it and
the affected organizations endorsed it?



MR. ADAMS: I thank the member for that question. I take full responsibility for the time. We have
not had a whole lot of building activity in the province, obviously, due to our economics and I did have some
personal feelings as minister, that I wanted to see some testing of the procedures along the way. I think we
are at that point now, where we have, in your hands if you will, the example. And that is the school that was
referred to earlier by the other question.






MR. DONAHOE: With respect, I am not really sure what I should understand the minister to be
suggesting he wanted to test because, it is clear, as I read this draft document, that he wasn’t testing this
document. Because, I asked the Minister of Supply and Services to acknowledge if it is not the fact, that the
draft document which his department recommends -the affected organizations’ support as far back as April -
that that document says that in a situation where you are going to hire a consultant, in the Department of
Supply and Services, and consulting fees are estimated to be $250,000, a $0.25 million or more, the process
is public notification.



Will the minister acknowledge that is step one in a situation where the fees are estimated to be $0.25
million or more?



MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I would not say that was step one at all, no.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



SUPPLY AND SERV.: CONSULTANT SELECTION - ORGANIZATIONS AFFECTED



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, if I may by way of a new question, I am just compelled to
ask the minister, what is step one if public notification, as set out in his department’s document endorsed by
the affected organizations is recommended as step one, public notification. He says, no that is not step one.
Would he please tell me and I hope through me and this debate, all the organizations affected, what step one
actually is?



HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, step one will follow or precede step two and step three when
we have a policy that is the official document of this government.



[4:15 p.m.]



MR. DONAHOE: At one, two, three, yes, indeed. (Laughter) Well, I ask the Minister of Supply and
Services, very seriously - one, two, three, three, two, one aside - is he saying then to this House today that, as
I read this draft document and the organizations affected by it, the architects and the consulting engineers and
so on, when they read in this document that in a project which carries with it a consulting fee estimated to
be $0.25 million or more and this minister’s department suggests and sets out that the process starts with
public notification that, on the strength of what he has just said now, they should understand that that is not
the way it is going to do. This first step, as far as he is concerned, is not going to be any more, from this point
on, public notification and it will be something else. Is that what he is saying?



MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, if I had the ability to look to the future and know what my colleagues
would do when it has made its final arrival in government as an official policy, then I could answer the
question very accurately. I would say that, very likely, it will be the first step.



MR. DONAHOE: It may, likely, but may be it will not be. I wonder if the minister then would outline
for me what process is it that he intends to follow which will resolve that question, what the first step will be
and, in fact, will transform what he is describing and is described here as a draft document into a final
document relative, if I may, not so much to his Cabinet colleagues, but relative to the professions affected.
What happens from this point on with the professions in order to lead this document from draft to final stage?



MR. ADAMS: My next role is to get this on the agenda at the Priorities and Planning Committee so
that we can do that ratification. I do want to tell my colleagues, through you, that that is our intention.
Yesterday, I made reference that we hope to have this official policy by the end of this year and that is still
my objective.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



MUN. AFFS.: HFX. METRO AMALGAMATION - TENDERING VIOLATION



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question through you to the
Premier. On November 15th when the Premier stood in this House and made his statement and in response
to a series of questions throughout Question Period, he indicated quite consistently that his number one
concern was the conflict of interest involving the Deputy Minister of Municipal Affairs and Deloitte &
Touche. Yet, we are being told and we know that this was an untendered contract to a major Liberal
contributor and a flagrant violation of his own tendering directive.



My question to the Premier is very simple. Why was such a flagrant violation of his own tendering
directive not also a concern for this Premier?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, it certainly was.



MR. CHISHOLM: Well, I have difficulty understanding how he can have it both ways when
throughout that period he said, quite clearly, that his one motivation in terms of asking people what was going
on was the whole issue of the conflict of interest question.



Perhaps, the Premier could explain - after we have heard every other minister tell us that on November
1st this appointment should be handled with open tendering - why he is the only senior minister in this
government who now claims that on November 1st it was agreed that the proposed contract would be
tendered?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I do not now claim; what I claimed on November 15th, November 16th
and any time I have spoken on this was that my understanding was that there was a call for proposals that
would be going out. I reinforced that plea the next day to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. I have not arrived
at this now, I have stated it consistently and my answer to the question has been the same every single time.



MR. CHISHOLM: I must ask this final question to the Premier. Is it not in fact more likely that it was
the Premier whose stated recollections were in fact incorrect and that he was part of the decision by senior
ministers of this government to give a sole-source contract to their good friend, Grant Morash on November
1st?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, these allegations are mischievous, they have nothing to do with
enlightening the public and this is totally wrong.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.



HEALTH: APPROPRIATIONS - REASON



MR. GEORGE MOODY: My question is for the Minister of Health. On November 8, 1994, the
minister will remember that he took a request to Cabinet that he be permitted pursuant - and I am sure he is
familiar - to Section 16(1)(a) of the Health Services and Insurance Act to raise the money he is able to spend
without Cabinet approval. As he knows, under that Act he is permitted to spend up to $100,000, this was for
$1 million. I would ask the minister if he could explain why it was necessary to get a discretionary amount
of money of $1 million from Cabinet on that particular day?



HON. RONALD STEWART: It was not necessary on that particular day but this was advised by my
staff in terms of our bookkeeping and our needs that might accrue in the next year.



MR. MOODY: Ordinarily, overexpenditures are dealt with by expropriations, obviously, this is not
for an overexpenditure. I would ask the minister if he could explain to me and to all taxpayers what this $1
million discretionary money that he received approval from Cabinet was to be used for? I think that is
reasonable.



DR. STEWART: Again, I would answer in saying that it was an elevation of the amounts that we
could, it was nothing specific in terms of that day but it merely raises the limit and I was advised by my staff
that this would be helpful and we so acted.



MR. MOODY: I understand the fact that he wants to raise the limit to $1 million, I understand that
fact. I am asking a very simply question on behalf of the taxpayers of this province, what is that money going
to be used for? In what areas of his budget under the Health Services Act is that money going to be used for?
Surely, he can explain if he asked for the $1 million what the money is for? That is all I am asking, I have
no difficulty with the process, no difficulty with the process at all, I would just ask the minister if he could
explain to me and to all Nova Scotians what the money is being used for?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the honourable gentleman opposite is confused in terms of what
we were seeking. We were seeking an elevation of the limit, we were not seeking money and we certainly did
not go before Cabinet and ask for $1 million dollars, it was in case there was a need, everything will go before
Cabinet, it will be tabled and public, whenever there is a need. But that is the limit and we cannot go beyond
that.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou West.



HEALTH: COLCHESTER REGIONAL HOSPITAL - STATUS



MR. DONALD MCINNES: My question also is to the Minister of Health. There is a rumour in Pictou
County that the Colchester Regional Hospital will be the regional hospital for Pictou County. I want to know
as does Laurel Holliday and many other residents of Pictou County if indeed the Colchester Regional Hospital
is to be the regional hospital for Pictou County?



HON. RONALD STEWART: Again, I would be happy if the honourable gentleman would give me
an address and a name I would respond directly to the constituent named. If the number of rumours are
consistent in all parts of the province including this place, I would be answering on my feet all of the time.
The fact is that there is no indication and there is absolutely no plan for designations of specific facilities at
this point. In fact, we have said from day one in the reform that we discourage the use of the term regional
hospital because it indicates prematurely at best the fact that one hospital would be given a pre-eminence in
the particular region. We know that we have in fact shied away from that because the regions are now fewer
than they have been before and we certainly could not envisage one particular facility occupying a pre-eminent
place. It might be that one facility would have certain services and another would be upgraded in terms of
others. That is the essence of health reform.



MR. MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for that answer. The minister has been asked by
my colleagues for Pictou County, both the member for Pictou Centre and the member for Pictou East as to
whether the minister is going to make additional appointments to the Northern Regional Health Board to give
better representation to Pictou County. Will the minister inform the House when he is going to do that, and
the people of Pictou County as well?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I have been asked this question several times. We have discussed it with
the Chairman of the Northern Regional Health Board. I might suggest that the number of applicants, we had
a resignation, as the honourable gentlemen opposite know, from the board in representing, if you would, and
I don’t use that term representing, the people in Pictou County, those who are chosen to be on the board are
representing all of Nova Scotia and with particular interest in the northern region. I want to again reiterate
that geographical representation should not be the criterion on which we choose members of a particular
board.



But that having been said, if you get into numbers, Mr. Speaker, you will find in the Cape Breton
region, for example, the number of applicants, when you look at them, we had only 13 per cent of those who
applied appointed to the board. In Pictou County it was 20 per cent who applied were appointed to the board.



I don’t want to get into those numbers, Mr. Speaker. I have cautioned the gentleman opposite not to
do that because it is not fair. On the other hand, there is a particular need, with the resignation and other
considerations, to increase the number of people from Pictou County on the board and we are working on that.
I have discussed it with the regional board chair and it should come within the next several weeks, I should
believe.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou Centre.



HEALTH - CUMB./COL. COS.: BOARD - APPLICATIONS



DR. JOHN HAMM: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Health. The minister has been engaged in
answering questions about the Northern Regional Health Board. Two weeks ago I asked the minister in
Question Period how many Pictounians applied to serve on the Northern Regional Health Board and the
minister did provide the information and there were 15 Pictounians that did apply. Of those 15, the minister
appointed 3 on a board of 16, and as he just again repeated to the House, one of those members has resigned
and now we have two appointees representing Pictou County.



My specific question to the minister is, how many applications did the minister receive from the
residents of Cumberland County and how many applications from the residents of Colchester County to serve
on the Northern Regional Health Board?



HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I cannot give that number at the moment. I simply do not
have it available in front of me. I could count up the numbers, of course, and do that. Again, I would ask the
honourable gentleman opposite and those who are in this House to understand that I will not begin to play
games in terms of numbers. I will repeat my statement that I have said in the past that geographic
representation was not the criteria recommended by the Blueprint Committee or recommended by anyone who
engages in health care reform in other jurisdictions in the country.



I would caution all members to be very careful and serious in their comments in terms of asking
whether one county has x amount or one county has another. We will disintegrate, Mr. Speaker, if we take
that view.



DR. HAMM: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure of the minister’s answer if he is going to provide me with the
numbers or not, but I would expect that he would oblige and would make that commitment.



By way of first supplementary, I have a question from Howard Moffatt of Dartmouth and he has a
question on hospital boards. His question is, and he is asking about his board, is the new board set up by the
Savage Government to receive pay?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I have not communicated with this constituent, nor as far as I can
remember, been asked that question about what he calls the Savage Government. Does the board receive pay?
The board will receive, and I assume that gentleman was speaking about the regional health board, the
regional health board will receive funding, obviously, from the Ministery of Health and from the coffers of
the taxpayer. In terms of the board members, they will not be paid for their services, these are volunteer
boards.



[4:30 p.m.]



DR. HAMM: I think I still fail to have a commitment from the minister that he would provide me with
the number of applicants from Cumberland County and Colchester County to serve on the board. Again,
would the minister make a commitment to give me those numbers?



DR. STEWART: No, Mr. Speaker, I am not going to make a commitment. I think that is frivolous and
it is not in keeping with my policy of geographic representation being a criterion.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.



HEALTH - VGH: EMERGENCY SERVICE - ADEQUACY



MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to direct my question to the Minister
of Health, the emergency doctor who is the minister responsible for emergency doctoring in the province. My
question concerns what appears to be something of an emergency in our emergency health care system, I refer
to the comments yesterday by the VGH Trauma Director, advising that there are no longer enough emergency
physicians willing and available to continue rotating on a volunteer basis, as the trauma team leader at the
VGH trauma unit.



Mr. Speaker, my question to the minister would simply be this, how can he assure Nova Scotians, as
he did yesterday that patients will receive the exact same service as they do now, when the VGH Trauma
Director has stated quite clearly that three emergency doctors volunteering as team leaders, on a rotational
basis, is not enough to run a truly effective system?






HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I might correct the impression of the honourable member
for Halifax Fairview in that I am no longer an emergency doc, as she terms me, as she terms other people in
this province; I am the Minister of Health and that is the difference here, let’s make that clear first of all. I
am sure that the docs who are over in the Victoria General Hospital would be happy to hear you using that
term, which has its own origins, I am sure, in the honourable member’s mind.



Let me speak, having said that, Mr. Speaker, from the experience of a trauma doc who works on the
trauma team and worked up until 18 or 19 months ago in the Victoria General Hospital. Let us make it clear,
lest the public and others, and those of you in this place might have some concern about the level of care being
given, in terms of trauma patients at the Victoria General Hospital. What the Trauma Director is saying is
that the trauma team, as it was organized, is no longer, in his estimation, and this is a clinical difference of
opinion I might say, with him and what he has said, is no longer able to be organized in the same way it was.



Will there be the same people taking care of the patients? Yes, there will be the same people taking
care of the patients. Will there be a trained, emergency, Royal College certified emergency physician caring
for the patient who comes in the Victoria General Hospital? Yes, there will be. Will there be a surgeon
available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, in-house? Yes, there will be. Will there be diagnostic radiology
service, including CAT scanning? Yes, there will be. I will go down the list if the honourable member
opposite wants to be informed fully.



The question here is the organization of the team, in terms of whether or not there is a concerted team
that is called down from in-house. That, according to what I get from the honourable member opposite, is no
longer working in that facility. However, the proposal that was given to me on November 4th was in
consideration in my department but it involves one thing, Mr. Speaker - and I beg the indulgence of the House
to hear me out - a different method of remuneration for physicians. As soon as you say that, you are now into
the realm of negotiations with the Medical Society, in terms of how we reimburse physicians. Of course that
is without the realm of that particular interest that the honourable member expresses. So, there are
ramifications of this, I have in turn tried to give the information so that you may be fully informed. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: I might note before I recognize the honourable member for a supplementary question,
that according to Beauchesne’s Parliamentary Rules and Forms, a question that invites a very long and tedious
answer certainly would restrict the number of supplementaries allowable because this would carry on
indefinitely. I will recognize one short snapper, please.



MS. MCDONOUGH: This is the Minister of Health that has been closing emergency services around
the province. This is the Minister of Health that has been closing small hospitals saying that a highly
specialized trauma unit is what is needed. This is the minister that is in the process of dismantling out
ambulance services. How can he expect Nova Scotians to have total confidence in the trauma services at the
Victoria General Hospital when the director itself says, that there are no longer enough physicians available
to serve as a trauma team coordinator to ensure a fully effective service?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, how can the citizens of Nova Scotia have confidence in a question like
that that proposes such preposterous and outrageous accusations. This is completely untrue, I have gone
through and I have met as late as 11:30 p.m. last night with the medical director of the Victoria General
Hospital and we have agreed in terms of what I have just said. I assure the honourable member opposite, I
assure the citizens of Nova Scotia, that the care and the personnel are there, on site, in the emergency
department and the surgical suites of the Victoria General Hospital.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.



TRANSPORT.: SYDNEY/YARMOUTH AIRPORTS - TAKEOVER



MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the honourable Minister of Transportation
and Communications. The minister stated in a July 15th article in the Daily News that the province would
be prepared to possibly take over the management of the airports in both Sydney and in Yarmouth. In a letter
to the minister on July 28th, a letter I can table this afternoon, that was written by my colleague, the member
for Kings North, he requested criteria, that he never got, that was being established by the province in order
to take control of these airports. My question for the minister is simply this, how far along are you in making
a determination of whether you will assume control of the airports in Yarmouth and Sydney?



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I ever said that the province was going to take
over the control and operation of any airports. I believe what I said is that we would get all the information
that we could from Transport Canada and we would meet with and work with interested groups, with
community organizations and with local governments, to see if there are ways to keep those airports operating.



MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, a Chronicle-Herald editorial a month or so ago, indicated there was
interest in the Yarmouth Airport by a Portland, Maine company. I wonder has the minister been brought up
to date on any discussions that have taken place between this Maine group and the federal Minister of
Transport?



MR. MANN: Mr. Speaker, neither the group from Maine nor the federal minister has shared any
information with me on any meetings they have had with regard to that specific issue.



MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary is this, in 1992 the federal Royal Commission
on National Passenger Transportation was an exhaustive report that was under the guidance of the former
Deputy Prime Minister, Erik Nielsen. The report stated that federal rules skewed costs at the Yarmouth
Airport and increased operating costs by as much as four times.



I am appreciative of the fact that for the time being, the federal government is overseeing both the
Yarmouth and Sydney airports but with the Minister of Transportation expressing earlier interest, I wonder
if he can provide Nova Scotians, especially residents of Sydney and Yarmouth, with an idea as to what his
government’s plans are regarding the management, if there are any plans at all, regarding the management
of the Sydney and Yarmouth airports?



MR. MANN: Mr. Speaker, if I can remember correctly, I think one of the difficulties here in dealing
with the figures released by Transport Canada in the airport issue, that when they released about the Canadian
Airport Authority and getting out of the local airports, for example, Yarmouth I believe, had an annual
operating loss in the area of $1.2 million with revenues of $212,000 and with 88 employees. I believe Sydney
was approximately $1.4 million, an annual operating deficit, with 212 employees and revenues around
$800,000.



In their report that Transport Canada released, they indicated that they had a plan and they had
methods of eliminating the operating loss for those areas in a five year period. My staff, in my Transportation
Policy Division, has been meeting with officials of Transport Canada in an attempt to identify what those
methods are that would see those operating losses eliminated over a five year period. We have indicated to
anyone who is interested in this issue that it is difficult for us to come up with specific answers or indicate
what we might be able to do with them until such time as we get that information from Transport Canada.



I can advise the member that I believe as recently as about 10 days ago, there was a meeting between
my officials and Transport Canada and that they will be meeting again in the near future.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou West.



SUPPLY AND SERV. - CHILDREN’S TRAINING CENTRE (PICTOU):

 

VACANT - STATUS



MR. DONALD MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Supply and Services.
During the last session, I raised a question regarding the children’s training centre in Pictou. That facility has
been closed since May 1993. It is a fine facility. It is an excellent building, and I just wonder if the minister
can bring me up-to-date on what the plans are for that facility, which has nothing in it, in Pictou?



HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, the member is right and we did raise this issue last year, but
yes, that facility is being turned over from us to the Department of Health for use for Drug Dependency in that
region of the province.



MR. MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, as I understood the minister to say that they were considering using it
for the detox centre. When will that facility be made available to transfer the detox centre, which is located
in an older facility in Pictou? I am not suggesting it is not a good idea, but when could they expect that that
facility would be able to be used for the detox centre in Pictou?



MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I am rather sure that it is the spring of 1995 that is targeted for the
opening of that centre. I do know that they did some negotiations very recently and the cost to bring it to its
fit-up, if you will, they started talking between $300,000 and $500,000. The more recent memo I received they
were down to between $150,000 and $200,000, and I think that is where we are, ready to proceed for a spring
opening.



MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The time allotted for the Oral Question Period has expired.



MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During Question Period, a short
time ago, you indicated that I should not be permitted to have the customary two supplementary questions to
my question posed to the Minister of Health, on the basis that the question invited too wide-ranging and
lengthy a response from the Minister of Health.






There was nothing, in my view, in the tone or the substance or the tenor or the length of my question
that was substantially different or even minimally different from the tone and the substance and the length
and the tenor of practically every other question that was asked in this House here this afternoon and
practically every question I have heard in this House for the last 14 years.



I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, that your ruling was in error because you failed to call the Minister of
Health to order when he went on for an inordinately long time in response to my quite pointed question. Mr.
Speaker, I would ask you to be more specific in your ruling, to clearly indicate what was wrong with my
question that I had the privilege of my second supplementary question taken away because the Minister of
Health was allowed to go on and on without you calling him to order.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Health.



HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I rise again on the point of order. The honourable member
opposite raised serious questions about the safety of care in trauma cases in this province. She raised further
questions about the organization and facilities in our flagship hospital in the central region of this province.
I had to respond in order to both inform the member, because she obviously was misinformed and, secondly,
to inform the citizens of the province on a matter that is of most serious concern to the honourable member
opposite and to the citizens.



I would rise in my place and state that and ask indulgence of the Chair, as I did during my response,
to put at rest both her fears and the fears of those she might incite. (Applause)



[4:45 p.m.]



MR. SPEAKER: I have heard submissions to the point of order and I am now prepared to address the
matter that has been raised. I will simply read from Beauchesne’s Parliamentary Rules and Forms, Chapter
10, Questions, Reports and Returns. Heading, Oral Questions, Paragraph 409(2) “The question must be brief.
A preamble need not exceed one carefully drawn sentence. A long preamble on a long question takes an unfair
share of time and provokes the same sort of reply. A supplementary question should need no preamble.”.



And further, from Page 122 of Beauchesne, under the heading, Supplementary Questions, Paragraph
414, “Although there may be no debate on an answer, further questions, as may be necessary for the
elucidation of the answers that have been given, within due limits, may be addressed to a Minister. The extent
to which supplementary questions may be asked is in the discretion of the Speaker. Sir Erskine May, Treatise
on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament (20th ed., 1983), pp. 345-46.”.



MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, on a further point of order. I would suggest, sir, that you
have exceeded your authority to exercise that discretion when you read from Erskine May in reference to
supplementary questions when I raised a point of order about why my first question, that was quite precise,
was quite brief and quite pointed, was sufficient to justify the Minister of Health going on and on and on.
Before I even had a chance to stand to ask a supplementary question, you, sir, indicated that I had jeopardized
my right to supplementary questions before I even asked my first supplementary question.






I didn’t ask you, sir, to cite authorities, I asked you to direct yourself to my question and what was
wrong with it, what was different about it, what was unique, what was exceptional and what was there about
it that cost me my privilege in this House to ask the two customary supplementary questions?



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order. I follow along with interest the
authority that you referred to in Beauchesne and the specific sections. Sir, with all due respect, I do not see
anything in there that provides the authority that would allow you to sit the member down because of the fact
that the Minister of Health decided he had to go on and on in response to the question. I don’t see that any
fault could have been identified on behalf of the member for Halifax Fairview.



I would like to know where it is exactly, other than the authorities you have already cited because I
don’t see that as an explanation of why it is you decided that because the Minister of Health went on so long,
that the member for Halifax Fairview would have her right to a second supplementary question taken away.
I would like to have an answer to that question, sir. Thank you.



MR. SPEAKER: The Speaker does not entertain questions nor is this Question Period. The Speaker
has already ruled on the point of order and rules that there is no point of order.



The honourable Premier.



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, if I may, I am sure the people I am going to introduce are interested in
this, but I will proceed to introduce some people. I have just signed a declaration for the Adoptive Parents
Association of Nova Scotia. It gives me great pleasure to welcome to this House, Bill Fraser, who is the
President of the Adoptive Parents Association and Deborah and Charles Banting and their charming daughter,
May, up in the gallery here. (Applause)



OPPOSITION MEMBERS’ BUSINESS



MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Greetings, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it is a pleasure to see you in the Chair.
Would you please call Resolution No. 979.



Res. No. 979, re Justice - Violent Crime: Position - Enunciate - notice given Nov. 10/94 - (Mr. T.
Donahoe)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition.



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have a few minutes to address the
substance of Resolution No. 979. The resolution, the operative clause reads: Therefore be it resolved that this
government, through the Minister of Justice, clearly enunciate its position on violent crime so that all Nova
Scotians will know the position being presented to the federal government as it introduces stiffer legislation
dealing with sentencing this fall.



I introduced the resolution, some days ago, because I believe people all across our province are
becoming more and more frightened for their personal safety, for the safety of their families, for the safety of
their homes, that of their neighbourhoods and that of their places of work. It is now impossible to view a local
news telecast or listen to a radio report without seeing or hearing the sometimes gruesome and always
frightening details of crime upon crime. I do not think I can remember a period of time, as compared, say,
to the last 10 months to 12 months when the incidence of violent crime has been as extreme as it has been in
this last year.



Nova Scotians are becoming more and more frightened. Murder, rapes, spousal abuse, child abuse and
sexual assault are becoming far more prevalent and far too frequent. Crimes of violence are a daily occurrence.
Too often we hear, as we did just the other day, that police officers are responding to calls to investigate family
violence situations; they leave the scene and within hours there is a murder-suicide and two people are dead.
Too often we hear of vicious assaults on spouses, girlfriends, companions and defenceless children. Too often
we hear of sexual abuse of women and children and the lifelong physical and sociological scarring which
accompanies it.



More and more, people from many Nova Scotian communities share their concern, their fear and their
outrage with me and, I am sure, with many other members of this House. Too often we hear of violent crime
involving firearms of all types and too often we hear of crime resulting from the abuse of drugs and alcohol.
We have even reached the point in the evolution of our contemporary society that courts in this land are now
deciding that drunkeness in the extreme is a defence in criminal cases.



I am hearing with increasing frequency from Nova Scotians, expressions of concern about sentencing
and parole. More and more people are saying to me that they are sick and tired of watching people convicted
of violent crime receiving a sentence of 6 years, 8 years, 10 years or 12 years and watch helplessly as so many
of these people are released from prison in three years or four years, many to commit serious crimes again,
if not similar or identical crimes which resulted in their incarceration in the first place.



The reason I raise this resolution in debate with this government today is in an attempt to have the
Minister of Justice reassure Nova Scotians that serious debate is, in fact, taking place between himself and
his officials and in concert with the judiciary, his prosecutorial staff and, indeed, with the representatives of
the Department of Justice nationally on the issues which are now and soon to be in front of the Parliament
of Canada.



We have heard much, many of us, about federal Minister Rock’s discussion paper. In fact, we have
heard so much that one section of the discussion paper has been ripped out of it before it even reached Nova
Scotia, the aspect of citing culture and religion as a reseasoned defence in the courts. We cannot get our hands
on a copy of this report before it has been digested and tossed around in the rest of the country and/or the
media.



On May 25th of this year, during debate in this House, the Minister of Justice for the Province of Nova
Scotia, said, “Solutions to violence and crime therefore cannot be crafted uniquely in Nova Scotia but require
national and international involvement. What we can do here . . .”, he went on to say “. . . in Nova Scotia is
to attempt to build on our unique way of life, consult with our community and attempt to become activists,
minimizing the effects of violent crime.”.



Then the Minister of Justice said later in that same speech, “We can give all the suggestions, we can
write all the letters. In the end there is a Parliament of Canada that has a responsibility to enact those laws.
I will make my views known and I have . . .”, said the Minister of Justice. I continue to quote, “We can all
express our views but let’s not clear the federal government of its responsibility in this regard.”. This sounds,
if I may, Mr. Speaker, somewhat like, send your comments and concerns to the government, but let’s not
expect them to pay very much attention.



The minister went on to mention his position paper on youth crime, which we have to assume went
to the federal Minister of Justice. He said, “The views of the Honourable Alan Rock, on that issue, are very
much in accord with our own.”. That is my very concern here today. This government has a very special
friendship with the Liberal Federal Government, and we all know that short telephone calls and brief
conversations on airplanes have not amounted to much by way of representation of Nova Scotia’s views to the
government in Ottawa.



In 1992, the vicious murder of three Nova Scotians and an attempted murder of a fourth, in the prime
of their lives, while working late one night in a Sydney Mines McDonald’s Restaurant, really knocked the
province off its feet on the issue of violence in our communities. Senseless crime to this degree, just was not
something that happened in our province.



It was difficult to round up a jury, Mr. Speaker, you will recall, because of the publicity and the rage
in the hearts of so many, over this tragedy and against the accused and since convicted, killers. The family
of the lone survivor is equally enraged because their daughter, too, has been robbed of a healthy, normal and
full life.



This crime has upset so many that a petition of tens of thousands of names was sent to Ottawa calling
for the death penalty. Well, the petition was refused, and so was their call. However, the point I really want
to make, Mr. Speaker, is that this tragedy is evidence of the strong feelings that one incident in Nova Scotia
can evoke, an incident that made Nova Scotians feel as though the victim’s rights are not even given the same
credence and the same respect and regard, as those of the criminal.



This is why it is so important, that this government let Nova Scotians know what ideas it is, in fact,
presenting to the federal Justice Minister. That is why I introduced the resolution that I did. I believe it is
incumbent upon the Minister of Justice to say to Nova Scotians and say clearly, where he is and where the
provincial government is, in relation to issues, particularly issues relative to violent crime.



The legislation on stiffer sentencing which I mentioned in the resolution, is now before the House of
Commons and has gone as far as passing second reading. That, in part, deals with the tougher sentencing on
hate motivated crimes. When Nova Scotians see news reports of a cache of weapons in Halifax, which
included rounds of ammunition designed to go through the bullet proof vests of our police forces, it is no
wonder that the honest, law-abiding, God-fearing, Nova Scotia citizens, start to wonder what really is going
on in our province.



They need - and it is their call that I make today - leadership from this government and from this
Minister of Justice. To know that their views - no matter how detached the minister thinks those are from the
federal level of government - are being heard and being represented by this Savage Government in Ottawa.



This is necessary, Mr. Speaker, in a day and age where the federal government is fighting the courts
on successful defence of extreme drunkenness, when pimps who murder young women are sentenced for a
few years, only to return to the same crime, when an individual within our own correctional facility is
murdered by another inmate. Nova Scotians must know that they are protected as best they can be and that
the system can work in favour of the victim. This, surely, is something that this government must have a view
on, and which they can share, and I say must share, and consult with the people of the Province of Nova
Scotia.



I introduced the resolution, as I mentioned some time ago, Mr. Speaker, because our office is receiving
a considerable number of communications where, as I said just a few moments ago, many people in Nova
Scotia are coming to be concerned. They are becoming to be concerned that the Young Offenders Act does
not serve them or, indeed, the young offenders or the victims of young offenders at all well. They are
becoming concerned that people can commit heinous crime, go to prison after conviction for 6, 8, 10, 12 years
and in a few years be out walking the streets. And, in too many cases, committing the same or similar crimes.



They are frightened, Mr. Speaker, and the point of my resolution is to call upon the Minister of Justice
to take the first step today to articulate what steps it is that he and his government have taken to ensure that
the Government of Canada makes appropriate amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada, so that some
modest amount of reassurance can be provided to a very fearful Nova Scotian population.



[5:00 p.m.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Justice.



HON. WILLIAM GILLIS: Mr. Speaker, I am glad to have the chance to rise today to respond to
Resolution No. 979, introduced by the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the Opposition in part of his
comments before he closed talked about leadership from the Savage Government and from the current
Minister of Justice. I just want to say this, that I am willing to compare the record of our government so far
and my record, as Minister of Justice, with the record in the justice field of the former Tory Government, the
Government of John Buchanan and Donald Cameron, a government in which this honourable gentleman who
is lecturing us this evening, was Attorney General for a considerable period of time. I wonder how much he
did to arrest the slide we had in problems with violence and all the rest.



I am going to say a few words tonight about some of the things we are trying to do. It may serve the
honourable member’s purposes to misrepresent the prevalence of violent crime in Canada and in Nova Scotia,
it doesn’t coincide with the facts. The honourable member can be excused since he is not alone in the
misconception.



The recently released Statistics Canada data shows a clear gap between perception and reality. Almost
one-half of the national sample taken by Statistics Canada thought that crime had increased since 1988. In
reality, Canadians are at no greater risk of crimes such as robbery, assault, theft and sexual assault, than they
were five years ago. Nova Scotians are actually below the national average risk of being victimized by one of
those crimes. We don’t like the crimes, but that is the facts in terms of the numbers.






It is clear that the honourable member is one of the majority of the members of the public that
overestimates the amount of violent crime in Canada, including Nova Scotia. Nationally, based on the latest
statistics, crimes of violence accounted for 11 per cent of crimes reported by police in 1992 but a survey of
the public found that three-quarters of the public over-estimated the amount. For example, the homicide rate
in Canada has been stable since 1976. The rate of break and enter, a crime that causes considerable public
concern, has declined from 26 per 1,000 households in 1980 to 22, in 1992. Any is too many but those are
the facts.



To bring a Nova Scotia perspective to the situation I would ask the honourable member to consider
these facts. In 1993, violent crime comprised only 12 per cent of all criminal offenses reported to the police
in Nova Scotia. This represents a decline from the previous year. The vast majority of violent crimes in Nova
Scotia that are reported to police are for minor assaults. In 1993, those low level assaults accounted for 64 per
cent of crimes in this category. Having clarified the points let me make it clear, as I said earlier, even this
reduced level of crime is unacceptable to all Nova Scotians.



I make these points, not to diminish the concern that we have for the situation, or the Leader of the
Opposition, for that matter, but to put it into proper perspective. Having done that I want to move on to where
the real challenges lie for Nova Scotia.



Domestic Violence, certainly and the Leader of the Opposition made reference to that. Those
challenges lie in that area. The kind of violence that has the potential not only to destroy people’s lives, but
also to destroy the cornerstone of our society, our families.



Earlier this month, Assistant Commissioner Burchill of the RCMP, testified before a legislative
committee. Assistant Commissioner Burchill expressed his concern with regard to the level of domestic
violence in Nova Scotia. There were statistics quoted, for example, in the first nine months of this year, the
number of spousal assaults reported to the RCMP was 9 per cent higher than the previous year.



In the 1993 Violence Against Women survey, a national study conducted by the Canadian Centre for
Justice Statistics, it was reported that one-quarter of all women have experienced sexual or physical violence
by a past or current marital partner. Although we know that some of that increase is the result of increased
public awareness of the issue, it is a clear indication of the challenge we face.



So, although I share my colleague’s concerns about violent crime, it is clear that our priorities must
reflect the real situation, not a distorted, sensationalized perspective. Mr. Speaker, the Government of Nova
Scotia is moving on the real situation.



For example, our Premier in September officially launched the public awareness campaign of the
Family Violence Prevention Initiative. The Family Violence Prevention Initiative has created a coordinated
and collaborative response to family violence including several government departments and community
organizations; this is positive. The Community Advisory Committee works with government departments and
the committee represents a cross-section or organizations involved in all aspects of family violence. We know
well, Mr. Speaker, that one government agency or one community group working alone cannot deal effectively
with this pervasive problem. It takes a coordinated effort and the Family Violence Prevention initiative
provides that focus.



For example, Mr. Speaker, the Initiative is providing training of literally hundreds of front-line
workers from a wide array of professional fields. As well the Initiative has developed comprehensive protocols
for use by community inter-agency groups that are using an interdisciplinary approach to domestic violence
on the a local level. In other words, this Initiative is facilitating the cooperative efforts that are being made
between the various agencies that must come into play if this very crucial social challenge is to be met.



On the legislative level you may be aware that it is the intention of this government to, in the upcoming
spring session, table a discussion draft of legislation intended to provide civil remedies that compliment the
traditional criminal justice response to domestic violence. That is an intention of ours.



As you are well aware and this has been referred to, the sole jurisdiction for legislation that deals
directly with criminal behaviour lies with the federal government. The federal Parliament deals with
legislation concerning gun control, as members know, young offenders and sentencing. This is not to say that
we can stand back and leave it completely to our federal legislators to tackle these challenges. We have made
and we must continue to make our views on these issues very clear.



One of the issues of young offender legislation to cite prominent example, it has been mentioned by
the Leader of the Opposition, the Government of Nova Scotia has called for more appropriate sentencing
options for violent and repeat offenders and this has been expressed to Allan Rock. We have recommended
that the legislation be changed to increase flexibility in the transfer to adult court of young offenders charged
with murder or other serious violent offences. We have urged the federal government that the names of young
offenders who commit such offences or have three prior convictions for indictable offences should be made
public and that the identity of youths who escape from custody should be made public immediately. We think
that is something that should be done.



Time is running along and I think I just have a minute or so left.



MR. SPEAKER: A minute and one-half.



MR. GILLIS: I just want to mention we all are concerned by firearms and we have to have the balance
between responsible youths and irresponsible youths. We have expressed through the federal-provincial
meetings our views on proper use of firearms so that those in rural areas can use them properly but that we
be concerned that there not be criminal elements using them for violent purposes.



Mr. Speaker, we have expressed views on sentencing and we have indicated to the federal government
that the courts should be guided by a number of fundamental principles, for example, the sentences should
reflect the seriousness of the offence and the degree of the responsibility and the courts must give similar
sentences to offenders who have committed similar crimes.



Also, and before I close I want to mention long-term prevention. Community placing, we have to get
out as a community, we have to work together, legislators, all-Parties, the police, the justice system in general;
we have to work together to try to prevent crimes from happening and keep our communities safer.






Mr. Speaker, we have to act as the champions of the people who are afraid of crime but if we, the
elected representatives of Nova Scotia, do not accept this as one of our priorities, who will? Who will
champion the cause of non-violence? Who is in a better position to stand up and be counted on the side of a
more peaceful and productive society? There is no one in a better position. We are the ones, the buck stops
here.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.



MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I know I have very few minutes to address this extremely
important question. I applaud the Official Opposition for bringing this concern about violence in our society,
violent crime in our society, to the fore in this debate this afternoon.



Mr. Speaker, earlier this afternoon we observed a moment of silence in this House for the victims of
spousal abuse who had literally lost their lives. I am pleased to say that members of this House gave
unanimous consent to a resolution that we would resolve, in recognition of the need to be unwaivering in the
struggle to end these tragic, needless assaults and deaths, to work together to try to do exactly that.



So, Mr. Speaker, it strikes me as quite unproductive and not very much in the spirit of that, for a debate
on this issue to very quickly deteriorate into a discussion about what are the statistics? Is there more crime,
is there less crime? Are we doing a better job or are we not doing as good a job as the last government.
Because I think it misses the point. What I think we have to accept is that we, as a society, are absolutely
failing to deal with these problems that literally result in the murder of women and children in their own
homes, in our province today.



Mr. Speaker, there are a number of measures that can be taken and I applaud the minister and his
department, and other ministries as well, for, I think, doing a better job in terms of sensitizing law
enforcement officers to this problem. I think there is better training and better procedures. But one of the
things that has come to light in discussing with people the horror of these continuing murders and domestic
violence is that although the policies are in place and there are many law enforcement officers who are acting
in good faith and diligently trying to implement those policies and observe those procedures, there really is
no effective mechanism at the community level to monitor that and to which people can turn when that isn’t
happening. I think that is one of the things we have to look at.



Secondly, Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely an outrage and I think it is reassuring that there is such a
widespread outrage across the country, that we have happening in this country today violent crimes and
domestic assaults and murders where the defence of drunkenness is being not only argued but upheld by the
courts. It seems to me that it is absolutely clear that we have to work together to get the necessary legislative
change, to ensure that that defence of drunkenness cannot be allowed to stand.



Mr. Speaker, in the final analysis, when we try to probe for solutions to this problem, not for how we
can argue about who is doing what in regard to responding to violence, in the final analysis, we are not going
to put an end to the kind of violent domestic crime that is happening in our midst until we do something
meaningful about the economic dependency of women and children. That is not going to be done overnight
but it is in those situations where women are experiencing spousal assault and physical and mental and
emotional abuse, that they see no alternatives, they don’t see the opportunity to make it on their own and be
economically independent and able to provide for themselves and their children, so they don’t escape very
often from those violent situations. No matter how conscientious and responsible and effective the law
enforcement officers are in discharging their duties, you are not going to be able to protect women from those
potentially violent situations if the only real protection is for women to escape them and reconstruct their lives
in non-violent situations.



So, Mr. Speaker, that is why I would conclude my brief comments on this subject tonight by pleading
with the government to understand that the real solutions to this problem lie in doing something meaningful
about pay equity, about employment equity, about adequate levels of income support, about automatic effective
enforcement of maintenance agreements which this government has yet to commit itself to, because the
legislation introduced is not what it needs to be in that regard. It is going to continue to subject women to the
threat of violence in far too many cases.



[5:15 p.m.]



Mr. Speaker, we also have a problem with what continues to exist in the way of women and children
being driven out of their own violent domestic situations because we have not been able to find a way to
reverse the onus. The perpetrator of the violent crime, under our current laws and our current procedures, is
enabled to remain in the home and the victimized women and children are forced out of that home. They
become the refugees from that home and have to seek protection and support outside of the home that has been
invaded by violent crime.



Mr. Speaker, we have got to diligently seek a solution to that problem. It is not one that is easily solved.
It is one that has to be handled extremely sensitively in regard to civil liberties and in regard to the balance
of rights and protections. But in the final analysis, we have got to find a solution to this problem.



I know that when the law enforcement officers came before the Human Resources Committee recently,
they agreed with the assertion that we have to change the law in order to be able to deal with this problem.
I do not think they were suggesting that there is an easy solution, but they very much encouraged us to address
this problem through seeking legislative change. In that regard, there are some things we can do about it.



I want to make a final plug, before I take my place, for the Human Resources Committee to do what
was strongly urged by the RCMP officials who met with that committee and what I think there had been
agreement would be an important thing to do. That is to sit down with victims of violence, with
representatives of transition houses in this province that are on the front line of dealing with those women
who become refugees with their children from domestic violent situations, and sit down with the departmental
officials in both Justice and Community Services to talk about what kind of remedies can be found to reverse
the onus so that the perpetrators of domestic crimes, domestic assaults, do not get to remain in the comfort
and security of the home which they have violated while the women and children who are being victimized
are doubly victimized because they are forced to leave their home.



Mr. Speaker, there is no question that that becomes double victimization. Because that sets in motion,
it is not a solution for a woman and her children to leave the scene of domestic violence to go to a transition
house. That is the beginning of very painful distressing process which is trying to figure out what alternatives
are out there. There are not the kind of supports that are needed to help ease that transition.



I think we have to recognize that it is solutions we need, not superficial responses to the problems and
to the symptoms of the problems. So I hope we will work together in recognition that we simply cannot
tolerate this degree of violence, the nature of this violence. We have got to find a way to put it to an end and
say that it will not be tolerated. Thank you.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call Resolution No. 1052.



Res. No. 1052, re Exco - Members: Standards Rigorous - Apply - notice given Nov.18/94 - (Mr. J.
Leefe)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Hants West.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, Resolution No. 1052 deals with a subject that I hoped the
Premier would be in the House to listen to and perhaps discuss. Because it deals with a double standard that
we appear to have now between the government and the Civil Service and between the lack of policy from the
government, particularly with regard to matters of tendering and public contracts.



Mr. Speaker, back on November 19, 1993, the Premier was taken to task during that particular period
by the Opposition because of untendered contracts. The Premier said at that time, remember this is almost
exactly a year ago, that he had learned yesterday that at least five government departments are still unaware
of his policy and that all contracts for more than $5,000 must be tendered.



Mr. Speaker, that came about because of the fact that the Minister of Tourism had gone out and let an
untendered contract for repairs on the Bluenose. However, there were a number of other minor contracts, as
well, from four other departments at about that time that disclosed that they, too, had violated the policy which
the Premier had set out.



Mr. Speaker, the unfortunate thing is that this happened, as I say, a year ago and the Premier, in
subsequent days to this November 19th revelation that nobody knew what the rules were, at least in five
departments anyway, made it abundantly clear that he was going to crack the whip and that he would make
sure that all his ministers, all his civil servants, became aware of the fact that indeed there was a policy for
tendering.



Mr. Speaker, we are one year down the road and the Premier is still standing in his place and he is
being besieged on all sides by ministers who have violated his policy on tendering. You might think that in
light of that, the Premier would say that perhaps there is something wrong with the policy. Perhaps it is not
clear. Perhaps it is written in Arabic or Greek or something that the ministers do not understand. Perhaps it
is not being communicated sufficiently well to the ministers, deputy ministers and others within departments
who make these kinds of decisions. You might think that he might say that perhaps the policy is too slack.
Perhaps it is wide open so that ministers can still do whatever they want to do and are still acceptable,
according to the policy that I have dictated.



But, Mr. Speaker, what is the response of the Premier to some of these violations, a whole slew, I might
mention, that have occurred since that date in November of 1993 and the present. His response is that the
Savage Liberals might loosen, not tighten, the tendering guidelines in light of the various violations of
government policy that have occurred.



Mr. Speaker, I do not know if I am particularly bright and everybody else is particularly dumb, but it
seems to me that you do not have to be a rocket scientist to come up with a tendering policy. I would think
if you took a couple of ministers, and there must be a couple of bright ministers over there. I see the Minister
of Finance there smiling. Well, maybe the Minister of Finance would be a suitable one of this small group,
and it will be pretty small group, perhaps the Minister of Labour and the Minister of the Environment and
the honourable Minister of the Economic Renewal Agency, perhaps.



But anyway, what I am saying, is you take some ministers, a small bunch from Cabinet, and you put
them in a room and say, look. What we want to do is to have every department and every person who is going
to make decisions regarding purchases for the government to abide by a certain set of rules. One of the rules
that we want is nothing costing more than a set amount shall be awarded without going to public tender.



If the minister says, well, maybe we should have some exceptions to that because the Minister of
Transportation the other day said, well you know, what happens if a bridge falls down in the middle of the
night and we have got to go out and put a Bailey bridge in or something that is going to cost $10,000? Surely
we don’t have to wait to go to tender to get that replacement bridge in.



Certainly for emergencies there should be some process whereby a minister can expend a sum of money
above whatever that set amount is. But it is a very simple policy just to require that particular minister to
scratch a note that goes to Priorities and Planning or, if Priorities and Planning is not meeting, to call a
special meeting of Priorities and Planning or perhaps a number of Cabinet Ministers, say five members of
Cabinet, to agree to that expenditure for the specific reasons as outlined by the minister, saying that this is
an emergency and we need the money. But apart from that, Mr. Speaker, everything goes to public tender.



Now somebody will say, well, that is fine but, however, when we want contracts from various
individuals or companies and we want a particular company or a particular individual to do a job, we would
like to be able to sole-source and we would like to pay them more than the base amount, whatever that base
amount is, $5,000 or $10,000 or whatever. Mr. Speaker, I really have no quarrel whatsoever with that because
there are times when you might want to sole-source a particular company or individual. I have no quarrel with
that at all, but there should be a process that every minister understands and they should know step by step
how they go about sole-sourcing for a person to fill a contract.



What should that process be, Mr. Speaker? Well, it can be as simple as the minister having to take a
memorandum to Priorities and Planning, or to Cabinet, whichever route you want, and Priorities and
Planning, and Cabinet, having examined that proposal, say yes, indeed, this is a particular occasion when
sole-sourcing is a good idea, it is something that should be done, but they should be prepared to make
available to the members of this House and to the public of Nova Scotia the reasons why they have to sole-source that particular individual or that particular service or that particular company.



In other words, Mr. Speaker, if there is transparency in sole-sourcing, if there is transparency in
exceeding the limits for going to tender for a specific project, that is fine, I am sure no reasonable Nova
Scotian would have any quarrel with that whatsoever.



So, Mr. Speaker, I don’t think there is any great difficulty in coming up with a policy. I don’t think
there is any great difficulty in telling every Cabinet Minister and every person within the Civil Service who
is responsible for purchasing, what that policy is.



Lastly, Mr. Speaker, there should be some kind of a penalty. I would suggest if the Premier wants his
policy to be abided by, he says, if a minister violates this policy, that minister is out of Cabinet, period,
finished. Thank you.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Bedford-Fall River.



MRS. FRANCENE COSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I hear comments about the wannabe member for Bedford-Fall River over there, from the member for Sackville-Cobequid. I am sure he realizes that I am the member
for Bedford-Fall River, despite his wannabe comments.



I am pleased to stand here this evening and debate the resolution that the rigorous standards set for
civil servants and MLAs of principle - I guess the drafter of this resolution meant the rigorous standards of
principle be applied to the Premier and members of inner Cabinet, rather than the double standard we have
seen over the last 18 months. There is no stronger sound than that of a person who has gone through a period
of reform, in terms of their own performance. But certainly this resolution is a discussion about double
standards and it is a resolution about don’t do as I do, or did, but do as I say.



One couldn’t really debate this resolution without looking at some of the past performance and the past
standards applicable to the previous government. It doesn’t take more than just a few minutes, Mr. Speaker,
to come up with a list of a variety of things that the previous government did that hardly met any kind of a
test for standard. I think about the sandblasting of Province House during the former Premier Buchanan’s
years. I think about the examples of getting names for a fund raising mail-out from the Department of
Finance’s provincial tax records. I think about the lack of effective affirmative action. I think about the roles
the various government committees and boards have played in the last several years. I think often those boards
served the agenda of the government rather than their own independent arm’s-length agenda. I think about
policies, or the lack of policies, that the previous administration did not put in place for fair hiring. I think
about the double-dipping practices of the former administration. I think about the patronage issues that they
routinely had no problem with and we are talking here, do not forget, about a double standard.



[5:30 p.m.]



I recall in 1978 when the previous administration took power there was a massive firing of Department
of Transportation workers. That is truly a very prime example of the patronage that was widely accepted by
the previous administration. When I stand here to discuss a double standard it is not hard to find examples.
Now, perhaps this resolution should come around to talking about transparency and the role of members of
this Legislature when they come here to work in the field of service for their constituents.



I think about the fact that this House in two years under the former Premier Cameron only met once
and it was about to meet again when the election was called and now we have a new standard. We have a
standard of sitting in this Legislature twice a year to improve accountability, to improve transparency, to
improve the standard of governance that our government is doing. When I look at double standards I look at
budget forecasts a few years ago that were $300 million short in the estimate. Now, if that is not an unreality
test, I do not know what is.



I think about annual reports, we are talking standards, we are talking transparency. Annual reports
are a requirement of this House and the word annual, obviously has a very clear definition. Annual reports
mean you put in this House for every year of the job that a board or an agency or a commission is doing, you
put in a report that the public can read and scrutinize and determine what is going on in that agency or board
or commission. I just happen to have in my hand, one annual report that is not an annual report at all. It
covered a period of three years 1989, 1990, 1991 up to 1992 and it is lumped into one document to make it
look good as one annual report.



Now annual reports play a very important role for the people of this province to see if their tax dollars
are being spent appropriately in those agencies, boards and commissions. The previous administration, with
its double standard, had the gall and the audacity to produce a so-called annual report that was really three
years’ worth of work. I think about the $2.4 million dollars that was spent from a federal offshore development
fund used for trunk sewer lines. You talk about double standard, there is another example.



I think about office rental policies, controversial lease-purchase agreements, taxpayers ending up
paying $50 million for a building that was assessed at $11 million. You talk about double standards, there is
another example. I think about appointing a staff person as a deputy minister just a few weeks before an
election to give that person a little bit of an extra edge, there is another double standard.



You see, it is almost a challenge and very much a difficult one to take seriously a resolution imposed
by the member, Mr. Leefe, about double standard because it has become so obvious that this is a case of do
as I say, not do as I do.



I am actually quite proud tonight to stand here and review the higher standards that we have demanded
of ourselves and this administration as we are trying to give and deliver a better government to the people of
Nova Scotia. Again I hear the sarcasm that is emerging from the other side of the room to try and put some
rabbit tracks down and, obviously, you strike a nerve when you get that kind of vocal response over there. We
do have a realistic and workable plan to lead this province out of a sea of debt and to lead it into prosperity.



One of the things that is abundantly clear is that we could no longer go along the way we were, and
hindsight is clear sight. We all know that the 15 years of misspending and overspending left a legacy of
cynicism and despair in the people of this province as they looked at government performance. Obviously,
one of the larger questions we had to answer was, how do we give a message of hope to the people of Nova
Scotia? How do we tell them in clear and articulate terms what it is we, as a government, plan to do and what
it is we, as a government, will be accountable for.



Yes, we did produce a document called Government By Design, which is an action plan for reform and
fiscal recovery, because without reform and without fiscal recovery this province will sink faster than it has
in the last 15 years. When we inherited a debt of $8 billion we knew, obviously, that the only way through it
was to devise tough measures that each and every one of us would have to support and make sure that our
voters and our constituents understood. So, we have devised a Government By Design plan and that clearly
spells out where we intend to take Nova Scotia over the next three years remaining, or three and one-half
years remaining.






Nova Scotia has been on the brink of fiscal disaster for so long that people actually forget that there
is a sense of hope now and that sense of hope is something that we are delivering on, on a daily basis.
Certainly there will be times over the next few years that under the intense pressure of government that our
record will not be perfect, because no record is perfect. When those times come, we will stand here in this
House and be transparent with our answers because that is the only way to be. We do not want to repeat the
performance of the last 15 years; spending with no plans and spending with no thoughts for the consequences.



Our fiscal plan will deliver a 10 per cent cut in the operational side of the budget and we will deliver
a balanced budget for the first time in 20 years. This is not possible to do without good goverance, good
accountability and top-notch leadership. I believe firmly that our government is delivering exactly that. We
have acted in a Liberal manner. It is more effective, it is more compassionate, it is much better and more
appropriate than the slash and burn tactics of the last 15 years. We have put in place a fair hiring policy where
merit is the basis of hiring rather than patronage. We have put in a new and revised Freedom of Information
Act and we are eliminating barriers that prevent all people from reaching their full potential.



The largest transformation in this House, to close my remarks, has been taken by the former Tory
Government now sitting in Opposition. Hindsight is clear sight and, daily, we watch them polishing their
halos that have become very tarnished in the past 15 years. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.



MR. JOHN HOLM: I welcome the opportunity to rise this afternoon to say a number of words on the
topic and the debate that is before us, and that is really one dealing with double standards. I want to say to the
member who spoke just a moment ago and just took her seat, the member for Bedford-Fall River, that I
happen to agree with large parts of what she has said. I certainly agree that one could conclude that we have
double standards when you have a member of the Official Opposition, the Conservative Party, standing and
criticizing this Liberal Government for doing exactly the same kinds of things that they did while they were
in government.



One can understand why the member for Bedford-Fall River might be scratching her head in disbelief,
when she hears the former government talking and telling this government how they should be following fair
hiring practices, how they should be following fair tendering practices, how they should have been following
compassionate programs.



Mr. Speaker, I heard the member saying all of these things and then I heard the member going on,
however, saying how they had a realistic plan and how things were different. Somehow, from the same corner
that we are in, from the window in the far left hand corner of this House, the reality is that we have seen no
difference, no change. The member may say that the Liberals put out a realistic plan. Well, I would suggest
then, that she and her colleagues might read it and they might also take a look at the tea leaves, and take a
look at what is going on and see exactly what they are doing.



Where was this member over the last number of weeks, while we have been discussing, while we have
been debating, day in and day out in this House, about the decision by this government to award a contract
for over $200,000? It was untendered and in direct violation of the tendering policies and guidelines. Where
was this member at that time? Nobody made any money, I say to the member from the right wing of the
Liberal Party, because they got caught.



Here we have this situation today where we find, again, the Minister of Supply and Services defending
the way they are planning to go about to hire an architect for design work on a school that the government
plans to build - untendered, no proposals called - supposedly on the basis that you can’t do it because it is
professional services, Mr. Speaker. Yet, system and tender proposal calls for other professional services have
been put out by this very same government. So in other words, when they decide they want to do it, they will;
when they decide they won’t do it, they won’t. I guess one of the primary determining factors, is when they
get caught.



Let’s take a look at the 1-800-Duck number that the province has. You can call the Premier on 1-800-Duck, whatever the call numbers are after it, I just call it duck. Because it is a waste of time, because from
what we have discovered by trying to get reports on those calls through the courts, they don’t have reports.
In other words, no reports have been compiled. What the government did at a time when they said they had
absolutely no money - excluding the cost of the telephones - they spent over $35,000.



The member for Bedford-Fall River talked about the cutting and slashing that was done by the former
government, and they did. Take a look at the cutting and slashing that has been done by this bunch. I ask you,
Mr. Speaker, how many of the cleaning staff who were sacked just the other day by the Minister of
Government Services, would have had a job for the full year for that $35,000? But no, it was more important
to spend that $35,000 on a public relations exercise for this government.



We heard the member talking about fair hiring practices. It was raised earlier today. There was put
out last spring a notice of a competition. I believe it was tabled on the floor; “The following secondment
opportunity is open to current Nova Scotia Government employees only. Interested employees should discuss
their intentions to apply with appropriate officials of their department.” In other words, it was to be a
secondment position. This is for the position of the Coordinator of Human Resource Development, the
Department of Human Resources. The closing date was June 30, 1994. Quite simple, quite clear, it is obvious,
this is a secondment from within government; somebody is going to be moved from one area to another to fill
this job and they are asking those who are interested in this position to apply from within government staff.
But did that happen? Their hiring practice, remember, and the answer is, no. Today, instead, find out that a
memorandum has gone to all staff of the Department of Human Resources from the deputy minister, Mildred
Royer, announcing the appointment, now closed. Remember, only government employees could apply.



[5:45 p.m.]



What have they done? They have announced the appointment of a woman who did not work for the
Province of Nova Scotia, she worked for the City of Halifax. A former employee, I would guess, of the deputy
minister. Do you know what? The point that I am making, has absolutely nothing to do with the name of the
individual who was appointed. She may be the most qualified and the best qualified person for the job and
she will never know it because there was no competition. There was absolutely no competition and we have
checked.






The lists of job postings, the opportunities that we receive, I know I do and I am sure others do, we
have them in our offices so any constituent who may wish to apply for a job can come in and go through them
and see what positions may be available so they could apply for. It is not listed, there was no competition. That
is an insult to the person who was employed. This has nothing to do with that young woman’s capabilities,
nothing whatsoever. It has totally to do with a process that this government said that they would ensure would
be in place and that is one of fair hiring policy. This directly violates that and it had prevented anybody else
who may have wished to have that job or apply for that job to apply because there was no advertisement, no
competition, no posting.



Here we have a government and a minister who has said that there are to be no preferred lists as were
notorious under the former government for professional services. But yet, they still maintain them and we saw
an admission of that on the floor of the House today.



We have a Premier who refuses to hold those accountable who break their policies. What happened
in the case of the Minister of Human Resources, when she awarded a contract untendered to Berkeley
Consultants? Was there the required written presentation provided to Priorities and Planning? I suggest there
was not because I have asked for it and the regulations say that I am entitled to receive it and I did not.



I say to the member and I say it in all sincerity, Nova Scotians did expect that a new broom was taking
over the Province of Nova Scotia. They didn’t expect that you were going to be taking your broom and be
simply shuffling the dust and the things that had been going on into a different corner, from the blue corner
to the red corner.



Nova Scotians are expecting this government to live up to the commitments of an honest, open
government, one with integrity. In the last 18 months, what they have seen is that a Liberal is a Tory too.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou West.



MR. DONALD MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, could you please call House Order No. 127 and I so move.



H.O. No. 127, re EMO - Staffing - notice given Nov. 16/94 - (Mr. D. McInnes)



[The Clerk read the House Order.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister responsible for the Emergency Measures Act.



HON. ROBERT HARRISON: I believe we are already undertaking to complete that House Order. We
will be happy to comply with that House Order, Mr. Speaker.



MR. SPEAKER: Is the House ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please
say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Would you please call House Order No. 128 and on behalf of the
honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley I so move, Mr. Speaker.



H.O. No. 128, re Nat. Res. - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov 16/94 - (Mr. B. Taylor)



H.O. No. 131, re Housing and Cons. Affs. - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 16/94 - (Mr.
D. McInnes)



[The House Orders were read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The motions are carried.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Would you please call House Order No. 133 and I so move, Mr. Speaker.



H.O. No. 133, re Transport. - Wood Motors Ford Leasing Contract - notice given Nov.16/94 - (Mr.
B. Taylor)



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Transportation and Communications.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if I can follow that last one, number three. I am
not sure if the Clerk understands what it means, but we certainly have no difficulty in letting the contractor,
the lease agreement, on the table at all, and if they can figure out what that number three meant, then they
probably can find it in there.



MR. SPEAKER: Is the House ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please
say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.

 

 

MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Would you please call House Order No. 134 and I so move, Mr. Speaker.

 

 

H.O. No. 134, re Transport - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 16/94 - (Mr. B. Taylor)



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]

 

 

MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Transportation and Communications.

 

 

HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, the request for this House Order brings me back to 1990 when
the member for Kings West, the former Minister of Transportation, we were in Opposition, the honourable
George Moody was Minister of Transportation. At the request of the now Minister of Fisheries, to a sort of
all-encompassing request for a House Order, he literally blew up in this House and went on at great length
at the extra work that his hardworking staff were being subjected to for what, in fact, are documents that are
open and public.



Mr. Speaker, with respect to the tremendous amount of work involved in putting this forward, I am
not going to agree to issue this. Most of it, I think the first part, what has been done in 1993, has been tabled
several times in this House, the last session. These tenders are opened in public and the companies are there
when they are opened, in most cases. This is all out in the open, so I am not going to put my staff through this.
I believe the documentation that has been requested in this one, we would probably have to move here in one
of the salt trucks because he has asked for the details of all contracts. There are three former Ministers of
Transportation on that side of the House who would know that these details are contained in two booklets for
each job. We put out dozens and dozens, perhaps there are as many as 100 contracts in this.



I don’t know if the member that requested this really knew what this involved, how much staff time
or the tremendous costs that would be involved but, in consideration of that, I am going to recommend that
this House Order be denied, Mr. Speaker.



MR. SPEAKER: The motion has been made. The honourable minister has declined. Would all those
in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. (Interruptions)



Order, please. I think I will put the question again. There was a motion made for the return to the
House Order and there was a decline on the part of the minister. I put the question of the motion for the return
to the House Order and I got an overwhelming affirmative vote. (Interruption) So I will ask for a hand show.



Would all those in favour raise your hands. All those opposed, raise your hands. Okay.



The motion has not carried. 



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, that is the first show of hands I have seen in this House.
Would you please call House Order No. 142.



H.O. No. 142, re ERA: Bluenose Organizations - Corres. (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 17/94 -
(Mr. J. Leefe)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Queens.



MR. JOHN LEEFE: I so move, Mr. Speaker.



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of the Economic Renewal Agency.



HON. ROSS BRAGG: Mr. Speaker, I know the member opposite has a keen interest in the Bluenose
and I will do everything I can to accommodate him and get him that information.



MR. SPEAKER: It has been duly moved and agreed by the minister to supply the information. Would
all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, since the Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency is being
so accommodating, would you please call House Order No. 146 and I so move.



H.O. No. 146, re ERA - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. G. Archibald)



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency.



HON. ROSS BRAGG: We would be delighted to provide those.



MR. SPEAKER: It has been agreed. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary
minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



We have not the opportunity to carry out any more House Orders.



The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, we will be sitting the hours, tomorrow, of 12:00 noon until
8:00 p.m. and the order of business following the daily routine and Question Period will be Public Bills for
Second Reading and we will continue in the order the bills are shown on the order paper.



Mr. Speaker, I move that we adjourn until 12:00 noon tomorrow.



MR. SPEAKER: The motion for adjournment has been made and carried. The House will now rise to
sit at 12:00 noon tomorrow and before all members leave their places, I would remind them that there is a
meeting to be held in a few moments of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.



[The House rose at 6:00 p.m.]